Exemption No. 10715

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

WASHINGTON, DC 20591

In the matter of the petition of

PHI AIR MEDICAL, L.L.C Regulatory Docket No. FAA -2011-1233

for an exemption from

§§ 135.293, 135.297, 135.299, and

135.343 of Title 14, Code of

Federal Regulations

DENIAL OF EXEMPTION

By letter dated October 28, 2011, Mr. Kurt A. Baden, Director of Operations, PHI Air 

Medical, L.L.C., 2800 44th Street, Suite 800, Phoenix, AZ 85008, petitioned the Federal 

Aviation Administration (FAA) on behalf of PHI Air Medical, L.L.C (Air Medical) for 

exemption from §§ 135.293, 135.297, 135.299, and 135.343 of Title 14 Code of Federal 

Regulations (14 CFR). The proposed exemption, if granted, would allow Air Medical (part 

119 air carrier certificate number VE7A070N) to use pilots previously qualified to operate 

under another air carrier certificate (that of PHI, Inc., part 119 air carrier certificate number 

HEEA617E, hereafter “PHI”) without additional training, testing, or checking by Air Medical.

The petitioner requests relief from the following regulations:

Section 135.293 states, in pertinent part, that no certificate holder may use the services of a 

pilot unless, since the beginning of the twelfth month before that service, that pilot has passed 

a written or oral test and a competency flight check given by the Administrator or authorized 

check airman.

Section 135.297 states, in pertinent part, that no certificate holder may use the services of a 

pilot in command unless, since the beginning of the sixth calendar month before that service, 

that pilot has passed an instrument proficiency check.

Section 135.299 states, in pertinent part, that no certificate holder may use the services of a 

pilot in command unless, since the beginning of the twelfth calendar month before that 

service, that pilot has passed a flight check using representative routes and airports in one of 

the types of aircraft which that pilot is to fly.
Section 135.343 states, in pertinent part, that no certificate holder may use a person as a 

crewmember unless that crewmember has completed the appropriate initial or recurrent 

training phase of the training program appropriate to the type of operation in which the 

crewmember is to serve since the beginning of the twelth calendar month before that service.

The petitioner supports its request with the following information:

PHI desires to implement the transition of approximately 78 helicopters and 275 pilots to the 

Air Medical part 119 air carrier certificate. Air Medical proposes to “adopt” the existing 

policies, programs, procedures, records, manuals and training programs of PHI. Air Medical, 

then, seeks this exemption to permit it to use pilots qualified under PHI’s approved air carrier 

training program for up to 13 months without clearly defined training, testing, or checking by 

Air Medical. The petitioner states that granting this petition will not only provide an 

equivalent level of safety, but will enhance safety. The 78 helicopters will continue to operate 

at the current PHI bases with the same personnel. The petitioner states that the day before the 

transition of the selected pilot and his/her aircraft at one of the 65 bases around the country, 

the pilot is fully trained/checked and qualified to serve as a pilot under part 135. The day after 

the transition, the same pilot will be flying the same helicopter from the same base using the 

same FAA-approved/accepted procedures with the same pilot competency and knowledge of 

the day before. The petitioner believes that additional training and checking will increase

additional exposure to potential hazards required by additional training and checking of 275 

pilots.

The petitioner states that denial of the petition will require additional FAA resources to 

conduct oversight of the training and checking required by the regulations from which relief is 

requested. The petitioner further states that merging the operations of the PHI helicopters with 

the Air Medical airplanes under one certificate would increase safety by allowing Air Medical 

to focus on one “line-of business.” The petitioner asserts that granting the exemption is in the 

public interest and would allow the FAA to focus on other safety issues.

Without providing a specific reference, the petitioner states that “similar administrative relief 

was previously provided by the FAA for several years in accordance with FAA Order 

8400.10.” This Order is now cancelled.

A summary of the petition was published in the Federal Register on February 2, 2012 (77 FR 

5087). No comments were received.

The FAA's analysis is as follows:

The FAA has considered the petitioner’s request and supporting materials and finds that a

grant of exemption would not be in the public interest and would not provide a level of safety 

equivalent to that provided by the current regulations.
Air Medical (VE7A) is a part 119 certificate holder authorized to conduct on-demand 

passenger, cargo and air ambulance operations under part 135 utilizing only fixed-wing 

aircraft. Air Medical currently operates 5 airplanes of the same type.

PHI (HEEA) is a part 119 certificate holder authorized to conduct on-demand passenger, 

cargo and air ambulance operations under part 135 utilizing only rotorcraft.

Air Medical will be acquiring assets from PHI’s helicopter air ambulance operations, 

including helicopters, operational bases, mechanics, pilots, check airmen and associated 

management personnel. Operationally, Air Medical will continue to conduct fixed-wing 

operations while adding 78 helicopter air ambulances at 65 bases around the country. Through 

this action Air Medical will be expanding its aircraft fleet to more than fifteen times it current 

size. It will also be adding helicopters to its certificate, a class of aircraft not currently 

operated by Air Medical.

Two operators that conduct operations under the same regulation may require operational 

control systems of differing degrees of sophistication. For example, a part 135 on-demand 

may find a simple flight locating system to be adequate. A part 135 helicopter air ambulances 

operator that conducts many flights a day to and from major terminal areas may find, however,

that a more sophisticated system is necessary to effectively control operations. The training 

associated with a carrier’s operational control system is necessarily unique and a critical safety 

component.

The transaction proposed between PHI and Air Medical can be characterized as an

acquisition.

1 At the conclusion of the acquisition, both certificates will remain active. 

However, the petitioner is requesting exemption from certain regulatory requirements in order 

to allow it to use pilots under the acquiring air carrier certificate without clearly defined 

training, testing or checking by Air Medical for up to 13 months.

Although the petitioner asserts there would be minimal operational changes, part 135 requires 

each individual air carrier to have an approved training program tailored specifically for its 

operation and the make, model and variant of aircraft flown. Training required by Air Medical 

and PHI is necessarily different to some degree for the following reasons: the nature of the 

two different operations; the tremendous difference in geographic size and scope of the 

combined operation, as well as the rapid expansion that will be incurred as a result of the 

acquisition; and the introduction of rotorcraft, with their significantly different operational 

characteristics, into what had been an airplane-only operation. All of these factors impose 

significant challenges for the combined carrier.

 1 FAA policy on oversight during a transition of assets is contained in FAA Order 8900.1 Volume 3, Chapter 34, 

Section 1, Air Carrier Mergers and the Acquisition of Air Carrier Operational Assets. This section discusses the 

development of a transition plan by the acquiring carrier; typically, when personnel are transferred, as the 

petitioner proposes here, such a plan would outline the training required to transition pilots successfully from one 

carrier to another. 
The petitioner has failed to show how its proposal would provide an equivalent level of safety

or be in the public interest.

The FAA’s Decision:

In consideration of the foregoing, the FAA finds that a grant of exemption is not 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 PHI Air Medical, LLC for an exemption 

from 14 CFR §§ 135.293, 135.297, 135.299 and 135.343 is hereby denied.

Issued in Washington, DC, on February 22, 2013.

/s/ 

Michael J. Zenkovich 

Acting Deputy Director, Flight 

Standards Service