Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 167 / Monday, August 31, 2009 / Proposed Rules 44779 

Scheibe-Flugzeugbau GmbH: Docket No. 

FAA–2009–0800; Directorate Identifier 

2009–CE–041–AD. 

Comments Due Date 

(a) We must receive comments by October 

15, 2009. 

Affected ADs 

(b) None. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to Models Bergfalke-III, 

Bergfalke-II/55, SF 25C, and SF–26A 

Standard gliders, all serial numbers, 

certificated in any category. 

Subject 

(d) Air Transport Association of America 

(ATA) Code 27: Flight Controls. 

Reason 

(e) The mandatory continuing 

airworthiness information (MCAI) states: 

The manufacturer has advised of receiving 

a report of looseness of the drive arm of the 

mechanical elevator trim tab, found during 

an annual inspection. This kind of damage is 

likely caused by penetrated humidity over 

the years. 

If left uncorrected, this condition could 

lead to the separation of the drive arm which 

could result in flutter of the elevator and 

possible loss of control of the aircraft. 

For the reasons stated above, this new 

Airworthiness Directive mandates repetitive 

inspections for solid fixation of the drive 

arms of the mechanical elevator trim tabs. 

Actions and Compliance 

(f) Unless already done, do the following 

actions: 

(1) At the next scheduled maintenance 

inspection after the effective date of this AD 

or within the next 12 months after the 

effective date of this AD, whichever occurs 

first, inspect the drive arm of the mechanical 

elevator trim tab for separation of the drive 

arm following Scheibe Flugzeugbau GmbH 

Service Bulletin No. 104–24/1; No. 232–6/1; 

and No. 653–91/1 (same document), dated 

June 25, 2009. If any looseness is found, 

before further flight, repair the drive arm of 

the mechanical elevator trim tab following 

Scheibe-Flugzeugbau GmbH Work 

Instruction No. 104–24; No. 232–6; and No. 

653–91 (same document), dated March 23, 

2009. 

(2) Repetitively thereafter, at intervals not 

to exceed every 12 months, inspect the drive 

arm of the mechanical elevator trim tab and 

do all corrective actions following ScheibeFlugzeugbau GmbH Service Bulletin No. 

104–24/1; No. 232–6/1; and No. 653–91/1 

(same document), dated June 25, 2009; and 

Scheibe-Flugzeugbau GmbH Work 

Instruction No. 104–24; No. 232–6; and No. 

653–91 (same document), dated March 23, 

2009. 

FAA AD Differences 

Note: This AD differs from the MCAI and/ 

or service information as follows: No 

differences. 

Other FAA AD Provisions 

(g) The following provisions also apply to 

this AD: 

(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs): The Manager, Standards Office, 

FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs 

for this AD, if requested using the procedures 

found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to 

Attn: Greg Davison, Glider Program Manager, 

FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, 

Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; 

telephone: (816) 329–4130; fax: (816) 329– 

4090. Before using any approved AMOC on 

any airplane to which the AMOC applies, 

notify your appropriate principal inspector 

(PI) in the FAA Flight Standards District 

Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local 

FSDO. 

(2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement 

in this AD to obtain corrective actions from 

a manufacturer or other source, use these 

actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective 

actions are considered FAA-approved if they 

are approved by the State of Design Authority 

(or their delegated agent). You are required 

to assure the product is airworthy before it 

is returned to service. 

(3) Reporting Requirements: For any 

reporting requirement in this AD, under the 

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act 

(44 U.S.C. 3501 et. seq.), the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) has 

approved the information collection 

requirements and has assigned OMB Control 

Number 2120–0056. 

Related Information 

(h) Refer to MCAI European Aviation 

Safety Agency (EASA) AD No.: 2009–0132, 

dated June 23, 2009; Scheibe-Flugzeugbau 

GmbH Service Bulletin No. 104–24/1; No. 

232–6/1; and No. 653–91/1 (same document), 

dated June 25, 2009; and ScheibeFlugzeugbau GmbH Work Instruction No. 

104–24; No. 232–6; and No. 653–91 (same 

document), dated March 23, 2009, for related 

information. 

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on August 

25, 2009. 

Kim Smith, 

Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft 

Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. E9–20968 Filed 8–28–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Parts 61, 91, and 141 

[Docket No. FAA–2008–0938; Notice No. 09– 

08] 

RIN 2120–AJ18 

Pilot in Command Proficiency Check 

and Other Changes to the Pilot and 

Pilot School Certification Rules 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: The FAA is proposing several 

changes to our pilot, flight instructor, 

and pilot school certification rules. The 

proposals include requiring pilot-incommand (PIC) proficiency checks for 

pilots who act as PIC of single piloted, 

turbojet-powered airplanes; allowing 

pilot applicants to apply for a private 

pilot certificate and an instrument rating 

concurrently; and making allowance in 

the rule to provide for the issuance of 

standard U.S. pilot certificates on the 

basis of an international licensing 

agreement between the FAA and a 

foreign civil aviation authority. The 

FAA has recently entered into such an 

agreement with the civil aviation 

authority of Canada. The FAA is also 

proposing to allow pilot schools to use 

Internet-based training programs 

without requiring schools to have a 

physical ground training facility. The 

FAA is proposing to allow pilot schools 

and provisional pilot schools to apply 

for a combined private pilot certification 

and instrument rating course. The FAA 

is also proposing to revise the definition 

of ‘‘complex airplane.’’ Because of 

changing technology in aviation, the 

results of successful research, and an 

international agreement, the FAA has 

determined these proposed changes to 

the pilot, flight instructor, and pilot 

school certification rules are necessary 

to ensure pilots are adequately trained 

and qualified to operate safely in the 

National Airspace System. The FAA has 

determined these proposals are needed 

to respond to changes in the aviation 

industry and to further reduce 

unnecessary regulatory burdens. 

DATES: Send your comments to reach us 

on or before November 30, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments 

identified by Docket Number FAA– 

2008–0938 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, 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. 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
44780 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 167 / Monday, August 31, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

For more information on the rulemaking 

process, see the SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION section of this document. 

Privacy: We will post all comments 

we receive, without change, to http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information you provide. 

Using the search function of our docket 

web site, anyone can find and read the 

electronic form of all comments 

received into any of our dockets, 

including the name of the individual 

sending the comment (or signing the 

comment for an association, business, 

labor union, etc.) You may review 

DOT’s complete Privacy Act Statement 

in the Federal Register published on 

April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477–78) or you 

may visit http://docketsInfo.dot.gov. 

Docket: To read background 

documents or comments received, go to 

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

and follow the online instructions for 

accessing the docket. Or, go to the 

Docket Management Facility 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: For 

technical questions concerning this 

proposed rule contact John D. Lynch, 

Certification and General Aviation 

Operations Branch, General Aviation 

and Commercial Division, AFS–810, 

Federal Aviation Administration, 800 

Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) 

267–3844; e-mail john.d.lynch@faa.gov. 

For legal questions concerning this 

proposed rule contact Michael Chase, 

Esq., Office of Chief Counsel, AGC–240, 

Regulations Division, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence 

Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; 

telephone (202) 267–3110; e-mail 

michael.chase@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Later in 

this preamble under the Additional 

Information section, we discuss how 

you can comment on this proposal and 

how we will handle your comments. 

Included in this discussion is related 

information about the docket, privacy, 

and the handling of proprietary or 

confidential business information. We 

also discuss how you can get a copy of 

this proposal and related rulemaking 

documents. 

I. Authority for This Rulemaking 

The FAA’s authority to issues rules 

regarding aviation safety is found in 

Title 49 of the United States Code. 

Subtitle I, section 106 describes the 

authority of the FAA Administrator, 

including the authority to issue, rescind, 

and revise regulations. Subtitle VII, 

Aviation Programs, describes in more 

detail the scope of the agency’s 

authority. 

This rulemaking is promulgated 

under the authority described in 

Subtitle VII, Part A, Chapter 447—Safety 

Regulation. Under section 44701, the 

FAA is charged with promoting safe 

flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by 

prescribing regulations necessary for 

safety. Under section 44703, the FAA 

issues an airman certificate to an 

individual when we find, after 

investigation, that the individual is 

qualified for, and physically able to 

perform the duties related to, the 

position authorized by the certificate. In 

this NPRM, we are proposing to amend 

the training, qualification, certification, 

and operating requirements for pilots. 

The proposing changes are intended 

to ensure that flight crewmembers have 

the training and qualifications to 

operate aircraft safety. For this reason, 

the proposed changes are within the 

scope of our authority and are a 

reasonable and necessary exercise of our 

statutory obligations. 

II. Background 

This notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM) includes 16 changes to FAA’s 

existing pilot, flight instructor, and pilot 

school certification regulations. These 

regulations are published in Title 14 of 

the Code of Federal Regulations, the 

pilot certifications regulations appear in 

part 61, the flight instruction regulations 

appear in part 91, and the pilot school 

certification regulations appear in part 

141. The proposed changes update are 

regulations to reflect advances in 

aircraft design and avionics, pilot 

training, and international relations. 

One of the proposed amendments 

requires proficiency checks for a pilot 

who acts as single pilot in comment of 

a turbo-jet powered airplane. These new 

turbojet-powered airplanes are widely 

referred to as very light jets (VLJs). 

Other proposed changes relate to 

improved pilot training methods 

including the use of Internet-based 

training programs and concurrent pilot 

certification and instrument rating 

training. The FAA is also proposing to 

revise § 61.71 to provide for the 

issuance of standard U.S. pilot 

certificates on the basis of an 

international licensing agreement 

between the FAA and a foreign civil 

aviation authority. Recently, the FAA 

entered into an Implementation 

Procedures for Licensing (IPL) 

agreement with the civil aviation 

authority from Transport Canada to 

establish reciprocity of pilot 

certification for the private pilot, 

commercial pilot, and airline transport 

pilot certificates for the airplane and 

instrument-airplane ratings. 

III. Summary Table of Proposed 

Changes 

The table below lists the proposed 

changes contained in this NPRM in 

order of their Code of Federal 

Regulations (CFR) designations. 

Proposal No. CFR designation Summary of the proposed changes 

1 ......................... § 61.1(b)(3) .............................................. Proposal to revise the definition of ‘‘complex airplane’’ to include airplanes 

equipped with a full authority digital engine control (FADEC) and move it from 

§ 61.31(e) to § 61.1(b)(3). 

2 ......................... § 61.58(a)(1) & (2) and (d)(1)–(4) ........... Proposal to require a § 61.58 PIC proficiency check for PICs of single piloted, turbojet-powered airplanes. 

3 ......................... § 61.65(a)(1) ............................................ Proposal to permit the application for and the issuance of an instrument rating 

concurrently with a private pilot certificate for pilots. 

4 ......................... § 61.71(c) ................................................. Proposal to allow the conversion of a foreign pilot license to a U.S. pilot certificate 

based on an Implementation Procedure for Licensing (IPL) agreement. 

5 ......................... § 61.129(a)(3)(ii) ...................................... Commercial pilot certificate, airplane single engine class rating—Proposal to replace the 10 hours of complex airplane aeronautical experience with 10 hours 

of advanced instrument training. 

6 ......................... § 61.129(b)(3)(ii) ...................................... Commercial pilot certificate, airplane multiengine class rating—Proposal to replace the 10 hours of complex multiengine airplane aeronautical experience 

with 10 hours of advanced instrument training. 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 167 / Monday, August 31, 2009 / Proposed Rules 44781 

Proposal No. CFR designation Summary of the proposed changes 

7 ......................... § 91.109(a) and (b)(3) ............................. Proposal to expand the use of airplanes with a single, functioning throwover control wheel for providing expanded flight training. This proposal parallels the long 

standing grants of exemptions that the FAA has issued to many petitioners for 

use with certain airplanes with a single, functioning throwover control wheel. 

8 ......................... § 141.45 ................................................... Proposal to allow pilot schools and provisional pilot schools an exception to the 

requirement to have a ground training facility when the training course is an online, computer-based training program. 

9 ......................... § 141.55(c)(1) .......................................... Proposal to allow pilot schools and provisional pilot schools an exception to the 

requirement to describe each room used for ground training when the training 

course is an online, computer-based training program. 

10 ....................... Part 141, Appx D, para. 4.(b)(1)(ii) ......... Commercial pilot certification course for an airplane single engine class rating— 

Proposal to replace the 10 hours of complex airplane training with 10 hours of 

advanced instrument training. 

11 ....................... Part 141, Appx D, para. 4.(b)(2)(ii) ......... Commercial pilot certification course for an airplane multiengine class rating— 

Proposal to replace the 10 hours of complex multiengine airplane training with 

10 hours of advanced instrument training. 

12 ....................... Part 141, Appx I, para. 4.(a)(3)(ii) ........... Additional airplane single-engine class rating at the commercial pilot certification 

level—Proposal to replace the 10 hours of complex airplane training with 10 

hours of advanced instrument training. 

13 ....................... Part 141, Appx I, para. 4.(b)(2)(ii) ........... Additional airplane multiengine class rating at the commercial pilot certification 

level—Proposal to replace the 10 hours of complex multiengine airplane training with 10 hours of advanced instrument training. 

14 ....................... Part 141, Appx I, para. 4.(j)(2)(ii) ............ Additional airplane single-engine class rating at the commercial pilot certification 

level—Proposal to replace the 10 hours of complex airplane training with 10 

hours of advanced instrument training. 

15 ....................... Part 141, Appx I, para. 4.(k)(2)(ii) ........... Additional airplane multiengine class rating at the commercial pilot certification 

level—Proposal to replace the 10 hours of complex multiengine airplane training with 10 hours of advanced instrument training. 

16 ....................... Part 141, Appx M .................................... Proposal to establish a combined private pilot certification and instrument rating 

course. 

On August 21, 2009, the FAA 

published a final rule entitled, ‘‘Pilot, 

Flight Instructor, and Pilot School 

Certificate’’ (See 74 FR 42500). In that 

final rule, we established paragraphs 

4.(a)(3)(ii), (b)(2)(ii), (j)(2)(ii), and 

(k)(2)(ii) in part 141, appendix I to 

clarify the training requirements for an 

additional aircraft category and class 

rating courses. In proposal Nos. 12, 13, 

14, and 15 of this preamble, we are now 

proposing additional changes to 

paragraphs 4.(a)(3)(ii), (b)(2)(ii), (j)(2)(ii) 

and (k)(2)(ii) in part 141, appendix I to 

replace the 10 hours of complex 

airplane training with 10 hours of 

advanced instrument training. 

IV. Description of Proposed Changes 

(1) Proposal to revise the definition of 

‘‘complex airplane’’ and move it from 

§ 61.31(e) to § 61.1(b)(3). 

The FAA proposes to revise the 

definition of ‘‘complex airplane’’ to 

include airplanes that are equipped 

with a full authority digital engine 

control (FADEC) system consisting of a 

digital computer and associated 

accessories for controlling both the 

engine and propeller with a single lever 

control. On November 2, 2006, we 

issued FAA Notice No. 8000.331, 

‘‘Airplanes Equipped with Retractable 

Landing Gear, Flaps, and FADEC Meet 

the Definition of a Complex Airplane 

(hereafter ‘Complex Airplane Notice’).’’ 

That Notice made the public aware of 

our determination that airplanes 

equipped with a retractable landing 

gear, flaps, and a FADEC system met the 

definition of a ‘‘complex airplane.’’ In 

that Notice, we also stated that a 

FADEC-equipped airplane with a 

retractable landing gear and flaps may 

be used for the training and practical 

test to meet the ‘‘complex airplane’’ 

requirement for the airplane singleengine and multiengine land ratings at 

the commercial pilot certification and 

flight instructor certification. 

The current definition of a ‘‘complex 

airplane’’ in § 61.31(e) requires that the 

airplane have a retractable landing gear, 

flaps, and a controllable pitch propeller. 

As a result, a number of training 

providers have complained to the FAA 

that they have had to keep older 

airplanes in their inventory that meet 

this current § 61.31(e) ‘‘complex 

airplane’’ definition for providing 

commercial pilot and flight instructor 

training of § 61.129(a)(3)(ii) or 

§ 61.129(b)(3)(ii) and the additional 

training requirements of § 61.31(e). To 

remove this unnecessary burden, we are 

proposing to consider an airplane 

equipped with a FADEC system as being 

equivalent to one having a controllable 

pitch propeller. 

(2) Proposal to require a recurrent PIC 

proficiency check for a PIC of a single 

piloted, turbojet-powered airplane. 

The FAA is proposing to revise 

§ 61.48 by requiring PIC proficiency 

checks for pilots who act as PIC of 

single piloted, turbojet-powered 

airplanes. Section 61.58 currently 

requires a PIC of aircraft requiring more 

than one pilot flight crewmember to 

undergo a proficiency check. 

The number of single piloted, 

turbojet-powered airplanes is expected 

to increase dramatically in the next few 

years. The expansion of single piloted, 

turbojet-powered airplanes is the result 

of new designs that are substantially 

lower in cost and smaller in size. These 

new turbojet-powered airplanes are 

widely referred to as very light jets 

(VLJs). 

In July 2005, the FAA convened a 

study group, known as the Very Light 

Jet (VLJ) Cross Organizational Group, to 

identify concerns regarding the safe 

operation of VLJs and other single 

piloted, turbojet-powered airplanes. One 

concern was that existing § 61.58 does 

not require a pilot in command (PIC) of 

a single piloted, turbojet-powered 

airplane to complete a recurrent PIC 

proficiency check. The § 61.58 PIC 

proficiency check currently applies only 

to a PIC of an aircraft that is type 

certificated for more than one required 

pilot flight crewmember. Thus, under 

current rules it would be possible for a 

pilot to accomplish the flight review 

required under § 61.56 in a glider, 

balloon, or small general aviation 

aircraft, such as a Cessna 152, and then 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
44782 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 167 / Monday, August 31, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

act as PIC in a single piloted, turbojetpowered airplane. 

When § 61.58 was originally adopted, 

there were no single piloted turbojetpowered airplanes and the FAA did not 

have to address whether a proficiency 

check was needed for single-piloted 

turbojet operations. However, with the 

manufacture of the Cessna Citation 

series beginning in the 1980s, some 

turbojet-powered airplanes have been 

certificated to be operated by one pilot, 

such as Cessna Citations and Citation 

Jets (Cessna 501, Cessna 551, and 

Cessna 515). Since § 91.531 requires 

large aircraft and most turbojetpowered, multiengine airplanes to be 

operated with a second-in-command 

pilot flight crewmember, the FAA began 

issuing grants of exemption to operators 

and training providers of two-piloted 

Cessna Citation (CE500, CE550, CE552, 

and CE450) to enable operations with 

one pilot. These grants of exemption 

were issued with certain conditions, one 

of which requires a PIC to undergo 

annual PIC training and proficiency 

checks. 

With the number of VLJs estimated to 

be in operation in the future, the FAA 

anticipates that there may be many lessexperienced owners and operators of 

these airplanes. The FAA believes that 

requiring § 61.58 PIC proficiency checks 

in single piloted, turbojet-powered 

airplanes will help ensure that these 

airplanes are operated by competent and 

proficient pilots. This proposed change 

would affect pilots who serve as PIC in 

single piloted, turbojet-powered 

airplanes, such as the Cessna 501, 

Cessna 525, Cessna 551, Raytheon 390, 

and Eclipse 500. (Pilots operating single 

piloted, turbojet-powered airplane with 

an experimental airworthiness 

certificate also would be affected.) The 

number of pilots affected will increase 

as the number of single piloted, turbojetpowered airplanes increase. There are 

several manufacturers who have such 

airplanes under development and the 

fleet is expected to expand significantly. 

(3) Proposal to permit the issuance of 

an instrument rating concurrently with 

a private pilot certificate. 

The FAA proposes to revise 

§ 61.65(a)(1) to allow applicants for a 

private pilot certificate and instrument 

rating to apply concurrently for the 

private pilot certificate with an 

instrument rating. This proposal would 

also result in adding a new appendix M 

to part 141 to establish a combined 

private pilot certification and 

instrument rating course. (See proposal 

number 16 in this preamble for further 

explanation.) 

Under existing § 61.65(a)(1), an 

applicant for an instrument rating must 

hold at least a private pilot certificate 

that is appropriate to the instrument 

rating sought. This precludes an 

applicant from simultaneously applying 

for both the private pilot certificate and 

instrument rating and performing one 

practical test for both the private pilot 

certificate and instrument rating. For 

several years the FAA co-sponsored 

studies and research with Advanced 

General Aviation Transport Experiment 

(AGATE), FAA and Industry Training 

Standards (FITS), Middle Tennessee 

State University (MTSU), and Embry 

Riddle Aeronautical University (ERAU) 

to explore the feasibility of private pilot 

applicants obtaining an instrument 

rating while concurrently enrolled in a 

private pilot certification course. The 

FAA has issued grants of exemption to 

ERAU and MTSU where we have 

monitored the feasibility of private pilot 

applicants receiving training 

concurrently for private pilot 

certification and instrument rating, and 

whether it can be done safely and 

efficiently. 

In 1994, AGATE was founded to 

develop affordable new technology as 

well as industry standards and 

certification methods for airframe, 

cockpit, flight training systems, and 

airspace infrastructure for the next 

generation of single piloted, all-weather 

light airplanes. The Flight Training 

Curriculum Workgroup was established 

to develop and validate advanced 

training technologies and techniques 

that take advantage of emerging 

technologies. The Workgroup developed 

a combined private pilot certificate and 

instrument rating training curriculum 

with part 141 pilot schools. In 1999, the 

FAA granted ERAU an exemption from 

§ 61.65(a)(1). That exemption 

(Exemption No. 7168) permitted 

graduates of ERAU’s combined private 

pilot and instrument rating course to 

take the combined private pilot 

certification and instrument rating 

airplane single-engine land practical 

test. In 2004, the FAA granted MTSU an 

exemption from § 61.65(a)(1). That 

exemption (Exemption No. 8456) allows 

graduates of MTSU’s combined private 

pilot certificate and instrument rating 

course to take the private pilot and 

instrument rating practical test 

simultaneously. 

ERAU’s and MTSU’s combined 

private pilot and instrument rating 

course has demonstrated that some of 

their students were able to handle the 

combined course and demonstrate the 

required knowledge, skills, and abilities 

to operate safely under both visual 

meteorological conditions (VMC). 

Historically, accident statistics show 

that all weather-related accidents 

account for approximately 4.0 percent of 

total accidents. For single engine 

airplanes with a fixed landing gear, the 

airplane used predominantly by both 

student and private pilots, by far the 

largest weather-related accident cause is 

continuing to fly under VFR into IMC. 

This occurs when a pilot encounters 

changing weather conditions and does 

not land prior to encountering IMC. The 

proposed rule change would permit 

private pilot applicants to combine their 

private pilot and instrument training, 

which would improve their skills to 

operate in IMC and should reduce 

weather-related accidents. Thus, the 

FAA is proposing to revise § 61.65(a)(1) 

to allow applicants for an instrument 

rating to concurrently apply for a 

private pilot certificate. 

(4) Proposal to allow the conversion of 

a foreign pilot license to a U.S. pilot 

certificate based on an Implementation 

Procedures for Licensing (IPL) 

agreement. 

The FAA proposes to amend § 61.71 

by adding a new paragraph (c) to allow 

the conversion of foreign pilot licenses 

to equivalent U.S. pilot certificates that 

are issued on the basis of an 

Implementation Procedures for 

Licensing (IPL) agreement that has been 

approved by the Administrator and the 

licensing authority of a foreign civil 

aviation authority. 

On June 12, 2000, the United States 

and Canada signed an international 

agreement known as a Bilateral Aviation 

Safety Agreement (BASA). This 

agreement facilitates the mutual 

acceptance of various aspects of aviation 

safety oversight systems for the benefit 

of pilots and other uses of those 

systems. It also promotes the efficiency 

of the aviation authorities of the 

respective countries through 

cooperative agreements. In the BASA, 

Canada and the United States have 

developed supporting agreements in the 

form of technical annexes called 

implementation procedures that address 

specific areas of aviation safety 

activities. The technical annex 

addressing pilot licensing is called 

Implementation Procedures for 

Licensing or IPL. The IPL permits pilots 

holding certain pilot licenses or 

certificates from either country to obtain 

a pilot license or certificate from the 

other country after the pilot applicant 

has met the appropriate qualifications 

and certification requirements. 

To execute an IPL, the BASA requires 

the FAA and Transport Canada Civil 

Aviation (TCCA) to first evaluate each 

other’s pilot licensing standards and 

procedures and compare them to their 

own to determine what, if any, 

additional requirements would be 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 167 / Monday, August 31, 2009 / Proposed Rules 44783 

necessary to assure that the pilots are in 

compliance with their own standards. 

This task has been completed and the 

associated IPL was signed by FAA and 

TCCA on July 14, 2006. This IPL allows 

holders of FAA pilot certificates and 

holders of TCCA pilot licenses to 

convert to Canadian pilot licenses and 

U.S. pilot certificates, respectively. The 

IPL currently is limited to the airplane 

category of aircraft at the private, 

commercial, and airline transport pilot 

levels of licenses or certificates, and 

includes the following ratings or 

qualifications: instrument rating, class 

ratings of airplane single engine land 

(ASEL) and airplane multi-engine land 

(AMEL), type ratings, and night 

qualification addressed under part 61 

and Canadian Aviation Regulations Part 

IV. The FAA and TCCA have agreed that 

they may amend the IPL to allow 

conversion of other licenses or 

certificates in the future. Therefore, to 

issue a U.S. pilot certificate on the basis 

of this IPL, the FAA proposes to revise 

§ 61.71 to allow holders of TCCA pilot 

licenses to convert to U.S. pilot 

certificates. 

This proposal would merely allow the 

issuance of a standard U.S. pilot 

certificate on the basis of an IPL 

agreement between the FAA and a 

foreign civil aviation authority. To date, 

our agreement with TCCA is the only 

IPL that we have entered into, and the 

agreement serves as the basis for 

proposing § 61.71(c). The issuance of a 

U.S. private pilot certificate and ratings 

under § 61.75 is a separate pilot 

certification process. 

(5) Commercial pilot certificate, 

airplane single-engine class rating— 

Proposal to replace the 10 hours of 

complex airplane aeronautical 

experience with 10 hours of advanced 

instrument training. 

The FAA proposes to eliminate the 

requirement for 10 hours of aeronautical 

experience in a complex airplane in 

§ 61.129(a)(3)(ii) and replace it with 10 

hours of advanced instrument training 

in a single-engine airplane, or in a flight 

simulator, flight training device, or an 

aviation training device that replicates a 

single-engine airplane. The training 

must include instrument approaches 

consisting of both precision and nonprecision approaches, holding at 

navigational radio stations, 

intersections, waypoints, and crosscountry flying that involve performing 

takeoff, area departure, enroute, area 

arrival, approach, and missed approach 

phases of flight. 

The FAA proposes to revise the 

Commercial Pilot Certification— 

Airplane Single Engine (Land and Sea) 

rating because fewer single-engine 

airplanes are being produced with 

retractable landing gears. Manufacturers 

of general aviation airplanes now 

produce technologically advanced 

airplanes with ‘‘glass cockpits,’’ but 

which do not have retractable landing 

gears. Many pilot schools have 

complained about the necessity to keep 

30-year old Cessna 172RGs and Piper 

Arrows in inventory, which are less 

technically advanced airplanes, for the 

sole purpose of providing 10 hours of 

complex airplane training. Furthermore, 

the FAA has determined that most 

commercial pilot applicants are 

simultaneously applying for the 

Instrument-Airplane rating, and this 

proposal would reduce training costs 

and align the rules with current training 

and certification practices. 

(6) Commercial pilot certificate, 

airplane multiengine class rating— 

Proposal to replace the 10 hours of 

complex multiengine airplane 

aeronautical experience with 10 hours 

of advanced instrument training. 

The FAA proposes to amend 

§ 61.129(b)(3)(ii) to eliminate the 

requirement for 10 hours of aeronautical 

experience in a complex multiengine 

airplane and replace it with 10 hours of 

advanced instrument training in a 

multiengine airplane, or in a flight 

simulator, flight training device, or an 

aviation training device that replicates a 

multiengine airplane. The training must 

include instrument approaches 

consisting of both precision and nonprecision approaches, holding at 

navigational radio stations, 

intersections, waypoints, and crosscountry flying that involved performing 

takeoff, area departure, enroute, area 

arrival, approach, and missed approach 

phases of flight. 

The FAA proposes to amend 

§ 61.129(b)(3)(ii) for the Commercial 

Pilot Certification—Airplane 

Multiengine (Land and Sea) rating 

because this training would be more 

beneficial if it were devoted to the 

development of proficiency using 

instruments. This proposed change to 

§ 61.129(b)(3)(ii) for the Commercial 

Pilot Certification—Airplane 

Multiengine (Land and Sea) rating 

would parallel the proposed change 

being considered for the Commercial 

Pilot Certification—Airplane SingleEngine (land and Sea) rating in for 

§ 61.129(a)(3)(ii). Therefore, the FAA 

proposes to replace the complex 

multiengine airplane training with 

advanced instrument training. 

(7) Proposal to expand the use of an 

airplane with a single, functioning 

throwover control wheel for providing 

certain kinds of flight training and 

checking. 

The FAA proposes to revise 

§ 91.109(a) to allow for use of an 

airplane with a single, functioning 

throwover control wheel for conducting 

flight instruction. We also propose to 

revise § 91.109(b)(3) to allow for the use 

of an airplane with a single, functioning 

throwover control wheel for conducting 

a flight review, performing recent flight 

experience, instrument flight 

experience, and instrument competency 

checks. 

Existing § 91.109(a) provides for 

conducting instrument flight instruction 

in a single engine airplane with a single, 

functioning throwover control wheel. 

Existing § 91.109(b)(3) provides for 

using a single engine airplane with a 

single, functioning throwover control 

wheel during simulated instrument 

flight. 

Since August 30, 1993, the FAA has 

issued several grants of exemption and 

extensions. These grants of exemption 

allow instructors to provide recurrent 

flight training and simulated instrument 

flight training in certain aircraft, such 

as, Beechcraft Barons, Bonanzas, 

Debonairs, and Travel Air that are 

equipped with a single, functioning 

throwover control wheel for the purpose 

of meeting the recency of experience 

requirements and flight review 

contained in §§ 61.56(a), (b), and (f) and 

61.57(e)(1) and (2). This proposal would 

amend § 91.109(a) and (b)(3) to 

incorporate the conditions and 

limitations that are stated in those 

grants of exemption. 

(8) Proposal to allow pilot schools and 

provisional pilot schools an exception to 

the requirement to have a ground 

training facility when the training 

course is an online, computer-based 

training program. 

The FAA proposed to revise § 141.45 

to allow an exception for pilot schools 

and provisional pilot schools to the 

requirement to have a ground training 

facility when the training course is an 

online, computer-based training 

program. Examples of online, computerbased training are the flight instructor 

refresher courses, pilot ground school 

courses, aeronautical knowledge 

training courses, and some elements of 

subpart K of part 141 special 

preparation courses. 

When part 141 was originally 

developed by the FAA in 1960, we did 

not envision that aviation training 

would be available on a personal 

computer via the Internet. More 

recently, the FAA has approved several 

training providers to conduct flight 

instructor refresher training through the 

Internet. Our experience with this kind 

of Internet-based training has shown 

that this training provides an equivalent 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
44784 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 167 / Monday, August 31, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

level of supervision by the training 

provider without requiring the student 

to be physically present in a classroom. 

The training providers for this kind of 

Internet-based training have a 

permanent business location and 

telephone, and the training course 

software allows the FAA to monitor the 

training from a remote site. For this 

reason, our rules should not prohibit 

part 141 pilot schools from conducting 

Internet-based training, nor should there 

necessarily be a ground training facility 

when training is being provided via the 

Internet. 

(9) Proposal to allow pilot schools and 

provisional pilot schools an exception 

from the requirement to describe each 

room used for ground training course is 

an online, computer-based training 

program. 

The FAA proposes to revise 

§ 141.55(c)(1) by providing an exception 

for pilot schools and provisional pilot 

schools from the requirement to 

describe each room used for ground 

training when the training course is an 

online, computer-based training 

program. Examples of online, computerbased training are flight instructor 

refresher courses, pilot ground school 

courses, aeronautical knowledge 

training courses, and some elements of 

appendix K, part 141 for special 

preparation courses. We are proposing 

this change for the same reasons 

previously discussed in proposal No. 8 

of this preamble. 

(10) Commercial pilot certification 

course for an airplane single-engine 

class rating—Proposal to replace the 10 

hours of complex airplane training 

requirement with 10 hours of advanced 

instrument training. 

The FAA proposes to revise part 141, 

appendix D, paragraph 4.(b)(1)(ii) to 

correspond to the change proposed for 

§ 61.129(a)(3)(ii), which is previously 

discussed in proposal No. 5 of this 

preamble document. This proposed 

change would require part 141 pilot 

schools to revise their commercial pilot 

certification courses by replacing 10 

hours of training in a ‘‘complex 

airplane’’ with 10 hours of advanced 

instrument training in a single-engine 

airplane, or in a flight simulator, flight 

training device, or an aviation training 

device that replicates a single engine 

airplane. 

(11) Commercial pilot certification 

course for an airplane multiengine class 

rating—Proposal to replace the 10 hours 

of complex multiengine airplane 

training requirement with 10 hours of 

advanced instrument training. 

The FAA proposes to revise part 141, 

appendix D, paragraph 4.(b)(2)(ii) to 

correspond to the change proposed for 

§ 61.129(b)(3)(ii), which is previously 

discussed in proposal No. 6 of this 

preamble. This proposed change would 

require part 141 pilot schools to revise 

their commercial pilot certification 

courses by replacing 10 hours of 

training in a ‘‘complex multiengine 

airplane’’ with 10 hours of advanced 

instrument training in a multiengine 

airplane, or in a flight simulator, flight 

training device, or an aviation training 

device that replicates a multiengine 

airplane. 

(12) Additional airplane single-engine 

class rating at the commercial pilot 

certification level—Proposal to replace 

the 10 hours of complex airplane 

training with 10 hours of advanced 

instrument training. 

The FAA proposes to revise part 141, 

appendix I, paragraph 4.(a)(3)(ii) to 

correspond to the change proposed for 

part 141, appendix D, paragraph 

4.(b)(1)(ii), which is previously 

discussed in proposal No. 5 of this 

NPRM document. This proposed change 

would require part 141 pilot schools to 

revise their commercial pilot 

certification courses by replacing 10 

hours of training in a ‘‘complex 

airplane’’ with 10 hours of advanced 

instrument training in a single-engine 

airplane, or in a flight simulator, flight 

training device, or an aviation training 

device that replicates a single engine 

airplane. 

(13) Additional airplane multiengine 

class rating at the commercial pilot 

certification level—Proposal to replace 

the 10 hours of complex multiengine 

airplane training requirement with 10 

hours of advanced instrument training. 

The FAA proposes to revise part 141, 

appendix I, paragraph 4.(b)(2)(ii) to 

correspond to the change proposed for 

part 141, appendix D, paragraph 

4.(b)(2)(ii), which is previously 

discussed in proposal No. 6 of this 

preamble. This proposed change would 

require part 141 pilot schools to revise 

their commercial pilot certification 

courses by replacing 10 hours of 

training in a ‘‘complex multiengine 

airplane’’ with 10 hours of advanced 

instrument training in a multiengine 

airplane, or in a flight simulator, flight 

training device, or an aviation training 

device that replicates a multiengine 

airplane. 

(14) Additional airplane single-engine 

class rating at the commercial pilot 

certification level—Proposal to replace 

the 10 hours of complex airplane 

training with 10 hours of advanced 

instrument training. 

The FAA proposes to revise part 141, 

appendix I, paragraph 4.(j)(2)(ii) to 

correspond to the change proposed for 

part 141, appendix I, paragraph 

4.(a)(3)(ii), which is previously 

discussed in proposal No. 5 of this 

preamble. This proposed change would 

require part 141 pilot schools to revise 

their commercial pilot certification 

courses by replacing 10 hours of 

training in a ‘‘complex airplane’’ with 

10 hours of advanced instrument 

training in a single-engine airplane, or 

in a flight simulator, flight training 

device, or an aviation training device 

that replicates a single engine airplane. 

(15) Additional airplane multiengine 

class rating at the commercial pilot 

certification level—Proposal to replace 

the 10 hours of complex multiengine 

airplane training with 10 hours of 

advanced instrument training. 

The FAA proposes to revise part 141, 

appendix I, paragraph 4.(k)(2)(ii) to 

correspond to the change proposed for 

part 141, appendix I, paragraph 

4.(b)(2)(ii), which is previously 

discussed in proposal No. 6 of this 

preamble. This proposed change would 

require part 141 pilot schools to revise 

their commercial pilot certification 

courses by replacing 10 hours of 

training in a ‘‘complex multiengine 

airplane’’ with 10 hours of advanced 

instrument training in a multiengine 

airplane, or in a flight simulator, flight 

training device, or an aviation training 

device that replicates a multiengine 

airplane. 

(16) Proposal to establish a combined 

private certification and instrument 

rating course. 

The FAA proposes to add new 

Appendix M to part 141 to correspond 

to the change proposed for § 61.65(a)(1), 

which is discussed in proposal No. 3 of 

this preamble. This proposed change 

would provide for a combined private 

pilot certification and instrument rating 

course. As discussed in proposal No. 3 

of this preamble, we propose to allow an 

applicant for an instrument rating to 

concurrently apply for a private pilot 

certificate. 

Under this proposal, the training 

requirements would be 65 hours of 

ground training and 70 hours of flight 

training that includes 5 hours of flying 

solo. The proposal would allow the use 

of flight simulators, flight training 

devices, and aviation training devices. 

The percentage of usage allowed to be 

conducted in flight simulators, flight 

training devices, and aviation training 

devices can be found in proposed 

paragraph 4.(c) in appendix M to part 

141. 

V. Regulatory Notices and Analyses 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

There are no new information 

collection requirements associated with 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 167 / Monday, August 31, 2009 / Proposed Rules 44785 

this NPRM. Existing information 

collection requirements have been 

approved previously by the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) under 

the provisions of the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 

3507(d)) and have been assigned OMB 

Control Number 2120-0021. 

International Compatibility 

In keeping with U.S. obligations 

under the Convention on International 

Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to 

comply with International Civil 

Aviation Organization (ICAO) Standards 

and Recommended Practices to the 

maximum extent practicable. The FAA 

has reviewed the corresponding ICAO 

Standards and Recommended Practices 

and has identified no differences with 

these proposed regulations. 

Regulatory Evaluation, Regulatory 

Flexibility Determination, International 

Trade Impact Assessment, and 

Unfunded Mandates Assessment 

Changes to Federal regulations must 

undergo several economic analyses. 

First, Executive Order 12866 directs 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 final 

rules 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. 

We suggest readers seeking greater 

detail read the full regulatory 

evaluation, a copy of which we have 

placed in the docket for this rulemaking. 

In conducting these analyses, FAA 

has determined that this proposed rule: 

(1) Has benefits that justify its costs; (2) 

is not an economically ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ as defined in section 

3(f) of Executive Order 12866; however, 

the Office of Management and Budget 

has determined that this NPRM is a 

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ because 

it harmonizes U.S. aviation standards 

with those of other civil aviation 

authorities, (3) is ‘‘significant’’ as 

defined in DOT’s Regulatory Policies 

and Procedures; (4) would not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities; (5) 

would not create unnecessary obstacles 

to the foreign commerce of the United 

States; and (6) 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. 

Benefit-Cost Analysis Summary 

A. Proposal To Require PIC Proficiency 

Checks for PICs of Single Piloted 

Turbojet-Powered Airplanes 

Costs—The FAA estimates that there 

are currently about 1,550 single piloted 

turbojet airplanes, and more to be 

manufactured in the future. The FAA 

estimates that only approximately 325 

of these airplanes are ever flown with a 

single pilot. The cost of PIC proficiency 

checks varies by the type of airplane as 

well as whether the check is performed 

in a simulator or an airplane, ranging 

from $600 to $2,000 per hour. In many 

instances, insurance carriers require 

annual PIC training in single piloted 

turbojet airplanes, so most pilots already 

undergo annual PIC proficiency checks 

to qualify for the premium reduction. 

Requiring proficiency checks on single 

piloted, turbojet-powered airplanes 

would be a new requirement. The FAA 

estimates that over 10 years costs would 

sum to approximately $26.8 million. 

Benefits—In July 2005, the FAA 

convened a study group, the VLJ Cross 

Organizational Group, to identify areas 

of concern regarding the safe operation 

of light jets and other single piloted 

turbojet-powered airplanes. The FAA 

and this study group noted that existing 

regulations are currently written so that 

pilots in charge of other single piloted 

turbojet-powered airplanes are not 

required to receive recurrent PIC 

proficiency checks. The FAA is 

concerned these PICs could take a flight 

review in a small general aviation 

aircraft and still fly legally and carry 

passengers in single piloted turboproppowered airplanes that are capable of 

operating at speeds of over 500 knots 

and with commercial jets. This proposal 

to require proficiency checks in single 

piloted, turbojet-powered airplanes and 

other single piloted airplanes would 

ensure that this would not occur, and 

constitutes an increase in safety. 

B. Proposal To Allow the Conversion of 

a Foreign Pilot License to a U.S. Pilot 

Certificate Based on an Implementation 

Procedure for Licensing (IPL) Agreement 

Costs and Benefits—There would be 

no incremental costs of implementing 

the Bilateral Aviation Safety Agreement 

(BASA). Removing barriers to getting 

pilot certificates and licenses and flying 

in both countries would encourage 

greater ease in flying and more efficient 

enforcement. By facilitating acceptance 

of various aspects of each country’s 

aviation safety oversight system, the 

proposal should lead to less burden for 

pilots and aviation authorities, and 

could engender cost savings. 

C. Proposal To Allow Pilot Schools To 

Use Internet-Based Training Programs 

Without Requiring Schools To Have a 

Ground Training Facility 

Costs—The FAA estimates that there 

are currently six operators that provide 

online training and that between five 

and fifteen pilot schools might initially 

consider adding an on-line curriculum. 

The FAA has no estimate of how many 

more would offer this service in the 

longer term. FAA bases its cost 

estimates on an additional 10 pilot 

schools initially electing to use this 

option. The costs would involve the 

costs of submitting a training course for 

FAA approval and the FAA’s processing 

costs. The FAA estimates that the total 

initial costs would sum to $10,800. 

Benefits—The FAA has in the past 

extended approval to several training 

providers to conduct flight instructor 

refresher training via the Internet. The 

FAA has found this kind of training is 

the equivalent to that provided in a 

classroom setting. Pilot schools would 

be able to realize cost savings through 

the need for fewer instructors, reduced 

costs of curriculum maintenance, and 

less classroom and auxiliary support 

space. The extent of savings would vary 

by provider. The FAA calls for 

comments on the potential cost savings. 

The FAA envisions the proposal to be 

a win-win situation for operators, course 

developers, pilots, and the FAA. 

D. Proposal To Change the Definition of 

‘‘Complex Airplane’’ and Eliminate the 

‘‘Complex Airplane’’ Training 

Requirements for Commercial Pilot and 

Flight Instructor Certification 

Costs—This change would not result 

in incremental costs; rather, it would 

result in cost savings which are 

considered a benefit as described below. 

Benefits—The FAA believes that this 

proposal would result in cost savings to 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
44786 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 167 / Monday, August 31, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

pilot schools and training providers 

because they wouldn’t have to keep an 

inventory of two kinds of airplanes to 

meet the commercial pilot and flight 

instructor certification requirements. 

The FAA estimates that each pilot 

school and training provider could save 

as much as $1,000 per airplane per 

month in maintenance and leasing 

costs. The FAA does not have data on 

the number of pilot schools and training 

providers maintaining inventories of 

airplanes equipped with the FADEC 

system and those without. Therefore, 

the FAA calls for comments on current 

and planned inventory levels of 

airplanes equipped with the FADEC 

system. 

Substituting 10 hours of instrument 

training for 10 hours of ‘‘complex 

airplane’’ training would allow students 

to use their time more efficiently. There 

are fewer ‘‘complex airplanes’’ that 

anyone could fly, students would 

benefit more by using these extra 10 

hours for instrument training rather 

than flying ‘‘complex airplanes.’’ Safety 

could be increased by the students 

getting the more useful instrument 

flying training. 

For students, there may be cost 

implications to the extent that they can 

substitute the 10 hours in a ‘‘complex 

airplane’’ for instrument training 

simulator time. Under the current 

regulations, commercial pilot applicants 

are permitted to credit 25 hours in a 

flight simulator/flight training device 

toward the commercial pilot certificate, 

and this would not change. However, in 

some cases, it is possible that some 

applicants could benefit. It is possible 

that substituting instrument training for 

‘‘complex airplanes’’ would make 

applicants more likely to use simulators 

if they would not have already trained 

for 25 hours in a flight simulator and so 

would save in terms of flight instructor 

costs. However, the FAA does not know 

how many applicants would substitute 

time from the currently required 

‘‘complex airplane’’ training for 

instrument simulator time and so calls 

for comments. 

E. Proposal To Allow Pilot Applicants to 

Apply for a Private Pilot Certificate and 

Instrument Rating Concurrently 

Costs and Benefits—There would be 

cost implications for applicants, pilot 

schools, and the FAA, as described 

below. 

1. Applicants 

Currently, the majority of applicants 

obtain their pilot certification outside of 

a part 141 pilot school because there are 

more fixed base operators and 

independent flight instructors than 

there are part 141 pilot schools. 

However, because the amount of time 

required would diminish substantially 

under part 141 pilot school training, the 

FAA believes that some applicants who 

would otherwise get their certificates 

under part 61 would seek out part 141 

pilot schools to receive their combined 

private pilot certification and 

instrument rating. 

Over the years, about 30% of 

applicants for pilot certification have 

graduated from part 141 pilot schools. 

The FAA estimates that about 2% of 

applicants would attempt to get a 

combined private pilot and instrument 

rating. The relatively low percentage 

results from the costs, time, and 

complexity of taking the combined 

training, and reflects the experience of 

schools operating under an exemption 

that permitted combined training. The 

FAA estimates a time advantage of 20 

hours for the combined rating as 

opposed to the individual ratings. 

Cost savings would be a function of 

the number of applicants getting the 

combined certificate at part 141 schools, 

having to take one less exam, and filling 

out one less application form. FAA 

estimates annual cost savings for 

applicants of $675,400 and ten-year 

costs savings of $6.75 million. 

2. Schools 

Of the part 141 pilot schools, 367 

schools provide courses for private pilot 

airplane certification and instrumentairplane ratings. The FAA does not 

know how many of these 367 schools 

would apply for a combined private and 

instrument course and calls for 

comments on the likelihood of schools 

exercising this option, and the estimated 

costs and benefits from doing so. Each 

pilot school would need to modify its 

syllabus to accommodate this change 

and submit it to its local FSDO for 

approval. 

3. FAA 

There would be both costs and cost 

savings to the FAA, the former 

involving the processing of modified 

syllabi and the latter involving the need 

to process fewer applications. At the 

FADO, the ASI would review and 

approve the course. Each applicant 

getting a combined private pilot and 

instrument rating would have to submit 

one less application form to the FAA for 

approval. Ten-year quantifiable net cost 

savings to the FAA would sum to 

$9,700. 

In addition to cost saving benefits, 

there would also be safety benefits. 

Currently, many pilots get their private 

pilot certificate and then wait before 

getting their instrument rating. Until 

they get their instrument rating, they fly 

under visual flight rules (VFR). They are 

not qualified to fly into instrument 

meteorological conditions (IMC). Until 

they quality for their instrument rating, 

they are at greater risk of weatherrelated accidents if changing weather 

conditions result in their operating into 

IMC. The FAA believes that combined 

private pilot certification and 

instrument rating would reduce 

weather-related accidents. While these 

types of accidents comprise 

approximately 4.0% of total accidents 

for single-engine airplanes with a fixed 

landing gear, they account for 

approximately 14.0% of the fatal 

accidents in such airplanes. The FAA 

reviewed 1,928 general aviation fatal 

accidents from October 2002 through 

June 2007. About 70% of eligible pilots 

were instrument rated; however, about 

75% of these accidents occurred under 

VMC. Pilots flying under VFR in bad 

weather are more likely to attempt to 

use VMC to land. About 45% of pilots 

flying under VFR or with no flight plan 

had accidents, while only 10% of pilots 

flying under IOFR had accidents. It is 

very possible that better flight planning 

for minimum safe altitudes in the event 

of inadvertent instrument 

meteorological conditions (IMC) would 

help more than altitude instrument 

flying and unusual altitude recovery 

training. Many fatal accidents are due to 

pilots being unable to control the 

airplane using instruments when they 

inadvertently enter IMC. However, if a 

pilot has an instrument rating when he 

or she first gets his or her private pilot 

certificate, then he or she is less likely 

to lose control of the aircraft. Thus, 

combined private pilot certification and 

instrument rating has the potential to 

reduce weather-related accidents of VFR 

flights into IMC. 

F. Total Costs 

Total costs of these proposals over 10 

years sum to $20.01 million ($13.27 

million, discounted). 

Initial Regulatory Flexibility 

Determination 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 

(RFA) establishes ‘‘as a principle of 

regulatory issuance that agencies shall 

endeavor, consistent with the objective 

of the rule and of applicable statutes, to 

fit regulatory and informational 

requirements to the scale of the 

business, organizations, and 

governmental jurisdictions subject to 

regulation.’’ To achieve that principle, 

the RFA requires agencies to solicit and 

consider flexible regulatory proposals 

and to explain the rationale for their 

actions. The RFA covers a wide-range of 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 167 / Monday, August 31, 2009 / Proposed Rules 44787 

small entities, including small 

businesses, not-for-profit organizations 

and small governmental jurisdictions. 

Agencies must perform a review to 

determine whether a proposed or final 

rule will 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 Act. 

However, if an agency determines that 

a proposed or final rule is not expected 

to have a significant economic impact 

on a substantial number of small 

entities, section 605(b) of the 1980 RFA 

provides that the head iof 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. 

For this rule, affected small entity 

groups are considered to be corporations 

that own aircraft, pilot schools, and 

training providers. The corresponding 

North American Indsutry Classsification 

System [NAICS] are 481211 (Non 

scheduled Chartered Passenger Air 

Transportation) and 611512 (Flight 

Training), respectively. Some of the 

proposals affect only pilots; however, 

pilots are not considered to be small 

entities, so there wuold no small entity 

impact on pilots. The remainder of this 

section discusses small entity impacts 

in the same order as the groupings 

above for the benefit-cost analysis 

summary. 

A. The proposal requiring proficiency 

checks for pilots in command of single 

piloted turbojet-powered airplanes 

would affect pilots, pilot examiners, and 

corporations that own these airplanes. 

Pilots are not entities, so there would 

not be a small entity impact with 

regards to pilots. The vast majority of 

the pilot proficiency examiners are 

employees of the operator, the 

corporation, and those that are not 

employees would not be considered 

small businesses. The cost of a 

proficiency check is about $1,300. Given 

the assumption of 1.5 pilots for each 

single piloted, turbojet-powered 

airplanes and the assumption that few 

corporations would have more than a 

few VLJs, the overall impact of these 

proficiency checks would be minimal, 

and so there would not be a significant 

impact. 

B. The proposal to allow foreign pilot 

applicants to convert their foreign pilot 

license to a U.S. pilot certificate issued 

on the basis of an IPL agreement would 

affect pilots, who are not consdiered to 

be small entities. 

C. The proposal to allow pilot schools 

to use online training without requiring 

a physical ground training facility 

would be optional. The FAA does not 

believe that more than 5 to 15 schools 

would initially take advantage of this 

proposal. Schools would opt to do this 

only if they believe that the ultimate pay 

off, in terms of additional students and 

revenue, would outweigh start-up costs 

and the annual maintenance costs. The 

FAA does not believe that there would 

be a significant impact on a substantial 

number of entities. 

D. Small businesses that would be 

affected by the revised definition of 

‘‘complex airplane’’ would be schools 

and training providers. Many pilot 

schools would not have to keep an 

inventory of two kinds of airplanes to 

meet the commercial pilot and flight 

instructor certification requirements. 

This would engender cost savings, 

which the FAA estimates at $1,000 per 

airplane annually. Accordingly, the 

FAA believes that this proposal would 

not have a significant economic impact 

on a substantial number of small 

entities. 

The proposal to replace the 

requirement for 10 hours of ‘‘complex 

airplane’’ aeronautical experience with 

10 hours of specific advanced 

instrument training with regards to the 

training required for a commercial pilot 

certificate would not have a small entity 

impact because pilots are not 

considered to be small entities. 

E. The proposal allowing applicants 

to apply for a private pilot certificate 

and instrument rating concurrently and 

allow pilot schools to apply for a 

combined private pilot certification and 

instrument rating course would affect 

pilots and pilot schools. Pilots are not 

small businesses, so there would not be 

a small entity impact. Each pilot school 

would have one-time costs to purchase 

and process the new syllabus before 

submission to the FSDO of under 

$1,000, which would not be a 

significant impact. 

Therefore, the FAA certifies that this 

proposed rule would not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

The FAA solicits comments regarding 

this determination. 

International Trade Impact Statement 

The trade Agreements Act of 1979 

(Pub. L. 96–39) prohibits Federal 

agencies from establishing any 

standards or engaging in related 

activities that create unnecessary 

obstacles to the foreign commerce of the 

United States. Legitimate domestic 

objectives, such as safety, are not 

considered unnecessary obstacles. 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 believes that it would impose the 

same costs on dometic and international 

entities and, thus have a neutral trade 

impact. 

Unfunded Mandates Determination 

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 

(adjusted annually for inflation) 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 $136.1 

million in lieu of $100 million. 

This proposed rule does not contain 

such a mandate. Therefore the 

requirements of Title II do not apply. 

Executive Order 13132, Federalism 

The FAA has analyzed this proposed 

rule under the principles and criteria of 

Executive Order 13132, Federalism. We 

determined that this action would not 

have a substantial direct effect on the 

States, on the relationship between the 

national 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. 

Plain English 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) requires each agency to 

write regulations that are simple and 

easy to understand. We invite your 

comments on how to make these 

proposed regulations easier to 

understand, including answers to 

questions such as the following: 

• Are the requirements in the 

proposed regulations clearly stated? 

• Do the proposed regulations contain 

unnecessary technical language or 

jargon that interferes with their clarity? 

• Would the regulations be easier to 

understand if they were divided into 

more (but shorter) sections? 

• Is the description in the preamble 

helpful in understanding the proposed 

regulations? Please send your comments 

to the address specified in the 

ADDRESSES section. 

Environmental Analysis 

FAA Order 1050.1E identifies FAA 

actions that are categorically excluded 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
44788 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 167 / Monday, August 31, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

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 307(k) and involves no 

extraordinary circumstances. 

Regulations That Significantly Affect 

Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use 

The FAA has analyzed this NPRM 

under Executive Order 13211, Actions 

Concerning Regulations that 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

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

have determined that it is not a 

‘‘significant energy action’’ under the 

executive order because it is not a 

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under 

Executive Order 12866, and it is not 

likely to have a significant adverse effect 

on the supply, distribution, or use of 

energy. 

VI. Additional Information 

Comments Invited 

The FAA invites interested persons to 

participate in this rulemaking by 

submitting written comments, data, or 

views. We also invite comments relating 

to the economic, environmental, energy, 

or federalism impacts that might result 

from adopting the proposals in this 

document. The most helpful comments 

reference a specific portion of the 

proposal, explain the reason for any 

recommended change, and include 

supporting data. To ensure the docket 

does not contain duplicate comments, 

please send only one copy of written 

comments, or if you are filing comments 

electronically, please submit your 

comments one time. 

We will file in the docket all 

comments we receive, as well as a 

report summarizing each substantive 

public contact with FAA personnel 

concerning this proposed rulemaking. 

Before acting on this proposal, we will 

consider all comments we receive on or 

before the closing date for comments. 

We will consider comments filed after 

that comment period has closed if it is 

possible to do so without incurring 

expense or delay. We may change this 

proposal in light of the comments we 

receive. 

Proprietary or Confidential Business 

Information 

Do not file in the docket information 

that you consider to be proprietary or 

confidential business information. Send 

or deliver this information directly to 

the person identified in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section of this 

document. You must mark the 

information that you consider 

proprietary or confidential. If you send 

the information on a disk or CD ROM, 

mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM 

and also identify electronically within 

the disk or CD ROM the specific 

information that is proprietary or 

confidential. 

Under 14 CFR 11.35(b), when we are 

aware of proprietary information filed 

with a comment, we do not place in the 

docket. We hold it in a separate file to 

which the public does not have access, 

and place a note in the docket that we 

have received it. If we receive a request 

to examine or copy this information, we 

treat it as any other request under the 

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

552). We process such a request under 

the DOT procedures found in 49 CFR 

part 7. 

Availability of Rulemaking Documents 

You can get an electronic copy using 

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.gpoaccess.gov/fr/index.html. 

You can also get a copy 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. Make sure to 

identify the docket number, notice 

number, or amendment number of this 

rulemaking. 

You may access all documents the 

FAA considered in developing this 

proposed rule, including economic 

analyses and technical reports, from the 

internet through the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal referenced in 

paragraph (1). 

List of Subjects 

14 CFR Part 61 

Aircraft, Airmen, Alcohol abuse, 

Aviation safety, Drug abuse, Recreation 

and recreation areas, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Security 

measures, Teachers. 

14 CFR Part 91 

Afghanistan, Agriculture, Air traffic 

control, Aircraft, Airmen, Airports, 

Aviation safety, Canada, Cuba, Ethiopia, 

Freight, Mexico, Noise control, Political 

candidates, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, 

Yugoslavia. 

14 CFR Part 141 

Airmen, Educational facilities, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Schools. 

The Proposed Amendment 

In consideration of the foregoing, the 

Federal Aviation Administration 

proposes to amend Chapter I of Title 14, 

Code of Federal Regulations, and, at 

amendatory instruction 14, as amended 

on August 21, 2009 (74 FR 42566), and 

effective October 20, 2009, as follows: 

PART 61—CERTIFICATION: PILOTS 

AND FLIGHT INSTRUCTORS 

1. The authority citation for part 61 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701– 

44703, 44707, 44709–44711, 45102–45103, 

45301–45302. 

2. Amend § 61.1 by re-designating 

paragraphs (b)(3) through (b)(16) as 

paragraphs (b)(4) through (b)(17) 

respectively, and by adding a new 

paragraph (b)(3) to read as follows: 

§ 61.1 Applicability and definitions. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(3) Complex airplane means an 

airplane that has a retractable landing 

gear, flaps, and a controllable pitch 

propeller, including airplanes equipped 

with an engine control system 

consisting of a digital computer and 

associated accessories for controlling 

the engine and propeller, such as a full 

authority digital engine control 

(FADEC). A complex seaplane would 

not necessarily be equipped with a 

retractable landing gear. 

* * * * * 

Amend § 61.31 by revising the 

introductory text of paragraph (e)(1) to 

read as follows: 

§ 61.31 Type rating requirements, 

additional training, and authorization 

requirements. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

(1) Except as provided in paragraph 

(e)(2) of this section, no person may act 

as pilot in command of a complex 

airplane, unless the person has— 

* * * * * 

4. Amend § 61.58 by revising the 

section heading; paragraphs (a), (d)(1), 

(d)(2), (d)(3), and (d)(4) to read as 

follows: 

§ 61.58 Pilot-in-command proficiency 

check: Operation of an aircraft that requires 

more than one pilot flight crewmember or 

is turbojet-powered. 

(a) Except as otherwise provided in 

this section, to serve as pilot in 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 167 / Monday, August 31, 2009 / Proposed Rules 44789 

command of an aircraft that is type 

certificated for more than one required 

pilot crewmember, or is turbojetpowered, a person must— 

(1) Within the preceding 12 calendar 

months, complete a pilot-in-command 

proficiency check in an aircraft in 

which that person will serve as pilot-incommand, that is type certificated for 

more than one required pilot flight 

crewmember, or is turbojet-powered; 

and 

(2) Within the preceding 24 calendar 

months, complete a pilot-in-command 

proficiency check in the particular type 

of aircraft in which that person will 

serve as pilot-in-command, that is type 

certificated for more than one required 

pilot flight crewmember, or is turbojetpowered. 

* * * * * 

(d) * * * 

(1) A pilot-in-command proficiency 

check conducted by a person authorized 

by the Administrator, consisting of the 

aeronautical knowledge areas, areas of 

operations, and tasks required for a type 

rating, in an aircraft that is type 

certificated for more than one pilot 

flight crewmember or is turbojetpowered. 

(2) The practical test required for a 

type rating, in an aircraft that is type 

certificated for more than one required 

pilot flight crewmember or is turbojetpowered; 

(3) The initial or periodic practical 

test required for the issuance of a pilot 

examiner or check airman designation, 

in an aircraft that is type certificated for 

more than one required pilot flight 

crewmember or is turbojet-powered; 

(4) A pilot proficiency check 

administered by a U.S. Armed Force 

that qualifies the military pilot for pilotin-command designation with 

instrument privileges, and was 

performed in a military aircraft that the 

military requires to be operated by more 

than one pilot flight crewmember or is 

turbojet-powered. 

* * * * * 

5. Amend § 61.65 by revising 

paragraph (a)(1) to read as follows: 

§ 61.65 Instrument rating requirements. 

(a) * * * 

(1) Hold at least a current private pilot 

certificate, or be concurrently applying 

for a private pilot certificate, with an 

airplane, helicopter, or powered-lift 

rating appropriate to the instrument 

rating sought; 

* * * * * 

6. Amend § 61.71 by adding new 

paragraph (c) to read as follows: 

§ 61.71 Graduates of an approved training 

program other than under this part: Special 

rules. 

* * * * * 

(c) A person who holds a foreign pilot 

license and is applying for an equivalent 

U.S. pilot certificate on the basis of an 

approved Implementation Procedures 

for Licensing agreement is considered to 

have met the applicable aeronautical 

experience, aeronautical knowledge, 

and areas of operation requirements of 

this part. 

7. Amend § 61.129 by revising 

paragraphs (a)(3)(ii) and (b)(3)(ii) to read 

as follows: 

§ 61.129 Aeronautical experience. 

(a) * * * 

(3) * * * 

(ii) 10 hours of advanced instrument 

training in a single engine airplane, or 

in a flight simulator, flight training 

device, or an aviation training device 

that replicates a single engine airplane, 

and the training must include 

instrument approaches consisting of 

both precision and non-precision 

approaches, holding at navigational 

radio stations, intersections, waypoints, 

and cross-country flying that involves 

performing takeoff, area departure, 

enroute, area arrival, approach, and 

missed approach phases of flight; 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(3) * * * 

(ii) 10 hours of advanced instrument 

training in a multiengine airplane, or in 

a flight simulator, flight training device, 

or an aviation training device that 

replicates a multiengine airplane, and 

the training must include instrument 

approaches consisting of both precision 

and non-precision approaches, holding 

at navigational radio stations, 

intersections, waypoints, and crosscountry flying that involves performing 

takeoff, area departure, enroute, area 

arrival, approach, and missed approach 

phases of flight; 

* * * * * 

PART 91—GENERAL OPERATING AND 

FLIGHT RULES 

8. The authority citation for part 91 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 1155, 40103, 

40113, 40120, 44101, 44111, 44701, 44704, 

44709, 44711, 44712, 44715, 44716, 44717, 

44722, 46306, 46315, 46316, 46504, 46506– 

46507, 47122, 47508, 47528–47531, articles 

12 and 29 of the Convention on International 

Civil Aviation (61 stat. 1180). 

9. Amend § 91.109 by revising 

paragraphs (a) introductory text and 

(b)(3) to read as follows: 

§ 91.109 Flight instruction; Simulated 

instrument flight and certain flight tests. 

(a) No person may operate a civil 

aircraft (except a manned free balloon) 

that is being used for flight instruction 

unless that aircraft has fully functioning 

dual controls. However, instrument 

flight instruction may be given in an 

airplane that is equipped with a single, 

functioning throwover control wheel 

that controls the elevator and ailerons, 

in place of fixed, dual controls, when— 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(3) Except in the case of lighter-thanair-aircraft, the aircraft must be 

equipped with fully functioning dual 

controls. However, an airplane 

equipped with a single functioning, 

throwover control wheel that controls 

the elevator and ailerons may be used in 

accordance with the following 

conditions and limitations: 

(1) The airplane’s pilot stations must 

be side-by-side seating. 

(ii) An airplane with only a single 

functioning, throwover control wheel 

must be equipped with operable rudder 

pedals at both pilot stations. 

(iii) An airplane equipped with a 

single functioning, throwover control 

wheel may be used for: 

(A) Conducting a flight review 

required by § 61.56 of this chapter. 

(B) Obtaining a recent flight 

experience as required by § 61.57 of this 

chapter. 

(C) Maintaining instrument 

proficiency as required by § 61.57(c) or 

(d) of this chapter. 

(iv) The pilot manipulating the 

controls of an airplane with only a 

single functioning, throwover control 

wheel must be qualified to, and serve as, 

pilot in command of the airplane. 

(v) To serve as a flight instructor in an 

airplane with only a single functioning, 

throwover control wheel, that flight 

instructor must: 

(A) Be current and qualified to serve 

as the pilot in command and flight 

instructor in the airplane involved, as 

required by § 61.195(b) and (f) of this 

chapter; and 

(B) Have logged at least 25 hours of 

pilot in command flight time in that 

make and model of airplane with a 

single, functioning throwover control 

wheel involved. 

* * * * * 

PART 141—PILOT SCHOOLS 

10. The authority citation for 14 CFR 

part 141 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701– 

44703, 44707, 44709, 44711, 45102–45103, 

45301–45302. 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
44790 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 167 / Monday, August 31, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

11. Revise § 141.45 to read as follows: 

§ 141.45 Ground training facilities. 

An applicant for a pilot school or 

provisional pilot school certificate must 

show that: 

(a) Except as provided in paragraph 

(c) of this section, each room, training 

booth, or other space used for 

instructional purposes is heated, 

lighted, and ventilated to conform to 

local building, sanitation, and health 

codes. 

(b) Except as provided in paragraph 

(c) of this section, the training facility is 

so located that the students in that 

facility are not distracted by the training 

conducted in other rooms, or by flight 

and maintenance operations on the 

airport. 

(c) If a training course is conducted 

through an Internet-based medium, the 

pilot school or provisional pilot school 

that provides the training must comply 

with the following: 

(1) The school must maintain a 

permanent business location and 

business telephone number. 

(2) The school must inform the FAA 

within 3 working days of any change of 

location of its permanent business 

address. 

(3) The school must maintain its FAAaproved training course outline and 

student records at its permanent 

business location. 

(4) The school must ensure that its 

approved Training Course Outlines are 

adhered to by its students and 

instructors. 

(5) The school will issue to each 

graduate of its approved training 

courses, a sequentially numbered 

graduation certificate containing at least 

the following information: 

(i) The school’s full business name 

and address. 

(ii) The full name and address of each 

graduate. 

(iii) The date of issuance of the 

graduation certificate. 

(iv) In accordance with § 61.719a) of 

this chapter, a statement that the 

graduation certificate is valid for 60 

days from the date of issuance. 

(v) The signature of the chief 

instructor or its FAA-approved Airman 

Certification Representative (ACR). 

(6) The school must maintain a record 

of the complete name and addressed of 

all of its students, whether a graduation 

certificate was issued or denied. If a 

graduation certificate is denied, the 

reason must be stated in that student’s 

file. Student records must be 

maintained for a period of at least 12 

calendar months after the student has 

completed or was terminated from the 

training course. 

(7) The school must maintain in 

current status, its mailing address, 

telephone number, and facsimile 

number for a point of contact for all its 

Internet-based training courses. 

(8) The school must submit its 

training course outlines revisions to the 

FAA that are identified numerically by 

page, date, and screen, at least 30 days 

prior to their planned use of the training 

course outline. Minor editorial and 

typographical changes do not require 

FAA approval, provided the school 

notifies the FAA within 30 days of their 

insertion. 

(9) For monitoring purposes, the 

school must provide the FAA an 

acceptable means to: 

(i) Log-in and review all elements of 

the course as viewed by attendees and 

to by-pass the normal attendee 

restrictions. 

(ii) Logoff at will from a remote 

location. 

(10) The school must incorporate 

adequate security measures into its 

Internet-based courseware information 

system and into its operating and 

maintenance procedures to ensure the 

following fundamental areas of security 

and protection: 

(i) Integrity. 

(ii) Identification/Authentication. 

(iii) Confidentiality. 

(iv) Availability. 

(v) Access Control. 

(11) The pilot school must design its 

Internet-based courses to ensure that the 

data will not be exposed to accidental 

alteration or destruction, and that the 

data is the same as that in source 

documents or has been correctly 

computed from source data without 

inappropriate alteration. 

(12) When requested by the FAA, the 

pilot school must make the following 

information about its Internet-based 

courses readily available to the FAA in 

a timely manner. The information must 

be held in confidence to protect that 

information from unauthorized 

disclosure. The information that must 

be made available to the FAA, includes: 

(i) Training course material and 

content. 

(ii) Name of the student to include the 

student’s pilot certificate number, 

address, and telephone number. 

(iii) Training folder or electronic 

training record, as appropriate, of the 

individual student. 

(iv) Tests taken by the individual 

student. 

(v) Test results record of the 

individual student. 

(vi) Copy of the graduation certificate 

of the individual student. 

(13) The pilot school must use 

software in the design of its Internetbased training courses that provides for 

accountability and traceability that 

enables any violations and attempted 

violations of security protections to be 

traced to an individual who may have 

committed such acts. 

12. Amend § 141.55 by revising 

paragraph (c)(1) to read as follows: 

§ 141.55 Training course: Contents. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(1) A description of each room used 

for ground training, including the 

room’s size and the maximum number 

of students that may be trained in the 

room at one time, unless the course is 

provided via an Internet-based training 

medium; 

* * * * * 

13. Amend Appendix D to part 141 by 

revising paragraphs 4.(b)(1)(ii) and 

4.(b)(2)(ii) to read as follows: 

Appendix D to Part 141—Commercial 

Pilot Certification Course 

* * * * * 

4. * * * 

(b) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(ii) 10 hours of advanced instrument 

training in a single-engine airplane, or in a 

flight simulator, flight training device, or an 

aviation training device that replicates a 

single-engine airplane, and the training must 

include instrument approaches consisting of 

both precision and non-precision 

approaches, holding at navigational radio 

stations, intersections, waypoints, and crosscountry flying that involves performing 

takeoff, area departure, enroute, area arrival, 

approach, and missed approach phases of 

flight; 

* * * * * 

(2) * * * 

(ii) 10 hours of advanced instrument 

training in a multiengine airplane, or in a 

flight simulator, flight training device, or an 

aviation training device that replicates a 

multiengine airplane, and the training must 

include instrument approaches consisting of 

both precision and non-precision 

approaches, holding at navigational radio 

stations, intersections, waypoints, and crosscountry flying that involves performing 

takeoff, area departure, enroute, area arrival, 

approach, and missed approach phases of 

flight; 

* * * * * 

14. Amend Appendix I to part 141, as 

amended on August 21, 2009 (74 FR 

42566), and effective October 20, 2009, 

by revising paragraphs 4.(a)(3)(ii), 

(b)(2)(ii), (j)(2)(ii), and (k)(2)(ii) to read 

as follows: 

Appendix I to Part 141—Additional 

Aircraft Category and/or Class Rating 

Course 

* * * * * 

4. * * * 

(a) * * * 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 167 / Monday, August 31, 2009 / Proposed Rules 44791 

(3) * * * 

(ii) 10 hours of advanced instrument 

training in a single-engine airplane, or in a 

flight simulator, flight training device, or an 

aviation training device that replicates a 

single-engine airplane and the training must 

include instrument approaches consisting of 

both precision and non-precision 

approaches, holding at navigational radio 

stations, intersections, waypoints, and crosscountry flying that involves performing 

takeoff, area departure, enroute, area arrival, 

approach, and missed approach phases of 

flight; 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(2) * * * 

(ii) 10 hours of advanced instrument 

training in a multiengine airplane, or in a 

flight simulator, flight training device, or an 

aviation training device that replicates a 

multiengine airplane and the training must 

include instrument approaches consisting of 

both precision and non-precision 

approaches, holding at navigational radio 

stations, intersections, waypoints, and crosscountry flying that involves performing 

takeoff, area departure, enroute, area arrival, 

approach, and missed approach phases of 

flight; 

* * * * * 

(i) * * * 

(2) * * * 

10 hours of advanced instrument training 

in a single-engine airplane, or in a flight 

simulator, flight training device, or an 

aviation training device that replicates a 

single-engine airplane and the training must 

include instrument approaches consisting of 

both precision and non-precision 

approaches, holding at navigational radio 

stations, intersections, waypoints, and crosscountry flying that involves performing 

takeoff, area departure, enroute, area arrival, 

approach, and missed approach phases of 

flight; 

* * * * * 

(k) * * * 

(2) * * * 

(ii) 10 hours of advanced instrument 

training in a multiengine airplane, or in a 

flight simulator, flight training device, or an 

aviation training device that replicates a 

multiengine airplane and the training must 

include instrument approaches consisting of 

both precision and non-precision 

approaches, holding at navigational radio 

stations, intersections, waypoints, and crosscountry flying that involves performing 

takeoff, area departure, enroute, area arrival, 

approach, and missed approach phases of 

flight; 

* * * * * 

15. Add new Appendix M to Part 141 

to read as follows: 

Appendix M to Part 141—Combined 

Private Pilot Certification and 

Instrument Rating Course 

1. Applicability. This appendix prescribes 

the minimum curriculum for a combined 

private pilot certification and instrument 

rating course required under this part, for the 

following ratings: 

(a) Airplane. 

(1) Airplane single engine. 

(2) airplane multiengine. 

(b) Rotocraft helicopter. 

(c) Powered-lift. 

2. Eligibility for enrollment. A person must 

hold a sport pilot, recreational, or student 

pilot certificate prior to enrolling in the flight 

portion of a combined private pilot 

certification and instrument rating course. 

3. Aeronautical knowledge training. 

(a) Each approved course must include at 

least 65 hours of ground training on the 

aeronautical knowledge areas listed in 

paragraph (b) of this section that are 

appropriate to the aircraft category and class 

rating of the course: 

(b) Ground training must include the 

following aeronautical knowledge areas: 

(1) Applicable Federal Aviation 

Regulations for private pilot privileges, 

limitations, flight operations, and IFR flight 

operations. 

(2) Accident reporting requirements of the 

National Transportation Safety Board. 

(3) Applicable subjects of the 

‘‘Aeronautical Information Manual’’ and the 

appropriate FAA advisory circulars. 

(4) Aeronautical charts for VFR navigation 

using pilotage, dead reckoning, and 

navigation systems. 

(5) Radio communication procedures. 

(6) Recognition of critical weather 

situations from the ground and in flight, 

windshear avoidance, and the procurement 

and use of aeronautical weather reports and 

forecasts. 

(7) Safe and efficient operation of aircraft 

and under instrument flight rules and 

conditions. 

(8) Collision avoidance and recognition 

and avoidance of wake turbulence. 

(9) Effects of density altitude on takeoff 

and climb performance. 

(10) Weight and balance computations. 

(11) Principles of aerodynamics, 

powerplants, and aircraft systems. 

(12) If the course of training is for an 

airplane category, stall awareness, spin entry, 

spins, and spin recovery techniques. 

(13) Air traffic control system and 

procedures for instrument flight operations. 

(14) IFR navigation and approaches by use 

of navigation systems. 

(15) Use of IFR en route and instrument 

approach procedure charts. 

(16) Aeronautical decision making and 

judgment. 

(17) Preflight action that includes— 

(i) How to obtain information on runway 

lengths at airports of intended use, data on 

takeoff and landing distances, weather 

reports and forecasts, and fuel requirements. 

(ii) How to plan for alternatives if the 

planned flight cannot be completed or delays 

are encountered. 

(iii) Procurement and use of aviation 

weather reports and forecasts, and the 

elements of forecasting weather trends on the 

basis of that information and personal 

observation of weather conditions. 

4. Flight training. 

(a) Each approved course must include at 

least seventy hours of training, as described 

in section 4 and section 5 of this appendix, 

on the approved areas of operation listed in 

paragraph (d) of section 4 that are 

appropriate to the aircraft category and class 

rating of the course: 

(b) Each approved course must include at 

least the following flight training: 

(1) For an airplane single-engine course: 

Seventy hours of flight training from an 

authorized instructor on the approved areas 

of operation in paragraph (d)(1) of this 

section that includes at least— 

(i) Except as provided in § 61.111 of this 

chapter, 3 hours of cross-country flight 

training in a single-engine airplane. 

(ii) Three hours of night flight training in 

a single-engine airplane that includes— 

(A) One cross-country flight of more than 

100 nautical miles total distance. 

(B) Ten takeoffs and 10 landings to a full 

stop (with each landing involving a flight in 

the traffic pattern) at an airport. 

(iii) Thirty-five hours of instrument flight 

training in a single-engine airplane that 

includes at least one cross-country flight that 

is performed under IFR and— 

(A) Is a distance of at least 250 nautical 

miles along airways or ATC-directed routing 

with one segment of the flight consisting of 

at least a straight-line distance of 100 

nautical miles between airports. 

(B) Involves an instrument approach at 

each airport. 

(C) Involves three different kinds of 

approaches with the use of navigation 

systems. 

(iv) Three hours of flight training in a 

single-engine airplane in preparation for the 

practical test within 60 days preceding the 

date of the test. 

(2) For an airplane multiengine course: 

Seventy hours of training from an authorized 

instructor on the approved areas of operation 

in paragraph (d)(2) of this section that 

includes at least— 

(i) Except as provided in § 61.111 of this 

chapter, 3 hours of cross-country flight 

training in a multiengine airplane. 

(ii) Three hours of night flight training in 

a multiengine airplane that includes— 

(A) One cross-country flight of more than 

100 nautical miles total distance. 

(B) Ten takeoffs and 10 landings to a full 

stop (with each landing involving a flight in 

the traffic pattern) at an airport. 

(iii) Thirty-five hours of instrument flight 

training in a multiengine airplane that 

includes at least one cross-country flight that 

is performed under IFR and— 

(A) Is a distance of at least 250 nautical 

miles along airways or ATC-directed routing 

with one segment of the flight consisting of 

at least a straight-line distance of 100 

nautical miles between airports. 

(B) Involves an instrument approach at 

each airport. 

(C) Involves three different kinds of 

approaches with the use of navigation 

systems. 

(iv) Three hours of flight training in a 

multiengine airplane in preparation for the 

practical test within 60 days preceding the 

date of the test. 

(3) For a rotorcraft helicopter course: 

Seventy hours of training from an authorized 

instructor on the approved areas of operation 

in paragraph (d)(3) of this section that 

includes at least— 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
44792 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 167 / Monday, August 31, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

(i) Except as provided in § 61.111 of this 

chapter, 3 hours of cross-country flight 

training in a helicopter. 

(ii) Three hours of night flight training in 

a helicopter that includes— 

(A) One cross-country flight of more than 

50 nautical miles total distance. 

(B) Ten takeoffs and 10 landings to a full 

stop (with each landing involving a flight in 

the traffic pattern) at an airport. 

(iii) Thirty-five hours of instrument flight 

training in a helicopter that includes at least 

one cross-country flight that is performed 

under IFR and— 

(A) Is a distance of at least 100 nautical 

miles along airways or ATC-directed routing 

with one segment of the flight consisting of 

at least a straight-line distance of 50 nautical 

miles between airports. 

(B) Involves an instrument approach at 

each airport. 

(C) Involves three different kinds of 

approaches with the use of navigation 

systems. 

(iv) Three hours of flight training in a 

helicopter in preparation for the practical test 

within 60 days preceding the date of the test. 

(4) For a powered-lift course: Seventy 

hours of training from an authorized 

instructor on the approved areas of operation 

in paragraph (d)(4) of this section that 

includes at least— 

(i) Except as provided in § 61.111 of this 

chapter, 3 hours of cross-country flight 

training in a powered-lift. 

(ii) Three hours of night flight training in 

a powered-lift that includes— 

(A) One cross-country flight of more than 

100 nautical miles total distance. 

(B) Ten takeoffs and 10 landings to a full 

stop (with each landing involving a flight in 

the traffic pattern) at an airport. 

(iii) Thirty-five hours of instrument flight 

training in a powered-lift that includes at 

least one cross-country flight that is 

performed under IFR and— 

(A) Is a distance of at least 250 nautical 

miles along airways or ATC-directed routing 

with one segment of the flight consisting of 

at least a straight-line distance of 100 

nautical miles between airports. 

(B) Involves an instrument approach at 

each airport. 

(C) Involves three different kinds of 

approaches with the use of navigation 

systems. 

(iv) Three hours of flight training in a 

powered-lift in preparation for the practical 

test, within 60 days preceding the date of the 

test. 

(c) For use of flight simulators or flight 

training devices: 

(1) The course may include training in a 

combination of flight simulators, flight 

training devices, and aviation training 

device, provided it is representative of the 

aircraft for which the course is approved, 

meets the requirements of this section, and 

the training is given by an authorized 

instructor. 

(2) Training in a flight simulator that meets 

the requirements of § 141.41(a) of this part 

may be credited for a maximum of 35 percent 

of the total flight training hour requirements 

of the approved course, or of this section, 

whichever is less. 

(3) Training in a flight training device or 

aviation training device that meets the 

requirements of § 141.41(b) of this part may 

be credited for a maximum of 25 percent of 

the total flight training hour requirements of 

the approved course, or of this section, 

whichever is less. 

(4) Training in a combination of flight 

simulators, flight training devices, or aviation 

training devices, described in paragraphs 

(c)(2) and (c)(3) of this section, may be 

credited for a maximum of 35 percent of the 

total flight training hour requirements of the 

approved course, or of this section, 

whichever is less. However, credit for 

training in a flight training device and 

aviation training device, that meets the 

requirements of § 141.41(b), cannot exceed 

the limitation provided for in paragraph 

(c)(3) of this section. 

(d) Each approved course must include the 

flight training on the approved areas of 

operation listed in this section that are 

appropriate to the aircraft category and class 

rating course— 

(1) For a combined private pilot 

certification and instrument rating course 

involving a single-engine airplane: 

(i) Preflight preparation. 

(ii) Preflight procedures. 

(iii) Airport and seaplane base operations. 

(iv) Takeoffs, landings, and go-arounds. 

(v) Performance maneuvers. 

(vi) Ground reference maneuvers. 

(vii) Navigation and navigation systems. 

(viii) Slow flight and stalls. 

(ix) Basic instrument maneuvers, flight by 

reference to instruments, and instrument 

approach procedures. 

(x) Air traffic control clearances and 

procedures. 

(xi) Emergency operations. 

(xii) Night operations. 

(xiii) Postflight procedures. 

(2) For a combined private pilot 

certification and instrument rating course 

involving a multiengine airplane: 

(i) Preflight preparation. 

(ii) Preflight procedures. 

(iii) Airport and seaplane base operations. 

(iv) Takeoffs, landings, and go-arounds. 

(v) Performance maneuvers. 

(vi) Ground reference maneuvers. 

(vii) Navigation and navigation systems. 

(vii) Basic instrument maneuvers, flight by 

reference to instruments, and instrument 

approach procedurse. 

(viii) Slow flight and stalls. 

(ix) Basic instrument maneuvers, flight by 

reference to instruments, and instrument 

approach procedures. 

(x) Air traffic control clearances and 

procedures. 

(xi) Emergency operations. 

(xii) Multiengine operations. 

(xiii) Night operations. 

(xiv) Postflight procedures. 

(3) For a combined private pilot 

certification and instrument rating course 

involving a helicopter: 

(i) Preflight preparation. 

(ii) Preflight procedures. 

(iii) Airport and heliport operations. 

(iv) Hovering maneuvers. 

(v) Takeoffs, landings, and go-arounds. 

(vi) Performance maneuvers. 

(vii) Navigation and navigation systems. 

(viii) Basic instrument maneuvers, flight by 

reference instruments, and instrument 

approach procedures. 

(ix) Air traffic control clearances and 

procedures. 

(x) Emergency operations. 

(xi) Night operations. 

(xii) Postflight procedures. 

(4) For a combined private pilot 

certification and instrument rating course 

involving a powered-lift: 

(i) Preflight preparation. 

(ii) Preflight procedures. 

(iii) Airport and heliport operations. 

(iv) Hovering maneuvers. 

(v) Takeoffs, landings, and go-arounds. 

(vi) Performance maneuvers. 

(vii) Ground reference maneuvers. 

(viii) Navigation and navigation systems. 

(ix) Slow flight and stalls. 

(x) Basic instrument maneuvers, flight by 

reference to instruments, and instrument 

approach procedures. 

(xi) Air traffic control clearances and 

procedures. 

(xii) Emergency operations. 

(xiii) Night operations. 

(xiv) Postflight procedures. 

5. Solo flight training. Each approved 

course must include at least the following 

solo flight training: 

(a) For a combined private pilot 

certification and instrument rating course 

involving an airplane single-engine: Five 

hours of flying solo in a single-engine 

airplane on the appropriate areas of operation 

in paragraph (d)(1) of section 4 of this 

appendix that includes at least— 

(1) One solo cross-country flight of a least 

100 nautical miles with landings at a 

minimum of three points, and one segment 

of the flight consisting of a straight-line 

distance of at least 50 nautical miles between 

the takeoff and landing locations. 

(2) Three takeoffs and three landings to a 

full stop (with each landing involving a flight 

in the traffic pattern) at an airport with an 

operating control tower. 

(b) For a combined private pilot 

certification and instrument rating course 

involving an airplane multiengine: Five 

hours of flying solo in a multiengine airplane 

or 5 hours of performing the duties of a pilot 

in command while under the supervision of 

an authorized instructor. The training must 

consist of the appropriate areas of operation 

in paragraph (d)(2) of section 4 of this 

appendix, and include at least— 

(1) One cross-country flight of at least 100 

nautical miles with landings at a minimum 

of three points, and one segment of the flight 

consisting of a straight-line distance of at 

least 50 nautical miles between the takeoff 

and landing locations. 

(2) Three takeoffs and three landings to a 

full stop (with each landing involving a flight 

in the traffic pattern) at an airport with an 

operating control tower. 

(c) For a combined private pilot 

certification and instrument rating course 

involving a helicopter: Five hours of flying 

solo in a helicopter on the appropriate areas 

of operation in paragraph (d)(3) of section 4 

of this appendix that includes at least— 

(1) One solo cross-country flight of at least 

50 nautical miles with landings at a 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 167 / Monday, August 31, 2009 / Proposed Rules 44793 

minimum of three points, and one segment 

of the flight consisting of a straight-line 

distance of at least 50 nautical miles between 

the takeoff and landing locations. 

(2) Three takeoffs and three landings to a 

full stop (with each landing involving a flight 

in the traffic pattern) at an airport with an 

operating control tower. 

(d) For a combined private pilot 

certification and instrument rating course 

involving a powered-life: Five hours of flying 

solo in a powered-lift on the appropriate 

areas of operation in paragraph (d)(4) of 

section 4 of this appendix that includes at 

least— 

(1) One solo cross-country flight of at least 

100 nautical miles with landings at a 

minimum of three points, and one segment 

of the flight consisting of a straight-line 

distance of at least 50 nautical miles between 

the takeoff and landing locations. 

(2) Three takeoffs and three landings to a 

full stop (with each landing involving a flight 

in the traffic pattern) at an airport with an 

operating control tower. 

6. Stage checks and end-of-course tests. 

(a) Each student enrolled in a private pilot 

course must satisfactorily accomplish the 

stage checks and end-of-course tests in 

accordance with the school’s approved 

training course that consists of the approved 

areas of operation listed in paragraph (d) of 

section 4 of this appendix that are 

appropriate to the aircraft category and class 

rating for which the course applies. 

(b) Each student must demonstrate 

satisfactory proficiency prior to receiving an 

endorsement to operate an aircraft in solo 

flight. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on August 3, 

2009. 

John M. Allen, 

Director, Flight Standards Service. 

[FR Doc. E9–20957 Filed 8–28–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Highway Administration 

23 CFR Part 650 

[FHWA Docket No. FHWA–2009–0074] 

RIN 2125–AF33 

National Bridge Inspection Standards 

AGENCY: Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM); request for comments. 

SUMMARY: The American Association of 

State Highway and Transportation 

Officials (AASHTO) Manual for 

Condition Evaluation of Bridges, 1994, 

second edition (also referred to as ‘‘the 

Manual’’), together with the 2001 and 

2003 Interim Revisions, is incorporated 

by reference in 23 CFR part 650, subpart 

E, approved by the Federal Highway 

Administration, and recognized as a 

national standard for bridge inspections 

and load rating. The purpose of this 

notice is to update the incorporation by 

reference language to incorporate the 

most recent version of the AASHTO 

Manual, now known as The Manual for 

Bridge Evaluation, First Edition, 2008. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before September 30, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: Mail or hand deliver 

comments to the U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Dockets Management 

Facility, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., 

Washington, DC 20590, or submit 

electronically at http:// 

www.regulations.gov or fax comments to 

(202) 493–2251. All comments should 

include the docket number that appears 

in the heading of this document. All 

comments received will be available for 

examination and copying at the above 

address from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., e.t., 

Monday through Friday, except Federal 

holidays. Those desiring notification of 

receipt of comments must include a selfaddressed, stamped postcard or may 

print the acknowledgment page that 

appears after submitting comments 

electronically. Anyone is able to search 

the electronic form of all comments 

received into any of our dockets by the 

name of the individual submitting the 

comment (or signing the comment, if 

submitted on behalf of an association, 

business, labor union, etc.). You may 

review DOT’s complete Privacy Act 

Statement in the Federal Register 

published on April 11, 2000 (Volume 

65, Number 70, Page 19477–78) or you 

may visit http://dms.dot.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Thomas Everett, Office of Bridge 

Technology, (202) 366–4675; or Mr. 

Robert Black, Office of the Chief 

Counsel (202) 366–1359, Federal 

Highway Administration, 1200 New 

Jersey Ave., SE., Washington, DC 20590. 

Office hours are from 7:45 a.m. to 4:15 

p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Electronic Access and Filing 

You may submit or retrieve comments 

online through the Federal eRulemaking 

portal at: http://www.regulations.gov. 

Electronic submission and retrieval help 

and guidelines are available under the 

help section of the Web site. It is 

available 24 hours each day, 365 days 

each year. Please follow the 

instructions. An electronic copy of this 

document may also be downloaded 

from the Office of the Federal Register’s 

home page at: http://www.archives.gov 

and the Government Printing Office’s 

Web page at: http:// 

www.access.gpo.gov/nara. 

Background 

This NPRM is being issued to provide 

an opportunity for public comment on 

the proposed revision to the 

incorporation by reference of the 

AASHTO Manual in the National Bridge 

Inspection Standards (NBIS). 

The Manual for Bridge Evaluation, 

First Edition (MBE) was adopted by the 

AASHTO Highways Subcommittee on 

Bridges and Structures in 2005. The 

MBE combines The Manual for 

Condition Evaluation of Bridges, Second 

Edition, and its 2001 and 2003 Interim 

Revisions with the Guide Manual for 

Condition Evaluation and Load and 

Resistance Factor Rating (LRFR) of 

Highway Bridges, First Edition, and its 

2005 Interim Revisions. Revisions based 

on approved agenda items from annual 

AASHTO Subcommittee meetings in 

2007 and 2008 are also incorporated 

into the MBE. 

The MBE, First Edition, 2008, 

supersedes The Manual for Condition 

Evaluation of Bridges, Second Edition, 

and the 2001 and 2003 Interim 

Revisions, which are currently 

incorporated by reference at 23 CFR 

650.317. The MBE offers assistance to 

bridge owners at all phases of bridge 

inspection and evaluation. The Manual 

serves as a standard and provides 

uniformity in the procedures and 

policies for determining the physical 

condition, maintenance needs, and load 

capacity of the Nation’s highway 

bridges. 

Because the information incorporated 

by reference at 23 CFR 650.317 has been 

superseded, the FHWA desires to 

update the NBIS regulation to reflect the 

latest information contained in the 

AASHTO documents. The FHWA also 

proposes to update the definition for 

‘‘AASHTO Manual’’ to reflect the 

updated document. 

Rulemaking Analysis and Notices 

Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory 

Planning and Review) and U.S. DOT 

Regulatory Policies and Procedures 

The FHWA has determined that this 

action would not be a significant 

regulatory action within the meaning of 

Executive Order 12866 or significant 

within the meaning of U.S. Department 

of Transportation regulatory policies 

and procedures. These changes are not 

anticipated to adversely affect, in any 

material way, any sector of the 

economy. The FHWA believes that the 

incorporation of the MBE within the 

NBIS regulation will greatly improve 

consistency and uniformity in the 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS