P.O. Box 700548, Dallas, Texas 75370-0548

(972) 725-9000  FAX (972) 725-9090

Docket Management Facility

U.S. Department of Transportation

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE

West Building, Ground Floor, Room W12-140

Washington, D.C. 20590

January 6, 2016

Re: Petition for Rule Change 14 CFR part 121 §121.436

Via Electronic Filing Federal Docket Management System 

Pursuant to 14 CFR part 11 §11.16, this petition respectfully requests that the Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA) amend 14 CFR part 121 §121.436 (hereinafter 121.436) to include the flight time 

experience of a pilot that has an Airline Transport Pilot (ATP) Rating, is the Pilot-in-Command (PIC) in 

any 14 CFR part 135 operations when the aircraft that is being operated requires a type rating. This 

amendment to 121.436 is justified due to Congress’ and the FAA’s intent to require quality flight time 

prior to becoming a PIC in 14 CFR part 121 (part 121) operations. This request, for an amendment to 

121.436, is based on the information provided below.

A. Introduction

The FAA promulgated 121.436 as the result of congressional action and the FAA’s final notice of 

proposed rulemaking (NPRM). The language is very specific as to the qualifications that were 

intended for a pilot to be eligible to be a PIC n 14 CFR part 121 (Part 121) operations. The intent 

is for a prospective PIC in Part 121 operations to have the experience similar to that of a Part 121 

PIC. This is very clear in the following passages:

1. In Public Law 111-216 The Airline Safety and Federal Aviation Administration Extension 

Act of 2010 (FAA Extension Act of 2010) it states:

“(a) Requirements

(1) Rulemaking Proceeding.—The Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration 

shall conduct a rulemaking proceeding to require part 121 air carriers to develop 

and implement means and methods for ensuring that flight crewmembers have 

proper qualifications and experience.

(2) Minimum Requirements.—

(A) Prospective Flight Crewmembers.—Rules issued under paragraph (1) shall 

ensure that prospective flight crewmembers undergo comprehensive preemployment screening, including an assessment of the skills, aptitudes, 

airmanship, and suitability of each applicant for a position as a flight 

crewmember in terms of functioning effectively in the air carrier’s operational 

environment.

(B) All Flight Crewmembers.— Rules issued under paragraph (1) shall ensure 

that, after the date that is 3 years after the date of enactment of this Act, all 

flight crewmembers—

(i) have obtained an airline transport pilot certificate under part 61 of title 

14, Code of Federal Regulations; and

(ii) have appropriate multi-engine aircraft flight experience, as determined 

by the Administrator.”1

 1 Public Law 111-216 The Airline Safety and Federal Aviation Administration Extension Act of 2010 Sec. 216 Flight Crewmember screening 

and Qualifications
Request for Rule Change to 14 CFR Part 121 §121.436 Page 2 January 5, 2016

2. In the final rule to the NPRM Pilot Certification and Qualifications Requirements for Air 

Carrier Operations (Final Rule), the FAA stated:

“The Airline Safety and Federal Aviation Administration Extension Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 111-

216) directed the FAA to conduct a rulemaking to improve the qualifications and training for 

pilots serving in air carrier operations. Specifically, section 216 of the Act focused on the 

qualifications of air carrier pilots and directed the FAA to issue a rule that would require all 

pilots serving in part 121 air carrier operations to hold an ATP certificate by August 2, 2013. 

Section 217 of the Act directed the FAA to amend 14 CFR part 61 to modify ATP certification 

requirements to prepare a pilot to function effectively in a multipilot (multicrew) environment, 

in adverse weather conditions, during high altitude operations, and in an air carrier 

environment, as well as to adhere to the highest professional standards. Section 217 also 

directed the FAA to ensure pilots have sufficient flight hours in difficult operational conditions 

that may be encountered in air carrier operations...”2 (Emphasis added)

B. The basic elements for flight crewmembers experience as intended by Congress in the FAA 

Extension Act of 2010 for 14 CFR Part 121 (part 121) Operations3 consists of:

1. Screen prospective flight crewmembers to assess the skills, aptitudes, airmanship, and 

suitability of each applicant for a position as a flight crewmember in terms of functioning 

effectively in the air carrier’s operational environment, 

2. Each flight crewmember must obtain an FAA Airline Transport Pilot Certificate (ATP), and

3. Have appropriate multi-engine aircraft flight experience, as determined by the 

Administrator.

C. The FAA in its final rule stated that it was complying with the FAA Extension Act of 2010 to 

prepare pilots for the ATP rating by changes to 14 CFR part 61 to modify ATP standards to 

include: 

1. Have experience in adverse weather conditions,

2. High altitude operations,

3. Experience in an air carrier environment,

4. Experience in multi-crew environment,

5. Sufficient flight hours in difficult operational conditions that may be encountered in air 

carrier operations, and 

6. Adherence to the highest professional standards

D. Background

1. The FAA issued final rule on July 15, 20134 creating new requirements in 121.436. Before a 

pilot could become a PIC in part 121 operations, that pilot would be required to comply with 

the following requirements:

a. 1,000 hours of experience by serving as a PIC in operations under §§ 91.103(a)(2)(i), 

135.243(a)(1), or as a second-in-command (SIC) in part 121 operations or any 

combination thereof. For those pilots who are employed as a pilot in command in 

part 121 operations on July 31, 2013, compliance with the requirements of this 

paragraph (a)(3) is not required.5

b. An SIC must have a type rating for the specific aircraft that he/she is going to fly,

c. A PIC must be at least 23 years old

 2 Pilot Certification and Qualification Requirements for Air Carrier Operations Final Rule – FAA Docket No. FAA-2010-0100 

Page 42323 3 FAA Extension Act of 2010 ¶a.2.

4 78 FR 42324

5 14 CFR 121.436(a)(3)
Request for Rule Change to 14 CFR Part 121 §121.436 Page 3 January 5, 2016

2. In the preamble to 14 CFR part 121 §121.436, the FAA addressed comments on what type

of flight time should count for the 1,000 hours of experience.

a . For instructors, the FAA stated:

“...the FAA chose these particular operations in subpart K of part 91 and part 135 

because they are air carrier-like operations that require the PIC to hold an ATP 

certificate. The ability to fly at the airline transport pilot (ATP) certificate level and

have demonstrated this proficiency during evaluation is an important regulatory

differentiation. Specifically, these pilots will have gained experience as a PIC of a 

turbojet airplane...”6 (Emphasis added.)

b. For pilots, the FAA stated:

“The FAA first proposed that certain operations under part 135 should require an 

ATP certificate in 1977. In that NPRM, the FAA stated the requirement to hold an 

ATP certificate to act as PIC in some part 135 operations was ‘[. . .] based in part on 

operational complexity and the number of persons carried, would provide a level of 

safety more comparable to that provided by part 121.’ For these same reasons the 

FAA has determined that flight time acquired as a PIC in operations under 

§91.1053(a)(2)(i),and §135.243(a)(1) and flight time acquired as an SIC in part 121 

operations should count towards the 1,000 hour air carrier experience requirement. 

Operations under §91.1053(a)(2)(i) or §135.243(a)(1) require an ATP certificate, are 

multicrew operations, and generally use turbine aircraft and therefore are the most 

applicable to part 121 operations. The FAA has determined that, while other part 91 

and part 135 operations may involve certain elements that are relatable to part 121 

operations, the varied nature of operations does not make credit toward the 1,000

hour requirement appropriate. As such, the proposed requirement that the 1,000 

hours in air carrier operations may be a combination of time as PIC in operations 

conducted under §91.1053(a)(2)(i) or §135.243(a)(1) or as SIC in part 121 operations 

remains unchanged from the NPRM”

7 (emphasis added)

E. Arguments To Modify 14 CFR part 121.436

1. On 14 CFR part 135 air carriers that require their PICs to operate both passenger and 

cargo aircraft, each PIC would be required to pass an instrument proficiency check under 

14 CFR part 135 §135.297(c)(1)(i) and hold an ATP under §135.243(a). This is the same 

requirement for those PICs operating aircraft under §91.1069

2. Regardless of the requirement to only hold a commercial pilot certificate to fly cargo 

turbojet aircraft under part 135, a pilot that does hold an ATP flying in an all-cargo Part 135 

turbojet aircraft is held to the responsibility and flight standards of his/her ATP certificate. 

Thus, that pilot would meet the 3-prong requirement set forth in ¶D.2.b. above.

3. An ATP-holding pilot flying PIC in a 200-knot, piston-engine Cessna 404 carrying 

passengers at 4,000 feet under Part 135 can count that time toward the part 121 

§121.436(a)(3) requirements for cargo operations but a pilot who has demonstrated the

ability to fly to ATP performance standards, and who is flying PIC in a 400-knot, turbojet

Falcon 20 carrying cargo at FL310 cannot, defies the logic enumerated in the FAA’s final 

rule.

 6 Ibid., 42337 7 Ibid, 42356 and 42357
Request for Rule Change to 14 CFR Part 121 §121.436 Page 4 January 5, 2016

4. Similarities between a Part 135 all-cargo turbojet PIC and a part 135 passenger turbojet 

PIC are shown in Table 1. As can be seen in Table 1, a Part 135 PIC obtains the same 

experience in every aspect of a Part 135 operation in a turbojet aircraft whether it is

operated with passengers on board or not. As can readily be seen, there is virtually no 

difference in the overall experience between an all-cargo Part 135 PIC and a passengeronly Part 135 PIC. 

TABLE 1

Part 135 All-Cargo 

Turbojet Operations

Part 135 Passenger 

Turbojet Operations

High Altitude Operations  

Operations in the national 

airspace system is the same

 

Multi-crew environment  

Management of Aircraft systems 

are the same

 

Weather knowledge, and weather 

minima are the same

 

Same instrument approaches –

ILS, VOR, GPS, etc.  

Subject to strict operational 

control 

 

Requires aircraft type rating 

issued by FAA or FAA designee

 

Requires 6 month instrument 

proficiency Check  

Requires yearly line check  

Aircraft handling characteristics, 

including takeoffs, landings, power 

management, engine out 

maneuvers, aircraft limitations, 

etc. are the same

 

Requires same amount of ground 

school hours

 

If PIC flies both passenger and 

cargo on the same aircraft type, 

an ATP is required.

 
Request for Rule Change to 14 CFR Part 121 §121.436 Page 5 January 5, 2016

5. Table 2 illustrates some of the differences between Part 121, Part 135 and part 91 subpart 

K. The purpose of this table shows that cargo and passenger operations conducted 

pursuant to Part 135 regulations are more closely related to Part 121 operations whether 

the flights are operated as passenger or cargo to that of Part 121 operations. 

6. As can be seen from Table 2, Part 91 subpart K operations do not have the same overall 

structure including required management, FAA oversight, U.S. Department of 

Transportation rules and other stringent safety standards of Part 135 or Part 121 

operations. These differences show that all Part 135 PICs, regardless of whether the PIC 

is flying all-cargo or passenger, are subject to many more layers of regulatory burden than 

that of part 91 subpart K PICs. 

TABLE 2

Differences Table for Part 135 and part 91 subpart K8

Part 121 Part 135 Part 91subpart K

Can hold out to public to conduct 

Common Carriage

Can hold out to public to conduct 

Common Carriage

NO Common Carriage – Cannot holdout 

to the public 14 CFR part 91.1005. Can 

fly only owners in the program. Very 

limited.

Certificate holder must be a U.S. 

Citizen

Certificate holder must be a U.S. 

Citizen U.S. Citizenship NOT required 

Air carrier is responsible for 

operational control. Persons 

exercising operational must be highly 

trained

Air carrier is responsible for operational 

Control. Persons exercising 

operational must be highly trained

NO Training required to perform the 

functions of operational control See 14 

CFR part 91.1009 through 1013. The 

fractional owner is in operational control of 

a flight –

Subject to 14 CFR part 119 Rules Subject to 14 CFR part 119 Rules

NO requirements under part 119. No 

certificate is issued (is NOT defined as an 

air carrier)

Drug and alcohol testing program 

required. Subject to 14 CFR part 120

Drug and alcohol testing program 

required. Subject to 14 CFR part 120 NO drug and alcohol testing required

Must have Director of Operations, 

Chief Pilot, Chief Inspector, Director 

of Safety and Director of Maintenance 

14 CFR part 119 §119.65

Must have Director of Operations, Chief 

Pilot and Director of Maintenance 14 

CFR Part 119.69

NO required management personnel or 

qualifications but must designate points of 

contact.

Line check of Pilot in command 

required 14 CFR part 121 §121.440

Line check of Pilot in command 

required 14 CFR part 135.299

NO line check of pilots in command 

required

Subject to U.S. Department of 

Transportation (DOT) rules

Subject to U.S. Department of 

Transportation rules concerning aircraft 

size limit and registration

NOT subject to any DOT rules

Assigned FAA principal inspectors 

and inspection program subject to all 

types of FAA inspections

Assigned FAA principal inspectors and 

inspection program subject to all types 

of FAA inspections

NOT subject to FAA inspections for line 

checks and en route inspections.

Subject to FAA enroute inspections 

14 CFR part 121 §121.548

Subject to FAA enroute inspections 14 

CFR part 135 §135.75

NOT Subject to FAA enroute inspections 

§91.1019(a)

Issued Operations Specifications Issued Operations Specifications Issued management specifications

Issued FAA U.S. Air Carrier 

Certificate

Issued FAA U.S. Air Carrier Certificate NOT a U.S. air carrier – no certificate is 

issued

Lower minimums established in 14 

CFR part 121 §121.652(a) specifically 

allows credit for ALL 135 PICs 

operating under 14 CFR part 91 

operations.

May credit PIC experience gained in 

part 135 operations to meet the 

experience requirements of 14 CFR 

part 121 §121.652(a)

NO credit is given to any 91 subpart K 

experience to meet the requirements of 14

CFR part 121 §121.652 

Must report potentially hazardous 

weather 14 CFR part 121 §121.561

Must report potentially hazardous 

weather 14 CFR part 135 §135.67 NOT required

Certificate holder or PIC must restrict 

or suspend operations when hazards 

are known to exist for safe operations 

§121.553.

Certificate holder or PIC must restrict or 

suspend operations when hazards are 

known to exist for safe operations 

§135.69

NO language exists that requires 

restriction of operations when hazards are 

known for safe operations

 8

 See AC91-84 Appendix 2, part 91 Subpart K, part 119, part 135 and part 121.
Request for Rule Change to 14 CFR Part 121 §121.436 Page 6 January 5, 2016

7. Interestingly, Part 91 subpart K PICs are not able to credit PIC time toward the 

requirements stated in 14 CFR part 121 §121.652(a)9

. Yet, there is no restriction on 

whether a PIC engaging in Part 135 operations is flying all-cargo or passenger aircraft to 

be able to credit his/her flight time as a PIC towards the 14 CFR part 121 §121.652(a) 

requirement. The relevant part of 14 CFR part 121 §121.652(a) states:

“...a Pilot in command employed by a certificate holder conducting operations in 

large aircraft under part 135 of this chapter, may credit flight time acquired in 

operations conducted for that operator under part 91 in the same type airplane for 

up to 50 percent of the 100 hours of pilot in command experience required by this 

paragraph.”

8. Part 91 subpart K, as can be seen from the Table 2 above, demonstrates the layers of 

requirements for a Part 135 air carrier vs. the requirements for a Part 91 subpart K 

operator. These layers translate into more management oversight of pilots in the Part 135 

certificate holders vs. the Part 91 subpart K operators. These distinctions are what elevate 

every pilot working for a Part 135 air carrier to more closely resemble the requirements for 

Part 121 air carriers.

a. Ameristar is not discounting the experience allowed by Part 91 subpart K PICs, but 

rather demonstrating that the entire environment must be considered if the FAA is 

going to equate a Part 91 subpart K operation to a Part 135 operation. 

b. Since there is a large contingent of all-cargo Part 121 air carriers, the FAA can simply 

modify the regulation to include the requirement for Part 135 PICs flying all-cargo 

operations to have an ATP to count the time toward the experience requirements of 

121.436.

9. In the denial of exemption from 14 CFR part 121 §121.436 of Title 14 to Gulf & Caribbean 

Cargo, Inc. 10, the FAA stated that:

“..it determined that the ability to fly at the airline transport pilot (ATP) certificate 

level and have demonstrated this proficiency during evaluation is an important 

regulatory differentiation.”

The FAA goes on to state in this denial of exemption from 14 CFR part 121 §121.436:

“The FAA determined that, while other part 91 and part 135 operations may involve 

certain elements that are relatable to part 121 operations, the varied nature of 

operations does not make credit toward the 1,000 hour requirement appropriate. 

Because turbojet pilots in part 135 cargo operations are not required to hold an 

ATP certificate, the time accrued in such operations does not count toward the 

requirements of § 121.436(a)(3)” (emphasis added).

a. While it is true that a Part 135 PIC is not required to hold an ATP to be a PIC in Part 

135 operations. However, if a PIC does hold an ATP and is flying in Part 135 

operations as a turbojet PIC in cargo operations, the quality of his/her flight time 

clearly overcomes both of the FAA’s objections in denying Gulf & Caribbean Cargo, 

Inc.’s exemption request.

b. If the FAA continues that same argument without considering that a Part 135 pilot 

may have an ATP while flying an all-cargo aircraft, then it would invalidate a Part 121 

second in command (SIC) flying exclusively all-cargo aircraft from upgrading to fly 

passengers in a Part 121 operation as a PIC even though that pilot has 1000 hours 

of Part 121 flight time as a second in command.

 9 §121.652(a) sets forth landing ceiling and visibility requirements for PICs with less than 100 flight hours in Part 121 

operations. 10 Denial Of Exemption Docket FAA-2014-0361 dated May 30, 2014
Request for Rule Change to 14 CFR Part 121 §121.436 Page 7 January 5, 2016

c. It is highly unlikely that a pilot flying a turbojet aircraft as a PIC in Part 135 all-cargo 

does not have an ATP. The FAA does not provide any data to contradict this 

supposition. For this reason alone, the FAA should count Part 135 all-cargo turbojet 

PIC flight time towards the requirements of 121.436 since most, if not all, turbojet 

Part 135 PICs have an ATP.

10. A pilot that has a type rating on the type of turbojet aircraft that Ameristar operates, has an ATP, 

has over 5000 hours of turbojet time and 10 years’ experience as a PIC in Part 135 all-cargo 

operations is a well-qualified candidate to become an immediate PIC under Part 121 operations. 

In fact, that pilot may fly as a PIC on ferry flights with aircraft that are on Ameristar’s Operations 

Specifications without any restrictions. Contrast this pilot with a Part 135 pilot that has total of 

1700 hours, 1000 hours in a turbo-propeller aircraft that has flown only passenger operations and 

is now qualified to fly in an all-cargo on-demand environment in Part 121 operations. This 

doesn’t square with common sense and clearly demonstrates a missing link in the current 

§121.436 rule. This can be easily corrected in the proposed rule change shown below in ¶F.

11. The FAA makes assumptions that are not backed up by any data regarding pilots flying turbojet 

aircraft in Part 135 and 14 CFR Part 125 (Part 125) operations. These assumptions are that 

pilots in Part 135 all-cargo and part 125 operations do not have ATPs. Ameristar challenges 

these assumptions as being incorrect in a very high percentage of cases if not in all cases. This 

is primarily due to an air carrier’s insurance requirements. Ameristar is not aware of any pilot 

flying PIC in Part 125 or Part 135 turbojet aircraft that do not have an ATP. 

12. In the FAA final rule document to 121.436 the FAA makes a case against the part 125 PIC 

because Part 125 operations cannot engage in common carriage. 14 CFR Part 91 subpart K 

also cannot engage in common carriage, yet part 91 subpart K PICs can credit their flight time to 

the requirements of 121.436. See the following from the final rule document: 

“The FAA determined that flight time in part 125 should not count because, although these 

operations share certain characteristics with part 121 operations, they are not sufficiently 

similar to count toward the 1,000 hours of air carrier experience. Part 125 does not 

involve common carriage, a pilot is only required to have a commercial pilot certificate, 

and the operating rules in part 125 differ significantly from the operating rules in part 121.” 

(emphasis add)11

13. The FAA completely ignores previous experience of a Part 121 PIC that may have flown 

thousands of hours of PIC in Part 121 operations, but was not employed on a specific date with a 

Part 121 air carrier. This means a PIC whose Part 121 air carrier went out of business on July 

30, 2013 after 20 years as a PIC for that air carrier, that PIC would be required to meet the 

requirements of 121.436. At the time the PIC upgraded to PIC, that pilot may have had less than 

500 hours as an SIC and would not meet the hourly requirements of §121.436(a)(3), even though 

that PIC may have thousands of hours as a Part 121 PIC. It is clearly discernable that this 

restriction in the rule contradicts the very essence of the rule itself – that being that the FAA is 

foregoing possible years of experience for no apparent reason. This has to be an oversight. The 

rule currently states:

“For those pilots who are employed as pilot in command in part 121 operations on July 

31, 2013, compliance with the requirements of this paragraph (a)(3) is not required.”

(emphasis added)

By placing a specific date in the rule, it excludes experience prior to that date. This can be 

easily corrected to include a PIC’s experience prior to July 31, 2013. Interestingly, the SIC has 

no such time limitation on when his/her time was accumulated.

 11 Ibid, 42357 ¶G.4.
Request for Rule Change to 14 CFR Part 121 §121.436 Page 8 January 5, 2016

F. Proposal to amend §121.436 Pilot Qualification: Certificates and Experience 

Requirements.

Changes are indicated in bold italics.

(a) No certificate holder may use nor may any pilot act as pilot in command of an aircraft (or as 

second in command of an aircraft in a flag or supplemental operation that requires three or 

more pilots) unless the pilot:

(1) Holds an airline transport pilot certificate not subject to the limitations in Sec. 61.167 

of this chapter;

(2) Holds an appropriate aircraft type rating for the aircraft being flown; and

(3) If serving as pilot in command in part 121 operations, has 1,000 hours as second in 

command or Pilot in Command in operations under this part, pilot in command in 

operations under § 91.1053(a)(2)(i) of this chapter, pilot in command in 14 CFR part 

135 operations where that pilot meets the requirements stated in §135.243(a)(1) of 

this chapter, or any combination thereof. 

(4) For those pilots who were employed as pilot in command in 14 CFR part 121 

operations on or before July 31, 2013, compliance with the requirements of this 

paragraph (a)(3) is not required.

Paragraphs (b), (c) and (d) would remain the same under this proposal.

Alternatively, the following restrictions could also be made part of the rule:

a. ¶(a)(3) above can be further delineated to require the PIC time accumulated in Part 135 allcargo operations must be in turbojet aircraft to be counted toward the 1000 hours required 

by §121.436 and/or

b. Pilots that have 1000 hours of PIC all-cargo experience in Part 135 operations are 

restricted to PIC in Part 121 all-cargo operations until reaching 1000 hours of Part 121 PIC 

or SIC experience or any combination thereof.

G. Public Benefit:

Since this proposal is a technical amendment consistent with the stated objectives of the Final 

Rule and the intent of Congress that includes pilots that have at least the equivalent level of 

experience as the current 14 CFR part 121 §121.436 rule as shown herein, the public interest 

will be served. The public interest is also served by correcting an inadvertent exclusion of highly 

qualified pilots to count their turbojet experience when transferring to Part 121 operations. In 

addition Part 121 air carriers would benefit by being able to upgrade highly qualified pilots to PIC 

and utilizing there expertise sooner. 

H. Costs

There would be no increased costs for this proposed technical amendment to §121.436 to the 

public in general. Ameristar, in particular would benefit from these highly skilled Part 135 allcargo PICs in their all-cargo operations rather than waiting at least 3 years for them to acquire 

the time currently required in §121.43612

 12 An Ameristar pilot averages about 300 flight hours per year.
Request for Rule Change to 14 CFR Part 121 §121.436 Page 9 January 5, 2016

I. The Regulatory Burden on Ameristar

There is a burden on Ameristar and similar operators such as Ameristar. These burdens 

include:

1. The ability to determine a Part 135 or Part 91 subpart K pilot’s flight time as a cargo pilot 

vs. a passenger pilot is burdensome and will be difficult to verify for a small business entity 

such as Ameristar.

2. Due to the low volume of flying at Ameristar (300-350 hours per year per pilot), a pilot 

would be required to wait at least 3 years before being able to transition to PIC in Part 121 

operation even though that pilot may have an ATP and a significant amount of PIC turbojet 

flight experience in all-cargo Part 135 operations. A pilot that has no all-cargo experience 

and has 1000 hours in all-passenger operations flying PIC on a multi-engine turbo-propeller 

aircraft would be immediately be eligible to fly PIC in Part 121 operations. This situation is 

real at Ameristar and has caused some social consternation as one could imagine among 

its pilot group.

3. Preventing an otherwise qualified pilot from flying PIC in Part 121 operations requires 

Ameristar to hire PICs that may not have the equivalent experience as existing SICs. 

Ameristar’s experience is that moving an existing SIC to PIC is less of a burden than 

bringing a new hire PIC that has exclusively passenger operational experience on line in 

the all-cargo arena.

H. Summary

It is clear that the FAA will not grant exemptions from 14 CFR part 121 §121.436 as can be seen 

from the denial of exemption request from Gulf and Caribbean13 where a solid argument was 

made for exemption. The FAA is steadfast in applying the strict wording of the regulation to a 

request for exemption regardless of the experience of a pilot. The only way to ensure the 

integrity of the rule and to include pilots that are substantially qualified to fly PIC in Part 121 is to 

adopt the amendment being proposed in this petition.

It is believed that the final rule may have inadvertently referenced a 14 CFR part 135 

§135.243(a)(1) assuming that all PICs engaged in Part 135 all-cargo operations did not have 

ATPs. This major unintended oversight was not inclusive of the FAA’s or Congress’ intent to 

provide experienced PICs in Part 121 operations. 

Since the changes proposed in this petition are consistent with the FAA’s final rule document14

and congressional intent with no substantive changes, 14 CFR part 121.436 should be amended 

as requested in this petition without the need for the public notice procedures under 5 U.S.C. 

553(b) for the solid common sense reasoning stated herein. It is the right course of action to 

amend 14 CFR part 121 §121.436 as requested.

Thank you in advance for your careful consideration.

Sincerely,

Pat Hulsey

Director of Operations

Ameristar Air Cargo, Inc.

4400 Glenn Curtiss Drive

Addison, Texas 75001

972-725-9000 Ext 9601

 13 Denial Of Exemption Docket FAA-2014-0361 dated May 30, 2014 14 Docket No. FAA-2010-0100