[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 160 (Friday, August 19, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-20372]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: August 19, 1994]
_______________________________________________________________________
Part VII
Department of Transportation
_______________________________________________________________________
Federal Aviation Administration
_______________________________________________________________________
14 CFR Parts 121, 125, and 135
Flight Attendant Duty Period Limitations and Rest Requirements; Final
Rule
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Parts 121, 125, and 135
[Docket No. 27229; Amendment Nos. 121-241; 125-21; 135-52]
RIN 2120-AE91
Flight Attendant Duty Period Limitations and Rest Requirements
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This final rule sets forth regulations that require air
carriers, air taxi, and commercial operators to provide duty period
scheduling limitations and rest requirements for flight attendants
engaged in air transportation and air commerce. This action results
from public and congressional interest in regulating flight attendant
work hours and from data contained in a Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA) study of industry practice relating to flight attendant flight,
duty, and rest times. This rule contributes to an improved aviation
safety system by providing the opportunity for flight attendants to be
rested sufficiently to perform their routine and emergency safety
duties.
EFFECTIVE DATE: This regulation is effective September 19, 1994, except
Secs. 121.683(a)(1), 135.63(a)(3), 135.63(a)(4)(x), 135.63(a)(5), and
135.63(b) which are not effective until the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) has approved the Paperwork Reduction Requirements. FAA
will publish a document in the Federal Register following OMB approval
of the Paperwork Reduction Requirements.
COMPLIANCE DATE: March 1, 1995.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Donell Pollard, Air Transportation Division, AFS-203, Flight Standards
Service, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) 267-3735.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Availability of the Final Rule
Any person may obtain a copy of this amendment 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 amendment number of this final rule.
Background
Statement of the Problem
Flight attendants are crewmembers who perform essential routine and
emergency safety duties. Routine duties include ensuring that carry-on
baggage is correctly stowed; verifying that exit seating requirements
are met, that passenger seat belts are fastened, and that galley
service times are properly stowed; and conducting passenger briefings
before takeoff. Emergency duties include conducting land and water
evacuations, controlling inflight fires, handling passengers who
threaten the safety of other passengers or the flight, managing medical
emergencies such as passenger illness or injury, managing inflight
emergencies such as smoke or fire in the cabin, and managing turbulent
air penetrations, airplane decompression, and hijackings. Additionally,
because flight attendants are crewmembers performing safety-related
functions, they must satisfactorily complete indoctrination, initial,
transition, and recurrent training requirements. In addition, they are
subject to the alcohol and drug use regulations and drug testing
regulations. Currently, flight attendants are the only safety-sensitive
aviation group that has no regulations with respect to flight, duty, or
rest periods. Such regulations exist for flight crewmembers,
dispatchers, air traffic control tower operators, and aviation
maintenance technicians.
This final rule is comparable to flight, duty, and rest
requirements for other safety-sensitive aviation groups because it
enhances public safety by requiring ``rest periods'' and limiting duty
periods for flight attendants. These requirements protect flight
attendants from work related fatigue that interferes with their ability
to perform essential safety duties. No accident/incident data currently
exists to provide a direct correlation between flight attendant fatigue
and passenger survivability. However, the FAA recognizes that a flight
attendant who is excessively fatigued is less likely to be capable of
performing safety duties than an adequately rested flight attendant.
This is an unacceptable safety risk. Therefore, the FAA adopts this
final rule in the interest of air transportation and air commerce
safety. The justification stated herein includes that which was
included in Notice of Proposed Rulemaking No. 93-3, published in the
Federal Register on March 31, 1993 (58 FR 17024).
Historical Review
In 1985, the FAA received two petitions for rulemaking requesting
limits on flight and duty hours for flight attendants. One petition\1\
sought to establish flight and duty time regulations similar to current
regulations for flight crewmembers. The other petition\2\ recommended
establishing maximum duty time limits and minimum daily, weekly, and
monthly rest periods. Both petitions recommended certain flight time
limitations and rest requirements for flight attendants that were more
restrictive than those that existed for flight crewmembers. The FAA
denied both petitions in a Denial of Petition issued on January 23,
1989, because the action sought by the petitioners was not warranted by
the information, views, and arguments contained in the petitions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\This petition was submitted by the Association of Flight
Attendants and summarized in the Federal Register (50 FR 6185) on
February 14, 1985.
\2\This petition was submitted by the Joint Council of Flight
Attendant Unions and summarized in the Federal Register (50 FR
25252) on June 18, 1985.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Congressional legislation (H.R. 638 and S. 1170) was introduced in
1989 to establish flight attendant duty time limitations. On May 17,
1989, the Subcommittee on Aviation of the House Committee on Public
Works and Transportation held a public hearing on H.R. 638. At the
hearing, the FAA stated its intent to initiate further studies of air
carrier flight attendant scheduling practices.
The FAA completed its ``Report on the Study of Current Industry
Practice-Flight Attendant Flight, Duty, and Rest Times'' on September
12, 1989 (hereafter referred to as ``the Industry Study'' [Docket No.
27229]), and submitted a copy of the study to the House Subcommittee on
Aviation. The study focused on U.S. air carrier scheduling practices
and flight attendant actual work hours and highlighted cases of
extended duty periods and minimum rest periods. The study indicated
that flight attendant duty hour problems may occur more frequently
among certain industry segments because of fundamental operational
differences. The study noted that most air carriers had policies to
address these problems. The study provided a framework for the FAA to
address this issue with appropriate regulatory action, which is
provided in this final rule.
The House Subcommittee on Aviation held another hearing on flight
attendant duty and rest on March 13, 1991. The FAA did not recommend
rulemaking at that hearing. Subsequent legislation on flight attendant
duty and rest, H.R. 14, was passed in the House of Representatives. In
1992, the language of H.R. 14 was incorporated into a provision in the
House and Senate versions of the FAA's appropriations bill; however,
that provision was deleted later by the conference committee. On
January 5, 1993, H.R. 14 was reintroduced in the House of
Representatives.
On March 26, 1993, the FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM), Notice No. 93-3, Flight Attendant Duty Period Limitations and
Rest Requirements (58 FR 17024; March 31, 1993) that proposed duty
period scheduling limitations and rest requirements for flight
attendants engaged in air transportation and air commerce. The FAA has
incorporated into this final rule comments on the NPRM received from
the public during the comment period, as appropriate.
Discussion of Comments
Fifty-one commenters submitted comments in response to the NPRM.
The commenters included trade and professional associations, individual
flight attendants, labor organizations, part 121 and 135 operators,
public interest groups, a government agency, a Member of Congress, and
other individuals. Among the commenters were the Air Line Pilots
Association (ALPA); the Air Transport Association (ATA); the Allied
Pilots Association (APA); the American Cyanamid Company; AMR Combs; the
Coalition of Flight Attendant Unions; Delta Airlines; Great American
Airways; the National Air Carrier Association (NACA); the National
Transportation Safety Board (NTSB); North American Airlines (NAA); the
Regional Airline Association (RAA); Southwest Airlines (SWA); Sun
Country Airlines (SCA); Transport Workers Union Local 556 (TWU Local
556)--Southwest Airlines; and flight attendants, some of whom are
employed by America West Airlines; Continental Airlines, Delta
Airlines, and Sun Country Airlines.
Commenters addressed general and specific issues such as scheduled
versus unscheduled operations; the application of flight crewmember
flight, duty, and rest requirements to flight attendants; rest period
requirements; duty period requirements; augmented crew requirements;
reserve and deadhead status for flight attendants; flight attendant
responsibility; the costs contained in the initial regulatory
evaluation; and the implementation period for this final rule.
Commenters also addressed the issues of flight attendant fatigue, the
Industry Study, international versus domestic operations, part 125
operations, and flight attendant duty limitations and rest regulations
in other nations.
Overview of the General Issues
Thirty-nine comments addressed the concept of regulating flight
attendant duty period limitations and minimum ``rest period''
requirements. Fourteen comments did not support establishing flight
attendant duty period limitations and rest requirements while 18
comments did support establishing such limits and requirements based on
certain revisions to the proposed rule.
The commenters who supported regulating flight attendant duty
period limitations and rest requirements included ALPA, APA, The
Coalition of Flight Attendant Unions, NTSB, nine commenters who
identified themselves as flight attendants, and a member of Congress
who strongly supports the comments of the Coalition of Flight Attendant
Unions. The commenters stated that, because a flight attendant's
primary duties are safety related, establishing regulations would
enhance public safety.
The 14 commenters who did not support the NPRM include Great
American Airways, RAA, SCA, and nine commenters who identified
themselves as flight attendants. Several of the commenters who
identified themselves as flight attendants stated that the provisions
in the NPRM would limit a flight attendant's opportunities to work
extra trips and that flight attendants are capable of handling safety
procedures and emergencies even when working longer duty periods.
Specific Issues
Apply Flight Crewmember Flight, Duty, and Rest Requirements to Flight
Attendants
In the NPRM, the FAA invited comments on the possibility of
modifying the proposed rule, as presented in the NPRM, to add an option
for operators to either follow the proposed duty limitations and rest
requirements or apply flight crewmember flight, duty, and rest
requirements to flight attendants.
Eleven commenters responded to the FAA's request for comments.
Seven of the commenters supported the option to permit operators to
either follow the proposed duty limitations and rest requirements or
apply flight crewmember requirements to flight attendants. Three
commenters opposed the option. Although Delta Air Lines did not oppose
the option, it expressed no interest in exercising the option.
ATA, Great American Airways, NACA, RAA, and Southwest Airlines
agreed that operators should be permitted to apply flight crewmember
requirements to flight attendants. ATA specified that applying flight
crewmember requirements should remain an option at the operator's
discretion. Great American Airways, Horizon Air, NACA, RAA, and
Southwest Airlines noted that there are scheduling and economic
advantages to using the same set of rules of flight crewmembers and
flight attendants.
The Coalition of Flight Attendant Unions and SCA opposed
establishing the option to permit operators to apply flight crewmember
flight, duty, and rest requirements to flight attendants. The Coalition
of Flight Attendants Unions stated that flight crewmember rules do not
provide adequate protection from fatigue. SCA noted that, if this
option had been a requirement in 1992, SCA would have had to hire an
additional 20 flight attendants. According to SCA, the cost burden of
hiring 20 flight attendants would have increased SCA domestic operating
costs by $1.75 million.
FAA Response
The FAA recognizes that giving operators the option to apply flight
crewmember flight, duty, and rest requirements to flight attendants
provides additional scheduling flexibility and eliminates the need for
an operator to have two sets of scheduling requirements for its flight
crewmembers and flight attendants. This provision also will permit
flight attendants on such operations to be scheduled with the same
limitations as the flight crewmembers. Therefore, the FAA has adopted
this option, which appears in Secs. 121.467(c) and 135.273(c) of this
final rule.
If an operator chooses to apply flight crewmember flight, duty, and
rest requirements to flight attendants, the operator must establish
written procedures for applying the requirements and the procedures
must be approved by the Administrator and referenced in the certificate
holder's operations specifications. The written procedures must apply
to all flight attendants used in the certificate holders operation. In
addition, written procedures must be applied to the certificate
holder's entire operation. Certificate holders may obtain approval by
submitting their procedures for preliminary review and approval to the
principal operations inspectors assigned to them at the FAA Flight
Standards District Offices that are charged with the overall inspection
of their operations. This approval process is similar to those used for
exit seating and passenger carry-on baggage requirements. Because
flight crewmember regulations were designed specifically for pilots,
FAA approval is required to ensure that flight crewmember rules are
adequately applied to flight attendants. In addition, the written
procedures for domestic, flag, and supplemental air carriers and for
commercial operators must apply the flight crewmember limitations
contained in subparts Q, R, or S of part 121, except for the provisions
for on-board rest facilities, as appropriate to the operation being
conducted. Therefore, operators must consider the type of operation
being conducted for each flight segment when scheduling flight
attendants according to the option.
In addition, the written procedures for establishing duty period
limitations and rest requirements for operators certificated under part
135 must include the limitations contained in subpart F, except for
provisions for on-board rest facilities, as appropriate to the
operation being conducted. Part 121 and 135 certificate holders are
required to provide flight attendants on aircraft with certain
passenger seating configurations in accordance with Secs. 121.391,
135.107, or the certificate holder's operations specifications, as
appropriate. The number of flight attendants required on an aircraft to
meet the provisions of Secs. 121.391, 135.107, or the certificate
holder's operations specifications, whichever is greater, is referred
to as the minimum flight attendant crew complement.
Any operator that elects the option to apply flight crewmember
flight, duty, and rest requirements to flight attendants and has
established written procedures for augmenting the minimum flight
crewmember complement must establish procedures for augmenting the
minimum flight attendant complement. The augmenting procedures must be
based on the number of flight crewmembers assigned to the flight that
is in addition to the minimum flight crewmember complement as specified
in the aircraft type certificate data sheet. For example, if the
minimum flight crewmember complement on a Boeing 747-300 is three, as
specified in the aircraft type certificate data sheet, an operator that
schedules four flight crewmembers for an extended long-range flight
will be required to schedule one flight attendant in addition to the
minimum flight attendant crew complement that is required by
Secs. 121.391, 135.107, or the certificate holder's operations
specifications. For example, if the operations specifications for a
certain airplane requires 8 flight attendants, and if the operator adds
1 flight crewmember, that operator would be required to add 1
additional flight attendant, for a total of 9 flight attendants.
In addition, any operator that elects the option of applying the
flight crewmember flight, duty, and rest requirements to flight
attendants, must ensure that the definition of ``rest period'' in this
final rule is applied to those flight attendants. (See the detailed
discussion on ``Rest Period Requirements'' and ``Reserve Status, Stand-
by Status, or Similar Assignments'' in this final rule.)
Under the provision for applying flight crewmember flight, duty,
and rest requirements to flight attendants, if the Administrator finds
that revisions to the written procedures are necessary for the
continued adequacy of the procedures for applying flight crewmember
flight, duty, and rest requirements to flight attendants, the
Administrator will require the operator to make necessary changes
within 30 days after being notified by the Administrator. In addition,
an operator may petition the Administrator to reconsider the notice to
change the procedures.
This procedure for requiring changes is consistent with the current
regulatory language for aircraft inspection programs and pilot training
programs contained in Secs. 91.415 and 121.405, respectively, as well
as a number of other regulations.
Any operator that establishes written procedures to apply the
flight crewmember flight, duty, and rest requirements to flight
attendants and that subsequently wishes to revise this practice and
schedule flight attendants according to the duty period limitations and
rest requirements in Secs. 121.467 or 135.273 must amend their
operations specifications in accordance with Secs. 121.79(c) and
135.17(b). These sections require a certificate holder to file an
application for an amendment of operations specifications at least 15
days before the effective date proposed by the applicant for the
amendment, unless a shorter filing period is approved by the Flight
Standards District Office charged with the overall inspection of the
certificate holder.
Unscheduled Operations
The NPRM proposed duty period limitations and rest requirements for
flight attendants in all domestic, flag, supplemental, and commercial
operations conducted under part 121 and part 125, and in all operations
conducted under part 135. No new requirements for operations conducted
under part 91 were proposed. The FAA received comments from part 121
and 135 operators about the applicability of the proposed requirements
to certain unscheduled operations. Those commenters included AMR Combs,
ATA, American Cyanamid Company, Delta Airlines, Great American Airways,
North American Airlines, and Southwest Airlines.
ATA, Delta Airlines, North American Airlines, and Southwest
Airlines said that the proposed duty period limitations and rest
requirements should not apply to military flights, e.g., Civil Reserve
Air Fleet (CRAF) and Military Airlift Command (MAC). ATA and Southwest
Airlines also said that special charters for sports teams should be
excluded from duty period limitations and rest requirements. Commenters
stated that because of the short notification associated with military
and special charters it would not be possible to obtain a waiver from
the regulation to conduct them. North American Airlines stated that the
proposed requirements should not apply to flights flown to remote
destinations on a weekly or ad hoc basis.
AMR Combs and American Cyanamid Company believe that the proposed
requirements should not apply to operations that do not require a
flight attendant. AMR Combs stated that many unscheduled operators do
not employ full-time flight attendants and that a flight attendant may
serve more than one certificate holder.
FAA Response
In response to commenters who stated that the proposed duty period
limitations and rest requirements should not apply to military flights
and special charters, this final rule does not except military or
special charter operations from duty period limitations and rest
requirements. If a certificate holder chooses to apply the flight
crewmember flight, duty, and rest time limitations option to flight
attendants when conducting military and special charter flights to
retain operational flexibility by scheduling the flight attendants with
the flight crewmembers, Secs. 121.467(c) and 135.272(c) require that
the flight crewmember flight, duty, and rest requirements option be
applied to all flight operations conducted by the certificate holder.
In response to AMR Combs and American Cyanamid Company, the FAA
agrees with these commenters. The final rule will not apply to those
operations where flight attendants are not required. However, all
flight attendants who are assigned to duties in an aircraft for
operations that require a flight attendant, including flight attendants
in excess of the minimum flight attendant crew complement, are subject
to duty limitations and rest requirements.
For example, an operator conducting operations on an aircraft with
19 passenger seats or less, which does not require a flight attendant
under Sec. 135.107, will not be required to meet flight attendant duty
period limitations and rest requirements for flights conducted on that
aircraft. However, if the operator's operations specifications state
that the operator will provide a flight attendant for flights on that
aircraft, then the operation does require a flight attendant.
Therefore, for any flight attendant assigned to flight duties on that
aircraft the certificate holder is required to meet the duty period
limitations and rest requirements of Sec. 135.273.
Duty Period Limitations
The NPRM proposed limiting flight attendant duty periods. Proposed
Secs. 121.466(a) and 135.273(a) defined a 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 NPRM
proposed that the time be calculated using either Coordinated Universal
Time or the local time of the flight attendant's home base.
Eleven commenters submitted comments supporting or recommending
revisions to this proposed definition.
Delta Air Lines, Southwest Air Lines, and TWU Local 556 agreed with
the FAA's proposed definition.
ALPA, APA, and the Coalition of Flight Attendant Unions stated that
duty periods should include non-flight duties. ALPA noted that ground
duties can be as fatiguing as flight duties. The Coalition of Flight
Attendant Unions recommended that the definition of a duty period be
replaced with: ``Any continuous period during which a flight attendant
is required to carry out any task associated with the business of an
aircraft operator.''
To ensure that the definition of duty period explicitly excludes
reserve status, ATA recommended that the following phrase be added to
the definition of duty period: ```Duty period' does not include time
when a flight attendant is on reserve status assignment, free of any
specifically assigned duties other than to report for a flight
assignment within a specified period of time, pursuant to a collective
bargaining agreement or company work rules.''
In addition to receiving comments on the definition of a duty
period, the FAA also received comments on the duty period limitations
proposed in the NPRM. The NPRM proposed to limit flight attendant duty
periods based on the length of the duty period, the number of flight
attendants assigned to a crew, and the amount of rest following the
duty period. The proposed rule contained provisions (proposed
Secs. 121.466(b) and 135.273(b)) to prohibit an operator from assigning
a flight attendant to a scheduled duty period of more than 14 hours
unless certain conditions are met. An operator would be allowed to
assign a flight attendant to a scheduled duty period up to 20 hours, if
the operator: (1) Assigns flight attendants in addition to the minimum
flight attendant complement; and (2) schedules an extended rest period
following the duty period.
Thirteen commenters submitted comments on issues pertaining to
flight attendant duty period limits. The comments addressed the use of
``scheduled'' versus ``actual'' duty periods, addressed the effect of
the proposed duty limits on unscheduled operators, made recommendations
to the proposals, and provided proposed duty period limits.
The Coalition of Flight Attendant Unions, Southwest Airlines, and
TWU Local 556 addressed the use of ``scheduled'' duty periods as
opposed to ``actual'' duty periods. Southwest Airlines and TWU Local
556 agreed that the proposed duty period limitations should be
``scheduled,'' not ``actual.'' TWU Local 556 stated that, if this
flexibility is not retained, the following would occur: (1) Flight
attendants would be replaced after 14 hours of actual duty, which
inconveniences passengers and causes delays because of the need to
locate crew replacements; (2) reserves would be placed at out stations;
(3) crews would be rerouted to cover flights that the original crews
cannot perform; (4) flight attendants would lose days off and have
their schedules disrupted; (5) additional costs for crews and stranded
passengers would be incurred; and (6) aircraft repositioning would be
required. However, the Coalition stated that there is no justification
for having no limit on actual hours and added that the actual number of
flight attendant duty hours per day needs to be limited.
AMR Combs stated that scheduled duty period limitations should
apply only to scheduled operations with more than 19 passenger seats.
Four commenters, including NAA, recommended revisions to the
proposed duty period limitations. NAA recommended that a layover of 4
to 5 hours during which a hotel room is provided should not count as
duty time. Other comments recommended limiting duty to: (1) 16 hours in
24 hours with 11 hours of flight time in domestic operations; (2) 30
hours in 5 days; (3) 16 hours with no more than 10 hours of flight
time; or (4) 12 hours for flights with multiple stops.
The Coalition of Flight Attendant Unions submitted an alternative
proposal to the NPRM that included duty period limitations. This
alternative divided duty period limitations according to domestic,
international, and long-range flights. The Coalition's alternative
proposed to limit: (1) Scheduled duty periods on domestic flights to no
more than 14 hours and actual duty periods to 15 hours; (2) scheduled
duty periods on international flights to no more than 16 hours and
actual duty periods to 17 hours; and (3) actual duty periods on long-
range flights to no more than 4 hours greater than the scheduled duty
time, not to exceed 20 hours. The Coalition distinguished between
domestic and international duty periods and stated that it reluctantly
includes a 20-hour duty period for long range international flights to
accommodate new generation aircraft, but only if additional rest is
provided.
FAA Response
In establishing duty period limitations, the FAA has considered a
variety of alternatives submitted by commenters, including the
proposals to set different limits for different types of operations. In
an effort to establish requirements that are conducive to safety and
compatible with air carrier operations, the FAA also has reviewed
current industry practices used to schedule flight attendants. To
provide the least complicated method of establishing effective
limitations for scheduling duty periods for flight attendants, the FAA
has decided to adopt the scheduled duty period limitations as proposed,
with a slight modification that distinguishes cosmetic and
international scheduled duty periods.
The FAA has revised the definition of a duty period in this final
rule to state that the time is calculated using Coordinated Universal
Time or local time to reflect the total elapsed time. The phrase ``or
the local time of the flight attendants's home base'' was replaced with
``or local time'' to be consistent with the definition of a calendar
day. The FAA has determined that any time zone can be used, as long as
the operator is consistent.
Duty period limitations are established to enhance the safety of
the flying public by ensuring that flight attendants do not become
overly fatigued during flight assignments. In addition, the duty period
limitations are designed to suit all operations that require flight
attendants without imposing a significant burden on operators.
In response to the Coalition of Flight Attendant Unions, the final
rule does not provide actual duty period limitations because such
provisions may unreasonably reduce operational flexibility. However,
the final rule requires that a flight attendant ``be given'' a
scheduled rest period between scheduled duty periods, i.e., rest
periods must be provided. Because duty periods are scheduled in
combination with actual rest periods, the objective of ensuring the
flight attendants are provided an opportunity to be rested will be met.
After further review of the Coalition comments and an analysis of
flight schedules, the FAA finds that scheduled duty periods of
operations wholly within the 48 contiguous states and the District of
Columbia should not be allowed to exceed 18 hours. The FAA is not aware
of any scheduled duty periods for these operations that currently do
exceed 18 hours. However, duty periods that contain one or more flights
that land or take off outside the contiguous 48 states and the District
of Columbia may extend up to 20 hours, provided that an extended rest
period is scheduled following the duty period and that additional
flight attendants are assigned to each flight segment in the duty
period. This provision will allow air carriers to conduct extended
long-range operations with new generation aircraft. Moreover, sections
121.467(b)(14) and 135.273(b)(14) will allow a flight attendant for a
domestic air carrier to continue on duty beyond the time when duty
would normally terminate, if circumstances exist that are unanticipated
and beyond the control of the air carrier such as adverse whether
conditions). This same exception will apply to flag and supplemental
operations.
A duty period as defined in this final rule means the period of
elapsed time between reporting for an assignment involving flight time
and release from that assignment. In response to ATA's recommendation
that the definition of a duty period should state that a duty period
does not include the time when a flight attendant is assigned to
reserve status, the FAA refers to the definition of a duty period in
Secs. 121.467(a) and 135.273(a) of the final rule, which indicates that
a duty period does not begin until a flight attendant reports for an
assignment involving flight time. Reserve status is discussed in
further detail under the heading ``Reserve Status, Stand-by Status, or
Similar Assignments.''
In response to NAA, all duty period assignments, including those
assignments with a 4- to 5-hour break in duty at a hotel, must be
assigned within duty period limitations and must meet minimum rest
requirements. The FAA would not consider this to be a break in, or
cessation of, the duty period.
In response to AMR Combs, this final rule applies to operations,
both scheduled and unscheduled, that require flight attendants.
Therefore, operators are not required to meet duty period limitations
and rest requirements of this final rule for operations that do not
require a flight attendant.
Duty Period Following Reduced Rest
Sections 121.466(i) and 135.273(i) of the NPRM proposed that an
operator be permitted to reduce a 12-hour rest period to 10 hours
following a duty period of more than 14 hours. In conjunction with this
proposed provision, the FAA also proposed Secs. 121.466(j) and
135.273(j), which would limit the scheduled duty period following a 10-
hour reduced rest period to less than 14 hours.
ATA, Delta Air Lines, and NACA submitted comments on limiting duty
periods following reduced rest. The commenters recommended that the FAA
permit an operator to schedule a 16-hour duty period following a
reduced rest period of 10 hours. ATA noted that this flexibility is
needed for international operations.
Delta Air Lines also recommended that the phrase ``14 or more
hours'' appearing in proposed Secs. 121.466(j) and 135.273(j) be
replaced with ``no more than 14 hours.'' Delta noted that the proposal
would limit the duty period following reduced rest to 13 hours 59
minutes.
FAA Response
Sections 121.467(b)(9) and 135.273(b)(9) of the final rule adopt
the provisions as proposed in Secs. 121.466(j) and 135.273(j) of the
NPRM, except that the provisions are revised, in response to Delta
Airlines' comment, so that an operator may not schedule a flight
attendant for a duty period of more than 14 hours following reduced
rest. This revision permits an operator to assign a flight attendant to
a duty period of up to and including 14 hours following a reduced rest
period of 10 hours.
The FAA does not agree with those commenters that state that an
operator should be allowed to schedule a 16-hour duty period following
a reduced rest period of 10 hours. This was not proposed in the notice
as it might promote problems of cumulative fatigue.
Duty Time That Exceeds Scheduled Duty Time When Beyond the Certificate
Holder's Control
Sections 121.466(o) and 135.273(o) proposed that a flight attendant
would not be considered scheduled for duty in excess of duty time
limitations if the flights to which the flight attendant is assigned
are scheduled and normally terminate within the limitations but,
because of circumstances beyond the control of the domestic, flag, or
supplemental air carrier or commercial operator (such as adverse
weather conditions), are not at the time of departure expected to reach
their destination within the scheduled time.
ALPA, APA, the Coalition of Flight Attendant Unions, Southwest
Airlines, and TWU Local 556 commented on this provision.
ALPA and APA stated that the maximum duty period limit should not
be exceeded by more than 2 additional hours regardless of circumstances
beyond the control of the operator.
The Coalition of Flight Attendant Unions stated that this provision
is unacceptable. The Coalition further stated that operators consider
all delays outside their control.
Southwest Airlines and TWU Local 556 stated that this provision
should apply to a flight attendant who is reassigned after reporting
for work and the reassignment is beyond the operator's control.
FAA Response
The FAA has adopted this provision as proposed so that air carriers
will not be penalized for operational delays such as those due to
weather and air traffic control. The FAA recognizes that delays are
costly and that operators avoid delays whenever possible. Sections
121.467(b)(14) and 135.273(b)(14) of this final rule apply to flights
that are assigned and scheduled and that normally terminate within
allowable duty limitations. However, this provision does not apply to
operational delays relating to flight attendant staffing problems. A
flight attendant's duty period begins when the flight attendant reports
for a flight assignment and ends when the flight attendant is released
by the air carrier. Changes to a flight attendant's schedule after a
duty period begins must be made in accordance with the duty period
limitations and rest requirements set forth in this final rule. In
addition, if a flight attendant reports for duty and is later
reassigned, the scheduled duty time before reassignment must be counted
as part of the total duty period.
Example: A flight attendant is scheduled for a 13-hour duty period
on flight staffed with the minimum cabin crew complement. The duty
period consists of two flight segments--a flight from New York to
Frankfurt followed by a flight from Frankfurt to Rome. Because of
adverse weather conditions, the flight leaving New York is delayed 2
hours, causing the flight attendant's duty period to exceed the
scheduled 14-hour duty period limitation. Although it is apparent at
the time of departure that the flight attendant's duty period will
exceed 14 hours, completion of the assignment will still comply with
duty period limitations, because the flight attendant was scheduled and
assigned to flights that normally terminate within the allowable duty
period limitations.
However, if, for example, the flight attendant is reassigned in
Frankfurt to a flight to Athens, the flight attendant's revised
scheduled duty period cannot exceed a total of 14 scheduled hours,
unless the flight attendant crew is augmented in accordance with
Secs. 121.467 (b)(4), (b)(5), or (b)(6), as appropriate, and each
flight attendant is given the minimum required rest. The flight
attendant's duty period did not start over in Frankfurt because of the
reassignment.
Rest Period Requirements
The FAA received numerous comments on issues related to the rest
requirements proposed in the NPRM. Commenters addressed issues
including the definition of a rest period, scheduled rest versus actual
rest, minimum rest, reduced rest, subsequent rest, relief from duty in
air transportation and air commerce for 24 consecutive hours of rest in
any 7 consecutive calendar days, and on-board rest requirements.
The NPRM defined a rest period as the period when a flight
attendant is free of all restraint or duty for a domestic, flag, or
supplemental air carrier or commercial operator and is free of all
responsibility for work or duty should the occasion arise. ATA, the
Coalition of Flight Attendant Unions, and Southwest Airlines
recommended revisions to the definition of rest period. The comments
submitted by ATA and the Coalition of Flight Attendant Unions addressed
reserve status in their recommended definitions of rest. Southwest
Airlines stated that the definition of rest period should be defined as
actual hours of rest, not scheduled hours of rest. Two commenters,
including Delta Airlines, agreed with the definition of rest period as
proposed in the NPRM.
The NPRM proposed requirements for scheduling rest and reduced rest
periods. Sections 121.466 (c) and (h) and 135.273 (c) and (h) of the
NPRM proposed requiring that a flight attendant scheduled for 14 hours
or less of duty be given 9 consecutive hours of rest, and that a flight
attendant scheduled for more than 14 hours but less than 20 hours be
given 12 consecutive hours of rest. Proposed Secs. 121.466 (d) and (i)
and 135.273 (d) and (i) proposed permitting an air carrier or
commercial operator to reduce these rest periods to 8 and 10
consecutive hours, respectively. Three commenters (Southwest Airlines,
TWU Local 556, and TWU of America) supported the minimum rest
requirements proposed in the NPRM and also indicated that the rest
requirements should not be increased.
The RAA expressed concern that the requirement to provide 9 hours
of rest for duty periods of more than 14 hours implies that a flight
attendant who reports for a flight that is canceled is required to
receive 9 hours of rest before the next duty period begins.
Commenters, including APA and individual flight attendants,
indicated that the actual time available for rest during a rest period
is often less than the scheduled rest period and may be as much as 2 to
3\1/2\ hours less than the number of hours scheduled in the rest
period. The commenters stated that this often occurs because of time
lost due to assisting passengers in deplaning, travel to and from a
rest facility, and other activities such as eating. One commenter
stated that it may take 35 minutes to 1 hour for passengers to deplane,
for the crew to gather its belongings, and for travel to the hotel; 1
hour to eat; and 1 to 1\1/2\ hours to prepare for duty again and travel
back to the airport.
The FAA received several alternatives to the proposed rest
requirements. APA recommended that a flight attendant scheduled for a
duty period of 14 hours or less be given a scheduled rest period of at
least 10 consecutive hours. The rest period could be reduced but not
scheduled as a reduced rest period as long as the rest period is
reasonably calculated to provide 8 consecutive hours at a suitable rest
facility and the flight attendant is provided a subsequent rest period
of at least 11 consecutive hours. Under the APA proposal, scheduled
rest periods and reduced rest periods would have to occur during the
24-hour period preceding the scheduled end of a duty period. APA
recommended that a flight attendant scheduled for a duty period of more
than 14 hours but no more than 18 hours be given a scheduled rest
period of at least 12 consecutive hours. This rest period could not be
reduced and must occur after the completion of the scheduled duty
period and immediately prior to the commencement of the subsequent duty
period. The Coalition of Flight Attendant Unions proposed rest
requirements based on domestic and international operations (see the
discussion of Domestic and International Operations). The Coalition of
Flight Attendant Unions' proposal recommended a minimum of 10 hours of
rest following domestic flights, 12 hours of rest following
international flights, and a rest period equal to twice the scheduled
flight time for long-range international flights. The Coalition of
Flight Attendant Unions' proposal did not include a provision for
reduced rest. RAA requested that minimum rest requirements for flight
attendants be aligned with flight crewmember requirements. One
commenter suggested that a rest period should be at least 9\1/2\ hours
at a hotel or 12 hours from the time of release to the beginning of the
next report. Another commenter stated that the proposed minimum
subsequent rest is satisfactory for domestic flights but not realistic
for international flights. The commenter suggested that the rest period
following international flights should be 24 hours.
Several commenters recommended that the FAA establish provisions
for on-board rest. APA recommended that a domestic, flag, or
supplemental air carrier or commercial operator be permitted to assign
a flight attendant to a scheduled duty period of more than 14 hours,
but no more than 16 hours, if the inflight duties assigned to flight
attendants by the air carrier or commercial operator were such that
each of the cabin crew could be free of all duty for ``25 percent of
the scheduled block time less 1 hour.'' APA stated that reclining seats
suitable for rest reserved for 25 percent of the assigned attendant
complement would have to be available throughout the flight. APA also
recommended that a domestic, flag, or supplemental air carrier or
commercial operator be permitted to assign a flight attendant to a
scheduled duty period of more than 16 hours, but no more than 18 hours,
if the inflight duties assigned to flight attendants by the air carrier
or commercial operator were such that each of the cabin crew could be
free of all duty for ``33 percent of the scheduled block time less 1
hour.'' APA added that reclining seats suitable for rest reserved for
33 percent of the assigned attendant complement would have to be
available throughout the flight. The Coalition of Flight Attendant
Unions recommended that a flight attendant be provided at least 1 hour
of continuous rest for any flight segment scheduled for 8 or more hours
of flight time, and that a passenger seat or bunk be assigned for crew
rest.
FAA Response
This final rule adopts the definition of rest period and the
minimum rest requirements as proposed in the NPRM. The FAA has
considered the various rest requirement alternatives proposed by
commenters and has determined that the rest requirements proposed in
the NPRM and adopted in this final rule are adequate to ensure that
flight attendants are provided the opportunity to be sufficiently
rested to perform their routine and emergency safety duties without
imposing a significant burden on operators. A discussion of the
comments recommending that reserve status be addressed in the
definition of rest is contained under the heading, ``Reserve Status,
Stand-by Status, or Similar Assignments.''
In response to Southwest Airlines' comment that rest should be
``actual'' hours of rest and not ``scheduled,'' the FAA considers that
the opportunity to rest, as provided by the rest period, to be
``actual'' rest. As proposed in the NPRM, this final rule requires that
a flight attendant ``be given'' a scheduled rest period. This provision
makes the operator responsible for ensuring that a flight attendant is
scheduled for and receives the scheduled rest period. The FAA
recognizes that how the flight attendant utilizes this rest period
cannot be regulated. Requiring operators to schedule rest periods
ensures that flight attendants know in advance when rest periods will
occur and that they will be of a specified duration.
A minimum rest period of 9 consecutive hours is required for all
duty period assignments of 14 hours or less, unless the rest period is
reduced in accordance with Sec. 121.467(b)(3) or Sec. 135.273(b)(3). A
flight attendant who reports for duty to find that the flight has been
canceled would have begun a duty period and would require minimum rest.
However, in response to RAA's concern, a carrier could either keep the
flight attendant on duty for reassignment or release the flight
attendant for a complete rest period.
Rest periods are required to occur between the completion of a
scheduled duty period and the commencement of a subsequent duty period.
Consequently, this final rule does not require that a required rest
period be given immediately prior to a flight assignment. Because duty
periods are defined as assignments involving flight time, a rest period
is not required following assignments that do not involve flight time,
such as training or ground duty assignments.
In response to commenters who indicated that the actual time
available to rest is typically less than scheduled rest, the FAA
considers a flight attendant to be free of all restraint or duty upon
release from an assignment involving flight time. The FAA understands
that the time available for sleep during a rest period may vary
depending on the amount of time a flight attendant spends in other
activities during the rest period. The FAA also recognizes that it
cannot compel a flight attendant to use rest periods for actual rest.
Additionally, this final rule regulates the frequency and duration
of required rest periods. This final rule does not regulate the quality
of rest facilities nor does it require certificate holders to provide
on-board rest for flight attendants.
Reduced Rest
Sections 121.466 (d) and (i) and 135.273 (d) and (i) of the NPRM
included provisions for operators to schedule 8-hour and 10-hour
reduced rest periods in conjunction with certain scheduled duty period
limitations. ALPA stated that a rest period should never be scheduled
for less than 10 consecutive hours. However, ALPA believes that it may
be permissible for an operator to reduce a rest period to less than 10
hours because of circumstances beyond the control of the certificate
holder. APA opposed the concept of reduced rest and stated that an air
carrier or commercial operator should not be permitted to schedule a
reduced rest period.
FAA Response
The FAA has adopted the reduced rest provisions as proposed. This
final rule permits an air carrier or commercial operator to schedule a
flight attendant for reduced rest. However, no flight attendant will
receive a rest period of less than 8 hours. This provision enables
operators to retain a certain degree of scheduling flexibility. The
reduced rest provision is adopted in conjunction with the requirement
to schedule a longer rest period subsequent to an 8- or 10-hour reduced
rest period. Together, these provisions prevent a flight attendant from
being assigned two consecutive reduced minimum rest periods and are
designed to protect flight attendants by minimizing the effects of
cumulative fatigue.
24-Consecutive-Hour Rest Period During Any 7 Consecutive Calendar Days
Sections 121.466(n) and 135.273(n) of the NPRM proposed that a
certificate holder be required to relieve a flight attendant engaged in
air transportation or air commerce from all further duty for at least
24 consecutive hours during any 7 consecutive calendar days. For
convenience, hereafter, this requirement will be referred to as the 24-
hour-in-7-day rest requirement. Proposed Secs. 121.466(a) and
135.273(a) of the NPRM defined 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. Labor organizations, operators, and
an association commented on the proposed 24-hour-in-7-day rest
requirement.
Several of the comments submitted included discussion of the term
``calendar day.'' ATA stated that the term ``calendar day'' is
confusing because it is unclear on which day an assignment begins or
ends. APA stated that the term calendar day should specify that the
local time used is that of the flight attendant's home base. In the
Coalition of Flight Attendant Unions' alternative to the NPRM, the
Coalition deleted the definition of the term ``calendar day'' but
retained the provision for 24 consecutive hours of rest in 7
consecutive calendar days.
ATA and Delta Air Lines recommended that the FAA revise the
proposed 24-hour-in-7-day rest requirement by replacing the phrase
``every 7 consecutive calendar days'' with the phrase ``every 168-
consecutive-hour period.''
Southwest Airlines and TWU Local 556 requested that the final rule
permit a flight attendant to voluntarily waive the 24-hour-in-7-day
rest requirement in order to be able to work extra hours. Southwest
Airlines states that, if flight attendants cannot waive this provision,
Southwest would be required to hire an additional 100 flight attendants
at an initial cost of $710,000 and an annual recurring cost of
$660,000. TWU Local 556 stated that they applied this provision to a
sample of 13 flight attendant schedules for February 1993. According to
TWU Local 556, if the 13 flight attendants were not permitted to fly
their schedule, which had been altered to include extra flights, each
flight attendant would have lost $11,063 in extra annual income. The
total lost income for 2,200 flight attendants would be $24 million.
ATA and Delta Air Lines recommended that the FAA include a
provision in the final rule similar to a statement included in the
preamble to the NPRM that indicated that the requirement for a 24-
consecutive-hour rest period in any 7 consecutive calendar days could
be postponed under certain circumstances.
AMR Combs and American Cyanamid Company noted that current
Secs. 135.267(f) and 135.269(d) require unscheduled operators to
provide flight crewmembers with at least 13 rest periods of at least 24
consecutive hours in each calendar quarter. AMR Combs stated that the
24-hour-in-7-day rest requirement proposed in the NPRM only should
apply to scheduled operations. American Cyanamid Company suggested that
flight attendants could be required to meet pilot weekly rest
requirements as an alternative.
Other comments submitted included: (1) A recommendation by TWU
Local 556 that the FAA could require four 24-hour breaks in 30 days or
require a 12-hour rest preceding the seventh duty day; and (2) a
Carnival Airlines flight service schedule indicating that a flight
attendant had been scheduled for 11 consecutive days of duty without
receiving a 24-consecutive-hour rest period.
FAA Response
The 24-hour-in-7-day rest requirement is designed to supplement
daily rest requirements and to ensure that flight attendants receive
the opportunity to obtain adequate rest. The FAA proposed the
definition of a calendar day to provide a unit of measure that could be
used to determine whether the 24-hour-in-7-day rest requirement is met.
In response to ATA's concern that the term ``calendar day'' causes
confusion, the FAA refers to the definition of ``calendar day'' in
Secs. 121.467(a) and 135.273(a) of the final rule, which indicates that
a calendar day begins at midnight and ends 24 hours later at the next
midnight. ``Seven consecutive calendar days'' as used in Secs. 121.467
and 135.273 of this final rule means a period of 7 consecutive days
beginning at midnight on the first day and ending at midnight 7 days
later. In response to APA's recommendation that the definition of
calendar day specify that the local time be that of the flight
attendant's home base, the FAA has determined that any time zone can be
used to determine whether the 24-hour-in-7-day rest requirement is met,
as long as the carrier is consistent. In other words, a certificate
holder may not manipulate the use of time zones when calculating 7
consecutive calendar days so as to vary the number of hours that
comprise any 7 consecutive calendar days.
The FAA has considered the commenters' request to replace the
proposed 7 consecutive calendar days with a 168-consecutive-hour
period. The FAA notes that the NPRM used language consistent with the
language contained in the current flight crewmember flight time
limitations rule. The FAA has decided that it should not introduce at
this final rule stage an inconsistency between the flight crewmember
flight time limitations rule language and the flight attendant duty
period limitations and rest requirements rule language. The FAA will
consider whether rulemaking should be initiated to replace 7
consecutive calendar days with 168-consecutive-hours.
The FAA has reviewed requests to permit flight attendants to
voluntarily waive the 24-hour-in-7-day rest requirement. The FAA has
not included that alternative in this final rule because the purpose of
requiring 24 consecutive hours free from duty in any 7 consecutive
calendar days is to ensure that flight attendants receive the
opportunity to obtain adequate rest. As with rest requirements
following reduced rest, the requirement for 24 consecutive hours of
rest in any 7 consecutive calendar days is designed to protect flight
attendants by minimizing the effects of cumulative fatigue.
In response to comments received from ATA and Delta Airlines, the
FAA has determined that it is not necessary to include in this final
rule provisions for permitting the 24-hour-in-7-day rest requirement to
be delayed. This final rule imposes restrictions for flight attendants
that parallel the restrictions that currently exist for flight
crewmembers. The absence of provisions to permit the 24-hour-in-7-day
rest requirement to be delayed does not preclude a flight attendant
from completing a duty period assignment that has extended into the
seventh calendar day because of a delay that is beyond the control of
the operator. In addition, the 24-hour-in-7-day rest requirement may be
delayed for reasons such as deadheading, assignment to training, and
others. However, if the requirement is delayed, the flight attendant
must be given the 24-consecutive-hour rest period before beginning any
subsequent duty period assignment.
In response to unscheduled operators, the FAA notes that
unscheduled part 135 operators conducting operations that require
flight attendants have the option to apply the flight crewmember flight
time limitations to flight attendants instead of using the duty period
limitations and rest requirements contained in this final rule.
Sections 135.267(f) and 135.269(d) require certificate holders to
provide each flight crewmember with at least 13 rest periods of at
least 24 consecutive hours each in each calendar quarter. Among other
requirements, operators that choose to apply flight crewmember
requirements to flight attendants would be required to provide flight
attendants with at least 13 rest periods of at least 24 consecutive
hours in each calendar quarter instead of relief from duty for 24
consecutive hours every 7 consecutive calendar days.
Comments on the costs associated with the 24-hour-in-7-day rest
requirement are addressed in the Regulatory Evaluation Summary.
Compensatory Rest Periods
Although there was no specific proposal in the notice, the FAA
requested comments on the feasibility of establishing compensatory rest
periods for flight attendants when scheduled duty periods are exceeded.
ATA, the Coalition of Flight Attendant Unions, and Delta Air Lines
opposed the establishment of compensatory rest periods.
FAA Response
In response to the comments submitted, the FAA will not mandate
compensatory rest periods in this final rule. The FAA has determined
that compensatory rest is not necessary, because the duty period
limitations and rest requirements contained in this final rule ensure
that flight attendants receive the opportunity to be adequately rested
to perform safety duties.
Reserve Status, Stand-by Status, or Similar Assignments
The FAA recognizes that current industry practice varies with
regard to the use of these terms and their relationship to duty or
rest. In the NPRM, the FAA requested comments on the most appropriate
way to address reserve status, stand-by status, or a similar
assignment. The FAA received 13 comments, primarily from air carrier
associations and labor organizations. Commenters described different
types of reserve status and suggested situations when reserve should be
considered duty or rest.
ATA recommended adding the following phrase to the definition of
rest period: ``except that reserve status assignments shall be
considered `rest' for purposes of this rule, provided that the only
work-related restriction shall be to report for a flight assignment
within a specified period of time pursuant to a collective bargaining
agreement or company work rules.'' The Coalition of Flight Attendant
Unions recommended that the definition of rest period be revised to
``the time period free of all restraint or duty from a domestic, flag,
or supplemental air carrier or commercial operator and free of all
responsibility, or interruption by, work or duty.''
In addition, commenters indicated that different types of reserve
status including ``call-in'' reserve and ``on-call'' reserve are
commonly found in the aviation industry. As described by commenters,
call-in reserve requires that a flight attendant contact, or be
available to be contacted by, the operator at designated times for
flight assignments. The commenters added that on-call reserve typically
requires that a flight attendant be available for an assignment on
short notice (usually within 1 hour) if contacted by the operator.
A majority of the commenters on this issue discussed whether
reserve status should be considered rest. ATA, NACA, and Southwest
Airlines stated that the time a flight attendant is assigned to reserve
status and is not assigned to a duty period should be considered rest
for the purpose of meeting the 24-hour-in-7-day rest requirement
proposed in Sec. 121.466(n) of the NPRM. RAA stated that the type of
reserve in which a person must contact the company for future
assignments--rather than being available for an assignment on short
notice--should be considered rest because it is free of all duty except
for the possibility of communication with the operators. Two individual
commenters stated that the time a flight attendant spends on reserve
should not be considered rest.
Four of the commenters, including ATA, Delta Air Lines, and RAA,
commented on whether reserve status should be considered part of a duty
period. ATA and Delta Air Lines stated that the time a flight attendant
spends on reserve should not be considered a duty period. ATA noted
that, if reserve is considered duty, operators will need to increase
staff by 20 to 30 percent. ATA estimates that the annual cost would be
$100 to $130 million for salaries, benefits, and associated training
and administrative costs. Delta Air Lines expressed concern that if
``on-call'' reserve is considered duty, flight attendants would request
at-home pay. RAA stated that the type of reserve in which a person is
expected to report on short notice should be considered duty. TWU Local
556 stated that duty time for a reserve flight attendant should be
calculated from actual report time to release time for a flight
assignment.
FAA Response
In response to the commenters who stated that reserve status should
be considered rest, the FAA notes that the time during which a flight
attendant is responsible for contacting a certificate holder or for
being available to be contacted by a certificate holder for an
assignment (e.g., reserve or stand-by status) does not meet any rest
period requirements, because the FAA has defined a rest period as free
of all restraint or duty and free of all responsibility for work or
duty should the occasion arise.
Specifically in response to ATA's, NACA's, and Southwest Airlines'
suggestions that reserve assignments should fulfill the 24-hour-in-7-
day rest requirement if no duty period is assigned, the FAA reiterates
that rest period requirements are not met when a flight attendant is
assigned to reserve status even if the flight attendant is not given a
duty period assignment. A duty period, as defined in this final rule,
does not begin until a flight attendant reports for an assignment
involving flight time. For example, a flight attendant who has been
assigned to reserve status for 24 hours but has not reported for a duty
period assignment during that time will not have satisfied the 24-hour-
in-7-day rest requirement. The rest requirement is not satisfied,
because the reserve assignment is a restraint and includes present
responsibility for work as a flight attendant if the occasion arises.
Some commenters stated that reserve status should not be restricted
by duty period requirements. The FAA refers the commenters to the
definition of duty period in Secs. 121.467(a) and 135.273(a) of the
final rule, the first sentence of which reads: ``Duty period means the
period of elapsed time between reporting for an assignment involving
flight time and release from that assignment. * * *'' It should be
clear that reserve status alone does not meet the definition of duty
period. On the other hand, it also should be clear that reserve status
may not be performed during a rest period. The definition of rest
period in Secs. 121.467(a) and 135.273(a) of the final rule states that
``Rest period means the time period free of all restraint or duty for a
domestic, flag, or supplemental air carrier or commercial operator and
free of all responsibility for work or duty should the occasion
arise.''
Augmented Cabin Crews
This final rule permits operators to schedule flight attendants for
duty periods of more than 14 hours provided an operator: (1) Assigns
flight attendants in addition to the minimum flight attendant
complement required for the flight or flights in that duty period under
the certificate holder's operations specifications; and (2) schedules
an extended rest period following the duty period.
Ten commenters submitted comments on the proposed augmented cabin
crew requirements addressing: (1) The concept of augmenting cabin crews
in proportion to the type of aircraft; (2) the relationship between
augmented cabin crews and flight attendant fatigue; and (3) the effect
of augmented crew requirements on unscheduled operators.
APA, NAA, and RAA noted that the proposed augmented cabin crew
requirements are not based on the size of the aircraft. APA stated that
if the FAA intends the provision for augmented cabin crews to be used
only for long-range operations, this should be clarified in the final
rule. APA noted that, under the proposed provisions, one flight
attendant would be added to either a two-person crew or an eight-person
crew. NAA noted that, one additional flight attendant on a Boeing 757
is a 20 percent increase in crew; one additional flight attendant on a
wide-body airplane is a 7 percent increase in crew. NAA recommended
that the FAA distinguish between wide-body and narrow-body airplanes by
requiring one additional flight attendant for any duty period between
14 and 20 hours on a narrow-body airplane. RAA stated that operators of
airplanes that require one or two flight attendants should not be
required to augment cabin crews in order to schedule duty periods
longer than 14 hours. RAA added that a passenger seat will be needed
for an additional flight attendant. RAA also noted that regional
operators schedule some duty periods longer than 14 hours; however,
many of these include an intermediate rest period.
APA, the Coalition of Flight Attendant Unions, and RAA addressed
the relationship between augmented cabin crews and fatigue. APA and the
Coalition stated that a larger crew does not necessarily result in a
less fatigued crew and noted that American Airlines, Trans World
Airlines, United Air Lines, and USAir currently assign flight
attendants in addition to the minimum crew complement. APA and the
Coalition of Flight Attendant Unions noted that the proposal does not
require an operator to provide a flight attendant with inflight rest.
RAA stated that requiring augmented cabin crews for the purpose of
reducing fatigue has been inadequately justified.
ATA and Delta Air Lines stated that the rule should permit a flight
to operate if an augmented crew is assigned but not present for a
flight because of unforeseen circumstances (e.g., illness or injury
during a layover). Delta suggested that 1 hour of on-board crew rest
for the remaining flight attendant crew could be provided in this
circumstance.
AMR Combs noted that a change is needed for on-demand operators.
They stated that a ``larger'' aircraft such as a Gulfstream or a
Challenger cannot accommodate up to four flight attendants. AMR Combs
stated that these operators would either apply for an exemption or not
use a flight attendant.
FAA Response
This final rule provides scheduling flexibility by permitting an
operator to schedule a flight attendant for a duty period of more than
14 hours if the flight attendant crew is augmented in accordance with
Sec. 121.467 (b)(4), (b)(5), or (b)(6), or Sec. 135.273 (b)(4), (b)(5),
or (b)(6). The augmented flight attendant crew provision permits
extended duty periods to accommodate certain operational requirements
such as those for long-range international flights, but this provision
also may be applied to domestic operations.
The provision for augmented cabin crews is designed to reduce
fatigue by decreasing flight attendant work load on a flight and by
providing an extended rest period following a long duty day. Although
the FAA recognizes that the provision will not require flight attendant
crews to be augmented proportionally for each aircraft type, it
provides the least complicated method for reducing fatigue and
accommodating certain operational requirements. Therefore, in this
final rule, the FAA adopts the provision for augmenting cabin crews on
a flight or flights with a scheduled duty period of more than 14 hours
but not more than 18 hours, and scheduled duty periods that do not
exceed 20 hours for duty periods that contain one or more flights that
land or take off outside the 48 contiguous states and the District of
Columbia.
In response to comments from AMR Combs, Delta Airlines, and RAA,
this final rule contains no provision to except an operator from
meeting minimum augmented cabin crew requirements when a flight
attendant duty period is scheduled for more than 14 hours in operations
that require a flight attendant. This includes instances in which a
required crewmember is not available following a layover, e.g., due to
illness or injury. Additionally, the use of an approved passenger seat
is required for operators that schedule flight attendants for duty
periods of more than 14 hours on aircraft that are not configured with
a flight attendant jumpseat for the additional flight attendant(s).
In response to AMR Combs' comment regarding the use of flight
attendants in Gulfstream and Challenger aircraft, this final rule
applies to operations that require a flight attendant. Typically,
Gulfstream and Challenger aircraft are not configured with more than 19
passenger seats and a flight attendant is not required to be on board.
Therefore, flight attendants assigned to such operations are not
subject to the duty period limitations and rest requirements in this
final rule. In addition, operators have the option to apply flight
crewmember flight, duty, and rest requirements to flight attendants.
Deadhead Transportation
Proposed Secs. 121.466(m) and 135.273(m) described deadhead
transportation as time spent in transportation, not local in character,
that a certificate holder requires of a flight attendant and provides
to transport the flight attendant to an airport at which that flight
attendant is to serve on a flight as a crewmember, or from an airport
at which the flight attendant was relieved from duty to return to the
flight attendant's home base. Under the proposal, time spent in
deadhead transportation is not rest.
ATA, Delta Air Lines, and NACA requested that the final rule
provide scheduling flexibility for flight attendants in deadhead
transportation. ATA requested that the FAA permit: (1) Operators to
schedule 2 hours of deadhead transportation to a domicile that is not
counted within duty time limitations; (2) flight attendants to waive
all duty time limitations when returning to a domicile and count the
time as rest; and (3) flight attendants to delay the weekly rest
requirement to return to the flight attendant's home base. Delta Air
Lines stated that the FAA should permit a flight attendant to alter
schedules to exceed the scheduled maximum duty time after the last
flight segment to return to the flight attendant's home base. Delta
also recommended that an operator be permitted to deadhead a flight
attendant for up to 20 hours regardless of the number of assigned
flight attendants. NACA suggested that the final rule clarify that the
time a flight attendant spends deadheading is not limited by duty
periods or the requirement to augment the flight attendant crew because
no inflight duties are involved.
ATA and NACA stated that the final rule should clarify that a
deadheading flight attendant is not a working member of the cabin crew
for the purpose of determining if staffing requirements must be
augmented.
The Coalition of Flight Attendant Unions and NACA agreed with the
NPRM that the time a flight attendant spends in deadhead transportation
is not rest.
FAA Response
Deadhead transportation as adopted in Secs. 121.467(b)(12) and
135.273(b)(12) of this final rule is not considered part of a rest
period. This use of deadhead transportation in relation to flight
attendant duty period limitations and rest requirements is consistent
with the application of flight crewmember flight time limitations and
rest requirements.
In addition, a flight attendant scheduled for deadhead
transportation is not assigned to duty in an aircraft and is not
considered a working crewmember. Therefore, for the purpose of
determining duty period limitations and rest requirements, deadhead
transportation is not considered an assignment involving flight time
and is not part of a duty period. In response to the comments
submitted, the FAA reiterates that an operator is not required to
augment flight attendant crews for flights when a flight attendant is
assigned to deadhead transportation because the time spent in deadhead
transportation is not part of a duty period. For example, an operator
may schedule a flight attendant crew for a flight to Europe with a duty
period of 14 hours. Immediately following the flight and before
beginning a 9-hour rest period, the operator requires the flight
attendant crew to deadhead for 2 hours to position the crew for the
next duty period assignment. In this example, the operator is not
required to augment the flight attendant crew because the deadheading
portion of the assignment is not considered part of the duty period.
However, the 2 hours spent positioning the crew for the next assignment
are not considered part of the 9-hour rest period.
Flight Attendant Responsibility
Proposed Secs. 121.466 and 135.273 state that a flight attendant
may not accept a work assignment that does not meet the duty time
limitations and rest requirements. Six commenters responded to this
provision.
ATA, APA, Delta Air Lines, and RAA opposed this provision. The
commenters stated that, if the provision were adopted, flight
attendants would be subject to FAA civil penalties. The commenters also
expressed concern that the provision would interfere with labor-
management relations. APA noted that a flight attendant could be
permitted to complete a flight assignment that the flight attendant
believes to be improper and to inform the FAA at the next opportunity.
The Coalition of Flight Attendant Unions included in its
alternative the provision for a flight attendant to refuse a work
assignment that does not meet the Coalition's proposed duty time
limitations and rest requirements. In contrast, TWU Local 556,
representing the flight attendants of Southwest Airlines, commented
that the provision of flight attendant responsibility could place a
flight attendant in the impossible position of risking either a fine
from the FAA or discipline for insubordination from the airline if the
carrier's scheduling department makes a mistake.
FAA Response
In light of comments received, the FAA has determined that only an
operator, not a flight attendant, should be responsible for ensuring
that duty limitations and rest requirements are met. The FAA bases its
decision on the fact that a flight attendant could be called upon to
decide between the violation of a regulation and possible disciplinary
action from the company. That misunderstanding and conflict between
company scheduling personnel and flight attendants could occur at a
time when flight attendants should be giving their full attention to
the passengers. In cases in which a flight attendant is aware that an
assignment does not meet duty period and rest requirements, the FAA
recommends that the flight attendant bring the situation to the air
carrier's attention. If the situation is not corrected, the flight
attendant should then inform the FAA. However, this recommendation does
not preclude a flight attendant from informing the FAA before
contacting the air carrier. In addition, flight attendant duty and rest
time records are subject to FAA review. Air carriers found to be in
noncompliance with the regulation are subject to enforcement action.
Recordkeeping
Sections 121.683(a)(1) and 135.63(a)(5) of the NPRM proposed
requiring certificate holders to maintain current records on flight
attendant duty and rest time requirements. The Coalition of Flight
Attendant Unions, Southwest Airlines, TWU Local 556, and TWU of America
agree with the proposed recordkeeping requirements. The Coalition of
Flight Attendant Unions does not anticipate that the recordkeeping
requirements as proposed in the NPRM would be unduly burdensome.
NAA stated that the cost of tracking crew time for duty and rest
could be very expensive. NAA noted that many small carriers do not have
expensive computer tracking systems and cannot afford to do manual
tracking.
Delta Airlines stated that the one-time cost for computer software
changes would be $368,000. NACA noted that one of its members estimates
that the proposed recordkeeping requirements would cost $50,000
annually.
FAA Response
The information and recordkeeping requirements of this final rule
are currently under review by the Office of Management and Budget.
Provided that they are approved by OMB, the FAA adopts the
recordkeeping requirements as proposed in the NPRM. These requirements
will become effective when they have been approved by OMB. The FAA
anticipates that this approval will be given soon.
The FAA recognizes that a concern of the aviation industry has been
the potential cost involved in tracking crew time for duty and rest
periods. The regulation provides that carriers maintain current records
for each flight attendant to verify compliance with flight, duty, and
rest time periods. The FAA intends to be as flexible as possible in
interpreting this recordkeeping requirement. Records may be maintained
by computer, by hand documentation, or by any other method that will
permit a carrier to assure compliance with the regulatory requirements.
Since many carriers already track flight attendant duty periods to
ensure that union contract or company guidelines on duty and rest time
are met, the FAA expects that recordkeeping systems already in place
will be sufficient to meet the recordkeeping requirements of the final
rule with minimal modification. Carriers that do not currently track
flight attendant duty periods will incur costs in developing
recordkeeping systems; however, the flexibility built into the final
rule should help to minimize these costs. Further, the FAA intends to
assist these carriers by providing information and guidance based on
already-implemented recordkeeping systems maintained by other air
carriers.
Implementation Time of the Final Rule
ATA and Delta Air Lines requested that the FAA not implement this
final rule immediately. They noted that operators will need time to
revise their computer programs. ATA requested a 12-month implementation
period; Delta requested an 18-month implementation period.
FAA Response
The FAA has considered the implementation periods proposed by ATA
and Delta. However, in the interest of public safety, the FAA has
determined that the final compliance date of this rule should be no
later than March 1, 1995. Because most operators are currently using
scheduling guidelines and tracking systems for flight attendants, the
FAA has determined that the March 1, 1995, date is reasonable.
Additional Issues
Fatigue
Commenters who addressed flight attendant fatigue include ATA, the
Coalition of Flight Attendant Unions, NACA, NTSB, RAA, SCA, and
Southwest Airlines.
ATA emphasized that flight attendant fatigue caused by abusive
scheduling or duty periods is not a problem in the scheduled airline
industry. NACA, RAA, SCA, and Southwest Airlines emphasized that
studies have found no correlation between flight attendant fatigue and
the ability of a flight attendant to perform safety-sensitive
functions. SCA point out that accident data do not specify flight
attendant fatigue as a factor in delay of evacuation or in injuries or
fatalities that occurred.
The Coalition of Flight Attendant Unions provided a summary of
research on circadian dysrhythmia and fatigue with an extensive
bibliography. NTSB reiterated Recommendation I-89-1, which stated that
the Department of Transportation should ``expedite a coordinated
research program on the effects of fatigue, sleepiness, sleep
disorders, and circadian factors on transportation system safety.''
Other commenters submitted copies of articles and recommendations
related to fatigue.
FAA Response
The FAA has reviewed the extensive amounts of literature provided
by commenters on fatigue related to travel and extended work periods as
well as to shift work. Although consideration has been given to
numerous fatigue studies, no accident/incident data is available to
provide a direct correlation between flight attendant fatigue and
passenger safety. However, it is evident that fatigue may affect flight
attendant performance and that proper scheduling practices may help
avoid compromising flight attendant performance. The FAA recognizes
that flight attendants perform essential safety duties and has
determined that the requirements contained in this final rule enhance
safety by protecting flight attendants from acute and chronic fatigue.
This final rule addresses the potential safety problems that could
occur if fatigued flight attendants work excessive duty hours or
receive inadequate rest.
Industry Study
The principal commenters who addressed the Industry Study include
AMR Combs, American Cyanamid Company, the Coalition of Flight Attendant
Unions, and SCA.
American Cyanamid Company stated that the Industry Study does not
indicate that there is a pattern of air carriers willfully scheduling
long duty days or long series of days without a day off. The Coalition
of Flight Attendant Unions indicated that the Industry Study has been
used as evidence that extreme examples of scheduling abuse are isolated
and that the actual occurrences of scheduling abuse were most likely
under-reported because the instances provided in the Industry Study
were ``self-selected.'' The Coalition further stated that, even though
the instances were self-selected, the Industry Study found industry-
wide flight attendant duty and rest period problems. SCA stated that
the Industry Study does not provide evidence to establish any
correlation among flight attendant duty time, flight attendant safety
duties, and risk to passengers. AMR Combs and American Cyanamid Company
noted that the Industry Study did not consider unscheduled part 135
operators.
FAA Response
The FAA conducted the Industry Study to determine if scheduling
extremes exist, and, if so, to determine the nature of the extremes,
not to determine the statistical frequency with which they occur or to
correlate passenger risk with extreme scheduling. Access to records was
gained through the cooperation of air carriers. The air carriers did
not choose individual records for examination. Based on the purpose of
the study, records were selected for review when flight attendant
scheduling extremes were expected to be likely. Therefore, statistical
inferences cannot be made. However, the data contained in the Industry
Study provides fundamental background information on flight attendant
scheduling practices.
The Industry Study included a review of data from major, national,
regional, and supplemental carriers. The study did not include a review
of unscheduled part 135 operators because relatively few of these
operators conduct operations that require a flight attendant. As
previously discussed, air carriers and commercial operators conducting
operations for which the FAA does not require a flight attendant will
not be required to comply with flight attendant duty period limitations
and rest requirements even if flight attendants are involved in those
operations.
International and Domestic Operations
The proposed amendment did not make a distinction between domestic
and international operations in determining flight attendant duty
limitations and rest requirements. Five commenters commented on whether
there should be a distinction between domestic and international
operations for determining flight attendant duty period limitations and
rest requirements. Four commenters, including the Coalition of Flight
Attendant Unions and the International Association of Machinists and
Aerospace Workers (IAM & AW), supported making a distinction. The
Coalition provided definitions for a domestic flight, an international
flight, and a long-range international flight. One commenter stated
that flight attendants assigned to international flight require more
rest than flight attendants assigned to domestic flights because flight
attendants on international flights are in a state of physical
desynchronization. Another commenter stated that duty period limits
should be 12 hours for domestic flights and 14 hours for international
flights. NAA stated that no distinction should be made between
international and domestic flights because some domestic flights are as
long as international flights and the work load is the same for the
crew.
FAA Response
After a review of the Coalition comments and an analysis of flight
schedules, the FAA finds that scheduled duty periods for operations
wholly within the 48 contiguous states and the District of Columbia
should not be allowed to exceed 18 hours. The FAA is not aware of any
scheduled duty periods for these operations that currently do exceed 18
hours. However, for duty periods involving one or more flights that
land or take off outside the 48 contiguous states and the District of
Columbia, the duty period may not exceed 20 hours. Thus, the final rule
makes this distinction between domestic and international operations.
Part 125 Operators
The NPRM proposed that each flight attendant be relieved from all
duty for at least 8 consecutive hours during any 24-hour period.
Two commenters, including the Coalition of Flight Attendant Unions,
addressed this proposal. The Coalition recommended that the 8-hour
period free of duty be replaced with a 10-hour period free of duty.
FAA Responses
Section 125.37, Duty time limitations, currently requires a flight
crewmember to be relieved from duty for at least 8 consecutive hours
during any 24-hour period. The final rule incorporates flight
attendants into the current provision, thus providing parallel duty
time limitations for flight attendants and flight crewmembers.
Rules for Flight Attendants in Other Nations
APA, the Coalition of Flight Attendant Unions, and the IAM & AW
noted that flight attendants in other nations have regulations that
provide flight attendant duty time limitations and minimum rest
requirements. APA stated that the proposed Joint Aviation Authorities
(JAA) regulations address issues related to fatigue. The Coalition
provided a copy of the proposed JAA rules.
FAA Response
During the Industry Study, the FAA conducted a review of the
International Civil Aviation Organization's (ICAO) regulations relating
to flight attendant flight, duty, and rest times including a review of
ICAO Circular Flight Crew Fatigue and Flight Time Limitations (52-AN/
47/6). The Industry Study identified 23 countries that have government
regulations for flight attendant flight and duty limitations and rest
requirements, and 24 countries that do not have such regulations. The
FAA notes that the Joint Aviation Regulations currently do not include
flight time limitations for flight attendants; however, the JAA have
proposed flight time limitations for flight crewmembers and flight
attendants that are currently under review by the European Community.
Based on this information, the FAA has determined that flight attendant
flight and duty limitations and rest requirements of some countries are
less stringent than the final rule adopted by the FAA, and the
requirements of other countries are more stringent than those being
adopted. Therefore, the FAA considers the final rule to be within the
range of worldwide governmental regulations governing flight attendant
duty limitations and rest requirements.
Changes to the NPRM
The FAA amended several provisions of the proposed rule in response
to comments received from the public. Any changes that significantly
altered the requirements of the duty period limitations and rest
requirements are discussed previously and are summarized in this
section.
The NPRM made no distinction between domestic and international
operations. In the final rule domestic operations are limited to up to
18-hour scheduled duty periods. However, scheduled duty periods that
involve one or more flights that land or take off outside the 48
contiguous states and the District of Columbia may be scheduled up to
20 hours, providing required augmentation is provided.
The FAA moved flight attendant duty period limitations and rest
requirements from proposed Sec. 121.466 in the NPRM to Sec. 121.467 in
the final rule to facilitate the incorporation of future amendments. In
addition, paragraphs describing duty period and rest period provisions
in the NPRM have been revised and renumbered in the final rule to
incorporate new and revised requirements. The FAA also revised the NPRM
to include minor editorial changes and revised the list of subjects to
include additional terms.
Based on comments receive, the FAA removed the proposed requirement
that a flight attendant be responsible for ensuring compliance with
duty period limitations and rest requirements before accepting any
flight assignments. The FAA determined that this is an operator's
responsibility and not the responsibility of a flight attendant.
The NPRM included the proposal that an operator may not assign a
flight attendant a duty period of 14 or more hours following a 10-hour
reduced rest period. In Secs. 121.467(b)(9) and 135.273(b)(9), the FAA
revised the NPRM to restrict an operator from assigning a flight
attendant to a duty period of ``more than 14 hours'' following a 10-
hour reduced rest period. This change permits an operator to assign a
flight attendant to a duty period of up to and including 14 hours
following the reduced rest period.
The FAA incorporated provisions into the final rule to give
operators the option to apply the flight crewmember flight, duty, and
rest requirements to flight attendants. The FAA permits this option
provided that the operator establishes written procedures that are
referenced in the certificate holder's operations specifications for
applying the appropriate flight crewmember flight, duty, and rest
requirements to flight attendants.
The following chart depicts the scheduled duty period, rest period,
and augmented flight attendant crew requirements for this final rule.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rest period following
Scheduled duty period Minimum rest period Reduced rest period reduced rest No. of flight attendants
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
14 hrs or less........................................ 9 hrs............... 8 hrs............... 10 hrs................... Minimum.
14-16 hrs............................................. 12 hrs.............. 10 hrs.............. 14 hrs................... Minimum + 1.
16-18 hrs............................................. 12 hrs.............. 10 hrs.............. 14 hrs................... Minimum + 2.
*18-20 hrs............................................ 12 hrs.............. 10 hrs.............. 14 hrs................... Minimum + 3.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Applies only to duty periods with one or more flights that land or take off outside the 48 contiguous States and the District of Columbia.
Costs
In the NPRM, the FAA requested additional information on the costs
of the proposed rule. The FAA received comments from associations,
labor organizations, and part 121 operators.
ATA, which primarily represents part 121 scheduled operators,
stated that the proposal would cost its members at least $8 million
annually to revise current computer crew scheduling programs, hire
additional personnel, extend layovers, and schedule reserves. ATA
believes that the costs were understated in the NPRM and noted that
they did not include an inflation factor. ATA indicated that the 15-
year cost of the proposed rule would be $88,947,099 using a 7-percent
discount rate and a 3-percent inflation rate. RAA stated that the costs
associated with the proposed rule are significantly understated. In
addition, RAA believes that the economic effect of the proposed rule
should reflect the cost burden of other recent rulemakings. NACA stated
that the proposal would cost one of its members an estimated $372,000
annually for additional staffing and $50,000 annually to meet
recordkeeping requirements.
The Coalition of Flight Attendant Unions stated that the median
flight attendant salary, based on the average salary for supplemental
air carrier flight attendants represented by the Association of Flight
Attendants (AFA), is $18,461. According to the Coalition, if 6,000
flight attendants are hired by supplemental operators, the cost in
salaries will be $1,107,660 [sic]. The Coalition noted that this is one
tenth the cost of random drug testing.
Delta Airlines, a scheduled part 121 operator, indicated that the
initial cost to comply with the proposed rule would be $2,863,416. This
cost includes the cost of hiring 36 additional flight attendants,
estimated at $1,348,000; paying flight attendants during deplaning,
estimated at $749,000; providing additional meals, estimated at
$400,000; and modifying computer software, estimated to be a one-time
cost of $367,000. Delta estimates that the annual cost to comply with
the proposed rule would be $2.5 million.
Sun Country Airlines, an unscheduled part 121 operator, stated that
it would be required to augment cabin crews on domestic flights more
often than it now does. Sun Country Airlines also stated that, if the
NPRM had been effective in 1992, the carrier would have hired an
additional 34 flight attendants and the cost to domestic operations
would have been $2.6 million in salaries, benefits, training, hotels,
meals, deadhead travel, and administrative burden. Sun Country Airlines
pointed out that the NPRM estimated that supplemental operators would
absorb 60 percent of the proposal's costs while supplemental operators
employ only 1 percent of all flight attendants.
Great American Airways, an unscheduled part 121 operator, stated
that the proposed rule would impose substantially greater costs on
supplemental air carriers. Positioning flight attendants would become a
major expense for supplemental operators. Unanticipated schedule and
routing changes could severely curtail current flexibility. However,
Great American Airways stated that the disruptions mentioned above
would be minimized if supplemental air carriers had the option to apply
the same work rules to both flight attendants and pilots. Great
American Airways estimates that the total cost savings that would be
derived from implementing a single set of duty limitations for its
cabin and flight crewmembers, as opposed to adopting the requirements
proposed in the NPRM, would be more than $100,000 annually.
FAA Response
The comments that address the costs associated with this final rule
are addressed in the Regulatory Evaluation Summary.
Paperwork Reduction Act
Information collection requirements for parts 121, 125, and 135
have been previously approved by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (Pub.
L. 96-511) and have been assigned OMB Control Numbers as follows: For
part 121, OMB Control Number 2120-0008; for part 125, OMB Control
Number 2120-0085; and for part 135, OMB Control Number 2120-0039. The
FAA has prepared changes to these control numbers to reflect the
additional paperwork requirements of this final rule and has submitted
these changes to OMB.
In completing this rulemaking, the FAA has been mindful that it is
the policy of the agency and the Administration to avoid imposing
unnecessary paperwork burdens on industry. To that end, the FAA has
carefully considered all comments on recordkeeping and has made every
attempt to minimize the paperwork burden for carriers. For example,
allowing carriers to employ a single scheduling system for entire
crews--pilots and flight attendants--will enable them to avoid
maintaining two separate duty schedules. Indeed, for many carriers, the
FAA believes the final rule will create little or no net additional
paperwork.
Regulatory Evaluation Summary
The FAA has determined that this rule: (1) Is a significant
regulatory action as defined in the Executive Order; (2) is significant
as defined in Department of Transportation's Regulatory Policies and
Procedures; (3) would not have a significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities; and (4) would not constitute a barrier to
international trade. These analyses, summarized below, are available in
the docket.
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Benefits
The FAA expects the final rule to help ensure that flight
attendants are rested and alert when performing emergency and routine
safety related duties and thereby reduce injuries and fatalities in air
carrier accidents. However, as in the NPRM, the FAA has not quantified
the benefits associated with this rulemaking because there is a lack of
accident/incident data that can be used to directly correlate flight
attendant fatigue with passenger fatalities and injuries. Instead, the
FAA has examined the potential benefits of this rulemaking from a
qualitative perspective.
Increased Safety
The FAA received comments both supporting and opposing the
correlation between flight attendant duty period limitations and rest
requirements and passenger safety. One commenter stated that fatigue
increases during the work period, and duty times that exceed 12 hours
for domestic flights and 14 hours for international flights can be
expected to potentially derogate safety performance. Another commenter
stated that the FAA has provided no sufficient foundation for
concluding that the absence of the proposed regulations constitutes a
derogation of aviation safety, and that the absence of any experience
in which a flight safety problem was attributable to undue flight
attendant fatigue is a strong argument that no such problem exists.
FAA Response
The FAA agrees with commenters who stated that inadequate rest or
excessive duty periods could derogate safety. However, the commenters
did not define acceptable or unacceptable levels of risk, and did not
provide any justification for the distinction. Because quantifiable
data was not available, the FAA was unable to calculate the
quantitative benefits of the rule.
The FAA recognizes that inadequate rest periods for flight
attendants could create a potential safety problem. Therefore, the FAA
expects that this final rule will ensure that flight attendants receive
the opportunity to be rested and alert when performing emergency and
routine safety-related duties, thereby reducing passenger and crew
injuries and fatalities.
Increased Worker Productivity
The Coalition stated that, in addition to improving the safety of
air travel, the regulatory evaluation should take into account the cost
savings from improved worker productivity. That commenter also stated
that a careful review of various studies would likely reveal that the
benefits of more reasonable duty hours and adequate rest include
decreased absenteeism and health problems related to fatigue. The
Allied Pilot Association stated that ``the welfare of regulated
employees ought to be one of the concerns of rulemakers.''
FAA Response
The FAA has examined the impact of improved worker productivity as
it relates to safety and has determined that reduced rest for flight
attendants could impede flight attendant performance during emergency
evacuations or during routine safety duties requiring a high degree of
alertness. Cost savings could result from improved worker productivity;
however, no information is available to quantify this benefit.
The change in duty hours coupled with adequate rest could decrease
absenteeism and improve health. However, the information needed to
quantify this, is not currently available.
In addition, the FAA is concerned with passenger and crewmember
safety, and is sensitive to crewmember health and welfare. The FAA
recognizes that employee health could improve if employees get more
rest.
Costs
Cost estimates contained in this summary are based on 1993 dollars
and are discounted at an annual effective rate of 7 percent. The FAA
estimates that the cost to the air carrier industry of establishing
flight attendant duty period limitations and rest requirements will be
$42.7 million over a 15-year period. The FAA expects that operators
would incur costs in the areas of recordkeeping and additional
staffing.
Cost estimates for supplemental air carriers and scheduled major,
national, and regional/commuter operators are separated. The FAA
estimates that the nondiscounted cost for all supplemental air carriers
for the first year will be approximately $2.5 million, and the annual
nondiscounted cost for all supplemental carriers would be approximately
$2.23 million. The FAA estimates that the total discounted costs for
supplemental air carriers over 15 years will be approximately $20.8
million. The FAA estimates that the first-year nondiscounted cost for
scheduled major, national, and regional/commuter operators will be
approximately $2.9 million, and the annual nondiscounted cost for these
operators would be approximately $1.2 million. The FAA estimates that
the total discounted costs for scheduled major, national, and regional/
commuter over 15 years will be approximately $21.9 million. Therefore,
over 15 years, the discounted cost for the air carrier industry will be
$42.7 million.
The above cost estimate is based on the assumption that air
carriers must augment their flight attendant crews. In some situations,
augmentation under the flight attendant rule requirements may be
avoided if an air carrier adopts and applies to flight attendants, by
option, the international, supplemental carrier pilot rules covering
flight and duty period.
Twenty-Four Consecutive-Hour Rest Period During any Seven Consecutive
Days
Southwest Airlines stated that the requirement for 24 consecutive
hours of rest during any 7 consecutive days would make it necessary for
the air carrier with which the commenter is affiliated to hire about
100 additional flight attendants at a first-year cost of $710,000 and a
subsequent annual cost of $600,000. A commenter representing Transport
Workers Union of America on behalf of Southwest Airlines flight
attendants indicated that the proposed rule, if adopted, would create a
financial burden for flight attendants and their employers and would
result in an average annual loss of $11,063 in extra income for each
flight attendant. This loss, projected for 2,200 flight attendants for
1 year, would total $24 million in lost income.
FAA Response
The requirement for 24 consecutive hours of rest in any 7
consecutive days is designed to supplement daily rest requirements and
to ensure that flight attendants receive the opportunity for adequate
rest. The FAA did not verify lost flight attendant income, because the
annual loss of extra income to some flight attendants represents a gain
to flight attendants who would be hired. This income transfer is not
considered a cost of this rulemaking.
Single Set of Duty Time Rules for Cabin and Flight Crew Members
Great American Airways stated that the total cost savings derived
from implementing a single set of duty time rules for its cabin and
flight crewmembers, as opposed to adopting the rules proposed in the
NPRM, would exceed $100,000 per year.
FAA Response
The FAA recognizes that giving operators the option to apply flight
crewmember flights, duty, and rest requirements to flight attendants
may provide a cost savings to certain operators, particularly
supplemental operators. The FAA expects that the operators that choose
the option will incur costs that are lower than those estimated in the
final regulatory evaluation.
However, the FAA recognizes that operators who choose to apply the
flight crewmember regulations for duty limitations and rest
requirements must submit an application to the appropriate Flight
Standards District Office for approval. This is a minor, one-time cost,
and the FAA assumes that operators who choose to incur this cost would
do so because it would obviate those operators from designing and
establishing a tracking system for flight attendants. Instead, this
option would allow them to use whatever system is in place for flight
crewmembers. The application process chosen was selected deliberately
out of concern that recordkeeping costs be kept to a minimum. That is,
the FAA chose an application process that is very familiar to carriers,
the commonly-used procedure for changes to operations specifications.
Limiting Scheduled Duty Period to Fourteen Hours
Great American Airways stated that limiting scheduled flight
attendant duty periods to 14 hours would force the air carrier and
other supplemental air carriers to add flight attendants at
intermediate stops. The commenter stated that, because company-required
deadhead transportation would be considered part of a duty period under
the FAA's proposal, it would be necessary to schedule flight attendants
for required rest after they completed a deadhead flight segment and
before they began the next duty period.
This commenter also stated that the proposed rules would impose
substantially greater costs on supplemental air carriers than other air
carriers because supplemental air carriers rarely have travel
privileges with scheduled carriers, and, when they do, they are often
very restrictive. Finally, this commenter stated that unanticipated
schedule and routing changes occur more frequently among charter
operators than scheduled carriers and could severely curtail the
flexibility of supplemental air carriers.
FAA Response
The FAA agrees that the greatest costs will be incurred by air
carriers that schedule flight attendants for the longest duty periods.
However, the commenter does not appear to provide any information on
the air carrier's ability to augment existing crews. The FAA points out
that costs could be minimized by using crew argumentation as a means of
compliance. In addition, time spent in deadhead transportation is not
considered part of a duty period; therefore, an operator is not
required to provide a rest period for flight attendants following time
spent in deadhead transportation.
Overall Costs
ATA stated that the FAA has understated costs considerably. This
commenter stated that the annual cost of complying with the proposed
regulation would be at least $8.0 million. This cost would include
programming expenses, additional personnel costs, costs associated with
extended layovers, and costs associated with reserve scheduling
(assuming that carrier reserve scheduling practices are not modified).
Assuming a discount rate of 7.0 percent and an inflation rate of 3.0
percent, the 15-year present value cost for the association's members
would be approximately $88.9 million.
FAA Response
The survey of ATA members indicates that the annual cost would be
at least $8.0 million. ATA stated that added annual personnel costs for
air carrier operators would be $4.0 million, additional meal/hotel
expenses would be $1.5 million, and additional reserve staffing would
be $2.5 million. Finally, ATA stated that carriers can expect to incur
a one-time expense of between $2.0 million and $3.0 million for
computer system program modifications. After contracting ATA twice
after the comment period closed to obtain clarifying information, the
FAA concluded that their estimate could not be used in its entirety
because information such as the number of affected carriers, wage
rates, additional employees needed, or hours worked was not provided.
In addition, ATA did not provide information on the cost of
augmenting the existing crew. The FAA permits longer duty periods with
the use of augmented crews. FAA data indicates that many flights are
staffed with more than the minimum flight attendant crew complement;
therefore, little or no additional cost would be incurred to meet the
crew argumentation requirements.
ATA also stated that the 15-year present value cost for its members
would be $88.9 million. This estimate assumed a discount rate of 7.0
percent and an inflation rate of 3.0 percent. The basis for the
commenter's estimate of the annual cost ($8.0 million) was not detailed
enough for the FAA to use it or the 15-year estimate derived from it.
The FAA has nevertheless attempted to develop an industry cost
estimate by recalculating the ATA estimate to exclude the ATA inflation
factor and by accounting for the fact that ATA members only represent a
portion of the industry that would be affected. As shown in the
Regulatory Evaluation, that figure would be $78.8 million. However, the
original information provided could not be fully substantiated, which
suggests that the ATA estimate may not be representative of the total
industry.
Supplemental Carriers
The Coalition stated that the median flight attendant salary at
supplemental air carriers is $18,461. The commenter indicated that this
estimate may be high because it represents the average salary at
supplemental carriers that have a collective bargaining agreement with
their flight attendant workforce. The commenter also stated that the
FAA assumed that the rule would lead to the hiring of 6,000 flight
attendants at supplemental carriers, and that the additional cost for
these new hires would be $1,107,600. The FAA received revised salary
information from the commenter stating that the average salary of a
flight attendant working for a supplemental carrier is $24,552, which
includes $6,092 in benefits.
FAA Response
The final regulatory evaluation assumes that, in the case of
supplemental operators, each flight attendant works 150 duty periods,
and that a carrier's cost per duty period is $163.68. Therefore, the
cost of 6,000 additional duty periods would be $982,100. To the extent
practicable, this cost estimate for supplemental operations was used in
developing the final regulatory evaluation.
Irregular Operations
Delta Air Lines stated that the proposed rule would cause the air
carrier to incur costs associated with irregular operations. The air
carrier estimated that it would have to hire 36 flight attendants at an
annual salary cost of $1.3 million for irregular operations. Other
costs associated with hiring additional flight attendants to meet the
requirements of the proposed rule, if adopted, would total $2.86
million in the initial year. The recurring annual cost of the proposed
rule, if adopted, would be nearly $2.5 million.
This commenter stated that, based on operations in June/July 1992
and January/February 1993, 62 flight attendants working together did
not meet the requirements of the NPRM and would require crew
replacement. The commenter typically schedules flight attendants for 3-
day city pairings with an average flight attendant crew of six. Because
most of the replacements that were needed were on domestic flights, the
commenter used an average of four flight attendants. These results
showed that 744 additional duty days would be required. The commenter
calculated that an additional 36 flight attendants would be needed
because a reserve flight attendant is available to fly an average of
20.5 days per month. Given an average monthly salary of almost $2,500,
plus monthly hotel, meal, and transportation expenses of almost $650
for irregular operations, the cost for a flight attendant would be
about $3,100 per month, or $1.3 million annually.
The commenter also stated that they do not have a deplaning period.
That is, pay and expenses cease at the block-in time of the last flight
in the duty period for the trip. This commenter calculates that the
cost of a 15-minute deplaning period would result in the hiring of 20
additional flight attendants. The cost would amount to $749,000
annually.
Finally, the commenter provided information documenting the
carrier's one-time cost of computer software changes, including
recordkeeping. The only additional information is that the cost of
programming and testing per man-hour is $40.
FAA Response
The FAA received clarification from the commenter stating that ``An
Ad Hoc Computer Program was developed to search through our crew
tracking systems to identify irregular operations that had occurred
that would have required crew replacement under the NPRM.'' The
commenter also stated that the NPRM ``Would require crew replacement.''
Finally, the commenter stated that they used an average crew of four
flight attendants in their calculations, which implies that they were
replacing their existing crew. This leads the FAA to assume that the
commenter did not consider crew augmentation. However, the FAA did use
some of the salary and cost data provided by the commenter.
With regard to hiring additional flight attendants for a 15-minute
deplaning period, the FAA notes that there is no new requirement in
this rule concerning deplaning; deplaning of the aircraft is a current
requirement.
Small Operators
Sun Country Airlines operates a fleet of 10 aircraft with 520
employees, 170 of whom are flight attendants. Based on 1992 operations,
the proposed rule would have required the commenter to hire 34
additional flight attendants, which would have increased operating
costs (i.e., salaries, benefits, costs of training, hotels, meals,
deadhead travel, and general administrative overhead) by $2.6 million
in 1992. However, this air carrier stated that, by applying crewmember
flight, duty, and rest requirements to flight attendants, the air
carrier would need to employ 20 additional flight attendants rather
than 34 additional flight attendants, with increased operating costs of
$1.75 million rather than $2.6 million. However, these lower costs
still exceeded the entire 1992 new profit for this carrier.
The Regional Airline Association stated that the proposed rule
would either require an additional jump seat in the cabin for which
there is insufficient space or it would require that a passenger seat
be set aside for the additional flight attendant. This commenter stated
that daily or routine loss of a revenue seat on a fleet of regional
aircraft with 20 to 50 seats would be enormous. It also pointed out the
added costs associated of layover lodging, meals, and per diem, and the
significant incremental weight of an added crewmember.
The National Air Carrier Association stated that the proposed rule
would impose costs of approximately $372,000 in additional flight
attendant staffing, and approximately $50,000 in recordkeeping.
FAA Response
The FAA received additional clarification from Sun Country
indicating that the proposed rule would cost $2.6 million. The annual
cost to deadhead flight attendants to their domicile would be $832,000.
In addition, hotel accommodations would be $842,000, added per diem
cost would be $308,000, initial and recurrent training would be
$10,200, and administrative costs would be $58,000. Because this
commenter does not have any interline agreements, it would have to pay
the added costs for deadhead tickets. This commenter estimated that
these costs would be $579,000.
Based upon this cost estimate, the cost per added flight attendant
would be about $76,500 per flight attendant ($2.6 million divided by 34
additional flight attendants). If this commenter did not have to incur
the costs for deadhead tickets, then the added cost would be $60,300
per flight attendant.
The commenter also provided information stating that the annual
cost of applying the part 121 supplemental carrier pilot flight, duty,
and rest requirements to flight attendants would be $1.75 million. The
added cost of 20 flight attendants would be $489,000. Hotel expenses
would be $679,000; per diem costs would be $244,000; training would
cost $6,000; and administrative costs would be $34,000. Finally, the
annual cost of deadheading flight attendants back to their place of
domicile would be $289,000.
Based upon their total cost estimate, the cost per added flight
attendant would be $1.75 million divided by 20 additional flight
attendants, or about $87,000 per flight attendant. If this commenter
did not have to incur the costs for deadhead tickets, then the added
cost would be $72,600 per flight attendant.
The FAA contends that these cost estimates represent the costs
associated with replacing the existing crew. The cost estimates do not
appear to represent the costs associated with augmenting the existing
crew with additional flight attendants. An air carrier whose goal is
profit maximization and cost minimization would choose the least costly
means of achieving compliance with the proposed rule, and, in most
cases, that appears to be the crew augmentation option.
RAA asserted that the final rule would impose costs based on the
fact that some aircraft would fly longer than 14 hours and full. The
FAA contacted this commenter and asked a clarifying question on the
number of times that an aircraft would fly more than 14 hours full. The
commenter was unable to provide information to substantiate this
assertion, and therefore, while a problem may exist, the FAA is unable
to determine the magnitude of it.
The FAA received additional information from a NACA member
(American Trans Air) stating that, to calculate annual costs, they
multiplied the average number of block hours in the fleet by the
percentage of flight hours the NPRM is expected to affect. The product
is the total number of affected block hours.
The number of affected block hours was then divided by the expected
number of flight attendant utilization hours, which varies by aircraft
type, and multiplied by the number of flight attendants to compute crew
requirements. Based on this calculation, 20 additional flight
attendants would be needed to meet the requirements of the proposed
rule. This commenter then multiplied the number of additional flight
attendants by their annual salary, including fringe benefits and
training, to arrive at a cost estimate of $372,000. Administrative
costs of $80,000 were added.
The FAA received additional clarification that the percentage of
flight hours was based upon the commenter's examination of all flights
that exceeded 14 hours. The commenter did not look at flights of 14 to
16 hours, 16 to 18 hours, or 18 to 20 hours.
The commenter divided the number of affected block hours by the
expected flight attendant utilization hours (Boeing 727, 60 hours;
Boeing 757 and Lockheed L-1011, 56 hours). The commenter did not know
how many duty periods this represented. After multiplying this number
by the number of flight attendants needed to complete crew
requirements, the commenter concluded that 20 additional flight
attendants would be needed to augment its flights.
The $13,000 annual salary represents a flight attendant's first-
year salary without overtime. The 20 percent benefits estimate
represents the company's portion of employee benefits.
To the extent practicable, the cost information provided by
commenters was used to revise the cost estimates in the final
regulatory evaluation.
Recordkeeping Costs
Several commenters provided the FAA with information on
recordkeeping. The Air Transport Association estimated that air
carriers would incur a one-time expense for computer system program
modifications of $2.0 million to $3.0 million. Delta Air Lines stated
that the one-time cost of software computer changes, including
recordkeeping, would be $367,200. American Trans Air, a member of the
National Air Carrier Association, stated that administrative costs
would be $80,000, approximately $54,000 of which would be the cost to
program and upgrade software, and $26,000 of which would be the cost of
data entry and associated labor.
FAA Response
Because of limited supporting documentation, a wide variation
between commenters' estimates, and the difficulty of ascertaining what
portion of the recordkeeping costs could be attributed to the
implementation of this final rule versus the cost to upgrade current
systems, the FAA stands by its original recordkeeping cost estimate.
Summary of Benefits and Costs
The FAA estimates that the cost of compliance with the requirements
of this final rule will be $42.7 million, discounted.
Although benefits cannot be quantified, the FAA concludes that the
establishment of flight attendant duty period limitations and rest
requirements are warranted, because they will contribute to an overall
enhancement of transport category airplane safety and utility that will
both promote and enhance the U.S. air transportation system.
Final Regulatory Flexibility Determination
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA was enacted by Congress
to ensure that small entities are not unnecessarily and
disproportionately burdened by Federal regulations. The RFA requires a
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis if a proposed rule would have ``a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.'' FAA Order 2100.14A outlines FAA's procedures and criteria
for implementing the RFA.
The fleet size for an operator of aircraft for hire to be
considered a small entity is nine or fewer aircraft. The threshold
annualized cost levels for operators of aircraft for hire in 1993
dollars are $117,800 for scheduled operators whose fleets have aircraft
with seating capacities of more than 60, $67,000 for scheduled
operators whose fleets have aircraft with seating capacities of 60 or
less (other scheduled operators), and $4,570 for unscheduled operators.
The proposals in the NPRM would affect air carriers that provide
passenger-carrying operations in aircraft for which flight attendants
are required. Other types of aviation companies would not be affected.
A ``substantial number'' of small entities is a number that is not less
than 11 and that is more than one-third of the small entities subject
to this rule.
According to FAA records of small entity air carriers that provide
passenger-carrying operations in aircraft that require flight
attendants, there are 23 part 125 and 135 operators that could be
affected by the final rule. Of these 23 operators, 7 are part 121/135
operators, 12 are part 125 operators, and 4 are part 135 operators. The
affected operators are those with nine or fewer aircraft. At least one
of the aircraft that they own have a seating configuration of more than
19 as described in either Sec. 125.269 or Sec. 135.107 and therefore
would have at least one flight attendant on board. There are also 8
part 121 operators that would be affected by the final rule. In July
1993, there were a total of 25 part 121/135 operators, 39 part 125
operators, and 3,040 part 135 operators. There are also more than 100
part 121 operators. The number of carriers that could be affected by
the rule does not exceed one-third of the total number of carriers in
any of the four categories of operators (parts 121, 121/125, 125 and
135). The FAA has therefore determined that a regulatory flexibility
analysis is not necessary.
International Trade Impact Statement
This final rule would not constitute a barrier to international
trade, including the export of American goods and services to foreign
countries and the import of foreign goods and services into the United
States.
The FAA has determined that the amendments to parts 121 and 135
will not have a significant impact on international trade. The final
rule is not expected to have an impact on trade opportunities for U.S.
firms doing business overseas or foreign firms doing business in the
United States. This finding is based in large part upon the review of
foreign civil aviation regulations governing flight attendant flight
and duty time practices and minimum rest requirements found in the
Industry Study as well as information supplied by commenters to the
public docket.
The Industry Study review shows that 23 countries, including
Argentina, Belgium, Brazil, Denmark, the Netherlands, France, Norway,
Portugal, Sweden, Switzerland, and West Germany, have government
regulations on flight attendant flight and duty times and rest periods.
The comment provided by the Flight Attendants states that the
European Community, through its Joint Aviation Authority (JAA) ``is
poised to issue flight attendant duty time and rest provisions which
would be based on state of the art research concerning work schedules
and fatigue.'' They state that the JAA rule would base duty time and
rest limits on the time of departure and the number of segments flown.
On the other hand, the Industry Study noted that 24 countries,
including Australia, Canada, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Japan, and Mexico,
do not regulate flight attendant work time.
The FAA concludes that there are many countries with flight
attendant flight and duty times and rest periods and many countries
without these regulations. Second, many firms in the United States
appear to be already in compliance or near compliance with the final
regulation. Therefore, the FAA has determined that the amendments to
parts 121, 125, and 135, will not have a significant impact on
international trade.
Federalism Implications
The regulation herein will not have substantial direct effects on
the states, on the relationship between the national government and the
states, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government. Therefore, in accordance with Executive
Order 12612, it is determined that this regulation will not have
sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a
Federalism Assessment.
Conclusion
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the FAA has determined
that this regulation is a significant regulatory action under Executive
Order 12866. In addition, the rule is considered significant under DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures. However, the FAA has determined
that this regulation will not have a significant economic impact,
positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities or on
international trade. A final regulatory evaluation of the regulation,
including a final Regulatory Flexibility Determination and
International Trade Impact Analysis, has been placed in the docket. A
copy may be obtained by contacting the person identified under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
Paperwork Reduction Act Approval
Sections 121.683(a)(1), 135.63(a)(3), 135.63(a)(4)(x),
135.63(a)(5), and 135.63(b) are not effective until the OMB has
approved the Paperwork Reduction Requirements. The FAA will publish a
document in the Federal Register following OMB approval of the
Paperwork Reduction Requirements.
List of Subjects
14 CFR Part 121
Air carriers, Aircraft, Aircraft pilots, Airmen, Airplanes,
Aviation safety, Hours of work, Pilots, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Safety.
14 CFR Part 125
Aircraft, Airmen, Airplanes, Aviation safety, Hours of work,
Pilots.
14 CFR Part 135
Air carriers, Aircraft, Airmen, Airplanes, Aviation safety, Hours
of work, Pilots, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Safety.
The Amendment
In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends parts 121, 125, and 135 of the Federal Aviation
Regulations (14 CFR parts 121, 125, 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. app. 1354(a), 1355, 1356, 1357, 1401, 1421-
1430, 1472, 1485, and 1502; 49 U.S.C. 106(g).
2. The heading for subpart P is revised to read as follows:
Subpart P--Aircraft Dispatcher Qualifications and Duty Time
Limitations: Domestic and Flag Air Carriers; Flight Attendant Duty
Period Limitations and Rest Requirements: Domestic, Flag, and
Supplemental Air Carriers and Commercial Operators
3. Section 121.461 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 121.461 Applicability.
This subpart prescribes--
(a) Qualifications and duty time limitations for aircraft
dispatchers for domestic and flag air carriers; and
(b) Duty period limitations and rest requirements for flight
attendants used in air transportation by domestic, flag, and
supplemental air carriers, and in air commerce by commercial operators.
4. Section 121.467 is added to subpart P to read as follows:
Sec. 121.467 Flight attendant duty period limitations and rest
requirements: Domestic, flag, and supplemental air carriers and
commercial operators.
(a) For purposes of this section--
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.
Duty period means the period of elapsed time between reporting for
an assignment involving flight time and release from that assignment by
the domestic, flag, or supplemental air carrier or commercial operator.
The time is calculated using either Coordinated Universal Time or local
time to reflect the total elapsed time.
Flight attendant means an individual, other than a flight
crewmember, who is assigned by a domestic, flag, or supplemental air
carrier or commercial operator, in accordance with the required minimum
crew complement under the certificate holder's operations
specifications or in addition to that minimum complement, to duty in an
aircraft during flight time and whose duties include but are not
necessarily limited to cabin-safety-related responsibilities.
Rest period means the period free of all restraint or duty for a
domestic, flag, or supplemental air carrier or commercial operator and
free of all responsibility for work or duty should the occasion arise.
(b) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, a
domestic, flag, or supplemental air carrier or commercial operator may
assign a duty period to a flight attendant only when the applicable
duty period limitations and rest requirements of this paragraph are
met.
(1) Except as provided in paragraphs (b)(4), (b)(5), and (b)(6) of
this section, no domestic, flag, or supplemental air carrier or
commercial operator may assign a flight attendant to a scheduled duty
period of more than 14 hours.
(2) Except as provided in paragraph (b)(3) of this section, a
flight attendant scheduled to a duty period of 14 hours or less as
provided under paragraph (b)(1) of this section must be given a
scheduled rest period of at least 9 consecutive hours. This rest period
must occur between the completion of the scheduled duty period and the
commencement of the subsequent duty period.
(3) The rest period required under paragraph (b)(2) of this section
may be scheduled or reduced to 8 consecutive hours if the flight
attendant is provided a subsequent rest period of at least 10
consecutive 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 subsequent duty period.
(4) A domestic, flag, or supplemental air carrier or commercial
operator may assign a flight attendant to a scheduled duty period of
more than 14 hours, but no more than 16 hours, if the air carrier or
commercial operator has assigned to the flight or flights in that duty
period at least one flight attendant in addition to the minimum flight
attendant complement required for the flight or flights in that duty
period under the air carrier's or the commercial operator's operations
specifications.
(5) A domestic, flag, or supplemental air carrier or commercial
operator may assign a flight attendant to a scheduled duty period of
more than 16 hours, but no more than 18 hours, if the air carrier or
commercial operator has assigned to the flight or flights in that duty
period at least two flight attendants in addition to the minimum flight
attendant complement required for the flight or flights in that duty
period under the air carrier's or the commercial operator's operations
specifications.
(6) A domestic, flag, or supplemental air carrier or commercial
operator may assign a flight attendant to a scheduled duty period of
more than 18 hours, but no more than 20 hours, 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, and if the air
carrier or commercial operator has assigned to the flight or flights in
that duty period at least three flight attendants in addition to the
minimum flight attendant complement required for the flight or flights
in that duty period under the domestic air carrier's or the commercial
operator's operations specifications.
(7) Except as provided in paragraph (b)(8) of this section, a
flight attendant scheduled to a duty period of more than 14 hours but
no more than 20 hours, as provided in paragraphs (b)(4), (b)(5), and
(b)(6) of this section, must be given a scheduled rest period of at
least 12 consecutive hours. This rest period must occur between the
completion of the scheduled duty period and the commencement of the
subsequent duty period.
(8) The rest period required under paragraph (b)(7) of this section
may be scheduled or reduced to 10 consecutive hours if the flight
attendant is provided a subsequent rest period of at least 14
consecutive 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 subsequent duty period.
(9) Notwithstanding paragraphs (b)(4), (b)(5), and (b)(6) of this
section, if a domestic, flag, or supplemental air carrier or commercial
operator elects to reduce the rest period to 10 hours as authorized by
paragraph (b)(8) of this section, the air carrier or commercial
operator may not schedule a flight attendant for a duty period of more
than 14 hours during the 24-hour period commencing after the beginning
of the reduced rest period.
(10) No domestic, flag, or supplemental air carrier or commercial
operator may assign a flight attendant any duty period with the air
carrier or commercial operator unless the flight attendant has had at
least the minimum rest required under this section.
(11) No domestic, flag, or supplemental air carrier or commercial
operator may assign a flight attendant to perform any duty with the air
carrier or operator during any required rest period.
(12) Time spent in transportation, not local in character, that a
domestic, flag, or supplemental air carrier or commercial operator
requires of a flight attendant and provides to transport the flight
attendant to an airport at which that flight attendant is to serve on a
flight as a crewmember, or from an airport at which the flight
attendant was relieved from duty to return to the flight attendant's
home station, is not considered part of a rest period.
(13) Each domestic, flag, or supplemental air carrier must relieve
each flight attendant engaged in air transportation and each commercial
operator must relieve each flight attendant engaged in air commerce
from all further duty for at least 24 consecutive hours during any 7
consecutive calendar days.
(14) A flight attendant is not considered to be scheduled for duty
in excess of duty period limitations if the flights to which the flight
attendant is assigned are scheduled and normally terminate within the
limitations but due to circumstances beyond the control of the
domestic, flag, or supplemental air carrier or commercial operator
(such as adverse weather conditions) are not at the time of departure
expected to reach their destination within the scheduled time.
(c) Notwithstanding paragraph (b) of this section, a domestic,
flag, or supplemental air carrier or commercial operator may apply the
flight crewmember flight time and duty limitations and rest
requirements of this part to flight attendants for all operations
conducted under this part provided that--
(1) The certificate holder establishes written procedures that--
(i) Apply to all flight attendants used in the certificate holder's
operation;
(ii) Include the flight crewmember requirements contained in
subparts Q, R, or S of this part, as appropriate to the operation being
conducted, except that rest facilities on board the aircraft are not
required;
(iii) Include provisions to add one flight attendant to the minimum
flight attendant complement for each flight crewmember who is in excess
of the minimum number required in the aircraft type certificate data
sheet and who is assigned to the aircraft under the provisions of
subparts Q, R, and S, as applicable, of this part;
(iv) Are approved by the Administrator and are described or
referenced in the certificate holder's operations specifications; and
(2) Whenever the Administrator finds that revisions are necessary
for the continued adequacy of the written procedures that are required
by paragraph (c)(1) of this section and that had been granted final
approval, the certificate holder must, after notification by the
Administrator, make any changes in the procedures that are found
necessary by the Administrator. Within 30 days after the certificate
holder receives such notice, it may file a petition to reconsider the
notice with the FAA Flight Standards District Office that is charged
with the overall inspection of the certificate holder's operations. The
filing of a petition to reconsider stays the notice, pending decision
by the Administrator. However, if the Administrator finds that an
emergency requires immediate action in the interest of safety, the
Administrator may, upon a statement of the reasons, require a change
effective without stay.
5. Section 121.683 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(1) to read
as follows:
Sec. 121.683 Crewmember and dispatcher record.
(a) * * *
(1) Maintain current records of each crewmember and each aircraft
dispatcher (domestic and flag air carriers only) that show whether the
crewmember or aircraft dispatcher complies with the applicable sections
of this chapter, including, but not limited to, proficiency and route
checks, airplane and route qualifications, training, any required
physical examinations, flight, duty, and rest time records; and
* * * * *
PART 125--CERTIFICATION AND OPERATIONS: AIRPLANES HAVING A SEATING
CAPACITY OF 20 OR MORE PASSENGERS OR A MAXIMUM PAYLOAD CAPACITY OF
6,000 POUNDS OR MORE
6. The authority citation for part 125 is revised to read as
follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 1354, 1421 through 1430, and 1502.
7. Section 125.37 is amended by revising the heading and paragraph
(a) to read as follows:
Sec. 125.37 Duty period limitations.
(a) Each flight crewmember and flight attendant must be relieved
from all duty for at least 8 consecutive hours during any 24-hour
period.
* * * * *
PART 135--AIR TAXI OPERATORS AND COMMERCIAL OPERATORS
8. The authority citation for part 135 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. app. 1354(a), 1355(a), 1421 through 1431,
and 1502; 49 U.S.C. 106(g) (revised Pub. L. 97-499, January 12,
1983).
9. Section 135.63 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(3) and
(a)(4)(x), adding new paragraph (a)(5), and revising paragraph (b) to
read as follows:
Sec. 135.63 Recordkeeping requirements.
(a) * * *
(3) A current list of the aircraft used or available for use in
operations under this part and the operations for which each is
equipped;
(4) * * *
(x) The date of the completion of the initial phase and each
recurrent phase of the training required by this part; and
(5) An individual record for each flight attendant who is required
under this part, maintained in sufficient detail to determine
compliance with the applicable portions of Sec. 135.273 of this part.
(b) Each certificate holder must keep each record required by
paragraph (a)(3) of this section for at least 6 months, and must keep
each record required by paragraphs (a)(4) and (a)(5) of this section
for at least 12 months.
* * * * *
10. Subpart F is amended by revising the heading to read as
follows:
Subpart F--Crewmember Flight Time and Duty Period Limitations and
Rest Requirements
11. Section 135.261 is amended by revising the introductory text of
the section and by adding a new paragraph (e) to read as follows:
Sec. 135.261 Applicability.
Sections 135.263 through 135.273 of this part prescribe flight time
limitations, duty period limitations, and rest requirements for
operations conducted under this part as follows:
* * * * *
(e) Section 135.273 prescribes duty period limitations and rest
requirements for flight attendants in all operations conducted under
this part.
12. Section 135.273 is added to Subpart F to read as follows:
Sec. 135.273 Duty period limitations and rest time requirements.
(a) For purposes of this section--
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.
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 local time to reflect the total elapsed time.
Flight attendant means an individual, other than a flight
crewmember, who is assigned by the certificate holder, in accordance
with the required minimum crew complement under the certificate
holder's operations specifications or in addition to that minimum
complement, to duty in an aircraft during flight time and whose duties
include but are not necessarily limited to cabin-safety-related
responsibilities.
Rest period means the period free of all responsibility for work or
duty should the occasion arise.
(b) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, a
certificate holder may assign a duty period to a flight attendant only
when the applicable duty period limitations and rest requirements of
this paragraph are met.
(1) Except as provided in paragraphs (b)(4), (b)(5), and (b)(6) of
this section, no certificate holder may assign a flight attendant to a
scheduled duty period of more than 14 hours.
(2) Except as provided in paragraph (b)(3) of this section, a
flight attendant scheduled to a duty period of 14 hours or less as
provided under paragraph (b)(1) of this section must be given a
scheduled rest period of at least 9 consecutive hours. This rest period
must occur between the completion of the scheduled duty period and the
commencement of the subsequent duty period.
(3) The rest period required under paragraph (b)(2) of this section
may be scheduled or reduced to 8 consecutive hours if the flight
attendant is provided a subsequent rest period of at least 10
consecutive 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 subsequent duty period.
(4) A certificate holder may assign a flight attendant to a
scheduled duty period of more than 14 hours, but no more than 16 hours,
if the certificate holder has assigned to the flight or flights in that
duty period at least one flight attendant in addition to the minimum
flight attendant complement required for the flight or flights in that
duty period under the certificate holder's operations specifications.
(5) A certificate holder may assign a flight attendant to a
scheduled duty period of more than 16 hours, but no more than 18 hours,
if the certificate holder has assigned to the flight or flights in that
duty period at least two flight attendants in addition to the minimum
flight attendant complement required for the flight or flights in that
duty period under the certificate holder's operations specifications.
(6) A certificate holder may assign a flight attendant to a
scheduled duty period of more than 18 hours, but no more than 20 hours,
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,
and if the certificate holder has assigned to the flight or flights in
that duty period at least three flight attendants in addition to the
minimum flight attendant complement required for the flight or flights
in that duty period under the certificate holder's operations
specifications.
(7) Except as provided in paragraph (b)(8) of this section, a
flight attendant scheduled to a duty period of more than 14 hours but
no more than 20 hours, as provided in paragraphs (b)(4), (b)(5), and
(b)(6) of this section, must be given a scheduled rest period of at
least 12 consecutive hours. This rest period must occur between the
completion of the scheduled duty period and the commencement of the
subsequent duty period.
(8) The rest period required under paragraph (b)(7) of this section
may be scheduled or reduced to 10 consecutive hours if the flight
attendant is provided a subsequent rest period of at least 14
consecutive 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 subsequent duty period.
(9) Notwithstanding paragraphs (b)(4), (b)(5), and (b)(6) of this
section, if a certificate holder elects to reduce the rest period to 10
hours as authorized by paragraph (b)(8) of this section, the
certificate holder may not schedule a flight attendant for a duty
period of more than 14 hours during the 24-hour period commencing after
the beginning of the reduced rest period.
(10) No certificate holder may assign a flight attendant any duty
period with the certificate holder unless the flight attendant has had
at least the minimum rest required under this section.
(11) No certificate holder may assign a flight attendant to perform
any duty with the certificate holder during any required rest period.
(12) Time spent in transportation, not local in character, that a
certificate holder requires of a flight attendant and provides to
transport the flight attendant to an airport at which that flight
attendant is to serve on a flight as a crewmember, or from an airport
at which the flight attendant was relieved from duty to return to the
flight attendant's home station, is not considered part of a rest
period.
(13) Each certificate holder must relieve each flight attendant
engaged in air transportation from all further duty for at least 24
consecutive hours during any 7 consecutive calendar days.
(14) A flight attendant is not considered to be scheduled for duty
in excess of duty period limitations if the flights to which the flight
attendant is assigned are scheduled and normally terminate within the
limitations but due to circumstances beyond the control of the
certificate holder (such as adverse weather conditions) are not at the
time of departure expected to reach their destination within the
scheduled time.
(c) Notwithstanding paragraph (b) of this section, a certificate
holder may apply the flight crewmember flight time and duty limitations
and rest requirements of this part to flight attendants for all
operations conducted under this part provided that--
(1) The certificate holder establishes written procedures that--
(i) Apply to all flight attendants used in the certificate holder's
operation;
(ii) Include the flight crewmember requirements contained in
subpart F of this part, as appropriate to the operation being
conducted, except that rest facilities on board the aircraft are not
required; and
(iii) Include provisions to add one flight attendant to the minimum
flight attendant complement for each flight crewmember who is in excess
of the minimum number required in the aircraft type certificate data
sheet and who is assigned to the aircraft under the provisions of
subpart F of this part, as applicable.
(iv) Are approved by the Administrator and described or referenced
in the certificate holder's operations specifications; and
(2) Whenever the Administrator finds that revisions are necessary
for the continued adequacy of duty period limitation and rest
requirement procedures that are required by paragraph (c)(1) of this
section and that had been granted final approval, the certificate
holder must, after notification by the Administrator, make any changes
in the procedures that are found necessary by the Administrator. Within
30 days after the certificate holder receives such notice, it may file
a petition to reconsider the notice with the FAA Flight Standards
District Office that is charged with the overall inspection of the
certificate holder's operations. The filing of a petition to reconsider
stays the notice, pending decision by the Administrator. However, if
the Administrator finds that there is an emergency that requires
immediate action in the interest of safety, the Administrator may, upon
a statement of the reasons, require a change effective without stay.
Issued in Washington, DC, on August 15, 1994.
David R. Hinson,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 94-20372 Filed 8-16-94; 12:44 pm]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M