Per 14 CFR Part 135, every FAA-certificated air taxi, charter, on-demand, and commuter operator runs against a documentation regime that an FAA Principal Operations Inspector (POI) audits annually under the FAA Enforcement Decision Process (FAA Order 2150.3C). The POI pulls the General Operations Manual (GOM) and General Maintenance Manual (GMM) under 14 CFR §135.21 and verifies revision control; pilot initial and recurrent testing records under 14 CFR §135.293; Instrument Proficiency Check (IPC) records under 14 CFR §135.297; and the broad recordkeeping obligations under 14 CFR §135.63. FAA civil penalties under 49 U.S.C. § 46301 reach $37,377 per violation in 2026 (inflation-adjusted annually under the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act) — and a recent FAA Enforcement Decision Process case against a Part 135 EMS air ambulance operator for §135.293 recurrent pilot testing documentation gaps assessed $42,000 in civil penalties, a representative figure for the document-side failure mode the right software prevents structurally.
The Part 135 operator stack splits across four compliance layers a POI audits during a surveillance visit. The first is the certificate-side document layer — the §135.21 GOM/GMM revision control, §135.293 + §135.297 pilot currency record, OpSpecs authorization documentation, and §135.63 recordkeeping that defines what the certificate holder is actually authorized to do and proves it survived audit. The second is the per-tail maintenance layer — the inspection forecasting, life-limited parts, AD applicability, and component traceability per aircraft. The third is the charter operations workflow — scheduling, dispatch, quoting, and crew pairing. The fourth is the safety audit and operator rating layer — third-party verification through ARGUS, Wyvern, or IS-BAO that unlocks charter broker and corporate customer network access.
The platforms ranked below split between those layers. Per-tail maintenance tracking platforms (CAMP Systems, Veryon/Traxxall, Flightdocs) handle the maintenance layer at per-aircraft pricing. Charter operations platforms (WingX) handle the scheduling and dispatch workflow. Safety audit platforms (ARGUS PRO) handle the operator rating layer. Document-side platforms (FileFlo for the §135.21 GOM/GMM revision control, §135.293 + §135.297 pilot currency, OpSpecs authorization documentation, and §135.63 recordkeeping under 14 CFR Part 135) handle the certificate-side document layer at flat-rate pricing. Most Part 135 operators need a platform from each category — and missing the certificate-side document layer is the most common path to a POI surveillance finding or §135.293 recurrent testing lapse.
Primary regulations cited in this guide: 14 CFR Part 135 (Commuter and on-demand operations), 14 CFR §135.21 (Manual requirements), 14 CFR §135.293 (Initial and recurrent pilot testing requirements), 14 CFR §135.297 (Pilot in command — instrument proficiency check), 14 CFR §135.63 (Recordkeeping requirements), and 49 U.S.C. § 46301 (FAA civil penalties). Operational citations: FAA Order 2150.3C (Compliance and Enforcement Program) and FAA Order 8900.1 Volume 3 Chapter 18 (Operations Specifications).
POI surveillance findings are usually documentation problems, not safety failures
The most common findings during a Part 135 Principal Operations Inspector surveillance visit are administrative — stale GOM/GMM revisions, missed §135.293 annual recurrent pilot testing, §135.297 IPC currency lapsed past the 6-month window, OpSpecs operations conducted outside authorized envelope, and §135.63 recordkeeping gaps in crew records or load manifests. The underlying flight operation was usually safe. The certificate-side documentation did not survive the audit. EDP enforcement, certificate suspension exposure, and the cost of digging out from a POI finding all turn on the document audit trail — which is the layer the right software prevents structurally.
The 7 Best Part 135 Compliance Platforms
Ranked by §135.21 GOM/GMM revision control depth, §135.293 + §135.297 pilot currency tracking, OpSpecs authorization documentation, §135.63 recordkeeping automation, and value across the certificate-side compliance layers an FAA Principal Operations Inspector reviews during surveillance.
FileFlo
Top Pick — Best for Part 135 Certificate-Side Document ComplianceBest For
Part 135 charter, air taxi, on-demand, and commuter operators (1-50 aircraft) that need §135.21 GOM/GMM revision control, §135.293 pilot currency tracking, §135.297 IPC records, OpSpecs authorization documentation, and §135.63 recordkeeping without per-aircraft pricing
Key Feature
AI document classification — upload any GOM/GMM revision, §135.293 recurrent testing form, §135.297 IPC record, or OpSpecs amendment and FileFlo classifies and files it against the right §135 subpart automatically
Part 135 Focus
§135.21 GOM/GMM revision control, §135.293 pilot currency, §135.297 IPC tracking, OpSpecs authorization documentation, §135.63 recordkeeping, §135.267 flight and duty time records, one-click POI surveillance binder
Strengths
- AI document parsing — every uploaded GOM/GMM revision, training certificate, and OpSpecs amendment classified against the correct 14 CFR Part 135 subpart
- §135.293 + §135.297 dual-clock tracking — surfaces annual recurrent AND 6-month IPC lapses before next dispatch
- 90/60/30-day expiration alerts for pilot currency, medical certificates, recurrent training, and OpSpecs authorization renewals
- §135.21 GOM/GMM revision history tracked with version control and FAA-acceptance evidence
- One-click POI surveillance binder — produces a complete EDP-defensible audit packet in under 60 seconds
- $299/mo flat regardless of pilot or aircraft count — no per-tail or per-pilot fees
- 5-day free trial, no credit card required, no annual contract
- Cross-regulation support: OSHA + EPA + DOT alongside FAA Part 135 in one platform for diversified operators
- 30-minute setup — no per-aircraft data migration project
Limitations
- Not a per-tail aviation maintenance tracking system — pair with CAMP, Veryon, or Flightdocs for inspection forecasting and AD applicability on each aircraft
- Not a charter scheduling, dispatch, or quoting platform — pair with WingX, ARGUS PRO, or Avianis for flight ops workflow
- No native MEL/CDL configuration or revision-by-tail management
Our take: FileFlo is the purpose-built answer to the Part 135 certificate-side document compliance problem: it manages the exact documents an FAA Principal Operations Inspector requests during surveillance, surfaces expiring §135.293 recurrent testing and §135.297 IPC currency weeks before the next dispatch, and produces a complete EDP-defensible audit binder in 60 seconds. For Part 135 charter and on-demand operators whose primary risk is GOM/GMM revision currency, pilot recurrent testing gaps, and OpSpecs envelope deviation — not per-tail AD tracking — FileFlo fills the certificate-side compliance gap at a flat rate that scales from a single-tail air taxi to a 50-aircraft on-demand fleet.
CAMP Systems
Best for Per-Tail Maintenance Tracking (Aircraft-Side)Best For
Part 135 operators whose primary use case is forecasting inspections, life-limited parts, and AD compliance per aircraft — not certificate-side §135.21 GOM/GMM or §135.293 pilot currency
Key Feature
Decades-deep per-tail maintenance tracking database with airframe, engine, and component history
Part 135 Focus
Per-tail maintenance tracking, AD compliance forecasting; secondary work order and recordkeeping modules; not purpose-built for §135.21 GOM/GMM revision control or §135.293 pilot currency
Strengths
- Industry-leading per-tail maintenance tracking with mature airframe and engine databases
- Strong AD compliance tracking and life-limited-parts forecasting per aircraft
- Deep integration with FAA AD and SB notification feeds
- Established vendor relationships across Part 135 charter and corporate flight departments
Limitations
- Per-aircraft pricing — costly for growing Part 135 fleets
- Not purpose-built for the certificate-side §135.21 GOM/GMM, §135.293 pilot currency, §135.297 IPC, or OpSpecs authorization tracking
- Sales-led pricing — requires a sales engagement to evaluate
- Annual contracts standard; multi-week onboarding
- No 5-day free trial
Our take: CAMP Systems is the per-tail maintenance tracking incumbent. Part 135 operators with significant per-tail AD and life-limited parts forecasting needs get strong value on the maintenance-tracking layer. Operators whose POI surveillance risk centers on their own §135.21 manuals, §135.293 pilot recurrent testing, §135.297 IPC currency, and OpSpecs envelope documentation will find CAMP's per-tail model misaligned with the certificate-side compliance need.
Veryon (Traxxall)
Best Post-Merger Maintenance Tracking SuiteBest For
Part 135 operators that want consolidated per-tail maintenance tracking and limited flight ops after the 2024 Traxxall + Continuum CMP rebrand
Key Feature
Combined maintenance tracking and limited flight ops platform after Traxxall + Continuum CMP consolidation
Part 135 Focus
Per-tail maintenance tracking + parts modules; per-aircraft architecture similar to CAMP; not purpose-built for §135.21 or §135.293 certificate-side compliance
Strengths
- Post-2024 merger consolidated Traxxall + Continuum CMP into a single suite
- Cloud-first architecture with modern UI compared to legacy on-prem maintenance systems
- Strong international footprint (EASA + FAA dual-environment) for operators with cross-border charter
- Per-tail maintenance tracking + light flight ops in one stack
Limitations
- Per-aircraft pricing — same structural mismatch as CAMP for certificate-side compliance use case
- Post-merger integration period creates feature-roadmap uncertainty
- Sales-led pricing — no published rates
- No purpose-built §135.21 GOM/GMM revision control or §135.293 pilot currency workflows
- Annual contracts standard; no 5-day free trial
Our take: Veryon is the rebranded post-2024 result of the Traxxall + Continuum CMP merger. For Part 135 operators that want per-tail maintenance tracking and limited flight ops unified, Veryon is competitive on the maintenance-tracking layer. For the §135.21 GOM/GMM revision control, §135.293 pilot currency, §135.297 IPC, and OpSpecs authorization documentation an FAA POI audits during surveillance, Veryon is the wrong layer of the stack.
WingX
Best Charter Scheduling, Dispatch, and Quoting PlatformBest For
Part 135 charter and on-demand operators that need integrated scheduling, dispatch, quoting, and crew-pairing — with secondary compliance tracking
Key Feature
Purpose-built Part 135 charter scheduling, quoting, dispatch, and crew-pairing platform
Part 135 Focus
Charter operations workflow — scheduling, dispatch, quoting, crew pairing, fuel uplift records; secondary §135.293 currency tracking; not purpose-built for §135.21 GOM/GMM revision control
Strengths
- Purpose-built Part 135 charter scheduling and dispatch workflow
- Strong adoption in mid-size on-demand and charter operators
- Integrated quoting and crew-pairing reduces tool sprawl on the operations side
- Some pilot currency and recurrent training tracking built in
Limitations
- Primary value is charter operations workflow, not certificate-side document compliance
- Per-operator pricing — not flat-rate
- No AI document classification for GOM/GMM revisions or OpSpecs amendments
- Limited §135.21 revision control depth compared to a purpose-built document platform
- Sales-led pricing — annual contracts standard
Our take: WingX is the Part 135 charter operations workflow incumbent. For scheduling, dispatch, quoting, and crew pairing, it is the right layer. For the §135.21 GOM/GMM revision control, §135.293 pilot currency record, §135.297 IPC tracking, and OpSpecs authorization documentation the POI requests during surveillance, WingX is not purpose-built — pair it with FileFlo for the certificate-side document audit trail.
Flightdocs
Best Cloud-First Maintenance TrackingBest For
Part 91 corporate flight departments and Part 135 charter operators that want a cloud-first maintenance tracking platform — certificate-side compliance is secondary
Key Feature
Cloud-native per-tail maintenance tracking with strong mobile experience for technicians and pilots
Part 135 Focus
Per-tail maintenance tracking; secondary work order and parts modules; not purpose-built for §135.21 GOM/GMM or §135.293 pilot currency
Strengths
- Cloud-first, mobile-friendly UI ahead of legacy maintenance tracking systems
- Strong adoption in Part 91 corporate flight departments and Part 135 charter operators
- Modern API stack for integration with flight ops and scheduling platforms
- Per-tail subscription with predictable scaling for fleet operators
Limitations
- Primary value is per-tail maintenance tracking, not certificate-side document compliance
- Per-aircraft pricing — same structural mismatch for §135.21 + §135.293 compliance use case
- No purpose-built GOM/GMM revision control workflows
- No AI document classification for §135.63 records
- Sales-led pricing; no 5-day free trial
Our take: Flightdocs is the modern cloud-first alternative to CAMP in the per-tail maintenance tracking category. For Part 135 operators whose primary compliance pain is their own certificate-side §135.21 GOM/GMM, §135.293 pilot currency, and OpSpecs authorization documentation, Flightdocs is not the right tool — pair it with FileFlo for the certificate-side audit trail.
ARGUS PRO
Best Safety Audit and Operator Rating PlatformBest For
Part 135 charter operators that need the ARGUS Gold/Platinum/Platinum Elite safety rating for broker network access and corporate customer requirements
Key Feature
Industry-standard Part 135 safety audit and operator rating used by charter brokers and corporate flight departments to qualify operators
Part 135 Focus
Third-party safety audit, operator rating, and recurrent compliance verification; complements but does not replace §135.21 GOM/GMM revision control or §135.63 recordkeeping platforms
Strengths
- Industry-standard safety rating that unlocks broker network and corporate customer access
- Recurrent audit cycle surfaces compliance gaps independent of FAA POI surveillance
- Established brand recognition with charter brokers and Fortune 500 flight departments
- Useful complement to a purpose-built compliance document platform
Limitations
- Not a document management platform — does not handle §135.21 GOM/GMM revision control or §135.293 pilot currency tracking workflow
- Annual subscription plus per-audit fees create variable cost structure
- No AI document classification or §135.63 recordkeeping automation
- Most useful as a complement to a broader compliance platform, not standalone
- Sales-led pricing; no flat-rate tier
Our take: ARGUS PRO is the safety audit and operator rating layer of the Part 135 stack — essential for charter operators that need broker network access and corporate customer qualification. It is not a substitute for the §135.21 GOM/GMM revision control, §135.293 pilot currency tracking, §135.297 IPC records, and §135.63 recordkeeping platform a Part 135 certificate holder operates day-to-day. Best used alongside FileFlo, with ARGUS PRO handling the rating layer and FileFlo handling the document audit trail.
Paper / Spreadsheet / Network Drive
The Status Quo Most Part 135 Operators Are QuittingBest For
Very small single-tail Part 135 operators with a single-pilot owner-operator structure and stable OpSpecs envelope
Key Feature
No software vendor relationship; full local control over the file binder
Part 135 Focus
Whatever the director of operations or chief pilot builds in Excel + a network drive — vulnerable to GOM/GMM revision drift, §135.293 + §135.297 currency lapses, OpSpecs documentation gaps, and §135.63 recordkeeping failures during POI surveillance
Strengths
- Zero software cost
- No vendor lock-in
- Familiar to long-tenured directors of operations and chief pilots
- Works for a single-tail air taxi with one PIC and a stable OpSpecs envelope
Limitations
- No automated expiration alerts — §135.293 annual recurrent and §135.297 6-month IPC currency slip through cracks
- GOM/GMM revision drift is the most common POI surveillance finding for paper-based Part 135 operators
- Building an EDP-defensible surveillance binder by hand takes days, not seconds
- No audit trail of who touched what record when — fails §135.21 manual control intent
- §135.63 recordkeeping gaps (crew records, load manifests, aircraft records) compound across each flight
- Hidden labor cost: a director of operations spending 6+ hours/week on compliance documentation costs more annually than the software
Our take: Paper, spreadsheets, and network drives are the status quo most Part 135 operators are actively quitting in 2026. The hidden labor cost of manual GOM/GMM revision control plus the asymmetric downside of a single FAA Enforcement Decision Process (EDP) finding — up to $37,377/violation under 49 U.S.C. § 46301, with certificate suspension exposure for systemic OpSpecs or §135.293 currency findings — makes the status quo more expensive than a flat-rate compliance platform within the first surveillance cycle.
Side-by-Side Comparison
All 7 platforms across the criteria that matter most for Part 135 certificate-side compliance: GOM/GMM management, §135.293 pilot currency, §135.21 manual revisions, OpSpecs tracking, pricing, and free trial availability.
| Criteria | FileFlo | CAMP | Veryon | WingX | Flightdocs | ARGUS | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GOM/GMM Mgmt (§135.21) | ✅ Purpose-built revision control | ⚠️ Secondary | ⚠️ Secondary | ⚠️ Limited | ⚠️ Secondary | ❌ Audit-side only | ❌ Manual drift |
| §135.293 Pilot Currency | ✅ AI-classified + alerts | ❌ Out of scope | ❌ Out of scope | ⚠️ Basic tracking | ❌ Out of scope | ⚠️ Audit-cycle review | ❌ Excel |
| §135.21 Manual Revisions | ✅ Version history + FAA-acceptance evidence | ❌ | ❌ | ⚠️ Limited | ❌ | ⚠️ Audit-cycle review | ❌ Drift |
| OpSpecs Tracking | ✅ Authorization documentation | ❌ | ❌ | ⚠️ Limited | ❌ | ⚠️ Audit-cycle review | ❌ Manual |
| Pricing | $299/mo flat | ~$50–$500/aircraft | Per-aircraft | Per-operator ($500–$2,000+/mo) | Per-aircraft | Annual subs + audit fees | $0 + hidden labor |
| Free Trial | ✅ 5 days | ❌ Demo only | ❌ Demo only | ❌ Demo only | ❌ Demo available | ❌ Demo only | N/A |
⚠️ = partial or limited support. ❓ = unknown / not published. Data based on vendor documentation as of May 2026 and post-2024 Veryon merger context.
How to Choose the Right Part 135 Compliance Platform
§135.21 Manual + GOM/GMM Compliance
Per 14 CFR §135.21, every Part 135 certificate holder must prepare and keep current a General Operations Manual (GOM) and, where the operator maintains aircraft, a General Maintenance Manual (GMM) — and must make them available to the FAA, the operator's personnel, and the crewmembers who must use them. The §135.21 obligation is not just "have a GOM" — it is "keep it current," which means every OpSpecs amendment, every regulatory change affecting the certificate envelope, and every operational policy change has to flow through a controlled revision cycle with FAA acceptance evidence retained on file. Stale GOM/GMM revisions are the single most common §135.21 finding during a Principal Operations Inspector surveillance visit. Compliance software must hold version history, route revisions through a controlled approval workflow, retain the FAA-acceptance evidence, and surface stale revisions before the POI does. Paper-based GOM/GMM control routinely lets revisions drift — the right software prevents drift structurally.
§135.293 Pilot Currency Tracking
Per 14 CFR §135.293, every Part 135 pilot in command must complete initial testing before serving as a PIC and recurrent testing every 12 calendar months thereafter — covering aircraft systems, performance, emergency procedures, and applicable regulations. The §135.293 record must demonstrate the testing was completed within the 12-calendar-month window. The most common §135.293 finding during a POI surveillance visit is a recurrent testing event that slipped past the 12-month window because nothing surfaced the lapse before the next dispatch. Compliance software must track the §135.293 clock per PIC, surface 90/60/30-day expiration alerts, and document the testing event with the check airman's signature retained on file. The FileFlo rule-pack for §135.293 cites a $42,000 enforcement example against a Part 135 EMS air ambulance operator for exactly this failure mode — the document audit trail is the structural defense. Pair §135.293 tracking with §135.297 IPC tracking (next section) for Part 135 PICs flying IFR.
§135.297 IPC and IFR Currency
Per 14 CFR §135.297, every Part 135 pilot in command who conducts IFR operations must complete an Instrument Proficiency Check (IPC) within the 6 calendar months preceding the month of the flight. The §135.297 clock runs in parallel with the §135.293 annual recurrent — a PIC can have a current §135.293 record and still be ineligible to dispatch IFR if the §135.297 IPC has slipped past the 6-month window. The most common error during a POI surveillance visit is a §135.297 IPC currency lapse that was not surfaced because the operator was tracking the §135.293 12-month clock but not the §135.297 6-month clock. Compliance software must track BOTH clocks per PIC, surface 60/30/14-day expiration alerts for the §135.297 IPC, and block the dispatch authorization when the IPC has lapsed. The dual-clock pattern is the operational heart of Part 135 pilot currency tracking — and it is exactly the kind of work paper-based tracking does poorly.
OpSpecs (Operations Specifications) Management
Operations Specifications (OpSpecs) are the FAA-issued document that defines exactly what operations a Part 135 certificate holder is authorized to conduct — by aircraft type, by geographic area, by operational envelope (VFR/IFR, day/night, single-pilot/two-pilot), by special authorizations (RVSM, RNP, LOAs), and by hazardous materials authorizations. OpSpecs are governed operationally by FAA Order 8900.1 Volume 3 Chapter 18 (Operations Specifications). Operating outside the OpSpecs envelope is one of the most serious Part 135 violations — the equivalent of operating without a certificate, exposing the certificate to suspension or revocation. Compliance software must hold the current OpSpecs document, route OpSpecs amendments through a controlled workflow, retain the FAA-acceptance evidence, and cross-reference operational dispatch authorizations against the OpSpecs envelope. The FileFlo platform indexes every OpSpecs amendment, surfaces the active authorization envelope per operation, and produces the OpSpecs evidence packet a POI requests during a surveillance visit — turning the OpSpecs binder from a backroom paper file into a live operational reference.
Single-Pilot vs Multi-Pilot Operations
Part 135 operators bifurcate between single-pilot operations (often small air taxis, EMS helicopters, and on-demand charter under §135.105 single-pilot authorization) and multi-pilot crew operations (typically scheduled commuter and larger on-demand charter under §135.99 manning and §135.101 minimum crew requirements). The §135.21 GOM must define which operations are conducted single-pilot vs multi-pilot, the §135.293 recurrent testing must cover the applicable operational envelope per PIC, and the §135.267 flight and duty time limits differ between unscheduled one-pilot crews and unscheduled two-pilot crews. The most common single-pilot Part 135 finding is a §135.293 recurrent testing record that did not cover the single-pilot operational envelope specifically; the most common multi-pilot finding is a §135.267 flight or duty time record that exceeded the applicable limit because the crew was tracked against the wrong category. Compliance software must distinguish per PIC and per operation whether the dispatch is single-pilot or multi-pilot, apply the correct §135.267 clock, surface the §135.293 envelope coverage gap, and route the §135.21 GOM revision through the controlled cycle when the operator's single-pilot/multi-pilot mix changes. FileFlo handles all three dimensions as first-class fields rather than free-text notes — closing the most common categorization gap during a POI surveillance review.
§135.63 Recordkeeping + EDP Defense
Per 14 CFR §135.63, every Part 135 certificate holder must maintain current records of each aircraft used (including airworthiness status), each crewmember (including certification, training, and competency records), and each flight (including load manifests, flight times, and dispatch authorizations) — at its principal business office or other places approved by the Administrator. The §135.63 retention rules vary by record type: crewmember training records for the duration of employment plus 12 months, load manifests for at least 30 days, and aircraft records consistent with §135.439 maintenance retention. The FAA Enforcement Decision Process (FAA Order 2150.3C) is the administrative framework under which POI surveillance findings are investigated, dispositioned, and resolved — typically through compliance action, civil penalty, or certificate action. The most common §135.63 finding during EDP is incomplete crewmember training records or load manifests missing required elements. Compliance software supports §135.63 by capturing every required record at the point of operational creation, indexing the record against the aircraft, crewmember, or flight it documents, applying the appropriate retention clock, and producing the EDP-defensible audit packet on demand. The cost of digging out from an EDP finding plus the asymmetric downside of a civil penalty up to $37,377 per violation under 49 U.S.C. § 46301 makes the document-side software pay for itself within the first surveillance cycle.
Certificate-side Part 135 compliance, without per-aircraft pricing
FileFlo holds the §135.21 GOM/GMM revision control, §135.293 + §135.297 pilot currency tracking, OpSpecs authorization documentation, and §135.63 recordkeeping audit trail behind every Part 135 certificate — for unlimited pilots and unlimited aircraft. AI document classification routes every uploaded revision, training certificate, and OpSpecs amendment to the correct §135 subpart automatically. $299/month flat, no contract, no per-tail fees.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is Part 135 compliance software?
Part 135 compliance software helps FAA-certificated air taxi, charter, on-demand, and commuter operators manage the documentation required under 14 CFR Part 135 — including the General Operations Manual (GOM) and General Maintenance Manual (GMM) revision control under §135.21, pilot currency under §135.293 (initial and recurrent testing) and §135.297 (instrument proficiency checks), Operations Specifications (OpSpecs) authorization tracking, crew flight and duty time records, and the broad recordkeeping obligations of §135.63. The best platforms surface stale manual revisions, expiring pilot currency, and missed recurrent training before a FAA Principal Operations Inspector does — and reduce certificate exposure across the EDP enforcement window.
How much does Part 135 compliance software cost?
Pricing splits across three categories. Per-tail aviation maintenance tracking platforms (CAMP Systems, Veryon/Traxxall, Flightdocs) price $30–$500/aircraft/month under sales-led annual contracts — optimized for fleet operators tracking inspections, life-limited parts, and ADs across customer aircraft. Charter-specific operations platforms (WingX, ARGUS PRO) price by tail count or operator size and bundle scheduling, dispatch, and limited compliance. Document-side compliance platforms (FileFlo) price $299/month flat for unlimited users and aircraft — purpose-built for the §135.21 GOM/GMM revision control, §135.293 pilot currency record, §135.297 IPC tracking, OpSpecs authorization documentation, and §135.63 recordkeeping audit trail that drive most FAA Enforcement Decision Process (EDP) findings during a Part 135 surveillance visit.
What does the FAA Enforcement Decision Process (EDP) inspect for Part 135 operators?
Per FAA Order 8900.1 Volume 3 and the FAA Compliance and Enforcement Program (FAA Order 2150.3C), Principal Operations Inspectors (POIs) and Principal Maintenance Inspectors (PMIs) conduct annual and event-driven surveillance of Part 135 certificate holders. During a routine surveillance visit or post-incident review, the inspector pulls: (1) the current General Operations Manual and General Maintenance Manual and verifies revision control against §135.21 requirements; (2) Operations Specifications (OpSpecs) authorizations and verifies operations are conducted within authorized envelope; (3) pilot records per §135.293 (initial and recurrent testing), §135.297 (IPC for IFR), §135.299 (line checks), and §135.301 (testing methods); (4) §135.63 recordkeeping including aircraft and crew records, flight times, and load manifests; (5) crew flight, duty, and rest time records under §135.267 and Subpart F. The most common findings are stale manual revisions, missed recurrent pilot testing, OpSpecs operations outside authorized envelope, and incomplete §135.63 records — all documentation problems the right software prevents structurally.
How long must Part 135 operators retain records?
Under 14 CFR §135.63, a Part 135 certificate holder must maintain current records of each aircraft, crewmember, and load manifest, and must keep these records at its principal business office or other places approved by the Administrator. Crewmember training records must be retained for the duration of employment and for at least 12 months after the crewmember leaves under §135.63(a)(4). Load manifests must be retained for at least 30 days under §135.63(c). Maintenance records on aircraft operated under Part 135 follow the §135.439 retention rules (typically 1 year after the work, or until the work is repeated or superseded). In practice, most Part 135 operators retain records substantially longer because §91.417 aircraft records, insurance underwriter requests, and EDP enforcement defense all reference the same records. Digital storage with auditable revision history is the lowest-cost path to meeting both the regulatory minimum and operator-driven retention demands.
What FAA civil penalty applies to Part 135 violations?
Under 49 U.S.C. § 46301(a)(1), the FAA may impose civil penalties up to $37,377 per violation for most Part 135 regulatory violations as of the 2026 inflation-adjusted schedule (penalty amounts adjusted annually under the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act). Repeat or systemic findings — particularly OpSpecs deviations, §135.293 pilot currency lapses, or §135.21 manual control failures — can result in suspension or revocation of the Part 135 certificate. Recent FAA enforcement actions against Part 135 operators have ranged from low-five-figure settlements for isolated documentation gaps to certificate suspensions and seven-figure exposure for EMS air ambulance and on-demand charter operators with pattern findings. The existing FileFlo rule-pack for §135.293 cites a $42,000 enforcement example against a Part 135 EMS operator for recurrent pilot testing documentation gaps — a representative figure for the document-side failure mode the right software prevents structurally.
How is CAMP Systems different from FileFlo for Part 135 compliance?
CAMP Systems is an aviation maintenance tracking platform built primarily around the aircraft tail — its core value is forecasting inspections, life-limited parts, and AD compliance per aircraft on behalf of an operator. CAMP's Part 135 modules support work orders and component traceability but the platform's pricing and architecture assume per-tail tracking, not certificate-side document compliance. FileFlo is a compliance document platform built for the Part 135 certificate itself — General Operations Manual (GOM) and General Maintenance Manual (GMM) revision control under §135.21, pilot currency records under §135.293 and §135.297, OpSpecs authorization tracking, §135.63 recordkeeping, and audit binder generation for FAA Principal Operations Inspector surveillance visits. For a Part 135 charter or on-demand operator whose primary risk is EDP findings on manual currency, pilot recurrent testing, and OpSpecs envelope deviation (not per-tail AD tracking), FileFlo is the more cost-aligned tool. Many operators use both: CAMP/Veryon for aircraft maintenance tracking, FileFlo for the certificate-side document compliance.
Can FileFlo replace a dedicated charter scheduling and dispatch platform?
No — FileFlo and charter operations platforms (WingX, ARGUS PRO, Avianis) serve different layers of the Part 135 operator stack. Charter operations platforms handle scheduling, quoting, dispatch, fuel uplift records, and the day-to-day flight ops workflow. FileFlo handles the document compliance layer behind the certificate: §135.21 GOM/GMM revision control, §135.293 pilot currency tracking, §135.297 IPC records, OpSpecs authorization documentation, §135.63 crew and aircraft records, §135.267 flight and duty time records, and audit preparation. Most Part 135 charter operators pair the two — WingX or ARGUS PRO for scheduling and dispatch, FileFlo for the certificate-side document compliance audit trail that an FAA POI requests during surveillance.
What is the relationship between §135.293 and §135.297?
Section §135.293 (Initial and recurrent pilot testing requirements) governs the baseline competency testing every Part 135 pilot in command must pass — initial testing before serving as a PIC, and recurrent testing every 12 calendar months on aircraft systems, performance, emergency procedures, and applicable regulations. Section §135.297 (Pilot in command — instrument proficiency check) layers on an additional requirement specifically for IFR operations: every Part 135 PIC who conducts IFR operations must complete an Instrument Proficiency Check (IPC) within the 6 calendar months preceding the month of the flight. The two requirements operate in parallel — a Part 135 PIC flying IFR must satisfy both §135.293 recurrent testing annually AND §135.297 IPC semi-annually. Compliance software for Part 135 operators must track both clocks per pilot and surface lapses before the next dispatch — the most common finding during a POI surveillance visit is a §135.297 IPC that has slipped past the 6-month window while the §135.293 annual recurrent is still current.
Stop reconstructing the §135.21 GOM binder the morning of the POI surveillance visit
FileFlo holds the certificate-side Part 135 compliance audit trail across every operation. §135.21 GOM/GMM revision control, §135.293 annual recurrent testing tracking, §135.297 6-month IPC tracking, OpSpecs authorization documentation, and §135.63 recordkeeping — all for $299/month flat, no contract, no per-aircraft fees, no per-pilot fees.
5-day free trial · No credit card required · Cancel anytime