AFS-12-454-E

Exemption No. 10523A

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

WASHINGTON, DC 20591 

 

In the matter of the petition of 

ERA HELICOPTERS, LLC Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2011-1084

for an exemption from § 91.1605

of Title 14, Code of 

Federal Regulations, SFAR No. 77

DENIAL OF PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION

By letter dated May 31, 2011, submitted to Docket No. FAA-2011-0583 by Ms. Dana Raaz, 

P.O. Box 6550, Lake Charles, LA, Era Helicopters LLC (Era) petitioned the Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA) for an exemption from Special Federal Aviation Regulation (SFAR) No. 

77, § 91.1605, of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). By letter dated September 22, 

2011, Mr. Robert D. Van de Vuurst, President, Era, 600 Airport Service Road, Lake Charles, LA 

70605 responded to the FAA’s request for additional information that would allow it to process 

Era’s original petition. This additional information was posted in Docket No. FAA-2011-1084. 

The proposed exemption, if granted, would permit Era to conduct on-demand rotorcraft 

operations in southern Iraq. Specifically, it would allow Era to conduct passenger transport and 

medevac operations in that region of Iraq on an as-needed basis for oil industry participants and, 

potentially, other clients.

The FAA denied Era’s initial petition in April 30, 2012, for failure to respond to an FAA 

request for more information, and Era petitioned for reconsideration by letter dated June 8, 2012. 

Era provided further supplemental information on June 8, 2012, from Mr. Van de Vuurst and on 

February 8, 2013, from Mr. Sten L. Gustafson, Chief Executive Officer, Era Group Inc. On 

January 15, 2014, Era clarified via email that it was not seeking any area restrictions for its 

proposed operations in Iraq. 

The petitioner requires relief from the following regulation:

Section 91.1605, SFAR No. 77—Prohibition Against Certain Flights Within the Territory 

and Airspace of Iraq. Paragraph (b), Flight prohibition, prescribes that no person may conduct 

flight operations over or within the territory of Iraq, except as provided in paragraphs (c) and (d)

or (b)(1)-(b)(5) of that section. Paragraph (c), Permitted Operations, prescribes that SFAR 

No. 77 does not prohibit persons described in paragraph (a) of that section from conducting flight 
2

operations within the territory and airspace of Iraq when such operations are authorized either 

by another agency of the United States Government (USG) with the approval of the FAA or by 

an exemption granted by the Administrator.

Paragraph (a) of §91.1605, SFAR No. 77, provides in pertinent part that the rule applies to:

(1) All U.S. air carriers or commercial operators;

(2) All persons exercising the privileges of an airman certificate issued by the FAA except 

such persons operating U.S.-registered aircraft for a foreign air carrier; or

(3) All operators of aircraft registered in the United States except where the operator of such 

aircraft is a foreign air carrier.

The petitioner supports its request with the following information:

Era states that the Iraqi government has made repeated requests that U.S. civil air carriers

be allowed to operate in Iraq. It states Iraq is in need of helicopter capabilities and that, at the 

time of Era’s September 21, 2011, letter, Iraq had only one available commercial helicopter 

operated by a small non-American company. Era also states that international oil companies 

operating in Iraq are interested in utilizing helicopters for personnel transport and medevac and 

would like to use a company that they recognize and that meets their efficiency and safety 

standards. At the time of the September 21, 2011, letter, according to the petitioner, U.S. 

citizens and others working in the oil industry in southern Iraq had to travel either by road, 

placing them in danger of improvised explosive device (IED) attack, or utilize a foreign 

company for air transport that might not meet the same safety standards that would be required 

of a U.S. operator. Era believes lives will be saved by its introduction of medevac operations in 

southern Iraq, which will speed the delivery of patients to medical facilities where they can 

obtain appropriate care. 

Era submitted detailed information, a great deal of which it requested be treated as 

proprietary information, to the FAA concerning its proposed operations in Iraq, including:

1. The locations of primary and alternate landing sites at which Era plans to operate;

2. Its plans for mitigating risks to the aircraft while airborne;

3. Survival training for crewmembers specific to the area;

4. A description of any special emergency equipment or aircraft modifications;

5. Information on specialized training for flight crew members;

6. Detailed information about Era’s process for obtaining comprehensive threat information, 

its dissemination of such information to flight crew members, and how such information 

will be used throughout all phases of the operation; and 
3

7. A copy of Era’s General Operations Manual (GOM) Supplement for Iraq, as well as 

other materials comprehensively describing Era’s processes and procedures for managing 

risks to its proposed operations in Iraq.

Era proposes several steps to mitigate risks associated with its requested flight operations. 

Era proposes to use special risk management processes and procedures, including enhanced 

operational control measures to ensure that company management has heightened awareness of 

and oversight over the proposed operations. Era also proposes to utilize flight planning 

software and explains how this software will contribute to giving all parties involved in the 

decision of whether to conduct a particular flight a comprehensive understanding of the risks 

involved with that flight. Era’s submissions to the FAA describe in detail how the risks 

associated with a proposed flight will be evaluated, the safety and security conditions that must 

be met for a proposed flight to take place, the circumstances under which flights will be 

cancelled or diverted, and who may cancel a flight. Era further describes the measures that it 

would take to ensure comprehensive security coverage for all aspects of its proposed operations

while avoiding the introduction of potential safety hazards.

Era’s submissions also describe in detail special processes and procedures to manage risks to 

its proposed medical evacuation flights. Key measures include: processes for assessing risks to 

proposed medevac operations that include consideration of current threat information and strict 

limits on the safety and security conditions under which a medevac flight may be initiated or 

continued. 

.

A summary of Era’s petition was published in the Federal Register on October 26, 2011 

(76 FR 66351). No comments were received. However, the FAA received supporting letters 

from Congressman Allen West on October 11, 2011, and Ambassador James Jeffrey on October

18, 2011. 

The FAA’s analysis is as follows: 

Upon receiving a denial of exemption, § 11.101 states that a petitioner may ask the FAA to 

reconsider its petition for exemption. The petition for reconsideration must show a significant 

additional fact that was not presented in the original petition, that the FAA made an important 

factual error in the denial, or that the FAA did not correctly interpret a law, regulation, or 

precedent. 

The FAA has fully considered the petitioner’s request and supporting information and finds 

that, although the petitioner’s new submissions to the FAA, taken as a whole, were very 

comprehensive and presented additional facts beyond those presented in its original petition, 

circumstances in Iraq have changed to such a degree since the petitioner made its submissions 

that granting the requested exemption would not be in the public interest and would not provide 

an equivalent level of safety to that provided by the regulation. 

On July 31, 2014, the FAA issued a Notice To Airmen (NOTAM) prohibiting flight 

operations in the territory and airspace of Iraq at or below flight level (FL) 300 because of 

significant changes in the operational environment for U.S. civil aviation. The resurgence of 

radical Islamic groups, such as the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), also known as the 
4

Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), and their ongoing combat operations against the Iraqi 

government and its allies had led to an increased threat to U.S. civil aviation in Iraq. This 

NOTAM increased restrictions on operations in the territory and airspace of Iraq beyond the 

restrictions contained in SFAR No. 77, § 91.1605, which remained in effect. The following 

operations that had been permitted under SFAR No. 77, § 91.1605, were prohibited by the July 

31, 2014, NOTAM: 

(1) Overflights of Iraq above FL 200 but at or below FL 300; 

(2) Operations at or below FL 300 by flights departing from countries adjacent to Iraq 

whose climb performance would not permit operations above FL 300 prior to entering 

Iraqi airspace; and 

(3) Flights within the territory of Iraq north of 34°30' North latitude originating from or 

destined to areas outside of Iraq to or from Erbil International Airport and 

Sulaymaniyah International Airport. 

On August 7, 2014, President Obama announced that he had authorized air drops of 

humanitarian aid to trapped Iraqi civilians and targeted airstrikes against militants associated 

with ISIL that have since resulted in numerous airstrikes. U.S. forces began conducting 

airstrikes on August 8, 2014, and, on the same day, the FAA issued a NOTAM prohibiting flight 

operations in the Baghdad (ORBB) Flight Information Region (FIR) at all altitudes by all: U.S. 

air carriers; U.S. commercial operators; persons exercising the privileges of an airman certificate

issued by the FAA, except when such persons are operating a U.S.-registered aircraft for a

foreign air carrier; and operators of U.S.-registered civil aircraft, except when such operators are 

foreign air carriers, subject to certain limited exceptions not relevant here. On August 10, 2014, 

the Department of State issued a Travel Warning for Iraq that advises U.S. citizens against all but 

essential travel to Iraq. The U.S. Embassy in Baghdad has relocated personnel due to the threat,

and its ability to provide consular services to U.S. citizens throughout Iraq, including Baghdad, is 

limited given the security environment. Americans in country are under restricted movement 

conditions, and often are accompanied by security advisors and protective security teams. On 

December 24, 2014, the FAA issued a NOTAM extending its prohibition on U.S. civil flight 

operations in the Baghdad (ORBB) FIR at all altitudes due to the continuing armed conflict 

between militants associated with ISIL and Iraqi security forces and their allies. 

The potential spread of militant forces associated with ISIL and airstrikes targeting those 

hostile forces may not be limited to just the northern regions of Iraq. For the reasons described 

above, the FAA has determined it would not be in the public interest to grant Era Helicopters the 

proposed exemption at this time, because it would not provide an equivalent level of safety to 

that provided by SFAR No. 77, § 91.1605.
5

The FAA’s Decision

In consideration of the foregoing, I find that a grant of exemption would not be in the public 

interest. Therefore, pursuant to the authority contained in 49 U.S.C. §§ 106(f), 40113 and 44701, 

delegated to me by the Administrator, Era Helicopters, LLC’s petition for exemption from 

14 CFR § 91.1605, SFAR No. 77, is hereby denied.

Issued in Washington, DC, on March 27, 2015. .

Michael P. Huerta

Administrator