28 CFR Part 35 Title II Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) - Preamble (published 2008)

"Minimal protection." (Section-by-Section Analysis)

There were many comments by service dog users urging the Department to remove from the definition the phrase "providing minimal protection."  The commenters set forth the following reasons for why the phrase should be deleted:  1) The current phrase can be interpreted to apply coverage under the ADA to "protection dogs" that are trained to be aggressive and protective, so long as they are paired with a person with a disability; and 2) since some view the minimal protection language to mean that a dog's very presence can act as a crime deterrent, the language may be interpreted to allow any untrained pet dog to provide minimal protection by its mere presence.  These interpretations were not contemplated by the ADA.

Question 9:  Should the Department clarify the phrase "providing minimal protection" in the definition or remove it?  Are there any circumstances where a service animal providing "minimal protection" would be appropriate or expected?