HEMS or Air Ambulance
Referring to JAR ops A;ppendix 1 to 3.005(d) the authorities can determine what constitutes HEMS or Air Ambulance (CATO).
Assuming HEMS, this appendix only suggests that operations into a hospital located in a hostile environment require PC1 otherwise there is little guidance for helicopters under 5,700kg MTOW. This could be interpreted as suggesting that once you are not operating into a hostile hospital heliport, and not operating in PC3 over a hostile environment, you can conduct it to the satisfaction of the local authority to at least PC2 -which itself provides some alleviations for less than 9 pax and 2009 for exposure times.
To me this appendix was written with 'wriggle room' which the authorities can use as they see fit. It seems harsh for any authority to suggest that all aspects of a HEMS flight should be conducted to PC1, for all mission sites.
With the expansion of ETOPS for the airlines, it seems entirely reasonable to me that exposure times should be practically considered for rotary wing ops as they are under PC2 (at least until 2009). We should have a more practical approach to risk assessment which is where some authorities lack either understanding or courage.