Flight Attendant Duty Period Limitations and Rest Requirements; Final Rule DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

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