Bill Overview
Title: Emergency Vacating of Aircraft Cabin Act
Description: This bill directs the Federal Aviation Administration to issue a final rule establishing evacuation standards for transport category airplanes that accounts for certain factors, including the ability of passengers of different ages (e.g., infants, children, and senior citizens) to safely and efficiently evacuate an airplane.
Sponsors: Sen. Duckworth, Tammy [D-IL]
Target Audience
Population: Passengers on transport category airplanes
Estimated Size: 926000000
- All airline passengers will be affected by this legislation as it pertains to the safety protocols and procedures during an emergency evacuation.
- The rules will be relevant to passengers of transport category airplanes worldwide, which includes practically all commercial flights.
- Annually, billions of passengers fly globally, with the International Air Transport Association (IATA) reporting over 4.3 billion air travelers in 2018 before COVID-19 decreased numbers.
- The legislation is intended to improve the evacuation procedures and therefore directly relates to the well-being of airline passengers in emergency situations.
- The requirement to consider passengers of different ages signifies a focus on diverse needs and potentially increasing the ease of evacuation for more vulnerable individuals (infants, children, seniors).
Reasoning
- The policy mainly impacts the well-being of individuals during unlikely events of emergency evacuations in aircraft. Hence, the direct effects on day-to-day life are minimal, reflected in modest changes to wellbeing scores, unless they've experienced such emergencies.
- Policy benefits will manifest primarily in peace of mind and increased confidence in flying safety, especially for vulnerable groups like the elderly and families with young children.
- Given the target population size and the budget, the policy focuses on procedural improvements and existing safety infrastructure, leading to a low to medium impact on individual wellbeing scores.
- Many individuals will not be directly impacted unless they encounter an emergency, resulting in 'none' impact categorization for them.
Simulated Interviews
Marketing Manager (New York, NY)
Age: 32 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's reassuring to know that evacuation standards will be improved, especially when traveling with a small child.
- I believe this will provide peace of mind for all travelers.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Engineer (Chicago, IL)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't often think about emergencies, but knowing there's a plan for everyone makes flying feels safer.
- Good that they are considering the needs of different ages.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Retired (Miami, FL)
Age: 67 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I worry about moving quickly in an emergency due to my mobility issues, so this policy is very encouraging.
- I hope this leads to more considerate designs in airplanes.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
Tech Startup CEO (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 29 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This doesn't affect me much as I rarely fly, but it's good knowing it's there if needed.
- Policies like this should be standard in every country.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Pilot (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Anything that improves safety on flights is beneficial.
- It's crucial to address these issues given past experiences in emergencies.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 10 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 10 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 10 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Graduate Student (Austin, TX)
Age: 23 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Safety improvements are always welcome, especially for someone traveling often.
- The policy should also address evacuation during international flights.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Attorney (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 61 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It sounds like a sensible move, but given that I don't travel much anymore, it's not very relevant to me.
- I'd like to see results before forming a stronger opinion.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Flight Attendant (Seattle, WA)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This kind of policy is critical to our roles; anything easing passenger panic in emergencies is beneficial.
- Evacuation protocols need constant updating for real-world scenarios.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Accountant (Denver, CO)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Necessary adjustments to evacuation processes are good, but I'm indifferent otherwise.
- Other issues like delays and in-flight comfort concern me more.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Freelancer (Boston, MA)
Age: 40 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Glad to see these measures, but I'd like to see more efforts in making flights sustainable as well.
- Travel safety is important, but it aligns equally with environmental concerns.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $20000000 (Low: $15000000, High: $25000000)
Year 2: $30000000 (Low: $25000000, High: $35000000)
Year 3: $30000000 (Low: $25000000, High: $35000000)
Year 5: $20000000 (Low: $15000000, High: $25000000)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- The act primarily benefits safety for a diverse population on airplanes, emphasizing varied needs during an evacuation.
- Compliance costs borne by airlines need to be balanced against the benefits of potentially reduced liabilities from incidents.
- Monitoring the impact on ticket prices and thereby on traveler numbers is crucial for mid-term economic impact assessment.