Key Lime Air Corp. Page 1 of 5 05/28/2014

KEY LIME AIR CORP.

PETITION FOR EXEMPTION FROM CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF 14 CFR § 121.436(a)(3)

This petition follows the requirements for petitions for exemption in the order presented in 14 CFR § 11.81.

(a) Name and mailing address and other contact information:

Mr. David Carrizo

Director of Operations

Key Lime Air Corp.

13252 E. Control Tower Road

Englewood, CO 80112

Telephone – (303) 768-9626

Fax – (303) 768-8144

Email – dcarrizo@keylimeair.com

(b) The specific section or sections of 14 CFR from which we seek exemption:

14 CFR § 121.436(a)(3)

(c) The extent of relief we seek, and the reason we seek the relief:

Key Lime Air requests that an exemption from 14 CFR § 121.436(a)(3) be granted which 

would allow us to promote SA226/SA227 series PICs currently employed in our Part 135 

cargo operation into PIC positions in our passenger SA227 aircraft operated under Part 

121 after they have obtained at least 1,000 hours as a PIC in KLA SA226/SA227 series 

aircraft.

Currently, 14 CFR § 121.436(a)(3) allows KLA to employ PICs in our Part 121 passenger 

operations only if they have obtained at least 1,000 hours of experience of the following 

types (or combination thereof):

- Experience as SIC obtained in part 121 operations

- Experience as PIC obtained in part 135 turbojet operations

- Experience as PIC obtained in part 135 multiengine commuter operations

- Experience as PIC obtained in part 135 10-or-more passenger operations

- Experience as PIC obtained in part 91 subpart K operations

Due to our positioning in the market as an emerging small carrier, it is becoming more 

difficult to attract candidates possessing the type and quantity of experience listed above; 

further, our experience has shown that even candidates which possess the type and 

quantity of experience required by 14 CFR § 121.436(a)(3) often face more challenges 

during training and qualification than our current Part 135 pilots operating the same type of 

aircraft used in our Part 121 operations. As KLA typically employs 20-25 Part 135 cargo

SA226/SA227 PICs, these pilots make ideal Part 121 passenger PIC candidates once they 

have obtained 1,000+ hours of experience, however the CFR does not allow us to consider 

them for transition to Part 121 passenger operations.

We cannot rely on our existing Part 121 SIC pool as candidates for upgrade to PIC. This 

is due to our flight schedule which only allows an SIC to log approximately 16 hours per 

week maximum (69 hours per month). At this rate, an SIC would not reach the experience 

requirements of 14 CFR § 121.436(a)(3) for, at minimum, 15 months. Our primary difficulty 

at that point is the retention of qualified candidates – once an SIC is 14 CFR § 

121.436(a)(3) qualified, there is little economic incentive for that pilot to upgrade to PIC at 

KLA because he can easily obtain a position at a regional carrier; we have recently lost 

two qualified candidates due to this scenario. The rate of pilot attrition, when compared to 
Key Lime Air Corp. Page 2 of 5 05/28/2014

the pool of pilots meeting the experience requirements of 14 CFR § 121.436(a)(3), and 

compared to our ability to upgrade qualified SICs, will not allow KLA to adequately crew its 

aircraft with safe, competent pilots.

A grant of this exemption would allow us to transition pilots from Part 135 cargo operations 

to Part 121 passenger operations, which we assert is not only equivalent to the level of 

safety provided by 14 CFR § 121.436(a)(3), but may exceed it under certain circumstances 

as discussed in section (e) below.

(d) The reasons why granting our request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would 

benefit the public as a whole:

KLA asserts that the public would benefit from this request being granted because:

- KLA can continue to provide uninterrupted service to the flying public; should the 

exemption not be granted, we predict that the current Part 121 PIC hiring 

challenges could adversely affect our ability to provide air transportation in our 

current market, and

- Our proposed Part 121 PIC transition plan would provide, in the majority of cases, 

an increased level of safety than the CFR currently provides.

(e) The reasons why granting the exemption would not adversely affect safety, or how the 

exemption would provide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by the rule from 

which we seek exemption:

After analysis of both the text and our interpretation of the intent of 14 CFR § 121.436(a)(3), 

we have concluded that our proposal provides, in all cases, an equivalent level of safety 

and, in some cases, in increased level of safety, as discussed below:

KLA currently operates a fleet of 35 aircraft, ranging from Piper PA-31-350 Navajo 

Chieftains to Dornier DO-328-300s, in mixed operations including on-demand, domestic, 

and supplemental. 20 of these aircraft are M7 (formerly Fairchild Aircraft) SA226 and 

SA227 series aircraft, 18 of which are used in Part 135 on-demand cargo operations and 

2 of which are used in Part 121 domestic and supplemental operations.

The SA226/SA227 Metro series aircraft were manufactured between 1972 and 2001 as an 

extended version of the successful Merlin product. Production included several military 

variants, the C-26 through C-26E. The SA227 series (AC, BC, CC, and DC models) share 

a common type rating. Certified for single-pilot operations, the aircraft were typically 

equipped for the era in which they were produced. Very little automation and few advanced 

technologies were included in the type design. Most aircraft destined for commercial 

passenger service were not equipped with autopilots, a fact that still remains true (no KLA 

Metros are equipped with autopilots).

The Metro is considered a “high workload” aircraft due to its flying qualities and the lack of 

stability augmentation technologies (such as autopilot). Although many KLA aircraft are 

equipped with basic GPS navigation technology for use in the enroute and terminal 

environment, our pilots are rely heavily upon traditional airway navigation techniques.

Additionally, KLA SA226/SA227 aircraft (and the majority of the Metro fleet in general) are 

not equipped with many of the technologies that were emerging or had not yet emerged 

during production, such as EFIS, EICAS, ADC, AHRS, INS, etc. The lack of any federated

or integrated/distributed modular avionics system positions these aircraft as “raw data” 

aircraft, i.e. pilots must gather and interpret flight, system, and navigation data from several 

individual sources and interpret the data to make conclusions and decisions regarding the 

situation of the aircraft.
Key Lime Air Corp. Page 3 of 5 05/28/2014

KLA pilots operate these aircraft in a geographical and meteorological environment which 

is unique in the United States and is a more challenging environment than other areas.

Pilots operating single-pilot IFR in our area of operation will develop a high level of 

aeronautical experience and proficiency, more so than pilots operating in more benign 

environments. 

Newly hired KLA cargo pilots are initially placed in our piston fleet, flying either Piper PA31-350s or Cessna 404s. These pilots are hired with at least the minimum experience 

required by Part 135 for PICs in IFR operations. The piston aircraft pilots at KLA gain 

experience in our area of cargo operation (Colorado, Wyoming, Kansas, and Nebraska), 

our flight operations and maintenance procedures, and further hone their instrument flying 

skills in a lower-workload environment. Once a pilot has become acclimated to our flying 

environment and has proved proficiency in the basics of commercial, single-pilot cargo 

operations, they are typically selected for upgrade to the SA226/SA227 series.

Historically, after 1-3 years experience, and at least 1,000 hours of experience in the Metro, 

the best candidates were selected for upgrade to passenger operations (either our Part 

135 passenger operations in the EMB-120ER and DO-328-300 aircraft or Part 121 

passenger operations in the SA227-DC).

We have found that this progression consistently provided us with pilots who possessed

exceptional instrument flying skills, excellent decision-making abilities, and understanding

of aircraft systems and limitations which are well above industry average. 14 CFR § 

121.436(a)(3) has eliminated our ability to use this well-proven progression.

The types of experience allowed by 14 CFR § 121.436(a)(3) for qualification of a pilot as a 

PIC under Part 121 are fairly restrictive and do not allow operators to take advantage of 

their most experienced pilots under many circumstances.

We offer the following examples of situations comparing the experience and skillset of a 

1,000+ hour KLA Part 135 Metro cargo PIC to various pilots possessing the quantity and 

types of experience required by 14 CFR § 121.436(a)(3). While this is not an extensive or 

exhaustive analysis, we assert that, in general, the 1,000+ hour KLA cargo pilot is a 

superior candidate for KLA Part 121 passenger operations, due in large part to their 

extensive experience in the SA226/SA227 series.

Examples illustrating equivalent or greater level of safety:

- 1,000+ hour KLA Metro Part 135 cargo PIC vs. 1,000+ hour Part 121 SIC (14 CFR 

§ 121.436(a)(3)): In this example, we believe that the experience of the KLA cargo 

PIC is superior to SIC experience, regardless of where it was obtained. The 

decision-making abilities cultivated by years of experience as a KLA PIC (in the 

same type of aircraft) is a clear safety advantage.

- 1,000+ hour KLA Metro Part 135 cargo PIC vs. 1,000+ hour Part 135 turbojet PIC

(14 CFR § 135.243(a)(1)): Although the turbojet PIC will undoubtedly be very 

proficient in aircraft operation, aeronautical decision making, and crew resource 

management, we are concerned that many turbojet PICs of the current generation 

are at risk of losing proficiency with raw-data flying without autopilot or other 

advanced automation technologies. This concern has been illustrated in recent 

high-profile accidents/incidents in which causal or contributing factors involving 

heavy reliance on aircraft automation systems. KLA does not dispute the clear 

advantages of these advanced technologies, however we are concerned that, for 

example, a pilot with 1,000+ hours flying a Dassault Falcon 7X (a modern, fly-bywire corporate jet) under Part 135, may have significant difficulties adapting to the 

Metro.
Key Lime Air Corp. Page 4 of 5 05/28/2014

- 1,000+ hour KLA Metro Part 135 cargo PIC vs. 1,000+ hour Part 135 commuter 

PIC (14 CFR § 135.243(a)(1)): The advantage goes, again, to the KLA cargo PIC. 

Part 135 commuter operations are typically conducted with smaller and less 

complex aircraft than the Metro series (commuter operations are limited to nonturbojet aircraft having fewer than 10 passenger seats). Many of these operations 

are conducted as single-pilot operations. Other than experience in handling 

passengers, in most cases a Part 135 commuter pilot will have a drastically lower 

level of technical proficiency than the KLA Part 135 cargo pilot.

- 1,000+ hour KLA Metro Part 135 cargo PIC vs. 1,000+ hour Part 135 10-or-more 

PIC (14 CFR § 135.243(a)(1)): In this case we find that these candidates will 

typically be very similar in their technical abilities and decision-making skills, 

however we do not believe that, with identical equipment, there are any significant 

differences in these candidates. With dissimilar equipment, however, the KLA Part 

135 Metro cargo PIC is clearly more qualified than a pilot with no Metro experience.

- 1,000+ hour KLA Metro Part 135 cargo PIC vs. 1,000+ hour Part 91 Subpart K PIC

(14 CFR § 91.1053(a)(2)(i)): In this circumstance, similar to the comparison with 

the typical turbojet PIC, many Part 91 Subpart K operations are conducted with 

current generation aircraft, thus putting these candidates at a disadvantage when 

transitioning to the Metro. Further, we feel that the more stringent and regimented 

operating environment of Part 135 operations makes the KLA Part 135 cargo 

candidate a safer choice for our operation.

Apart from these theoretical situations, our actual operating experience confirms many of 

our concerns. In one case, a prior Canadair CRJ-200 PIC was hired and was ultimately 

terminated due to his inability to manage the systems of the Metro, which resulted in 

serious incidents during training and IOE involving loss of control (note that this PIC was 

hired directly into a Metro PIC position based on his extensive experience as a Part 121 

PIC). In another case, a similarly qualified PIC was hired directly into the Metro as a PIC 

and ultimately failed to meet minimum standards during flight training; this failure was 

attributed to the degradation of basic airmanship during his tenure as a Part 121 PIC at his 

prior carrier. Our traditional progression of pilots through our Part 135 cargo system (which 

is no longer a viable option under 14 CFR § 121.436(a)(3)) has allowed us eliminate these 

types of pilot candidates from our pilot pool early in the progression; by the time a pilot is 

qualified for transition to Part 121 PIC, any safety-related deficiencies have been identified 

and corrected.

While there are numerous other comparisons of possible pilot candidates which can be 

made, our operating experience has shown that our traditional system of pilot progression 

provides both KLA and the public with a level of safety equal to or greater than the level 

afforded by the minimum regulatory standard. Additionally, KLA will provide PICs qualified 

under this exemption with 15 additional hours of IOE to further acclimate the candidate in 

the Part 121 operating environment.

(f) A summary which can be published in the Federal Register:

(1) The rule from which we seek exemption:

14 CFR § 121.436(a)(3)

(2) A brief description of the nature of the exemption we seek:

KLA proposes that it be granted an exemption which would allow it to qualify its 

current Part 135 SA226/SA227 cargo PICs with at least 1,000 hours PIC time in 
Key Lime Air Corp. Page 5 of 5 05/28/2014

type as Part 121 SA227 passenger PICs. The Part 135 cargo SA226/SA227 PIC 

experience shall be considered in lieu of the experience requirements of 14 CFR 

§ 121.436(a)(3).

(g) Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support our request:

We anticipate that other similarly situated 121/135 certificate holders will face many of the 

same challenges as KLA. Further, we do not feel that the intent of the rule, as written, was 

to disallow an air carrier’s most experienced pilots from operations under Part 121 simply 

due to the fact that their flying experience was obtained under a different operating rule or 

type of operation. We agree, for example, that a 1,000+ hour pilot flying Cessna 208s in 

Part 135 operations may not possess the level of airmanship or decision-making ability 

required for Part 121 passenger operations. Conversely, we do not agree that a 1,000+ 

hour pilot flying Beech 1900s, Fairchild Metros, or even larger transport-category aircraft 

should be disallowed since these pilots, for the most part, have obtained a greater level of 

experience and proficiency than pilots meeting the requirement of 14 CFR § 121.436(a)(3) 

simply because those aircraft are not turbojet or passenger-configured aircraft.

(h) Reasons to exercise the privileges of this exemption outside the United States

KLA is authorized to conduct operations in Alaska, Canada, Mexico, Central America, 

South America, and the Caribbean. KLA anticipates that PICs qualified under this 

exemption will operate outside of the United States.