Decision No. 232-AT-A-2000

March 30, 2000

File Nos. U3570/98-25
U3570/98-26

---

APPLICATIONS

On October 16, 1998, Mr. Awde and Mr. Kitt filed applications with the Canadian Transportation Agency (hereinafter the Agency) with respect to the matters set out in the title. Canada 3000 Airlines Limited (hereinafter Canada 3000) subsequently filed its answer to the complaints, to which Mr. Awde and Mr. Kitt submitted their reply. Additional information was also provided by the parties.

Mr. Awde and Mr. Kitt purchased from a travel agency vacation packages that were organized by the tour operator, Canada 3000 Holidays. These vacation packages included air transportation provided by the air carrier, Canada 3000, and land arrangements in Las Vegas, such as hotel accommodations and transportation between the airport and the hotel. In addition to the difficulties experienced with respect to the air transportation provided by Canada 3000, Mr. Awde and Mr. Kitt also complained about various aspects of the land arrangements. The Agency's jurisdiction in accessible transportation matters is limited by its legislation to eliminating undue obstacles in the transportation network under the legislative authority of Parliament. Hotel services clearly fall outside of this federal transportation network as do ground transportation services from airports outside of Canada. As such, the Agency will not consider these aspects of the complaint in its Decision.

Pursuant to subsection 29(1) of the Canada Transportation Act, the Agency is required to make its decision no later than 120 days after the application is received unless the parties agree to an extension. In this case, the parties have agreed to an extension of the deadline.

ISSUE

The issues to be addressed are whether the service provided by Canada 3000 during boarding and deplaning, the aircraft seating provided, and the damage caused to Mr. Awde's and Mr. Kitt's wheelchairs constituted undue obstacles to their mobility, and if so, what corrective measures should be taken.

FACTS

Mr. Awde and Mr. Kitt are quadriplegic, are of large stature and use electric wheelchairs. In addition to using their electric wheelchairs, they also travelled with their manual wheelchairs and one mechanical lift used by their caregivers. Mr. Awde and Mr. Kitt, along with two travelling companions and four caregivers, travelled between Vancouver and Las Vegas on October 1 and 4, 1998.

Prior to travel, the travel agent submitted medical forms to the tour operator, which were subsequently forwarded to Canada 3000. The forms stipulate that Mr. Awde and Mr. Kitt require wheelchairs, either in the terminal or onboard the aircraft, and that they use electric wheelchairs. Furthermore, the forms state that they can use "normal" aircraft seats placed in a normal upright position when required, and as such, no special arrangements needed to be made. Information concerning Mr. Awde and Mr. Kitt was also contained in the tour operator's "Special Requests" forms, as well as in Canada 3000's Passenger Information Sheets. These forms show the code "WCHC"(passenger non ambulatory/non self reliant - attendant and wheelchair required - must be carried up/down stairs and to/from seat) for Mr. Awde and Mr. Kitt and a note explaining that they are quadriplegic.

Assistance in transfers, boarding and deplaning

Mr. Awde and Mr. Kitt require transfer assistance to board and deplane aircraft. This assistance was provided by their two travelling companions.

Aircraft seating

Canada 3000 operated the two flights with Boeing 757 aircraft, in which aisle seats with moveable armrests are located in rows 37 and 38. The last row in this aircraft is row 39. Mr. Awde and Mr. Kitt were assigned seats in rows 38 and 37 respectively. Mr. Kitt occupied his seat in row 37, but Mr. Awde was unable to reach his seat due to the narrowness of the aisle. As a result, Canada 3000 reassigned Mr. Awde's seating and the two travelling companions carried him to row 10, where they lifted him over the fixed aisle armrest.

At check-in for the return flight, Canada 3000 re-assigned Mr. Awde's and Mr. Kitt's seating to bulkhead seats in row 1 to better meet their needs. Upon boarding, the carrier's personnel noticed that this seating was inappropriate because, although the bulkhead area provides more legroom, all of the seats have fixed armrests. As a result, Canada 3000 re-assigned their seating to approximately 12 rows from the bulkhead row and they were lifted over the fixed aisle armrest by their two travelling companions.

Damage to electric wheelchairs

Mr. Awde's and Mr. Kitt's wheelchairs were damaged during the trip. Mr. Kitt's electric wheelchair was damaged on the outbound flight, and he had to leave the Las Vegas airport using his manual wheelchair. Canada 3000 had his wheelchair delivered to the hotel at approximately 3:30 p.m., four hours following his arrival in Las Vegas. A repairman went to the hotel at approximately 5:00 p.m. to assess the damage, and returned to the hotel at 7:00 p.m. that evening to repair Mr. Kitt's electric wheelchair temporarily. This allowed Mr. Kitt to use the wheelchair until repairs could be completed when he returned home.

After his return to Vancouver, Mr. Kitt's electric wheelchair was adjusted on two occasions while he awaited the delivery of parts. A new wheelchair frame arrived in January 1999; however, it was the wrong one. When the proper wheelchair frame arrived at the end of May 1999, Mr. Kitt and his attendant delivered his electric wheelchair to the repair shop for final repairs, and picked it up 15 hours later. During that time, he used his manual wheelchair.

Mr. Awde's electric wheelchair was damaged on the return flight. Canada 3000 employees made temporary repairs at the Vancouver airport, which allowed Mr. Awde to leave the airport using his electric wheelchair. The next day, Canada 3000 had Mr. Awde's damaged electric wheelchair picked up from his home to have it repaired. He was without it for one and a half days, during which he used his manual wheelchair.

When Mr. Awde's electric wheelchair was returned, he found out that it was not completely repaired as a necessary part was ordered and would be installed at a later date. He was however able to use it while awaiting the delivery of the part. The part arrived in December 1998, at which time Mr. Awde and his attendant travelled 125 kilometres round trip to have the part installed.

Canada 3000 paid for the repairs to Mr. Kitt's and Mr. Awde's wheelchairs and, in Mr. Awde's case, the ancillary delivery service provided by the carrier for the temporary repair.

POSITIONS OF THE PARTIES

Assistance in transfers, boarding and deplaning

Travel Agent

In a letter to Canada 3000 Holidays, the travel agent states that she repeatedly informed the tour operator during the reservation process that Mr. Awde and Mr. Kitt would need assistance to transfer and to reach their aircraft seats.

Mr. Awde and Mr. Kitt

Mr. Awde and Mr. Kitt state that throughout their journey, they dealt with Canada 3000 personnel who seemed to either not know that they needed assistance, were physically incapable of transferring them or did not know how to transfer them. For these reasons, the two travelling companions provided the necessary transfers to board and deplane the aircraft.

Mr. Awde and Mr. Kitt did not feel that they had to request transfer assistance, as their travel agent had already made the request. They are of the view that the carrier's employees should have reassured them of their expertise in transferring passengers safely.

Mr. Awde and Mr. Kitt state that Canada 3000 personnel offered assistance on two occasions. On one of these occasions, personnel offered to transfer them from their manual to their electric wheelchairs in Las Vegas. This assistance was not required as their caregivers perform this transfer with the lift. The second incident was when Canada 3000 employees in Las Vegas offered boarding assistance, to which Mr. Awde and Mr. Kitt state that they may have advised them to "stay away" due to their experience on the outbound flight.

Canada 3000 Holidays / Canada 3000

Canada 3000 Holidays submits that it was not aware that Mr. Awde and Mr. Kitt required airline employees to physically assist them. The tour operator indicates that reservation records, as well as letters received from the clients, stipulate that the attendants in the travelling party were care aids. Canada 3000 Holidays therefore assumed that they were present to meet the needs of Mr. Awde and Mr. Kitt, hence the term "caregiver" or "attendant". In addition, Canada 3000 states that the Vancouver employees at the boarding gate and the agent who escorted them to the aircraft assumed that the two travelling companions would provide the required boarding and deplaning assistance.

Canada 3000 indicates that its personnel offered assistance on two occasions in Las Vegas, but Mr. Awde and Mr. Kitt advised the staff to stay away as their fellow travellers would effect the transfers.

Aircraft seating

Travel Agent

In a letter to Canada 3000 Holidays, the travel agent states that during numerous conversations with the tour operator during the reservation process, she described her clients' stature and their need for movable armrests.

Mr. Awde and Mr. Kitt

According to Mr. Awde, the seats they occupied on both flights were not designed for larger passengers, or those with special needs. In addition, Mr. Awde and Mr. Kitt explain that they occupied seats in row 13 on the return flight, with Mr. Kitt in the window seat, his caregiver in the middle, and Mr. Awde in the aisle seat. They indicate that they were cramped and uncomfortable.

Canada 3000 Holidays / Canada 3000

Canada 3000 Holidays submits that it cannot be held responsible for any representations or promises made by the travel agent. The tour operator states that it is common knowledge among travel agents that the seat pitch and seating configurations of charter aircraft vary significantly from that of scheduled carriers. Canada 3000 Holidays is of the opinion that, when the travel agent is familiar with its clients and their needs, the travel agent should be able to discern which aircraft type would be most suitable.

Canada 3000 submits that when Mr. Awde and Mr. Kitt checked in for their return flight, it assigned them bulkhead seats in row 1 and advised that due to the configuration of the aircraft, they might have to change seats. Upon boarding, Canada 3000 personnel recognized that row 1 was inappropriate and moved Mr. Awde and Mr. Kitt to rows 12 and 13. According to Canada 3000, the seating problem on the return flight was not anticipated, and the alternative seating was the best accommodation possible in the circumstances.

Canada 3000 provided information relating to accessible seating on the Boeing 757 aircraft, which is published in its employee Airport Services Training Manual and in its Traffic Manual for contracted ground handlers. The Training Manual indicates seat widths, rows with movable aisle armrests, emergency exit seats, rows with no windows, rows with seats that do not recline, and the location of video screens and lavatories. The Traffic Manual contains similar information, except that it does not address emergency exit rows.

Damage to electric wheelchairs

Mr. Awde and Mr. Kitt

Mr. Kitt states that his wheelchair is his only mode of transport and that he is incapacitated without it; it is not a luxury, but rather a necessity.

Mr. Kitt submits that upon arrival in Las Vegas, he found that his electric wheelchair was damaged. He submits that Canada 3000 simply provided the phone number for Mesa Medical in Las Vegas and he made the repair arrangements himself. Mr. Kitt states that following the completion of temporary repairs, he called Canada 3000 to thank the employee who had provided the phone number.

Mr. Kitt indicates that two days after his return home, he transported his damaged electric wheelchair to the repair shop. He and his attendant waited approximately six or seven hours while the damage was assessed and his electric wheelchair was re-adjusted. He then left the shop with his electric wheelchair. Mr. Kitt explains that, approximately one month later, he returned to the repair shop, where he and his attendant waited approximately 2 to 3 hours while additional adjustments were made to his electric wheelchair.

Mr. Kitt states that at no time did Canada 3000 offer to have his damaged wheelchair transported to/and from the repair shop, nor did he make any inquires in this regard as he thought that this was his responsibility.

Mr. Awde states that, upon return to Vancouver, his electric wheelchair was damaged. When the wheelchair part arrived, he and his attendant lost a half a day to travel to the repair shop. Mr. Awde refers to the Agency's publication Taking Care of the Air Travel Experience - a Guide for Persons with Disabilities, which stipulates that mobility aids must be repaired or replaced until the matter is resolved. His understanding is that this would be done in an expeditious and timely fashion, and not in three and a half months.

Mr. Awde and Mr. Kitt explain that they receive daily attendant care and, therefore, they did not incur out-of-pocket expenses for their attendants' assistance when they went to the repair shops.

Canada 3000 / Canada 3000 Holidays

Canada 3000 submits that its Las Vegas airport agent attempted to contact several repair companies and eventually contacted Mesa Medical and arranged for a representative to meet Mr. Kitt at his hotel. Canada 3000 indicates that Mr. Kitt subsequently contacted the Canada 3000 agent to advise that his wheelchair had been repaired to the extent that it was useable and that further repairs would be made upon his return to Canada. Upon Mr. Kitt's return to Canada, Canada 3000 made arrangements to have a courier pick up Mr. Kitt's wheelchair from his residence and deliver it to a shop for complete repair. The total repair cost was $2,898.00, paid by Canada 3000.

Canada 3000 submits that although it makes every attempt to carry checked baggage in a safe and timely manner, damage does occur. Canada 3000 states that it did its best to ensure that repairs and/or replacement of the damaged aids took place without delay.

Canada 3000 states that its check-in agents receive disability awareness training as found in its Airport Services Training Manual. Canada 3000 provided training records for the check-in and baggage employees involved, which reveal that two passenger agents received initial training in April 1998, one supervisor received training in September 1991, a second supervisor received training in June 1994 and a baggage supervisor received training in December 1996.

Canada 3000 submits that it provides all contracted ground handlers with a Canada 3000 Traffic Manual which includes Disability Awareness Training. The carrier submitted a letter from its contracted ground handler in Vancouver which indicates that the company provides training that includes speaking to new staff on the handling of wheelchairs and other mobility devices.

On Mr. Awde's and Mr. Kitt's departure and return dates, the Vancouver contractor's ramp personnel consisted of two leads and seven employees. The training records of these employees show that one lead received training in April 1995, while the other lead was trained in May 1996. The training dates for the seven employees were as follows: one each in 1993, 1994, 1996 and four between February and September 1998.

Canada 3000 states that its present contracted ground handler in Las Vegas did not provide services in October 1998. The previous company was unable to provide training records, but assured the carrier that ramp and check-in staff received disability awareness training, and were shown a video on the handling of mobility aids.

Canada 3000 Holidays states that it provided the appropriate services, but recognizes the frustration and inconveniences its clients faced during transportation and at their destination. As such, Canada 3000 Holidays offered to refund the cost of Mr. Awde's and Mr. Kitt's package holiday, that is $439.00 each.

ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

In making its findings, the Agency has considered all of the material submitted by the parties during the pleadings.

Assistance in transfers, boarding and deplaning

The evidence indicates that while the reservations were being made and at the time of travel, assumptions were made by Canada 3000 Holidays and Canada 3000 personnel that members of the travelling party would assist Mr. Awde and Mr. Kitt to board and deplane the aircraft. Unfortunately, these assumptions were not discussed with Mr. Awde and Mr. Kitt and, as a result, the carrier appeared to the applicants and the travelling companions to not be prepared to provide the required transfer assistance.

The Agency notes that, prior to departure, detailed information was submitted in the medical forms and by the travel agent to the tour operator and the carrier. Therefore, the carrier knew that two quadriplegic passengers would be travelling on the dates in question. The Agency is of the opinion that the information submitted to Canada 3000 should have warranted further inquiries by the carrier to clarify the type of assistance needed.

Although some persons with disabilities prefer that their attendants perform transfer assistance, some attendants or caregivers are not capable of providing this assistance during travel, as was demonstrated in this case. On both flights, the two travelling companions ultimately performed the transfers. The Agency is of the view that it was the carrier's responsibility to transfer the passengers. Therefore, there should have been an adequate exchange of information between the parties involved to ensure that the carrier and the travellers with disabilities were aware of the services needed and of the carrier's ability to provide them.

The Agency finds that Canada 3000's failure to confirm whether Mr. Awde and Mr. Kitt would require any transfer assistance from its personnel constituted an obstacle to their mobility. It resulted in confusion and uncertainty at the point of departure as to how they would board the aircraft, which ultimately caused Mr. Awde and Mr. Kitt to turn to other passengers in their travelling party for the necessary assistance. Dialogue between persons with disabilities and the carrier is often key in ensuring that the services will be provided in accordance with the needs and preferences of persons with disabilities. The Agency finds that the obstacle was undue as it could have easily been avoided had Canada 3000 personnel simply inquired about Mr. Awde's and Mr. Kitt's need for assistance from the carrier.

The Agency recognizes that, in many cases, travellers with disabilities are provided with assistance that has been requested at the time the reservations were made, without having to make a second request at the time of travel. However, as was demonstrated in this case, there are unfortunate circumstances where the carrier's personnel may not be aware of services requested by the traveller, despite the requests made at the time of booking. Therefore, when faced with a situation where the carrier's personnel is not taking measures to provide services requested in advance, it might be helpful if persons with disabilities were to request these services from the airport personnel. This would assist in ensuring that carrier airport personnel are aware of the needs and requirements of the traveller with a disability. Although the Agency recognizes that in Mr. Awde's and Mr. Kitt's case, Canada 3000's airport personnel was not aware of the assistance they required, it is the Agency's opinion that a reminder or an inquiry concerning their needs could have helped to resolve the situation to Mr. Awde's and Mr. Kitt's satisfaction.

The Agency also notes that on two occasions Canada 3000 did offer to assist Mr. Awde and Mr. Kitt. Unfortunately, the offers were made when the assistance was not required, and at an inopportune time prior to the return flight. Mr. Awde and Mr. Kitt did not want the carrier's involvement in the boarding of the return flight in light of the lack of assistance provided by the carrier on the outbound flight. As a result, Mr. Awde and Mr. Kitt refused the carrier's offer for assistance on both occasions. The Agency recognizes, however, that there is no indication that Canada 3000 would not have been able to assign the personnel capable of providing the necessary lifting and transferring assistance.

Aircraft seating

The issues concerning Mr. Awde's and Mr. Kitt's seating involve the seats they occupied, the location of the aisle seats with movable armrests in the aircraft, and the assignment of bulkhead seats for their return flight.

With respect to the seats they occupied, the Agency notes that Canada 3000 Holidays was informed by the travel agent in the medical forms that Mr. Awde and Mr. Kitt can use "normal" aircraft seats, and no arrangements needed to be made with respect to seating. Therefore, aside from ensuring that the seats assigned to Mr. Awde and Mr. Kitt provided a movable armrest, which would facilitate transfers, the carrier made no other seating arrangements to meet their special needs. The Agency recognizes that there are seating issues related to quadriplegia, which, in some cases, need to be considered when seats are being assigned by carriers. For example, a person who is quadriplegic lacks the flexibility and movement needed to adjust his or her position in an aircraft seat, which might otherwise allow him or her and the person in the adjacent seat to be more comfortable. These problems would be compounded in cases where stature is an issue. The Agency finds that the seats occupied by Mr. Awde and Mr. Kitt did not meet their special needs in that they caused them to be uncomfortable during their flights and, as such, did constitute an obstacle to their mobility. However, the Agency finds that the obstacle was not undue as the carrier was not given the opportunity to explore other alternatives with the passengers as its personnel were not informed during travel of Mr. Awde's and Mr. Kitt's discomfort.

Although Mr. Awde and Mr. Kitt were assigned aisle seats with moveable armrests on the outbound flight, the only two rows with such features were located one behind the other and near the rear of the aircraft. Due to the narrow width of the aisles, it was not possible for Mr. Awde to reach his seat with the use of an onboard wheelchair.

The Agency recognizes that what may be an accessible seat to one person, can create problems for another. In some instances, a person with a disability may only need an aisle seat with a movable armrest to meet his or her needs, and the location of that seat is of no consequence. However, as is evidenced in this case, other persons with disabilities have multiple seating needs that must be met by the carrier to enable them to travel. Furthermore, it is reasonably foreseeable that persons who require movable armrests may also require seats as close to the front of the aircraft as possible to facilitate access to those seats. Although the seats located at the rear of the aircraft, in rows 37 and 38, might be acceptable to some persons with disabilities, others experience difficulties in reaching these rows and, as happened to Mr. Awde, some cannot reach these rows at all. For this reason, the Agency is of the opinion that seats identified by carriers as accessible to persons with disabilities should not be limited to having only one accessibility feature such as movable armrests, with all of them located in the same area of the aircraft. The Agency is of the opinion that aisle seats with movable armrests should be distributed throughout the aircraft to meet the different needs of persons with disabilities, such as additional legroom and seats located close to a washroom and/or an exit.

The Agency is of the opinion that the location of the aisle seats with movable armrests in rows 37 and 38 of Canada 3000's Boeing 757 aircraft constituted an obstacle to Mr. Awde's mobility on both the outbound and inbound flights as it resulted in him having to be lifted over the fixed aisle armrest of another row. Fixed aisle armrests make the transfer of passengers with mobility impairments to and from aisle seats very difficult in view of the limited space which normally surrounds passenger seats and subjects these passengers to unnecessary risk of injury during a transfer.

The Agency has already recognized the difficulties which can result from an insufficient number of aisle seats with moveable armrests located throughout the aircraft. In the Code of Practice - Aircraft Accessibility for Persons with Disabilities (hereinafter the Code of Practice), the Agency promotes movable armrests on at least 50 percent of the passenger aisle seats evenly distributed throughout the aircraft, if possible. This level of accessibility is to be available on newly manufactured aircraft ordered, purchased or leased for use on or after January 1, 1999, while carriers are to work toward this goal as existing passenger seats are replaced with new ones.

In light of the obstacle as it exists in this case, Canada 3000 should be required to show cause why the Agency should not find that this obstacle is undue and include in its response information concerning its refurbishing plans with respect to this aircraft. Canada 3000 will also be required to advise the Agency on whether it would be feasible to move existing aisle seats with movable armrest to the forward portion of the cabin, pending the full implementation of the Code of Practice. Following consideration of these submissions, the Agency will determine whether this obstacle is undue and, if so, whether corrective measures are required.

With respect to the return flight, the Agency recognizes that Canada 3000 made an effort to provide more appropriate seating. However, at the time of seat re-assignment, the carrier's personnel was unsure of the bulkhead seat limitations. The Agency notes that the seat charts and the personnel training material provided by Canada 3000 do not explain that bulkhead seats have fixed armrests.

The Agency finds that the assignment of bulkhead seats for the return flight in this case constituted an obstacle to the mobility of Mr. Awde and Mr. Kitt. It resulted in inappropriate seating and having to make further seat re-assignments once the passengers boarded the aircraft to a row which required that they both be lifted over the fixed aisle armrest. The Agency finds that this obstacle was undue as it could have been avoided had Canada 3000 ensured that the personnel responsible for assigning seats were aware of the bulkhead seat limitations.

Damage to electric wheelchairs

Mr. Awde made reference to Taking Care of the Air Travel Experience - A Guide for Persons with Disabilities, which incorporates provisions of the Air Transportation Regulations, SOR/88-58, respecting the handling of mobility aids. However, these Regulations are applicable to domestic air travel only and the guide reflects services offered on domestic flights only.

The Agency is of the view that an adequate level of training should minimize damage caused to mobility aids while in a carrier's care. Canada 3000 has indicated that its contracted ramp personnel receive training on the handling of mobility aids. Unfortunately, travel on the two flights in these cases resulted in two damaged wheelchair claims within a four-day period. No evidence was submitted by Canada 3000 with respect to abnormal operational conditions which could have led to damage of the mobility aids on those two flights. The Agency is of the opinion that greater importance must be placed on the transportation of mobility aids and on the consequences of the loss of or damage to mobility aids to persons with disabilities. A person's wheelchair must be given higher priority during transportation.

In view of the above, the Agency finds that this damage constituted obstacles to Mr. Awde's and Mr. Kitt's mobility as it deprived them of their wheelchairs and their independence. The Agency is concerned that despite the fact that the employees were trained, some as recently as 1998, damage continues to occur and these two incidents of damaged electric wheelchairs suggest a lack of effectiveness of the training provided to Canada 3000's contracted ground personnel with respect to the handling and stowing of mobility aids. The Agency further finds the obstacles to be undue as the damage could have been avoided had the wheelchairs been handled properly.

The Agency is of the view that the arrangements for repairs of damaged mobility aids should be made by the carrier, unless persons with disabilities clearly indicate that they prefer to do it themselves. In addition, the repairs should be made at no cost to persons with disabilities and with a minimum of inconvenience to them. With respect to Mr. Awde's and Mr. Kitt's damaged wheelchairs, Canada 3000 is of the view that it did its best to ensure that repairs and/or replacement of the damaged aids took place without delay. Canada 3000's training program stipulates that if a mobility aid is damaged, the carrier will provide, at no charge, a replacement mobility aid until the repairs are completed. This was not done in this case.

The Agency is of the opinion that the manner in which Canada 3000 handled the damage caused to Mr. Awde's and to Mr. Kitt's wheelchairs subjected them to unnecessary inconveniences. Although the evidence in Mr. Kitt's case is controverted as to who initially contacted the repair company in Las Vegas, it is clear that subsequent arrangements in Las Vegas were left to Mr. Kitt. In addition, once Mr. Kitt returned to Vancouver, he transported his wheelchair to the repair shop on different occasions to have the repairs completed. With respect to Mr. Awde's damaged wheelchair, and upon return to Vancouver, although Canada 3000 arranged to have it transported to the repair shop for temporary repairs, the same was not done for the final repairs.

The Agency finds that Canada 3000's handling of the wheelchair repairs in Las Vegas and Vancouver constituted obstacles to Mr. Awde's and Mr. Kitt's mobility as it placed the burden on them to deal with the repair companies, required them to deliver their own wheelchairs to the repair shops, and left them without an independent means of mobility for periods of time. The Agency finds that these obstacles were undue as they could have been avoided if Canada 3000 had taken measures to ensure that its personnel discussed the best way to have the repairs done with a minimum of difficulty for and inconvenience to Mr. Awde and Mr. Kitt. These discussions should also have included the options that are available for the provision of a temporary replacement mobility aid during the repair period.

CONCLUSION

Based on the above findings, the Agency requires Canada 3000 to take the following corrective measures within thirty (30) days from the date of this Decision:

• Canada 3000 is required to emphasize to its personnel the importance of ensuring that both the carrier and the person with a disability have all necessary information concerning the person's need for assistance and the carrier's ability to provide the assistance. Canada 3000 is also required to bring to the attention of its personnel the complaints filed by Mr. Awde and Mr. Kitt involving assumptions made concerning who would assist them in boarding and deplaning, in order to remind them of the importance of making the necessary inquiries to determine the needs of passengers with disabilities. Canada 3000 is required to advise the Agency of the means of implementation taken by the carrier in this regard.
• Canada 3000 is required to show cause why the Agency should not find that the location of the aisle seats with movable armrests in rows 37 and 38 of Canada 3000's Boeing 747 aircraft constituted an undue obstacle to Mr. Awde's mobility and include in its response information concerning its refurbishing plans in regards to this aircraft. Canada 3000 is also required to advise the Agency on whether it would be feasible to move existing aisle seats with movable armrest to the forward portion of the cabin, pending the full implementation of the Code of Practice.
• Canada 3000 is required to amend its Airport Services Training Manual and Traffic Manual to add information on the limitations caused by the fixed armrests in bulkhead rows, and ensure that employees assigning seats have easy access to this information as well as information concerning seats with liftable aisle armrests. Canada 3000 is further required to submit to the Agency a copy of the amended manuals, along with a report on the measures taken to improve employee/contractor access to the seating information.
• Canada 3000 is required to submit to the Agency the training module and material concerning the handling and stowing of wheelchairs.
• Canada 3000 is required to inform the Agency of the steps it will take to ensure that the employees of its contracted ground handler in Las Vegas are adequately trained on how to handle wheelchairs.
• Canada 3000 is required to submit to the Agency the instructions it provides to contracted personnel on the procedures to follow when handling claims for damaged mobility aids.

After consideration of the required information, the Agency will determine whether further action is required.