Commercial airlines: passenger rights.
Do you support it?
Want to know if it passes?
We'll email you when SB 1264 moves — a committee vote, a floor vote, or a signature. Nothing else.
Free forever · unsubscribe in one click.
Your answer was recorded either way.
Which district are you in?
Your ZIP is all we need to match you to your own representatives — so we can tell you how they voted on SB 1264.
You're tracking SB 1264
We'll email you the moment it moves.
SB 1264 — Commercial airlines: passenger rights.
Last action — Died on file.
No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.
-
✓Introduced
-
✓In Committee
-
3Passed Senate
-
4Passed Assembly
-
5To Executive
-
6Enacted
This bill died with 2009-2010 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Senate” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis. It would have to be reintroduced in the current session to move again.
Summary
Pursuant to existing law, the federal Department of Transportation has adopted regulations, that became effective April 29, 2010, requiring air carriers, as defined, to do all of the following: (1) adopt contingency plans for lengthy tarmac delays that include specified passenger services and to publish those plans on their Internet Web site, (2) adopt a customer service plan that addresses specified matter and audit compliance with the plan, and (3) designate Advocates for Passengers' Interests and inform consumers how to file a complaint about scheduled service, acknowledge receipt of each complaint, and send a substantive response to each complainant. The regulations make an air carrier's failure to comply with its contingency plan for lengthy tarmac delays an unfair and deceptive practice subject to enforcement by the department. The regulations additionally make unrealistic scheduling of flights and the holding out of certain chronically delayed flights an unfair and deceptive practice and an unfair method of competition. Existing law requires the Public Utilities Commission to require every commercial air operator, as defined, to procure, and continue in effect, adequate protection against liability for personal bodily injuries and property damage as a result of an accident, that may be imposed by law upon the operator and upon any person using, operating, or renting an aircraft, as defined, with the permission of the operator. This bill would require, whenever passengers have boarded an aircraft, as defined, and departure of the aircraft from the airport, as defined, is delayed by more than 2 hours, or more than 2 hours have passed following landing of the aircraft and passengers have not disembarked from the aircraft, that the air carrier, as defined, provide passengers, as needed, with (1) electrical service that is sufficient to provide the passengers with fresh air and light, (2) waste removal service in order to service the holding tanks for onboard restrooms, and (3) adequate food and drinking water and other refreshment. This bill would require an air carrier to provide clear and conspicuous notice regarding passenger or consumer complaint contact information. The bill would authorize the commission to levy a civil penalty of up to $27,500 per passenger upon an air carrier for violation of the above-described requirements, if the federal Department of Transportation no longer has the authority to levy fines pursuant to its above-described regulations, along with interest upon any unpaid and delinquent penalty, and requires the commission to pay any moneys collected through the levy into the General Fund. The commission would be required to notify the Department of Finance and the relevant policy and fiscal committees of the Legislature if it determines the federal Department of Transportation no longer has the authority to levy fines and conditions the commission's exercise of its enforcement authority upon the Legislature making an appropriation for that purpose.
Bill Text
- Amended 06/01/10 - Amended Senate Current pdf June 01, 2010
- Amended 04/26/10 - Amended Senate pdf April 26, 2010
- Amended 04/12/10 - Amended Senate pdf April 12, 2010
- Introduced 02/19/10 - Introduced pdf February 19, 2010
- SB1264 View text html
Action History
-
Died on file.
-
Placed on inactive file on request of Senator Leno.
-
(Ayes 36. Noes 0. Page 3794.)
-
Reconsideration granted.
-
Motion to reconsider made by Senator Leno.
-
Read third time. Refused passage. (Ayes 17. Noes 16. Page 3794.)
-
Read second time. Amended. To third reading.
-
From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 7. Noes 3. Page 3674.)
-
(Suspense - for vote only.)
-
Set for hearing May 27.
-
Placed on APPR suspense file.
-
Set for hearing May 10.
-
Read second time. Amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
-
From committee: Do pass as amended, but first amend, and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 6. Noes 2. Page 3311.)
-
Set for hearing April 20.
-
From committee with author's amendments. Read second time. Amended. Re-referred to Com. on T. & H.
-
To Com. on T. & H.
-
From print. May be acted upon on or after March 23.
-
Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.
Sponsors
- Leno · Primary
- Lieu · Cosponsor
- Simitian · Cosponsor
- Torres · Cosponsor
Sponsorship breakdown
Export CSV (upgrade) →1 sponsors · 3 co-sponsors · 118 not signed on · 2 voted No
Sponsors (1)
- Leno
Co-sponsors (3)
- Lieu
- Simitian
- Torres
Not signed on (118)
118 members have not signed on to this bill.
Show all 118 →"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.
Votes
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 34 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Democratic | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 37 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| % of votes cast | 95% | 0% | 0% | 5% |
How each member voted (39)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Yee | — | Yea |
| Hancock | — | Yea |
| Wyland | — | Yea |
| Cedillo | — | Yea |
| Cogdill | — | Yea |
| Corbett | — | Yea |
| Harman | — | Yea |
| Hollingsworth | — | Yea |
| Huff | — | Yea |
| Leno | — | Yea |
| Lowenthal | — | Yea |
| Negrete | — | Yea |
| Runner | — | Yea |
| Ducheny | — | Yea |
| McLeod | — | Yea |
| Dutton | — | Yea |
| Ashburn | — | Yea |
| Oropeza | — | Yea |
| Pavley | — | Yea |
| Romero | — | Yea |
| Simitian | — | Yea |
| Steinberg | — | Yea |
| Walters | — | Yea |
| Wiggins | — | Yea |
| Wolk | — | Yea |
| Aanestad | — | Not Voting |
| Alquist | — | Yea |
| Kehoe | — | Yea |
| Liu | — | Yea |
| Price | — | Yea |
| Wright | — | Yea |
| Correa | — | Yea |
| Cox | — | Not Voting |
| DeSaulnier | — | Yea |
| Denham | — | Yea |
| Florez | — | Yea |
| Calderon, Lisa | Democratic | Yea |
| Padilla, Stephen C. | Democratic | Yea |
| Strickland, Tony | Republican | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 17 | 15 | 0 | 4 |
| Democratic | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Republican | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 17 | 17 | 0 | 5 |
| % of votes cast | 44% | 44% | 0% | 13% |
How each member voted (39)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Yee | — | Yea |
| Corbett | — | Yea |
| Hancock | — | Yea |
| Lowenthal | — | Yea |
| Cedillo | — | Nay |
| Hollingsworth | — | Not Voting |
| Negrete | — | Nay |
| Runner | — | Nay |
| Huff | — | Nay |
| Cogdill | — | Nay |
| Ducheny | — | Nay |
| Dutton | — | Nay |
| Liu | — | Yea |
| McLeod | — | Nay |
| Ashburn | — | Nay |
| Pavley | — | Yea |
| Price | — | Not Voting |
| Romero | — | Yea |
| Simitian | — | Yea |
| Wiggins | — | Yea |
| Wright | — | Nay |
| Aanestad | — | Nay |
| Alquist | — | Yea |
| Harman | — | Not Voting |
| Kehoe | — | Yea |
| Leno | — | Yea |
| Oropeza | — | Yea |
| Steinberg | — | Yea |
| Walters | — | Nay |
| Wolk | — | Yea |
| Wyland | — | Nay |
| Correa | — | Nay |
| Cox | — | Not Voting |
| DeSaulnier | — | Yea |
| Denham | — | Nay |
| Florez | — | Yea |
| Calderon, Lisa | Democratic | Nay |
| Padilla, Stephen C. | Democratic | Not Voting |
| Strickland, Tony | Republican | Nay |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 7 | 3 | 0 | 1 |
| Total | 7 | 3 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 64% | 27% | 0% | 9% |
How each member voted (11)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Yee | — | Yea |
| Corbett | — | Yea |
| Kehoe | — | Yea |
| Leno | — | Yea |
| Price | — | Yea |
| Walters | — | Nay |
| Wolk | — | Yea |
| Alquist | — | Yea |
| Wyland | — | Nay |
| Cox | — | Not Voting |
| Denham | — | Nay |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 9 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Total | 9 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| % of votes cast | 82% | 0% | 0% | 18% |
How each member voted (11)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Yee | — | Yea |
| Corbett | — | Not Voting |
| Kehoe | — | Yea |
| Leno | — | Yea |
| Alquist | — | Yea |
| Price | — | Yea |
| Wolk | — | Yea |
| Walters | — | Yea |
| Wyland | — | Yea |
| Cox | — | Yea |
| Denham | — | Not Voting |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 6 | 2 | 0 | 1 |
| Total | 6 | 2 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 67% | 22% | 0% | 11% |
How each member voted (9)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Lowenthal | — | Yea |
| Harman | — | Not Voting |
| Huff | — | Nay |
| Kehoe | — | Yea |
| Ashburn | — | Nay |
| Oropeza | — | Yea |
| Pavley | — | Yea |
| Simitian | — | Yea |
| DeSaulnier | — | Yea |
Subjects
Frequently asked questions
- What does SB 1264 do?
- Pursuant to existing law, the federal Department of Transportation has adopted regulations, that became effective April 29, 2010, requiring air carriers, as defined, to do all of the following: (1) adopt contingency plans for lengthy tarmac delays that include specified passenger services and to publish those plans on their Internet Web site, (2) adopt a customer service plan that addresses specified matter and audit compliance with the plan, and (3) designate Advocates for Passengers' Interests and inform consumers how to file a complaint about scheduled service, acknowledge receipt of each complaint, and send a substantive response to each complainant. The regulations make an air carrier's failure to comply with its contingency plan for lengthy tarmac delays an unfair and deceptive practice subject to enforcement by the department. The regulations additionally make unrealistic scheduling of flights and the holding out of certain chronically delayed flights an unfair and deceptive practice and an unfair method of competition. Existing law requires the Public Utilities Commission to require every commercial air operator, as defined, to procure, and continue in effect, adequate protection against liability for personal bodily injuries and property damage as a result of an accident, that may be imposed by law upon the operator and upon any person using, operating, or renting an aircraft, as defined, with the permission of the operator. This bill would require, whenever passengers have boarded an aircraft, as defined, and departure of the aircraft from the airport, as defined, is delayed by more than 2 hours, or more than 2 hours have passed following landing of the aircraft and passengers have not disembarked from the aircraft, that the air carrier, as defined, provide passengers, as needed, with (1) electrical service that is sufficient to provide the passengers with fresh air and light, (2) waste removal service in order to service the holding tanks for onboard restrooms, and (3) adequate food and drinking water and other refreshment. This bill would require an air carrier to provide clear and conspicuous notice regarding passenger or consumer complaint contact information. The bill would authorize the commission to levy a civil penalty of up to $27,500 per passenger upon an air carrier for violation of the above-described requirements, if the federal Department of Transportation no longer has the authority to levy fines pursuant to its above-described regulations, along with interest upon any unpaid and delinquent penalty, and requires the commission to pay any moneys collected through the levy into the General Fund. The commission would be required to notify the Department of Finance and the relevant policy and fiscal committees of the Legislature if it determines the federal Department of Transportation no longer has the authority to levy fines and conditions the commission's exercise of its enforcement authority upon the Legislature making an appropriation for that purpose.
- Who sponsors SB 1264?
- SB 1264 is sponsored by Leno, Lieu, Simitian, and Torres.
- What is the current status of SB 1264?
- This bill died with 2009-2010 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Senate” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
- Where can I track SB 1264?
- Track SB 1264 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.
Make your voice heard on SB 1264
Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.
Stay ahead of SB 1264
Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously
One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.
Track this bill →