AFS-13-258-E

Exemption No. 10843

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

WASHINGTON, DC 20591

 

In the matter of the petition of 

 

ALAMEDA COUNTY SHERIFF’S Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2013-0167

AIR SQUADRON

 

for an exemption from § 61.113(c) of 

Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations 

DENIAL OF EXEMPTION

 By letter dated February 15, 2013, Mr. Matthew C. Weisman, Alameda County 

Sheriff’s Air Squadron (ACSAS), 4217 Oakmore Road, Oakland, CA 94602-1811 petitioned 

the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on behalf of ACSAS for an exemption from 

§ 61.113(c) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). The proposed exemption, if 

granted, would allow pilots to be reimbursed for certain costs related to operating flights 

sanctioned by ACSAS and the Alameda County Sheriff’s Office (ACSO).

The petitioner requests relief from the following regulations:

Section 61.113(c), which prescribes that a private pilot may not pay less than the pro 

rata share of the operating expenses of a flight with passengers, provided the expenses 

involve only fuel, oil, airport expenditures, or rental fees.

Although ACSAS only requested relief from § 61.113(c), the FAA finds that ACSAS also 

requires relief from the following regulation:

Section 61.113(a), which prescribes, in pertinent part, that no person who holds a 

private pilot certificate may act as a pilot in command of an aircraft that is carrying 

passengers or property for compensation or hire; nor may that person, for 

compensation or hire, act as pilot in command of an aircraft. 
2

The petitioner supports its request with the following information:

ACSAS seeks an exemption allowing reimbursement for pilots for expenses related to flights

by the ACSAS. Those flights would involve transport of passengers, animals, and/or cargo, 

and all operations will be controlled by ACSAS. Flight operations include flights related to:

1. Sheriff’s Office business

2. Alameda County Office of Emergency Services personnel on official business 

3. Response to major disaster

4. Law enforcement investigation

5. Mutual aid responses

6. Carriage of rescue, cadaver detection, or explosive detection dogs 

The petitioner states the expenses are limited to fuel, oil, airport expenditures, rental fees, 

crew travel expenses such as meals, ground transportation, hotels, and supplies for passengers. 

The FAA requested supplementary information about those expenses, and ACSAS clarified 

those expenses include landing/takeoff fees, parking/transient fees, aircraft fuel, aircraft oil, 

crew out of pocket expenses while travelling, and any other aircraft consumables or special

supplies required by the trip. ACSAS further explained the reimbursed expenses may include 

ground transportation, lodging at the destination, and overnight transient hangar fees. 

The petitioner states its petition is in the public interest because ACSAS missions facilitate 

public services provided by the Alameda County Sheriff’s Office (ACSO) and the Alameda 

County Office of Emergency Services. 

The petitioner states its petition meets an equivalent level of safety because its Transport 

Policy Procedures document (submitted with ACSAS’s petition) ensures standards that meet 

or exceed the certification requirements for other individuals currently operating under the 

privileges of an exemption from § 61.113(c). ACSAS also states in its petition that its flights 

are subject to more regulations than flights by public aircraft. 

The flights would be operated in accordance with ACSAS’s Transport Policy and Procedures 

document. That document includes guidance for ACSAS members on the following topics:

1. Training and operating procedures

2. General Organizational 

3. Risk Management 

4. Maintenance

5. Pilot and Aircraft Requirements

6. Flight Rules

7. ACSAS Records and reports
3

 A summary of the petition was published in the Federal Register on April 23, 2013

(78 FR 24291). No comments were received.

The FAA’s analysis is as follows:

ACSAS made a timely response to an FAA inquiry requesting clarification and specifics on 

the relief it seeks. The FAA determined from the petition and supplementary information that

ACSAS seeks regulatory relief to allow reimbursement for expenses related to following 

operations:

1. Search-and-location flights

2. Transportation of people and cargo to support ACSO activity

3. Charitable medical flights

Search-and-location flights

Section 61.113(e) allows individuals exercising private pilot privileges to be reimbursed for 

aircraft operating expenses that are directly related to search and location operations, provided 

the operations are sanctioned by, and under the direction and control of, a local, State, or 

Federal agency, or an organization that conducts search and location operations. We interpret 

the proposal from ACSAS to be requesting reimbursement of expenses other than those 

identified in the CFR (specifically, fuel, oil, airport expenditures, or rental fees). 

The supplementary information from ACSAS requests relief to allow reimbursement of 

landing/takeoff fees, parking/transient fees, aircraft fuel, aircraft oil, any other aircraft 

consumables or special supplies required by the trip, crew out of pocket expenses 

reimbursable by the ACSO or ACSAS such as meal expense while travelling, ground 

transportation, lodging, and overnight transient hangar fee. ACSAS also points out that those 

expenses are not an exhaustive list of all direct expenses that might be associated with a flight.

The FAA finds no reason to expand its list of permitted reimbursable expenses for ACSAS. 

The petitioner has not shown how it is unique as an organization or the missions that it 

conducts that justifies, as in the public interest, described in an expansion of the reimbursable 

expenses beyond the expenses permitted under § 61.113(e).

The FAA has in the past granted limited exemptions similar to ACSAS’s request. For 

example, Exemption No. 6771 (and subsequent extensions) issued to Civil Air Patrol (CAP), 

expanded the types of reimbursement that may be offered for individuals involved in search 

and location missions with the CAP. We found that the CAP is sufficiently unique (as an 

organization chartered by the U.S. Congress, established in the United States Code, and as an 

auxiliary of the United States (U.S.) Air Force) that the public interest supports an expansion

of the expenses for reimbursement for flights directly related to U.S. Air Force assigned 
4

missions. The FAA further stated that it did not find it in the public interest to allow the same 

reimbursement for corporate missions.

Transportation of people and cargo to support ACSO activity

In its petition, ACSAS requests relief to allow reimbursement for expenses for operations 

involving transportation of ACSO property and personnel. These operations are normally 

conducted using public aircraft (using, for example, a Sheriff’s Department helicopter to move

equipment and personnel). Some sheriff’s offices charter aircraft for those missions from an 

air carrier certificated by the FAA under part 135. These air-taxi operations employ the safety 

procedures and are subject to special FAA oversight. For these reasons, they achieve a high 

level of safety, compared to private pilot operations that are not under an FAA operating 

certificate.

The FAA has determined that the petitioner’s request would be contrary to the requirements of 

§ 61.113(c). Since such operations include reimbursement for more than the pro rata share of

operating expenses for transporting ACSO personnel or cargo, the reimbursement would 

constitute compensation and would be considered a commercial operation for which a part

119 operator’s certificate would be required. 

Since an alternative method of transportation (using a public aircraft or an air carrier) is 

available to the ACSO, we find no compelling public interest or equivalent level of safety 

argument in support of this request.

Charitable medical flights

The FAA has previously determined that it is in the public interest to allow certain flight 

operations by volunteer pilots holding at least a private pilot certificate. We found that it was 

appropriate to allow limited reimbursement for expenses for individuals providing flights that 

we felt were in the public interest. We added conditions and limitations to those exemptions 

that improved the safety of the operation to meet an equivalent level of safety. Accordingly, 

the FAA has granted relief to organizations that provide charitable medical flights.

Section 821 of Public Law 112-95 defines a “volunteer pilot organization” as an organization 

that (1) is described in section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and is exempt 

from taxation under section 501(a) of such Code. ACSAS has described itself as an 

organization holding a designation under Section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code. 

Because ACSAS does not hold the appropriate status under 501(c)(3), the FAA cannot grant 

the relief identified in the statute.
5

The FAA’s Decision

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

equivalent level of safety. Therefore, pursuant to the authority contained in 49 U.S.C. 

§§ 40113 and 44701, delegated to me by the Administrator, the petition of Alameda County 

Sheriff’s Air Squadron for an exemption from 14 CFR § 61.113(c) is hereby denied.

Issued in Washington, D.C., on August 14, 2013.

/s/

John M. Allen

Director, Flight Standards Service