This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains notices to the public of the proposed

issuance of rules and regulations. The

purpose of these notices is to give interested

persons an opportunity to participate in the

rule making prior to the adoption of the final

rules.

Proposed Rules Federal Register

65316 

Vol. 83, No. 244 

Thursday, December 20, 2018 

1 14 CFR 61.156 specifically states the training 

requirement applies to a pilot seeking a multiengine 

class rating on his or her ATP certificate or a pilot 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 61 

[Docket No.: FAA–2018–1050; Notice No. 

18–05] 

RIN 2120–AL23 

Removal of Training Requirements for 

an Airline Transport Pilot Certificate 

Issued Concurrently With a SingleEngine Airplane Type Rating 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: This notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) would remove an 

unnecessary multiengine training 

requirement for pilots seeking to obtain 

an initial airline transport pilot (ATP) 

certificate concurrently with a singleengine airplane type rating. This action 

also proposes to revise several pilot 

certification regulations by removing the 

July 31, 2014 date, which served as the 

compliance date for the multiengine 

ATP training requirements, because the 

date is no longer necessary. 

DATES: Send comments by February 19, 

2019 

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified 

by docket number 2018–1050 using any 

of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov and follow 

the online instructions for sending your 

comments electronically. 

• Mail: Send comments to Docket 

Operations, M–30; U.S. Department of 

Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE, Room W12–140, West 

Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 

20590–0001. 

• Hand Delivery or Courier: Take 

comments to Docket Operations in 

Room W12–140 of the West Building 

Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE, Washington, DC, between 9 

a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. 

• Fax: Fax comments to Docket 

Operations at 202–493–2251. 

Privacy: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 

553(c), DOT solicits comments from the 

public to better inform its rulemaking 

process. DOT posts these comments, 

without edit, including any personal 

information the commenter provides, to 

www.regulations.gov, as described in 

the system of records notice (DOT/ALL– 

14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at 

www.dot.gov/privacy. 

Docket: Background documents or 

comments received may be read at 

http://www.regulations.gov at any time. 

Follow the online instructions for 

accessing the docket or go to the Docket 

Operations in Room W12–140 of the 

West Building Ground Floor at 1200 

New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, 

DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Barbara Adams, Air Transportation 

Division, Air Carrier Training Systems 

and Voluntary Safety Programs Branch, 

Federal Aviation Administration, 800 

Independence Avenue SW, Washington, 

DC 20591; telephone 202–267–8166; 

email: Barbara.Adams@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Authority for This Rulemaking 

The FAA’s authority to issue rules on 

aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the 

United States Code (49 U.S.C.). Subtitle 

I, Section 106 describes the authority of 

the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, 

Aviation Programs, describes in more 

detail the scope of the agency’s 

authority. 

This rulemaking is promulgated 

under the authority described in 49 

U.S.C. 106(f), which establishes the 

authority of the Administrator to 

promulgate regulations and rules; 49 

U.S.C. 44701(a)(5), which requires the 

Administrator to promulgate regulations 

and minimum standards for other 

practices, methods, and procedures 

necessary for safety in air commerce and 

national security; and 49 U.S.C. 

44703(a), which requires the 

Administrator to prescribe regulations 

for the issuance of airman certificates 

when the Administrator finds, after 

investigation, that an individual is 

qualified for, and physically able to 

perform the duties related to, the 

position authorized by the certificate. 

This rulemaking is within the scope of 

the FAA’s authority because it amends 

the eligibility requirements for the 

issuance of a single-engine airplane ATP 

certificate. 

Table of Contents 

I. Overview of Proposed Rule 

II. Background 

A. Current Regulations 

B. History 

III. Discussion of the Proposal 

IV. Regulatory Notices and Analyses 

A. Regulatory Evaluation 

B. Regulatory Flexibility Determination 

C. International Trade Impact Assessment 

D. Unfunded Mandates Assessment 

E. Paperwork Reduction Act 

V. Executive Order Determinations 

A. Executive Order 13132, Federalism 

B. Executive Order 13211, Regulations 

That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

C. Executive Order 13609, International 

Cooperation 

D. Executive Order 13771, Reducing 

Regulation and Controlling Regulatory 

Costs 

VI. Additional Information 

A. Comments Invited 

B. Availability of Rulemaking Documents 

C. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act 

I. Overview of Proposed Rule 

This NPRM would remove an 

unnecessary multiengine training 

requirement for pilots seeking to obtain 

an initial airline transport pilot (ATP) 

certificate concurrently with a singleengine airplane type rating. The FAA 

also proposes to revise several pilot 

certification regulations by removing the 

July 31, 2014 date, which served as the 

compliance date for the multiengine 

ATP training requirements, because the 

date is no longer necessary. 

II. Background 

A. Current Regulations 

Current regulations require a pilot 

seeking an ATP certificate concurrently 

with an airplane type rating to complete 

training in an FAA-approved course 

from an authorized training provider, 

including ground training and flight 

simulation training device (FSTD) 

training in a device that represents a 

multiengine airplane. Therefore, this 

training requirement was intended for 

pilots seeking an ATP certificate in a 

multiengine airplane. However, because 

of the way the regulations are written,1


khammond on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSAL
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2018 / Proposed Rules 65317 

seeking an airplane type rating concurrent with an 

ATP certificate. The use of ‘‘airplane type rating’’ 

means it applies to both single-engine and 

multiengine airplane type ratings. In paragraph (b), 

however, the FSTD training is required to be in a 

device that represents a multiengine airplane. 

2 14 CFR 121.159 prohibits use of a single-engine 

airplane in part 121 operations. 

3These training requirements are found in 14 

CFR 61.156. 

4Cirrus Aircraft received type certification of the 

SF50 Vision Jet in October 2016. 

5 14 CFR 61.157(b). 

the requirement for training in a 

multiengine airplane has the 

unintended effect of applying to a pilot 

seeking a type rating for a single-engine 

airplane concurrently with an ATP 

certificate. When the training 

requirement became effective in 2014, 

there were no single-engine airplanes 

that required the pilot to obtain a type 

rating prior to serving as pilot in 

command. However, with the 

certification of the Cirrus Vision Jet in 

2016, there is now is a single-engine 

airplane that requires the pilot to obtain 

a type rating prior to serving as pilot in 

command. Under the current 

regulations, if a pilot seeks to obtain the 

type rating in the Cirrus Vision Jet 

concurrently with the initial issuance of 

the ATP certificate in the airplane 

category with a single-engine type 

rating, that pilot would be required to 

complete the multiengine training to be 

eligible for the practical test. 

B. History 

The Airline Safety and Federal 

Aviation Administration Extension Act 

of 2010 (Pub. L. 111–216) (the ‘‘Act’’) 

was signed into law in August 2010 and 

included provisions to improve airline 

safety and pilot certification and 

training. In response to the Act, FAA 

modified the eligibility requirements for 

an ATP certificate with an airplane 

category multiengine class rating with 

the publication of the Pilot Certification 

and Qualification Requirements for Air 

Carrier Operations Final Rule (78 FR 

42324) in July 2013 (2013 Final Rule). 

Section 216 of the Act specifically 

required all pilots in part 121 to have an 

ATP certificate and an appropriate 

amount of multiengine time. Section 

217 of the Act established minimum 

qualifications for an ATP certificate that 

were focused on air carrier pilots and 

multiengine airplane experience. The 

statutes did not address single-engine 

airplanes. Additionally, part 121 

prohibits the use of single-engine 

airplanes.2

To address the ATP requirements set 

forth in the Act, the FAA established a 

requirement for a pilot to complete an 

FAA-approved ATP certification 

training program (ATP CTP) that 

includes ground training and flight 

training in a multiengine flight 

simulation training device (FSTD). 

Pilots must complete the ATP CTP to be 

eligible for the multiengine ATP 

knowledge test.3 Upon review of the 

regulatory requirements for an ATP 

certificate, the FAA found that some of 

them, as written, do not distinguish 

between a pilot getting a single-engine 

airplane rating and a multiengine 

airplane rating. For example, as noted, 

pilots seeking an ‘‘airline transport pilot 

certificate obtained concurrently with 

an airplane type rating’’ are required to 

complete the ATP CTP specified in 

§ 61.156 and receive a graduation 

certificate from an authorized training 

provider. With that express language, 

pilots seeking an ATP certificate 

concurrently with a single-engine 

airplane type rating must complete 

multiengine airplane training to obtain 

an ATP certificate in a single-engine 

airplane. 

At the time the 2013 Final Rule 

published, there were no single-engine 

airplanes that required a type rating to 

serve as pilot in command (PIC); 

therefore, there were no comments 

indicating concern with completing 

multiengine training to be eligible for a 

type rating. However, since the 2013 

Final Rule published, Cirrus Aircraft 

received type certification for its singleengine Vision Jet (SF50) 4 and a pilot is 

required to hold a type rating for that 

airplane to serve as PIC. The way that 

§ 61.156 is written, a pilot cannot 

complete a practical test for an initial 

ATP certificate with the SF50 type 

rating unless the pilot completes 

multiengine training. Alternatively, to 

avoid the training requirement, a pilot 

could use a different single-engine 

airplane (i.e., one that does not require 

a type rating) to obtain the initial ATP 

certificate and then complete a second 

practical test in the SF50 to add the type 

rating to the ATP certificate.5 Or, a pilot 

could add the type rating to his or her 

commercial pilot certificate first and 

then complete an ATP practical test in 

a different single-engine airplane and 

the SF50 type rating would be carried 

forward to the ATP certificate. In either 

case the pilot would be taking an 

additional and unnecessary practical 

test to avoid completing the multiengine 

training in the ATP CTP. 

III. Discussion of the Proposal 

As previously mentioned, several 

sections in part 61 apply to a pilot 

seeking an ATP certificate with a 

multiengine airplane rating or an ATP 

certificate concurrently with an 

‘‘airplane type rating.’’ While these 

regulations were intended to apply to 

pilots seeking an ATP certificate in a 

multiengine airplane, the regulations do 

not specify that they apply only to pilots 

seeking a ‘‘multiengine’’ airplane type 

rating. Therefore, the requirements 

apply to pilots seeking an ATP 

certificate concurrently with a 

multiengine type rating as well as pilots 

seeking an ATP certificate concurrently 

with a single-engine airplane type 

rating. 

In this NPRM, the FAA is proposing 

to revise §§ 61.39(d), 61.153(e), 61.156, 

and 61.165(f) to reflect that the ground 

training and FSTD training in a 

multiengine airplane, which is specified 

in § 61.156, applies to pilots seeking an 

ATP certificate with a multiengine 

airplane rating or an ATP certificate 

obtained concurrently with a 

multiengine airplane type rating. 

Additionally, because §§ 61.39(b), 

61.155(c)(14), and 61.160 contain the 

same problematic language that fails to 

specify ‘‘multiengine’’ airplane type 

rating, the FAA is proposing to make 

similar revisions to §§ 61.39(b), 

61.155(c)(14), and 61.160 to reflect the 

FAA’s original intent. These proposed 

amendments are necessary to ensure a 

pilot seeking an ATP certificate 

concurrently with a single-engine 

airplane type rating will not be required 

to comply with unnecessary training 

requirements that were intended for 

applicants seeking an ATP certificate in 

a multiengine airplane. Consistent with 

the Act’s direction to enhance 

multiengine experience requirements, 

this NPRM does not propose any 

changes for what is currently required 

for a pilot seeking a multiengine 

airplane ATP certificate. 

The FAA notes that while the 

burdensome multiengine training 

requirement of § 61.156 would be 

removed for a pilot seeking an ATP 

certificate concurrently with a singleengine airplane type rating, there would 

be no reduction in safety because a pilot 

would still be required to obtain specific 

training and testing that is appropriate 

to the single-engine airplane type rating 

the pilot is seeking. More specifically, to 

add a single-engine airplane type rating 

to an ATP certificate or obtain a singleengine type rating concurrently with an 

ATP certificate, a pilot must receive and 

log ground and flight training from an 

authorized instructor, receive an 

endorsement from an authorized 

instructor that the training was 

completed, and perform a practical test 

in accordance with the requirements in 

§ 61.157(b). 

In addition to the proposed 

amendments previously discussed, the 


khammond on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSAL
65318 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

6The FAA notes that this NPRM redesignated 

§ 61.35(a)(3)(iii)(C) as § 61.35(a)(3)(iii)(B). 

7http://airlines.org/dataset/annual-round-tripfares-and-fees-domestic/ Accessed October 2018. 

8https://www.gsa.gov/travel/plan-book/per-diemrates/per-diem-files-archived. 

9Based on the FAA Aircraft Registry as of April 

2018, there have been about 49 built, including 

prototypes (http://registry.faa.gov/aircraftinquiry/ 

AcftRef_Results.aspx?Mfrtxt=&Modeltxt=SF-50&

PageNo=1). 

FAA is proposing to amend several 

sections in part 61 by removing the July 

31, 2014 date, which served as the 

compliance date for the multiengine 

training requirement. Now that the date 

has passed, the FAA finds that the date 

is no longer necessary in the following 

regulations: §§ 61.35(a)(2) and 

(a)(3)(iii)(B),6 61.153(e), 61.155(c)(14), 

61.156, 61.165(c)(2) and (f)(2). The FAA 

is also proposing to remove 

§ 61.35(a)(3)(iii)(B) as unnecessary 

because it contained a prerequisite for 

applicants seeking issuance of an ATP 

certificate prior to August 1, 2014. As a 

result, § 61.35(a)(3)(iii)(C) is 

redesignated as § 61.35(a)(3)(iii)(B). 

Furthermore, the FAA finds that 

§ 61.155(d) is no longer necessary. This 

section required an applicant who 

successfully completed the ATP 

knowledge test prior to August 1, 2014, 

to successfully complete the practical 

test within 24 months from the month 

in which the knowledge test was 

successfully completed. Because more 

than 40 months has elapsed since 

August 1, 2014, it is impossible for an 

applicant to successfully complete an 

ATP practical test within 24 months of 

taking a knowledge test prior to that 

date. The FAA is therefore proposing to 

remove § 61.155(d) from part 61. For the 

same reasons, the FAA is proposing to 

remove the language from § 61.165(f)(2) 

that allows a pilot to present valid ATP 

knowledge test results from a test taken 

prior to August 1, 2014. 

IV. Regulatory Notices and Analyses 

A. Regulatory Evaluation 

Changes to Federal regulations must 

undergo several economic analyses. 

First, Executive Order 12866 and 

Executive Order 13563 direct that each 

Federal agency shall propose or adopt a 

regulation only upon a reasoned 

determination that the benefits of the 

intended regulation justify its costs. 

Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

of 1980 (Pub. L. 96–354) requires 

agencies to analyze the economic 

impact of regulatory changes on small 

entities. Third, the Trade Agreements 

Act (Pub. L. 96–39) prohibits agencies 

from setting standards that create 

unnecessary obstacles to the foreign 

commerce of the United States. In 

developing U.S. standards, this Trade 

Act requires agencies to consider 

international standards and, where 

appropriate, that they be the basis of 

U.S. standards. Fourth, the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 

104–4) requires agencies to prepare a 

written assessment of the costs, benefits, 

and other effects of proposed or NPRMs 

that include a Federal mandate likely to 

result in the expenditure by State, local, 

or tribal governments, in the aggregate, 

or by the private sector, of $100 million 

or more annually (adjusted for inflation 

with base year of 1995). This portion of 

the preamble summarizes the FAA’s 

analysis of the economic impacts of this 

proposed rule. 

In conducting these analyses, FAA 

has determined that this proposed rule: 

(1) Has cost savings with no additional 

costs; (2) is not an economically 

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ as 

defined in section 3(f) of Executive 

Order 12866; (3) does not require an 

analysis under the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act; (4) would not create 

unnecessary obstacles to the foreign 

commerce of the United States; and (5) 

would not impose an unfunded 

mandate on state, local, or tribal 

governments, or on the private sector by 

exceeding the threshold identified 

above. These analyses are summarized 

below. 

This proposed rule would not make 

any changes to the requirements for a 

pilot seeking a multiengine airplane 

ATP certificate. Rather, this proposed 

rule would simply remove an 

unintended and unnecessary training 

requirement in multiengine airplanes 

for a pilot seeking a single-engine 

airplane ATP certificate concurrently 

with a single-engine airplane type 

rating, with no reduction in safety 

because a pilot will still be required to 

obtain specific training and be tested to 

receive the single-engine airplane type 

rating. 

This proposed rule would relieve 

costs for a pilot seeking both an ATP 

certificate concurrently with a singleengine airplane type rating. Current 

regulations require a person seeking 

both an ATP and a single-engine type 

rating to complete multiengine airplane 

training. 

In order to estimate future cost 

savings of removing unnecessary 

multiengine training requirements for 

pilots seeking to obtain an initial Airline 

Transport Pilot (ATP) certificate 

concurrently with a single-engine 

airplane type rating, the regulatory 

evaluation of the final rule is based on 

the following key assumptions, factors 

and data. 

• We use a five-year period of 

analysis based on the most current data 

available at the time. 

• We use a seven and three percent 

discount rate for calculating present 

values of benefits and costs as 

prescribed by OMB in Circular A–4. 

• Estimates are provided in constant 

dollars with 2017 as the base year. 

• We estimate that costs of an airline 

transport pilot (ATP) certification 

training program (CTP) to an applicant 

to be $5,000. 

• We estimate that the cost of renting 

a newer glass cockpit single-engine 

airplane to be $175 per hour wet. An 

airplane rented wet includes 

maintenance, insurance, fuel, airport 

fees, any other duties, and taxes. 

• We estimate that for an ATP 

practical test, a single-engine airplane 

would have to be rented for three hours 

to practice for the test and two hours for 

the test. 

• In addition to renting an airplane, a 

designee would be required. We 

estimate that the designee would cost 

the applicant $500. 

• Based on data from the Airlines for 

America (A4A), we estimate that the 

average domestic round-trip fare and 

fees would be about $340.7

• Based on data from the General 

Services Administration (GSA) website, 

for 2017, the average cost of a hotel in 

the continental US would be $93 per 

day and the average cost of the per 

diem, including meals and incidental 

expenses, would be $51 per day.8

As previously discussed, there were 

no single-engine airplanes that required 

a type rating until the certification of the 

Cirrus Vision Jet in 2016.9 From October 

2016 through August 2018, 111 pilots 

received SF50 type ratings. Of these 111 

pilots, the FAA estimates that 40 

percent could have upgraded their 

certificate with an airline transport pilot 

(ATP) certification training program 

(CTP), but opted to just add the SF50 

type rating to their commercial 

certificate to avoid completing the ATP 

CTP training costs. Since there are 23 

months from October 2016 through 

August 2018, the FAA calculated that 

there would be an average of 5 pilots per 

month that would receive a singleengine type certificate (111 pilots 

divided by 23 months), or about 60 

pilots per year (5 pilots times 12 

months). The FAA then calculated that 

40 percent of 60 pilots would be 24 

pilots (0.4 times 60) per year that could 

incur costs savings by avoiding the costs 

of the ATP CTP. 

In order to estimate the cost savings 

of an applicant obtaining an ATP CTP, 


khammond on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSAL
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2018 / Proposed Rules 65319 

they would have two options. For the 

first option, the applicant would have to 

complete a five to seven day ATP CTP 

provided by an FAA-authorized training 

provider. The FAA calculates the course 

would take an average of six days ((5 + 

7)/2). The applicant would also incur 

the expense to travel to a flight school 

to take the course, get a hotel for six 

days, and pay a per diem for meals. In 

the assumptions above, an ATP CTP 

would cost $5,000, round trip airfare 

would cost about $340, a hotel would 

cost $93 a day, and meals and incidental 

expenses would cost $51 a day. Using 

these costs, the FAA estimates that this 

proposal would save an applicant about 

$6,200 in 2017 dollars. The following 

table shows the cost saving results of the 

first option over the five-year period of 

analysis. 

OPTION 1 COST SAVINGS

Year 

Potential Savings in 2017$ Present value 

Class Fare Hotel Per diem Avg days # pilots Total cost 

savings 7% 3% 

A B C D E F (A+B+((C+D)×E))×F 

1 ............................................................................ $5,000 $340 $93 $51 $6 $24 $148,893 $139,152 $144,556 

2 ............................................................................ 5,000 340 93 51 6 24 148,893 130,049 140,346 

3 ............................................................................ 5,000 340 93 51 6 24 148,893 121,541 136,258 

4 ............................................................................ 5,000 340 93 51 6 24 148,893 113,590 132,289 

5 ............................................................................ 5,000 340 93 51 6 24 148,893 106,159 128,436 

Total ............................................................... ............ .................... ........ ................ ................ .............. 744,464 610,490 681,886 

Savings per pilot ............................................ ............ .................... ........ ................ ................ .............. 6,204 5,087 5,682 

Note: Numbers may not add due to rounding. 

For the second option, the applicant 

would have to rent a single-engine 

airplane and hire a designee (check 

pilot) for the practical test. We estimate 

that for an ATP practical test, a singleengine airplane would have to be rented 

for three hours to practice for the test 

and two hours for the test. In the 

assumptions above, a single-engine 

airplane would cost $175 per hour. The 

FAA calculates the airplane rental 

would cost a total of $875 dollars to rent 

($175 * (2 + 3 hours)). The applicant 

would also incur the expense to travel 

to a private plane rental company, hire 

a designee, get a hotel for one day, and 

pay a per diem for meals. In the 

assumptions above, round trip airfare 

would cost about $340, a designee 

would cost $500, a hotel would cost $93 

a day, and meals and incidental 

expenses would cost $51 a day. Using 

these costs, the FAA estimates that this 

proposal would save an applicant about 

$1,900 in 2017 dollars. The following 

table shows the cost saving results of the 

second option over the five-year period 

of analysis. 

OPTION 2 COST SAVINGS

Year 

Potential Savings in 2017$ Present value 

Fare A/C rental 

Designee 

Hotel Per diem # pilots Total cost 7% 3% 

A B C D E F (A+B+C+D+E)*F 

1 ............................................................................ $340 $875 $500 $93 $51 $24 $44,613 $41,694 $43,313

2 ............................................................................ 340 875 500 93 51 24 44,613 38,967 42,052 

3 ............................................................................ 340 875 500 93 51 24 44,613 36,417 40,827 

4 ............................................................................ 340 875 500 93 51 24 44,613 34,035 39,638 

5 ............................................................................ 340 875 500 93 51 24 44,613 31,808 38,483 

Total ............................................................... ............ .................... ........ ................ ................ .............. 223,064 182,922 204,314 

Savings per pilot ............................................ ............ .................... ........ ................ ................ .............. 1,859 1,524 1,703 

Note: Numbers may not add due to rounding. 

The FAA estimates that this proposal 

would have costs savings between $223 

thousand to $744 thousand over the five 

year period of analysis. The FAA 

considers this proposed rule would 

provide small cost savings with no 

additional costs. 

Therefore, the FAA has determined 

that this proposed rule is not a 

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ as 

defined in section 3(f) of Executive 

Order 12866, and is not ‘‘significant’’ as 

defined in DOT’s Regulatory Policies 

and Procedures. 

B. Regulatory Flexibility Determination 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 

(Pub. L. 96–354) (RFA) establishes ‘‘as a 

principle of regulatory issuance that 

agencies shall endeavor, consistent with 

the objectives of the rule and of 

applicable statutes, to fit regulatory and 

informational requirements to the scale 

of the businesses, organizations, and 

governmental jurisdictions subject to 

regulation.’’ To achieve this principle, 

agencies are required to solicit and 

consider flexible regulatory proposals 

and to explain the rationale for their 

actions to assure that such proposals are 

given serious consideration. The RFA 

covers a wide-range of small entities, 

including small businesses, not-forprofit organizations, and small 

governmental jurisdictions. 

Agencies must perform a review to 

determine whether a rulemaking would 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. If 

the agency determines that it will, the 

agency must prepare a regulatory 

flexibility analysis as described in the 

RFA. However, if an agency determines 

that a rule is not expected to have a 


khammond on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSAL
65320 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities, 

section 605(b) of the RFA provides that 

the head of the agency may so certify 

and a regulatory flexibility analysis is 

not required. The certification must 

include a statement providing the 

factual basis for this determination, and 

the reasoning should be clear. 

This proposed rule would not make 

any changes to the requirements for a 

pilot seeking a multiengine airplane 

ATP certificate. Rather, this proposed 

rule would simply remove an 

unintended and unnecessary training 

requirement in multiengine airplanes 

for a pilot seeking a single-engine 

airplane ATP certificate concurrently 

with a single-engine airplane type 

rating, with no reduction in safety 

because a pilot will still be required to 

obtain specific training and be tested to 

receive the single-engine airplane type 

rating. This proposed rule would relieve 

costs for a pilot seeking an ATP 

certificate concurrently with a singleengine airplane type rating. 

Therefore, as provided in section 

605(b), the head of the FAA certifies 

that this proposed rule would not result 

in a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

C. International Trade Impact 

Assessment 

The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 

(Pub. L. 96–39), as amended by the 

Uruguay Round Agreements Act (Pub. 

L. 103–465), prohibits Federal agencies 

from establishing standards or engaging 

in related activities that create 

unnecessary obstacles to the foreign 

commerce of the United States. 

Pursuant to these Acts, the 

establishment of standards is not 

considered an unnecessary obstacle to 

the foreign commerce of the United 

States, so long as the standard has a 

legitimate domestic objective, such as 

the protection of safety, and does not 

operate in a manner that excludes 

imports that meet this objective. The 

statute also requires consideration of 

international standards and, where 

appropriate, that they be the basis for 

U.S. standards. 

The FAA has assessed the potential 

effect of this proposed rule and 

determined that it would have only a 

domestic impact and therefore no effect 

on international trade. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Assessment 

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4) 

requires each Federal agency to prepare 

a written statement assessing the effects 

of any Federal mandate in a proposed or 

final agency rule that may result in an 

expenditure of $100 million or more (in 

1995 dollars) in any one year by State, 

local, and tribal governments, in the 

aggregate, or by the private sector; such 

a mandate is deemed to be a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action.’’ The FAA currently 

uses an inflation-adjusted value of 

$155.0 million in lieu of $100 million. 

This proposed rule does not contain 

such a mandate; therefore, the 

requirements of Title II of the Act do not 

apply. 

E. Paperwork Reduction Act 

The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

(44 U.S.C. 3507(d)) requires that the 

FAA consider the impact of paperwork 

and other information collection 

burdens imposed on the public. The 

FAA has determined that there would 

be no new requirement for information 

collection associated with this proposed 

rule. FAA has also determined it is not 

necessary to amend any existing 

collection. The current paperwork filing 

that established the ATP CTP imposes a 

requirement for a training provider to 

submit a training program to the FAA 

for approval. In the original filing it was 

determined there was no paperwork 

burden on a person taking the ATP CTP, 

therefore this proposed rule would have 

no impact on that filing. The FAA also 

evaluated the paperwork filing for the 

Airman Certificate and/or Rating 

Application. If an applicant is seeking a 

multiengine airplane ATP certificate, 

submitting the ATP CTP graduation 

certificate is required as part of that 

collection. This proposed rule does not 

change that requirement therefore no 

amendment is needed. 

F. International Compatibility 

In keeping with U.S. obligations 

under the Convention on International 

Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to 

conform to International Civil Aviation 

Organization (ICAO) Standards and 

Recommended Practices to the 

maximum extent practicable. The FAA 

has determined that there are no ICAO 

Standards and Recommended Practices 

that correspond to these proposed 

regulations. 

G. Environmental Analysis 

FAA Order 1050.1F identifies FAA 

actions that are categorically excluded 

from preparation of an environmental 

assessment or environmental impact 

statement under the National 

Environmental Policy Act in the 

absence of extraordinary circumstances. 

The FAA has determined this proposed 

rulemaking action qualifies for the 

categorical exclusion identified in 

paragraph 5–6.6 and involves no 

extraordinary circumstances. 

V. Executive Order Determinations 

A. Executive Order 13132, Federalism 

The FAA has analyzed this proposed 

rule under the principles and criteria of 

Executive Order 13132, Federalism. The 

agency has determined that this action 

would not have a substantial direct 

effect on the States, or the relationship 

between the Federal Government and 

the States, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities among the 

various levels of government, and, 

therefore, would not have Federalism 

implications. 

B. Executive Order 13211, Regulations 

That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

The FAA analyzed this proposed rule 

under Executive Order 13211, Actions 

Concerning Regulations that 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use (May 18, 2001). The 

agency has determined that it would not 

be a ‘‘significant energy action’’ under 

the executive order and would not be 

likely to have a significant adverse effect 

on the supply, distribution, or use of 

energy. 

C. Executive Order 13609, International 

Cooperation 

Executive Order 13609, Promoting 

International Regulatory Cooperation, 

promotes international regulatory 

cooperation to meet shared challenges 

involving health, safety, labor, security, 

environmental, and other issues and to 

reduce, eliminate, or prevent 

unnecessary differences in regulatory 

requirements. The FAA has analyzed 

this action under the policies and 

agency responsibilities of Executive 

Order 13609, and has determined that 

this action would have no effect on 

international regulatory cooperation. 

D. Executive Order 13771, Reducing 

Regulation and Controlling Regulatory 

Costs 

This proposed rule is expected to be 

an E.O. 13771 deregulatory action. 

Details on the estimated cost savings of 

this proposed rule can be found in the 

rule’s economic analysis. 

VI. Additional Information 

A. Comments Invited 

The FAA invites interested persons to 

participate in this rulemaking by 

submitting written comments, data, or 

views. The agency also invites 

comments relating to the economic, 

environmental, energy, or federalism 

impacts that might result from adopting 

the rulemaking action in this document. 

The most helpful comments reference a 

specific portion of the rulemaking 


khammond on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSAL
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2018 / Proposed Rules 65321 

action, explain the reason for any 

recommended change, and include 

supporting data. To ensure the docket 

does not contain duplicate comments, 

commenters should send only one copy 

of written comments, or if comments are 

filed electronically, commenters should 

submit only one time. 

The FAA will file in the docket all 

comments it receives, as well as a report 

summarizing each substantive public 

contact with FAA personnel concerning 

this rulemaking. The FAA will consider 

all comments it receives on or before the 

closing date for comments. The FAA 

will consider comments filed after the 

comment period has closed if it is 

possible to do so without incurring 

expense or delay. The agency may 

change this rulemaking action in light of 

the comments it receives. 

Proprietary or Confidential Business 

Information: Commenters should not 

file proprietary or confidential business 

information in the docket. Such 

information must be sent or delivered 

directly to the person identified in the 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

section of this document, and marked as 

proprietary or confidential. If submitting 

information on a disk or CD ROM, mark 

the outside of the disk or CD ROM, and 

identify electronically within the disk or 

CD ROM the specific information that is 

proprietary or confidential. 

Under 14 CFR 11.35(b), if the FAA is 

aware of proprietary information filed 

with a comment, the agency does not 

place it in the docket. It is held in a 

separate file to which the public does 

not have access, and the FAA places a 

note in the docket that it has received 

it. If the FAA receives a request to 

examine or copy this information, it 

treats it as any other request under the 

Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 

552). The FAA processes such a request 

under Department of Transportation 

procedures found in 49 CFR part 7. 

B. Availability of Rulemaking 

Documents 

An electronic copy of rulemaking 

documents may be obtained from the 

internet by— 

1. Searching the Federal eRulemaking 

Portal (http://www.regulations.gov); 

2. Visiting the FAA’s Regulations and 

Policies web page at http://

www.faa.gov/regulations_policies or 

3. Accessing the Government Printing 

Office’s web page at http://

www.gpo.gov/fdsys/. 

Copies may also be obtained by 

sending a request to the Federal 

Aviation Administration, Office of 

Rulemaking, ARM–1, 800 Independence 

Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591, or 

by calling (202) 267–9680. Commenters 

must identify the docket or notice 

number of this rulemaking. 

All documents the FAA considered in 

developing this proposed rule, 

including economic analyses and 

technical reports, may be accessed from 

the internet through the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal referenced in item 

(1) above. 

C. Small Business Regulatory 

Enforcement Fairness Act 

The Small Business Regulatory 

Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 

(SBREFA) requires FAA to comply with 

small entity requests for information or 

advice about compliance with statutes 

and regulations within its jurisdiction. 

A small entity with questions regarding 

this document may contact its local 

FAA official, or the person listed under 

the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

heading at the beginning of the 

preamble. To find out more about 

SBREFA on the internet, visit http://

www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/ 

rulemaking/sbre_act/. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 61 

Aircraft, Airmen, Aviation safety. 

The Proposed Amendment 

In consideration of the foregoing, the 

Federal Aviation Administration 

proposes to amend chapter I of title 14, 

Code of Federal Regulations as follows: 

PART 61—CERTIFICATION: PILOTS, 

FLIGHT INSTRUCTORS, AND GROUND 

INSTRUCTORS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 61 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40113, 

44701–44703, 44707, 44709–44711, 44729, 

44903, 45102–45103, 45301–45302, Sec. 

2307 Pub. L. 114–190, 130 Stat. 615 (49 

U.S.C. 44703 note). 

■ 2. Amend § 61.35 by: 

■ a. Revising paragraph (a)(2) and 

paragraph (a)(3)(iii)(A); 

■ b. Removing paragraph (a)(3)(iii)(B); 

■ c. Re-designating paragraph 

(a)(3)(iii)(C) as paragraph (a)(3)(iii)(B); 

and 

■ d. Revising newly re-designated 

paragraph (a)(3)(iii)(B) 

The revisions read as follows: 

§ 61.35 Knowledge test: Prerequisites and 

passing grades. 

(a) * * * 

(2) For the knowledge test for an 

airline transport pilot certificate with an 

airplane category multiengine class 

rating, a graduation certificate for the 

airline transport pilot certification 

training program specified in § 61.156; 

and 

(3) * * * 

(iii) * * * 

(A) For issuance of certificates other 

than the ATP certificate with an 

airplane category multiengine class 

rating, the applicant meets or will meet 

the age requirements of this part for the 

certificate sought before the expiration 

date of the airman knowledge test 

report; and 

(B) For issuance of an ATP certificate 

with an airplane category multiengine 

class rating obtained under the 

aeronautical experience requirements of 

§§ 61.159 or 61.160, the applicant is at 

least 18 years of age at the time of the 

knowledge test; 

* * * * * 

■ 3. Amend § 61.39 by revising the 

introductory text of paragraph (b) and 

the introductory text of paragraph (d) to 

read as follows: 

§ 61.39 Prerequisites for practical tests. 

* * * * * 

(b) An applicant for an airline 

transport pilot certificate with an 

airplane category multiengine class 

rating or an airline transport pilot 

certificate obtained concurrently with a 

multiengine airplane type rating may 

take the practical test with an expired 

knowledge test only if the applicant 

passed the knowledge test after July 31, 

2014, and is employed: 

* * * * * 

(d) In addition to the requirements in 

paragraph (a) of this section, to be 

eligible for a practical test for an airline 

transport pilot certificate with an 

airplane category multiengine class 

rating or airline transport pilot 

certificate obtained concurrently with a 

multiengine airplane type rating, an 

applicant must: 

* * * * * 

■ 4. Amend § 61.153 by revising 

paragraph (e) to read as follows: 

§ 61.153 Eligibility requirements: General. 

* * * * * 

(e) For an airline transport pilot 

certificate with an airplane category 

multiengine class rating or an airline 

transport pilot certificate obtained 

concurrently with a multiengine 

airplane type rating, receive a 

graduation certificate from an 

authorized training provider certifying 

completion of the airline transport pilot 

certification training program specified 

in § 61.156 before applying for the 

knowledge test required by paragraph 

(g) of this section; 

* * * * * 

■ 5. Amend § 61.155 by revising 

paragraph (c)(14) and removing 

paragraph (d) to read as follows: 


khammond on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSAL
65322 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

§ 61.155 Aeronautical knowledge. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(14) For an airplane category 

multiengine class rating, the content of 

the airline transport pilot certification 

training program in § 61.156. 

■ 6. Amend § 61.156 by revising the 

heading and introductory text to read as 

follows: 

§ 61.156 Training requirements: Airplane 

category—multiengine class or multiengine 

airplane type rating concurrently with an 

airline transport pilot certificate. 

A person who applies for the 

knowledge test for an airline transport 

pilot certificate with an airplane 

category multiengine class rating must 

present a graduation certificate from an 

authorized training provider under part 

121, 135, 141, or 142 of this chapter 

certifying the applicant has completed 

the following training in a course 

approved by the Administrator. 

* * * * * 

■ 7. Amend § 61.160 by revising the 

introductory text of paragraph (a), the 

introductory text of paragraph (b), the 

introductory text of paragraph (c), and 

paragraph (d) to read as follows: 

§ 61.160 Aeronautical experience— 

airplane category restricted privileges. 

(a) Except for a person who has been 

removed from flying status for lack of 

proficiency or because of a disciplinary 

action involving aircraft operations, a 

U.S. military pilot or former U.S. 

military pilot may apply for an airline 

transport pilot certificate with an 

airplane category multiengine class 

rating or an airline transport pilot 

certificate concurrently with a 

multiengine airplane type rating with a 

minimum of 750 hours of total time as 

a pilot if the pilot presents: 

* * * * * 

(b) A person may apply for an airline 

transport pilot certificate with an 

airplane category multiengine class 

rating or an airline transport pilot 

certificate concurrently with a 

multiengine airplane type rating with a 

minimum of 1,000 hours of total time as 

a pilot if the person: 

* * * * * 

(c) A person may apply for an airline 

transport pilot certificate with an 

airplane category multiengine class 

rating or an airline transport pilot 

certificate concurrently with a 

multiengine airplane type rating with a 

minimum of 1,250 hours of total time as 

a pilot if the person: 

* * * * * 

(d) A graduate of an institution of 

higher education who completes fewer 

than 60 semester credit hours but at 

least 30 credit hours and otherwise 

satisfies the requirements of paragraph 

(b) may apply for airline transport pilot 

certificate with an airplane category 

multiengine class rating or an airline 

transport pilot certificate concurrently 

with a multiengine airplane type rating 

with a minimum of 1,250 hours of total 

time as a pilot. 

* * * * * 

■ 8. Amend § 61.165 by revising 

paragraph (c)(2), the introductory text of 

paragraph (f), and paragraph (f)(2) to 

read as follows: 

§ 61.165 Additional aircraft category and 

class ratings. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(2) Successfully complete the airline 

transport pilot certification training 

program specified in § 61.156; 

* * * * * 

(f) Adding a multiengine class rating 

to an airline transport pilot certificate 

with a single engine class rating. A 

person applying to add a multiengine 

class rating, or a multiengine class 

rating concurrently with a multiengine 

airplane type rating, to an airline 

transport pilot certificate with an 

airplane category single engine class 

rating must— 

* * * 

(2) Pass a required knowledge test on 

the aeronautical knowledge areas of 

§ 61.155(c), as applicable to multiengine 

airplanes; 

* * * * * 

Issued under authority provided by 49 

U.S.C. 106(f), 44701(a)(5), and 44703(a) in 

Washington, DC, on December 13, 2018. 

Rick Domingo, 

Executive Director, Flight Standards Service. 

[FR Doc. 2018–27402 Filed 12–19–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Food and Drug Administration 

21 CFR Parts 50, 312, and 812 

[Docket No. FDA–2018–N–2727] 

RIN 0910–AH52 

Institutional Review Board Waiver or 

Alteration of Informed Consent for 

Minimal Risk Clinical Investigations; 

Extension of Comment Period 

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, 

HHS. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of 

comment period. 

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug 

Administration (FDA or the Agency) is 

extending the comment period for the 

proposed rule that appeared in the 

Federal Register of November 15, 2018. 

The Agency is taking this action in 

response to a request for an extension to 

allow interested persons additional time 

to submit comments. 

DATES: FDA is extending the comment 

period on the proposed rule published 

November 15, 2018 (83 FR 57378). 

Submit either electronic or written 

comments by February 13, 2019. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

as follows. Please note that late, 

untimely filed comments will not be 

considered. Electronic comments must 

be submitted on or before February 13, 

2019. The https://www.regulations.gov 

electronic filing system will accept 

comments until 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time 

at the end of February 13, 2019. 

Comments received by mail/hand 

delivery/courier (for written/paper 

submissions) will be considered timely 

if they are postmarked or the delivery 

service acceptance receipt is on or 

before that date. 

Electronic Submissions 

Submit electronic comments in the 

following way: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Comments submitted electronically, 

including attachments, to https://

www.regulations.gov will be posted to 

the docket unchanged. Because your 

comment will be made public, you are 

solely responsible for ensuring that your 

comment does not include any 

confidential information that you or a 

third party may not wish to be posted, 

such as medical information, your or 

anyone else’s Social Security number, or 

confidential business information, such 

as a manufacturing process. Please note 

that if you include your name, contact 

information, or other information that 

identifies you in the body of your 

comments, that information will be 

posted on https://www.regulations.gov. 

• If you want to submit a comment 

with confidential information that you 

do not wish to be made available to the 

public, submit the comment as a 

written/paper submission and in the 

manner detailed (see ‘‘Written/Paper 

Submissions’’ and ‘‘Instructions’’). 

Written/Paper Submissions 

Submit written/paper submissions as 

follows: 

• Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for 

written/paper submissions): Dockets 

Management Staff (HFA–305), Food and 


khammond on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSAL