Aviation Consumer Protection: Increased Transparency Could Help Build Confidence in DOT's Enforcement Approach
Fast Facts
Consumer advocates, airlines, and others raised concerns about how the Department of Transportation enforces aviation consumer protection laws and regulations. This includes protection from unfair and deceptive practices, discrimination on the basis of disability, and other harms.
We found that Transportation's enforcement of these protections lacked transparency on how investigations were conducted and resolved, reducing confidence in Transportation's decision-making.
We recommended that Transportation publish information on the process it uses to enforce consumer protections and make the results of its efforts more transparent.
Information Published by DOT about the Results of its Aviation Consumer Protection Investigations (2008-2017)
Highlights
What GAO Found
The Department of Transportation's (DOT) enforcement approach generally uses a range of methods to encourage compliance with consumer protection regulations, including conducting outreach and information-sharing, issuing guidance, and sending non-punitive warning letters for those violations that do not rise to the level that warrants a consent order. DOT usually enters into consent orders when it has evidence of systematic or egregious violations. Such orders are negotiated between DOT and violators (e.g., airlines) and typically include civil penalties. DOT officials see benefits from using consent orders, which can include credits for actions taken to benefit consumers or to improve the travel environment. Annual consent orders increased from 20 in 2008 to 62 in 2012, but then generally declined to a low of eight in 2019. GAO's analysis showed that the decline in consent orders was most marked among those issued against non-air carrier entities (e.g., travel agents), those addressing certain types of violations such as advertising, and orders containing smaller civil penalty amounts. DOT officials said that the agency did not change its enforcement practices during this time.
Examples of DOT's Compliance Promotion and Enforcement Efforts
Airlines and consumer advocates GAO interviewed said that DOT's enforcement process lacked transparency, including into how investigations were conducted and resolved and about when and why DOT takes enforcement actions. Moreover, DOT publishes limited information related to the results of its enforcement activities, notably information about the number and type of consumer complaints it receives as well as issued consent orders. DOT does not publish other information such as aggregated data about the number or nature of open and closed investigations or issued warning letters. DOT is taking some actions to increase transparency, such as developing a publicly available handbook, but none of those actions appears to fully address the identified information gaps such as information about the results of investigations. Some other federal agencies provide more information about enforcement activities, including publishing warning letters or data about such letters. Publishing additional information about how DOT conducts investigations and enforcement, and about the results of enforcement activities, could improve stakeholders' understanding of DOT's process and help build confidence in its approach.
Why GAO Did This Study
Consumer advocates, airlines, and other stakeholders have raised concerns about how DOT enforces aviation consumer protection requirements. DOT has the authority to enforce requirements protecting consumers against unfair and deceptive practices, discrimination on the basis of disability or other characteristics, and other harms.
The FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 contained a provision for GAO to review DOT's enforcement of consumer protection requirements. This report examines: (1) DOT's approach to the enforcement of aviation consumer protections and the results of its efforts, and (2) selected stakeholder views on this approach and steps DOT has taken to address identified concerns. GAO reviewed DOT data on consent orders and consumer complaints; reviewed other DOT documentation related to its enforcement program; interviewed DOT officials and selected industry and consumer stakeholders, including advocacy organizations, which we identified from prior work and a literature review; and identified leading practices for regulatory enforcement.
Recommendations
GAO is making two recommendations, including: that DOT publish information describing the process it uses to enforce consumer protections, and that DOT take additional steps to provide transparency into the results of its efforts. DOT concurred with these recommendations.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Agency Affected | Recommendation | Status |
---|---|---|
Office of Aviation Consumer Protection | The Assistant General Counsel should provide additional information on the process OACP uses to investigate potential consumer protection violations, to assess risk, and to pursue enforcement actions and establish a timeframe for doing so. Such transparency could be provided through the handbook that OACP is currently drafting or through other public means such as providing additional information on its website. (Recommendation 1) |
Consumer advocates, airlines, and other stakeholders have raised concerns about how the Department of Transportation (DOT) enforces aviation consumer protection requirements. DOT has the authority to enforce requirements protecting consumers against unfair and deceptive practices, discrimination on the basis of disability or other characteristics, and other harms. DOT's enforcement approach generally uses a range of methods to encourage compliance with consumer protection regulations, including conducting outreach and information-sharing, issuing guidance, and sending non-punitive warning letters for those violations that do not rise to the level that warrants a consent order. In 2020, GAO reported that DOT's enforcement approach focuses on improving compliance and reserves consent orders for egregious or systematic violations. Airlines and consumer advocates GAO interviewed at the time said that DOT's enforcement process lacked transparency, including into how investigations were conducted and resolved and about when and why DOT takes enforcement actions. In addition, GAO found that DOT publishes limited information related to the results of its enforcement activities. Providing clarity in rules and processes is a key principle for effective and efficient regulatory enforcement and federal internal controls related to transparency call for agency management to communicate information in a way that external parties can help the agency achieve its objectives. Stakeholders GAO spoke with about the clarity of DOT's approach generally expressed dissatisfaction with their lack of understanding of how the office carries out its enforcement efforts in three areas, including the process itself, how the agency accounts for risk to consumers, and the effectiveness of its activities. Officials at DOT's Office of Aviation Consumer Protection said they were taking actions to bring additional transparency into the investigation and enforcement process through the development of a handbook, which lacked a timeline for issuance, or other documentation. However, the officials did not provide GAO with evidence that the information to be provided will offer additional clarity into the process DOT uses to investigate potential consumer protection violations, to assess risk, and to pursue enforcement actions. Without providing additional insight into these areas, industry stakeholders, consumer advocates, and consumers themselves may continue to lack full confidence in DOT's enforcement process and the results of its enforcement efforts. Therefore, GAO recommended that DOT provide additional information on the process DOT's Office of Aviation Consumer Protection uses to investigate potential consumer protection violations, to assess risk, and to pursue enforcement actions and establish a timeframe for doing so. Such transparency could be provided through the handbook that DOT is currently drafting or through other public means such as providing additional information on its website. In February 2023, GAO confirmed that DOT had posted to its aviation consumer protection website a notice to explain its investigatory and enforcement policies and practices. The notice describes how DOT learns about potential problems through consumer complaints and industry monitoring, and describes DOT's investigation process, as well as the types of enforcement that DOT may take. Moreover, the notice provides additional explanation of how DOT's Office of Aviation Consumer Protection considers risk to consumers in its enforcement decision making, including recalibrating the penalties improves on airlines and ticket agents to deter future misconduct by seeking higher penalties that would not be viewed as simply a cost of doing business. By providing additional information on its website, DOT has taken steps to improve stakeholders' understanding of DOT's process and help build confidence in its approach.
|
Office of Aviation Consumer Protection | The Assistant General Counsel should take steps to provide transparency and clarity into the results of OACP's enforcement of consume including investigations that do not result in a consent order. Such information could be aggregated data about cases, investigations, or warning letters. (Recommendation 2) |
The Department concurred. OACP plans to launch a new system and database to track investigations and outcomes in spring 2024. With the launch of this system, data regarding investigations will be automatically collected and available internally via reporting functions. According to OACP officials, having move granular data available in the future will allow OACP to provide aggregated data about its enforcement work. As of January 2024, OACP officials described potential outward-facing components to provide more transparency and clarity into the results of its consumer protection enforcement actions, but these have not yet been developed. GAO will continue to monitor OACP's efforts in this area.
|