West Bend Air, Inc. Post Office Box. 409 West Bend. WI 53095 262.334.5603 phone 262.334.5662 fax.

July 11, 2013 Fond du Lac Skyport N6308 Rolling Meadows Dr. Fond du Lac. WI 54937 920.922.6000 phone 920.922.8706 fax.

U.S. Dept. ofTransportation DocketOperations, 

### M-JO WestBuildingGroundFloor, Room Wl2-140 1200 New JerseyAve, SE Washington, D.C. 20590

.
Ladies and Gentlemen: Exemption No. 9965A Regulatory DocketNo. F AA-2009-0990 RE: Extension Request

,..


# ·u

\..;.) t:o West Bend Air, Inc. would like to apply for an extension to our ExemptionNo. 9965A, Regulatory DocketNo. F**AA-2009~0990** for a period oftwo;..years (from the expiration date of 11-30-2013) outto I r-30-2015, for the same reasons sighted in our original petition (encl.). We have included,foryourconvenience, a copy of: (I.) yourletter approving our original exemption request and (2.) our original petition for exemption.

R

# ards~**·~~-** .. ·.· (.

. -

### 4~. .
Craig Devenport President · West Bend Air, Inc.

### u.s.Depcl'tment of1anspcr1alion FedM'aiAIMitoli AclrNnlsttallan N()vember 16, 2009

Mr. John M. Morris Director ofOperations West Bend Air, Inc. P.O. Box409 WestBend. WI 53095 

### Dear Mr. Morris: Exemption No. 9965 BOO Independence Ave

. SW WaslungiOI'I. DC 20591

Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2009-0990

# COP~'

This Jetteris to infonnyou that we have granred your request for exemption. Ittransmits our decision, explains its basis, and gives you the conditions and limitations ofthe exemption, including the date it ends. 

### The Basis 

### for OurDecision By letter dated October 12, 2009, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on behalfofWest Bend Air, Inc. (WB Air), for an exemption from part 120 ofTitle 14, Code ofFederal Regulations (14 CFR). That exemption, ifgranted, would allow WB Air, which is operating under separate parts ofthe regulations, to cover its safety-sensitive employees Wlder one testing program. The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a swnmary ofthe petition in the Fed.eral Reeister because the requested exemption would not set a precedent, and any delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to WB Air. The FAA has issued a grant ofexemption in circumstances similar in all material respects to those presented in your petition. In Grant ofExemption No. 9703 (copy enclosed). the FAA found that Solid Edge's § 91.147 air tour operations were closely connected to 

### its part 135 operations. The FAA also fotmd that combining the petitioner's two testing programs into one would be in the public interest and would maintain an equivalent level ofsafety to that provided by the current regulations. Thus, the FAA concluded it was unnecessary to burden the petitioner by requiring it to conduct two separate testing programs.

AAM-I0-038-E

### '\ 

# .,,,

' ' 

# \ 1



### Having reviewed your reasons for requesting an exemption, I fmd that- • they 

### do not differ materially from those presented by 

### the petitioner in the enclosed grant ofexemption; • the reasons stated by the FAA 

### for granting the enclosed exemption also apply to the situation you present; and 

### • a grant ofexemption is in the public interest. Our Decision 

### Under the 

### authority contained in 49 U.S.C. 40113 

### and 44701, 

### which the FAA 

### Administrator has delegated to 

### me, I 

### hereby grant WB 

### Air an exemption from part 120 

### to the extent necess81)' to allow WB 

### Air, which is 

### operating under separate parts 

### ofthe regulations, to cover its 

### safety-sensitive employees under one testing program, subject to the conditions and 

### limitations described beJow. Conditions and Limitations 1. 

### Employees 

### ofWB Air 

### are subject to the drug and alcohol regulations at 

### aJI times while conducting operations tmder 

### part 135 

### or part 91. 2. 

### The drug and aJcohol testing program must be implemented under the auspices of 

### the WB 

### Air part 135 

### operation, not under the part 91. 

### This exemption terminates on**No~·ember** 30, 2011, 

### unless sooner superseded orrescinded. Sincerely, 

### Is/ Frederick E. 

### Tilton, M.D. Federal Air Surgeon

Enclosure 

# COpy 2.....AJr.Jac. r'olr Officr 'Box .of()C) 

# "'e.r Bend. WI S309, fond ni.M Sltypon f'o/6308 Rolli

..**M~M** Dr. fonddu w. WI**~?J7 ,;!62.)3.4.~)**  P'w- ;tG2.334.S66:Z f.u '120.922.6000p"'-" 920.921.11706 fax 

### October 12, 2009 • • I ·" ,-,- ' 

# . ' • .,1 •• ' I 

### U.S. Department ofTnwsportation Docket 

### Management System 

### 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE West Building Ground Floor, 

### Rm. Wl2-140 

### Washington, DC 20590

Ladies and**Gentl~en:** 

# COPY

West 

### Bend Air, Inc. is seeking relieffrom 14 CFR Part 120.117 (b) 

### (2). Formerly 14 CFR 121 Appendix I (IX) (b) 

### (2). as it 

### is currently being interpreted. which is 

### requiring us to 

### maintain two (2) 

### completely separate Random Drug and Alcohol Testing Programs. West Bend 

### Airis in complete agreement 

### with the regulations to 

### eliminate Drug and alcohol 

### abuse through implementation ofa Random Drug and 

### Alcohol Testing Program which has been accomplished through its 

### Charter operationunder Part 135 for both pilots 

### and mechanics. .tlowever. West Bend Air

### believes it 

### is an unnecessary burden for the company to 

### cmy a second Random Drug and Alcohol Testing Program to 

### cover the Air 

### Tour operation 

### under Part 91.147. Even though 

### West Bend Air utilizes different classes of

### aircraft for each operation, (Multi Engine for its 

### Part 135 operation and Single Engine for its 

### Part 91.147 operation) all 

### the aircraft are flown by the same 

### pilots and maintained bythe same mechanics, all ofwhom 

### are covered by

### West Bend Air's Random Drug and 

### Alcohol Testing Program under its 

### Part 135 certificate as mentioned above. After 

### careful consideration ofthe regulations and literature distributed by the U.S. 

### Department ofTnmsportation. (DOT) West Bend 

### Air is also ofthe opinion 

### that, as noted below. theimpleutentation ofa duplicate Random Drug and Alcohol Testing Program is not required. The

### publication "!lest Practices for DOT Random Drug and Alcohol Testing" (actually written and published prior to the drug rule being switched from 14 CFR Part 121 to 14 

### CFR Part 120, yet 

### still current on the 

### DOTWeb Sight) from the U.S Department of 

### Transportation-Office ofthe Seaetary-O.ffice ofDrug and Alcohol Policy and 

### Compliance asks 

### the question on page two (2) in section IV. "{SetdD.g-Up a Random Pool ofEmployees}". Underitem B. '"Can an employerregulated by different DOT 

### agencies put its mnplones 

### in tbe same random pools?"'. The answers is

..YES. Employen and Consortiaffbird PartyAdmillbtraton (CffPAs) sobjedto more than one DOT Atency drug and alcohol testing rule may combble covered DOT safety-sensitive eJDployees iDto a single random pool."

# COP"' Surely 

### ifemployees ofthe same company that are covered by different DOT agencies such as FAA, FMCSA, FRA, FT A, PHMSA, USCG, are allowed to be eombiDed into a singlerandom pool, wouldn»t it also 

### stand tbe test ofreason (belogical) for company employees covered underjustone DOT agency namely the FAA even though operating under two (2) different regulations (such as 14 CFR Part13.5 and 14 CFR Part 91) to be given the same allowance? I can't think ofanything more "Regulation Number Different" than FMCSA -(MotorCarrier) operating under49 CFR Part 382 and FRA

- (Railroad) operating under 49 CFR Part 219 as given in their example. So 

### what is the ''drug" diffenmce in operations under Part 135 Vs Part 91 in comparison to Part 382 Vs Part 219? Unless 14 CPR and 49 CFR are totally unrelated and warrant different coosidcrations, 

### which is highly doubttbl. PJease also note that ifan 

### Employer, West Bend Air is a 

### "Cornpany•• yet 1believetbat it would also 

### tit the de1inition of an Employer, has two (2) employees, one covered 

### by 

### Jets say the FAA- (Aviation}, and the other covered by lets say theFMCSA- (Motor Carrier), that Employer, according to their example. is still considered to be One (1) Employer 

### "Company" and NOTTwo (2) different Employers "Companies"! I point this out only because the FAA'sposition onthe subject is contrary to 

### what has been placed in writing bythe DOT. On 

### page 3 ofthe same pamphlet in 

### Section C. The 

### question is asked: "Don au employee performfag duties eovered by more than one DOT Ageney deed to be iD multiple pools?" The answer is: "AD employee perforadllgdudes subjectto more 

### thu one DOT Ageney's regulations mast be randomly 

### tetted atthe percentage nte estabUsheclfor the c.lendaryear by the DOTAgeney regulating more than 50 perceatofthe employee's funetiou. So ifyoa have u employee who drives yourttaeks 75 peneut oftbe t:lmfand operates yourtraDJJt buues 25 pereeat ofthedme, ttaat employee Deeds to be

### iD die FMCSA-regulated pooL" Please note, as indicated from the above example. should West Bend Airchooseon its own to incorporate two separate.Random Testing Programs, the employee would still only need to beplaced in one (1) random pool not both. 1'he U.S. Department oftransportation- Office ofthe SecretBiy- Office ofDrug and Alcohol Policy and Compliance has**r~issued** another publication, ftom August of2009 which makesit current for this situation, 

### called**~what** employen Deed to

### know about DOT Drug 11Dd Alcohol Testlug (Guidance

### ud BestPradfees)" Onpage 17 in

### that booklet under the heading ofRandom. The seventh (7., paragraph ftom the top States:**~Employers** 

### aud CtrP As subjectto 

### more th11D 

### oae DOT 

### Aaeacy clrua ud alcohol tesdag rule maycombiDe covered DOTnfety-leDS.itive e.mpJoyftl 

### iato a siDgl.e random pool (for e:umple, trabl 

### encfneen ad track

### driven)."

## .... 

# COPY

What is the purpose, or the intent if

### you will, ofthe regulation requiring Random Drug and Alcohol testing? 

### Although not stated directly 

### anywhere but alluded to 

### many times, the regulation is in place to
.. deter drug and alcohol use by 

### safety-sensitive employees in the workplace". The real "deterrent 

### fac:to.r" is 

### not having 

### dual drug testing programs 

### but ratherhaving the 

### safety-sensitive employee understand thatregardless ofpast testing that 

### employee is eligible for a random selection at 

### any time. In the pamphlet Best

### Practices for DOT Random Drug and 

### Alcohol Testing (mentioned above) on page 3under section E.

### t6How ofteu should aeledion1**a~~d** tests take plaee?" it states: '"What makes random tadag so effective JJ theeleJBeut ofsurprile." 

### I have taken the liberty ofbreaking

### down a small portion ofthe New Regulation 14 CFR Part 

### J20 for ease ofexploration. The 

### new regulation 14 CFRPart 120.117 (d) (3) (formerly 14 CFR 121 AppendixI (IX)(d) (3)) is quoted below. 14 CFR Part 120.117 States:

.. Implementing a drug testing program... 

### Section (d)States: "Obtaining

### an Antidrug 

### and Alcohol Misuse Prevention Program Operations Specification."' 

### Sub-Section (3) States: "Yoa are reqa.lrecl to obtala 

### oaly oae Autidrug and Alcohol MJsase Preventioa Program Operations Spedficadon to ndsfy this requlreme.at 

### uuder tbfs 

### part." West Bend Air

### has maintained a safe drug 

### and alcohol free 

### operation since its inception some20 years ago and 

### has no intention ofletting up on its vigilance. With 

### this petition West Bend Airrespectfully 

### requests an exemption from canying 

### a second Random Drug 

### and Alcohol Test.ins 

### Program. WestBend Airwould preferuti1izing this entire request as a summary should itbe 

### necessary toplace something in theFederal Registry. Thankyou for your considerations

.**.,~** 

# A Y!**rJJ~.** est

# a1.~**~Inc.** John M. 

### Morris**~ectorof~tions -------~-------**  - . -