FAA Reference Library
FAA Office of Chief Counsel interpretations of the regulations - how the FAA reads its own rules, issued in response to specific questions.
About Legal Interpretations
Legal interpretations are letters from the FAA Chief Counsel explaining how a regulation applies to a specific situation. They are non-binding but carry real weight in how the FARs are enforced and understood. Sourced from the FAA Dynamic Regulatory System; each links to the full letter.
View Mode
May 20, 2008
FlightPush Summary
A part 121 all-cargo flight from JFK to Newark to Frankfurt keeps its international character under 14 CFR 121.521 if Newark is only a fuel stop. Even if cargo is loaded at Newark, making the first leg a U.S.-mainland flight under 14 CFR 121.513, no safety rule bars carrying the additional airman on that leg.
March 14, 2008
FlightPush Summary
A part 135 operator asked whether the FAA's 1991 reading of adequate sleeping facilities under 14 CFR 135.269(b)(5) still applies. It does: the phrase generally means a bunk or berth, not a reclining seat, judged case by case. A formal determination for a specific aircraft goes to the FAA Long Beach Aircraft Evaluation Group.
June 11, 2007
FlightPush Summary
A Polar Air pilot and an ALPA attorney asked how 14 CFR 121.485(b) rest applies to flights with fewer than three pilots and to crews returned to a non-home base. The FAA said only flights requiring three or more pilots plus an additional crewmember count, and crews must get the full rest at home base unless it was all given at once at an appropriate alternative U.S. base.
May 3, 2007
FlightPush Summary
An individual asked whether 14 CFR 121.471(g) lets a flight crewmember exceed flight time limitations only to return to a hub or base, since the rule says "destination" in the singular. The FAA said that reading is incorrect and that no FAA interpretation it knows of imposes such a restriction.
October 15, 2007
FlightPush Summary
A requester asked whether a pilot who flies a morning trip, is released for 9 hours, then flies an evening return trip has received the rest part 135 requires. The FAA said no: 9 hours does not meet the 10 consecutive hours of rest required by 14 CFR 135.267, though extending the break to 10 hours would start a new duty day and make the schedule permissible.
November 16, 2007
FlightPush Summary
An individual asked whether earlier FAA interpretations of the quarterly rest rule in 14 CFR 135.267(f) still stand and whether they apply to on-demand charter operators. The FAA said yes to both: rest must be continuous, known in advance, and free from all restraint by the certificate holder, and each flight crewmember must actually receive at least 13 such 24-hour periods every quarter.
October 29, 2007
FlightPush Summary
The Air Line Pilots Association asked about pre-duty rest for flag reserve pilots. The FAA said flag rules require rest through the 24-hours-off-in-seven-days rule and intervening rest periods, that reserve time is not rest, and that without onboard sleeping quarters FAA safety experts consider it reckless to let crewmembers be awake 26 hours at landing.
December 11, 2006
FlightPush Summary
After a reduced rest period, an airline flight crewmember's compensatory rest must begin within 24 hours of the start of the reduced rest. If the pilot or carrier knows before a segment departs that compensatory rest will start late, the pilot may not depart on it. A crewmember who knows continuing is not legal may not continue, even if a scheduler or chief pilot says otherwise.
February 23, 2006
FlightPush Summary
A Detroit FSDO inspector asked whether a supplemental crew may fly a final leg after delays push total flight time past 8 hours. The FAA said the crew may complete the leg if the original schedule was realistic, the delays were truly beyond the carrier's control, and the crew is not so fatigued as to be careless or reckless. It directed the FSDO to review three months of carrier data.
December 19, 2005
FlightPush Summary
Summit Jet, a Part 135 operator, asked whether its pilots' "not scheduled" days met the 14 CFR 135.267(f) requirement for at least 13 rest periods of at least 24 consecutive hours per quarter. The FAA said a day is not rest if pilots must respond to messages during it, and that Summit Jet must show each crewmember receives at least 13 such periods every quarter, not just an average.
December 15, 2005
FlightPush Summary
Atlas Air asked whether crewmembers who must stay contactable on layover or on residence reserve are resting under 14 CFR 121.483(b). The FAA said no: rest must be continuous, known in advance, and free of all restraint, so flight time cannot be assigned without a qualifying 24-consecutive-hour rest in the prior seven days. Deadheading, which is not flight time, may still be assigned.
April 29, 2005
FlightPush Summary
Pinnacle Airlines asked whether an unforeseen mechanical delay can extend a flight attendant's duty past 14 hours under 14 CFR 121.467(b)(14). The FAA said yes, if the flights normally terminate within limits, but the delay cannot reduce required rest, such as the 9 hours under 14 CFR 121.467(b)(2), before the next duty period. Fatigue still matters under 14 CFR 91.13(a).
July 15, 2005
FlightPush Summary
The Air Line Pilots Association asked whether the weather-delay exception in 14 CFR 121.471(g) excuses compensatory rest. The FAA said no: it covers flight time limits only, so a pilot who knows before the last segment that delays will push compensatory rest beyond the 24-hour limit may not depart.
July 26, 2005
FlightPush Summary
ALPA asked whether a reserve day followed by six flight duty days meets the rule requiring 24 consecutive hours of rest in any 7 days. The FAA said no: reserve duty is not rest, and under 14 CFR 121.483(b) and 121.503(c) a 24-hour rest must appear looking back 7 days from midnight of each flight day. Even a rest the day before Day 1 would cover only through Day 6.
January 11, 2005
FlightPush Summary
A requester asked whether supplemental carriers may use "legal to start, legal to finish" to exceed 14 CFR part 121 duty limits. The FAA said no: a pilot scheduled to exceed the limit before pushback may not depart, only a minimum 8-hour rest breaks a duty period, and no rules let a company avoid duty limits, although the FAA may weigh unforeseen in-flight delays in enforcement.
December 31, 2004
FlightPush Summary
Time a reserve pilot must stay available to answer a carrier's call or page is not rest under 14 CFR 121.471, because rest means freedom from all restraint by the carrier. Transportation that is local in character may count toward rest, but the carrier must keep that travel time reasonably brief if it counts it.
July 4, 2004
FlightPush Summary
The Teamsters Airline Division asked whether a carrier may break a duty period with a three-hour hotel stop during a maintenance delay. The FAA said no: rest must be continuous, known in advance, and free from responsibility for work, and a crew effectively on call in a hotel is on duty, so the time counted toward the 16-hour limit in 14 CFR 121.505(b).
May 9, 2003
FlightPush Summary
The Air Line Pilots Association asked whether a pilot who received reduced rest and then spent a day on standby and deadhead was owed compensatory rest. The FAA said no: neither standby nor deadhead triggers compensatory rest under 14 CFR 121.471, though neither may occur during a required rest period. The FAA also explained how ferry flights count toward rest and flight time limits.
April 10, 2003
FlightPush Summary
A supplemental operations pilot asked when a certificate holder may use the international flight time rules under 14 CFR 121.513. The FAA said the certificate holder must affirmatively elect them and tell its flight crewmembers; multi-leg operations that are international in character can qualify, and no single leg must exceed 8 hours. Both of the pilot's example flights were eligible.
November 15, 2002
FlightPush Summary
An FAA inspector asked whether three pilots on a 10-hour supplemental international round trip may split the aloft time among themselves. The FAA said no: any pilot serving as a flight crewmember on a leg counts the leg's entire block-to-block time, so the PIC and First Officer A each count 10 hours toward the 14 CFR 121.521 limits. Questions about the third pilot were left for a later opinion.
June 23, 2000
FlightPush Summary
Time a pilot must remain available to answer the carrier's phone is not rest under 14 CFR 121.471. In the scenario, nine hours of prior rest satisfied the rule if less than 8 hours of flight time was scheduled, but not for 8 to under 9 hours, which requires 10 consecutive hours of rest.
August 24, 1999
FlightPush Summary
A flag carrier cannot start a day with a two-pilot crew under 14 CFR 121.481 and then add a third pilot to fly a later segment under the longer 12-hour limit of 14 CFR 121.483. The pilots must first receive the rest period required by 14 CFR 121.481(b); otherwise the conversion would defeat the rest rules.
June 25, 1996
FlightPush Summary
A requester asked how 14 CFR 121.471(b) rest rules apply to reserve pilots under United Airlines policies. The FAA said reserve duty is not rest because the pilot keeps a present responsibility for work; a reserve pilot assigned flight time must be relieved of all duty early enough to get the required continuous rest in the 24 hours before the assignment's scheduled completion.
March 26, 1992
FlightPush Summary
AMR Combs asked whether standby or reserve status counts as duty for flight crewmembers. Lacking a specific schedule, the FAA offered general observations: a standby or reserve pilot has a present responsibility to work if called and is therefore on duty, which tolls the rest period. The FAA also declined to review the company's operations manual policies.
March 27, 1992
FlightPush Summary
The Air Line Pilots Association asked whether crewmembers' commutes between home and two co-domiciled airports count as duty time. The FAA said no: home-to-airport travel is local transportation, not provided by the carrier, and counts as part of a rest period. 14 CFR 121.471(f) covers non-local transportation the carrier requires and provides, such as deadheading.
October 14, 1992
FlightPush Summary
A requester asked whether a part 121 crew that flew 3 hours of domestic flights and then 8 hours of flag flights between rest periods was legal. The FAA said yes: domestic limits in 14 CFR 121.471 govern the domestic legs and flag limits in 14 CFR 121.483 govern the flag legs, and the schedule met both.
November 24, 1992
FlightPush Summary
A requester asked when domestic air carrier crews may complete schedules after weather delays add flight time. The FAA said a crew may finish the day's scheduled flights if delays are beyond the carrier's control, and for the 30-hours-in-7-days limit, actual prior flight time plus the day's scheduled time must not exceed 30 hours under 14 CFR 121.471(a).
November 12, 1992
FlightPush Summary
Zuckert, Scoutt & Rasenberger asked whether a carrier may complete the remaining legs of a multi-leg flight when adverse weather will push flight time beyond limits. The FAA said yes in both scenarios: under 14 CFR 121.471(g), unforeseen weather or delays disrupting a properly scheduled flight are excused, though carriers must schedule realistically and adjust schedules that consistently run over.
January 13, 1992
FlightPush Summary
A law firm asked the FAA for its prior policies and interpretations on what "schedule" means in 14 CFR 121.481(a) and 14 CFR 121.483(a). The FAA did not answer the question itself; it supplied 21 documents it found within the scope of the request and billed the processing costs under FOIA regulations.
April 20, 1992
FlightPush Summary
A Jetstream International Airlines pilot asked whether delays that push actual flight time past 34 hours in 7 days bar finishing the day's schedule under 14 CFR 135.265(a)(3). The FAA said no: if prior actual flight time plus the day's scheduled time is 34 hours or less, the pilot may complete the day, though a carrier should relieve a dangerously fatigued pilot.
March 27, 1992
FlightPush Summary
A requester asked whether a pilot may fly scheduled operations on seven consecutive days without 24 consecutive hours off duty. The FAA said no: under 14 CFR 135.265(d) a day is a calendar day, so relief must come on the seventh day, and counting 168 consecutive hours instead would require an exemption.
June 19, 1991
FlightPush Summary
Evergreen International Airlines asked whether hotel telephone or pager standby counts as duty under 14 CFR 121.471(d). The FAA said no, because the rule limits duty aloft: it is violated only if a crewmember flies in air transportation seven consecutive days without 24 hours off, so 7 days of standby alone is allowed, though definitive answers need precise facts.
March 21, 1991
FlightPush Summary
The Air Line Pilots Association asked whether Midway Airlines violated 14 CFR 121.471(d) when a delayed sixth-day trip ended 7 minutes into the crew's seventh day. The FAA said no, because the delay was beyond the carrier's control, as long as the crew received the full 24 hours of rest before further duty aloft; carriers must still schedule realistically.
June 19, 1991
FlightPush Summary
The Air Line Pilots Association asked whether rest under 14 CFR 121.481(b) is based on hours scheduled or hours actually flown. The FAA said it is based on hours actually flown, so a flight scheduled for 5 hours that runs one hour long requires at least 12 hours of rest.
June 20, 1991
FlightPush Summary
The Allied Pilots Association asked whether a pilot could be rescheduled en route to a longer segment when holding delays would push flight time past the 8-hour limit. The FAA said this does not violate 14 CFR 121.471(a)(4) if the change results from weather or other circumstances beyond the carrier's control, under 14 CFR 121.471(g), though schedules must remain realistic.
November 9, 1990
FlightPush Summary
The Air Line Pilots Association asked whether a pilot released at 2200 and due back at 0600 receives legal rest. The FAA said a required 9-hour rest may be reduced to 8 hours under 14 CFR 121.471(c), but a compensatory rest of at least 10 hours must begin within 24 hours after the reduced rest began, even if flights are delayed, and cannot be reduced.
May 30, 2017
FlightPush Summary
The Aeronautical Repair Station Association asked whether employees who receive parts for stock are safety-sensitive under the drug and alcohol testing rules. The FAA said no: inspecting packaging, verifying sources, and matching parts to purchase orders are not maintenance or preventive maintenance, so these employees are not safety-sensitive under 14 CFR part 120 and should not be in the testing pool.
August 29, 2016
FlightPush Summary
Rose Aircraft Services asked the FAA to define the indicators of probable drug use that justify a reasonable cause test under 14 CFR 120.109. The FAA said testing must rest on a reasonable and articulable belief based on such indicators, cited examples like mood swings and changes in appearance, attitude, and speech, and pointed to its documentation form checklist covering appearance, behavior, motor skills, speech, and odor.
January 20, 2016
FlightPush Summary
A contractor with its own drug testing program, like Job Aire Group, must meet 14 CFR part 120, subpart E as if it were the employer, so its own supervisors, possibly including on-site coordinators, make reasonable-cause testing decisions under 14 CFR 120.109(d). Client certificate holders' supervisors may share observations but not decide. An employee who fails to appear for a directed test could be found to have refused.
May 29, 2015
FlightPush Summary
Odyssey Airways asked whether a mechanic outside a DOT/FAA drug and alcohol testing program may make repairs needed before the next flight. The FAA said yes, as emergency maintenance under 14 CFR 120.35 and 14 CFR 120.39, both in the Bahamas and in the United States when no covered provider is available, provided the operator meets the notice and re-inspection requirements.
November 19, 2014
FlightPush Summary
Dynamic Airways asked when an employee is 'hired' for pre-employment drug testing. The FAA said the hiring event itself is the standard: under 14 CFR 120.109(a), the employer must conduct the test and receive a verified negative result before hiring anyone for a safety-sensitive function.
April 19, 2013
FlightPush Summary
Kalitta Air asked about drug testing and random-test notification. The FAA said the "performing" definition in 14 CFR 120.7(k) applies only to alcohol testing, so employees responsible for safety-sensitive functions are subject to drug testing at any time. Random tests must be unannounced, and employers should notify employees when they can ensure the employee proceeds to testing immediately.
September 18, 2013
FlightPush Summary
A physician asked whether random drug testing is limited to employees actually performing safety-sensitive duties. The FAA reaffirmed its Mayo interpretation: the 14 CFR 120.7(k) definition of performing does not apply to drug testing, so a pilot hired to perform a safety-sensitive function is subject to random drug testing even if not immediately available to fly due to a lapse in currency.
November 30, 2012
FlightPush Summary
An airman's attorney sought removal of all records of a random alcohol test he called invalid. DOT and the FAA found no basis to cancel the test under 49 CFR 40.267 or 40.269, so the airman must complete the return-to-duty process before safety-sensitive work. The FAA had separately expunged references to an Emergency Order of Revocation from his FAA airman and medical records.
July 18, 2012
FlightPush Summary
Piedmont Propulsion System asked whether a subcontractor that fabricates the replacement parts it designs must drug and alcohol test its employees under FAA rules. The FAA said no: as in its 2006 Pratt & Whitney interpretation, fabricating a part is not maintenance, so the subcontractor is not required to have an FAA testing program.
July 23, 2010
FlightPush Summary
The Aeronautical Repair Station Association asked whether failing to provide enough urine for a follow-up drug test, after an earlier verified positive, permanently disqualifies an employee under 14 CFR 120.111. The FAA said no, because a refusal is not a verified positive result. The employee must still be removed from safety-sensitive functions until completing the return-to-duty process.
December 31, 2024
FlightPush Summary
Ordnance & Energetics Consulting LLC asked whether its guided munitions resembling unmanned aircraft are aircraft. The FAA said they meet the 14 CFR 1.1 definitions of aircraft and unmanned aircraft, intent is not part of those definitions, and it cannot interpret "munition." Civil rules generally apply unless operations qualify as public aircraft operations, and warhead-carrying flights need authorization under Section 363 of the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018.
September 27, 2024
FlightPush Summary
Rupprecht Law asked whether drone transport of organs or blood beyond visual line of sight could get a 14 CFR 107.31 waiver. The FAA agreed waivers are possible if the operator truly owns the cargo or carries it without compensation or holding out, but warned that it rejects sham ownership, construes compensation broadly, and would need more facts on a specific operation.