November 7, 2012

Mr. Andrew D. Lotter

4700 Empire Avenue, Hanger One

Burbank, CA 91505

Dear Mr. Lotter:

This letter is in response to your September 25, 2012 letter sent to the public docket (Docket 

No. FAA-2005-20109) petitioning the Federal Aviation Administration on behalf of 

Ameriflight, LLC (Ameriflight) for clarification to Exemption No. 8480E. That exemption 

from Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) §§ 121.631(b), (c), and (d) allows 

Ameriflight to operate certain Embraer Brasilla EMB-120 airplanes with a maximum payload 

capacity greater than 7,500 pounds in all-cargo service under part 135.

We have reviewed your request for clarification of a portion of paragraph 5 of the conditions 

and limitations in Exemption No. 8480E, granted on April 11, 2012. Your assessment is 

correct, and we appreciate your efforts to remain in compliance with the conditions and 

limitations of your grant of exemption. 

Condition No. 5 requires you to comply with §§121.631(b)(c), and (d). As you point out, 

subparagraphs (c) and (e) relate to extended operations (ETOPS) and since you are not 

currently conducting ETOPS, those subparagraphs do not apply. In the future, if you are 

approved to conduct ETOPS and wish to do so, then those subparagraphs will apply.

You must comply with §121.631(b), which states, in pertinent part, that:

(b) No person may allow a flight to continue to an airport to which it has been 

dispatched or released unless the weather conditions at an alternate airport that was 

specified in the dispatch or flight release are forecast to be at or above the alternate 

minimums specified in the operations specifications for that airport at the time the 

aircraft would arrive at the alternate airport.

We understand your confusion in that there appears to be an implication that to fully comply

with that subparagraph, you would also have to comply with §121.623. It essentially

mandates that an alternate be identified for all part 121 flights. However, that regulatory
2

reference is not included in your required conditions and limitations. The key phrase in 

§121.631(b) says, “. . . unless the weather conditions at an alternate airport that was 

specified in the dispatch or flight release . . .” (emphasis added). It does not necessarily

require a specified alternate. 

In your case, you must comply with the regulatory requirements of part 135 relating to the 

designation of an alternate airport. If the conditions of a specific flight are such that 

designation of an alternate airport is prescribed by part 135, then you must do so and 

§121.631(b) will apply. If no alternate airport is prescribed for a specific flight under part 

135, you may leave blank those entries referenced in §121.631(b) and that subparagraph will 

not apply.

We hope this clarifies our intent in establishing that particular condition and limitation in the 

grant of exemption. Once again, we thank you for your concern that you remain in regulatory

compliance. If we can be of any further assistance, please contact the Air Transportation 

Division, AFS-200 at (202) 267-8166. 

Sincerely,

/s/

Michael J. Zenkovick

Acting Deputy Director, Flight Standards

 Service