AFS-15-333-E

Exemption No. 11180

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

WASHINGTON, DC 20591

 

In the matter of the petition of 

 

BILLINGS FLYING SERVICE Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2015-0104

 

for an exemption from

§ 91.313(a) and (b)

of Title 14, Code of 

Federal Regulations 

 

GRANT OF EXEMPTION

 By letter dated January 16, 2015 Mr. Jeff Cook, Billings Flying Service, 6309 Jellison 

Road, Billings, MT 59101 petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for an 

exemption from § 91.313(a) and (b) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). The 

proposed exemption, if granted, would allow Billings Flying Service to conduct operations 

needed to satisfy training, type rating requirements, and proficiency requirements found in 

part 61 in restricted category aircraft.

The petitioner requests relief from the following regulations:

Section 91.313(a), which prescribes in pertinent part, that no person may operate a restricted 

category civil aircraft for other than the special purpose for which it is certificated or in an 

operation other than one necessary to accomplish the work activity directly associated with 

that special purpose.

Section 91.313(b), which prescribes in pertinent part, that operating a restricted category civil 

aircraft to provide flight crewmember training in a special purpose operation for which the 

aircraft is certificated is considered to be an operation for that special purpose.
2

The petitioner supports its request with the following information:

The petitioner states that Billings Flying Service supports the United States government in fire 

suppression operations and Billings Flying Service conducts these operations in S-61A and 

CH-47D type aircraft, which have been issued special airworthiness certificates in the 

restricted category. 

Billings Flying Service pilots operating these aircraft are subject to the type rating 

requirements and proficiency check requirements prescribed in §§ 61.31 and 61.58. Billings

Flying Service explains that the restrictions on the airworthiness certificate and those found in 

§ 91.313 have recently been interpreted to restrict the aircraft use for type rating training and 

pilot-in-command (PIC) checks.

Billings Flying Service notes that it has conducted training and proficiency check for many 

years, and that such operations are safe, present no additional risk to the public, and are in the 

public interest. Billings Flying Service notes that it would perform no additional maneuvers or 

operations, above what they have conducted in the past, under an exemption. Operations

conducted under an exemption, if granted, would be in the same location for training 

previously used by Billings Flying Service. The petitioner asserts that conducting these same 

operations, including those that would be under the oversight of an FAA Designated Pilot 

Examiner (DPE), Aviation Safety Inspector, or Pilot Proficiency Examiner (PPE), present no 

additional risk and are in the public interest. 

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition 

in the Federal Register because this is not a precedent-setting petition, and any delay in acting 

on this petition would be detrimental to Billings Flying Service.

The FAA’s analysis is as follows:

The FAA has fully considered the petitioner’s request and supporting information and 

determined that the relief requested meets an equivalent level of safety and is in the public 

interest.

Although the petition requests relief from § 91.313(b), the FAA does not believe that an 

exemption from that provision is necessary. This provision allows an operator to consider 

training for the special purpose operation for which the aircraft is certificated to be an 

operation for that special purpose. Since Billings Flying Service will not be conducting 

training directly related to the special purpose under this exemption, relief from § 91.313(b) is 

not required. 

As noted, § 91.313(a) states that “no person may operate a restricted category civil aircraft for 

any purpose other than the special purpose for which it is certificated” or “in an operation 

other than one necessary to accomplish the work activity directly associated with that special 

purpose.” Special purpose operations for restricted category aircraft are outlined in § 21.25(b). 

The FAA has recently determined that practical tests for the addition of a type rating 
3

designation to a pilot certificate, training in preparation for such practical tests, or other flights 

necessary for the conduct of such practical tests, would be contrary to the limitations 

described in § 91.313(a). The FAA recognizes that the recent determination creates a 

regulatory barrier for operators needing to conduct flights to meet the type rating requirements 

of § 61.31 when a standard category aircraft in the same category, class, and type is not 

reasonably available to the operator.

The FAA notes that its determination that restricted category aircraft cannot be used for 

practical test for type ratings, does not apply to proficiency checks accomplished by those 

pilots that already hold the requisite type rating and whose duties are to perform an operation 

described in § 91.313(a). These flights, such as flights needed to satisfy the PIC proficiency 

checks required by § 61.58 (and associated PPE observations), are considered necessary to 

accomplish the work activity directly associated with the aircraft’s special purpose and would 

not require regulatory exemption.

The FAA believes that the fire suppression operations conducted by Billings Flying Service

are a benefit to the public. Since these operations cannot be conducted without appropriately 

trained and certificated pilots, the FAA finds that Billings Flying Service request for 

exemption would also be in the public interest. The FAA also believes that safety is enhanced 

by enabling the conduct of a practical test to add a type rating, as well as the training in 

preparation for that practical test, in the aircraft or aircraft type that will be operated by the 

pilot during the special purpose operation. 

The FAA recognizes that airworthiness standards for restricted category aircraft do not meet 

the same level of safety that is required for aircraft certificated in the standard or transport 

category. The operating limitations set forth in § 91.313 are designed to compensate for this 

and to provide the necessary level of safety for special purpose operations. However, the FAA 

finds that an equivalent level safety would be met by the conditions/limitations provided in 

this exemption. The FAA has issued grants of exemption in circumstances similar in all 

material respects to those presented in your petition. In Grant of Exemption No. 10863 (copy 

enclosed), the FAA found that an exemption was appropriate to allow the Sikorsky Aircraft 

Corporation (Sikorsky) to utilize a restricted category aircraft S-61 to conduct part 61 flight 

crewmember training including for those pilots not employed by Sikorsky. The FAA is issuing

Billings Flying Service similar conditions and limitations as were issued in Exemption No. 

10863, with modifications necessary to meet the requested relief, as described below.

Exemption No. 10863 was based, in part, on that fact there are no standard category short 

body S-61’s available for use by Sikorsky. Condition/Limitations No. 1 of Exemption No. 

10863 prescribed that the exemption would terminate upon availability of a standard category 

short body S-61. This condition and limitation was appropriate for the exemption, as the 

aircraft was being utilized by Sikorsky to train pilots other than those employed by Sikorsky. 

The condition acknowledged that, when a standard category short body S-61 became 

available, there would be an acceptable avenue for these other entities to obtain training 

without the need to utilize a restricted category aircraft. The FAA supports the use of 
4

restricted category aircraft for flight training and practical tests for type ratings for those pilots 

who are employed by an operator to perform special purpose operations in these aircraft. The 

FAA believes that, for those pilots who are not employed by an operator, the use of restricted 

category aircraft for flight training and practical tests should be allowed only under narrow 

circumstances. Since Billings Flying Service has not requested to provide training to pilots 

that are not employed by the petitioner, the FAA has removed condition and limitation No. 1 

found in Exemption No. 10863. 

The relief granted in this exemption allows Billings to operate a restricted category aircraft for 

a practical test necessary for its pilots to obtain a type rating designation as required by 

§ 61.31. In addition, the exemption allows Billings to train pilots in preparation for these

practical tests. The FAA is limiting this relief to those pilots, employed by Billings Flying 

Service, who have the intent of participating in a special purpose operation for which the 

listed aircraft are certificated. The exemption would also grant relief for any flights necessary 

to designate a DPE in one of the aircraft types listed in Condition/Limitation No. 1. The 

limitation on using this exemption outside of these purposes, and by other operators, is 

contained in Condition/Limitation Nos. 2 and 5. 

The FAA finds that an exemption from § 91.313(c) is required for Billings to conduct the 

operations described in the petition. Recent legal interpretation by the FAA recognizes an 

instructor who is being paid to provide flight training in an aircraft is operating the aircraft for 

compensation or hire regardless of whether he or she is acting as pilot in command. The same 

principle applies to DPEs providing practical tests. The FAA does not seek to restrict Billings

Flying Service from providing compensation to those conducting training or practical tests 

functions in the aircraft covered under this exemption. However, Billings Flying Service can 

only conduct such flights if the person receiving training will be conducting special purpose 

operations on behalf of the operator; or, in the case of a DPE, will be conducting practical 

tests for the operator’s pilots. The FAA has captured this policy in Condition/Limitation Nos. 

3 and 5. 

The FAA has reviewed the condition and limitations and limitations pertaining to 

maintenance requirements for similar operators. The FAA finds the Type Certificate Data 

Sheet (TCDS) for the S-61A (H2EA) and TCDS for the CH-47D (R0011DE) provide 

instruction on how the helicopters will be serviced, inspected and maintained. The FAA has 

captured the requirement to adhere to the TCDS instructions in Condition/Limitation Nos. 8 

and 9.

The FAA’s Decision

In consideration of the foregoing, I find that a grant of exemption is in the public interest.

Therefore, pursuant to the authority contained in 49 U.S.C. §§ 106(f), 40113 and 44701 

delegated to me by the Administrator, Billings Flying Service is granted an exemption from 

14 CFR § 91.313(a) and (c) to the extent necessary to allow Billings Flying Service to conduct 
5

operations in restricted category S-61A and CH-47D aircraft, subject to the conditions and 

limitations listed below. 

Conditions and Limitations

1. The privileges of this exemption are limited to the following aircraft:

a. Sikorsky S-61A: N561SC; and.

b. CH-47D: N401AJ, N561AJ and N562AJ.

2. Billings Flying Service must be in full operational control of any aircraft operated 

using the privileges of this exemption.

3. The relief from § 91.313(c) is only granted to the extent necessary to allow for the 

operations described in Condition/Limitation No. 5.

4. All routes and locations used during any operation conducted under this exemption 

must be accepted by the CHDO in the geographic region where the aircraft is to be 

operated. 

5. Billings Flying Service may only use the aircraft for the special purposes identified on 

the restricted category airworthiness certificate for the aircraft in Condition/Limitation 

No. 1 and the following operations:

a. Practical tests necessary to issue type ratings required by § 61.31(a) to pilots 

employed by Billings;

b. Proficiency training for pilot employed by Billings Flying Service seeking to 

take a practical test for a type rating designation necessary to operate an aircraft 

covered under this exemption; and,

c. Observation flights performed with an Aviation Safety Inspector onboard for 

the purpose of designating or observing a Designated Pilot Examiner (DPE).

6. An aircraft configuration analysis including but not limited to flight deck, flight 

manual, operating limitations, and procedures must be completed and provided to the 

CHDO reflecting the capability of the aircraft to perform all required procedures and 

maneuvers necessary to meet the training, practical tests, and proficiency check

requirements in part 61.

7. No person may operate an aircraft under the relief of this exemption at a weight greater 

than the weight that, with the critical engine inoperative, would permit a rate of climb 

of at least 50 feet per minute at an altitude of at least 1,000 feet above the elevation of 

the highest ground or obstruction within the area to be operated or at an altitude of 

5,000 feet, whichever is higher.
6

8. The S-61A aircraft listed in Condition/Limitation No. 1(a) must be serviced and 

maintained in accordance with Type Certificate Data Sheet (H2EA).

9. The CH-47D aircraft listed in Condition/Limitation No. 1(b) must be serviced and 

maintained in accordance with Type Certificate Data Sheet (R0011DE).

10. A copy of this exemption must be provided to the CHDO in the geographic region 

where the aircraft is based and must be carried aboard the aircraft at all times. 

11. Failure to meet any of the conditions of this exemption immediately cancels the 

authority authorized by this exemption.

This exemption terminates on February 28, 2017, unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

Issued in Washington, D.C., on February 18, 2015

/s/

John Barbagallo

Acting Deputy Director, Flight Standards Service .