AFS-15-532-E

Exemption No. 16837

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

WASHINGTON, DC 20591

In the matter of the petition of 

 

GAMA CHARTERS, INC. Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2015-0267

 

for an exemption from § 135.247 

of Title 14, Code of 

Federal Regulations 

 

DENIAL OF EXEMPTION

 By letter dated January 22, 2015, Mr. Thomas H. Miller, Manager, Gama Charters, Inc. 

(Gama), 700 Great Meadow Road, Standford, Connecticut 06497 petitioned the Federal 

Aviation Administration (FAA) on behalf of Gama for an exemption from § 135.247 of 

Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). The proposed exemption, if granted, would 

allow Gama to meet pilot in command recency of experience requirements through 

compliance with § 135.247(a)(3)(i) or (ii) in an aircraft that is not type certificated for more 

than one pilot flight crew member.

The petitioner requests relief from the following regulation:

Section 135.247 prescribes, in pertinent part:

(a) No certificate holder may use any person, nor may any person serve, as pilot in 

command of an aircraft carrying passengers unless, within the preceding 90 days, that 

person has—

(1) Made three takeoffs and three landings as the sole manipulator of the flight 

controls in an aircraft of the same category and class and, if a type rating is required, of 

the same type in which that person is to serve; or

(2) For operation during the period beginning 1 hour after sunset and ending 1 hour 

before sunrise (as published in the Air Almanac), made three takeoffs and three 
2

landings during that period as the sole manipulator of the flight controls in an aircraft 

of the same category and class and, if a type rating is required, of the same type in

which that person is to serve. A person who complies with paragraph (a)(2) of this 

section need not comply with paragraph (a)(1) of this section.

(3) Paragraph (a)(2) of this section does not apply to a pilot in command of a turbinepowered airplane that is type certificated for more than one pilot crewmember, 

provided that pilot has complied with the requirements of paragraph (a)(3)(i) or (ii) of 

this section:

(i) The pilot in command must hold at least a commercial pilot certificate with the 

appropriate category, class, and type rating for each airplane that is type certificated for 

more than one pilot crewmember that the pilot seeks to operate under this alternative, 

and:

(A) That pilot must have logged at least 1,500 hours of aeronautical experience as a 

pilot;

(B) In each airplane that is type certificated for more than one pilot crewmember that 

the pilot seeks to operate under this alternative, that pilot must have accomplished and 

logged the daytime takeoff and landing recent flight experience of paragraph (a) of this 

section, as the sole manipulator of the flight controls;

(C) Within the preceding 90 days prior to the operation of that airplane that is type 

certificated for more than one pilot crewmember, the pilot must have accomplished 

and logged at least 15 hours of flight time in the type of airplane that the pilot seeks to 

operate under this alternative; and

(D) That pilot has accomplished and logged at least three takeoffs and three landings

to a full stop, as the sole manipulator of the flight controls, in a turbine-powered 

airplane that requires more than one pilot crewmember. The pilot must have performed 

the takeoffs and landings during the period beginning 1 hour after sunset and ending 1

hour before sunrise within the preceding 6 months prior to the month of the flight.

(ii) The pilot in command must hold at least a commercial pilot certificate with the 

appropriate category, class, and type rating for each airplane that is type certificated for 

more than one pilot crewmember that the pilot seeks to operate under this alternative, 

and:

(A) That pilot must have logged at least 1,500 hours of aeronautical experience as a 

pilot;
3

(B) In each airplane that is type certificated for more than one pilot crewmember that 

the pilot seeks to operate under this alternative, that pilot must have accomplished and 

logged the daytime takeoff and landing recent flight experience of paragraph (a) of this 

section, as the sole manipulator of the flight controls;

(C) Within the preceding 90 days prior to the operation of that airplane that is type 

certificated for more than one pilot crewmember, the pilot must have accomplished 

and logged at least 15 hours of flight time in the type of airplane that the pilot seeks to 

operate under this alternative; and

(D) Within the preceding 12 months prior to the month of the flight, the pilot must 

have completed a training program that is approved under part 142 of this chapter. The

approved training program must have required and the pilot must have performed, at 

least 6 takeoffs and 6 landings to a full stop as the sole manipulator of the controls in a 

flight simulator that is representative of a turbine-powered airplane that requires more 

than one pilot crewmember. The flight simulator’s visual system must have been 

adjusted to represent the period beginning 1 hour after sunset and ending 1 hour before

sunrise.

The petitioner supports its request with the following information:

Gama proposes to allow its pilots to meet night currency requirements under 

§ 135.247(a)(3)(i) or (ii) in a Beechcraft BE300-B300 type aircraft. The petitioner states that 

the night currency alternative described in § 135.247(a)(3)(i) or (ii) only applies to aircraft 

certificated for more than one pilot crewmember. The petitioner expresses that it would like to 

use this night currency alternative for the BE300-B300 even though this type aircraft is part 23 

commuter category certificated for operations with a crew of one pilot.

Gama states that it currently operates the Beechcraft BE300-B300 aircraft type with 

two pilots at all times and that all of Gama's BE300-B300 pilots hold Airline Transport Pilot 

(ATP) certificates. Further, the petitioner states that the majority of its Beechcraft BE300-

B300 type aircraft pilots have a requirement for a second in command limitation depicted on 

their ATP certificates. Gama explains that it does not hold Operations Specification (OpSpec)

A015, "autopilot authorized in lieu of second in command" privileges listing the BE300-B300 

type aircraft. Thus it is required to operate the aircraft with a minimum of two pilots at all 

times. Gama states that its BE300-B300 pilots successfully complete simulator training in

level D BE300-B300 simulators every six months.

Gama asserts that it can maintain an acceptable level of safety using two pilot

operations of this single pilot certificated aircraft by exercising and adhering to the night 

currency requirements depicted under the subject section's paragraphs (a)(3)(i) or (ii) for its 

BE300-B300 single pilot aircraft. The petitioner claims granting this request would be in the 

public interest and would not jeopardize public safety in any way.
4

In support of this proposal, Gama submitted the following comments:

1. Gama's principal base of operations is located at 700 Great Meadow Road 

Sikorsky Memorial Airport, Stratford, CT 06497. Gama holds Air Carrier 

Operating Certificate Number 02GA9701 and conducts air taxi and on demand 

charter operations under part 135.

2. Gama performs management and consulting services for private individuals and

corporations who own aircraft (hereinafter referred to as Owners). In addition to

operating these aircraft for their private use, these Owners have found it beneficial 

to occasionally charter these aircraft to third parties. This is done under contract to 

Gama and under the auspices of Gama's Air Carrier Operating Certificate.

3. Gama has operational control of the Owners' aircraft when these aircraft are being

operated under the authority of the Air Carrier Operating Certificate in accordance 

with part 135. The Owners have operational control of their respective aircraft 

when said aircraft are being operated under the rules of part 91.

4. The demands of the charter (air taxi) service operated by Gama include operations 

at night as well as during daylight hours.

5. Gama has been authorized by the FAA to conduct night operations under part 135 

since 1983 through the authority of OpSpec A003. Gama has been safely

conducting said night operations at all times since the issuance of said authority. In 

over 32 years of experience in the management of night aircraft operations under 

part 135, Gama has never experienced a performance or safety issue. Gama has 

instituted an effective Safety Management System (SMS) used to identify and 

mitigate any and all risk in potentially unsafe operational conditions. This SMS has 

been officially recognized by the following industry and governmental sources:

1) FAA SMS Pilot Program Level 3;

2) Air Charter Safety Foundation (ACSF) Level 3;

3) IS-BAO Level 3;

4) IS0-9001-2008 Registered;

5) ARG-US Platinum Level; and

6) Wyvem Recommended.

In regard to public interest, Gama states that this exemption would permit it to respond 

to a growing demand for night operations and would permit its aircraft to be available to the 

general public, which would not otherwise be available. The petitioner contends that by not 

extending the flexibility offered by the night currency alternative described in
5

§ 135.247(a)(3)(i) or (ii) to single pilot certified aircraft, such as the BE300-B300, would 

impose an unreasonable burden to the operator. In supplemental information posted to the 

docket on July 24, 2015, Gama states that the exemption would allow it to operate with an 

enhanced level of safety, which would be in the public interest, for the following reasons:

1) Gama’s FAA Approved part 135 pilot training program does not require that any 

of its simulator training be conducted in the night environment;

2) The night environment for simulator training is a much more demanding and 

difficult setting to operate an aircraft in, especially when transitioning from 

instrument to visual conditions in the night environment;

3) The subject petition would require our pilots to successfully complete six (6) 

takeoffs and six (6) landings to a full stop in a full motion simulator in the night 

environment every six (6) months as well as maintain standard 90 day takeoff and 

landing currency;

4) Pilots operating to this standard must have logged at least 1,500 hours of 

aeronautical experience as a pilot; and

5) Pilots operating to this standard must have accomplished and logged at least 

15 hours of flight time within the preceding 90 days prior to the operation in the 

type of airplane described in this petition.

 A summary of the petition was published in the Federal Register on March 25, 2015

(80 FR 15861). No comments were received.

The FAA's analysis is as follows:

The FAA finds that the issuance of an exemption to § 135(a)(3) would be precedent 

setting. The FAA has fully considered all of the petitioner’s supporting information and finds 

that a grant of exemption is not in the public interest and could adversely affect safety.

It is FAA policy, as reflected in the regulations, that certain safety standards are in 

place to ensure that those who participate in aviation are held to an appropriate level of safety. 

Therefore, when petitioning for relief from a regulation, the petitioner must demonstrate how 

a grant of exemption would not adversely impact safety and would maintain a level of safety 

equivalent to the rule. In addition, the petitioner must establish how a grant of exemption 

would benefit the public as a whole. 

Section 135.247 contains the regulatory requirements for the recency of experience for 

the pilot in command (PIC) of an aircraft carrying passengers. The regulation requires, for the 

period beginning 1 hour after sunset and ending 1 hour before sunrise, the PIC make three 

takeoffs and three landings during that period as the sole manipulator of the flight controls in 

an aircraft of the same category and class and, if a type rating is required, of the same type in 

which that person is to serve. This regulation also contains two additional alternate means of 
6

compliance that a pilot in command of a turbine-powered airplane that is type certificated for 

more than one pilot crewmember can use to comply with the night takeoff and landing 

requirements of § 135.247(a)(2). When these alternate means of compliance were added to the 

Regulation of Fractional Aircraft Ownership Programs and On-Demand final rule (68 FR 

54520) in September 2003, the FAA noted in the preamble to the final rule that the 

requirements of § 135.247(a)(3) apply to airplanes that are type certificated for more than one 

pilot crewmember. This specifically excluded utilizing the alternate means of compliance 

when only the operating rule required more than one pilot crewmember.

Gama contends that granting this exemption would permit it to respond to the growing 

demand for night operations and permit its aircraft to be available to the general public which 

would otherwise not be available. The FAA finds that the current regulations do not prevent 

Gama from being available for night operations. However, the FAA finds that the petitioner 

has not provided a reason as to why Gama is unique in comparison to other operators who 

provide night operations while complying with the rule as written. 

Gama also contends that there would be an enhancement to its current level of system 

safety, as summarized in items two through five of its supplement to the original exemption 

request. The FAA finds that there would not be an enhancement in safety above which is 

already provided in the current regulatory requirements. The FAA’s analysis of those items is

as follows:

1. Gama contends that the night environment for simulator training is a much more

demanding and difficult setting to operate an aircraft in, especially when transitioning 

from instrument to visual conditions in the night environment. The FAA contends 

that, with respect to takeoff and landing operations, the operation of a simulator in the 

night environment is no more demanding than the actual night operation of the

aircraft. The current regulation § 135.247(a)(2) requires three takeoffs and three

landings in the aircraft, and those can be conducted when transitioning from 

instrument to visual conditions. Furthermore, Gama is not requiring that those 

required landings be conducted while transitioning from instrument to visual 

conditions in a simulator, so all the required landings could be conducted in visual 

conditions in the simulator.

2. Gama stated if granted the exemption, it would comply with § 135.247(a)(3)(ii)(D), 

which requires a pilot, within the preceding 12 months, to accomplish six takeoffs and 

six landings to a full stop as the sole manipulator of the controls in a flight simulator 

that is representative of a turbine-powered airplane that requires more than one pilot 

crewmember. However, the petitioner contends that there would be an enhanced level 

of safety because its pilots would be required to complete six takeoffs and six landings 

every 6 months. Since Gama states that it would comply with §135.247(a)(3)(ii)(D),

which only requires six takeoffs and six landings within the preceding 12 months in an 

aircraft simulator, the FAA finds that this is not an enhanced level of safety as 
7

compared to the current regulatory requirement to accomplish three takeoffs and three

landings in the aircraft within the preceding 90 days.

3. Gama states that there would be an enhanced level of safety because its pilots would 

be required to have logged 1500 hours of aeronautical experience as a pilot. Gama 

states in its petition that all of Gama's BE300-B300 pilots hold Airline Transport Pilot 

(ATP) certificates. The FAA finds no enhancement in the current level of safety, since 

Gama’s BE-300 pilots already meet the 1500 hour aeronautical experience

requirement.

4. Gama also states that requiring 15 hours of flight time in type in the preceding 90 days 

would be an enhancement to its level of safety. The FAA finds that the 15 hour 

requirement, on its own merit, does not provide for an equivalent level of safety with 

regard to night takeoff and landing safety. Furthermore, Gama did not provide 

sufficient information to demonstrate that the 15 hour requirement actually would 

enhance safety above the level currently experienced at the carrier.

The FAA’s Decision

 In consideration of the foregoing, I find that a grant of exemption would not provide an 

level of safety equal to that provided by the rule. Therefore, pursuant to the authority 

contained in 49 U.S.C. §§ 106(f), 40113, and 44701, delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the Gama Charters, Inc. petition for an exemption from 14 CFR § 135.247 is denied.

Issued in Washington, DC, on June 15, 2016.

/s/

John S. Duncan

Director, Flight Standards Service