Calling the FSDO is the best option. If there is room for interpretation in this rule, it's only your local FSDO's interpretation that matters.
I found the below clip in the now-defunct FAQ that might be of interest to you. The question isn't exactly the same as yours, but I think the answer sheds some light on one FAA guy's interpretation of this reg. It worthy to note, however, that John Lynch's excellent FAQ list is no longer endorsed by the FAA and they've removed it from their website. You can find copies of it on the internet if you search for it, and it's helpful in certain situations, but asking your local FSDO is the best way to go.
QUESTION: In the context of operations conducted by the Civil Air Patrol, the revised § 61.113(e) provides that a private pilot may be reimbursed “....for aircraft operating expenses that are directly related to search and location operations, provided the expenses involve only fuel, oil, airport expenditures, or rental fees...” This has given rise to some troubling questions. For example, if a CAP member, who is a private pilot, rents an airplane to assist with a search operation, it seems clear under the regulation he may be reimbursed his out-of-pocket “...fuel, oil, airport expenditures, or rental fees...” So far so good, the CAP member private pilot has not lost any money. But what if the same CAP member owns his own airplane--was it the intent of the new regulation that such a pilot may rent it to CAP to recover his out-of pocket costs or was the intention of the new rule to require such a private pilot member of CAP to either not fly the mission or assume the aircraft operating expenses himself ?
Another troubling question is, if CAP wants a member, who is a private pilot, to give orientation flights to its cadets members, or fly himself or other CAP members to a CAP meeting or participate in training flights, was it the intent of the new rule that such flights be treated as “directly related to search & location operations” ? If not, is there some way the private pilot can be reimbursed the same out-of-pocket “...fuel, oil, airport expenditures, or rental fees...” ? Or is the intent and effect of the new rule to force a private pilot volunteer to CAP to assume or part of that out-of-pocket financial burden himself or forego making the flight?
ANSWER: Ref. § 61.113(e); The answer is no, ownership costs are not reimbursable costs. The rulemaking team that drafted this rule specifically intended not to include ownership costs in reimbursable costs. The decision was based on the realization that trying to establish what would be REASONABLE reimbursement ownership costs was impossible to establish. Additionally, the decision was based on the conditions and limitations that were contained in past grants of exemption from the old § 61.118 that was the basis for adopting § 61.113.
Ref. § 61.113(a); No, there is no way for a private pilot to recover such costs. The rulemaking team that drafted this rule did not consider expanding those kinds of privileges to private pilots. With what was adopted in the new § 61.113, the line between the privileges and limitations of the private pilot vs. the commercial pilot is getting more and more narrow! However, the Civil Air Patrol has petitioned for a grant of exemption and I know your petition is being processed at this time.
{Q&A-162}
