July 1, 2013 

SENT VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Docket Management System 

400 ih Street, SW, Room PL-400 

Washington, DC 20591-0001 

RE: REQUEST FOR EXEMPTION 

To Whom It May Concern: 

ZfH 3 JUL 2 t~ ~._) f : 31 

This letter is to request that an exemption from compliance with 14 C.F.R. 121.434(c)(1)(ii) 

be granted to Trans States Airlines, LLC (hereafter "Trans States"). 

This exemption request is identical to exemption 8054 that was granted to Trans States, 

May 13, 2003, and extended on February 17, 2005 and May 22, 2007. 

Trans States requests relief from the following regulation: 

FAR 121.434(c)(1)(ii) prescribes, in pertinent part, that if a qualifying 

PIC is completing initial or upgrade training specified in §121.424, the 

PIC must be observed in the performance of prescribed duties by an 

FAA inspector during at least one flight leg that includes a takeoff and 

a landing. 

Trans States supports its request with the following information: 

The original intent of §121.434(c)(1)(ii), issued in early 1970, was to validate the training a 

pilot received in a visual simulator. Since that rule was adopted, the airline industry has had 

nearly three decades of experience with visual simulators and advanced simulation. The 

airlines have successfully trained tens of thousands of pilots using sophisticated advanced 

simulators. Trans States believes the advanced simulation experience of the airline industry 

combined with that of the FAA has made the present rule obsolete. 

Trans States asserts that delays caused by waiting until the FAA can observe a qualifying 

PIC are costly. Trans States asserts that because of limited labor and resources at the St. 

Louis, Missouri, Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), Trans States' Principal Operations 

Inspector (POl) has had difficulty providing personnel to perform operating experience (OE) 

observations on a timely basis. Recognizing it as an unacceptable long-term solution, Trans 

States has requested the use inspectors from other FSDO's; however, the results have 

been much less than adequate. Trans States asserts that the delays experienced as a result 

of a lack of adequate FAA resources are extensive, with a current back log of 10 Captain 

11495 Navaid Road, Suite 340, Bridgeton, Missouri 63044 

314.222.4316 office, 314.222.4311 fax, dhayes@transstates.net 
candidates who are otherwise ready for line flight, but are still awaiting support from the 

FSDO staff in the conduct of the required FAA observation. These pilots were originally 

planned to be flying the line by mid-June. An additional 10 Captain candidates will be ready 

for required observations in July, and their completion dates must be pushed back to 

accommodate those Captains who were ready in June but were unable to be observed. 

Further exasperating the backlog is the inability of the FSDO to add staff as a result of 

sequestration. 

. Trans States further asserts that the FAA has the authority to, and routinely does, observe 

any pilot at any time. However, the FAA conducts these routine observations on a schedule 

that the local office sets without the burden of having to observe a particular pilot on specific 

flights necessitated by the airline's training and service schedule. 

Trans States contends that relieving the FAA inspectors of their obligation to observe pilots 

as required under §121.434(c)(1 )(ii) would allow the FAA to focus its efforts on higher priority 

safety concerns. Additionally, relief from this requirement would allow the FAA to focus its 

resources on the creation of additional APDs and Line Check Airmen, an undertaking which 

has also been negatively impacted by lack of resources since the beginning of sequester. 

The airline submitted the names of four individuals for consideration as Line Check Airmen 

in December 2012, but did not receive final approval on the fourth individual until late May 

2013. This was due in large part to a lack of resources at the local FSDO. 

Trans States has been advised that at Safety Summit I, sponsored by the DOT and the 

FAA, one of the recommendations from the Training Issues Working Group was to allow a 

qualified company check airman to provide the FAA observation when an FAA inspector is 

not available. Trans States adds that this would allow the FAA to target its personnel on 

those area deserving higher priority and attention and, thus, provide a more cost-effective 

use of an inspector's time. Trans States Airlines states on information and belief that this 

Safety Summit I recommendation has been endorsed at all levels of the FAA as an action 

that clearly would benefit the FAA and airlines. 

Trans States believes that the exemption would be in the public interest as it would: 

1. Allow the FAA greater flexibility and better use of its inspection force by focusing 

on higher priority safety functions; 

2. Allow Trans States Airlines to use a qualified pilot immediately after completing 

OE; 

3. Allow Trans States Airlines to significantly increase the use of qualified pilots and 

improve its ability to provide on-time, dependable air service to the public; and 

4. Allow Trans States Airlines to reduce the unnecessary cost of wages and lost 

productivity for those qualified pilots waiting for the FAA observation. 
5. Allow Trans States Airlines to compete on equal playing field with other regional 

airlines who carry the same of like exemption. 

Trans States further adds that, in some instances, the FAA inspector performing the 

observation may not even be qualified in the airplane being flown. By allowing a company 

check airman who is highly qualified in the airplane to complete the observation, a greater 

level of scrutiny and objectivity would be provided for the qualifying PIC. 

Finally, Trans States proposes that the requested exemption be subject to the following 

conditions and limitations, if granted: 

1. Trans States Airlines would submit to its POl an estimate of the number of PICs 

completing training and a plan of how OE observations would be conducted. The 

plan would be approved by the POl before a qualified check airman began an OE 

observation. 

2. Trans States Airlines would nominate qualified check airmen to perform the OE 

observation, and the FAA would approve the qualified check airmen to conduct 

the observation through a letter of authorization. 

3. Trans States Airlines would only use the FAA approved check airmen when the 

POl indicated that the FSDO is unable to supply resources to support the 

required observation. 

4. The requirement of §121.434(c)(1)(ii) would be considered fulfilled if a FAAauthorized check airman performs the observation. The observation requirement 

would be documented in the qualifying pilot's record. 

5. The authorized check airman would be a check airman other than the one who is 

conducting the OE flights of the qualifying pilot. 

Thank you for your consideration of our request of this exempti 

information please call me at 314-222-4316. 

David J. . Hay s, Ill 

Vice President & Gene I unsel 

Trans States Holdings, Inc. 

11495 Navaid Road, Suite 340 

Bridgeton, MO 63044 

(314) 222-4316- Telephone 

(314) 222-4311 -Facsimile 

d hayes@transstates. net 

Attorney for Trans States Airlines, LLC