AFS-08-361-E 

 Exemption No. 10111 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

WASHINGTON, DC 20591 

 

In the matter of the petition of 

 

ENDLESS MOUNTAIN PILOTS, Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2008-0760

EAA CHAPTER 1458, INC., 

 

for an exemption from §§ 91.146 and 

91.147 and part 136 of Title 14, 

Code of Federal Regulations 

DENIAL OF EXEMPTION 

 By letters dated July 25, 2008 and August 26, 2008, Mr. Heath Goldstein, Endless 

Mountain Pilots, EAA Chapter 1458, Inc. (EMP), 83 Abington Gardens Drive, South 

Abington Township, Pennsylvania 18411-9364, petitioned the Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA) on behalf of EMP for an exemption from §§ 91.146 and 91.147, and 

part 136, subpart A, of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). The proposed 

exemption, if granted, would permit, for a 1-year period: (1) an aircraft owner who is not 

piloting his/her own aircraft or the airport owner of Seamans Field Airport in Factoryville, 

Pennsylvania (9N3), who rents aircraft in the normal course of business to share with the pilot 

in command (PIC) the fuel, oil, and operating cost of such flight if such aircraft owner 

chooses; (2) an aircraft owner who is not piloting his/her own aircraft or the airport owner of 

9N3 to allow the use of his/her aircraft at no expense to the PIC, if such aircraft owner so 

wishes; (3) an airport owner of 9N3 to offer fuel at a reasonable discount rate which would be 

no less than his actual cost of the fuel; (4) EMP to share the cost of fuel, oil, and aircraft 

operation with the aircraft owner and/or PIC; and (5) allow a pilot who does not have the 

required 500 hours of flight time to volunteer for such flights. 

The petitioner requests relief from the following regulations:

Section 91.146 prescribes, in pertinent part, that reimbursement of the operator of the 

airplane or helicopter is limited to that portion of the passenger payment for the flight 

that does not exceed the pro rata cost of owning, operating, and maintaining the aircraft 
2

for that flight, which may include fuel, oil, airport expenditures, and rental fees; and 

that a private pilot acting as pilot in command has at least 500 hours of flight time. 

Section 91.147 prescribes, in pertinent part, that each operator conducting passengercarrying flights for compensation or hire must comply with the safety provisions of 

part 136, subpart A, of this chapter, and apply for and receive a Letter of Authorization 

from the Flight Standards District Office nearest to its principal place of business, 

unless all flights are conducted under § 91.146. 

Part 136, subpart A, National Air Tour Safety Standards, applies to each person 

operating or intending to operate a commercial air tour in an airplane or helicopter and, 

when applicable, to all occupants of the airplane or helicopter engaged in a commercial 

air tour. 

The petitioner supports its request with the following information:

The petitioner states that since 1992 nearly 40,000 pilots have volunteered and 

provided flight experiences to more than 1.25 million children free of charge. The 

petitioner posits that the high cost of fuel and operating an aircraft, and the decline in 

general aviation, have affected participation in the organization’s rallies. As such, the 

petitioner asserts that the proposed exemption would alleviate some burden off of the 

volunteer pilots, increase participation at Young Eagle rallies, and be in the public 

interest. 

Furthermore, the petitioner believes that an equivalent level of safety would be 

maintained by conducting all Young Eagle operations in accordance with the rules and 

guidelines set by the Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA). The petitioner states 

that the volunteers: are private pilots who are members of EAA, have current medical 

certificates, and are current in their flight review. The petitioner acknowledges that 

EAA does not provide guidance on the number of minimum hours that pilots must have 

to conduct Young Eagle flights. The petitioner also recognizes that this is a safety 

concern and states that the rallies’ coordinator would ensure that an inexperienced pilot 

would not serve as PIC. This would be accomplished through the coordinator’s review 

of the volunteers’ pilot logbooks for logged hours as PIC, destinations traveled, and 

how often the volunteer served as PIC. The petitioner states that the Young Eagles 

coordinator has conducted over 800 hours of logged flight time and has also conducted 

Young Eagle flights. 

In addition to the oversight provided by the coordinator, the petitioner states that these 

additional safety precautions would be taken: 

1. All aircraft used during EMP Young Eagle rallies would be in airworthy 

condition; 

2. Designated parking would be provided for all aircraft being used during the 

rallies; 
3

3. Only authorized personnel, i.e., PICs, designated escorts, and ground personnel 

would be permitted to access designated parking areas; 

4. All PICs would obtain briefings before rallies; 

5. PICs would be current to carry passengers in airworthy conditions and take no 

more passengers than the aircraft permits; 

6. Before each flight, PICs would conduct pre-flight inspections of their aircraft; 

7. A weight and balance calculation would be done by each PIC; 

8. No hot loading, no unusual altitudes, no aerobatic maneuvers, and no flight 

formation would be permitted; 

9. All passengers would be briefed before each flight; 

10. All passengers would wear seatbelts and shoulder straps for the entire duration 

of the flight; and 

11. PICs would make necessary position pattern calls on 9N3’s airport frequency 

and follow all right traffic patterns and altitude for 9N3 airport. 

The petitioner also requests that the FAA review the program and events of the EAA’s 

Young Eagle rallies. 

 A summary of the petition was published in the Federal Register on December 4, 2008 

(73 FR 73986). No comments were received. 

The FAA’s analysis is as follows: 

The FAA finds that the petition if granted would not provide an equivalent level of safety and 

is, therefore, not in the public interest. On February 13, 2007, the FAA published the 

National Air Tour Safety Standards final rule, which set forth operating limitations for charity 

flight events like those proposed by the petitioner. See 72 FR 6884. 

The preamble of the air tour rule explains, in detail, the FAA’s determination that logging of 

flight time is a form of compensation. Also, writing off the cost of the aircraft is 

compensation; charging a fee to get into an event in order to get a “free” ride is compensation, 

etc. The preamble clearly illustrates charity, nonprofit, and community events. All of the 

flights by these charities involve compensation in one form or another, but in the interest of 

the public good and charity, the FAA developed the operating limitations in §§ 91.146 and 

91.147 to allow these events to occur under the provisions of part 91 rather than the more 

restrictive commercial operating rules of part 135. Rather than make a case-by-case 

determination using exemptions, as was the case before the Air Tour Safety Standards rule 

was published, the FAA created two new sections in part 91: § 91.146, Passenger-carrying 

flights for the benefit of a charitable, nonprofit, or community event, and § 91.147, Passengercarrying flights for compensation or hire. 

While the petitioner requested an exemption from §§ 91.146 and 91.147, § 91.146 appears to 

be the relevant provision for the petitioner’s events. Section 91.146(b)(7) limits the 
4

operator’s reimbursement to the “portion of the passenger payment for the flight that does not 

exceed the pro rata cost of owning, operating, and maintaining the aircraft for that flight, 

which may include fuel, oil, airport expenditures, and rental fees.” In establishing this 

provision, the FAA recognized that: 

It is often hard to determine whether a pilot is working for “free” or is being 

compensated in some manner. In the interest of charity, the FAA has allowed certain 

forms of compensation or hire, such as the ability to log pilot time and the ability to 

accept payment for aircraft fuel and oil. Some pilots own or borrow the aircraft used 

and are [not] paid for their pilot time. Some pilots rent an aircraft and are reimbursed 

by the sponsor. Some pilots are reimbursed for aircraft rental but provide their time 

for free. Some pilots who own the aircraft they fly are able to “write-off” some 

ownership expenses. Some pilots are paid to fly. All of the flights by these museums 

and charities involve “compensation,” but in the interest of public good and charity, 

the FAA has allowed them to operate outside of part 135 requirements. In this final 

rule, operators of these kinds of flights will continue to be allowed to operate outside 

of part 135 requirements, even though the FAA considers the operations to be for 

compensation or hire. 

72 FR 6884-01 

The operations the petitioner proposes to conduct, as recognized in the final rule, are 

operations for compensation or hire. The FAA, in promulgating this rule, reviewed over 100 

exemptions granting relief similar to what the petitioner now requests. The FAA promulgated 

this rule to establish a common standard that would allow these “experience” flights to 

continue without requiring the operators to obtain certification and operate under the 

provisions of part 135. The FAA has limited compensation for these experience flights to the 

passenger portion of the operating expenses associated with the flight. The petitioner has not 

demonstrated why it would be in the public interest to now allow complete reimbursement for 

these flights. 

Furthermore, we note that § 91.146(b) also requires that each private pilot conducting flights 

during one of these events must have at least 500 hours of flight time. Prior to this rule, all 

such private pilots were required to have at least 200 hours. The FAA received many public 

comments, including comments from EAA, about the increase from 200 to 500 hours during 

the rulemaking process. The petitioner states that he intends to use private pilots but not 

require any minimum flight time. This is not acceptable and would not provide an equivalent 

level of safety to the operating limitations set forth in § 91.146. Section 61.113 permits a 

private pilot to act as pilot in command of a charitable, nonprofit, or community event flight 

described in § 91.146 if the sponsor and the pilot comply with the requirements of § 91.146. 

If § 91.146 is not complied with, private pilots conducting the event flights will be at risk of 

violation. The petitioner did not request exemption from § 61.113 but also did not offer any 

equivalent level of safety that could cause us to grant such an exemption. 
5

Additionally, we note that § 91.146(b)(10) requires these flights to be operated in accordance 

with the safety provisions of part 136, subpart A, which includes passenger briefings. We 

note that the petition does not address these provisions or indicate intent to comply with these 

provisions. As such, the petitioner has not demonstrated that a grant of this exemption will 

not have an adverse impact on safety. 

The FAA’s Decision: 

 In consideration of the foregoing, I find that a grant of exemption would not provide an 

equivalent level of safety and would not be in the public interest. Therefore, pursuant to the 

authority contained in 49 U.S.C. §§ 40113 and 44701, delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the petition of Endless Mountain Pilots, EAA Chapter 1458, Inc., for an exemption from 

14 CFR §§ 91.146 and 91.147 and part 136, subpart A, is hereby denied. 

Issued in Washington, D.C., on Aug 02 2010. 

/s/ 

Raymond Towles 

Acting Director, Flight Standards 

 Service