Four aviation trade associations are urging the FAA to extend a proposed rule preempting state meal-and-rest-break laws beyond scheduled airlines to also cover charter, fractional, and helicopter operations, arguing that the agency’s current proposal leaves a gap in coverage.
The FAA recently published the proposed rule in the Federal Register, seeking to clarify that federal duty-and-rest rules for flight crew members override conflicting state and local break laws. The agency said the rule responds to recent litigation, including Bernstein v. Virgin America, over whether state break laws can apply to flight attendants during a duty period.
“Conflicting state or local laws would create a complex patchwork of regulatory requirements that would frustrate the federal regulatory scheme and inhibit aviation safety,” the FAA wrote, arguing that state laws requiring crew to be relieved of all duty could create an unworkable conflict with federal safety regulations, since crew must remain available to respond to emergencies throughout a flight.
As drafted, the rule applies only to Part 121 air carriers. In a joint comment filed on September 4, the closing day of the public comment period, the Association of Value Airlines, National Air Transportation Association, NBAA, and Vertical Aviation International noted that the gap appears unintentional. The groups said that operations under Parts 91K, 125, and 135—including fractional ownership programs, large-aircraft operators, and charter and helicopter operators—are subject to a comparable federal duty-and-rest framework, yet were left out of the proposed preemption language. The associations cited seven active Part 91K management specifications holders, 53 active Part 125 certificate holders, and roughly 2,000 active Part 135 certificate holders currently without the clarity the rule would provide to airlines.
The coalition believes the FAA’s reasoning for Part 121 applies with equal or greater force to smaller operators. “Just like Part 121 carriers, operations under Parts 91K, 125, and 135 are subject to an extensive federal duty and rest regulatory framework, the same safety-critical crewmember functions, the same operational conflicts, and the same impact on prices, routes, and services,” the groups wrote.
The comment singled out single-pilot Part 135 operations, about 30% of Part 135 certificate holders, according to the filing, as particularly exposed, since FAA rules restrict which pilots those operators may use and leave no practical way to add crew to accommodate state-mandated breaks. The groups also pointed to air ambulance operations under FAR 135.271, arguing that the federally prescribed helicopter hospital emergency medical evacuation service framework governing assignment, flight time, and rest shouldn’t be altered by state requirements tied to a flight’s base, departure point, or destination.
The coalition proposed specific regulatory text extending preemption language to FARs 91.1057, 125.37, and new 135.275, mirroring the preemption provisions the FAA proposed for Part 121 carriers.
More In Regulations and Government
