Fatigue Permeates Flight and Maintenance Activities in Airline Industry

Air Safety Week, May 28, 2001

Get-tough policy on enforcement of pilot rest rule announced

In the decades-long controversy over how much time pilots and other airline personnel can be on duty, a new element on the scene is raising the stakes - enforcement. The specter of fines being levied on carriers and on individual pilots for being in violation of Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulations has created a new sense of need to update the existing regulations.

Another aspect, the advent of new jets capable of what are called ultra- long haul (ULH) flights as adding to the pressure to update flight and duty time regulations. These flights, non-stop point-to-point marathons of more than 16 hours duration and perhaps as long as 22 hours, mean someone can take off and fly direct to virtually anywhere on the globe. While the demands on the crews, and the insidious effects of fatigue on their performance, are the subject of ongoing discussions within the industry, the most immediate concern deals with the FAA's recent declaration that it will enforce minimum pilot rest rules.

The FAA announced in a May 14 Notice of Enforcement Policy that it would "rigorously enforce" the existing flight crew rest requirements. Specifically, US dollars 121.471 of the Federal Aviation Regulations, which specify a minimum of 8 hours of rest in a 24-hour period for domestic operations. According to Carol Hallett, president and CEO of the Air Transport Association (ATA), said the regulations have traditionally been interpreted such that if the crew was legal to start a flight, it was legal to finish. The ATA is the trade group representing major carriers in the U.S.,

No, declares the FAA. It has pronounced that if the crew cannot look back over the previous 24-hour period and find a minimum of 8 hours of rest, that situation constitutes a violation of the regulation.

This latest action from the FAA is the latest development over the past year. During June of 1999 the FAA announced it would strictly enforce the reserve rest rule, giving the industry a six-month grace period to come into compliance. This action was intended to prevent situations where pilots, called from reserve duty, would be awake continuously for 24 hours or more after completing their assigned flights (see ASW, June 14, 1999).

Then last September Capt. Rich Rubin, acting on behalf of the Allied Pilots Association (APA), the union of American Airlines [AMR] pilots, asked the FAA to provide additional clarification. Rubin asked the FAA to interpret the regulations on the basis of several hypothetical duty day scenarios. FAA Deputy Chief Counsel James Whitlow provided detailed responses last November. Whitlow's response basically declared that pilots could not be on duty for more than 16 hours in a 24-hour period (see ASW, December 11, 2000).

The FAA's May 14th notice basically takes the Whitlow interpretation and declares that it applies not just to APA and American Airlines; it applies to domestic operations for all Part, 121 (scheduled) operators. They have until November 1, 2001, to bring their scheduling and operational practices into full compliance, as that is the date the FAA declares it will launch a "comprehensive review" of the situation in the field and to "deal stringently with any violations discovered." The strongly-worded announcement reiterates Whitlow's interpretation - if a pilot cannot complete a flight and look back over the previous 24 hours and find 8 hours of rest, the flight cannot depart. Note that the 8-hour look-back rule does not require 8 hours of sleep, as the non-duty time may include travel time to and from a place of rest.

Divided reactions

The FAA's announcement has spurred two immediate reactions. The ATA has filed a lawsuit against the FAA, declaring in essence that the Whitlow interpretation and enforcement thereof constitutes rulemaking and hence violates requirements for comment, cost-benefit evaluation, and so forth. Oral arguments, sources advise, are slated for October 18, 2001. The ATA's Capt. Al Prest decried the FAA's apparent "cookie-cutter" approach. "There needs to be an alternative method of compliance to allow airlines to avoid a 'one size fits all' constraint. I know that's were our members would like to go," he said. As an illustration of the regulatory shoe fitting too tightly, Hallett cited a case where, if the crew departs at 1:59, it could complete the flight and remain legal under the 8-hour look-back rule, but a delayed takeoff at 2:01 could well end with the crew being in an illegal status. "Three minutes can make the difference between go and no-go," she explained.

The pilots unions, on the other hand, hailed the FAA's announcement, while fretting that the agency is not moving quickly enough. Capt. Bob Miller, President of the Coalition of Airline Pilots Associations (CAPA), said "the fact that the industry is being given an additional six months to comply with a law that has been in existence or over 15 years is troubling." Duane Woerth, president of the Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA), the nation's largest pilots union, was more blunt: "I call on the FAA to quit stalling and act now." Woerth was speaking in the context of modernizing outdated regulations based on "reams of scientific data" amassed on the subject of fatigue. Woerth went on to outline a 4-point action program, one that is backed by all the major pilot associations.