AFS-14-070-E

August 7, 2015

Exemption No. 12450

Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2013-1042

Dr. Philip M. Tartalone, Ph.D.

Associate Professor, Aviation Flight Technology

Eastern Michigan University

School of Technology Studies

122 Sill Hall

Ypsilanti, Michigan 48197

Dear Dr. Tartalone:

This letter is to inform you that we have denied your petition for exemption. It transmits our 

decision and explains its basis.

The Basis for Our Decision

By letter dated November 20, 2013, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration 

(FAA) on behalf of Eastern Michigan University (EMU) for an exemption from 

§§ 61.160(b)(3)(i) and 61.160(b)(3)(ii) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) to 

enable graduates of EMU’s Aviation Flight Technology program, who completed their

training under part 61 from August 2008 through December 2013, to qualify for the 1,000 

hours restricted airline transport pilot (ATP) certificate.

1

The petitioner supports its request with the following information:

EMU’s Aviation Flight Technology students complete the required ground and flight 

training under an agreement with the Eagle Flight Centre (EFC), a subsidiary of 

Suburban Aviation, Ottawa Lake, Michigan.

 

1 The FAA notes that, although EMU has not requested relief for the EMU students receiving ground and flight 

training under Eagle Flight Centre’s part 141 certificate, these students also would not qualify for the 1000 hours 

restricted ATP certificate without an exemption from § 61.160(b)(3)(i) because EMU does not hold a part 141 

ground school certificate.
2

Between August 2008 and December 2013, the EFC had a cadre of students who 

graduated from, and who will graduate from, its part 61 program.

In June 2010, the EFC received its part 141 pilot school certificate. Since June 2010, 

EMU, in concert with the EFC, has continued to administer both the part 141 and part 

61 training, concurrently.

On November 20, 2013, EFC was offering ground training under part 141 and flight 

training under part 61 and part 141. 

On January 1, 2014, EMU began requiring its students to complete part 141 ground 

and flight training for the instrument rating and commercial pilot certificate at EFC.

EMU asserted that EFC’s part 61 training program is as structured and demanding as 

EFC’s FAA approved part 141 training program. Additionally, the part 61 students 

were taught by the same instructors and administered by the same supervisors as the 

part 141 students. EMU therefore asserted that the quality of flight and ground training 

in EMU/EFC’s program is the same under part 61 and part 141.2

The FAA has fully considered the petitioner’s supporting information and has determined the 

relief requested is not in the public interest and would adversely affect safety.

The FAA notes that Public Law 111-216 requires all pilots in part 121 to have an ATP 

certificate. It also states that minimum flight time to obtain an ATP certificate is 1,500 hours. 

The statute did allow for a credit towards the 1,500 hours, only if the FAA determined that 

allowing a pilot to take “specific academic training courses will enhance safety more than 

requiring the pilot to fully comply with the flight time requirement.”

As described in the preamble to the final rule, the FAA promulgated § 61.160 [78 FR 42324, 

July 15, 2013] to account for the specific program criteria necessary to meet the intent of 

Public Law 111-216. The FAA considered not only how to determine if an institution of 

higher education and its program would qualify, but how to evaluate specific academic 

courses, and then how to oversee such a program. 

One of the key components of the degree program is having the ground and flight training for 

the instrument rating and commercial pilot certificate integrated with a student’s broader 

aviation academic curriculum. The FAA concluded the established training standards and 

quality provided by an institution of higher education that holds a part 141 pilot school 

 

2 EMU submitted attachments A and C, which contained EFC’s part 61 syllabus for instrument and commercial 

training, and attachments B and D, which contained the counterparts in EFC’s part 141 training program. 

However, EMU failed to show the FAA the primary differences between the part 61 and part 141 training 

programs. Notwithstanding EMU’s assertions, EMU students receiving ground and flight training under EFC’s 

part 141 certificate are not eligible for the 1000 hours restricted ATP certificate without an exemption from § 

61.160(b)(3)(i) because EMU does not hold a part 141 ground school certificate.
3

certificate are necessary to ensure this integration of the pilot ground training and broader 

academic curriculum is performed to a suitable standard. Accordingly, 

“[u]nder § 61.160, a graduate must have completed all ground training for the 

commercial pilot certificate and instrument rating at the institution of higher 

education... [and] the academic institution must, at a minimum, hold a part 141 pilot 

school certificate for ground training. This requirement will ensure that the ground 

training for certification is integrated into the institution’s broader academic 

curriculum. (78 FR 42348). [In addition], the FAA has oversight of the training 

conducted through part 141 program approval. Those pilot schools must renew their 

certificates every 24 months and demonstrate the quality of the training through an 

established training standard.” (78 FR 41352).

Based on the FAA’s records, EMU does not hold a part 141 ground school certificate. The 

FAA reviewed the description that EMU provided of its arrangement with EFC for the ground 

and flight training of students enrolled in its Aviation Flight Technology program. The 

arrangement does not meet the intent of having the ground training integrated with the broader 

academic curriculum. EMU does not have control over the curriculum provided by EFC and 

the FAA would have no oversight responsibilities with EMU because it does not hold a part 

141 pilot school certificate. Therefore, the FAA has determined that EMU’s aviation degree 

program does not meet the minimum level of integrating its pilot ground training with its 

broader academic curriculum of an aviation degree program.

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition 

in the Federal Register because this is not a precedent-setting petition, and any delay in acting 

on this petition would be detrimental to EMU.

The FAA recently issued a denial of exemption to Baylor University in circumstances similar 

to those presented in your petition. In Denial of Exemption No. 11135 (copy enclosed), the 

FAA found that the requirement for the institution of higher education to hold a 141 certificate 

was a necessary component of the institution’s degree program. This ensures proper 

integration of the instrument rating and commercial pilot certificate ground training with the 

institution’s broader academic curriculum. Further, requiring the institution of higher 

education to hold a 141 certificate enables the FAA to oversee the program and ensure 

continued compliance with the letter of authorization. The FAA concluded this integration and

oversight is critical for assuring that the standards set forth by Congress for a reduction in 

flight time continues to be met.

The FAA has determined that EMU’s aviation degree program does not meet the minimum 

level of integration of its pilot ground training with its broader academic curriculum of an 

aviation degree program by virtue of not holding an air agency certificate issued in accordance 

with part 141. Therefore, the FAA finds that an approval of EMU’s petition for a grant of 

exemption from §§ 61.160(b)(3)(i) and 61.160(b)(3)(ii) is not in the public interest.
4

Our Decision

Under the authority contained in 49 U.S.C. §§ 106(f), 40113 and 44701, which the FAA 

Administrator has delegated to me, I hereby deny the petition of Eastern Michigan University 

for an exemption from 14 CFR §§ 61.160(b)(3)(i) and 61.160(b)(3)(ii).

Sincerely,

//s//

John Barbagallo

Deputy Director, Flight Standards Service

Enclosure