Guidance Questions and Answers Concerning 49 CFR Part 39, ADA Rules Concerning Passenger Vessels

SERVICE ANIMAL ISSUES

39.3, 39.91

QUESTION: WHAT KINDS OF ANIMALS ARE REGARDED AS SERVICE ANIMALS?

ANSWER:

* The Department intends that the service animal provisions of Part 39 be interpreted to be consistent with the service animal provisions of Department of Justice (DOJ) rules under Titles II and III of the ADA (as published in the Federal Register on September 15, 2010).

* Consequently, the Department understands a service animal to be any dog that is individually trained to do work or perform tasks for the benefit of an individual with a disability, including a physical, sensory, psychiatric, intellectual, or other mental disability.

* Other types of animals (e.g., cats, primates) are not considered service animals under DOJ rules.

* Animals that are not trained to do work or perform tasks are not considered to be service animals. For example, emotional support animals, which provide emotional support, well-being, comfort, or companionship to an individual with disabilities but are not trained to do work or perform tasks, are not considered to be service animals. 

39.3, 39.91

QUESTION: WHAT LIMITATIONS CAN A PVO IMPOSE WITH RESPECT TO CARRYING A SERVICE ANIMAL?

ANSWER:

* A PVO may decline to carry a service animal if it is not housebroken or if it is not under the control of its user and the user does not take effective action to control it.

* A PVO may impose legitimate safety requirements that are necessary for safe operation of the vessel and its facilities. Such safety requirements must be based on actual risks and not on mere speculation, stereotypes, or generalizations about individuals with disabilities.

* For example, a PVO could impose a legitimate safety requirement that a service dog not be permitted to enter a sauna or steam room, sit on any surface other than the floor, or join its user in the water of a pool or hot tub. The dog could accompany its handler to the vicinity of the pool, but would need to remain outside the pool, including the “beach” (i.e., the wet deck).

39.3, 39.91

QUESTION: WHAT QUESTIONS IS IT PERMISSIBLE TO ASK OF A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY CONCERNING A SERVICE ANIMAL?

ANSWER:

* A PVO may not ask about the nature or extent of a person's disability, but may make two inquiries to determine whether an animal qualifies as a service animal. A PVO may ask:

1. if the animal is required because of a disability, and

2. what work or task the animal has been trained to perform.

* Generally, a PVO may not make these inquiries about a service animal when it is readily apparent that an animal is trained to do work or perform tasks for an individual with a disability (e.g., the dog is observed guiding an individual who is blind or has low vision, pulling a person's wheelchair, or providing assistance with stability or balance to an individual with an observable mobility disability).

* In addition, a PVO cannot require documentation, such as proof that the animal has been certified, trained, or licensed as a service animal.

39.3, 39.91

QUESTION: HOW IS A SERVICE ANIMAL CARED FOR WHILE ON BOARD A VESSEL?

ANSWER:

* The care of the service animal is the responsibility of its user. The PVO is not responsible for the care or supervision of a service animal.

* The PVO must permit the user to bring a reasonable quantity of food on board for the animal and, in the case of a vessel with overnight accommodations, provide reasonable refrigerator space for the animal’s food that requires refrigeration.

* Where a service animal is not permitted to disembark with its user (e.g., because of quarantine restrictions at a foreign port), the regulation provides that the PVO must work with the animal’s user to ensure that the animal is properly cared for during the user’s absence.

* While the PVO is not responsible for the care or supervision of the animal, the PVO should communicate with the passenger so that the passenger understands his/her responsibility to meet the essential needs of the animal (e.g., food, water, elimination) during the passenger’s absence. The PVO should also take additional steps to facilitate the accommodation of the service animal in the user’s absence (e.g., placing a sign on a cabin door to tell cleaning personnel not to enter). 

39.3, 39.21(b), 39.91

QUESTION: MAY PVOs ESTABLISH POLICIES PROHIBITING OR LIMITING PASSENGERS WITH DISABILITIES FROM TRAVELING WITH ANIMALS?

ANSWER:

*PVOs must permit passengers with disabilities to travel with service animals.

*This provision does not mean that PVOs have to allow passengers to bring pets with them on board a vessel. PVOs may establish policies prohibiting or limiting all passengers, including passengers with disabilities, from traveling with animals other than service animals. For example, a PVO could prohibit anyone from traveling with a pet, could decline to transport certain kinds of animals, or could impose conditions on the transportation of animals (e.g., requiring an animal to be on a leash or in a kennel).

*Such policies must be nondiscriminatory. For example, a PVO could not impose restrictions on animals accompanying passengers with disabilities that would not apply to animals accompanying other passengers.

*PVO policies concerning the transportation of animals are, like PVO policies on other matters, subject to the reasonable modification provisions of section 39.21(b). In some circumstances, this may result in PVOs making exceptions to otherwise valid general policies (see next Question and Answer). 

39.21(b)

QUESTION: SHOULD PVOs MODIFY POLICIES TO ACCOMMODATE REQUESTS BY PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES TO TRAVEL WITH ANIMALS THAT DO NOT MEET THE DEFINITION OF SERVICE ANIMALS?

ANSWER:

*Section 39.21 of the rule provides that a PVO must make reasonable modifications to policies, practices, or procedures to avoid discrimination (public entities) or to afford goods, services, facilities, advantages, and accommodations to individuals with disabilities (private entities), unless doing so would fundamentally alter the PVO’s services, programs, or activities (public entities) or the PVO’s goods, services, facilities, privileges, or advantages (private entities).

* On some occasions, a passenger with a disability may ask to travel with an animal that does not meet the definition of a service animal, for the purpose of helping the passenger deal with the effects of her or her disability.

*If transporting such an animal would be inconsistent with the PVO’s policies concerning the transportation of animals other than service animals (e.g., a “no pets” policy), the PVO should determine whether (1) it can make a reasonable modification these policies to permit the animal to accompany the passenger, or (2) whether doing so would create a fundamental alteration.

* This is a case-by-case determination. If in the facts of the specific situation, the PVO can determine that it is able make the requested modification of its policies, practices, and procedures to allow the animal to accompany the passenger, without creating a fundamental alteration, the PVO should make the requested modification. If transporting the animal would result in a fundamental alteration in the situation, the PVO need not modify its policies.

*The PVO may also, in order to determine whether a reasonable modification of its policies is appropriate, ask questions and seek information or documentation about the animal, its training, and the function it performs for the passenger that go beyond what is appropriate in the case of a service animal.

• For example, the PVO could require the passenger to provide evidence or documentation that the passenger has a disability requiring assistance from the animal.

1. In the case of someone requesting the accommodation of an emotional support animal, this could include obtaining recent current documentation (i.e., no older than one year from the date of the passenger's scheduled initial flight) on the letterhead of a licensed mental health professional (e.g., psychiatrist, psychologist, licensed clinical social worker, including a medical doctor specifically treating the passenger's mental or emotional disability) stating the following:(1) The passenger has a mental or emotional disability recognized in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders—Fourth Edition (DSM IV);

2. The passenger needs the emotional support animal as an accommodation for the voyage;

3. The individual providing the assessment is a licensed mental health professional, and the passenger is under his or her professional care; and

4. The date and type of the mental health professional’s license and the state or other jurisdiction in which it was issued.

*A PVO also may require a passenger with a disability seeking to travel with an animal that does not fall within the definition of service animals to provide sufficient advance notice to allow the PVO to determine whether a reasonable modification the PVO’s policies is appropriate.

• The requested advance notice is intended to give the PVO adequate time to check any documentation requested by the passenger and to make the determination of whether granting the request would create a fundamental alteration of the PVO’s services.

*The Department believes that carrying certain kinds of animals (e.g., snakes, other reptiles, ferrets, rodents, and spiders) would create a fundamental alteration of a PVO’s services.

*In determining whether accommodating other animals that do not fall within the definition of service animal (e.g., miniature horses, monkeys) would create a fundamental alteration, a PVO may consider factors such as the type, size, and weight of the animal and whether the vessel can accommodate an animal with those characteristics; whether the passenger has sufficient control of the animal; whether the animal is housebroken or its elimination needs can otherwise be met without causing health or sanitation problems; and whether the animal’s presence would compromise legitimate health and safety requirements that are necessary for safe operation of the vessel.

*If reasonable conditions on the passenger’s use of the animal (e.g., the animal could be in the passenger’s room but could not accompany the passenger to the dining hall) can mitigate circumstances that would otherwise result in the exclusion of the animal on the basis of fundamental alteration, the PVO should make a modification subject to those conditions.