Exemption No. 11852 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

WASHINGTON, DC 20591 

In the matter of the petition of 

LAST FRONTIER AVIATION 

GROUP 

for certain exemptions from part 120 

ofTitle 14, Code of 

Federal Regulations 

Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2015-0561 

DENIAL OF EXEMPTION 

By letter dated March 3, 2015, Mr. David King, President, Last Frontier Aviation Group 

(LFAG), 1415 N. Local 302 Road, Suite G, Palmer, AK 99645, petitioned the Federal 

Aviation Administration (FAA) on behalf of LF AG for an exemption from certain FAA drug 

and alcohol testing regulations in part 120 ofTitle 14 ofthe Code of Federal Regulations 

( 14 CFR). The proposed exemption, if granted, would allow two part 135 operators, Last 

Frontier Air Ventures, Ltd. operating under part 135 Certificate No. L49A498I and Prism 

He licopters, Inc. operating under part 135 Certificate No. EOOA6341 (which already operates 

a combined program with its Part 145 repair station under the same name and operating 

Certificate No. EOOR634D) to combine both drug and alcohol programs into one program. 

The petitioner requested relief from the following regulations: 

Section 120.3 prescribes, in pertinent part, that the purpose of part 120 is to establish a 

program designed to help prevent accidents and injuries resulting from the use of prohibited 

drugs or the misuse of alcohol by employees who perform safety-sensitive functions in 

aviation. 

AAM-15-80 1-E 
Section 120.7, in pertinent part, for the purposes of part 120, defines Employer as a part 119 

certificate holder with authority to operate under parts 121 and/or 135; an operator as defined 

in § 91.147, or an air traffic control facility not operated by the FAA, or by, or under contract 

to the U.S. Military. 

Sections 120.111 and 120.2 19 state, in pertinent part, that an employer is prohibited from 

releasing certain employee information contained in drug and alcohol records. In addition to 

these specific requirements, many pru1 120 regulations require each employer to have its own 

drug and alcohol testing program. 

The petitioner supports its request with the following information: 

2 

The petitioner states that the two part 135 operations and one part 145 repair station at issue in 

this petition are affiliated through ownership under one business group, LF AG. Both 

companies share the same property and employees perform safety-sensitive duties for both 

companies using business agreements. The companies have operated separate part 135 

Certificates and the Department of Transportation (DOT) mandated drug and alcohol testing 

programs are remarkably similar in function and administration. Granting this petition would 

allow the companies in this group (LF AG) to uni fy their drug and alcohol testing programs 

while continuing to operate two separate part 135 operations and one part 145 repair station. 

LF AG states that granting this exemption from the FAA's drug and alcohol testing regulations 

and allowing a unified program among the two part 135 operators (including the part 145 

repair station) will be in the public interest due to a decrease in paperwork, statistical 

anomalies, administrative costs and would provide a level of safety because the companies 

could share information, procedures and processes in advance of a single shared program. 

This collaboration will allow LF AG to strengthen the end-state program by adopting a 

program that covers all employees. 

A summary of LFAG's petition was published in the Federal Register on Wednesday, April 

29,2015 (80 FR 23847) with a closing comment period of May 19, 2015. No comments were 

received. 

The FAA's analysis is as follows: 

The FAA carefully considered all information presented by the petitioner and finds that 

granting the petition for exemption would not provide a level of safety equi valent to that 

provided by the rule fi·01n which it seeks exemption and, therefore, would not be in the public 

interest. 

As defined in § 120.7, each employer or part 119 certificate holder with authority to operate 

under parts 12 1 or 135 and each operator as defined in § 91.14 7 must have its own drug and 

alcohol testing program. The FAA regulations do not consider groups or corporations as 

employers, and a group or corporation may not accept responsibility for drug and alcohol 

testing program compliance. One of the FAA's uses of the air carrier certificate is to record 
3 

an air carrier's compliance history. The premise that each employer (i.e. certificate holder) 

must have its own drug and alcohol testing program assists the agency in its effort to have an 

accurate image of air carriers' drug and alcohol testing program compliance. Allowing a 

business with two air carrier certificates to maintain a unified drug and alcohol testing 

program could allow the business to present an inaccurate image of compliance for one or 

both of the certificates. For example, LF AG corporation could decide to align all potential 

violation history to one of the pat1 135 certificates, regardless of which operating certificate 

incurs violations. Under this circumstance, the public would be unaware of the true 

magnitude of a specific air carrier's compliance under the regulations created to ensure safety. 

For this reason, among others, it is imperative for the safety of the flying public that each 

certificate holder's operating history remains separate. 

The FAA has issued grants of exemption to allow a unified drug and alcohol testing program 

between two employers in expectation of a merger to a single operating certificate. The FAA 

has not granted an exemption to allow a unified drug and alcohol testing program to two part 

135 operators without the benefit of a merger to surrender one of the certificates. The FAA 

regulation does allow a part 121 or 135 operator to include its employees operating under its 

pat1 145 repair station certificate, similar to that of Prism Helicopters. This is a common 

practice and ultimately makes the part 135 operation responsible for all compliance and 

enforcement issues for the part 145 repair station. Furthermore, current FAA drug and alcohol 

testing program regulations allow air carriers operating under a part 121 or 135 certificate, and 

a§ 91.147 operation, to maintain a unified drug and alcohol testing program. Under this 

circumstance, the incentive to present an accurate image o'f compliance between the air carrier 

and § 91.147 operator is simpler to achieve since the air carrier must accept that the § 91.14 7 

operation will be held to a higher standard of safety, compliance, and potential subsequent 

violation penalty. LF AG owns and operates two part 135 operations and a part 145 repair 

station with business agreements in place to allow for a shared safety-sensitive workforce. 

Many aviation corporations own two or more certificated companies and engage in business 

agreements to share safety-sensitive workers. Therefore, the FAA does not find LF AG's 

business structure unique. The petition for exemption that LF AG submitted for consideration 

does not provide an exceptional circumstance that would warrant an exemption to the 

requirement to maintain separate drug and alcohol testing programs, as each is considered a 

separate employer. 

As previously stated, §§ 120.111 and 120.219, prohibit an employer from releasing the drug 

and alcohol testing records of its employees. The LF AG requests relief from these 

confidentiality requirements in order to share employees' drug and alcohol testing records 

among the companies involved. In addition, LF AG contends that an exemption from 

confidentiality requirements would allow better management and reduce administrative costs. 

While the petitioner states relief from the confidentiality requirements would reduce costs, the 

FAA finds that relief would compromise employees' drug and alcohol testing record 

information. The FAA does not find that a grant of exemption fi·om the confidentiality 

requirements in §§ 120.111 and 120.219 is in the public interest. 
The FAA recognizes that the companies· drug and alcohol testing programs are similar in 

content and administration due to their LF AG affiliation. However, the regulations require 

each employer to implement and maintain separate and distinct drug and alcohol testing 

programs to ensure proper administration and strict confid.cntiality of employees' drug and 

alcohol testi ng records. 

The FAA's Decision: 

In consideration of the foregoing, I find that a grant of exemption would not be in the public 

interest. Therefore, pursuant to the authority contained in 49 U.S.C. §§ l06(f), 4011 3 

and 4470 I, delegated to me by the Administrator, the petition of the LFAG for an exemption 

from 14 CFR §§ 120.7, 120. 1 I 1, and 120.2 19, and from any other parts of 120 to operate a 

unified drug and alcohol testing program for Last Frontier Air Ventures and Prism 

Helicopters, Inc. is hereby denied. 

Issued in Washington, D.C., on JUN 1 7 2015 

James R. Fraser 

Federal Air Surgeon 

4