PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Aug 5, 2015
Airline Access to Emergency Epinephrine Act of 2015
This bill directs the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to clarify, and to require air carriers (including foreign carriers) to clarify, that 1:1,000 epinephrine ampules included in emergency medical kits carried on aircraft are to be used for the treatment of anaphylaxis.
The FAA shall require an air carrier to:
carry on each aircraft at least two packs of epinephrine auto-injectors for use as the initial treatment for anaphylaxis,
replace them upon expiration or use, and
train air crewmembers on how to recognize the symptoms of an acute allergic reaction and administer auto-injectable epinephrine.
The Government Accountability Office shall report to Congress on air carrier policies relating to passengers with food allergies.
People & committees
Sen. Kirk, Mark Steven [R-IL] · R–IL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze S.1972 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine S.1972 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine S.1972 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine S.1972 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.