Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 244 / Wednesday, December 20, 1995 / Proposed Rules 65951

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Parts 121, 135

[Docket No. 28081; Notice No. 95–18]

RIN 2120–AF63

Flight Crewmember Duty Period

Limitations, Flight Time Limitations

and Rest Requirements

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM).

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to amend

existing regulations to establish one set

of duty period limitations, flight time

limitations, and rest requirements for

flight crewmembers engaged in air

transportation. The proposal results

from public and congressional interest

in regulating flight crewmember rest

requirements, NTSB Safety

Recommendations, petitions for

rulemaking, and scientific data

contained in recent National

Aeronautics and Space Administration

(NASA) studies relating to flight

crewmember duty periods, flight times,

and rest. The proposal would update the

regulations and replace certain outdated regulations with a simplified

regulatory approach based upon

scientific studies of fatigue. The

objective of the proposal is to contribute

to an improved aviation safety system

by ensuring that flight crewmembers are

provided with the opportunity to obtain

sufficient rest to perform their routine

and emergency safety duties.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before March 19, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Send or deliver comments

on this notice in triplicate to: Federal

Aviation Administration, Office of the

Chief Counsel, Attention: Rules Docket

(AGC–200), Room 915G, Docket No.

28081, 800 Independence Avenue, SW,

Washington, DC 20591. Comments may

also be submitted to the Rules Docket by

using the following Internet address:

nprmcmts@mail.hq.faa.gov. Comments

must be marked Docket No. 28081.

Comments may be examined in the

Rules Docket in Room 915G on

weekdays between 8:30 a.m. and 5:00

p.m., except on Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Larry Youngblut, Project Development

Branch, AFS–240, Air Transportation

Division, Flight Standards Service,

Room 829, Federal Aviation

Administration, 800 Independence

Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591;

telephone (202) 267–3755.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

Interested persons are invited to

participate in this rulemaking by

submitting written data, views, or

arguments, and by commenting on the

possible environmental, economic, and

federalism- or energy-related impact of

the adoption of this proposal.

Comments concerning the proposed

implementation and effective date of the

rule are also specifically requested.

Comments should carry the regulatory

docket or notice number and should be

submitted in triplicate to the Rules

Docket address specified above. All

comments received and a report

summarizing any substantive public

contact with FAA personnel on this

rulemaking will be filed in the docket.

The docket is available for public

inspection both before and after the

closing date for receiving comments.

Before taking any final action on this

proposal, the Administrator will

consider the comments made on or

before the closing date for comments,

and the proposal may be changed in

light of the comments received.

The FAA will acknowledge receipt of

a comment if the commenter includes a

self-addressed, stamped postcard with

the comment. The postcard should be

marked ‘‘Comments to Docket No.

28081.’’ When the comment is received

by the FAA, the postcard will be dated,

time stamped, and returned to the

commenter.

Availability of the NPRM

Any person may obtain a copy of this

NPRM by submitting a request to the

Federal Aviation Administration, Office

of Public Affairs, Attention: Public

Inquiry Center, APA–430, 800

Independence Avenue SW.,

Washington, DC 20591, or by calling

(202) 267–3484. Communications must

identify the notice number of this

NPRM.

Persons interested in being placed on

a mailing list for future FAA NPRM’s

should request a copy of Advisory

Circular No. 11–2A, Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking Distribution System, which

describes application procedures.

Background

The aviation industry requires 24-

hour activities to meet operational

demands. Growth in global long-haul,

regional, overnight cargo, and short-haul

domestic operations is likely to increase

round-the-clock requirements. Flight

crews must be available to support 24-

hour a day operations to meet these

industry demands. Both domestic and

international aviation frequently require

crossing multiple time zones. Therefore,

shift work, night work, irregular work

schedules, unpredictable work

schedules, and time zone changes will

continue to be commonplace

components of the aviation industry.

These factors affect human physiology

by causing performance-impairing

fatigue that can affect the level of safety.

The FAA believes that it is critical,

whenever possible, to incorporate

scientific information on fatigue and

human sleep physiology into

regulations on flight crew scheduling.

Such scientific information can help to

maintain the safety margin and promote

optimum crew performance and

alertness during flight operations.

Over the past 40 years, scientific

knowledge about sleep, sleep disorders,

circadian physiology, fatigue,

sleepiness/alertness, and performance

decrements has grown significantly.

Some of this scientific knowledge,

gained through field and simulator

studies, has confirmed that aviators

experience performance-impairing

fatigue from sleep loss resulting from

current flight and duty practices.

Incorporation of scientific knowledge on

fatigue into operations (e.g., regulatory

scheduling considerations, personal

strategies, fatigue countermeasures)

would greatly benefit safety. A primary

purpose of this rulemaking is to

incorporate as much as possible of the

scientific knowledge into the applicable

regulations.

A second purpose of this proposed

rulemaking is to establish consistent

and clear duty period limitations, flight

time limitations, and rest requirements

for all types of operations. The current

regulations require revising because of

their complexity and age. While

domestic flight time limitations and

some commuter limitations were

updated in 1985, flag and supplemental

operations were not. With

advancements in new aircraft, these

operational distinctions are no longer as

meaningful as they once were. This

proposal would establish the same duty

period limitations, flight time

limitations, and rest requirements for all

types of operations in part 121 for

domestic, flag, and supplemental

operations and in part 135 for commuter

and on-demand operations. The duty

period limitations, flight time

limitations, and rest requirements

would allow for differences based on

the length of flights and number of flight

crewmembers on a flight.
65952 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 244 / Wednesday, December 20, 1995 / Proposed Rules

General Discussion

Historical Review

The Civil Aeronautics Act of 1938 (52

Stat. 1007; as amended by 62 Stat. 1216,

49 U.S.C. 551) and subsequently, the

Federal Aviation Act of 1958 (now

codified at 49 U.S.C. 40101 et seq.)

addressed the issue of regulating flight

crewmember hours of service. The

Federal Aviation Act, as amended,

empowers and directs the Secretary of

Transportation to promote the safety of

civil air flight in air commerce by

prescribing and revising from time to

time ‘‘reasonable rules and regulations

governing, in the interest of safety, the

maximum hours or periods of service of

airmen, and other employees.’’

Despite many changes in the airline

transportation industry over the 30

years before 1983, the rules governing

flight time limitations and rest

requirements remained virtually

unchanged because no safety reasons

had been presented which necessitated

changes to the regulations. But the

presumed level of safety established by

these rules did not necessarily mean

that the rules were as effective as they

should have been when considered in

light of changes that had occurred in the

industry in the previous 30 years.

In 1983, a significant rulemaking was

initiated to clarify and simplify the

regulations and to make them more

applicable to the air transportation

environment at that time. A significant

driving force for amending the flight

time regulations in 1983 was that the

requirements under part 121 were so

complicated that they had required

thousands of pages of interpretation and

had sometimes been incorrectly

followed by air carriers.

A second significant factor justifying

amendment of the rules in 1983 was

their inflexibility. For example,

although under the then existing rule,

air carriers were not considered in

violation of the rules if flight times were

exceeded due to adverse weather

conditions or other circumstances

beyond the control of the air carrier, an

air carrier did not have the flexibility to

adjust scheduled rest periods in the

event of late arrivals or other factors. If

a flight was late, the subsequent flights

often had to be delayed while substitute

flight crewmembers were brought in or

while the flight crewmembers received

their scheduled rest periods.

A third factor affecting the pre-1983

rules was, under deregulation of the air

transportation industry, the number and

variety of domestic certificate holders

dramatically increased. The complexity

and variety of the newer operations

required that the FAA provide clear and

simple minimum safety criteria for all

operators.

A fourth factor affecting the pre-1983

rules, and one related to the changing

character of the air transportation

industry, was the growth of commuter

operations. Some commuter operations

fall under part 121 domestic rules while

others fall under part 135 rules. A

question existed as to whether either set

of requirements effectively covered

these comparatively new and growing

operations. Thus an additional aim of

the 1983–1985 rulemaking proceedings

was to study the materials submitted by

the commuter industry group and

incorporate the findings into the

applicable rules in order to provide, in

this segment of the industry, a level of

safety equivalent to other air

transportation operations.

The 1983–1985 rulemaking

proceeding was not the FAA’s first

attempt to solve the previously

described problems. For a number of

years before 1983 the FAA recognized

that the flight time limits and rest

requirements needed to be clarified and

substantively improved in those areas

where they were potentially inadequate.

On several occasions the FAA had

attempted to correct the flight time

limitation problems of both parts 121

and 135 through rulemaking actions.

But because of the complexity of the

flight time rules and the economic

interests affected, none of the previous

proposals succeeded in resolving the

problems to the satisfaction of the

affected parties. Given the importance of

the flight time rules in air transportation

safety, the FAA decided in 1983 to try

an innovative approach that would

bring the affected parties together to

negotiate a resolution.

1983–1985 Regulatory Negotiation

In 1983 regulatory negotiation was a

new concept recommended by the

Administrative Conference of the

United States. Basically, it was a

procedure by which representatives of

all interests affected by a rulemaking

could be brought together to fully

discuss the issues under conditions

conducive to narrowing or eliminating

differences and to negotiating a

proposed rule acceptable to each

interest. In accordance with the

recommended procedure, the FAA

created an advisory committee chartered

under the Federal Advisory Committee

Act. The committee was comprised of

persons representing the diverse

interests affected by the flight time

rules, including persons representing

flight crewmembers, air carriers, air

taxis, helicopter operators, and the

public.

The committee met for 16 days in

1983 under the direction of a convener/

mediator and thoroughly discussed the

major issues involved in the regulation

of flight time limits and rest

requirements for domestic operations

under part 121 and for operations under

part 135. Although the committee did

not reach consensus on any particular

proposal, its deliberations were

successful in narrowing the differences

among parties and in reaching

substantial agreement on some issues. In

addition, the committee identified major

areas of concern and all parties obtained

significant, new information on a

subject which had been discussed,

without resolution, for years. The

committee deliberations led to a notice

of proposed rulemaking [49 FR 12136,

March 28, 1984] and then to a final rule

[50 FR 29306, July 18, 1985]. The final

rule reflected comments received from

the organizations represented on the

Advisory Committee and from others.

The final rule accomplished the

following major objectives:

(1) It resolved a series-of-flights

problem in part 121, domestic air carrier

rules, thereby addressing many

interpretation issues;

(2) It established a new rest period

requirement in part 121, domestic air

carrier rules, for flight crewmembers

scheduled to fly 8 hours or less in 24

consecutive hours and allowed greater

scheduling flexibility, including the

introduction of a reduced rest period;

(3) It upgraded the requirements for

all operations in part 135, particularly

scheduled operations; and

(4) It incorporated into the rules

certain exemptions that had wide

applicability: The reduction of a 10-

hour rest under part 135 under certain

conditions; the extension of flight time

with augmented crews; and the special

limitations needed for helicopter

medical emergency services.

ARAC Flight/Duty Working Group

While the FAA’s 1983–1985 flight

time limitations rulemaking was a step

forward in dealing with rest and flight

time issues, the rulemaking was limited

in its scope and did not address either

flag or supplemental operations under

part 121. The FAA recognized at the

time that flag and supplemental rules

would need to be updated because these

rules contained some of the same

language and problems contained in the

domestic rules that were amended.

Furthermore, though the 1985

rulemaking clarified some of the flight

time and rest requirements, it did not

resolve the problems completely. Also,

since the 1985 rulemaking, the

complexity of the rules and
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 244 / Wednesday, December 20, 1995 / Proposed Rules 65953

inconsistencies associated with various

types of operations (domestic, flag, and

supplemental under part 121 and

commuter and on-demand under part

135) have continued to make

application and interpretation

burdensome. A number of petitions to

amend the various sections were

received (discussed in more detail later),

as well as hundreds of letters

concerning the interpretation of rest

requirements for flight crewmembers

assigned to a reserve status. Therefore,

on June 15, 1992, the FAA announced

[57 FR 26685] the establishment of the

Flight Crewmember Flight/Duty Rest

requirements working group (ARAC

Flight/Duty Working Group) of the

Aviation Rulemaking Advisory

Committee (ARAC).

The ARAC had been established by

the FAA in January 1991 [46 FR 2190,

January 22, 1991] as a vehicle for

convening representatives of interested

groups to assist the FAA in addressing

regulatory problems in a forum that

could use, in a less formal setting, many

of the regulatory negotiation techniques

that had been used by the 1983–1985

flight time limitations advisory

committee. The working group’s task

was to determine whether regulations

pertaining to air carrier flight duty and

rest requirements are consistently

interpreted and understood by the FAA,

air carriers, and pilots; to evaluate

industry compliance/practice regarding

scheduling of reserve duty and rest

periods; and to evaluate reports of

excessive pilot fatigue as a result of such

scheduling. The working group was to

develop recommendations for advisory

material and a regulatory revision as

appropriate.

Between its creation on June 15, 1992,

and June 30, 1994, the ARAC Flight/

Duty Working Group met on numerous

occasions. The chairman of this working

group (Dr. Donald E. Hudson of the

Aviation Medicine Advisory Service)

submitted a preliminary report on

February 1, 1994, and a final report on

June 30, 1994. The report indicated that

while the working group did not reach

a consensus on the specific issues, the

working group did agree on four major

areas that the FAA should address in

future rulemaking actions: Absence of a

duty time limitation; reserve

scheduling; back-side-of-the-clock

operations; and scheduled reduced rest.

Each of the four areas is briefly

described here. Three areas are

specifically addressed in this

rulemaking and one, back-side-of-theclock operations, is partially, though

indirectly, addressed.

Continuous or indefinite duty could

occur under the current rules if flight

crewmembers complete their daily

schedule when delays encountered are

beyond the control of the certificate

holder, no matter how long it extends

their duty period. The reserve

scheduling issue concerns questions

such as, do the same rest period

requirements apply to flight

crewmembers assigned to reserve duty

as the rest period requirements that

apply to flight crewmembers assigned to

scheduled flights? Back-side-of-the

clock operations refers to the question

whether special duty limitations and

rest requirements should be developed

for operations that are scheduled during

a flight crewmember’s normal sleep

cycle. The scheduled reduced rest issue

concerns whether certificate holders

should be allowed to schedule reduced

rest in advance or whether reduced rest

should only be allowed to deal with

unavoidable delays.

Because no consensus could be

reached, Dr. Hudson’s final report

included proposals submitted by several

members of the working group. It also

stated that there is enough clear

scientific guidance available to assist

the FAA in establishing a regulatory

‘‘safety floor’’ that will both address the

identified issues and not unfairly

penalize carriers economically. The

report further stated that there is not any

physiological justification for having

different work rules for part 121 and 135

operators.

NASA Research Program

In 1980, in response to a

Congressional request, the National

Aeronautic and Space Administration

(NASA) Ames Research Center created a

Fatigue/Jet Lag Program to examine

whether there are safety problems due

to transmeridian flying and fatigue in

association with various factors found

in air transport operations. Since its

inception, the program has pursued the

following three goals: (1) to determine

the extent of fatigue, sleep loss, and

circadian disruption in both domestic

and international flight operations; (2)

to determine the impact of these factors

on flight crew performance; and (3) to

develop and evaluate countermeasures

to reduce the adverse effects of these

factors and improve flight crew

performance and alertness. In 1991, the

NASA Ames Program was renamed the

NASA Ames Fatigue Countermeasures

Program to highlight the increased focus

on the third goal. Since the beginning of

the program, NASA has worked in close

cooperation with the FAA and with the

airline industry to collect data and to

provide the findings of its extensive

research as quickly as possible. This

research is fundamental to this

proposal.

NASA Technical Memoranda reveal

general principles pertinent to

scheduling flight crewmembers. The

memoranda include but are not limited

to the following:

1. Crew Factors in Flight Operations

II: Psychophysiological Responses to

Shorthaul Air Transport Operations.

(NASA Technical Memorandum

108856, November 1994)

2. Crew Factors in Flight Operations:

Factors Influencing Sleep Timing and

Subjective Sleep Quality in Commercial

Long-Haul Operations. (NASA

Technical Memorandum 103852,

December 1991)

3. Principles and Guidelines for Duty

and Rest Scheduling in Commercial

Aviation. (NASA Technical

Memorandum, 1995)

Copies of these memoranda have been

placed in the public docket for this

rulemaking.

These memoranda state that sleep,

awake time off, and recovery are

primary considerations for maintaining

alertness and performance levels.

Adequate sleep is essential to maintain

alertness and performance, a positive

mood, and overall health and wellbeing. Each individual has a basic sleep

requirement. The average sleep

requirement is for 8 hours in a 24-hour

period. Losing as little as 2 hours of

sleep in a 24-hour time period can result

in acute sleep loss, which will promote

fatigue and degrade subsequent

performance and alertness. Over days,

sleep loss will accrue into a cumulative

sleep debt which can only be reversed

by sleep. An individual who has

obtained required sleep performs better

even after long hours awake or during

altered work schedules. An individual

who is fatigued typically shows a

decline in performance by requiring

more time to complete a given task. Two

nights of an individual’s usual sleep

requirement will typically stabilize the

sleep pattern and restore acceptable

levels of waking alertness and

performance. More frequent recovery

periods reduce cumulative fatigue more

effectively than less frequent ones. For

example, weekly recovery periods afford

a higher likelihood of relieving acute

fatigue than monthly recovery periods.

Consequently, regulations that ensure

minimum days off per week are critical

for minimizing the effects of cumulative

fatigue over longer periods of time.

The NASA findings and

recommendations have been

summarized in a 1995 NASA Technical

Memorandum titled ‘‘Principles and

Guidelines for Duty and Rest

Scheduling in Commercial Aviation.’’
65954 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 244 / Wednesday, December 20, 1995 / Proposed Rules

This is the first document that NASA

intends to publish. This first document

is intended to be concise, focused on

operational considerations and to

provide specific scientific input to this

complex issue. The second document

will provide the specific scientific

references that support the principles

and guidelines outlined in the first

document. The second document will

be longer and will focus on the

scientific considerations related to these

issues. NASA has assured the FAA that

the Technical Reports presently in the

docket contain the data on which the

results and conclusions in both the first

and second document are based. While

not every NASA finding or

recommendation is specifically reflected

in this proposal, the overall thrust of

this proposal is consistent with those

findings and recommendations. Specific

findings of the 1995 NASA

memorandum are discussed and where

relevant referenced by paragraph

number in the discussion of specific

proposals in this document.

National Transportation Safety Board

Recommendations (NTSB)

Issues of fatigue in transportation

have been of special concern to the

NTSB in all modes of transportation. In

1989, the NTSB made three

recommendations to the Department of

Transportation (DOT) to encourage an

aggressive Federal program to address

the problems of fatigue and sleep issues

in transportation safety:

Expedite a coordinated research

program on the effects of fatigue,

sleepiness, sleep disorders, and

circadian factors on transportation

system safety. (I–89–1)

Develop and disseminate educational

material for transportation industry

personnel and management regarding

shift work; scheduled work and rest;

and proper regimens of health, diet, and

rest. (I–89–2)

Review and upgrade regulations

governing hours of service for all modes

to ensure that they are consistent and

that they incorporate the results of the

latest research on fatigue and sleep

issues. (I–89–3)

Further NTSB recommendations were

issued as a result of the August 18,

1993, Douglas DC–8–61 freighter crash

at the Leeward Point Airfield at the U.S.

Naval Air Station, Guantanamo Bay,

Cuba after the captain lost control of the

airplane on approach. The airplane was

destroyed by impact forces and a post

accident fire, and the three flight

crewmembers sustained serious injuries.

NTSB determined that among the

probable causes of this accident were

impaired judgment, impaired decisionmaking, and impaired flying abilities of

the captain and flightcrew due to the

effects of fatigue.

In the letter accompanying the NTSB

Safety Recommendations issued as a

result of the accident, the NTSB cited

the fact that FAA’s flight and duty rules

applicable to part 121 and 135

certificate holders, as interpreted, allow

flight crewmembers to conduct flights

under part 91, e.g., ferry flights for their

certificate holders following the

completion of flights conducted under

part 121 or 135, without having to count

these flight hours or duty time toward

the part 121 or 135 flight time duty time

limitations and rest requirements. The

NTSB concluded that ‘‘the accident trip

was under the provisions of a

combination of separate regulations that

allowed extended flight and duty times

to be scheduled, contrary to safe

operating practices.’’ The NTSB went on

to note that the United States and

France are the only countries in the

world that base their aviation hours of

service regulations on flight time, while

most other countries base them on duty

time or a combination of duty and flight

time.

As a result of the Guantanamo Bay

accident, the NTSB issued the following

Safety Recommendations that relate to

flight and duty time limits:

(1) Revise part 121 to require that

flight time accumulated in

noncommercial ‘‘tail end’’ ferry flights

conducted under part 91, as a result of

14 CFR, part 121, revenue flights, be

included in the flight crewmember’s

total flight and duty time accrued

during those revenue operations. (A–

94–105)

(2) Expedite the review and upgrade

of flight/duty time limitations of the

Federal Aviation Regulations to ensure

that they incorporate the results of the

latest research on fatigue and sleep

issues. (A–94–106)

The NTSB also reiterated an earlier

recommendation that the FAA require

U.S. air carriers operating under 14 CFR

part 121, to include, as part of pilot

training, a program to educate pilots

about the detrimental effects of fatigue,

and strategies for avoiding fatigue and

countering its effects. (A–94–5)

Aviation Safety Reporting System

The FAA has recently examined

incident reports submitted by pilots to

NASA’s Aviation Safety Reporting

System. Since January 1, 1986, NASA

has received several reports of situations

resulting from fatigue from pilots

engaged in part 121 operations and 200

reports from pilots conducting part 135

operations. Although these incidents

did not actually result in accidents, they

were of a sufficiently serious nature that

pilots took the trouble to file a report

with NASA with the hope of gaining the

attention of the regulatory authorities.

Petitions for Rulemaking

The FAA has received several

petitions for rulemaking on flight, duty,

and rest requirements:

On June 1, 1989, the Air Transport

Association of America (ATA)

petitioned the FAA to amend part 121,

Subpart R of the FAR (which contains

the flight time limitations for flag

operations). This petition primarily

addressed the need for rulemaking to

address the industry wide technological

airplane changes that have taken place

since these rules were promulgated,

such as airplanes that require only two

pilots on long distance flights and

significant improvements in cockpit

automation and noise reduction.

Specifically, the petition requested that

two-pilot flight crews be allowed to fly

12 hours between required rest periods.

On June 22, 1990, the Air Line Pilots

Association (ALPA) petitioned the FAA

to amend §§ 121.471 and 135.265 to

delete the reduced rest provisions and

to increase the required minimum rest

for flight crewmembers who are

scheduled to fly fewer than 8 hours in

a 24-hour period to 10 hours with at

least 8 hours in a rest facility; propose

longer rest for flight crewmembers who

are scheduled to fly more than 8 hours

or who make more than eight landings

in a 24-hour period; limit duty period

time to 14 consecutive hours in a 24-

hour period; mandate 1 calendar day

free of duty every 7 days, even when

flight crewmembers are assigned reserve

and/or training duties; and restrict air

carriers from interrupting a flight

crewmember’s rest by communicating

with him or her during a required rest

period.

On September 12, 1990, the Regional

Airline Pilot Association (RAPA)

petitioned to amend § 135.265 of the

FAR to delete the reduced rest

provisions for flight crewmembers who

are scheduled to fly in pressurized

aircraft during a 24-hour period and

increase the minimum rest period to 10

hours with at least 9 hours in a rest

facility. For those crewmembers

scheduled to fly in unpressurized

aircraft, and those who make more than

seven landings in a 24-hour period,

RAPA petitioned to require a 12-hour

rest with at least 10 hours in a rest

facility. RAPA petitioned also for an

amendment to § 135.265(a) of the FAR

which would reduce the total flight time

allowed per year to 1,000 hours and per

month to 100 hours.
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 244 / Wednesday, December 20, 1995 / Proposed Rules 65955

On November 25, 1991, Mr. Thomas

T. Gasta, a captain on turbo-jet aircraft,

petitioned the FAA to amend the

definitions in part 1 of the FAR to

include a definition of rest that would

ensure that a rest period is free from

restraint and free from responsibility for

work. Mr. Gasta’s particular concern is

to ensure that reserve time is not

considered rest.

The FAA has considered each of these

petitions for rulemaking in preparing

this NPRM.

Commuter Rulemaking

The FAA has issued a proposed

rulemaking that would affect commuter

operations, in general, including

applicable flight time limitations and

rest requirements (Notice 95–5, 60 FR

16230; March 29, 1995).

The effect of Notice 95–5, if adopted,

would be to apply the part 121 domestic

flight time limitations and rest

requirements to certain commuter

operations within the United States and

the part 121 flag flight time limitations

and rest requirements to certain

commuter operations to or from the

United States. Thus, that proposal

would eliminate the present differences

between part 121 and part 135 flight

time limitations and rest requirements

for affected commuter operations. For

all of the reasons discussed in this

preamble, the FAA has decided to

propose one set of duty period

limitations, flight time limitations, and

rest requirements for flight

crewmembers engaged in air

transportation (domestic, flag,

supplemental, commuter and ondemand operations). Since, if adopted,

this proposal would eliminate all of the

present differences between parts 121

and 135 in this subject area, it overrides

the related proposal and discussion in

Notice 95–5. Nonetheless, in any final

rule action based on this proposal, the

FAA will consider, where relevant, any

comments relating to flight time

limitations and rest requirements

submitted in response to Notice 95–5.

If the commuter rulemaking is issued

as a final rule, the compliance date for

the flight time limitations and rest

requirements of that rule will be

coordinated with the effective date of

any final rule that may be issued as a

result of this NPRM, so that certificate

holders conducting commuter

operations will have to change their

procedures for scheduling duty periods,

flight time, and rest only once.

The Proposal

General

This proposal is a preventive measure

designed to address the potential safety

problems associated with fatigue-based

performance decrements. This proposal

is not a response to specific accidents,

but rather to extensive data which

shows a relationship between fatigue

and a decrement in performance. This

proposed measure would place

limitations on flight crewmember hours

of service by requiring certain

scheduling limitations and minimum

rest periods.

The proposed rule would simplify

existing flight crewmember flight time

limitations and rest requirements by

replacing existing Subparts Q, R, and S

of part 121 with a new Subpart Q and

revising most of subpart F of part 135.

Subpart Q of part 121 would not

differentiate between domestic, flag, and

supplemental operations as current

regulations do, and subpart F of part 135

would not differentiate between

commuter and on-demand operations.

As stated previously, the proposed

regulatory limitations for parts 121 and

135 are based in part on knowledge of

effects of fatigue as reflected in the

scientific studies done by NASA. These

proposed amendments would be

compatible with air carrier operations

and would provide reasonable, basic

limitations that are conducive to safety.

The FAA considered a number of

options prior to proposing those

outlined in this notice. The proposal in

this notice takes a combined approach

based on duty period limitations, flight

time scheduling limitations, daily and

weekly rest requirements, and

requirements for augmented flight

crews. Since the studies concerning

fatigue in flight operations could not

determine any fatigue based rationale

for differentiating between types of

operations, a single proposed set of

scheduling limitations was selected for

all types of operations. The proposal is

designed to provide science based

parameters for duty limitations and rest

requirements and, at the same time, be

understandable to everyone involved in

flight operations. The proposal would

establish a basic scheduling limitation

for two pilot flight crews of 14 hours of

scheduled duty, 10 hours of scheduled

flight time, and 10 hours of scheduled

rest. Certificate holders would have

additional flexibility under the proposal

to increase the length of scheduled duty

periods, but only under certain

conditions. The proposed scheduled

maximum 14 hour duty period, 10

hours of scheduled flight time, and 10

hour rest period are consistent with the

NASA ‘‘Principles and Guidelines’’

(Specific Principles, Guidelines, and

Recommendations 2.2.3 and 2.1.2,

hereafter referred to as

‘‘Recommendations’’) for 2-pilot crews.

Although not a proposal in this

notice, the FAA also requests that

commenters provide scientific data

concerning the amount of flight time

that two pilot flightcrews should be

allowed to fly in a 14-hour duty period,

particularly on long range international

flights that infringe on the flight

crewmember’s window of circadian low

(2 a.m. to 6 a.m. at the crewmember’s

home base time).

Applicability

Proposed §§ 121.471 and 135.261

state the applicability of these

amendments. Subpart Q in part 121

would provide duty period limitations,

flight time limitations, and rest

requirements for flight crewmembers in

domestic, flag, and supplemental

operations. Subpart F in part 135 would

provide duty period limitations, flight

time limitations, and rest requirements

for commuter and on-demand

operations.

The proposed duty period limitations,

flight time limitations, and rest

requirements would also be applicable

to duty periods and flight time

performed for a certificate holder

conducting part 91 operations, as

specified in proposed §§ 121.1, 121.487,

135.1, and 135.275.

Terms and Definitions

Proposed §§ 121.471 and 135.261

contain a list of terms and definitions

applicable to the proposed amendments.

The proposal defines ‘‘approved

sleeping quarters’’ to mean an area

designated for the purpose of flight

crewmembers obtaining sleep as

approved by the Administrator. See

Advisory Circular 121–31, ‘‘Flightcrew

Sleeping Quarters and Rest Facilities’’

for guidance on methods obtaining FAA

approval for aircraft used in part 121

and 135 operations. Sleeping quarters

that are already in use that have been

determined to be adequate by the

Administrator, such as bunks or other

horizontal surfaces, will not need to be

reapproved because of this proposed

rule. The FAA recognizes that there is

a difference between the term

‘‘adequate’’ sleeping quarters and

‘‘approved’’ sleeping quarters.

Approved sleeping quarters could

include additional possibilities that

were not part of ‘‘adequate sleeping

quarters’’ as previously interpreted. For

example, formerly passenger seats were

never considered adequate for use as

sleeping quarters. Recently, however, a
65956 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 244 / Wednesday, December 20, 1995 / Proposed Rules

new type of passenger seat has been

developed that meets the guidelines in

AC 121–31 and therefore could be

approved for use as sleeping quarters by

certificate holders operating under part

121 or part 135.

The proposed rule defines four kinds

of time: assigned time, duty involving

flight time (referred to as ‘‘duty

period’’), reserve time, and rest (referred

to as ‘‘rest period’’). Definitions of each

of these times, as well as other terms, as

proposed in §§ 121.471 and135.261, are

discussed below.

‘‘Assigned time’’ is time when the

flight crewmember is assigned by the

certificate holder to activities other than

flight duties. Assigned time may include

activities such as deadhead

transportation, training, loading

baggage, taking tickets, administrative

tasks and any other assignments,

excluding reserve time and required rest

periods. Assigned time may be

performed as part of a duty period, in

which case the proposed duty period

limitations and rest requirements in

§§ 121.473, 121.475, and 135.263 would

apply. Rest requirements associated

with assigned time that is not part of a

duty period are found in proposed

§§ 121.483(f) and 135.271(f).

The proposed rule defines ‘‘duty

period’’ as the period of elapsed time

between reporting for an assignment

involving flight time and release from

that assignment by the certificate

holder. The time is calculated using

either Coordinated Universal Time or

the local time of the flight

crewmember’s home base.

The proposed rule defines two types

of reserve: ‘‘Reserve time’’ and ‘‘standby

duty.’’ ‘‘Reserve time’’ is defined as a

period of time when a flight

crewmember must be available to report

upon notice for a duty period. The

certificate holder must allow the flight

crewmember a minimum of 1 hour or

more to report. Reserve time is not

considered part of a rest period and is

not considered a duty period. Reserve

time does not include activities defined

as assigned time. Reserve time ends

when the crewmember reports for a

duty period, when the crewmember is

notified of a future flight assignment

and released from all further

responsibilities until report time for that

assignment, or when the flight

crewmember has been relieved for a rest

period.

‘‘Standby duty’’ in the proposed rule

must be treated just like any other duty

period associated with flight. Standby

reserve duty is any period of time when

a flight crewmember is required to

report for a flight assignment in less

than 1 hour from the time of

notification. It also includes time when

a flight crewmember is required to

report to and remain at a specific facility

(e.g., airport, crew lounge) designated by

a certificate holder.

The proposed rule defines ‘‘rest

period’’ as the time period free of all

restraint or duty for a certificate holder

and free of all responsibility for work or

duty should the occasion arise. Rest

periods are considered personal time.

Rest periods are provided to give the

flight crewmember a predetermined

opportunity for rest.

For example, if a flight crewmember

is scheduled for a duty period which

ends on 1200 on Tuesday and requires

14 hours of rest and the flight

crewmember is not scheduled for

another duty period until 1200 on

Thursday, then the 48 hours between

duty periods is considered a rest period.

The flight crewmember’s minimum rest

period requirements would be satisfied

after 14 hours from the time the duty

period ended. The air carrier may

reschedule the flight crewmember, but

must ensure the minimum rest period

requirements are satisfied. It should be

noted that the crewmember cannot be

required by the air carrier to contact the

air carrier, answer the phone, carry a

beeper, remain at a specific location or

in any other way be responsible to the

air carrier during a scheduled rest

period. This does not prohibit the flight

crewmember from contacting the air

carrier at his or her own discretion.

For clarification purposes, the

proposal also defines a ‘‘calendar day’’

as the period of elapsed time, using

Coordinated Universal Time or local

time, that begins at midnight and ends

24 hours later at the next midnight. The

definition is needed because certificate

holders have been confused about the

application of the term. ‘‘Calendar day’’

is defined in the proposed rule in a

manner consistent with past

interpretations of the rule.

Also, for clarification purposes, the

proposal defines ‘‘operational delays’’ as

delays that are beyond the control of the

certificate holder such as those that

would be caused by weather, aircraft

equipment malfunctions, and air traffic

control delays. It would not include late

arriving passengers, late food service,

late fuel trucks, or delays in loading

baggage, freight, or mail, or similar

events.

Flight Crewmember Duty, Flight, and

Rest

Proposed §§ 121.473, 121.475, and

135.263 would establish maximum

scheduled duty periods and a maximum

scheduled amount of flight time for

flight crewmembers within the

maximum scheduled duty period. In

addition, the proposal would establish

minimum rest requirements for flight

crewmembers, including requirements

that apply when flight crews are

augmented and when on board rest

facilities are provided.

Current rules are primarily based on

flight time. In addition, in some cases

the current rules are based on actual

rather than scheduled flight time. The

major basis for the proposed rule is

scheduled duty. The reason for going to

a scheduled duty rule is that it is more

consistent with current studies relating

to fatigue.

For the purposes of assignments

involving flight time, the duty period

includes the total elapsed time between

when the flight crewmember reports for

a flight assignment, as required by the

air carrier, and when the flight

crewmember is relieved from duty by

the air carrier. A typical duty period for

a flight crewmember would consist of

pre-flight duties and post-flight duties

assigned by the air carrier. Pre-flight

safety duties include aircraft emergency

equipment checks, flight planning/

dispatch related duties, and complying

with the certificate holder’s approved

operations manual.

At least one industry study and

information obtained from

crewmembers indicates that air carriers

vary in how early they require flight

crewmembers to check in to begin their

duty periods and pre-flight duties. This

check-in or report time varies

depending on the type of equipment

flown and the flight destination.

Carriers typically require flight

crewmembers to arrive 30 minutes to 1

hour before scheduled departure. For

international flights some carriers

require flight crewmembers to report for

duty up to 2 hours before departure.

Post-flight safety duties include the

post-landing duties, safe deplaning of

passengers, duties related to securing

the aircraft, and administrative

responsibilities such as reporting

inoperative equipment to maintenance

personnel. Typically, flight

crewmembers are required to remain on

duty after the aircraft arrives at the gate

to accomplish these post-flight duties

before they are relieved from duty.

A duty period may also include

activities defined as ‘‘assigned time,’’ as

discussed under ‘‘Terms and

Definitions,’’ above.

Thus, a flight crewmember’s duty

period is not solely a function of

whether the aircraft is airborne. Flight

crewmembers perform important safety

duties during boarding and deplaning.

This proposal, therefore, is based on

duty periods that include flight time
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 244 / Wednesday, December 20, 1995 / Proposed Rules 65957

rather than solely on flight time. The

FAA expects certificate holders to

establish realistic report and release

times to allow flight crewmembers

sufficient time to complete these

essential pre-flight and post-flight safety

activities.

Proposed §§ 121.473 and 135.263

would provide for different duty period

limits based on the number of pilots

assigned. Each duty period would have

a scheduled flight time limit and would

be followed by a required rest period.

NASA (Recommendation 2.3.6)

recognizes that the use of additional

flight crewmembers justifies longer duty

periods if the flight crewmembers are

provided on-duty sleep opportunities.

To allow flexibility a scheduled duty

period could be extended two hours if

the extension is needed because of

operational delays. Rest periods may be

reduced by up to one hour only if the

reduction is needed because of

operational delays and then only if the

pilot has not exceeded the pilot’s

scheduled maximum duty-period

limitations. If a rest period is reduced,

the next rest period would have to be

extended.

Table 1 provides a summary of the

proposed limitations on duty periods

and flight time and the proposed rest

requirements for pilots.

For one- and two-pilot crews. In

proposed § 135.263(b), the basic duty

period scheduling limitation for a onepilot crew would be 14 hours, including

no more than 8 scheduled hours of

flight time. In proposed §§ 121.473(b)

and 135.263(c), the basic duty period

limitations for a two-pilot crew would

be 14 hours, including no more than 10

scheduled hours of flight time. The

minimum rest period for one- and twopilot crews would be 10 hours. The

proposed 10-hour limit on scheduled

flight time and the proposed 10-hour

minimum rest are consistent with

NASA Recommendations 2.3.3 and

2.1.1, respectively.

These proposed duty periods for oneand two-pilot crews could be extended

to 16 hours due to operational delays.

The rest periods may be reduced to 9

hours if the actual duty period is not

more than 14 hours and if the reduction

is needed due to operational delays. If

the rest period is reduced the next rest

period would have to be a minimum of

11 hours. A duty period extended due

to operational delays may involve

longer than scheduled flight time.

TABLE 1.—PILOT DUTY PERIOD, FLIGHT TIME AND REST REQUIREMENTS

No. of pilots Duty period

hours Flight time hours

Minimum

rest

hours

Reduced rest hours 1

Rest

hours following reduced

rest

(compensatory)

Extended duty period

hours 2

1 (part 135) ..................... No more than 14 No more than 8 . 10 9, May only be reduced

if duty period has not

exceeded 14.

11 Up to 16 only if due to

operational delays

2 ...................................... No more than 14 No more than 10 10 9, May only be reduced

if duty period has not

exceeded 14.

11 Up to 16 only if due to

operational delays

3 ...................................... No more than 16 No more than 12 14 12, May only be reduced

if duty period has not

exceeded 16.

16 Up to 18 only if due to

operational delays

3 Each pilot must have

sleep opportunity and

approved sleeping

quarters must be available.

More than 16,

but no more

than 18.

No more than 16 18 16, May only be reduced

if duty period has not

exceeded 18.

20 Up to 20 only if due to

operational delays

4 Each pilot must have

sleep opportunity ad

approved sleeping

quarters must be available 3.

More than 18 but

no more than

24.

No more than 18 22 20, May only be reduced

if duty period has not

exceeded 24.

24 Up to 26 only if due to

operational delays

1 Rest periods may be reduced only when the actual duty period does not exceed the maximum scheduled duty period for that crew composition and if the pilot is provided a compensatory rest period. This compensatory rest period must be scheduled to begin no later than 24 hours

after the beginning of the reduced rest period. 2The flights to which the pilot is assigned must at block out time be expected to reach their destination within the extended duty period.

3Applies only to duty periods with one or more flights that land or take off outside the 48 contiguous states and DC.

Longer Duty Period for a 3-Pilot Crew.

Under proposed §§ 121.473(c) and

135.263(d), the certificate holder may

schedule up to a 16-hour duty period

with up to 12 hours of flight time if 3

pilots are assigned to the flight. The

required rest would be 14 hours. This

duty period could be extended to 18

hours due to operational delays. The

required rest could be reduced to 12

hours if the actual duty period is not

more than 16 hours. If the rest is

reduced the next rest would have to be

16 hours.

Longer duty period for three-pilot

flightcrews with approved sleeping

quarters. Under proposed §§ 121.473(d)

and 135.263(e), if three pilots are

assigned and if approved sleeping

quarters are provided, the scheduled

duty period can be up to 18 hours with

a scheduled flight time limit of 16

hours. The required rest would be 18

scheduled hours. Each pilot must be

given an opportunity to rest in approved

sleeping quarters. The duty period

could be extended to 20 hours due to

operational delays. The rest could be

reduced to 16 hours if the actual duty

period is not more than 18 hours. If the

rest is reduced, the next rest would have

to be 20 hours.

Longer duty period if outside the U.S.,

four pilots, and approved sleeping

quarters. Under proposed §§ 121.473(e)

and 135.263(f), if the duty period

involves one or more flights outside the

48 contiguous states, if four pilots are

assigned, and if approved sleeping

quarters are provided, the scheduled

duty period can be up to 24 hours with

18 hours of scheduled flight time. Each
65958 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 244 / Wednesday, December 20, 1995 / Proposed Rules

pilot must be given an opportunity to

rest in flight in approved sleeping

quarters. The required scheduled rest

following the duty period would be 22

hours. The duty period could be

extended to 26 hours due to operational

delays. The rest could be reduced to 20

hours if the duty period is not greater

than 24 hours. If the rest is reduced, the

next rest would have to be 24 hours.

Reporting for a duty period. The effect

of the proposal is that if a flight

crewmember reports for duty, including

standby duty, as required and finds that

the flight assignment was incorrectly

scheduled or that the flight is delayed

or canceled, a duty period nevertheless

would have begun. For example, a flight

crewmember may report for duty as

scheduled, only to find that the assigned

report time is incorrect and that duty

actually begins 2 hours later. The carrier

could either keep the flight crewmember

on duty or release the flight

crewmember for a complete rest period

under the applicable section of this

proposed rule. While the rule language

does not spell out in detail this kind of

example, or application, this is how the

concept of duty period would work.

Extension of duty periods. The intent

of this proposed rule is to ensure that

flight crewmembers are provided

adequate opportunity to rest through

properly scheduled duty periods, flight

times, and rest. Regular delays on

certain routes or deviations from certain

schedules would indicate that the

schedules need to be adjusted to comply

with the proposed limitations. The

proposal acknowledges that certain

delays, such as adverse weather, cannot

be anticipated. A flight crewmember

would not be considered to be

scheduled for flight time or a duty

period in excess of flight time or duty

period limitations if the flights to which

he is assigned are scheduled and

normally terminate within the

limitations, but due to operational

delays (such as adverse weather

conditions, equipment malfunctions,

and air traffic control) are not at block

out time expected to reach their

destination within the scheduled time.

Operational delays do not include late

arriving passengers, late food service,

late fuel trucks, delays in handling

baggage, freight, or mail, or similar

events. (See proposed §§ 121.473,

121.475, 121.479, 135.263, 135.267.)

The FAA is proposing limiting the

extension of any scheduled duty period

due to operational delays to no more

than 2 hours. If at any time during a

duty period it is determined that, due to

operational delays, a scheduled flight

will not terminate within the scheduled

termination of that duty period plus 2

hours, then the flight crewmembers

must be relieved of duty before

initiating that flight segment. They may

be scheduled for another flight as long

as that flight is scheduled to terminate

within the original scheduled duty

period limitations plus two hours. The

FAA believes that 2 hours provides

flexibility in the event of operational

delays and also limits the possibility of

flight crewmembers being on a

continuous duty period even when the

duty period is extended due to

circumstances beyond the control of the

certificate holder. The limit on flight

time hours is discussed elsewhere in

this preamble.

Certificate holders would be expected

to recognize when certain schedules

need adjustment due to regularly

experienced or seasonal delays.

Augmented Flight Crews

The longer scheduled duty periods

that would be allowed under proposed

§ 121.473 (c), (d), and (e) and § 135.263

(c), (d), and (e) are contingent upon the

assignment of additional pilots in order

to maintain safety by distributing the

workload and permitting more rest. This

will ensure that pilots are alert and can

contribute to safe operations. It is

important to note that if a pilot is

scheduled for a duty period longer than

14 hours, the appropriate number of

additional pilots would have to be

present on every flight segment within

that duty period. In practical terms, the

FAA expects that this would occur on

larger aircraft and, generally, long-haul

operations with relatively few flight

segments. This result would be

consistent with the intent of the

proposal and consistent with current

industry practice.

It should be noted, however, that if a

flight crew with additional, nonrequired pilots is assigned a duty period

of 14 hours or less, the certificate holder

may follow § 121.473(b) or § 135.263(b),

(i.e., provide a rest period of 10 hours).

Proposed §§ 121.473 (d) and (e) would

require opportunities for flightcrew

members to rest and availability of

approved sleeping quarters for duty

periods of more than 16 hours. The

provision for additional flight

crewmembers and for on board sleeping

quarters takes into account the extended

time flight crewmembers may be on

duty to complete long range flight

segments. Existing rules, (§§ 121.483,

121.485, 121.507, 121.509, 121.521,

121.523) require augmented flightcrews

for longer duty periods.

Existing rules in some cases, under

present § 121.523(c), allow a scheduled

duty period of 30 hours; however, the

FAA believes that 24 hours should be

the limit of any scheduled duty period.

This proposal does not provide for

substituting flight engineers for pilots.

Rather the augmentation of pilots must

take place regardless of the number of

flight engineers assigned.

Reduction of the rest period. In order

to provide additional flexibility, the

FAA is proposing to allow the reduction

of rest due to operational delays. The

rest period may be reduced only if the

maximum scheduled duty period

limitation has not been exceeded or

extended. Table 1 provides information

on reduced rest periods followed by

compensatory rest periods.

Flight Engineers

Proposed § 121.475 would provide

similar requirements for flight

engineers. Table 2 provides a summary

of the proposed limitations on duty

periods and flight time and the

proposed rest requirements for pilots

and flight engineers. Present part 121

rules for domestic operations do not

contain separate flight time limitation

requirements for flight engineers. The

flag and supplemental operations rules

(§§ 121.493 and 121.511) deal with

flight engineers by referencing other

sections within the applicable subpart.

To avoid any possible confusion as to

which flight time limitation rules apply

to flight engineers, the FAA proposes in

§ 121.475 to address flight engineers

separately.
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 244 / Wednesday, December 20, 1995 / Proposed Rules 65959

TABLE 2.—FLIGHT ENGINEER DUTY PERIOD, FLIGHT TIME AND REST REQUIREMENTS

No. of flight engineers Duty period

hours Flight time hours Minimumrest hours Reduced rest hours (1)

Rest hours

following reduced rest

(compensatory)

Extended duty period

hours 2

1 .................................... No more than

14.

No more than

10.

10 9, May only be reduced

if duty period has not

exceeded 14.

11 Up to 16 only if due to

operational delays

1 .................................... No more than

16.

No more than

12.

14 12, May only be reduced if duty period

has not exceeded 16.

16 Up to 18 only if due to

operational delays

2 Each flight engineer

must have sleep opportunity and approved sleeping quarters must be available.

More than 16,

but no more

than 20.

No more than

16.

18 16, May only be reduced if duty period

has not exceeded 18.

20 Up to 20 only if due to

operational delays

2 Each flight engineer

must have sleep opportunity and approved sleeping quarters must be available.

More than 18

but no more

than 24 3.

No more than

18.

22 20, May only be reduced if duty period

has not exceeded 24.

24 Up to 26 only if due to

operational delays

1 Rest periods may be reduced only when the actual duty period does not exceed the maximum scheduled duty period for that crew composition and if the flight engineer is provided a compensatory rest period. This compensatory rest period must be scheduled to begin no later than 24

hours after the beginning of the reduced rest period. 2The flights to which the flight engineer is assigned must at block out time be expected to reach their destination within the extended duty period. 3Applies only to duty periods with one or more flights that land or take off outside the 48 contiguous States and DC.

Reserve and Standby Assignments

Current regulations do not specifically

cover the issue of reserve time and

standby duty. Within the air

transportation industry two types of

generic reserve assignments have

developed. One type, usually referred to

as ‘‘standby reserve,’’ is essentially the

same as a duty period, and as discussed

below would be treated as duty for duty

period limitation and rest requirement

purposes. The other type, here called

‘‘reserve time’’ is not considered part of

a rest period and is not considered part

of a duty period and therefore would be

dealt with separately under this

proposal. Proposed §§ 121.477 and

135.265 provide reserve assignment

requirements.

Under the proposal a standby duty

period must be scheduled in accordance

with proposed §§ 121.473, 121.475, or

135.263. A standby duty ends when the

duty period associated with a

subsequent flight assignment ends or

the flight crewmember is relieved from

standby duty for a scheduled rest

period.

Standby duty periods are assigned

because the air carrier believes that

some time within that period the flight

crewmember will be needed for a flight

assignment and must report for flight

assignment within less than 1 hour of

being notified. Standby duty also

includes time when a flight

crewmember is required to report to and

remain at a specific facility (e.g., airport,

crew lounge) designated by a certificate

holder. Usually flight crewmembers are

assigned to standby duty at the airport.

In addition, since the industry has

indicated that they treat standby as

duty, this proposed definition should

not impose any additional burdens on

certificate holders. It is because of the

momentary anticipation of a flight

assignment, which prevents a pilot from

planning for adequate rest, that standby

assignments are treated as duty periods.

The proposed standby duty period

would be treated as a duty period that

is associated with flight, regardless of

whether the flight crewmember is ever

assigned to flight time during that

standby duty period or not. Standby

duty periods would be scheduled in

accordance with proposed duty period

limitations, flight time limitations, and

rest requirements. A standby duty

period commences when the flight

crewmember is placed on standby duty

and ends when the flight crewmember

is relieved of duty, whether that duty is

standby or flight. Following standby

duty, the flight crewmember must be

scheduled for and must receive the

same amount of rest as he or she would

receive if he or she accumulated flight

time, even if there is no actual flight

time.

Reserve time is a period of time when

a flight crewmember is not on duty but

nonetheless must be available to report

upon notice for a duty period. During

reserve time a flight crewmember

typically goes about his or her off duty

routine, obtaining rest as needed during

each 24 hour period. Reserve time is not

considered part of a rest period, is not

considered part of a duty period, and is

not considered assigned time. Reserve

time ends when the crewmember is

released, the crewmember is notified of

a future duty period assignment and

released from all further responsibility

until the report time for that assignment,

or the crewmember reports for a duty

period. The certificate holder must

allow the flight crewmember a

minimum of 1 hour to report.

Often flight crewmembers are on

reserve for days at a time and are given

10 or more hours notification prior to a

duty period assignment. However, there

are times when a flight crewmember is

given fewer than 10 hours notification

and may not be completely rested. Some

flight crewmembers arise early in the

morning and may have been awake for

many hours at the time they receive

notification of an evening flight. These

flight crewmembers may not have an

opportunity for a complete rest period

before the flight assignment. The same

may be true of a flight crewmember who

does not awaken until the middle of the

afternoon and receives fewer than 10

hours notification of a duty period

which starts after midnight.

Since it is difficult to predict when an

individual flight crewmember sleeps

and when he or she awakens, no

attempt has been made in the proposal

to correlate the amount of notice a flight

crewmember should receive with the

time of day. Rather, the emphasis is

placed on the flight crewmember’s

receiving enough notice to provide an
65960 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 244 / Wednesday, December 20, 1995 / Proposed Rules

opportunity for rest before the duty

period assignment. If a flight

crewmember receives at least 10 hours

notice there would be enough time for

the flight crewmember to be fully rested

before reporting for a duty period of 14

hours. However, under proposed

§§ 121.477(b) and 135.265(b), when

flight crewmembers receive fewer than

10 hours notice for a duty period

assignment, there is a reduction in the

length of that duty period. While it

could be possible for a flight

crewmember to receive 10 hours rest

before being placed on reserve and then

given 10 hours of notification in order

to serve a 14-hour duty period, the FAA

believes that efficient crew scheduling

will minimize the possibility of this

happening. Table 3 shows for each

proposed amount of notification time

the proposed corresponding duty period

limitation.

Proposed §§ 121.477(b)(2) and

135.265(b)(2) would provide another

option under which a flight

crewmember could be given a minimum

6-hour period of protected time for each

24 hours of reserve time. During this 6-

hour period of protected time the

certificate holder would not be able to

contact the flight crewmember or assign

the flight crewmember to any duty. The

6-hour period must be assigned before

the flight crewmember begins the

reserve time assignment and must occur

at the same time during each 24-hour

period during a reserve time

assignment. Any duty period

assignment must be scheduled to be

completed within the 18-hour reserve

time, exclusive of the 6 hours of

protected time. The length of the duty

period and the subsequent rest period

must be in accordance with §§ 121.473,

121.475, or 135.263. The FAA believes

that this option would allow flexibility

for the certificate holder while giving

the flight crewmember sufficient

certainty to plan for and obtain adequate

rest. While the 6 hours of protected time

must be the same 6 hours for any

reserve assignment, it could be a

different 6 hours for subsequent reserve

assignments (e.g., a subsequent reserve

assignment following duty or assigned

time).

Under either reserve time assignment

option, the flight crewmember must be

notified of which option has been

selected before the beginning of the

reserve time assignment.

Although NASA recommends a

predictable and protected 8-hour sleep

opportunity (2.6.2), the FAA believes

that the above described options are

practical and in most instances will

provide at least an 8-hour rest

opportunity. Either the flight

crewmember is provided an opportunity

for a full 10-hour rest period or, in the

case of a short notice, the flight

crewmember’s duty period is limited, or

the flight crewmember is able to plan

each day with the certain knowledge

there will be a minimum 6-hour period

for undisturbed rest. Thus, these options

would protect against excess fatigue

without eliminating the objective of the

reserve system and without placing a

significant economic burden on the

industry.

There have been a number of

complaints stating that in some cases

pilots were unable to obtain enough rest

because they were given a reserve

assignment immediately following a

duty period and then were called for

duty before they had received an

adequate rest. While under these

proposed rules such a practice would be

a violation because of the requirement

for a minimum rest period between duty

periods, the FAA has included in

proposed §§ 121.477(b) and 135.265(b) a

requirement that a flight crewmember

must be given a 10-hour rest period

before beginning a reserve time

assignment. Sections 121.483(c) and

135.271(c) state that required rest

periods can occur concurrently so this

proposed requirement may not require

an additional rest period.

The FAA believes that both of these

methods of handling reserve time

assignments would provide more

flexibility, would be less costly for

certificate holders, and would be more

likely to ensure adequate rest than the

current rules. Under the lookback

provision in the current rules, for

instance, a flight crewmember on

reserve could not take a flight

assignment unless he or she had a

scheduled rest period in the previous 24

hours. There have been situations in

which certificate holders have professed

experiencing difficulties in

implementing rest requirements for

flight crewmembers on reserve.

Recognizing this, the FAA has

developed this proposal. However, if

this proposal on reserve time

assignments is not issued as a final rule,

the FAA intends to ensure that the

current rule, as interpreted, is being

correctly implemented.

Other Proposals on Reserve Time

Presented During ARAC Discussions

Southwest Airlines proposed a system

under which the total of reserve time

and ‘‘time engaged in scheduled air

transportation’’ could not exceed 18

hours (16 hours if this period included

any time during the hours between 0300

and 0459). In addition, Southwest

proposed that reserve time between

0001 and 1000 not be included if the air

carrier did not contact the crewmember

during that period. One option

presented by the Air Line Pilots

Association is similar to Southwest’s

proposal. ALPA would not allow

reserve time and duty time to exceed 16

hours. A 14-hour maximum would

apply when the duty time is not

contained with the period between 0500

and 0259.

The FAA has several concerns about

this approach. First, we believe it will

be difficult to understand and to apply

consistently. More importantly,

although it appears to provide for some

reductions in duty time, depending on

the time of day a crewmember is

notified of a flight assignment, it does

not expressly provide for any dedicated

rest opportunity. Moreover, it is not

clear exactly what would be

encompassed by Southwest’s term ‘‘time

engaged in scheduled air

transportation.’’ The FAA requests that

commenters supporting this approach

provide additional details about this

alternative and operational scenarios on

how it would be applied. Commenters

should provide information on how this

alternative does or does not provide the

flexibility of the options proposed in

this NPRM, and how this alternative

provides an equivalent level of safety to

the options proposed here.

The International Brotherhood of

Teamsters proposed two alternatives for

reserve duty. The first alternative

proposes that a crewmember could be

assigned a reserve period of 24

consecutive hours if the crewmember is

given 11 hours or more advance

notification for a flight assignment. The

second alternative would allow a

crewmember to be assigned a reserve

period of up to 12 consecutive hours if

the crewmember is given less than 11

hours of advance notification. In this

case, the total flight time and duty time

could not exceed 17 hours. The FAA

believes that both of these options

unnecessarily limit the scheduling

flexibility of the operator and that both

would greatly increase operators’ costs

while providing no increase in safety

when compared with the reserve

options proposed in this NPRM.

The Air Transport Association would

give the operator five alternatives for

dealing with reserve time. (1) The

carrier could give the employee at least

eight consecutive hours of rest during

any 24 hour period on reserve; (2) The

carrier could give the crewember at least

10 hours of advance notice of any

assignment, at which point the

crewmember would be released on rest

until the time to report; (3) The carrier

could not assign the crewmember on
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 244 / Wednesday, December 20, 1995 / Proposed Rules 65961

reserve to flights between midnight and

5 a.m.; (4) The carrier could assign the

crewmember on reserve to no more than

two flight segments; or (5) The carrier

could establish alternative policies and

procedures to ensure that a crewmember

will not be assigned to a flight unless

that crewmember is ‘‘adequately rested

for that flight assignment.’’

The first three ATA proposals are

generally similar to this NPRM. The

NPRM contains the option of blocking

out a protected period of at least six

hours during which the crewmember

could not be disturbed by the employer.

This is less restrictive than ATA’s

proposal (1), although it involves a

slightly longer period than would be

provided by proposal (3). Like ATA’s

proposal (2), the NPRM would provide

for advance notice of assgnments.

However, the NPRM is not limited to a

single cut-off of 10 hours’ notice.

Carriers would be permitted to assign

crewmembers to duty periods that vary

with the amount of advance notice,

down to as little as 4 hours’ notice.

Since ATA’s proposal number (4) does

not address rest at all, it is not included

in the NPRM. Proposal number (5) sets

no minimum standards for rest, and it,

too, is therefore not part of this NPRM.

The Air Line Pilots Association, in

addition to the alternative described

above, offered a proposal somewhat

similar to that of ATA. ALPA’s proposal

appears intended to provide more

stability for pilot rest periods; it would

not permit carriers to move the eight

hour rest period more than three hours

in any 24-hour period. Similarly, ALPA

proposed a six-hour protected period,

comparable to the five-hour period

proposed by ATA. Our comments on

ATA’s proposal apply to ALPA’s as

well, i.e., we believe we have

accomodated much of their objectives.

Another proposal advanced during

the ARAC discussions came from a

labor/pilot group consisting mainly of

Part 135 pilots. This proposal would

limit any combination of reserve time

and duty periods to no more than 18

hours or any duty assignment to no

more than 14 hours. After being on

reserve for 18 hours, a crewmember

would have to receive a 10-hour rest

period before accepting another reserve

assignment. This proposal is not

included in the NPRM because it

unnecessarily limits the air carrier’s

reserve scheduling flexibility and

provides no increase in safety when

compared with the options proposed in

the NPRM.

TABLE 3.—ADVANCE NOTIFICATION

No. of hours notification prior to report

time

10 hours or more 8 or more hours but

less than 10

6 or more hours but

less than 8

4 or more hours but

less than 6 Less than 4 hours

Maximum scheduled

duty period.

Maximum scheduled

duty period 1.

No more than 12

hours.

No more than 10

hours.

No more than 8 hours No more than 6

hours.

1 Maximum scheduled duty period could be 14, 16, 18, or 24 hours.

Additional Duty Period Limitations and

Reduced Rest

Current §§ 121.471(g) and 135.263(d)

state that a flight crewmember is not

considered to be scheduled for flight

time in excess of the flight time

limitations if the flights to which he or

she is assigned normally terminate

within the limitations, but due to

circumstances beyond the control of the

certificate holder (such as adverse

weather conditions) are not at block out

time expected to reach their destination

within the scheduled time. These

requirements do not specify a limit to

the flight time extensions under these

circumstances.

In theory, under the current rule

language, duty periods could be

extended for unlimited periods of time

as long as the extension was due to

operational causes beyond the control of

the air carrier such as weather,

mechanical problems, and Air Traffic

Control situations. This could result in

flight crewmembers who, after the first

flight of a flight schedule in a duty

period, would be as much as 6 hours

late, but would still continue with the

flight schedule. The NASA Scientific

Working Group determined that

extended duty periods with no limit on

the amount of time which the duty

period could be extended was one of the

major fatigue related problems with

current flight crewmember assignments

(Recommendations 1.4, 2.1.2, and 2.3.3).

Therefore, the FAA has proposed to

place a limit on the amount of time that

a duty period may be extended

regardless of the nature of the delay.

Proposed §§ 121.473, 121.475, and

135.263 would allow certificate holders

an extension of a duty period of not

more than 2 hours beyond the

maximum scheduled duty period if the

extension is due to operational delays

not under the control of the certificate

holder. The proposed requirements

would also allow the reduction of the

required rest if the flight crewmember

has not exceeded the required duty

period (without the extension), if the

flight crewmember is provided with a

longer subsequent rest period as

specified, and if the reduction in rest is

due to operational delays. Reduced rest

periods may not be scheduled in

advance.

Proposed §§ 121.479 (a) and (b) and

135.267 (a) and (b) would state that a

flight crewmember is not considered to

be scheduled for a duty period or flight

time in excess of the duty period or

flight time limitations if the duty period

or flight times to which the flight

crewmember is assigned are scheduled

and normally terminate within the

limitations, but due to operational

delays are not at block out time

expected to reach their destination

within the scheduled duty period or

flight time.

In addition, proposed §§ 121.479(a)

and 135.267(a) state that a flight

crewmember may not serve as a

crewmember in an aircraft if, at block

out time for the purpose of flight, that

flight crewmember’s actual elapsed duty

time plus duty time scheduled for the

next flight will cause the flight

crewmember to exceed the applicable

duty period limitations by more than

two hours. However, there is no limit on

actual flight time accrued during a duty

period, if the additional flight time is

due to operational delays, but in any

event the duty time limit may not be

extended by more than 2 hours.

The proposal would allow a

certificate holder the flexibility to

schedule the same crew on a flight even

when that flight is going to be late;

however, it would not allow flight

crewmembers to be scheduled

indefinitely even when the

circumstances which caused them to be

late are beyond the control of the

certificate holder. During a scheduled

flight assignment, if the combination of

scheduled times for the remaining

flights would mean that the maximum

scheduled duty period would be

exceeded by more than two hours, the

flight crewmember would have to be
65962 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 244 / Wednesday, December 20, 1995 / Proposed Rules

rescheduled so that the remaining duty

period to which he or she is assigned

will not exceed the maximum

scheduled duty period by more than

two hours. This can be done by

assigning a flight crewmember to a new

flight schedule or by reassigning the

original scheduled flights so the flight

crewmember is relieved of duty before

commencing the flight which would

extend beyond the maximum scheduled

duty period plus two hours.

Weekly and Monthly Flight Time

Limitations

Proposed §§ 121.481 and 135.269

would provide limits on the amount of

actual flight time which a flight

crewmember can accrue in a calendar

month and in any 7 consecutive

calendar days. These proposed rules

would replace current §§ 121.471(a),

121.481 (d), (e), and (f), 121.503 (d) and

(e), 135.265(a) and 135.267(a). Although

NASA states that there is insufficient

scientific information to provide

guidance in this area, these limits are

proposed to counter any harmful effects

of any possible cumulative fatigue.

In addition to the scheduled flight

time limits which are integrated into the

scheduled duty periods, weekly and

monthly flight time limits are proposed

as follows:

• Proposed §§ 121.481(a) and

135.269(a) would limit a flight

crewmember to 32 flight hours in any 7

consecutive calendar days.

• Proposed §§ 121.481(b) and

135.269(b) would limit a flight

crewmember to 100 flight hours in any

calendar month.

In practice, this means that, before

beginning to fly on any particular day,

a flight crewmember’s actual accrued

flight time for the previous six days

must be added to the flight time

scheduled to be flown that day. If the

result is fewer than 32 hours, the flight

crewmember may begin and complete

the day’s scheduled flying even if delays

(which are beyond the carrier’s control)

encountered during the day eventually

cause the total time to exceed 32 hours.

The same principle applies for the

calendar month flight time limitation.

Current regulations place varying

limits on the amount of time that a flight

crewmember can serve. The variance is

based on the type of operation. Flight

crewmembers given flight assignments

under part 121 for domestic operations

(§ 121.471(a)) are limited to 30 flight

hours in any 7 consecutive days. The 7

consecutive day limit for flag operations

is 32 flight hours (§ 121.481(d)) and

there is no 7 consecutive day limit for

supplemental operations. Under

§ 135.265(a) in scheduled operations the

amount of flight time which may be

accrued in any 7 consecutive days is 34

hours and there is no 7 consecutive day

limit for unscheduled operations.

Sections 121.471(a) and 121.481(e)

restrict flight crewmembers serving in

domestic or flag operations conducted

under part 121 to 100 hours in any

calendar month and § 121.503(d)

restricts flight crewmembers serving in

supplemental operations to 100 flight

hours in any 30 consecutive days.

Section 121.521(c) allows certain flight

crewmembers to accrue 120 hours in

any 30 consecutive days. Section

135.265 allows flight crewmembers

serving in part 135 scheduled

operations to accumulate 120 flight

hours in any calendar month.

In addition, § 121.471(a) restricts

flight crewmembers engaged in

domestic operations conducted under

part 121 to 1000 hours in any calendar

year. Section 135.265 allows flight

crewmembers serving in part 135

scheduled operations to serve as

crewmembers during flight for 1200

hours in any calendar year, while

§ 135.267 allows 1,400 flight hours in a

calendar year for unscheduled

operations. Sections 121.503, 121.521,

135.267, and 135.269 also provide other

calendar quarter and 90 consecutive day

limitations.

The proposed rule would establish a

common 32 hour limitation in any 7

consecutive days, a 100 hour limitation

in any calendar month, and would

eliminate quarterly, 90 consecutive day

and calendar year limitations.

The proposed rule does not provide a

yearly flight time limitation because the

monthly limit would effectively restrict

flight time to 1200 hours in a calendar

year. Although the NASA document

recommends the annual flight time

limitations be decreased a percentage of

the monthly requirement, it also states

that there is not enough scientific data

to provide specific guidance in this area.

The FAA believes that this proposal

contains sufficient additional rest

provisions (i.e. 36 hours in 7 days, 10

hour rest periods, and 48 hours for

crossing multiple time zones). Because

of the increase in rest requirements, the

FAA believes that safety would not be

adversely affected because of a lack of

a yearly flight time limit which is less

than the sum of all the monthly flight

time limits. At the same time the lack

of annual flight time limits will provide

flexibility and the opportunity for

increased productivity. In view of the

fact that there is no scientific data to

suggest a discrete yearly limit and the

fact that the requirement for rest has

been increased, the FAA believes the

proposed rule will provide the

appropriate level of safety.

The FAA believes that there is no

longer justification for the different

weekly, monthly, and annual flight time

limitations for different types of

operations and that proposing a single

limitation standard provides adequate

safeguard against the effects of

cumulative fatigue, eliminates rules that

do not have an adequate scientific

rationale, and also simplifies the overall

limitations. The FAA asks for comments

from the public about the maximum

number of hours a flight crewmember

should be allowed to fly under this

chapter. Further, the FAA asks for

comments regarding the impact of this

rule on seasonal flying.

Additional Rest Requirements

The proposed rule would continue

some of the rest requirements which are

contained in the existing regulations.

Proposed §§ 121.483(a) and 135.271(a)

would state that no certificate holder

may assign any flight crewmember and

no flight crewmember may accept any

duty period or flight time with the

certificate holder unless the flight

crewmember has had at least the

minimum rest period required.

Proposed §§ 121.483(b) and 135.271(b)

would state that no duty could be

assigned during any required rest

period. This proposed requirement

would preclude any carrier from

assigning any type of duty, including

nonflight assignments (such as training,

assigned time, reserve time, standby

duty, or ground duties), to any

flightcrew member during a required

rest period. These proposed

requirements are the same as those in

current § 121.471(c)(4) and (e) and

§ 135.263(a) and (b).

Proposed §§ 121.483(c) and 135.271(c)

would be a new requirement to clarify

that rest periods required under the

subpart can occur concurrently with any

other required rest period. For instance

a required 10-hour rest could occur

concurrently with the 36-hour rest

required under proposed §§ 121.483(e)

and 135.271(e). Further, under the

proposal, if a flight crewmember is not

serving in assigned time, reserve time,

standby duty or a duty period, that

crewmember would be in a rest period.

Proposed §§ 121.483(d) and

135.271(d) would be a new requirement

stating that a rest period required in

§§ 121.473, 121.475, or 135.263 may be

reduced only because of operational

delays. The reductions may not be

scheduled in advance.

Current §§ 121.471 and 135.265

require each domestic air carrier

operating under part 121 and each
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 244 / Wednesday, December 20, 1995 / Proposed Rules 65963

certificate holder in scheduled

operations under part 135 to relieve

each flight crewmember engaged in

scheduled air transportation from all

further duty for at least 24 consecutive

hours during any 7 consecutive days.

Proposed §§ 121.483(e) and 135.271(e)

would require that each flight

crewmember who is assigned to one or

more duty periods, standby duty, or

reserve time shall be provided a rest

period of at least 36 consecutive hours

during any 7 consecutive calendar days.

The proposed 36-hour rest could be

taken during a layover. Thirty-six hours

of rest is the amount of time

recommended by the NASA Scientific

Working Group (2.1.3); further the FAA

believes that flight crewmembers should

be provided at least 36 consecutive

hours rest during any 7 consecutive

calendar days any time they are

assigned to reserve regardless of the

nature of the reserve. This allows flight

crewmembers the time to plan for and

obtain a thorough rest so that they are

not fatigued if they receive a duty

period assignment.

The Air Transport Association

proposed, during the ARAC discussions,

that this provision be applied over a

period of 168 consecutive hours rather

than 7 consecutive calendar days. We

believe that it would be more difficult

for crewmembers and carriers to

maintain records in this fashion.

However, commenters are invited to

address this issue more fully in their

comments. If adequate justification is

shown for using 168 hours rather than

7 calendar days, the final rule may

incorporate that proposal. Commenters

should note that any change in this

provision would likely require

corresponding changes in the flight time

limitations proposed in §§ 121.481 and

135.269.

Proposed §§ 121.483(f) and 135.271(f)

would require certificate holders to

provide each flight crewmember

assigned to assigned time, as defined in

proposed §§ 121.471 and 135.261, a

minimum rest period of 10 hours before

the commencement of a subsequent

duty period. This rest period may occur

concurrently with another required rest

period. This proposed rest requirement

is needed to address situations in which

a flight crewmember is assigned to one

of a group of activities that are neither

rest nor part of an assignment involving

flight time, but which could contribute

to crewmember fatigue (e.g. training,

deadhead transportation, etc.). The

intent of this proposed rule is for flight

crewmembers to have the opportunity to

obtain sufficient rest in order to be able

to perform assigned flight duties,

regardless of whether the fatigue was

caused by flight duties or by other

activities for the certificate holder.

However, certificate holders have the

option of counting assigned time as part

of a duty period and scheduling the

appropriate rest period for that duty

period or of counting assigned time

exclusively as assigned time and

ensuring that the flight crewmember is

given 10 hours of rest before

commencing a duty period. The 10

hours is consistent with the other

required rest periods.

For example, a flight crewmember

could be deadheaded to a new location

at the beginning of a duty period and

then begin a schedule flight assignment.

In this case the deadhead transportation

would be counted as part of the duty

period. Alternatively, after completing a

duty period, a flight crewmember could

be deadheaded back to his or her home

base before beginning the required rest

period. In this case the deadhead

transportation could be considered

assigned time. Performing assigned time

after the completion of a duty period

would be permitted as long as the flight

crewmember received the minimum rest

required for that duty period or 10

hours, whichever is greater, before the

next duty period.

Proposed §§ 121.483(g) and 135.271(g)

would establish a requirement for a

certificate holder to provide each flight

crewmember at least 48 consecutive

hours of rest upon return to the flight

crewmember’s home base after

completion of one or more duty periods

that terminate in a time zone or zones

that differs from the time zone of the

flight crewmember’s home base by 6 or

more hours and the flight crewmember

remains in that time zone or zones for

at least 48 consecutive hours. The

accumulation of the 48 hours may be in

one or more time zones but each of

these time zones must be 6 or more

hours from the flight crewmember’s

home base. The flight crewmember must

receive this rest before beginning a

subsequent duty period. The home base

is determined by the certificate holder

and is where that crewmember is based

and receives schedules. The present

rules make no provisions for rest

periods based on time zones. The NASA

Scientific Working Group data and

subjective comments from

crewmembers indicate there is a need to

recognize the additional fatigue effects

of crossing time zones (2.1.4). The

literature indicates that some flight

crewmembers experience, at times,

additional fatigue from crossing as few

as two time zones; while others do not

report the same fatigue until they have

crossed many more time zones. The

FAA recognizes the complicated

problem of addressing each individual

flight crewmembers circadian rhythm;

nevertheless by establishing a minimum

rest requirement at the home base for

flight crewmembers who cross 6 or more

time zones the FAA believes these flight

crewmembers will be given an

opportunity to once again establish

what is for that flight crewmember the

normal sleep awake cycle. The proposed

rest requirement is a minimum

requirement and is provided to give the

flight crewmember an opportunity for

rest. The flight crewmember should use

this time to obtain the needed rest so

that he or she will be rested when called

upon for the next duty period. The FAA

will issue advisory material based on

scientific studies to assist air carriers

and flight crewmembers in dealing with

fatigue related issues.

Deadhead Transportation

Current §§ 121.471(f) and 135.263(c)

specify that time spent in

transportation, not local in character,

that a certificate holder requires of a

flight crewmember and provides to

transport the crewmember to an airport

to which he or she is to serve on a flight

as a crewmember, or from an airport at

which the flight crewmember was

relieved from duty to return to his or her

home base is not considered part of a

rest period. This type of transportation

is commonly called ‘‘deadhead’’

transportation. Proposed §§ 121.485 and

135.273 would be the same as the

current requirement except that in

addition it would specify that for duty

period limitation purposes the

certificate holder and flight

crewmember must consider deadhead

time as assigned time or as part of a duty

period associated with flight.

Other Flying for a Certificate Holder

Proposed §§ 121.487 and 135.275

establish duty period and flight time

limitations for other flying for a

certificate holder, including flying

under part 91. Flight crewmembers and

certificate holders must ensure that any

duty periods and flight assignments

assigned by the certificate holder are

scheduled, assigned, and performed

under the applicable requirements of

parts 121 and 135 (14 CFR 121.473,

121.477, 121.479,121.481, 121.483, and

14 CFR 135.263, 135.265, 135.267,

135.269, and 135.271) even if the flight

is not conducted under part 121 or 135.

In addition, any flight crewmember who

is employed by two or more air carriers

or commercial operators must ensure

that any duty periods and flight

assignments are scheduled, assigned

and performed under the applicable

rules of parts 121 and 135. In other
65964 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 244 / Wednesday, December 20, 1995 / Proposed Rules

words, when certificate holders assign

flight crewmembers to conduct ferry

flights, or other flights under part 91,

this flight assignment is treated just as

any other duty period involving flight.

This proposal is based on NTSB

recommendation A–94–105, which was

issued as a result of the Guantanamo

Bay accident, discussed above under

‘‘NTSB Recommendations’’ and the

FAA’s belief that other flying for a

certificate holder such as training flights

for a 121 or 135 certificate holder may

cause both short term and cumulative

fatigue which may adversely effect that

flight crewmember’s flight duties

performed under parts 121 and/or 135.

This would include flying for more than

one part 121 and/or 135 certificate

holder.

Proposed Effective Date for Final Rule

The FAA is proposing an effective

date of 60 days after these proposals are

published as a final rule. By that date all

certificate holders operating under part

121 or part 135 would have to begin

scheduling all flight time duty periods

and rest periods in accordance with the

new requirements. However, as

mentioned above under ‘‘Commuter

Rulemaking,’’ the FAA intends to

coordinate the effective date of this

rulemaking with the compliance date of

the commuter rulemaking, so that

certificate holders conducting commuter

operations will have to change their

procedures for scheduling flight time,

duty periods, and rest periods only

once.

The FAA requests comments on the

length of time needed between the

issuance of the final rule and its

effective date.

Regulatory Impact Analysis Summary

Proposed changes to Federal

regulations must undergo several

economic analyses. First, Executive

Order 12866 directs that each Federal

agency shall propose or adopt a

regulation only upon a reasoned

interpretation that the benefits of the

intended regulation justify its costs.

Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act

of 1980 requires agencies to analyze the

economic effect of regulatory changes

on small entities. Third, the Office of

Management and Budget directs

agencies to assess the effect of

regulatory changes on international

trade. In conducting these analyses, the

FAA has determined that this Notice of

Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) would

probably generate benefits and cost

savings that are greater than its costs

and is ‘‘a significant regulatory action’’

as defined in the Executive Order. The

FAA also estimates that the NPRM

would have a significant economic

impact on a substantial number of small

entities. No part of the proposed rule is

expected to constitute a barrier to

international trade. These analyses,

available in the docket, are summarized

below.

This proposal would amend existing

regulations to establish one set of duty

period limitations, flight time

limitations, and rest requirements for

flight crewmembers engaged in air

transportation. Currently, these

limitations and requirements differ

across the various sectors of the

industry (e.g., part 121, part 135). In

addition, the FAA is required to

consider alternatives to the proposed

rule when the following circumstances

are met:

—The regulatory action is designated as

a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ (as

defined by Executive Order 12866),

and

—The regulatory action is designated as

having a significant impact on a

substantial number of small

businesses, nonprofit groups, or

airports operated by small

governmental jurisdictions.

The FAA has determined that the

potential economic impacts of the

proposed rule are sufficiently large that

both of these criteria are satisfied.

Accordingly, two alternatives will be

discussed in the section entitled

‘‘Analysis of Alternatives’’ below.

Cost-Benefit Analysis

Proposal

As mentioned above, the main thrust

of the proposal is to amend existing

regulations to establish one set of duty

period limitations, flight time

limitations, and rest requirements for

flight crewmembers engaged in air

transportation. The proposal would

establish a basic scheduling limitation

for 2 pilot crews of 14 hours of

scheduled duty and 10 hours of

scheduled rest. The maximum length of

duty periods permitted would increase

as the number of pilots increases. The

proposal would also revise limits on the

amount of flight time which a flight

crewmember can accrue in a duty

period, in any 7 consecutive calendar

days, and in a calendar month. The

maximum duty period limits would be

decreased in most cases for part 121 and

part 135 operators, and the required

length of rest periods would be

increased. These changes are expected

to impose unquantifiable costs on

unscheduled part 135 operators.

Although the maximum length of

duty periods would generally decrease

under the proposal, the maximum

allowable flight times for pilots

operating 2-pilot aircraft (no flight

engineer) would increase from 8 to 10

hours. This provision should create the

potential for substantial cost savings for

both part 121 and 135 operators.

The FAA determined that 2

provisions of the proposed rule could

impose substantial quantifiable costs.

Another provision could impose

substantial costs on the commuter

operators, but could not be quantified.

The potential economic impacts on the

air taxi operators of these provisions

could not be quantified at this time. The

most costly provision applies to the

scheduling and duty assignments of

reserve pilots. A reserve pilot must be

available to report upon notice for a

duty period with one hour or longer of

notice. The proposal would require that

the maximum length of a duty period be

reduced in those cases when less than

10 hours of notice for a duty period

assignment is received. The proposal

would also provide another option

under which a flight crewmember could

be given a regularly scheduled

minimum 6 hour protected time within

each 24 hours of reserve time.

The other provision which would

impose substantial quantifiable costs

would require that ‘‘ferry’’ flight time

used to reposition aircraft be counted

the same as time accrued in part 121/

135 revenue operations for the purpose

of determining compliance with FAA

limitations on duty periods and flight

time limitations. Another provision that

would increase the minimum required

rest periods between flight duty periods

might impose substantial costs on the

commuter operators, but they cannot be

quantified without additional data. The

provisions pertaining to reserve pilot

scheduling might also impose

substantial costs on air taxi operators,

but these costs could not be quantified.

Cost Analysis

As described in more detail in the

Regulatory Impact Analysis, the FAA

has relied heavily on surveys of a

limited number of operators to develop

its analysis. The FAA is interested in

comments on the representativeness of

the data used for extrapolation to the

entire affected population. Where

commenters believe these survey data

do not reflect the circumstances/

responses for operators generally, the

FAA welcomes any and all relevant data

supporting such claims.

The FAA also seeks comments on its

methodology, assumptions, and/or data

used to estimate the following:

(1) The efficiency gains from the

increase in allowable flight time from 8

to 10 hours.
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 244 / Wednesday, December 20, 1995 / Proposed Rules 65965

(2) The likely operator response to the

reserve pilot requirements (i.e., the

likelihood of operators choosing

between canceling flights and adding

pilots),

(3) The cost to operators and

passengers of flight cancellations and of

adding pilots, and

(4) The potential safety benefits from

reduced fatigue.

Part 121 Air Carriers

The FAA estimated the economic

impact of each provision of this

proposed rule. Some of the provisions

by themselves were estimated to entail

substantial compliance costs, whereas

others have the potential for affording

substantial cost savings to operators.

The proposed rule is estimated to

impose discounted costs of $842.03

million on part 121 operators over the

next 15 years, but these costs are

expected to be offset by the cost savings.

The total potential discounted cost

savings from increased productivity

were estimated at $1.72 billion over this

period. The net discounted compliance

cost savings of the proposed rule would

therefore amount to $877.90 million

over this period. The cost savings would

result if operators take advantage of

opportunities afforded by the proposal

to more efficiently schedule their

existing workforce, which could enable

them to reduce their plans for hiring

new pilots by 3,348 pilots over the next

15 years.

Costs

The FAA determined that the primary

cost of implementing the reserve pilot

scheduling and duty time regulations

would consist of the cost of reassigning

some scheduled airline pilots or hiring

new pilots to assure adequate coverage

of flights that would otherwise have to

be canceled or delayed. Other

provisions of the proposal, however,

may allow operators to use on-line

pilots more intensively; therefore, the

need for additional reserve pilots is

likely to be satisfied by reassigning online pilots that would become available

because of enhanced productivity. In

addition, a relatively small number of

flights might be canceled.

These cost estimates were based on

the least cost combination of reserve

pilot scheduling options for each

operator based on the nature of its flight

operations, such as the amount of

advance notification provided reserve

pilots and duty period durations. The

FAA estimates that the part 121

scheduled operators would have to hire

an additional 500 pilots, representing a

1% increase in their current pilot

staffing level, thereby increasing their

recurring annual salary costs by $41.29

million. In addition, the FAA estimated

that the flight cancellations resulting

from decreased flexibility in scheduling

reserve pilots would impose societal

costs (the value of delayed passenger

time) amounting to $8.12 million per

year. The total potential cost of the

reserve pilot regulation was therefore

estimated at $49.40 million annually

after the first year the proposed rule

were in effect for part 121 scheduled

carriers. In the first year, this annual

cost would be increased by $9.26

million to $58.66 million to capture

initial training costs.

The FAA determined that the reserve

pilot regulation would also impose

substantial costs on part 121

unscheduled or ‘‘supplemental’’ air

carriers. The economic impact on these

air carriers is expected to be greater than

for the scheduled part 121 carriers

because of the less predictable nature of

their operations, which doesn’t allow

them to give as much advance

notification of flight assignments to

their reserve pilots. The FAA estimated

that approximately 330 additional

pilots, representing about 4% of their

present pilot staffing level, would need

to be hired by these air carriers at a

recurring annual cost of $24.02 million.

The FAA determined that the

proposed restriction on ‘‘ferry’’ flights

would have very little, if any, impact on

scheduled part 121 operators. These

proposed restrictions, however, could

have a substantial economic impact on

part 121 unscheduled operators, which

are more likely than the scheduled

operators to conduct these operations

because of the greater distance between

crew bases and destination points of

their revenue flights. The FAA

estimated that these operators would

have to hire an additional 235 pilots

(3% increase in current pilot staff) to

avoid major disruptions in their flight

schedules, entailing recurring annual

costs amounting to $17.04 million.

The total recurring annual potential

compliance costs (reserve pilot and

‘‘ferry flight’’ restrictions) for

unscheduled or supplemental operators

were therefore estimated at $41.06

million. The first year initial training

costs for these unscheduled air carriers

were estimated to add $10.10 million to

annual costs in the first year.

In summary, the total first year annual

compliance costs for all part 121 air

carriers of the reserve pilot regulation

and restriction on ferry flights were

estimated at $110.28 million. Societal

costs resulting from canceled flights

were estimated to comprise $8.12

million of this total. These costs were

estimated based on the time that

passengers on canceled flight would be

delayed, which the analysis assumes

would be two hours. Total discounted

costs were estimated at $842.46 million

over the period from 1996–2010.

Cost Savings

The FAA expects that these costs

would be more than offset by cost

savings afforded the scheduled part 121

operators by the opportunity to more

effectively utilize their flight

crewmembers. The potential cost

savings for the unscheduled part 121 air

carriers, however, are not expected to be

of a sufficient magnitude to outweigh

the proportionally higher potential costs

that were estimated for this sector of the

industry. Under the proposal, both

scheduled and unscheduled air carriers

could increase the maximum permitted

flight times within individual duty

periods from 8 to 10 hours for 2-pilot

crews.

The potential productivity gains from

this provision should enable scheduled

part 121 air carriers to maintain their

current schedules with fewer pilots and

transfer some pilots from active or

nonreserve to reserve status. The

decrease in the anticipated need for

pilots among the scheduled air carriers

is expected to substantially outweigh

any potential increased need for pilots

among the unscheduled air carriers. In

other words, the overall need for pilots

in future years should decrease because

the positive economic effects resulting

from increased productivity are

expected to outweigh the negative

economic impacts of the need for more

reserve pilots.

Data collected by the FAA indicate

that domestic air carriers do not fly their

crewmembers close to the maximum

permitted current limit of 100 hours per

month. The average monthly flying time

for the scheduled air carriers is 60

hours. The part 121 unscheduled

operators tended to fly their

crewmembers from 40–60 hours per

month. In fact, most unionized air

carriers are prevented by labor contracts

from flying their crewmembers more

than 75–80 hours per month.

If this proposed rule is adopted as an

amendment, most air carriers would

likely attempt to take advantage of the

opportunity to utilize their

crewmembers more effectively. The

increase from 8 to 10 hours in the

maximum permitted flight hours 2-pilot

crews could fly within individual duty

periods should provide an incentive for

air carriers to increase the daily flight

hours and hence monthly flight hours of

their crews and decrease the amount of

duty time which is not flight time. The

FAA determined that air carriers would
65966 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 244 / Wednesday, December 20, 1995 / Proposed Rules

most likely be able to increase

utilization of their pilots by 4% on

average (which would amount to an

additional 2 flight hours per month per

pilot in most cases).

Air carriers would realize these

productivity gains only to the extent

that their pilot salary costs would not

increase. Such an assumption appears

warranted for the following reasons. The

FAA estimated that about 10% of the

pilot salary cost of the major air carriers

is for nonproductive time (i.e., time

within a duty period that is not devoted

to actually flying the airplane). Air

carriers frequently pay pilots for this

nonproductive time at a reduced hourly

rate, as established by formulas in their

contracts. The proposal would allow

them to significantly reduce this

nonproductive time by permitting an

increase in maximum flight hours from

8 to 10 hours within a shorter duty

period.

Many unionized part 121 air carriers

would probably have to renegotiate their

contracts in order to reduce the amount

of nonproductive time for which they

are currently paying. Renegotiation

would not be required, however, in

order to add about 2 hours on average

to monthly pilot flying hours because

actual flying hours are currently

considerably lower than the maximum

range of 75–80 hours under most

contracts. In addition, the nonunionized

air carriers would in theory have a

greater potential for increasing flight

hours flown by their crewmembers

because their maximum limits on flight

hours tend to be closer to the current

regulatory maximums of 1,000 hours per

year. Under the proposal, the maximum

monthly flight time of 100 hours per

month would effectively allow 1,200

hours of flight time per year, thereby

affording them the potential of a 20%

increase in productivity (nonunionized

air carriers account for 16% of the

operations flown by all part 121 air

carriers). This analysis, however, only

assumes a 4% increase in productivity.

The FAA estimated that a 4% overall

productivity enhancement would afford

part 121 carriers overall total cost

savings amounting to $3.07 billion

(present value, $1.72 billion) over the

next 15 years. These estimates are based

on an expected decrease of 3,348 new

pilots hired over this period and an

average loaded salary of $82,572 for part

121 scheduled and $72,600 for part 121

supplemental. In addition, initial

training costs of $18,516 for part 121

scheduled pilot and $17,908 for part 121

supplemental pilot were used in this

analysis as in the cost analysis.

This estimate should be regarded as

an lower bound for potential cost

savings arising from the increase in pilot

productivity. Productivity cost savings

above 4% are theoretically possible;

however, due to any salary increases

that unions may negotiate, the air

carriers may not be able to achieve all

of these savings. In any event, air

carriers would have a greater

opportunity to limit pay for

nonproductive time under the proposal,

as noted above, which currently

amounts to a significant part of their

total salary costs. The FAA does not

have sufficient information to assess the

interplay of these factors in determining

pilot salaries and requests comments

from the public on this issue.

Longer proposed flying hours would

also allow air carriers to reduce the

number of 3-pilot crews in favor of 2-

pilot crews. The FAA estimates an

additional savings of 200 pilots, with

annual net cost savings which could

amount to $20.40 million in the first

year and $16.54 million in subsequent

years. These potential cost savings were

estimated at $119.62 million

(discounted) over a 15-year period.

Consequently, total cost savings of the

proposed rule for part 121 air carriers is

expected to amount to $3.32 billion

(present value, $1.87 billion) over the

next 15 years.

Part 135 Scheduled Air Carriers

The proposed rule is estimated to

impose discounted quantifiable costs of

$56.75 million on part 135 carriers over

the next 15 years, but these costs could

be offset by cost savings. The total

potential cost savings of the proposed

rule are expected to amount to $94.04

million over the next 15 years. The net

cost savings, which would result from

an expected net reduction of 353 new

pilots hired over the next 15 years,

could therefore amount to $50.68

million over this period. This

conclusion is contingent on the

assumption that these operators would

be able to modify their flight schedules

so as to avoid expenses associated with

longer minimum rest periods without

significantly affecting revenues.

Costs

The FAA estimated that the reserve

pilot provisions of the proposal would

result in the hiring of 152 additional

pilots in order to avoid having to cancel

flights because of inadequate reserve

pilot resources. The increased annual

cost for the industry was estimated at

$6.12 million. In addition, these

operators are expected to incur

incremental initial training costs

amounting to $1.06 million in the first

year the proposed rule is in effect,

increasing annual compliance costs to

$7.18 million in that year. These costs

would amount to a discounted $56.75

million over a 15-year period.

Cost Savings

Part 135 scheduled airlines would

reap potential cost savings amounting to

$145.04 million (present value, $84.76

million) over the next 15 years.

Although these operators currently tend

to utilize their pilots more intensively

than the part 121 operators (i.e., 74–89

hours), they still utilize them well under

the proposed regulatory maximum of

100 hours a month. The potential for a

4% increase in productivity would still

remain. The fact that a considerably

smaller portion of the part 135 pilot

workforce is unionized would remove

that possible constraint to increased

productivity.

These potential cost savings are based

on a projection that these operators

would need 353 fewer pilots at an

average annual loaded salary of $40,280

that was used in the analysis of costs.

In addition, initial training costs of

$6,948 per pilot would be saved.

Benefits

The FAA has promulgated flight time

limitation rules that contain rest

requirements for certain operations and

weekly and monthly limits on the

number of hours of flight time in an

effort to protect flight crewmembers

from work-related fatigue. The issue did

not receive much publicity until May

1994, when the NTSB cited pilot fatigue

as a probable cause in an accident when

the captain lost control of a DC–8

freighter while approaching the U.S.

Naval Station Airbase at Guantanomo

Bay, Cuba in August 18, 1993. Prior to

that time, this factor had never been

cited by the NTSB as a probable cause

in an accident involving part 135 or 121

operations.

In its investigation, the NTSB noted

that the flight crew had been on duty

about 18 hours and had flown about 9

hours at the time of the accident. Under

the proposed rule, this flight would

have been illegal because the maximum

length of a duty period for a 3-person

flight crew on an airplane lacking

appropriate sleeping quarters is 16

hours. In addition, the company had

intended to further extend this flight by

having the crew ferry the airplane back

to Atlanta after the plane had landed at

Guantanamo Bay, which would have

resulted in a total duty time of 24 hours.

The NTSB report specifically noted that

the flight crewmembers had

experienced a disruption of circadian

rhythms and sleep loss, which resulted

in fatigue that had adversely affected
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 244 / Wednesday, December 20, 1995 / Proposed Rules 65967

performance during the critical landing

phase.

The National Aeronautic and Space

Administration (NASA) Ames Research

Center has been studying this issue

since 1980 and has published a number

of studies on it. These studies have

established a relationship between long

duty periods and fatigue and between

fatigue and a deterioration in

performance.

It is very difficult to quantify the

potential safety benefits of this proposed

rule because of the scarcity of accidents

that have been attributable to pilot

fatigue. The NTSB has not focused on

this issue until quite recently in its

accident investigations. The FAA

believes that the investigation of the

effects of fatigue on pilot performance

should not be limited to a review of

relevant accidents. A better

understanding of this issue can be

gained from examining incident reports

submitted by pilots to the National

Aeronautical and Space

Administration’s Aviation Safety

Reporting System (ASRS). Since January

1, 1986, ASRS has received 21 reports

of unsafe incidents resulting from

fatigue by pilots engaged in part 121

operations and 200 reports from pilots

conducting part 135 operations.

Although these incidents did not

actually result in accidents, they were of

a sufficiently serious nature that pilots

filed a report with NASA with the hope

of gaining the attention of the regulatory

authorities.

NASA has sponsored some research

into the issue of the relationship

between fatigue and performance

decrements based on information

contained in these incident reports. The

researchers found that about 21% of the

reports citing air transport flight crew

errors were related to the general issue

of fatigue. The researchers selected a

control or comparison group of incident

reports citing these problem areas but

where fatigue was not an apparent

factor. Most of the incidents in both data

sets involved altitude or clearance

operational deviations (e.g., taking off or

landing without clearance). The

deviations within the fatigue set tended

to occur more frequently during the

more critical descent, approach, and

landing flight phases. This finding was

expected because fatigue is most likely

to set in towards the end of a flight or

work day. Another key finding was that

duty period length and workload level

were most frequently cited as being

responsible for the fatigue.

The FAA has quantified the economic

value of all major accidents involving

the part 121 air carriers and part 135 air

carriers over the 1985–1994 period that

were attributable to pilot error. For the

part 121 analysis, the FAA examined

the seating capacity, average passenger

load, and the average replacement cost

of a representative sample of both

narrow body and wide body aircraft.

The FAA examined the same factors in

estimating the cost of a part 135

accident.

For the part 121 analysis, the FAA

assumes that an average airplane costs

$14.75 million in 1994 dollars and

carries 107 people (101 passengers, 3

flight crewmembers, and 3 flight

attendants). In order to provide the

public and government officials with a

benchmark comparison of the expected

safety benefits of rulemaking actions

over an extended period of time with

estimated costs in dollars, the FAA

currently uses a value of $2.7 million to

statistically represent a human fatality

avoided. The values for serious and

minor injuries are $518,000 and

$38,000, respectively. For the part 135

analysis, the FAA used the same

assumptions regarding the value of a

human life and injuries. The amount of

airplane damage and severity of injuries

was based on a review of NTSB reports

of all accidents involving 10–30 seat

aircraft over the period from 1985–1994.

Based on these assumptions, the FAA

estimated that the economic value of the

71 serious accidents involving pilot

error used in part 121 scheduled

operations that were involved in serious

accidents over the 1985–1994 period at

$1.896 billion. Projecting this total from

1996 to 2010 yields a discounted $1.151

billion. The comparable total for the 8

serious accidents involving pilot error

used in part 121 supplemental

operations that were involved in serious

accidents over this time period was

$273.9 million. Projecting this total from

1996 to 2010 yields a discounted $166.3

million. The corresponding total for the

71 aircraft involving pilot error used in

part 135 operations with 10 to 30 seats

that were involved in serious accidents

over that period was $602.32 million.

Projecting this total from 1996 to 2010

yields a discounted $365.73 million.

The NASA research study

summarized above revealed that 21% of

pilot error incidents were related to

fatigue. Applying this proportion to the

total discounted value of the pilot error

accidents, using the assumptions noted

above, one could conclude that fatigue

resulted in accidents valued at $398.24

million (present value, $241.81 million)

for part 121 scheduled operations,

$57.52 million (present value, $34.92

million) for part 121 supplemental

operations, and $126.49 million (present

value, $76.80 million) for part 135

operations over a 15-year period. These

estimates could be used to provide some

idea of the potential safety benefits of

this proposed rule, assuming it is 100%

effective in preventing these types of

accidents.

Cost Savings and Benefits

Initial annual quantifiable compliance

costs for part 121 scheduled, part 121

supplemental, and scheduled part 135

air carriers were estimated at $58.66

million, $41.16 million and $7.18

million, respectively. Subsequent

annual quantifiable compliance costs

were estimated at $49.40 million, $41.06

million and $6.12 million, respectively.

Over the period from 1996 to 2010, costs

would amount to $750.33 million

(present value, $458.63 million),

$625.99 million ($383.40 million) and

$92.89 million (present value, $56.75

million), respectively.

For part 121 scheduled operators,

these compliance costs should be more

than offset by cost savings that are

projected to result from productivity

enhancements for the scheduled part

121 carriers. The same conclusion may

apply to the part 135 operators as well

in view of the potential magnitude of

the unquantifiable costs. But cost

savings expected to accrue to the part

121 supplemental carriers are not

expected be sufficient to offset potential

costs for this sector of the industry.

The estimates for the scheduled part

135 air carriers do not include the

potential costs of the proposed general

limitations on flight duty and rest

periods, which are expected to be fairly

significant, although not quantifiable at

the present time. On the other hand,

these estimates do not take account of

potential cost savings as air carriers gain

more experience in implementing the

various combinations of the available

options, which should in theory result

in the selection of the most cost

effective option. The extent to which

these potential impacts would offset

each other cannot be determined on the

basis of the available data.

These estimates also do not include

the potential costs of the proposed rule

for air taxi operators, which could not

be quantified. The FAA expects that the

costs of the reserve pilot restrictions

would probably not be substantial for

this sector of the industry because the

majority of the operators should be able

to adopt the second reserve pilot

scheduling option without major

operational disruptions. The FAA does

not have sufficient information to

estimate the potential compliance costs

for this sector of the industry if the

‘‘other commercial flying’’ restrictions

in the proposal are adopted. The

potential for cost savings would appear
65968 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 244 / Wednesday, December 20, 1995 / Proposed Rules

to be more limited for these operators

because of the point-to-point and

geographically restricted nature of their

operations, which would tend to limit

the length of flight assignments.

The FAA has quantified the economic

value of all major accidents involving

the part 121 fleet and part 135 fleet over

the 1985–1994 period that were

attributable to pilot error. Based on this

value and the proportion of incidents

with similar causal factors where pilots

were affected by fatigue, the FAA

estimated that if proposed rule were

100% effective at eliminating fatigue as

a factor in accidents, it could prevent

accidents involving part 121 scheduled

operations valued at $242 million and

part 121 supplemental operations at $35

million over a 15-year period. The same

methodology yielded an estimate of $77

million for the potential effectiveness of

the proposal in preventing part 135

accidents. It is important to note that it

is unlikely that this proposal would be

100% effective, in part because it

addresses duty and rest times, but does

not require pilots to rest. The FAA is

unable to develop an estimate of

effectiveness of this proposal in

reducing fatigue-related incidents, but

welcomes data and methodologies that

may assist such an effort.

The table below compares the costs,

potential benefits, and cost savings

sections. The FAA therefore concludes

that the proposed rule would be cost

beneficial for the part 121 scheduled

operators, sector of the air

transportation industry, would probably

be cost beneficial for the entire part 121

sector of the air transportation industry,

and could be cost beneficial for the

scheduled part 135 operators as well,

provided the unquantifiable compliance

costs for the commuters do not exceed

about $127.5 million (discounted) over

a 15-year period.

The FAA does not have sufficient

information at this time to evaluate the

cost effectiveness of this proposal for air

taxi operators. A more definitive overall

conclusion would not be appropriate in

view of the lack of data pertaining to

how the affected air carriers would

modify their operations in order to

comply with the proposed rule and also

to take advantage of the opportunities to

increase pilot productivity. The FAA

has decided to issue this proposed rule

with the expectation that additional

data that can clarify these issues will be

forthcoming.

FIFTEEN YEAR DISCOUNTED COSTS/COST SAVINGS

Part 121 scheduledPart 121 supplemental Total part 121 Part 135 scheduled Air taxi

Compliance costs ............................................... $458,627,143 $383,403,020 $842,030,163 $56,750,685 Unknown.

Reserve requirements ................................. 458,627,143 224,331,554 682,958,697 56,750,685 Unknown.

Other requirements ..................................... 0 159,071,466 159,071,466 0 Unknown.

Potential safety benefits ..................................... 241,806,628 34,922,912 276,729,539 76,802,495 Unknown.

Net costs of reserve and other requirements .... 216,820,515 348,480,108 565,300,623 (20,051,810) Unknown.

Cost savings ....................................................... 1,658,078,896 215,723,343 1,873,802,239 107,431,330 Unknown.

Increased flight times ......................................... 1,504,206,226 215,723,343 1,719,929,569 107,431,330 Unknown.

Other cost savings ............................................. 153,872,670 0 153,872,670 0 Unknown.

Net combined cost savings of proposal ............. 1,441,258,380 (132,756,765) 1,308,501,615 127,483,140 Unknown.

This rulemaking should be considered

complimentary to the Commuter Rule

and the Air Carrier Training Program

final rule. One of the goals of these three

rulemaking actions is to prevent the 67

accidents that represent the accidentrate gap between part 135 commuter

operators and part 121 operators. The

FAA estimates that over the next 15

years, closing this gap would prevent 67

accidents at a present value benefit of

$350 million.

In terms of the accident rate gap, the

benefits of this NPRM are a part of this

total benefit. However, it is not possible

to allocate that benefit among the three

rulemaking actions because it difficult

to determine which rulemaking action

would prevent a given accident. For

example, individual accidents may be

prevented by any one or a combination

of several factors such as:

• Preventing the occurrence of a

problem with an airplane in the first

place (Commuter rule);

• Providing more or better crew

training to properly respond to the

problem after it occurs (Air Carrier

Training Program rule);

• Providing a dispatcher to help

identify a problem before it becomes a

potential accident (Commuter rule);

• And ensuring pilots are not overworked and tired (Pilot Rest and Duty

NPRM).

The Commuter Rule only addresses a

portion of the necessary requirements to

close the accident-rate gap. If the $51

million present value in net cost savings

of this rule ($107 million in cost savings

minus $56 million in costs) is combined

with the cost of the Commuter Rule, $75

million, and the cost of Pilot Training,

$34 million, the total cost, $58 million

(¥$51+$75+$34), is still less than the

estimated $350 million benefit of

eliminating the accident-rate gap. These

rules combined need only be 17 percent

effective to be cost-beneficial. The $77

million in potential safety benefits of

this proposed rule is a subset of the

aforementioned $350 million.

Analysis of Alternatives

As explained above, the FAA is

required to consider alternatives to the

proposed rule; the two alternatives will

be discussed in this section. As

indicated earlier in this preamble, if this

proposal on reserve time assignments is

not issued as a final rule, the FAA

intends to ensure that the current rule,

as interpreted, is being correctly

implemented. The FAA has estimated

that doing so could cost part 121

operators in excess of $2.5 billion and

part 135 operators in excess of $450

million discounted over the next 10

years. At the same time, the resulting

potential safety benefits would be no

more than those estimated for this

proposal.

Alternative Number One

This alternative would be to maintain

the status quo. This option would not

impose any costs on operators because

it would not require that they change

their pilot scheduling practices. It could

impose costs on society, however, by

increasing the risk of a preventable

fatigue-related accident. The

accumulation of a substantial body of

scientific evidence documenting the

harmful effects of fatigue on pilot

performance have increased the need to

amend these rules. In addition, given

the scientific data available and the

NTSB recommendations resulting from

an accident at Guantanamo Bay in

August 1993, this option is not feasible.

Alternative Number Two

This alternative was the original

proposal considered by the FAA. After

surveying industry, the FAA determined
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 244 / Wednesday, December 20, 1995 / Proposed Rules 65969

that such a proposal would impose

substantial costs, and that these costs

would outweigh any potential benefits.

Consequently, the current proposal was

established, which uses some of the

elements of this original proposal.

This alternative would afford

operators three options for scheduling

their reserve pilots but does not address

the fatigue problem for pilots who are

not on reserve status. The three options

for scheduling reserve pilots are as

follows:

Option 1: The certificate holder provides a

minimum of 10 hours of advance notice of

reporting time for flight duty.

Option 2: The certificate holder provides 8

hours of rest each 24 hour period of reserve

duty. The 8 hours of rest must be assigned

prospectively and remain constant for the

duration of the reserve assignment.

Option 3: For each 24 hour period of

reserve duty the flight crewmember is limited

to 18 hours of eligibility for flight duty, with

the remaining 6 hours being set aside for rest.

The potential annual compliance

costs for the part 121 scheduled carriers

were estimated at $225 million on an

annual basis based on the assumption

they would have to increase their pilot

staffing by 4%. The second most heavily

affected sector of the industry was the

air taxi operators, who indicated they

would have to increase their pilot

staffing by 74%, resulting in potential

annual compliance costs of $175

million. The FAA estimated that

commuter operators would increase

their pilot staffing by 5% in order to

avoid disrupting their flight schedules,

resulting in potential annual

compliance costs of $24 million.

Finally, the annual compliance cost for

the part 121 unscheduled operators was

estimated at $11.5 million.

The total annual cost was estimated to

be $436 million for the air carrier

industry. These costs would not be

offset by any cost savings because of the

limited nature of this alternative (i.e.,

applies only to reserve pilots). In

addition, this alternative would have a

considerably lower potential for

preventing accidents than the proposal

for the same reason. The FAA therefore

concluded that this alternative would

not be cost beneficial.

Initial Regulatory Flexibility

Determination

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980

(RFA) requires Federal agencies to

review rules that may have ‘‘a

significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities.’’

Under FAA Order 2100.14A, the

criterion for a ‘‘substantial number’’ is a

number that is not less than 11 and that

is more than one third of the small

entities subject to the rule. This rule

would primarily affect part 121 and 135

operators. For operators of aircraft for

hire, a small operator is one that owns,

but not necessarily operates, nine or

fewer aircraft. The FAA’s criteria for

‘‘significant impact’’ are $4,600 or more

per year for an unscheduled operator,

$119,900 or more per year for a

scheduled operator whose airplane fleet

has over 60 seats, and $67,000 or more

for other scheduled carriers.

A. Initial Regulatory Flexibility

Determination

The present value cost savings of the

proposed rule over the 10-year study

period would be $1.20 billion for the

part 121 scheduled carriers or $148.47

million annualized at 7%. Based on a

total fleet of 3,429 airplanes for these air

carriers, the projected annualized cost

savings of this rule would be $43,298

per airplane. Given the threshold

annualized cost of $119,900 for a small

part 121 scheduled operator, the FAA

estimates that the proposed rule would

have a significant economic impact on

any operator owning 3 or more aircraft

but less than 10 aircraft. However, there

are only 7 small operators in this

category. Since this is less than 11, a

substantial number of these entities

would not be affected.

The present value of the net costs of

the proposed rule over the 10-year study

period would be $139.56 million for the

part 121 unscheduled carriers or $19.82

million annualized at 7%. Based on a

total fleet of 557 airplanes for these

operators, the projected annual cost of

this rule would be $42,747 per airplane.

This exceeds the cost threshold of

$4,600 per unscheduled operator for all

small operators in this sector of the

industry.

The present value of the cost savings

of the proposed rule over the study

period has been estimated at $50.68

million for the part 135 scheduled

carriers or $7.2 million annualized at

7%. Based on a total fleet of 950

airplanes for these operators, the

projected annual cost of this rule would

be $7,579 per airplane. Given the

threshold annualized cost of $67,000 for

a small commuter operator, the FAA

estimates that an operator would need

to own exactly 9 airplanes in order to

incur a significant economic impact. As

there is only one part 135 scheduled

carrier with 9 airplanes, the FAA

concludes that a substantial number of

small entities in this sector of the

industry would not be significantly

affected by the proposed rule.

The FAA requests comments from

small air taxi operators regarding the

potential economic impacts of this

proposed rule on their operations.

Would additional pilots be required to

maintain the current scope of their

operations?

B. Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

As the proposed rule would have a

significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small part 121

unscheduled operators, an initial

regulatory flexibility analysis has been

prepared. This analysis assures that

agencies have examined selected

regulatory alternatives that could

minimize the economic burdens of the

proposed rule on small entities. As

delineated in section 603(b) of the RFA,

this initial regulatory flexibility analysis

is required to identify: (1) the reasons

why the agency is considering this

action, (2) the objectives and legal basis

for the proposed rule, (3) the kind and

number of small entities to which the

proposed rule would apply, (4) the

projected reporting, record keeping, and

other compliance requirements of the

proposed rule, and (5) all Federal rules

which may duplicate, overlap or

conflict with the proposed rule. This

section of the RFA further requires that

each initial regulatory flexibility

analysis contain a description of any

significant alternatives to the proposed

rule which accomplish the stated

objectives of applicable statutes and

which minimize any significant

economic impact of the proposed rule

on small entities.

1. Why the Agency Action is Taken

The main reason for the NPRM is that

the FAA Administrator, when

prescribing safety regulations, is

required by statute to consider ‘‘the duty

of an air carrier to provide service with

the highest possible safety in the public

interest.’’ The FAA has determined that

the most appropriate way to meet this

statutory mandate is to ensure that flight

crewmembers are provided with the

opportunity to obtain sufficient rest to

perform their routine and emergency

safety duties. The need for this

rulemaking is supported by studies on

pilot fatigue conducted by NASA,

anecdotal evidence of the problem

contained in pilot reports submitted to

the Aviation Safety Reporting System,

and the complexity and age of the

current flight duty and rest period

restrictions.

2. Objective of and Legal Basis for the

Proposed Rule

The objective of the proposed rule is

to increase safety in passenger- and

cargo-carrying operations, both

scheduled and unscheduled. The

proposed rule would also clarify and
65970 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 244 / Wednesday, December 20, 1995 / Proposed Rules

simplify existing regulations pertaining

to duty period limitations, flight time

limitations, and rest requirements for

crewmembers. This objective is more

thoroughly discussed in the preamble to

the NPRM.

The legal basis for the proposed rule

is 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 1153, 40101, 40102,

etc.

3. Description of the Small Entities

Affected by the Proposed Rule

The proposal would affect part 121 air

carriers conducting both scheduled and

unscheduled operations. The FAA

estimates that the proposal would affect

only one scheduled part 121 operator,

which owns 9 aircraft. The remaining

operators in this category each own 5 or

fewer aircraft, less than the number

required for a substantial economic

impact potential. The FAA estimates

that the proposal would have a

substantial economic impact on all 23

small part 121 unscheduled operators,

which operate a total of 99 aircraft.

4. Compliance Requirements of the

Proposed Rule

The proposed duty period limitations,

flight time limitations, and rest

requirements would apply to all

crewmembers conducting part 121

domestic, flag, and supplemental

operations, as well as those engaged in

commuter and on-demand operations.

These limitations and requirements

would also apply to part 121 and 135

certificate holders conducting part 91

operations. The preamble to the NPRM

provides a more thorough discussion of

the compliance requirements of the

proposed rule.

5. Overlap of the Proposed Rule With

Other Federal Regulations

No other Federal rules would

duplicate, overlap, or conflict with the

proposed rule.

6. Alternatives to the Proposed Rule

Alternative Number One did not have

any potential compliance costs.

Alternative Number Two would have

been more costly and would have had

a significant impact on a substantial

number of entities for the three industry

areas where costs could be estimated.

Alternative Number Two would have

projected annual costs of $65,325 per

aircraft for part 121 scheduled

operators. Therefore, any operator with

2 or more aircraft would be significantly

affected by this alternative rule. Since

these operators would comprise more

than one-third of the total number of

small operators in this category, the

FAA concludes that a substantial

number of small entities would be

affected. In addition, Alternative

Number Two was substantially more

costly for part 121 unscheduled

operators than the proposed rule, which

would have affected all operators in this

sector of the industry. The impacts of

this Alternative on these operators

would be considerably greater than the

proposed rule.

Alternative Number Two would have

projected annual costs of $20,443 per

aircraft for part 135 scheduled

operators.

Therefore, any operator with 4 or

more aircraft would be significantly

affected by this alternative rule. Since

these operators comprise at least onethird of the total number of small

entities in this sector of the industry, the

FAA concludes that a substantial

number of small operators would be

affected. This Alternative, which would

be considerably more costly for ondemand air taxis than scheduled part

135 operators, would have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small operators in this sector

of the industry as well.

In addition, the FAA considered an

alternative proposal for part 121

supplemental carriers that was proposed

at an ARAC (Aviation Regulatory

Advisory Committee) meeting. Under

this proposal, part 121 supplementals

could develop alternative policies and

procedures or flight schedules that

allow a flight crewmember to anticipate

when a flight time assignment might

occur or that otherwise ensures a flight

crewmember will not be assigned to a

flight unless that flight crewmember is

adequately rested for that flight

assignment. However, the FAA rejected

this option because it does not provide

one level of safety for the industry.

These different policies or procedures

would be ripe for abuse by both

certificate holders and pilots and they

would be very difficult for the FAA to

enforce. In short the FAA believes this

alternative would not provide the same

level of safety as the proposal. The FAA

does, however request comments on

other possible alternatives.

Initial Trade Impact Analysis

The FAA believes that in specific

foreign countries, including Great

Britain, Germany, and some other

European countries, pilot, flight, and

duty regulations are more restrictive

because they make use of more variables

as constraints than in the United States.

These variables include 1) take-offs and

landings, 2) day or night flights, 3)

cumulative duty hours per week and

month, 4) the number of flights in a

duty period, 5) whether the flight crew

is ‘‘acclimated’’ to the local time. The

net impact of the proposal on the U.S.

firms’ operating costs is likely to be

considerably less than the compliance

costs with current rules because of the

projected gains in productivity. Foreign

air carriers may already be burdened

with similar or higher costs to the extent

the applicable regulations are as strict or

more strict than the proposal. The FAA

solicits information from commenters

regarding these policies.

Any impacts should be limited to the

part 121 air carriers. Most of the nation’s

65 commuter airlines operate almost

exclusively on domestic routes, with

only limited international operations

and no transoceanic routes. Similarly,

air taxi operators seldom fly outside of

domestic airspace.

Federalism Implications

The proposed regulations do not have

substantial direct effects on the states,

on the relationship between national

government and the states, or on the

distribution of power and

responsibilities among various levels of

government. Thus, in accordance with

Executive Order 12612, it is determined

that such a regulation does not have

federalism implications warranting the

preparation of a Federalism Assessment.

Paperwork Reduction Act

The reporting and recordkeeping

requirements associated with this

proposed rule remain the same as under

the current rules and have previously

been approved by the Office of

Management and Budget under the

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction

Act of 1980 (Public Law 96–511) and

have been assigned OMB Control

Numbers 2120–0585. The FAA believes

that this proposed rule would not

impose any additional recordkeeping or

reporting requirements. If, however, a

commenter finds that this notice would

require additional recordkeeping or

reporting, the FAA solicits specific

information on the volume, type, and

costs of the additional records or

reports.

Conclusion

For the reasons set forth under the

heading ‘‘Regulatory Analysis,’’ the

FAA has determined that this proposed

regulation is a significant rule under

Executive Order 12866, and is a

significant rule under Department of

Transportation Regulatory Policies and

Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26,

1979). Also, for the reasons stated under

the headings ‘‘Trade Impact Statement’’

and ‘‘Regulatory Flexibility

Determination,’’ the FAA certifies that

the proposed rule would have a

significant economic impact on a
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 244 / Wednesday, December 20, 1995 / Proposed Rules 65971

substantial number of small entities. A

copy of the full regulatory evaluation is

filed in the docket and may also be

obtained by contacting the person listed

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

List of Subjects

14 CFR Part 121

Air carriers, Aircraft, Aircraft pilots,

Airmen, Airplanes, Aviation Safety,

Safety.

14 CFR Part 135

Air carriers, Aircraft, Airmen,

Aviation Safety, Pilots, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

In consideration of the foregoing, the

Federal Aviation Administration

proposes to amend the Federal Aviation

Regulations (14 CFR parts 121 and 135)

as follows:

PART 121—CERTIFICATION AND

OPERATIONS: DOMESTIC, FLAG, AND

SUPPLEMENTAL AIR CARRIERS AND

COMMERCIAL OPERATORS OF

LARGE AIRCRAFT

1. The authority citation for part 121

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44119,

44101, 44701–44702, 44705, 44709–44711,

44713, 44716–44717, 44722, 44901, 44903–

44904, 44912, 46105. 46103, 46105.

2. Section 121.1 is amended by

adding a new paragraph (g) to read as

follows

§ 121.1 Applicability.

* * * * *

(g) As specified in § 121.487, the duty

period limitations, flight time

limitations and rest requirements of this

part are also applicable to duty periods

and flight time performed for a

certificate holder conducting operations

under part 91 or part 135 of this chapter.

Subpart R—[Removed and reserved]

3. Subpart R (§§ 121.480 through

121.493) is removed, and the subpart

heading is reserved.

4. Subpart Q is revised to read as

follows:

Subpart Q—Flight Crewmember Duty

Period Limitations, Flight Time Limitations

and Rest Requirements

Sec.

121.471 Applicability and terms.

121.473 Pilot duty period limitations, flight

time limitations, and rest requirements.

121.475 Flight engineer duty period

limitations, flight time limitations, and

rest requirements.

121.477 Reserve and standby assignments.

121.479 Additional flight crewmember duty

period and flight time scheduling

limitations.

121.481 Weekly and monthly flight

crewmember flight time limitations.

121.483 Additional flight crewmember rest

requirements.

121.485 Deadhead transportation.

121.487 Duty period and flight time

limitations: Other flying for a certificate

holder.

Subpart Q—Flight Crewmember Duty

Period Limitations, Flight Time

Limitations and Rest Requirements

§ 121.471 Applicability and terms.

(a) This subpart prescribes duty

period limitations, flight time

limitations and rest requirements for

flight crewmembers in domestic, flag,

and supplemental operations.

(b) For the purpose of this subpart the

following terms and definitions apply:

(1) Approved sleeping quarters means

an area designated for the purpose of

flight crewmembers obtaining sleep as

approved by the Administrator.

(2) Assigned time means a period of

time when the flight crewmember is

assigned by the certificate holder to

activities other than flight duties or

reserve time. Assigned time may

include activities such as deadhead

transportation, training, loading

baggage, taking tickets, administrative

tasks, or any other assignments at the

direction of the certificate holder.

Assigned time may be considered part

of a duty period or not part of a duty

period, at the discretion of the

certificate holder.

(3) Calendar day means a period of

elapsed time, using Coordinated

Universal Time or local time, that

begins at midnight and ends 24 hours

later at the next midnight.

(4) Duty period means a period of

elapsed time between reporting for an

assignment involving flight time and

release from that assignment by the

certificate holder. The time is calculated

using either Coordinated Universal

Time or the local time of the flight

crewmember’s home base, to reflect the

total elapsed time.

(5) Operational delays means delays

due to operational conditions and

requirements that are beyond the

control of the certificate holder such as

adverse weather, aircraft equipment

malfunctions, and air traffic control. It

does not include late arriving

passengers, late food service, late fuel

trucks, delays in handling baggage,

freight or mail, or similar events.

(6) Protected time means a period of

time during which a certificate holder

may not contact the flight crewmember

and the crewmember has no

responsibility for work. Protected time

occurs only during a reserve assignment

pursuant to § 121.477(b)(2).

(7) Reserve time means a period of

time when a flight crewmember must be

available to report upon notice for duty

involving flight time and the certificate

holder allows the flight crewmember at

least 1 hour to report. Reserve time is

not considered part of a rest period and

is not considered part of a duty period

involving flight time. Reserve time ends

when the flight crewmember reports for

a duty period, when the flight

crewmember is notified of a future flight

assignment and released from all further

responsibilities until report time for that

assignment, or when the flight

crewmember has been relieved for a rest

period. Reserve time does not include

activities defined as ‘‘assigned time.’’

(8) Rest period means a period of time

free of all restraint or duty for a

certificate holder and free of all

responsibility for work or duty should

the occasion arise. A flight crewmember

is not ‘‘free of all restraint’’ or ‘‘free of

all responsibility’’ if that person must,

among other things, accept phone calls,

carry a beeper, or contact the air carrier.

If a flight crewmember is not serving in

assigned time, reserve time, standby

duty or a duty period, that crewmember

would be in a rest period.

(9) Standby duty means any period of

time when a flight crewmember is

required to report for a flight assignment

in less than 1 hour from the time of

notification. It also includes time when

a flight crewmember is required to

report to and remain at a specific facility

(e.g. airport, crew lounge) designated by

a certificate holder. Standby duty is

considered part of a duty period.

Standby duty commences when the

flight crewmember is placed on standby

duty. Standby duty ends when the flight

crewmember is relieved from duty

associated with an actual flight or is

otherwise relieved from duty.

§ 121.473 Pilot duty period limitations,

flight time limitations, and rest

requirements.

(a) A certificate holder may assign a

scheduled duty period or reserve

assignment to a pilot and a pilot may

accept that assignment only when the

applicable duty period limitations,

flight time limitations, and rest

requirements of this section are met.

(b) Except as required in paragraphs

(c), (d), and (e) of this section, no

certificate holder may assign a flight

crew consisting of two pilots, and no

pilot may accept, a scheduled duty

period of more than 14 hours. The duty

period may not include more than 10

scheduled hours of flight time. Each

pilot must be scheduled for a

subsequent rest period of at least 10

consecutive hours. This rest period
65972 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 244 / Wednesday, December 20, 1995 / Proposed Rules

must occur between the completion of

the scheduled duty period and the

commencement of the next duty period.

(1) Due to operational delays, the rest

period required under this paragraph (b)

may be reduced to no fewer than 9

consecutive hours if the pilot has not

actually exceeded the maximum 14-

hour duty period and if the pilot’s next

rest period is at least 11 hours. This

subsequent rest period must be

scheduled to begin no later than 24

hours after the beginning of the reduced

rest period and must occur between the

completion of the scheduled duty

period and the commencement of the

next duty period.

(2) The duty period required under

this paragraph (b) may be extended to

16 hours when the extension is due to

operational delays. In this case the 10

hour rest period may not be reduced.

(c) A certificate holder may assign a

flight crew consisting of 3 pilots, and a

pilot may accept, a scheduled duty

period of up to 16 hours. The duty

period may not include more than 12

scheduled hours of flight time. Each

pilot must be scheduled for a

subsequent rest period of at least 14

consecutive hours. This rest period

must occur between the completion of

the scheduled duty period and the

commencement of the next duty period.

(1) Due to operational delays, the rest

period required under this paragraph (c)

may be reduced to no fewer than 12

consecutive hours if the pilot has not

actually exceeded the maximum 16-

hour duty period and if the pilot’s next

rest period is at least 16 hours. This

subsequent rest period must be

scheduled to begin no later than 24

hours after the beginning of the reduced

rest period and must occur between the

completion of the scheduled duty

period and the commencement of the

next duty period.

(2) The duty period required under

this paragraph (c) may be extended to 18

hours when the extension is due to

operational delays. In this case the 14

hour rest period may not be reduced.

(d) A certificate holder may assign a

flight crew consisting of 3 pilots, and a

pilot may accept, a scheduled duty

period of more than 16 hours, but no

more than 18 hours. The duty period

may not include more than 16

scheduled hours of flight time. Each

pilot must be given an opportunity to

rest in-flight in approved sleeping

quarters. Each pilot must be scheduled

for a subsequent rest period of at least

18 consecutive hours. This rest period

must occur between the completion of

the scheduled duty period and the

commencement of the next subsequent

duty period.

(1) Due to operational delays, the rest

period required under this paragraph (d)

may be reduced to no fewer than 16

consecutive hours if the pilot has not

actually exceeded the maximum 18-

hour duty period and if the pilot’s next

rest period is at least 20 hours. This

subsequent rest period must be

scheduled to begin no later than 24

hours after the beginning of the reduced

rest period and must occur between the

completion of the scheduled duty

period and the commencement of the

next subsequent duty period.

(2) The duty period required under

this paragraph (d) may be extended to

20 hours when the extension is due to

operational delays. In this case the 18

hour rest period may not be reduced.

(e) If the scheduled duty period

includes one or more flights that land or

take off outside the 48 contiguous states

and the District of Columbia, a

certificate holder may assign a flight

crew consisting of 4 pilots, and a pilot

may accept, a scheduled duty period of

more than 18 hours but not more than

24 hours. The duty period may not

include more than 18 scheduled hours

of flight time. Each pilot must be given

an opportunity to rest in-flight in

approved sleeping quarters. Each pilot

must be scheduled for a subsequent rest

period of at least 22 consecutive hours.

This rest period must occur between the

completion of the scheduled duty

period and the commencement of the

next subsequent duty period.

(1) Due to operational delays, the rest

period required under this paragraph (e)

may be reduced to no fewer than 20

consecutive hours if the pilot has not

actually exceeded the maximum 24

hour duty period and if the pilot’s next

rest period is at least 24 hours. This

subsequent rest period must be

scheduled to begin no later than 24

hours after the beginning of the reduced

rest period and must occur between the

completion of the scheduled duty

period and the commencement of the

next subsequent duty period.

(2) The duty period required under

this paragraph (e) may be extended to 26

hours when the extension is due to

operational delays. In this case the 22

hour rest period may not be reduced.

§ 121.475 Flight engineer duty period

limitations, flight time limitations, and rest

requirements.

(a) A certificate holder may assign a

scheduled duty period or reserve

assignment to a flight engineer, and a

flight engineer may accept, a scheduled

duty period only when the applicable

duty period limitations, flight time

limitations, and rest requirements of

this section are met.

(b) Except as provided in paragraphs

(c), (d), and (e) of this section, no

certificate holder may assign a flight

engineer, and no flight engineer may

accept, a scheduled duty period of more

than 14 hours. The duty period may not

include more than 10 scheduled hours

of flight time. Each flight engineer must

be scheduled for a subsequent rest

period of at least 10 consecutive hours.

This rest period must occur between the

completion of the scheduled duty

period and the commencement of the

next subsequent duty period.

(1) Due to operational delays, the rest

period required under this paragraph (b)

may be reduced to no fewer than 9

consecutive hours if the flight engineer

has not actually exceeded the maximum

14-hour duty period and if the flight

engineer is provided with a subsequent

rest period of at least 11 hours. This

subsequent rest period must be

scheduled to begin no later than 24

hours after the beginning of the reduced

rest period and must occur between the

completion of the scheduled duty

period and the commencement of the

next subsequent duty period.

(2) The duty period required under

this paragraph (b) may be extended to

16 hours when the extension is due to

operational delays. In this case the 10

hour rest period may not be reduced.

(c) A certificate holder may assign a

flight engineer, and a flight engineer

may accept, a scheduled duty period of

more than 14 hours, but no more than

16 hours. The duty period may not

include more than 12 scheduled hours

of flight time. Each flight engineer must

be scheduled for a subsequent rest

period of at least 14 consecutive hours.

This rest period must occur between the

completion of the scheduled duty

period and the commencement of the

next subsequent duty period.

(1) Due to operational delays, the rest

period required under this paragraph (c)

may be reduced to no fewer than 12

consecutive hours if the flight engineer

has not actually exceeded the maximum

16-hour duty period and if the flight

engineer is provided with a subsequent

rest period of at least 16 hours. This

subsequent rest period must be

scheduled to begin no later than 24

hours after the beginning of the reduced

rest period and must occur between the

completion of the scheduled duty

period and the commencement of the

next subsequent duty period.

(2) The duty period required under

this paragraph (c) may be extended to 18

hours when the extension is due to

operational delays. In this case the 14

hour rest period may not be reduced.

(d) A certificate holder may assign a

flight engineer, and a flight engineer
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 244 / Wednesday, December 20, 1995 / Proposed Rules 65973

may accept, a scheduled duty period of

more than 16 hours, but no more than

18 hours. The duty period may not

include more than 16 scheduled hours

of flight time. The certificate holder

must assign to the flight or flights in that

duty period at least two flight engineers.

Each flight engineer must be given an

opportunity to rest in flight in approved

sleeping quarters. Each flight engineer

must be scheduled for a subsequent rest

period of at least 18 consecutive hours.

This rest period must occur between the

completion of the scheduled duty

period and the commencement of the

next subsequent duty period.

(1) Due to operational delays, the rest

period required under this paragraph (d)

may be reduced to no fewer than 16

consecutive hours if the flight engineer

has not actually exceeded the maximum

18-hour duty period and if the flight

engineer is provided with a subsequent

rest period of at least 20 hours. This

subsequent rest period must be

scheduled to begin no later than 24

hours after the beginning of the reduced

rest period and must occur between the

completion of the scheduled duty

period and the commencement of the

next subsequent duty period.

(2) The duty period required under

this paragraph (d) may be extended to

20 hours when the extension is due to

operational delays. In this case the 18

hour rest period may not be reduced.

(e) If the scheduled duty period

includes one or more flights that land or

take off outside the 48 contiguous states

and the District of Columbia, the

certificate holder may assign a flight

engineer, and a flight engineer may

accept, a scheduled duty period of more

than 18 hours but not more than 24

hours. The duty period may not include

more than 18 scheduled hours of flight

time. The certificate holder must assign

to the flight or flights in that duty period

at least two flight engineers. Each flight

engineer must be given an opportunity

to rest in-flight in approved sleeping

quarters. Each flight engineer must be

scheduled for a subsequent rest period

of at least 22 consecutive hours. This

rest period must occur between the

completion of the scheduled duty

period and the commencement of the

next subsequent duty period.

(1) Due to operational delays, the rest

period required under this paragraph (e)

may be reduced to no fewer than 20

consecutive hours if the flight engineer

has not actually exceeded the maximum

24-hour duty period and if the flight

engineer is provided with a subsequent

rest period of at least 24 hours. This

subsequent rest period must be

scheduled to begin no later than 24

hours after the beginning of the reduced

rest period and must occur between the

completion of the scheduled duty

period and the commencement of the

next subsequent duty period.

(2) The duty period required under

this paragraph (e) may be extended to 26

hours when the extension is due to

operational delays. In this case the 22

hour rest period may not be reduced.

§ 121.477 Reserve and standby

assignments.

(a) Standby duty. Standby duty

commences when a flight crewmember

is placed on standby duty. Standby duty

periods must be scheduled in

accordance with §§ 121.473 or 121.475.

Standby duty periods end when the

duty period associated with a

subsequent flight assignment ends or

the flight crewmember is relieved from

standby duty for a scheduled rest

period.

(b) Reserve time. A certificate holder

may assign a reserve assignment to a

flight crewmember and a flight

crewmember may accept that

assignment only when the applicable

provisions of this section are met. Each

flight crewmember must be given a 10-

hour rest period before being assigned to

reserve time. Reserve time may be

assigned under either of the following

options and the flight crewmember must

be notified of which option has been

selected before the beginning of the

reserve time assignment:

(1) A certificate holder may schedule

a flight crewmember assigned to reserve

time and a flight crewmember may

accept any duty period if the flight

crewmember receives at least 10 hours

notice and if the duty period is

scheduled in accordance with

§§ 121.473 or 121.475. If a flight

crewmember does not receive at least 10

hours notice, the following limitations

apply:

(i) If at least 8 hours notice is given,

the scheduled duty period is limited to

no more than 12 hours. The duty period

required under this paragraph (b)(1)

may be extended to 14 hours when the

extension is due to operational delays.

(ii) If at least 6 hours notice is given,

the scheduled duty period is limited to

no more than 10 hours. The duty period

required under this paragraph (b)(1)

may be extended to 12 hours when the

extension is due to operational delays.

(iii) If at least 4 hours notice is given,

the scheduled duty period is limited to

no more than 8 hours. The duty period

required under this paragraph (b)(1)

may be extended to 10 hours when the

extension is due to operational delays.

(iv) If fewer than 4 hours notice is

given, the scheduled duty period is

limited to no more than 6 hours. The

duty period required under this

paragraph (b)(1) may be extended to 8

hours when the extension is due to

operational delays. 

(2) A certificate holder may assign a

flight crewmember to a reserve

assignment, and a flight crewmember

may accept a duty period, if, for each

24-hour period, the flight crewmember

receives at least a regularly scheduled 6-

hour period that is protected from any

contact by the certificate holder. The

hours of the 6-hour protected time

period must be assigned before the flight

crewmember begins the reserve time

assignment and must occur at the same

time during each 24-hour period during

a reserve time assignment. Any duty

period assignment must be scheduled to

be completed within the 18 hour reserve

period. The length of the duty period

and the subsequent rest period must be

in accordance with §§ 121.473 or

121.475.

§ 121.479 Additional flight crewmember

duty period and flight time scheduling

limitations.

(a) A flight crewmember is not

considered to be scheduled for a duty

period in excess of the scheduled duty

period limitations if the duty periods to

which he or she is assigned are

scheduled and normally terminate

within the limitations, but, due to

operational delays, the flights to which

he or she is assigned are not at block out

time expected to reach their destination

within the scheduled duty period.

However, no air carrier may assign a

flight crewmember, nor may a flight

crewmember accept, a flight that at

block out time would extend the flight

crewmembers scheduled duty period

maximum more than two hours, as

provided in §§ 121.473 and 121.475.

(b) A flight crewmember is not

considered to be scheduled for flight

time in excess of the flight time

limitations if the flights to which he or

she is assigned are scheduled and

normally terminate within the

limitations, but due to operational

delays are not at block out time

expected to reach their destination

within the scheduled time.

§ 121.481 Weekly and monthly flight

crewmember flight time limitations.

No certificate holder may schedule

any flight crewmember, and no flight

crewmember may accept, an assignment

for flight time under this part if that

flight crewmember’s total flight time for

a certificate holder under parts 91, 121,

and 135 of this chapter will exceed—

(a) 32 hours in any 7 consecutive

calendar days.

(b) 100 hours in any calendar month.
65974 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 244 / Wednesday, December 20, 1995 / Proposed Rules

§ 121.483 Additional flight crewmember

rest requirements.

(a) No certificate holder may assign

any flight crewmember, and no flight

crewmember may accept, any duty

period or flight time with the certificate

holder unless the flight crewmember

has had at least the minimum rest

required under this subpart.

(b) No certificate holder may assign

any flight crewmember and no flight

crewmember may accept any duty with

the certificate holder during any

required rest period. For example the

flight crewmember may not be required

to contact the certificate holder, answer

the telephone, carry a beeper, remain at

a specific location or in any other way

be responsible to the air carrier during

a rest period.

(c) Rest periods that are required

under this subpart can occur

concurrently with any other rest period.

(d) The reduced rest periods allowed

under §§ 121.473 and 121.475 may only

be used due to operational delays and

may not be scheduled in advance.

(e) Each certificate holder shall

provide each flight crewmember who is

assigned to one or more duty periods,

standby duty, or reserve time a rest

period of at least 36 consecutive hours

during any 7 consecutive calendar days.

(f) Each certificate holder must

provide each flight crewmember

assigned to assigned time, when the

assigned time is not part of a duty

period, a rest period of at least 10 hours

before the commencement of a

subsequent duty period.

(g) Each certificate holder must

provide each flight crewmember at least

48 consecutive hours of rest upon return

to the flight crewmember’s home base

after completion of one or more duty

periods that contain flights that

terminate in a time zone or zones that

differs from the time zone of the flight

crewmember’s home base by 6 or more

hours and the flight crewmember

remains in that time zone or zones for

at least 48 consecutive hours. The flight

crewmember must receive this rest

before beginning a subsequent duty

period. The home base is determined by

the certificate holder and is where that

crewmember is based and receives

schedules.

§ 121.485 Deadhead transportation.

Time spent in transportation, not

local in character, that a certificate

holder requires of a flight crewmember

and provides to transport the

crewmember to an airport at which he

or she is to serve on a flight as a

crewmember, or from an airport at

which he or she was relieved from duty

to return to his or her home station is

not considered part of a rest period. For

duty period limitation purposes the

certificate holder and flight

crewmember must consider deadhead

time as assigned time or as part of a duty

period associated with flight.

§ 121.487 Duty period and flight time

limitations: Other flying for a certificate

holder.

No flight crewmember who is

employed by a certificate holder

conducting operations under this part

may do any other duty or flying for any

certificate holder conducting operations

under part 121 or 135 of this chapter if

that duty or flying for a certificate

holder plus his or her duty or flying

under this part will exceed any duty

period or flight time limitation in this

part. This section applies to any other

duty or flying under part 91, part 121 or

part 135 of this chapter for any

certificate holder whether the duty or

flying precedes or follows the flight

crewmember’s flying under this part.

Subpart S—[Removed and reserved]

5. Subpart S (§§ 121.500 through

121.525) is removed, and the subpart

heading is reserved.

PART 135—AIR TAXI OPERATORS

AND COMMERCIAL OPERATORS

6. The authority citation for part 135

is revised to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 1153, 40101,

40102, 40103, 40113, 44105, 44106, 44111,

44701–44717, 44722, 44901, 44903, 44904,

44906, 44912, 44914, 44936, 44938, 46103,

46105.

7. Section 135.1 is amended by

adding a new paragraph (b) to read as

follows

§ 135.1 Applicability.

* * * * *

(b) As specified in § 135.275, the duty

period limitations, flight time

limitations and rest requirements of this

part are also applicable to duty periods

and flight time performed for a

certificate holder conducting operations

under part 91 or part 121 of this chapter.

8. The heading for subpart F is revised

to read as follows:

Subpart F—Flight Crewmember Duty

Period Limitations, Flight Time

Limitations, and Rest Requirements

9. Sections 135.261, 135.263, 135.265,

135.267, 135.269, and 135.273 are

revised and 135.275 is added.

§ 135.261 Applicability and terms.

(a) This subpart prescribes duty

period limitations, flight time

limitations and rest requirements for

flight crewmembers in commuter and

on-demand operations.

(b) For the purpose of this subpart the

following terms and definitions apply:

(1) Approved sleeping quarters means

an area designated for the purpose of

flight crewmembers obtaining sleep as

approved by the Administrator.

(2) Assigned time is time when the

flight crewmember is assigned by the

certificate holder to activities other than

flight duties or reserve time. Assigned

time may include activities such as

deadhead transportation, training,

loading baggage, taking tickets,

administrative tasks, or any other

assignments at the direction of the

certificate holder. Assigned time may be

considered part of a duty period or not

part of a duty period, at the discretion

of the certificate holder.

(3) Calendar day means the period of

elapsed time, using Coordinated

Universal Time or local time, that

begins at midnight and ends 24 hours

later at the next midnight.

(4) Duty period means the period of

elapsed time between reporting for an

assignment involving flight time and

release from that assignment by the

certificate holder. The time is calculated

using either Coordinated Universal

Time or the local time of the flight

crewmember’s home base, to reflect the

total elapsed time.

(5) Operational delays means delays

due to operational conditions and

requirements that are beyond the

control of the certificate holder such as

adverse weather, aircraft equipment

malfunctions, and air traffic control. It

does not include late arriving

passengers, late food service, late fuel

trucks, delays in handling baggage,

freight or mail, or similar events.

(6) Protected time means a period of

time during which a certificate holder

may not contact the flight crewmember

and the crewmember has no

responsibility for work. Protected time

occurs only during a reserve assignment

pursuant to § 121.477(b)(2).

(7) Reserve time means a period of

time when a flight crewmember must be

available to report upon notice for duty

involving flight time and the certificate

holder allows the flight crewmember at

least 1 hour to report. Reserve time is

not considered part of a rest period and

is not considered part of a duty period

involving flight time. Reserve time ends

when the flight crewmember reports for

a duty period, when the flight

crewmember is notified of a future flight

assignment and released from all further

responsibilities until report time for that

assignment, or when the flight

crewmember has been relieved for a rest
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 244 / Wednesday, December 20, 1995 / Proposed Rules 65975

period. Reserve time does not include

activities defined as ‘‘assigned time.’’

(8) Rest period means the time period

free of all restraint or duty for a

certificate holder and free of all

responsibility for work or duty should

the occasion arise. ‘‘Free of all restraint’’

and ‘‘free of all responsibility’’ would

include, but not be limited to, accepting

phone calls, being required to carry a

beeper, or being required to contact the

air carrier. If a flight crewmember is not

serving in assigned time, reserve time,

standby duty or a duty period, that

crewmember would be in a rest period.

(9) Standby duty means any period of

time when a flight crewmember is

required to report for a flight assignment

in less than 1 hour from the time of

notification. It also includes time when

a flight crewmember is required to

report to and remain at a specific facility

(e.g. airport, crew lounge) designated by

a certificate holder. Standby duty is

treated like any other duty associated

with flight. Standby duty commences

when the flight crewmember is placed

on standby duty. Standby duty ends

when the flight crewmember is relieved

from duty associated with an actual

flight or is otherwise relieved from duty.

§ 135.263 Pilot duty period limitations,

flight time limitations, and rest

requirements.

(a) A certificate holder may assign a

scheduled duty period or reserve

assignment to a pilot and a pilot may

accept that assignment only when the

applicable duty period limitations,

flight time limitations, and rest

requirements of this section are met.

(b) For aircraft for which only one

pilot is required, no certificate holder

may assign a pilot and no pilot may

accept a scheduled duty period of more

than 14 hours. The duty period may not

include more than 8 scheduled hours of

flight time. The pilot must be scheduled

for a rest period of at least 10

consecutive hours. This rest period

must occur between the completion of

the scheduled duty period and the

commencement of the next subsequent

duty period.

(1) Due to operational delays, the rest

period required under this paragraph (b)

may be reduced to no fewer than 9

consecutive hours if the pilot has not

actually exceeded the maximum 14-

hour duty period and if the pilot is

provided with a subsequent rest period

of at least 11 hours. This subsequent rest

period must be scheduled to begin no

later than 24 hours after the beginning

of the reduced rest period and must

occur between the completion of the

scheduled duty period and the

commencement of the next duty period.

(2) The duty period required under

this paragraph (b) may be extended to

16 hours when the extension is due to

operational delays. In this case the 10

hour rest period may not be reduced.

(c) Except as required in paragraphs

(d), (e), and (f) of this section, no

certificate holder may assign a flight

crew consisting of two pilots and no

pilot may accept a scheduled duty

period of more than 14 hours. The duty

period may not include more than 10

scheduled hours of flight time. Each

pilot must be scheduled for a rest period

of at least 10 consecutive hours. This

rest period must occur between the

completion of the scheduled duty

period and the commencement of the

next duty period.

(1) Due to operational delays, the rest

period required under this paragraph (c)

may be reduced to no fewer than 9

consecutive hours if the pilot has not

actually exceeded the maximum 14-

hour duty period and if the pilot is

provided with a subsequent rest period

of at least 11 hours. This subsequent rest

period must be scheduled to begin no

later than 24 hours after the beginning

of the reduced rest period and must

occur between the completion of the

scheduled duty period and the

commencement of the next duty period.

(2) The duty period required under

this paragraph (c) may be extended to 16

hours when the extension is due to

operational delays. In this case the 10

hour rest period may not be reduced.

(d) A certificate holder may assign a

flight crew consisting of 3 pilots and a

pilot may accept a scheduled duty

period of more than 14 hours, but no

more than 16 hours. The duty period

may not include more than 12

scheduled hours of flight time. Each

pilot must be scheduled for a rest period

of at least 14 consecutive hours. This

rest period must occur between the

completion of the scheduled duty

period and the commencement of the

next duty period.

(1) Due to operational delays, the rest

period required under this paragraph (d)

may be reduced to no fewer than 12

consecutive hours if the pilot has not

actually exceeded the maximum 16-

hour duty period and if the pilot is

provided with a subsequent rest period

of at least 16 hours. This subsequent rest

period must be scheduled to begin no

later than 24 hours after the beginning

of the reduced rest period and must

occur between the completion of the

scheduled duty period and the

commencement of the next duty period.

(2) The duty period required under

this paragraph (d) may be extended to

18 hours when the extension is due to

operational delays. In this case the 14

hour rest period may not be reduced.

(e) A certificate holder may assign a

flight crew consisting of 3 pilots, and a

pilot may accept a scheduled duty

period of more than 16 hours, but no

more than 18 hours. The duty period

may not include more than 16

scheduled hours of flight time. Each

pilot must be given an opportunity to

rest in-flight in approved sleeping

quarters. Each pilot must be scheduled

for a rest period of at least 18

consecutive hours. This rest period

must occur between the completion of

the scheduled duty period and the

commencement of the next subsequent

duty period.

(1) Due to operational delays, the rest

period required under this paragraph (e)

may be reduced to no fewer than 16

consecutive hours if the pilot has not

actually exceeded the maximum 18-

hour duty period and if the pilot is

provided with a subsequent rest period

of at least 20 hours. This subsequent rest

period must be scheduled to begin no

later than 24 hours after the beginning

of the reduced rest period and must

occur between the completion of the

scheduled duty period and the

commencement of the next subsequent

duty period.

(2) The duty period required under

this paragraph (e) may be extended to 20

hours when the extension is due to

operational delays. In this case the 18

hour rest period may not be reduced.

(f) If the scheduled duty period

includes one or more flights that land or

take off outside the 48 contiguous states

and the District of Columbia, a

certificate holder may assign a flight

crew consisting of 4 pilots and a pilot

may accept a scheduled duty period of

more than 18 hours but not more than

24 hours. The duty period may not

include more than 18 scheduled hours

of flight time. Each pilot must be given

an opportunity to rest in-flight in

approved sleeping quarters. Each pilot

must be scheduled for a rest period of

at least 22 consecutive hours. This rest

period must occur between the

completion of the scheduled duty

period and the commencement of the

next subsequent duty period.

(1) Due to operational delays, the rest

period required under this paragraph (f)

may be reduced to no fewer than 20

consecutive hours if the pilot has not

actually exceeded the maximum 24

hour duty period and if the pilot is

provided with a subsequent rest period

of at least 24 hours. This subsequent rest

period must be scheduled to begin no

later than 24 hours after the beginning

of the reduced rest period and must

occur between the completion of the
65976 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 244 / Wednesday, December 20, 1995 / Proposed Rules

scheduled duty period and the

commencement of the next subsequent

duty period.

(2) The duty period required under

this paragraph (f) may be extended to 26

hours when the extension is due to

operational delays. In this case the 22

hour rest period may not be reduced.

§ 135.265 Reserve and standby

assignments.

(a) Standby duty. Standby duty

commences when a flight crewmember

is placed on standby duty assignment.

Standby duty periods must be

scheduled in accordance with § 135.263.

Standby duty periods end when the

duty period associated with a

subsequent flight assignment ends or

the flight crewmember is relieved from

standby duty for a scheduled rest

period.

(b) Reserve time. A certificate holder

may assign a reserve assignment to a

flight crewmember and a flight

crewmember may accept that

assignment only when the applicable

provisions of this section are met. Each

flight crewmember must be given a 10-

hour rest period before being assigned to

reserve time. Reserve time may be

assigned under either of the following

options and the flight crewmember must

be notified of which option has been

selected before the beginning of the

reserve time assignment:

(1) A certificate holder may schedule

a flight crewmember assigned to reserve

time and a flight crewmember may

accept any duty period if the flight

crewmember receives at least 10 hours

notice and if the duty period is

scheduled in accordance with § 135.263.

If a flight crewmember does not receive

at least 10 hours notice, the following

limitations apply:

(i) If at least 8 hours notice is given

the scheduled duty period is limited to

no more than 12 hours. The duty period

required under this paragraph (b)(1)

may be extended to 14 hours when the

extension is due to operational delays.

(ii) If at least 6 hours notice is given

the scheduled duty period is limited to

no more than 10 hours. The duty period

required under this paragraph (b)(1)

may be extended to 12 hours when the

extension is due to operational delays.

(iii) If at least 4 hours notice is given

the scheduled duty period is limited to

no more than 8 hours. The duty period

required under this paragraph (b)(1)

may be extended to 10 hours when the

extension is due to operational delays.

(iv) If fewer than 4 hours notice is

given the scheduled duty period is

limited to no more than 6 hours. The

duty period required under this

paragraph (b)(1) may be extended to 8

hours when the extension is due to

operational delays.

(2) A certificate holder may assign a

flight crewmember to a reserve

assignment and a flight crewmember

may accept a duty period if, for each 24-

hour period, the flight crewmember

receives at least a regularly scheduled 6-

hour period that is protected from any

contact by the certificate holder. The

hours of the 6-hour protected time

period must be assigned before the flight

crewmember begins the reserve time

assignment and must occur at the same

time during each 24-hour period during

a reserve time assignment. Any duty

period assignment must be scheduled to

be completed within the 18 hour reserve

period. The length of the duty period

and the subsequent rest period must be

in accordance with § 135.263.

§ 135.267 Additional flight crewmember

duty period and flight time scheduling

limitations.

(a) A flight crewmember is not

considered to be scheduled for a duty

period in excess of the scheduled duty

period limitations if the duty periods to

which he or she is assigned are

scheduled and normally terminate

within the limitations, but, due to

operational delays, the flights to which

he or she is assigned are not at block out

time expected to reach their destination

within the scheduled duty period.

However, no air carrier may schedule a

flight crewmember, nor may a flight

crewmember accept a flight that at block

out time would extend the flight

crewmembers scheduled duty period

maximum more than two hours, as

provided in § 135.263.

(b) A flight crewmember is not

considered to be scheduled for flight

time in excess of the flight time

limitations if the flights to which he or

she is assigned are scheduled and

normally terminate within the

limitations, but due to operational

delays are not at block out time

expected to reach their destination

within the scheduled time.

§ 135.269 Weekly and monthly flight

crewmember flight time limitations.

No certificate holder may schedule

any flight crewmember and no flight

crewmember may accept an assignment

for flight time under this part if that

flight crewmember’s total flight time for

a certificate holder under parts 91, 121,

and 135 of this chapter will exceed—

(a) 32 hours in any 7 consecutive

calendar days.

(b) 100 hours in any calendar month.

§ 135.271 Additional flight crewmember

rest requirements.

(a) No certificate holder may assign

any flight crewmember and no flight

crewmember may accept any duty

period or flight time with the certificate

holder unless the flight crewmember

has had at least the minimum rest

required under this subpart.

(b) No certificate holder may assign

any flight crewmember and no flight

crewmember may accept any duty with

the certificate holder during any

required rest period. For example the

flight crewmember may not be required

to contact the certificate holder, answer

the telephone, carry a beeper, remain at

a specific location or in any other way

be responsible to the air carrier during

a rest period.

(c) Rest periods that are required

under this subpart can occur

concurrently with any other rest period.

(d) The reduced rest periods allowed

under § 135.263 may only be used due

to operational delays and may not be

scheduled in advance.

(e) Each certificate holder shall

provide each flight crewmember who is

assigned to one or more duty periods,

standby duty, or reserve time a rest

period of at least 36 consecutive hours

during any 7 consecutive calendar days.

(f) Each certificate holder must

provide each flight crewmember

assigned to assigned time, when the

assigned time is not part of a duty

period, a rest period of at least 10 hours

before the commencement of a

subsequent duty period.

(g) Each certificate holder must

provide each flight crewmember at least

48 consecutive hours of rest upon return

to the flight crewmember’s home base

after completion of one or more duty

periods that terminate in a time zone or

zones that differs from the time zone of

the flight crewmember’s home base by

6 or more hours and the flight

crewmember remains in that time zone

or zones for at least 48 consecutive

hours. The flight crewmember must

receive this rest before beginning a

subsequent duty period. The home base

is determined by the certificate holder

and is where that crewmember is based

and receives schedules.

§ 135.273 Deadhead transportation.

Time spent in transportation, not

local in character, that a certificate

holder requires of a flight crewmember

and provides to transport the

crewmember to an airport at which he

or she is to serve on a flight as a

crewmember, or from an airport at

which he or she was relieved from duty

to return to his or her home station is

not considered part of a rest period. For
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 244 / Wednesday, December 20, 1995 / Proposed Rules 65977

duty period limitation purposes the

certificate holder and flight

crewmember must consider deadhead

time as assigned time or as part of a duty

period associated with flight.

§ 135.275 Duty period and flight time

limitations: Other flying for a certificate

holder.

No flight crewmember who is

employed by a certificate holder

conducting operations under this part

may do any other duty or flying for a

certificate holder conducting operations

under part 121 or part 135 of this

chapter if that duty or flying for a

certificate holder plus his or her duty or

flying under this part will exceed any

duty period or flight time limitation in

this part. This section applies to any

other duty or flying under part 91, part

121, or part 135 of this chapter for a

certificate holder whether the duty or

flying precedes or follows the flight

crewmember’s flying under this part.

§ 135.271 [Redesignated as § 135.277]

10. Section 135.271 is redesignated as

§ 135.277 and revised to read as follows:

§ 135.277 Additional flight crewmember

rest requirements.

(a) No certificate holder may assign

any flight crewmember and no flight

crewmember may accept any duty

period or flight time with the certificate

holder unless the flight crewmember

has had at least the minimum rest

required under this subpart.

(b) No certificate holder may assign

any flight crewmember and no flight

crewmember may accept any duty with

the certificate holder during any

required rest period. For example the

flight crewmember may not be required

to contact the certificate holder, answer

the telephone, carry a beeper, remain at

a specific location or in any other way

be responsible to the air carrier during

a rest period.

(c) Rest periods that are required

under this subpart can occur

concurrently with any other rest period.

(d) The reduced rest periods allowed

under § 135.263 may only be used due

to operational delays and may not be

scheduled in advance.

(e) Each certificate holder shall

provide each flight crewmember who is

assigned to one or more duty periods,

standby duty, or reserve time a rest

period of at least 36 consecutive hours

during any 7 consecutive calendar days.

(f) Each certificate holder must

provide each flight crewmember

assigned to assigned time, when the

assigned time is not part of a duty

period, a rest period of at least 10 hours

before the commencement of a

subsequent duty period.

(g) Each certificate holder must

provide each flight crewmember at least

48 consecutive hours of rest upon return

to the flight crewmember’s home base

after completion of one or more duty

periods that terminate in a time zone or

zones that differs from the time zone of

the flight crewmember’s home base by

6 or more hours and the flight

crewmember remains in that time zone

or zones for at least 48 consecutive

hours. The flight crewmember must

receive this rest before beginning a

subsequent duty period. The home base

is determined by the certificate holder

and is where that crewmember is based

and receives schedules.

Issued in Washington, D.C., on December

11, 1995.

Thomas C. Accardi,

Acting Director, Flight Standards Service.

[FR Doc. 95–30547 Filed 12–14–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 121

[Docket No. 27264]

RIN 2120–AF96

The Age 60 Rule

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Disposition of comments and

notice of agency decisions.

SUMMARY: This action announces FAA’s

decisions on a number of issues

regarding the FAA’s ‘‘Age 60 Rule’’. The

issues include: responding to the

comments requested in 1993 regarding

various aspects of the Age 60 Rule,

including the ‘‘Age 60 Project,

Consolidated Database Experiments,

Final Report’’, and issues raised by

pilots seeking exemptions from the Age

60 Rule, issues raised by a petition for

rulemaking by the Professional Pilots

Federation (PPF), requesting the FAA to

remove the Age 60 Rule.

After review of all comments, studies,

and other pertinent information, the

FAA has determined not to initiate

rulemaking to change the Age 60 Rule

at this time. The FAA also has decided

not to grant any of the pending petitions

for exemption or rulemaking.

ADDRESSES: The complete docket

containing recent comments on the Age

60 Rule, including copies of studies

related to the Age 60 issue, may be

examined at the Federal Aviation

Administration, Office of the Chief

Counsel (AGC–200), Rules Docket,

Room 915–G, 800 Independence

Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591,

weekdays (except Federal holidays)

between 8:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.

Availability of Disposition

Any person may obtain a copy of this

Disposition by submitting a request to

the Federal Aviation Administration,

Office of Public Affairs, Attention:

Public Inquiry Center, APA–220, 800

Independence Avenue, SW.,

Washington, DC 20591, or by calling

(202) 267–3484. Requests should be

identified by the docket number of this

Disposition.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Daniel V. Meier, Jr., AFS–240,

Regulations Branch, Federal Aviation

Administration, 800 Independence

Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591,

Telephone (202) 267–3749 or (202) 267–

8086.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

Section 121.383(c) of the Federal

Aviation Regulations (FAR) (14 CFR

§ 121.383(c)) prohibits any air carrier

from using the services of any person as

a pilot, and prohibits any person from

serving as a pilot, on an airplane

engaged in operations under part 121 if

that person has reached his or her 60th

birthday. The FAA adopted the ‘‘Age 60

Rule’’, as it has come to be known, in

1959 (24 FR 9767, December 5, 1959).

In late 1990, the FAA initiated a study

aimed at consolidating available

accident data and correlating it with the

amount of flying by pilots as a function

of their age. This resulted in a document

entitled ‘‘Age 60 Project, Consolidated

Database Experiments, Final Report’’,

dated March 1993 (the ‘‘Hilton Study’’).

The FAA held a public meeting and

requested comments regarding various

issues related to the Age 60 Rule,

including the Hilton Study (58 FR

21336, April 20, 1993). The FAA has

reviewed the written comments

received in the docket (Docket No.

27264) and to the comments presented

at the public meeting. The FAA is also

responding to a number of pending

petitions from pilots seeking an

exemption from the Age 60 Rule.

Finally, the FAA is responding to a

petition for rulemaking submitted by the

Professional Pilots Federation (PPF).

This document describes the history

and basis for the rule, the major events

during the history of the rule, the FAA’s

response to the issues raised above, and

the FAA’s rationale for maintaining the

Age 60 Rule.

I(a). Basis for the 1959 Rule

The FAA promulgated the Age 60

Rule in 1959 because of concerns that a

hazard to safety was presented by

utilization of aging pilots in air carrier

operations. As noted in that rulemaking,