Part 121 Rules May Come to Part 135 Carriers

By Kerry Lynch
Published June 14, 2011  AVIATIONWEEK.COM

FAA, in the throes of finalizing new flight, rest and duty regulations for Part 121 carriers, is considering extending the rules to Part 135 operators, says FAA Flight Standards Director John Allen. Speaking during the National Air Transportation Association’s Air Charter Summit June 8 in Chantilly, Va., Allen did not provide a time line on a potential proposal for Part 135, and concedes the agency has its hands full with mandates from last summer’s Airline Safety and FAA Extension Act of 2010, which stemmed in part from the 2009 Colgan Air crash near Buffalo, N.Y. He added, however, that future rulemakings will include a flight-and-duty-time proposal for on-demand operators, and “what you see in 121 will translate to 135.”

The science of fatigue has emphasized human physiology, he says, adding, “Flight rest is a human issue, not just [based on] how you operate.” He thinks the Part 121 final rule, expected to be released in August, will have enough flexibility to work for Part 135.

John Duncan, manager of FAA’s Flight Standards Air Carrier Division, adds, “It’s coming for everybody.” He echoes sentiments that the “commonality is human physiology. It applies to everybody.”

National Air Transportation Association President James Coyne expressed concern about the costs and manpower requirements that would be necessary should on-demand operators be subject to regulations designed for scheduled operations. “Should we be worried by the economic impact of the proposal?” he asked Allen. Noting that FAA officials previously had pledged to treat 135 differently than 121 flight and duty time, Coyne adds that a straightforward application of the Part 121 rules to Part 135 “just seems unfair.”

Coyne notes that the government’s response to air traffic control fatigue issues is to hire more controllers. “If [FAA] treats the 135 world just like 121, can we send the bill to the government [to hire more pilots]?” he asked. Coyne urged FAA to consider the differences between the two types of operations when formulating the 135 flight-and-duty-time proposal.

Allen responded that any rule will have to “move through the regulatory juggernaut,” and that industry should stress the differences between the operations during the comment period that would come with the Part 135 flight-and-duty-time notice of proposed rulemaking. Comments hold FAA accountable, he says, adding, “We made significant adjustments” to the 121 rules as a result of the comments. “We learned a lot from the comments” and Part 135 will benefit from that.

Allen also notes that “real-world issues will be taken into consideration” in developing the flight-and-duty-time rules. When asked by an Air Charter Summit attendee to consider the recommendations of the Part 125/135 Aviation Rulemaking Committee when formulating the Part 135 flight-and-duty-time proposal, Allen responded that those recommendations would remain part of the conversation. “We know it’s a different community than 121,” he says. “We are aware of the great work the [ARC] did and will take that into account,” adds Duncan.

But Duncan also reiterates Allen’s sentiments about their full regulatory plate, and says of Part 135 flight and duty time, “It’s not going to happen soon because there are other priorities.”