[NAGDU] URGENT – reminder to file comments in support of NFB's petition to exempt blind guide-dog users from ACAA transportation forms requirements

[Al Elia]

Dear listmates,

As I previously wrote,  the NFB filed a petition with the FAA  to exempt 
blind passengers from any requirements to complete attestation forms to 
travel by air with their guide dogs on January 29, 2024. Shortly 
thereafter, the Office of the Secretary of Transportation asserted 
authority over that petition, and its docket was moved from the FAA to 
[Docket 
DOT-OST-2024-0014](https://www.regulations.gov/docket/DOT-OST-2024-0014) 
in that office.

Presumably due to confusion over the change of location, our petition 
has only received eight comments so far. While they have all been 
comments in support of the petition, we urge all guide dog users, 
organizations, and training programs to file comments in support as soon 
as possible. While there is currently no deadline for comments, we are 
not aware of any rule preventing the Office of the Secretary from 
cutting off the comment period at any time. Also, the more comments 
there are, the more likely the Secretary is to grant the petition. 
Comments mnay be filed on the comment page for the new docket at   
https://www.regulations.gov/commenton/DOT-OST-2024-0014-0001

Again, the text of the petition is included below for your convenience. 
The petition and supporting appendices can also  be downloaded 
[here](https://www.regulations.gov/document/DOT-OST-2024-0014-0001).

Thank you all very much for your support.

/Æ

January 29, 2024

U.S. Department of Transportation
Docket Operations
West Building Ground Floor
Room W12-140
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.
Washington, D.C. 20590

Re: Petition for exemption from 14 C.F.R. §§ 382.27(b)(3), 75, and 79
Submitted By: Elizabeth Schoen, Sherry Gomes, and Will Simpson, blind 
individuals; and the National Federation of the Blind (“NFB”), on 
behalf of its members, including Elizabeth Schoen, Sherry Gomes, and 
Will Simpson, representing a class of all blind individuals traveling in 
the United States.

   Pursuant to 49 C.F.R. § 5.3(a)(2) and 49 U.S.C. § 44701(f), 
Elizabeth Schoen, Sherry Gomes, and Will Simpson, who are all blind 
guide dog users, and the National Federation of the Blind, on behalf of 
its members, including Elizabeth Schoen, Sherry Gomes, and Will Simpson, 
petition the Federal Aviation Administration, through the Department of 
Transportation (“DOT”), for the following exemption on behalf of a 
class of all blind individuals on flights within, departing from, or 
arriving in the United States:

Beginning one hundred and twenty days from the date of this petition and 
continuing indefinitely, all blind passengers seeking to travel by air 
with a guide dog service animal shall be exempt from the provisions of 
14 C.F.R. §§ 382.27(b)(3), 75, and 79(a)(4).
This exemption is necessary as a reasonable modification, pursuant to 
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. § 794, to 
ensure meaningful access to DOT-funded and regulated air travel by blind 
passengers who use guide dogs. Blind passengers who are unable to 
independently access the U.S. Department of Transportation Service 
Animal Air Transportation Form identified in 14 C.F.R. § 382.75(a) or 
the DOT Service Animal Relief Attestation Form identified in 14 C.F.R. 
§ 382.75(b) (collectively "DOT Forms"), either in print or electronic 
form, are being dissuaded from air travel and are even being denied 
passage on flights for which they have purchased tickets. They are 
suffering that discrimination because they are unable to complete and 
submit the DOT Forms independently in advance, and because the current 
regulations do not require air carriers to assist passengers like them 
in completing and submitting DOT forms in advance.
Elizabeth Schoen, a blind college student, was not permitted to fly from 
Minneapolis to Boston in April 2023 because she was unable to complete 
and submit DOT Forms online. Ms. Schoen was obviously blind, and her 
guide dog was performing an obvious service of guiding her, but airline 
staff did not allow her to fly because she had not submitted DOT Forms 
in advance of her flight.
Sherry Gomes has attempted to complete the DOT Forms, but was unable to 
do so without the assistance of a sighted person. Because she cannot 
independently complete the DOT Forms now required by airlines, she is 
afraid of being turned away or being otherwise mistreated at the airport 
because she uses a guide dog. She therefore no longer travels by air 
despite a desire to do so in order to visit friends and attend 
conferences.
Will Simpson booked travel online in advance for Thanksgiving 2023. 
During the reservation process, he was not informed as to how to 
indicate he would be traveling with his guide dog. After speaking with 
the air carrier’s staff by online chat, he was informed that his guide 
dog was known to the airline, and he would be able to travel. Instead, 
he was denied at the airport because he had not previously completed the 
DOT Form, and was only able to travel after arguing with the air 
carrier’s airport staff for over an hour.
Reasons for and benefits of exemption
This petition seeks an exemption from those sections of 14 C.F.R. Part 
382 which allow air carriers to condition a passenger’s travel with a 
service animal on completion and submission of DOT Forms. The exemption 
is needed because, although certain blind travelers may not be able to 
complete the forms, or submit them in advance, the regulation does not 
require airlines to accommodate their disability. In fact, airlines are 
expressly permitted to refuse to provide such accommodations, as 14 
C.F.R. §79(a)(4) specifically states that an airline “may deny 
transport to a service animal … [if t]he passenger with a disability 
seeking to travel with a service animal in the cabin of the aircraft 
does not provide completed current [DOT Forms] to the carrier when 
requested to do so.” Id. Petitioner Schoen was denied permission to 
fly, by the private airline relying on that regulation, because she did 
not complete the form on-line 48 hours prior to her flight, and the 
airline did not allow her to submit alternative verification that her 
service animal is a trained guide dog. This discriminatory denial of 
access is expressly permitted by the regulation, but it violates Section 
504 of the Rehabilitation Act.
Other sections of the ACAA regulations demonstrate DOT’s awareness 
that individuals with disabilities may need air carriers to provide them 
with assistance to ensure meaningful access to air carrier services 
offered through electronic technology. For example, air carriers “must 
assist prospective passengers who indicate that they are unable to use 
[the air carrier’s] Web site due to a disability and contact [the air 
carrier] through other channels (e.g., by telephone or at the ticket 
counter).” 14 C.F.R. § 382.43(c)(4). That requirement is in addition 
to a separate requirement that air carriers’ websites must be 
accessible. 14 C.F.R. §§ 382.43(c)(1)-(3). It goes on to require air 
carriers to disclose and allow booking of web-based discount fares 
through those other channels, and to waive any fees normally associated 
with use of those other channels. 14 C.F.R. §§ 382.43(c)(4)(i)-(ii).
The carrier requirements for provision and acceptance of the DOT Forms 
also demonstrate DOT’s understanding that some passengers with 
disabilities and service animals may not be able to use the electronic 
DOT Forms, notwithstanding their accessibility to other passengers. 
DOT’s regulations require carriers to make accessible electronic DOT 
Forms available on their websites, but also require them to provide 
paper copies of the forms upon request. 14 C.F.R. § 382.75(e). Those 
regulations similarly require airlines who demand advance submission of 
DOT Forms to not only accept them electronically, but also by hard copy. 
14 C.F.R. § 382.75(f). The requirement for paper copies to be sent and 
accepted by mail demonstrates DOT’s recognition that some persons with 
disabilities who use service animals may not have access to and the 
skills necessary to use technology to obtain and submit electronic DOT 
Forms. Despite this demonstrated awareness, and the understanding shown 
by the telephone-ticketing requirement that accessible technology is not 
a panacea, the DOT failed to require non-technological alternative 
access for blind passengers unable to complete the DOT Forms. That 
failure is inexcusable considering that guide dogs are the prototypical 
service animal.
As discussed below, many blind guide-dog users cannot independently 
complete DOT Forms. Because air carriers are not required to assist such 
passengers in completing and submitting those forms, those blind 
passengers face significant obstacle that impede their access to air 
travel. The exemption sought herein will eliminate airlines’ ability 
to condition travel on submitting DOT Forms that those blind passengers 
cannot independently complete due to their blindness. By removing that 
obstacle, the exemption will ensure that all blind passengers who use 
guide dogs will have meaningful access to air travel.
The exemption is necessary because the DOT cannot provide any other 
immediate remedy to address the barriers to air travel posed by the DOT 
Forms. The DOT is responsible for remedying those barriers because it 
alone bears responsibility for the DOT Forms and their shortcomings; and 
for failing to ensure air carriers’ provision of assistance to blind 
passengers in completing and submitting those forms where such 
assistance is necessary due to their disability.
The public benefits when people with disabilities have meaningful access 
to air travel, and when the government does not impose barriers to such 
meaningful access for specific groups of persons with disabilities. The 
public also benefits when government agencies do not violate laws such 
as Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. The exemption is consistent 
with the Congressional charge that the “Federal Government play[] a 
leadership role in promoting … and in assisting States and providers 
of services in fulfilling the aspirations of such individuals with 
disabilities for … independent living…” 29 U.S.C. § 701. Without 
the exemption, the regulation violates 29 U.S.C. § 794’s mandate that 
“[n]o otherwise qualified individual with a disability in the United 
States, as defined in section 705(20) of this title, shall, solely by 
reason of her or his disability, be excluded from the participation in, 
be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any 
program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance or under any 
program or activity conducted by any Executive agency…” (Id. 
Emphasis added.) The DOT actively regulates and provides funding to the 
airlines. By promulgating the regulation, DOT created and bears direct 
responsibility for its adverse impact on blind people who rely on guide 
dogs.
There is no evidence to suggest that this exemption will negatively 
affect public safety. Guide dogs have a long record of safe travel, 
having been trained and used in the U.s. for more than ninety-five 
years. “History of Guide Dogs,” International Guide Dog Federation 
(available at https://www.igdf.org.uk/guide-dogs/history-of-guide-dogs/ 
(last accessed Jan 24, 2024)). The NPRM supporting the regulation 
acknowledges that “dogs are the most common animal species used to 
assist individuals with their disabilities, both on and off aircraft, 
and that dogs have both the temperament and ability to do work and 
perform tasks while behaving appropriately in a public setting and while 
being surrounded by a large group of people.” (Traveling by Air With 
Service Animals, 85 FR 79742-01). Guide dogs receive structured 
socialization and behavior training not only by professional trainers as 
part of their several months of guide training (See “Standard 5: Dog 
Training and Behaviour,” Standards, International Guide Dog 
Federation, October 5, 2023 (available on request from 
enquiries at igdf.org.uk)), but also by their volunteer puppy-raisers 
during the year leading up to that training. See, E.g., “Puppy Raising 
Manual,” Guide Dogs for the Blind (available at 
https://www.guidedogs.com/uploads/files/Puppy-Raising-Manual/Puppy-Raising-Manual-COMBINED.pdf).
Likewise, concerns about “fake” service animals don’t apply to 
guide dogs. The DOT has never received a complaint that a passenger 
fraudulently represented themself as a blind person using a guide dog, 
nor has it received an assertion by any airline that a passenger has 
fraudulently completed DOT Forms indicating as Such. An individual is 
unlikely to attempt to pass off a pet or emotional support animal as a 
guide dog, as opposed to passing it off as another type of service 
animal for a less-obvious disability. Were they to make such an attempt, 
it would be readily apparent that the dog is not actually guiding the 
passenger, or that the passenger is not blind, or both.
Finally, there are an estimated 500,000 working service animals of any 
type in the United States. See 
https://share.america.gov/service-dogs-save-lives/. According to the 
International Guide Dog Federation, a member organization of guide dog 
training programs, there are only between 20,000 and 23,000 guide dogs 
in service worldwide at any given time. See 
https://www.igdf.org.uk/about-us/facts-and-figures/. Of those, only an 
estimated 10,000 are in use as working guide dogs in the United States. 
See, https://www.guidingeyes.org/guide-dogs-101/. As those estimated 
10,000 guide dogs represent a mere two percent (2%) of the service 
animals in the United States, the regulatory requirements related to DOT 
Forms will still apply to ninety-eight percent of service animals and 
their users once this exemption is granted.
Fundamental barriers to the DOT Forms
The DOT Forms were intended to be accessible to passengers with 
disabilities, including blind passengers. However, as a practical matter 
the DOT Forms are only accessible to blind passengers who have access to 
and skills to use both necessary technology and the internet. This is 
because, the regulations only require carriers to make accessible 
electronic DOT Forms available on their websites and to accept completed 
forms electronically. Since paper is inaccessible to blind passengers 
absent the assistance of carrier staff, and since there is no provision 
requiring airlines to provide such assistance in person or by telephone, 
only the website offers them the possibility of access to the forms, and 
only electronic submission offers them the opportunity to access and 
submit forms in advance. These both require internet access, and both 
require access to and the skills to use the technology necessary to read 
and complete the DOT Forms. That technology is not available to all 
blind passengers.
“Fillable” PDF forms such as the DOT Forms can only be completed 
with the aid of screen reading software on personal computers running 
Microsoft’s Windows or Apple’s macOS operating systems. See 
Declaration of Karl Belanger, attached as Appendix A. While it is 
possible for a blind person to read accessible PDF documents – 
including the DOT Forms – on other types of devices using screen 
reading software, it is not possible for a blind person to independently 
enter information on PDF documents and forms using screen reading 
software on mobile devices, tablets, or ChromeBooks, whether those 
devices are made by Apple, Google, Samsung, Amazon, or another 
manufacturer. Id. This is because manufacturers and developers have not 
yet built the capability to enter information on PDFs non-visually using 
screen reading software when using those devices. This is true even if 
the fillable PDF forms are otherwise accessible and can be completed 
non-visually using a personal computer running Windows or macOS. Id. 
Obviously, a blind person cannot independently obtain electronic DOT 
Forms from DOT or carrier websites without internet access. They can 
neither independently mark up a PDF using visual marking tools, nor 
independently complete paper DOT Forms by manually writing on them. As 
previously explained, the only technology that currently offers them the 
possibility to independently complete and submit DOT Forms is a personal 
computer. Courts have held that being able to access a governmental 
program or service independently is essential to meaningful access under 
the Rehabilitation Act. Nat’l Fed. Of the Blind v. Lamone, 813 F.3d 
494 (4th Cir. 2016). According to data from the latest American 
Community Survey (“ACS”) by the U.S. Census, only 56.1% of blind 
Americans have access to both a computer and the internet at home. See 
Declaration of Marlie Elia, attached as Appendix C. Accordingly, at 
least 43.9% of blind Americans entirely lack meaningful access to the 
DOT Forms. Id.
This is not a speculative concern. As the following data shows, a large 
percentage of blind guide dog users currently experience barriers to 
using the DOT Forms, even if they have access to the internet. This data 
demonstrates the need for the exemption sought in this petition.
Survey of Blind Guide Dog Users, and Extrapolation to Total U.S. Guide 
Dog-Using Population
The National Association of guide Dog Users ("NAGDU"), a division of the 
NFB dedicated to advocacy regarding the rights and responsibilities of 
guide dog use, conducted an online survey from June through August 2023. 
See, Declaration of Raul Gallegos, attached hereto as Appendix B. That 
survey, in which 103 respondents participated, provides insight into how 
blind guide dog users experience air travel and what technology and 
comfort level they possess for finding and attempting to complete the 
DOT Forms. Id.
It must be said at the outset that the survey undercounts blind persons 
who do not use technology to access the internet, as nearly all 
respondents said they did. This makes sense given that the survey was 
conducted online. Nevertheless, nearly four percent of respondents do 
not use technology to access electronic documents such as PDFs at all. 
This and other survey data reflect that even blind individuals, like Mr. 
Simpson and Mses. Schoen and Gomes, who might otherwise use the 
internet, nonetheless face technology barriers that prevent them from 
accessing the kind of electronic documents currently required to fly 
with their guide dogs.
Despite its small sample size, the NAGDU survey comports with the 
estimates of the much larger ACS. The ACS data indicates that 
approximately 73.5% of blind people have access to the internet. 
Appendix C, Exh. 1. The NAGDU survey data indicates that, of those who 
do use the internet to access electronic documents like the DOT Forms, 
approximately 77.6% use a macOS or MS-Windows computer to access PDFs. 
Appendix B, Exh. 1. Combining those two indications yields an estimated 
57% of blind people who have access to both the internet and a personal 
computer, which comports with the ACS 56.1% estimate of the same. The 
NAGDU data shows that 22.4% of blind people who use the internet to 
access electronic documents can only
do so using technology that currently affords them no way to 
independently complete fillable PDF forms such as the DOT Forms. Id.
Beyond the absolute barriers currently presented by mobile and other 
non-macOS/MS-Windows technology, respondents encountered additional 
barriers regarding the DOT Forms that demonstrate the need for an 
alternative such as carrier assistance. For example, 29.4% were unable 
to identify what information the forms require a passenger to provide, 
52% were unable to independently complete them, and 5.9% were unable to 
open them at all. Id. In fact, only 42.2% of respondents were able to 
independently fill out DOT Forms. Id.

   As to their air travel experiences, 34.3% of respondents have 
actually “experienced difficulty flying with a guide dog, such as 
being harassed by airline staff or being denied a flight due to not 
following airline pre-flight procedures for bringing a service animal," 
and 4.9% of respondents, Have never used a guide dog and are hesitant to 
do so due to the requirements for flying with a guide dog. Id.
   As discussed above, there are approximately 10,000 working guide dogs 
in use in the United States. See, 
https://www.guidingeyes.org/guide-dogs-101/. Based on the ACS, only 
73.5% have internet access. The NAGDU survey indicates that of those, 
only 42.2% are able to independently complete DOT Forms. That means that 
69% of guide dog users in the U.S. are currently unable to independently 
access the DOT Forms; or six thousand nine hundred American guide dog 
users who lack meaningful access to the DOT Forms, and to air travel, 
because of their disability. DOT failed to ensure that blind passengers 
who use guide dogs would have such meaningful access, despite having 
demonstrated elsewhere that it understood the need and means to so 
ensure. As shown above, the petition should be granted.

Jurisdiction of exemption
This exemption will only apply within the jurisdiction of the United 
States. It will therefore only apply outside of the United States where 
a flight departs from or arrives in the United States.
Summary for federal register
The provisions of 14 C.F.R. §§ 382.27(b)(3), 75, and 79(a)(4) shall 
not apply to any blind passenger seeking to travel by air with a guide 
dog service animal. This means that no air carrier may require such a 
blind passenger to complete or provide forms as set forth in 14 C.F.R. 
§ 382.75(a) or (b), nor may an air carrier condition transport of such 
a guide dog service animal on the provision of any such forms.

Respectfully submitted,

s/ Albert Elia
Albert Elia D.C. Bar No. 1032028
Civil Rights Education and Enforcement Center
1245 East Colfax Avenue
Suite 400
Denver, CO 80218
303-757-7901
aelia at creeclaw.org

s/ Cynthia L. Rice
Cynthia L. Rice
Civil Rights Education and
Enforcement Center
131 Stuart Street
Suite 400
San Francisco, CA 94105
303-551-9389
crice at creeclaw.org
Attorneys for Elizabeth Schoen, Sherry Gomes, Will Simpson, and NFB

CERTIFICATION
I, Mark Riccobono, in my individual capacity and as the President and 
authorized representative of National Federation of the Blind, have not 
in any manner knowingly and willfully falsified, concealed or failed to 
disclose any material fact or made any false, fictitious, or fraudulent 
statement or knowingly used any documents which contain such statements 
in connection with the preparation, filing or prosecution of this 
petition. I understand that an individual who is found to have violated 
the provisions of 18 U.S.C. section 1001 shall be fined or imprisoned 
not more than five years, or both.

   MARK RICCOBONO