FLC ACCEPTS 12 HR FLT WITH SUPPOSEDLY 'ADEQUATE' REST FACILITIES. NEXT DAY THEY WERE NOTIFIED OF POSSIBLE FAR VIOLATION.

Narrative

I WAS ASSIGNED TO FLY A TRIP FROM TEL AVIV TO NEW YORK. DUE TO WINDS AND PAYLOAD; WE FOUND THAT A FUEL STOP IN GANDER WOULD BE REQUIRED. MY COMPANY HAD ANTICIPATED A POSSIBLE BLOCK TIME OF OUR 12 HRS. THEREFORE A HVY CREW CONSISTING OF 2 CAPTS; 1 FO AND 2 FE'S WERE IN PLACE FOR THE FLT. I ACCEPTED THE ASSIGNMENT WITH THE APPROVAL OF OUR FLT OPS DEPT. THE FLT WAS 12:14 BLOCK TO BLOCK. 2 ROWS OF SEATS WERE BLOCKED OFF FOR THE COCKPIT CREW IN THE REAR OF SECTION A. THE FOLLOWING DAY I WAS NOTIFIED BY FLT OPS THAT WE MAY HAVE BEEN IN VIOLATION OF THE FARS DUE TO INADEQUATE REST FACILITIES. MY CREW AND I HAD DISCUSSED THE TERM 'ADEQUATE' REST FACILITY PRIOR TO THE FLT. I TOLD THEM THAT THERE WAS NOT A DEFINITION FOR THIS IN THE REGS THAT I WAS AWARE OF. I HAVE NOW BEEN MADE AWARE OF AN ADVISORY CIRCULAR WHICH COVERS THIS. I SINCERELY FELT; AT THE TIME OF THE FLT; THAT WE WERE OPERATING IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FARS. I ALSO HAD TRUST IN THE PLANNING OF OUR FLT OPS DEPT AS THE CHIEF PLT AND DIRECTOR OF FLT OPS WERE BOTH INVOLVED WITH AND APPROVED THE FLT. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR STATES THAT THERE HAS BEEN NO FOLLOW UP FROM COMPANY OR FAA. RPTR WAS EMBARRASSED BECAUSE OF HELPING TO CONVINCE OTHER CREW MEMBERS THAT THE SIT WAS OK. THEN TO BE TOLD THAT THE CONDITIONS WERE NOT ADEQUATE WAS A BLOW. THE DIRECTOR OF FLT OPS READ THE WORDING OF THE ADVISORY CIRCULAR OVER THE PHONE THE NEXT DAY. RPTR WILL TRY TO OBTAIN A COPY OF THE ADVISORY CIRCULAR AND FORWARD TO ANALYST.