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 whic h 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 p art 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 a n emerging small carrier, it is becoming more difficult to attract candidates possess ing the type and quantity of experience listed above; further, our experience has shown that even candidates which possess the type and quantity of experien ce 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 car go 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 ex isting 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 b ecause 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 toKey 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 op erations, 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 intere st; 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 saf ety than the CFR currently pr ovides.

(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 ai rcraft , 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 s uccessful 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, t he aircraft were typically equipped for the er a 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 a re 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 technol ogy for use in the enroute and terminal environment, our pilots are rely heavil y up on traditional airway navigation techniques. Additionally, KLA SA226/SA227 aircraf t (and the majority of the Metro fleet in general ) are not equipped with many o f 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. pilo ts 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 mete orological 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 tha n pilots operating in more benign

environments.

Newly hired KLA cargo pilots are initially placed in our piston fleet, flying either Piper PA

31

- 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 the ir 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 a nd 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 qualificat ion 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 an d 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, th e 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 e xperience 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 § 135.24 3(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 t urbojet 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 concer ned that, for example, a pilot with 1,000+ hours flying a Dassault Falcon 7X (a modern, fly

- by

wire 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 c ommuter
PIC (14 CFR § 135.24 3(a)(1) ) : The advantage goes, again, to the KLA cargo PIC. Part 135 commuter operations are typically conducted with smaller and less complex aircra ft than the Metro series (commuter operations are limited to non

turbojet aircraft having fewer than 10 p assenger 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 car go pilot.

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

- or

- more PIC (14 CFR § 135.24 3(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 dis similar 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 § 91.10 53(a)(2)(i)) : In this circumstance, similar to the comparison w ith 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 operati ng 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 PI C 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 ou r 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 w hich 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 le as t 1,000 hours PIC time inKey Lime Air Corp. Page 5 of 5 05/28 /2014 type as Part 121 SA227 passeng er 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 op erations 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 le vel of airmanship or decision

- making ability required for Part 121 pas senger operations. Conversely, we do not agree that a 1,000+ hour pilot flying Beech 1900s, Fairchild Metros, or even larger transport

- category aircraft

s hould be disallowed sin ce these pilots, for the most part, have obtained a greater level of experience and proficiency than pilot s 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 a uthorized 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.