The National Civil Aviation Administration (ANAC) has set new operational parameters for aviation personnel to ensure adequate rest and alertness conditions in air operations, in line with the best international practices and standards.
It did so by approving Resolution No. 812/2025, which establishes technical and interpretive guidelines for the implementation of Decree No. 378/2025 on maximum flight times, minimum rest periods, and fatigue management, for operators that do not opt to implement their own Fatigue Risk Management System (FRMS).
In this context, the new ANAC resolution introduces the necessary modifications to the Argentine Civil Aviation Regulations (RAAC) to adapt them to the provisions of the decree. Likewise, technical guidelines were approved that act as a guide for the interpretation and application of the regime, providing clarity on the responsibility of operators regarding service times, rest periods, and crew scheduling.
“These tools aim to provide greater predictability to operations and favor a homogeneous implementation throughout the industry,” indicates the Secretariat of Transport in a communiqué issued today.
In accordance with Decree No. 378/25, operators may choose to develop and implement their own Fatigue Risk Management System (FRMS), which must be presented to the Aviation Authority under sworn statement and guarantee, at a minimum, the safety level provided for in the regulations. Those who do not adopt their own FRMS must fully comply with the decree's general regime.
Regarding service conditions, it is specified that each crew member must assess their fitness to operate before each flight, while operators maintain the responsibility of verifying that the crews are fit and that the scheduling complies with the activity and rest limits established in the regulations or in the fatigue management system they may eventually implement.
Likewise, it is clarified that the concept of “service time” refers to flight service time, whose duration will depend on the functions assigned by the operator within the limits established by the regulations or by the adopted FRMS. This implies that “service time” is considered to be the time from when the worker reports to the place where they take service until they conclude their task in the same place.
One point that generated controversy, especially with Aerolíneas Argentinas staff, who considered the “taking of service” to be the moment the remis designated for their transfer arrived at their home.
The guidelines also incorporate definitions aligned with international standards to ensure a uniform interpretation of the norm.
“With this measure, it reaffirms its commitment to operational safety, crew protection, and efficiency in air operations,” concludes the communiqué.
Among them, the concept of “service time zone” is specified, understood as the geographical area in which the longitudinal difference between the departure and arrival points does not exceed 60 degrees, a key criterion for assessing fatigue associated with time zone changes in air operations.
Additionally, terminological criteria are unified to avoid disparate interpretations.
It is clarified that references to “flight period” and “flight service period” must be understood as “flight time” and “flight service time”, respectively.
It is also established that the definitions of “guard” and “reserve” will follow what is provided for in the Operations Manuals of each operator, ensuring coherence with the own procedures of each operator.
In a complementary manner, the new ANAC regulation incorporates specific provisions for air work operations through the approval of the “Rules for the Application of the Fatigue Risk Management System for Those Operators That Opt for Its Implementation”.
Said regulation establishes, as a general rule, the minimum requirements that operators who choose to implement their own fatigue management system must meet, ensuring adequate safety levels according to the particular characteristics of these operations.
“In this way, ANAC takes a new step in strengthening the national aeronautical system and consolidating a modern, coherent, and internationally best-practice-aligned regulatory framework.”
