Faa Reg

[SDdriver]

Does anyone know what set of regs refer to non-profit flying companies?

THanks in advance.

SD

 

[KickSave]

I thought most all the major airlines are non profit flying companies?

 

[Brother Francis]

Smart a$$

 

[ShawnC]

I thought most all the major airlines are non profit flying companies?

He may be a smart a$$ but it's true for a few of the major airlines.

 

[SDdriver]

Just to clarify, I am trying to find info (regs) on hauling freight non-profit.

Does that fall under FAR 91, since the cargo being flown is not for hire? More like for charity?

Just curious. And please guys, only serious responses.

SD

 

[KickSave]

Lighten up, Francis

c. Ox, from Stripes


(I can't believe I actually said that)


I was all set to add my $.02 about how the regs talk about compensation or hire, without regard for actual profits, and some limted stuff about non commercial pilots flying certain charity events... but then I realized I didn't have enough in depth knowledge on the subject, so I just said the first thing that came to mind.

 

[chawbein]

Lighten up, Francis

c. Ox, from Stripes

Sorry, that is the incorrect answer. The correct answer is Russell Ziske, aptly played by Harold Ramis.

I know, I'm a jack@ss.

 

[KickSave]

Doh! I can't even be a smartass without screwing it up

Actually for SD, I'm doing some web searching on the subject. I would also just contact the FSDO or the FAA web site and ask the so called experts there.

 

[SDdriver]

Kicksave,

I didn't really mind the comment, I thought it was kinda funny, I am just trying to get an idea of where to start looking in the regs for this type of operation.

135 states flying cargo or people for hire. 121 same thing just different things involving amount of pax's and all that stuff, but I can't seem to find out what reg controls total non-profit flying. There is a company down in south Florida that flys skymasters I think, they look for cubans stranded in the ocean trying to get to the US, they are totaly non profit and all of their expenses are from donations, I am sure the pilots are paid, but as far as the organization making money, they don't.

Just curious where to get info on an organization like that, where the actual pilots are paid for their flying, but the company does not earn a profit for the service, wheather it be flying looking for aliens, or hauling cargo, and such. I know the FAA has to have control on that type of operation in some form or fashion, but I don't know where to find the info. I have been to the ATL FSDO site, but like I said I am not sure what reg to look under.

SD

 

[SDdriver]

Oh yeah, I tried to call 2 FSDOs but got only recordings, guess they are all out ramp checking. )

I'll keep trying to call.

SD

 

[KickSave]

SD, no worries. In my search, partly for my own leanring, I came up with just this: The FARs refer to profit as the test of a commercial operation. The definition of a commercial operater includes this line:

"Where it is doubtful that an operation is for "compensation or hire", the test applied is whether the carriage by air is merely incidental to the person's other business or is, in itself, a major enterprise for profit."

There is no other reference to profit in the FARs, other than profit and loss balance sheets for commerical operators. Definitely no reference to "non-profit."

Using my amateur logic, if you are not engaged in an enterprise for profit, then there isn't a FAR section, like 121 or 135, that covers your specific type of operation. If your business is searching for Cuban refugees for the purpose of rescuing them, and you fly planes as an incidental aspect of that business, then you are not a commercial operator, IMO.

One other suggestion would be to contact some local flying clubs and talk to them. Most flying clubs are listed as non-profit organizations, even though the individual owners are hoping to actually make money by renting out their planes. The company that organizes and manages the flying club however, is a non profit co for tax purposes. THey might be able to give you some more insight.

/Dave

 

[SpiderMan]

Sorry, that is the incorrect answer. The correct answer is Russell Ziske, aptly played by Harold Ramis.

I know, I'm a jack@ss.

Still wrong. Sgt. Hulka said that to Francis Sawyer (Psycho) in Stripes.

 

[SDdriver]

Thanks for the help,

I was searching as you were and kinda came up with the same info. I found some other good info on basic non-profits that don't have anything to do with aviation, so incorporating the aviation aspect I came up with the same conlusion, that is ,I don't think there is any reg that specificly governs the non-profit aviation company. Thanks for your time and help..

SD

 

[midlifeflyer]

SD, there are no specific regs dealing with the issue. But here are two pieced of the puzzle you need to work with (hopefully with an aviation lawyer):

The first is a 1993, FAA Legal opinion saying the merely taking a tax deduction for a charitable flight was enough "compensation" to require Part 135 certification. The context was a request from Senator Phil Gramm on behalf of Angel Flight. The FAA pretty much said that Angel Flight pilots were violating Part 61 no compensation rules. Bearing in mind that there are a number of FA opinions about "building time" being compensation, this can be a problem.

The NTSB has held that compensation or hire exists where a private pilot receives reimbursement of expenses or takes a tax deduction for voluntarily carrying persons or property on flights. The NTSB ruled such flights to be in violation of Section 61.118. The FAA argued for this interpretation and agrees with the NTSB decision. Private pilots making volunteer air flights involving the carriage of persons or property are in violation of Section 61.118 if they receive any reimbursement of expenses or take any tax deductions for those flights. In addition, if the operator of the aircraft does not have an FAA operating certificate, carriage of persons or property for compensation or hire is also a violation of Part 121 or 135 of the FAR. On the other hand, if the flights conducted by Angel Flight do not involve compensation or hire, as that phrase has been interpreted by the FAA and the NTSB, then neither Angel Flight nor the pilots involved would be in violation of Section 61.118, Part 121, or Part 135.

The second is the later FAA policy, obviously so that the FAA wouldn't come out looking like Scrooge on Christmas Eve. This is from 8400.10. the Air Transportation Operations Inspector's Handbook.

1345. FAA POLICY REGARDING "COMPENSATION OR HIRE" CONSIDERATIONS FOR CHARITABLE FLIGHTS OR LIFE FLIGHTS. Various organizations and pilots are conducting flights that are characterized as "volunteer," "charity," or "humanitarian." These flights are referred to by numerous generic names, including "lifeline flights," "life flights," "mercy flights," and "angel flights." These types of flights will be referred to as "life flights" in this section.
A. Purposes for Life Flights. The types of organizations and pilots involved with or conducting life flights vary greatly. The most common purpose of life flights is to transport ill or injured persons who cannot financially afford commercial transport to appropriate medical treatment facilities, or to transport blood or human organs. Other "compassionate flights" include transporting a child to visit with a dying relative, or transporting a dying patient to return to the city of the patient's birth.
B. FAA Policy. The FAA's policy supports "truly humanitarian efforts" to provide life flights to needy persons (including "compassionate flights"). This also includes flights involving the transfer of blood and human organs. Since Congress has specifically provided for the tax deductibility of some costs of charitable acts, the FAA will not treat charitable deductions of such costs, standing alone, as constituting "compensation or hire" for the purpose of enforcement of FAR § 61.118 or FAR Part 135. Inspectors should not treat the tax deductibility of costs as constituting "compensation or hire" when the flights are conducted for humanitarian purposes.

 

[slickmagneto]

NON PROFIT

The South Florida company you are referring to is Brothers to the Rescue. I think they are based at OPF, Opa Locka, Fl.

 

[B190Captain]

Sorry, that is the incorrect answer. The correct answer is Russell Ziske, aptly played by Harold Ramis.

I know, I'm a jack@ss.

Negative,

"Lighten up Francis," was said by the ever-so loved Sgt. Hulka played by Warren Oates.

 

[chawbein]

Bzzzzzzzt!

You get half-credit. Not only was it said by Sgt. Hulka, but also later in the movie by Russell Ziske. Everybody knows that Sgt. Hulka said it, but the quote in question refers to someone other than Sgt. Hulka. Therefore, I'm right and you are wrong.

Thanks for playing.