PLT OF AN AIR TAXI PAX FLT IN A C210 OPERATED UNDER AN INST FLT PLAN WHEN THE ACFT WAS NOT CERTIFIED FOR IFR FLT IN THE ACR OP SPECS.

Narrative

I WAS DEPARTING THE SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA FOR BFL CARRYING PAX AS AN FAR PART 135 CHARTER OPERATOR. MY ACFT IS A SINGLE ENG C210 EQUIPPED WITH DUAL ALTERNATORS AND A DUAL VACUUM SYS (BUT NOT YET CERTIFIED UNDER NEW SINGLE ENG IFR REGS FOR FAR PART 135 OP). CEILINGS WERE RPTED 2000-3000 FT AT MY DEP AND 7000 FT AT MY DEST WITH CONDITIONS IMPROVING SHORTLY BEYOND MY DEP AREA. THERE IS NO WX RPTING FOR MUCH OF MY FLT RTE. APPROX 20 MINS AFTER DEP; CONDITIONS HAD NOT IMPROVED AS FORECAST. WX WAS STILL MVFR AND RAINING AT TIMES. I NEEDED TO CROSS A SMALL MOUNTAIN RANGE; BUT WAS CONCERNED ABOUT FLYING DOWN AN UNFAMILIAR VALLEY IN MVFR. MY OTHER OPTION WAS TO TURN BACK TOWARD MY DEP; WHERE WX HAD DETERIORATED. AN ADDITIONAL ALTERNATIVE WAS TO SIMPLY FILE IFR AND CONTINUE THE FLT; WHICH IS WHAT I DID. A YR AGO; FILING IFR IN THIS ACFT; IN THE EXACT SAME SIT WAS PERFECTLY LEGAL; BUT SINCE AUG/98; THE FAA'S ELIMINATION OF 'LIMITED IFR' FOR SINGLE ENG ACFT OPERATING UNDER FAR PART 135 HAS MADE THIS A VIOLATION OF REGS. I WAS DISGUSTED THAT A RULE CHANGE WOULD FORCE ME TO COMPROMISE THE SAFETY OF A FLT UNNECESSARILY. THE ACFT WAS FULLY IFR EQUIPPED AND AS A PLT; I AM RATED AND CURRENT. WERE I TO ABIDE BY THE NEW REGS FOR SINGLE ENG IFR; I WOULD BE FORCED TO SCUD-RUN IN THE VICINITY OF HAZARDOUS TERRAIN. IT CONCERNS ME THAT IN AN EFFORT TO MAKE SINGLE ENG IFR SAFER FOR CHARTER AND AIR TAXI OPS; THE FAA HAS FORCED PLTS TO FLY DANGEROUSLY. I WONDER HOW MANY ACCIDENTS HAVE BEEN CAUSED BY THESE NEW REGS.