Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University
Author Note
This paper was prepared for ASCI 602, The Air Transportation System,
Taught by Assistant Professor Jeffrey J. Jorgensen.
Allegiant Air was penalized by the Department of Transportation on October 5, 2018, after investigations revealed the airline’s inability to follow through on guarantees to passengers contained in its Tarmac Delay Contingency Plan. This plan, which is required by the regulator for “covered carriers” with at least one airplane certified to carry 30 or more people, is designed to alleviate passenger misery in the case of lengthy Tarmac delays. Allegiant was rated unsatisfactory in terms of maintaining acceptable cabin temperatures, food, and drink, as well as giving timely information. Passengers were harmed as a result of these failures, which were in violation of 14 CFR 259, 49 U.S.C. 42301, and 49 U.S.C. 41712.
Review of Delay
Allegiant Air is one of the most well-known affordable airlines in the United States. It is the ninth largest commercial airline in the country, earning it major air carrier status in the U.S.
“Allegiant is an air carrier under 49 U.S.C. 40102(a)(2) and offers covered air transportation under 49 U.S.C. 42301(i)(2).” (Source: DOT 2018). Due to a maintenance delay, Allegiant Flight 471 departed Albuquerque International Sunport Airport (ABQ) at 6:43 p.m. with aircraft doors closing at 6:43 p.m. but pushing back at 8:23 p.m.
“ Allegiant is an air carrier as defined by 49 U.S.C. § 40102(a)(2) and provides covered air transportation as defined in 49 U.S.C. § 42301(i)(2).” (DOT 2018). Flight 471 operated by Allegiant, on departure out of Albuquerque International Sunport Airport (ABQ) with aircraft doors closing at 6:43 pm, but push back only achieved at 8:23 pm, due to a delay compelled by maintenance. The return of the plane to the gate at 8:34 p.m. for law enforcement to board and deal with an uproar between two passengers provided an opportunity for the crew to remind all passengers of their right to deplane if they so desired, as three passengers eventually disembarked with the law enforcement officers through the back stairs about two hours and fifteen minutes into the delay. A further issue on the way back to the gate was the failure of the jet bridge, which rendered it unusable. After a three-hour Tarmac delay that allowed for domestic departures, Flight 471 finally departed the gate at 10:03 p.m. and took off successfully shortly after.
Performance of Allegiant’s Tarmac Delay Contingency Plan
The Station’s and, by extension, the OCC’s handling of the situation was unsatisfactory, as there would have been no need for a Tarmac delay contingency if the maintenance had been performed prior to the passengers’ boarding. However, if a technical issue arises after passengers have boarded, customers can still depart through the jet bridge and return to the boarding area. With passengers on board, 1 hour and 40 minutes of doors closed for maintenance was too much time; had passengers disembarked and enplaned, the stress of being closed in an aircraft with less than ideal air conditioning, inadequacy of water, and food could have been avoided because passengers could get snacks and supplies in the terminal while waiting in the boarding area. When the badly handled maintenance delay developed into an extended Tarmac delay, the Station manager should have been proactive in arranging for water, which arrived 2 hours and 30 minutes later. Other pledges in the Tarmac contingency plan, such as providing food and drink two hours after the initial door closure, were completely disregarded, most likely due to a lack of preparedness given the company’s low-cost, discounted travel strategy. Although efforts were made in the areas of extra cooling using external Air cart and Ground power, as well as a late distribution of water to passengers, these efforts fell short of the parameters set forth in Allegiant’s Tarmac delay contingency plan.
To say the least, efficient taxi to departure area and priority coordination from Ground / Departure control in favor of Tarmac delayed Aircraft could have kept Flight 471 just under the allowed 3 hour cutoff for departing Aircrafts, if NextGen technology had been deployed at this Airfield.Another area where NextGen coordination would have improved the outcome of this event is efficient use of gates; once the decision was made to return to the boarding gate, a serviceable jet bridge with proximity and shorter taxi time to law enforcement could have been allocated; perhaps with a jet bridge facility that was working optimally, complying with the Tarmac delay assurance that offers passengers a safe deplaning in the event of Tarmac delay would have been more appealing and executable by the crew.
Conclusion
The purpose of 14 CFR 259-Enhanced protection for airline passengers is to alleviate airline passengers’ suffering during lengthy Tarmac delays and to enhance airline accountability to consumers. This can best be accomplished through proactive and collaborative efforts on the part of the airlines, as well as joint efforts with the airport authorities, to assist flights that have been delayed on the Tarmac and, once issues have been resolved, expedite as a matter of priority the flights affected by Tarmac delays, so that they can possibly operate within the allowed time window.
A better way of handling the cabin cooling challenges and unpreparedness to provide water and snacks would have been to disembark the passengers and have them return to terminal and hence, eliminate the need to feed them after the wait and within 2 hours of the flight.
Lastly, in addition to retiring the MD-80 and replacing it with better cooling aircraft, Allegiant must provide enough snacks and water on each flight to meet legal requirements to passengers in a timely manner in the event of a protracted Tarmac delay. This does not need to be a financial burden because water and snacks can always be carried over to subsequent flights if no need arises to exhaust them.
References
Department of Transportation (DOT). (2018, October 5). 2018-10-7 Consent Order (Allegiant Air, LLC) Retrieved from https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=DOT-OST-2018-0001-0016
Department of Transportation (DOT). (2018, March 13).Tarmac delays. Retrieved from https://www.transportation.gov/individuals/aviation-consumer-protection/tarmac-delays
Government Publishing Office (GPO). (2019, September 12). Electronic code of federal regulations: Part 259-Enhanced protections for Airline passengers. Retrieved from https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=c327ec1c760c8a98e3e37f6fb85854d1&mc=true&node=pt14.4.259&rgn=div5