Decision No. 66-AT-A-2002
February 8, 2002
APPLICATION by Air Canada pursuant to section 32 of the Canada Transportation Act, S.C., 1996, c. 10, for a review of Decision No. 670-AT-A-2001 dated December 27, 2001.
File No. U3570/99-68
APPLICATION
On January 18, 2002, Air Canada requested that the Canadian Transportation Agency (hereinafter the Agency) reopen Decision No. 670-AT-A-2001 dated December 27, 2001 as it relates to the issue of tactile row markers.
Specifically, Air Canada is concerned with the reference in the Decision that "Air Canada agreed to the installation of tactile row markers such as those described in the Air Code of Practice and the Agency has no information as to why it has not complied with this provision". Air Canada submits that no reference was made by either party to the Code of Practice or to Air Canada's alleged consent or undertaking. Air Canada further submits that the Agency has a duty to ensure that all information, whether verbal or in writing, that is taken into consideration by the Agency be communicated to both parties so that the parties have a chance to comment. Air Canada submits that it was within Air Canada's basic rights to comment on this information prior to a final decision being issued by the Agency and that if it had been given the opportunity to comment, Air Canada would have advised that it did not consent to having tactile row markers installed on all equipment and would have provided information concerning safety issues.
Air Canada requests that:
- the case be reopened on the issue of tactile row markers;
- the document relied upon by the Agency be provided to Air Canada and the applicant;
- the parties be given the opportunity to provide comments, arguments and documents if necessary, on the specific issue; and,
- the execution of the decision of the Agency be stayed until the final decision is rendered on this issue.
BACKGROUND
Marie Laporte-Stark filed an application with the Agency concerning the difficulties she experienced while travelling from Tel Aviv, Israel to Montréal, Quebec, with Air Canada in December 1999. Numerous pleadings were exchanged between the parties and on December 27, 2001, the Agency issued Decision No. 670-AT-A-2001. The Agency concluded, among other matters, that the absence of tactile row markers on the overhead bins or on the passenger aisle seats constituted an undue obstacle to Ms. Laporte-Stark's mobility. In reaching its decision, the Agency made reference to the Code of Practice, Aircraft Accessibility for Persons with Disabilities (hereinafter the Air Code).
The Air Code was produced by the Agency in close consultation with its Accessibility Advisory Committee, the air industry, the community of persons with disabilities and other interested parties.
Section 2.7 of the Air Code states that "Tactile markers to indicate row numbers should be placed on overhead bins or on passenger aisle seats".
By letter dated October 25, 2000, Marian Robson, the Chairman of the Agency, wrote to Robert Milton, President of Air Canada, as well as the presidents of all other air carriers who are covered by the Air Code, expressing her surprise and disappointment with the results of a monitoring survey conducted by the Agency on compliance with the provisions of the Air Code. In that letter, the Chairman asked that an action plan be submitted to the Agency that would describe in detail the measures that will be taken to address the issues raised in the survey report.
In a letter dated June 11, 2001, Air Canada responded that with respect to tactile row markers, the carrier was in the process of renumbering aircraft from the CP A320 fleet and identifying seats with braille row markers under bin attachments. It was further stated that Air Canada's DC9 Energized aircraft are now equipped with braille signage. Air Canada also indicated that it had formed an accessibility multi-task group whose mandate is to conduct a "Feasibility and Cost Analysis for the implementation of the few items from the [Air] Code not yet featured on our aircraft".
Air Canada did not indicate that it did not agree with the Air Code provisions regarding tactile row markers and, in fact, there was every indication that Air Canada was installing such markers on its fleet of aircraft.
ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
Air Canada's letter of January 18, 2002 has provided the Agency with new information regarding Air Canada's position with respect to the installation of tactile row markers on its fleet of aircraft.
The Agency is concerned with the fact that Air Canada has raised new information regarding the nature of Air Canada's position with respect to the provision of Section 2.7 of the Air Code. In light of the above, the Agency hereby allows Air Canada's application for a review of Decision No. 670-AT-A-2001, pursuant to section 32 of the CTA, with respect to the installation of tactile row markers on overhead bins or on passenger aisle seats.
Application for a stay
As the Agency is only reviewing that part of Decision No. 670-AT-A-2001 that relates to tactile row markers, the Agency will, pursuant to section 79 of the National Transportation Agency General Rules, SOR/88-23, stay only that part of the Decision that relates to the installation of tactile row markers as found in conclusion number three of the said Decision.
Procedure
Air Canada is hereby given 15 days from the date of receipt of this Decision to provide its comments to the Agency with respect to the installation of tactile row markers. A copy of Air Canada's response must be served on Mrs. Laporte-Stark at the same time as it is filed with the Agency. Ms. Laporte-Stark will then have 10 days from the receipt of Air Canada's comments to file an answer with the Agency, along with a copy to the carrier. Air Canada will then have five days from the receipt of Ms. Laporte-Stark's answer to file a reply with the Agency, along with a copy to Ms. Laporte-Stark.
- Date modified: