12374 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 40 / Wednesday, February 29, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Parts 61, 121, 135, 141, and 142 

[Docket No. FAA–2010–0100; Notice No. 12– 

01] 

RIN 2120–AJ67 

Pilot Certification and Qualification 

Requirements for Air Carrier 

Operations 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: This action would create new 

certification requirements for pilots in 

air carrier operations. The proposal 

would require a second in command 

(first officer) in part 121 operations to 

hold an airline transport pilot (ATP) 

certificate and a type rating for the 

aircraft to be flown. The FAA proposes 

to allow pilots with an aviation degree 

or military pilot experience to obtain an 

ATP certificate with restricted privileges 

with fewer than 1,500 hours total time 

as a pilot. The proposal also would 

require at least 1,000 flight hours in air 

carrier operations in order to serve as a 

pilot in command in part 121 air carrier 

operations. Finally, the FAA is 

proposing to modify an ATP certificate 

with an airplane category multiengine 

class rating or type rating to require 50 

hours of multiengine flight experience 

and completion of a new FAA-approved 

ATP Certification Training Program for 

a Multiengine Class Rating or Type 

Rating that would include academic 

training and training in a flight 

simulation training device. These 

proposed requirements would ensure 

that pilots have proper qualifications 

and experience in difficult operational 

conditions and in a multicrew 

environment prior to serving as pilot 

flightcrew members in air carrier 

operations. 

DATES: Send your comments on or 

before April 30, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments 

identified by Docket Number FAA– 

2010–0100 using any of the following 

methods: 

• Federal Rulemaking 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. 

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, the Docket 

Operations in Room W12–140 of the 

West Building Ground Floor at 1200 

New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, 

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

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

technical questions concerning this 

proposed rule contact Barbara Adams, 

Aircraft Certification Service, AIR–230, 

Federal Aviation Administration, 950 

L’Enfant Plaza SW., Suite 500, 

Washington, DC 20024; telephone (202) 

385–4286; facsimile (202) 385–6475; 

email barbara.adams@faa.gov. For legal 

questions concerning this proposed rule 

contact Anne Moore, Office of the Chief 

Counsel—Regulations Division, AGC– 

240, Federal Aviation Administration, 

800 Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) 

267–3123; facsimile (202) 267–7971; 

email anne.moore@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 

related rulemaking documents. 

Authority for This Rulemaking 

The FAA’s authority to issue rules on 

aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the 

United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 

106 describes the authority of the FAA 

Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation 

Programs, describes in more detail the 

scope of the agency’s authority. 

This rulemaking is promulgated 

under the authority described in 

Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 

447. Under that section, the FAA is 

charged with prescribing regulations for 

the issuance of airman certificates. In 

addition, the Airline Safety and Federal 

Aviation Administration Extension Act 

of 2010 (Pub. L. 111–216) specifically 

directed the FAA to conduct a 

rulemaking proceeding to amend 14 

CFR part 61 to modify the requirements 

for issuance of an ATP certificate. This 

regulation is within the scope of that 

authority. 

List of Abbreviations and Acronyms 

Frequently Used in This Document 

ANPRM—Advance Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking 

ARC—Aviation Rulemaking Committee 

ATP—Airline Transport Pilot 

FOQ ARC—First Officer Qualifications 

Aviation Rulemaking Committee 

FSTD—Flight Simulation Training Device 

NPRM—Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

PIC—Pilot in Command (Captain) 

SIC—Second in Command (First Officer) 

Table of Contents 

I. Overview 

II. Background 

A. Statement of the Problem 

B. Current Requirements 

C. History of the Proposed Rule 

1. Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

(ANPRM) 

2. First Officer Qualifications Aviation 

Rulemaking Committee (FOQ ARC) 

3. National Transportation Safety Board 

(NTSB) Recommendations 

4. Airline Safety and Federal Aviation 

Administration Extension Act of 2010 

(Pub. L. 111–216) 

D. Related Rulemakings 

III. General Discussion of the Proposal 

A. ATP Certificate for All Pilots Operating 

Under Part 121 

B. Aeronautical Experience Requirement in 

the Class of Airplane for the ATP 

Certificate Sought 

C. Aircraft Type Rating for All Pilots 

Operating Under Part 121 

D. ATP Certification Training Program for 

an Airplane Category Multiengine Class 

Rating or Type Rating 

E. ATP Certificate With Restricted 

Privileges Based on Academic or 

Military Training 

F. Minimum of 1,000 Hours in Air Carrier 

Operations To Serve as PIC in Part 121 

Operations 

IV. Regulatory Notices and Analyses 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 40 / Wednesday, February 29, 2012 / Proposed Rules 12375 

I. Overview 

As discussed in greater detail 

throughout this document, this 

rulemaking proposes to modify the 

requirements for pilots operating in part 

121 air carrier operations. Additionally, 

it would amend the requirements for all 

pilots seeking to obtain an airline 

transport pilot (ATP) certificate with an 

airplane category multiengine class 

rating and/or type rating. The new 

requirements would ensure that all 

pilots entering an air carrier 

environment have a background of 

training and aeronautical experience 

that would allow them to adapt to a 

complex, multicrew environment in a 

variety of operating conditions. 

The proposed requirements would 

most affect any individual seeking an 

ATP certificate with an airplane 

category multiengine class rating. The 

proposed requirements would also 

affect any person wanting to serve as 

pilot in command (PIC) in part 121 air 

carrier operations as well as an 

individual wishing to serve as PIC in 

part 91 subpart K operations or part 135 

operations as defined by 

§ 91.1053(a)(2)(i) or § 135.243(a)(1). In 

addition, persons wanting to serve as 

second in command (SIC) in part 121 air 

carrier operations would be affected by 

the proposed rules. Any certificate 

holders approved under part 121, 135, 

141, or 142 would be affected by the 

proposed rule if they choose to offer the 

proposed ATP Certification Training 

Program. 

A general summary of current versus 

proposed pilot certification 

requirements is included in the 

following table. 

Scenario Current regulations Proposed regulations 

Receive an ATP certificate with airplane category and multiengine 

class rating.

Be at least 23 years old, hold a 

commercial pilot certificate with 

instrument rating, pass a knowledge test and practical test, and 

have at least 1,500 hours total 

time as a pilot.

Meet all of the requirements in the current regulations, successfully 

complete a new ATP Certification Training Program before taking 

the ATP knowledge test, and have a minimum of 50 hours in class 

of airplane. 

Receive an ATP certificate with restricted privileges (multiengine 

class rating only).

None .............................................. Be at least 21 years old, hold a commercial pilot certificate with instrument rating, successfully complete a new ATP Certification 

Training Program, pass ATP knowledge and practical tests, and for 

military pilots, have a minimum of 750 hours total time as a pilot, or 

for a graduate of an aviation degree program, have a minimum of 

1,000 hours total time as a pilot. 

Serve as a second in command 

(first officer) in part 121 air carrier 

operations.

Hold a commercial pilot certificate 

with appropriate category and 

class ratings and an instrument 

rating.

Hold an ATP certificate with appropriate aircraft type rating 

OR 

Hold an ATP certificate with restricted privileges and an appropriate 

aircraft type rating. 

Serve as pilot in command (captain) in part 121 air carrier operations.Hold an ATP certificate with appropriate aircraft type rating and 

have at least 1,500 hours of 

total time as a pilot.

Meet all of the requirements in the current regulations and have a 

minimum of 1,000 flight hours in air carrier operations (as an SIC 

in part 121 operations, a PIC in operations under either 

§ 135.243(a)(1) or § 91.1053(a)(2)(i), or any combination thereof). 

The FAA began considering changes 

to the certification requirements for SICs 

in part 121 operations in early 2010, 

when it published an advance notice of 

proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) entitled 

‘‘New Pilot Certification Requirements 

for Air Carrier Operations.’’ (75 FR 

6164, February 8, 2010). The ANPRM 

sought input on current part 121 pilot 

eligibility, training, and qualification 

requirements for SICs. The FAA 

received nearly 1,300 comments to the 

ANPRM, including comments from 

airlines, associations, universities, and 

individual pilots. Most agreed that the 

FAA should strengthen part 121 SIC 

certification requirements, although 

they recommended various methods for 

improvement. 

In order to help develop potential 

changes to part 121 SIC certification 

requirements, the FAA chartered an 

aviation rulemaking committee (ARC) in 

July 2010. The ARC, comprised of a 

cross section of the aviation industry, 

recommended new minimum 

certification levels and aeronautical 

experience requirements for SICs, as 

well as additional flight and ground 

training requirements. Additionally, the 

ARC developed a method for crediting 

various types of academic training and 

flight experience towards the minimum 

required flight hours for SICs. Before the 

ARC could submit its final 

recommendations, President Obama 

signed the Airline Safety and Federal 

Aviation Administration Extension Act 

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

which included several specific 

provisions related to modifying the ATP 

certification requirements to prepare 

pilots to operate more safely in air 

carrier operations. The FAA asked the 

ARC to consider the provisions of 

sections 216 and 217 of the Act in 

developing its final recommendations. 

The current proposals in this NPRM 

are consistent with the statutory 

mandates set forth in the Act. 

Public Law 111–216 

Sections 216 & 217 NPRM 

1. All part 121 flightcrew members must hold an ATP by August 2, 2013. (216) ......................... An SIC in part 121 must have one of the following: 

• ATP certificate. 

• Restricted Privileges ATP certificate. 

2. To be qualified to receive an ATP, an individual shall have sufficient flight hours, as determined by the Administrator, to enable a pilot to function effectively in an air carrier operational environment; and have received flight training, academic training, or operational experience * * * to function effectively in an air carrier operational environment. (217).Restricted Privileges ATP certificate. 

Minimum number of flight hours shall be at least 1,500 flight hours. (217) 

A pilot need not fully comply with the flight hours requirement above provided specific academic training courses, beyond those listed below, as determined by the Administrator. (217) 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
12376 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 40 / Wednesday, February 29, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

Public Law 111–216 

Sections 216 & 217 NPRM 

3. All part 121 flightcrew members must have an appropriate amount of multi-engine flight experience, as determined by the Administrator. (216).50 hours of aeronautical experience in class of 

airplane required for an ATP. 

Aircraft type rating for part 121 SICs. 

1,000-hour minimum air carrier experience so 

serve as a PIC in part 121 operations. 

4. To be qualified to receive an ATP an individual shall have received flight training, academic 

training, or operational experience that will prepare a pilot to:.

ATP Certification Training Course. 

a. function in a multipilot environment; 

b. function in adverse weather conditions (icing); 

c. function during high altitude operations; 

d. to adhere to the highest professional standards; and 

e. function in an air carrier operational environment. (217) 

The total flight hours should include sufficient flight hours in difficult operational conditions. 

(217) 

5. To be qualified to receive an ATP, an individual shall have sufficient flight hours, as determined by the Administrator, to enable a pilot to function effectively in an air carrier operational environment. (217).1,000-hour minimum air carrier experience to 

serve as a PIC in part 121 operations. 

6. Prospective flightcrew members must undergo comprehensive pre-employment screening, 

including an assessment of the skills, aptitudes, airmanship, and suitability * * * for operating in an air carrier operational environment. (216).

Revised ATP requirements (ATP certification 

training course, higher total time, and multiengine time). 

Aircraft type rating for the aircraft to be flown in 

part 121 operations (SIC). 

1,000-hour minimum air carrier experience so 

serve as a PIC in part 121 operations. 

The FAA also considered the 

responses to the ANPRM, the ARC 

recommendations, and National 

Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) 

safety recommendations when 

developing the NPRM, insofar as the 

recommendations and comments did 

not conflict with the Act’s requirements. 

Throughout this document, the FAA 

invites commenters to address specific 

questions, along with any other matters 

they consider relevant. The FAA is 

particularly interested in receiving 

recommendations that would provide 

the same or better level of experience 

and training for pilots in air carrier 

operations at lower cost. Any 

recommendations should take into 

account the requirements of sections 

216 and 217 of the Act. The FAA may 

incorporate any such recommendations 

in a final rule in this proceeding. 

The FAA estimates that the cost will 

be minimal for the requirement of 50 

hours of multiengine time for the ATP 

certificate with an airplane category 

multiengine class rating or type rating. 

The FAA also estimates as minimal the 

costs of the requirement that a pilot 

have 1,000 hours of air carrier operating 

experience prior to serving as a part 121 

PIC. 

As discussed in more detail below, on 

a pre-statute basis, the proposed rule 

has costs that far exceed its benefits. 

However, about 75 percent of these 

costs (about $55 million annualized) are 

the result of the underlying statutory 

requirement that all pilots operating 

under part 121 have an ATP by August 

1, 2013. Although the FAA currently 

requires 1,500 hours for an ATP 

certificate, the requirement for all part 

121 flightcrew members to hold an ATP 

certificate will take effect whether or not 

a regulation is issued. If the FAA were 

not to use its authority to allow credit 

for academic credit, these projected 

costs would rise to more than $87 

million annualized. Therefore, the costs 

associated with this provision are 

attributable to the statute, not this 

proposed regulation. The rule has been 

proposed largely to reflect the 

requirements of the statute. 

Accordingly, the table below shows the 

expected costs of the remaining two 

primary cost drivers of the proposed 

rule along with the expected benefits. 

Total cost 

($ mil) 

PV cost 

($ mil) 

Annualized PV 

cost 

($ mil) 

Part 121 ATP Certificate Requirement ............................................................................ $1,575.2 $582.0 $54.9 

Type Rating (Part 121 Operators Only) .......................................................................... ............................ 3.4 0.3 

ATP Certification Training Program ................................................................................. 443.3 196.9 18.6 

Total Social Cost (Pre-statutory baseline) ............................................................... 2,018.5 782.4 73.9 

Costs Attributable to Proposed Rule (Post-statutory baseline) ....................................... 443.3 200.4 18.9 

Total benefits 

($ mil) 

PV benefits 

($ mil) 

Annualized PV 

benefits 

Total Social Benefit .......................................................................................................... $896.0 $384.1 $36.3 

Notes: 

1. Although a social cost, the cost of the ATP certificate requirement is not a cost attributable to the proposed rule, as the requirement is specifically mandated by the Airline Safety Act of 2010. 

2. Although incremental total costs of the type rating are zero, incremental present value costs are positive. See discussion in the Regulatory 

Notices & Analyses section. 

3. The same flight test qualifies a pilot for both the ATP certificate and the type rating. The incremental present value cost of the type rating requirement ($3.4 million) occurs because more current pilots have ATP certificates than type ratings. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 40 / Wednesday, February 29, 2012 / Proposed Rules 12377 

1A copy of this study is in the docket for this 

NPRM. 

4. Owing to a requirement of a preliminary version of this paper, the incremental cost of the type rating requirement includes the cost of the 

ATP written exam. As this is an extremely small cost, it is not reallocated here to the cost of the ATP certification requirement. 

5. Annualized PV Cost/Benefit is the annual cash flow of the 20-year annuity that yields the same present value as the cost/benefit item. 

6. Column sums may be off one or more units from totals owing to rounding. 

II. Background 

A. Statement of the Problem 

The 2009 Colgan Air accident outside 

of Buffalo, New York, focused public 

and Congressional attention on multiple 

aspects of current air carrier 

requirements, including the level of 

training and experience of pilots in part 

121 air carrier operations. The accident 

raised questions regarding whether SICs 

should be held to the same training and 

flight hour requirements as PICs, and 

whether a pilot’s overall academic 

training and the quality of the flight 

training were as important as the total 

number of flight hours. The accident 

also raised questions regarding pilot 

professionalism and whether pilots 

received sufficient experience in a 

multicrew environment. 

In an effort to address these questions, 

the FAA evaluated recent accidents in 

parts 121 and 135 to determine whether 

current certification requirements are 

sufficient to produce pilots who can 

enter an air carrier environment and 

train and perform their duties 

effectively. The accident reports 

revealed deficiencies in several areas 

involving training in aircraft manual 

handling skills, stall and upset 

recognition and recovery, high altitude 

operations, pilot monitoring skills, 

effective CRM, stabilized approaches, 

and operations in icing conditions. The 

six proposals in this NPRM are the 

result of analysis of the accident reports, 

recommendations of the First Officer 

Qualification Aviation Rulemaking 

Committee (FOQ ARC), and the 

requirements set forth in Public Law 

111–216. The proposals are directed at 

improving the knowledge and skills of 

pilots before they serve as a required 

crewmember in air carrier operations. 

B. Current Requirements 

Currently, a pilot serving as PIC in 

part 121 operations must hold an ATP 

certificate and a type rating for the 

aircraft flown. Prior to applying for an 

ATP practical test, a pilot must hold a 

commercial pilot certificate with an 

instrument rating, have 1,500 hours 

total time as a pilot, be 23 years of age, 

and pass the ATP knowledge test. After 

a pilot has obtained a commercial pilot 

certificate, there are no additional 

ground or flight training requirements 

prior to applying for an ATP certificate 

with an airplane category multiengine 

class rating. In addition, a pilot applying 

for an ATP certificate with an airplane 

category multiengine class rating is not 

required to obtain any additional 

experience in a multiengine airplane 

beyond the minimal hours required for 

a commercial pilot certificate with a 

multiengine class rating. A pilot who 

holds an ATP certificate may serve as 

PIC in part 121 operations with no prior 

experience in a part 121 air carrier 

environment. 

Current regulations for part 121 air 

carrier operations require the SIC to 

hold at least a commercial pilot 

certificate with appropriate category and 

class ratings and an instrument rating. 

To be eligible for a commercial pilot 

certificate with an airplane category 

rating, an applicant must be at least 18 

years of age and have 250 hours of flight 

time (less if the certificate is obtained 

under a part 141 pilot school or a part 

142 training center). An applicant for a 

commercial pilot certificate with an 

airplane category multiengine class 

rating could obtain the certificate with 

minimal hours of flight time in a 

multiengine airplane. An SIC in part 

121 air carrier operations is not 

currently required to have an aircraft 

type rating for the aircraft flown in 

revenue service; however, an SIC may 

be required to have a pilot type rating 

under § 61.55 for flag operations. 

C. History of the Proposed Rule 

1. Advance Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking (ANPRM) 

On February 8, 2010, the FAA 

published an advance notice of 

proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) seeking 

public input on whether current 

eligibility, training, and qualification 

requirements for commercial pilots were 

adequate (75 FR 6164). In the ANPRM, 

the Agency asked whether all part 121 

pilots should hold an ATP certificate 

and whether they should have 1,500 

flight hours even without holding an 

ATP certificate. Additionally, the 

Agency asked if academic training could 

substitute for required flight hours, and, 

if so, what types of training and how 

much credit should a pilot receive for 

the training. Finally, the Agency asked 

if there should be specific ground or 

flight training required of part 121 

pilots. The comment period for the 

ANPRM closed on April 9, 2010. The 

FAA received comments from nearly 

1,300 commenters, including flight 

schools, flight school associations, pilot 

associations, major and regional 

carriers, and individuals. 

Before the FAA could issue a notice 

of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) based 

on the comments from the ANPRM, 

Public Law 111–216 was enacted on 

August 1, 2010. The Act sets forth a 

number of mandates which preclude 

several of the options underlying the 

questions posed in the ANPRM. While 

the FAA has considered and appreciates 

all of the comments received in 

response to the ANPRM, the following 

discussion of the comments focuses on 

those areas for which the FAA 

continues to have discretion. All of the 

comments are publicly available in the 

docket. 

a. Effect of Aviation Degrees on Pilot 

Knowledge Base and Credit for 

Academic Study 

The FAA asked whether pilots who 

graduate from accredited aviation 

universities have a stronger knowledge 

base than pilots without an aviation 

degree. The FAA also asked whether 

academic study should be credited for a 

portion of the required number of flight 

hours and whether only certain types of 

academic studies should be credited. 

With respect to the question of 

whether academic study leads to a 

stronger knowledge base, 781 

commenters agreed, including Aviation 

Accreditation Board International 

(AABI), Air Line Pilots Association 

(ALPA), Boeing, International Air 

Transport Association (IATA), Pilot 

Career Initiative (PCI), Society of 

Aviation and Flight Educators (SAFE), 

Cape Air Nantucket Airlines, and the 

University Aviation Association (UAA). 

Most supporters credited the structured 

learning environment of accredited 

aviation universities as the major factor 

in providing a strong knowledge base. 

Additionally, commenters cited a 2010 

Pilot Source Study 1 as evidence that 

graduates from accredited aviation 

universities perform better in training. 

Atlantic Southeast Airlines (ASA), 

General Aviation Manufacturers 

Association (GAMA), Regional Airline 

Association (RAA), and Southern 

Illinois University Carbondale (SIU) 

stated graduates of aviation universities 

took courses pertinent to air carrier 

operations, which better prepared the 

graduates for working in an air carrier 

environment. However, a few 

commenters noted that, while aviation 

university graduates do have a stronger 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
12378 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 40 / Wednesday, February 29, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

background, that formal education does 

not guarantee they will perform better 

than other flightcrew members. 

Forty-one commenters did not agree 

that aviation degrees lead to a stronger 

knowledge base. Over half of these 

commenters, including Ameristar Air 

Cargo and the Coalition of Airline Pilots 

Associations (CAPA), believed 

academics cannot substitute for actual 

flight experience. Other commenters, 

including Air Transport Association of 

America (ATA) and CAPA, stated that 

quality training was also available 

outside of aviation universities, 

including the military. 

With respect to the question of 

crediting academic study toward flight 

time, 761 commenters, including 

Boeing, PCI, and the University of 

Alaska Anchorage Aviation Technology 

Division, supported the idea. 

Approximately 700 of these 

commenters, including AABI, ALPA, 

Continental Airlines, and the 

Professional Aviation Board of 

Certification (PABC), believed in 

crediting only academics from 

accredited universities. SAFE and UAA 

supported crediting any academics 

related to air carrier operations, 

regardless of where they were obtained. 

Two commenters proposed allowing 

credit for courses from 14 CFR part 141 

pilot schools and part 142 training 

centers. The University of Alaska 

Anchorage Aviation Technology 

Division, RAA, National Business 

Aviation Association (NBAA), ATA, and 

PCI, agreed with crediting academics 

but suggested the requirements and 

standards for doing so need to be 

determined by an ARC or expert panel. 

There were 114 commenters opposed 

to crediting any academic study in lieu 

of flight time. Most of these 

commenters, including American 

Association for Justice, Ameristar Air 

Cargo, CAPA, IATA, and the National 

Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), 

stated academics cannot substitute for 

actual experience. 

The FAA believes structured 

academic study can provide a solid 

foundation that is focused and can 

prepare a pilot for a career at an air 

carrier. Additionally, section 217 of the 

Act allows the FAA to credit specific 

academic training courses towards the 

total number of required flight hours for 

an ATP certificate. 

b. Minimum Number of Flight Hours 

With Academic Credit 

The FAA asked if pilots who receive 

credit for academic study should still 

have a minimum number of flight hours 

before serving as SIC in part 121 air 

carrier operations. The FAA offered 750 

hours as a possible minimum and 

sought comment on whether that 

number was too high, too low, or 

adequate. 

Over 760 commenters favored a 

minimum hour requirement, although 

they varied in response to the proposed 

750-hour minimum. Approximately 700 

of these commenters, including UAA, 

the University of Alaska Anchorage 

Aviation Technology Division, and 

JetBlue Airways, believed 750 hours 

was too high. Many of those in favor of 

a lower number of flight hours sited the 

Pilot Source Study, which claimed 

pilots with as few as 500 hours 

performed safely and professionally in 

part 121 air carrier operations. ALPA, 

ATA, Calspan Corporation, and SIU 

stated 750 hours was appropriate, 

though they offered a variety of 

conditional reductions for certain 

qualifications, such as for graduates of 

aviation colleges or pilots employed by 

airlines with ‘‘formal AQP-developed ab 

initio programs.’’ Twenty-one 

commenters, including Ameristar Air 

Cargo and CAPA, felt 750 hours was too 

low, indicating that more flight 

experience leads to better, safer pilots. 

Twenty-four commenters were not in 

favor of any minimum hour 

requirement. Half of those commenters, 

including AABI, ASA, Continental 

Airlines Express, Continental Airlines, 

and GAMA, stated any minimum 

requirement would be arbitrary and 

would not guarantee a higher level of 

safety. Other commenters stated the 

FAA should focus on improving overall 

pilot training rather than hour 

requirements. 

The University of Alaska Anchorage 

Technical Division, SAFE, and PABC 

recommended that an ARC or an expert 

panel should determine if minimum 

hour requirements were necessary and, 

if so, what that minimum should be. 

The FAA believes actual flight 

experience is valuable in preparing a 

pilot to fly in an air carrier environment. 

The FAA also believes structured 

academic study can provide a solid 

foundation that is focused and can 

prepare a pilot for a career at an air 

carrier as well. Additionally, section 

217 of Public Law 111–216 allows the 

FAA to credit specific academic training 

courses to count towards the number of 

required flight hours for an ATP 

certificate. 

c. Improving Existing Monitoring, 

Evaluation, Information Collection 

Requirements, and Enforcement 

Associated With Pilot Performance 

The FAA sought input on whether 

existing regulations could be amended 

to improve pilot performance and 

increase safety. Approximately 60 

commenters responded to this question, 

offering a variety of ways to strengthen 

existing programs. 

Many of the commenters cited the 

need for greater disclosure of pilot 

records to facilitate screening of 

prospective pilots. AABI, Calspan 

Corporation, Cape Air Nantucket 

Airlines, PABC, Pilot Career Initiative/ 

Delta Connection Academy, and SAFE 

suggested an applicant’s examination, 

accident, and incident record be 

divulged to the examiner or air carrier 

when he or she is seeking a new 

certificate, rating, or employment. 

Others, including Ameristar Air Cargo 

and the Liberty University School of 

Aeronautics, called for greater ability to 

track pilot performance, so carriers 

could offer additional training to 

underperforming pilots and pair them 

with more skilled pilots in a mentoring 

situation. The Liberty University School 

of Aeronautics also proposed requiring 

more time in aircraft type for new 

captains. The RAA advocated air carrier 

access to the FAA database of pilot 

checkride evaluations and enforcement 

actions for hiring purposes. Commenters 

also recommended expanding the use of 

voluntary reporting systems such as 

ASAP and FOQA. Proponents of these 

systems included ALPA, Continental 

Airlines Express, CAPA, and 

Continental Airlines. 

Additionally, commenters suggested 

modifying existing certificate 

requirements. Several commenters 

stated the current minimum hours for 

both commercial and ATP certificates 

do not reflect today’s more complex 

airspace and aircraft and that more 

hours are needed to ensure a pilot has 

the necessary skills. Others 

recommended ‘‘richer’’ simulator 

training sessions that are a closer 

approximation of actual flying 

conditions. One commenter stated that, 

in addition to an ATP certificate, a type 

rating should be required because a type 

rating demonstrates a greater knowledge 

of the specific aircraft being flown. A 

few commenters suggested less reliance 

on simulators and more time in an 

aircraft to teach pilots how to respond 

better to emergency situations, such as 

stalls and spins. 

The Act addresses many of the areas 

identified in the comments, including 

access to pilot records, pilot 

performance monitoring, safety 

management systems, and reporting 

systems. These issues will be the focus 

of future FAA actions. To the extent that 

the comments relate to pilot 

certification requirements, the FAA will 

consider the comments in light of the 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 40 / Wednesday, February 29, 2012 / Proposed Rules 12379 

requirements of sections 216 and 217 of 

the Act. 

2. First Officer Qualifications Aviation 

Rulemaking Committee (FOQ ARC) 

In response to the ANPRM, the FAA 

Administrator chartered the FOQ ARC 

on July 16, 2010. The ARC was 

comprised of a cross section of the 

aviation industry with participation 

from: 

• Air Line Pilots Association, 

International (ALPA) 

• Air Transport Association of 

America, Inc. (ATA) 

• Aircraft Owners and Pilots 

Association (AOPA) 

• Aviation Accreditation Board 

International (AABI) 

• The Coalition of Airline Pilots 

Associations (CAPA) 

• National Air Disaster Alliance/ 

Foundation (NADA/F) 

• National Business Aviation 

Association (NBAA) 

• Pilot Career Initiative (PCI) 

• Regional Airline Association (RAA) 

The FOQ ARC provided a forum for 

the U.S. aviation community to discuss 

flight experience and training 

requirements to fly as a first officer 

(second in command) in a part 121 air 

carrier operation. The ARC also 

evaluated the comments received in 

response to the ANPRM. Specifically, 

the ARC considered and addressed: 

• What should be the minimum 

certification level required of a First 

Officer? 

• What should be the minimum flight 

hour experience requirements of a First 

Officer? 

• Can academic training substitute for 

hours of experience? If so, what subjects 

and how much flight experience? 

• Should there be an air carrier 

endorsement on a commercial pilot 

certificate? If so, what kind of flight and 

ground training should be required? 

• Should there be an operational 

experience requirement (e.g. high 

altitude, icing) before being permitted to 

operate as a First Officer? 

As a result of the enactment of Public 

Law 111–216, the Administrator also 

asked the FOQ ARC to define the flight 

hours and/or experience in difficult 

operating conditions that are necessary 

to prepare a pilot for part 121 air carrier 

operations. Based on academic 

references, review of available data in 

the subject area, and the FOQ ARC’s 

experience in part 121 operations and 

training, the FOQ ARC members 

developed recommendations in these 

areas. 

Although the FAA has considered the 

FOQ ARC’s recommendations in 

drafting this proposed rule, the Agency 

retains the authority and obligation to 

evaluate proposals and independently 

determine how best to amend existing 

regulations in accordance with the 

requirements of the Act. A copy of the 

FOQ ARC’s final report is available for 

inspection in the docket to this 

proposed rule. 

FOQ ARC Recommendations 

Substitution of Academic Training for 

Flight Experience 

One of the most challenging topics the 

ARC was tasked to evaluate was what, 

if any, academic training courses or 

programs could be used to replace 

actual flight experience. The FOQ ARC 

developed an academic credit system 

that assessed the quality of each 

potential component of typical pilots’ 

education and experience. The ARC’s 

system gives credit for both the pilot’s 

total flight-hour experience and specific 

academic training. The ARC reasoned 

that certain types of experience and 

training were more effective in 

preparing a pilot to transition to an air 

carrier environment. Although all 

members of the ARC agreed education 

was essential to producing safe and 

effective crewmembers, two FOQ ARC 

member organizations filed minority 

opinions disagreeing with the concept 

of awarding flight-hour credit for 

academic training. 

The FAA believes that, in certain 

circumstances, the combination of 

focused academic training and 

structured flight training can substitute 

for actual flight experience. 

Additionally, the FAA finds value in the 

concept of awarding credit for flight 

experience that is more applicable to 

part 121 operations (e.g. multiengine, 

multicrew aircraft experience); however, 

it does not believe the Act permits this 

sort of credit to reduce the minimum 

required flight hours for the ATP 

certificate. 

Type Rating for the Aircraft Being 

Flown for Pilots in Part 121 Air Carrier 

Operations 

The ARC unanimously proposed that 

all SICs in part 121 air carrier operations 

have an appropriate type rating for the 

aircraft to be flown. The ARC believes 

that training required to obtain a type 

rating exposes the pilot to an advanced 

multiengine aircraft and a multicrew 

environment. 

The FAA tentatively agrees that 

requiring all SICs in part 121 air carrier 

operations to possess an appropriate 

type rating for the aircraft to be flown 

would provide all pilot crewmembers 

the qualifications necessary to operate 

in difficult conditions. 

50 Hours of Multiengine Experience for 

an ATP Certificate With a Multiengine 

Class Rating 

The FOQ ARC reviewed the 

requirements of the Act and 

recommended 50 hours of multiengine 

experience as a prerequisite for an 

applicant for an ATP certificate with a 

multiengine class rating. 

The FAA agrees additional 

multiengine experience would benefit 

all pilots who are required to hold an 

ATP certificate with a multiengine class 

rating. In addition, this recommendation 

would further the requirements of 

section 216 of the Act, which requires 

the Administrator to determine the 

appropriate amount of multiengine 

flight hours. 

‘‘Advanced jet training’’ for 

Crewmembers Entering Part 121 Service 

With a ‘‘SIC Only’’ ATP 

The FOQ ARC unanimously proposed 

an ‘‘advanced jet training’’ (AJT) course 

designed to give instruction in air 

carrier flightcrew operations in a 

multiengine aircraft, emphasizing the 

transition of the professionally qualified 

pilot to a highly skilled member of an 

air carrier flightcrew. The ARC 

proposed course topics including crew 

resource management (CRM), flightcrew 

training techniques, high speed and 

high altitude programming of automatic 

flight control systems, transport aircraft 

flight techniques, turbojet operations in 

all flight regimes and in difficult 

operational conditions, and use of 

advanced avionics. The FOQ ARC 

recommended AJT courses be approved 

by the FAA to ensure a structured 

quality training experience. The 

members of the FOQ ARC 

recommended that the flight training for 

the proposed course only be 

accomplished in simulators. 

The FAA agrees that there may be 

value in a foundational course designed 

to prepare a pilot for the complexities of 

air carrier operations. The FAA also 

believes that if this training were 

required at the ATP certification level it 

could address the gap in knowledge 

between the aeronautical knowledge of 

a commercial pilot and the knowledge 

a pilot should have prior to entering an 

air carrier environment. This training 

course would provide the flight training 

in difficult operating conditions 

required by section 217 of the Act. 

New ATP Practical and a New ATP 

Written Exam 

The FOQ ARC also identified the 

aeronautical knowledge and flight 

proficiencies it believes are essential to 

part 121 first officer qualifications and 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
12380 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 40 / Wednesday, February 29, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

recommended that these areas be 

appropriately evaluated in the 

knowledge and practical tests for an 

ATP certificate. 

The FAA tentatively agrees the ATP 

knowledge test should be revised to 

incorporate new knowledge areas 

specific to air carrier operations and 

difficult operational conditions. The 

FAA believes that including these new 

knowledge areas in the ATP knowledge 

test would respond to the requirements 

of section 217 of the Act. 

Quality Assurance and Oversight 

The FOQ ARC believes that its 

recommendations to the FAA should, if 

implemented, be examined and 

analyzed over time to ensure their 

effectiveness. The FOQ ARC 

recommended that a data collection 

process be instituted for continuous 

feedback on all pilots attaining an ATP 

certificate at reduced hours. 

The FAA agrees data collection is an 

essential part to any safety management 

system and continues to evaluate 

methods to assess pilot performance 

beyond those already required. The 

FAA has convened two ARCs to 

consider pilot mentoring, leadership, 

and professional development, as well 

as flightcrew member education, 

support, and training standards. 

Air Carrier Annual Reporting: Flight 

Hours, Education, Pay and Benefits 

The FOQ ARC recommends that, 

through August 1, 2013, all part 121 air 

carriers provide an annual report to the 

FAA showing flight hours, education, 

and qualifications for each first officer 

hired during that past year. The ARC’s 

stated purpose of the report would be to 

show that air carriers are making 

progress in complying with the 

provisions of the Act. The qualifications 

would be disclosed individually and deidentified for each pilot hired. This 

annual filing report would also include 

a report on the air carrier’s first officer 

annual pay and benefits. Two ARC 

member organizations dissented from 

the recommendation to require air 

carriers to provide information on pay 

and benefits. 

The FAA has chosen not to adopt this 

recommendation and is not required to 

issue regulations on this topic; however, 

the Agency sees value in ensuring part 

121 air carriers are aware of the Act and 

its requirements as they pertain to pilot 

flightcrew members. Therefore, the FAA 

issued Information for Operators (InFO) 

10024, Airline Transport Pilot 

Certificate Requirements for Pilots in 

Part 121 Operations, on December 15, 

2010, which outlined the applicable Act 

requirements. 

3. National Transportation Safety Board 

(NTSB) Recommendations 

Human error has been a major factor 

in many of the commercial airlines 

accidents over the past 10 years. This 

was most recently evidenced in the 

Colgan Air accident that occurred on 

February 12, 2009, when the pilot lost 

control of the aircraft after failing to 

follow appropriate procedures. The 

accident resulted in the death of 45 

passengers, 2 flight attendants, both 

pilots, and an individual on the ground. 

The NTSB’s final accident report 

identified a number of safety issues, 

including flightcrew member 

qualifications, failure to adhere to the 

sterile cockpit rules, and improper 

handling of the aircraft. 

The FAA identified 31 accidents in 

part 121 air carrier operations and 30 

accidents in part 135 air carrier 

operations from fiscal year 2001 through 

fiscal year 2010 that could have been 

mitigated if the proposed enhanced ATP 

qualification standards and part 121 

requirements had been in effect at the 

time of those accidents. The analysis 

indicated the accidents were a result of 

various issues, including improper 

aircraft handling, poor CRM, poor 

situational awareness, and inadequate 

training. These accidents resulted in 107 

fatalities, 28 serious injuries, and 44 

minor injuries. A detailed description of 

this analysis, and how it was conducted, 

is provided in Section E of the initial 

regulatory evaluation that is available 

for review in the docket. 

The NTSB investigation reports of 

these accidents revealed, among other 

issues, inadequacies in the following 

areas: aircraft handling to include stall 

and upset recognition and recovery, 

high altitude training, active pilot 

monitoring skills, effective CRM, 

stabilized approaches, operations in 

icing conditions, and hypoxia training. 

These accidents resulted in the NTSB 

issuing several recommendations 

related to these areas. The changes 

proposed in the NPRM address, at least 

in part, the following NTSB 

recommendations: 

• Training of flightcrews to respond 

to sudden, unusual or unexpected 

aircraft upsets (Recommendations A– 

96–120, A–04–62, A–07–3, and A–09– 

113); 

• Develop and conduct stall recovery 

training and provide stick pusher 

familiarization training for pilots of 

stick-pusher equipped aircraft 

(Recommendations A–10–22 and A–10– 

23); 

• High altitude training 

(Recommendations A–07–1 and A–07– 

2); 

• Training and guidance for rudder 

use in transport-category aircraft 

(Recommendation A–02–2); 

• Airport situational awareness 

(Recommendation A–07–44); 

• Stabilized approach concept 

(Recommendations A–01–69 and A–08– 

18); 

• Landing performance calculations 

(Recommendations A–07–59 and A–08– 

41); 

• CRM training (Recommendation A– 

03–52); 

• Pilot monitoring duties 

(Recommendation A–10–10); 

• Requirements for flightcrew 

member academic training regarding 

leadership and professionalism 

(Recommendations A–10–15); 

• Training in icing conditions 

(Recommendation A–07–14); 

• Hypoxia awareness training 

(Recommendation A–00–110); and 

• Training in crosswinds with gusts 

(Recommendations A–10–110 and A– 

10–111). 

In the NPRM, the FAA has included 

a provision that would incorporate the 

various training areas identified in these 

NTSB recommendations. The proposed 

training would include both academic 

and flight simulation training device 

(FSTD) training for individuals who 

apply for an ATP certificate with 

airplane category multiengine class 

rating or type rating. The proposed 

training would have to be completed to 

become eligible for taking the ATP 

knowledge test. While these areas may 

also be addressed in an air carrier’s 

training program, the training proposed 

in this NPRM would be an ATP 

certificate requirement aiming to bridge 

the knowledge and experience gap 

between a commercial pilot and a 

professional pilot operating in an air 

carrier environment. 

4. Airline Safety and Federal Aviation 

Administration Extension Act of 2010 

(Pub. L. 111–216) 

On August 1, 2010, President Obama 

signed into law the Airline Safety and 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Extension Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 111– 

216). In addition to extending the FAA’s 

authorization, the Act included 

provisions to improve airline safety and 

pilot training. Specifically, section 216, 

Flight Crewmember Screening and 

Qualifications, and section 217, Airline 

Transport Pilot Certification, pertain 

directly to this rulemaking. 

Section 216 requires the FAA to 

conduct a rulemaking proceeding to 

require: 

• Part 121 air carriers to develop and 

implement means and methods for 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 40 / Wednesday, February 29, 2012 / Proposed Rules 12381 

2The FAA notes that section 201 of the Act states 

that ‘‘[t]he term ‘flight crewmember’ has the 

meaning given the term ‘flightcrew member’ in part 

1 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations.’’ Part 1 

defines ‘‘flightcrew member’’ as ‘‘a pilot, flight 

engineer, or flight navigator assigned to duty in an 

aircraft during flight time.’’ Because flight engineers 

and flight navigators have never been required to 

qualify as pilots, the FAA assumes Congress did not 

intend to require ATP certificates for these 

flightcrew members. 

ensuring flightcrew members have 

proper qualifications and experience; 

• All flightcrew members in part 121 

air carrier operations to hold an ATP 

certificate and to have obtained 

appropriate multiengine flight 

experience, as determined by the 

Administrator by August 2, 2013; and 

• Prospective flightcrew members to 

undergo comprehensive preemployment screening of, including an 

assessment of the skills, aptitudes, 

airmanship, and suitability of each 

applicant for a position as a flightcrew 

member in terms of functioning 

effectively in the air carrier’s 

operational environment. 

Section 216 requires the FAA to issue 

an NPRM by January 28, 2011, and a 

final rule by August 2, 2012. 

Independent of any rulemaking 

proceeding by the FAA, this section 

directs that all flightcrew members in 

part 121 air carrier operations must hold 

an ATP certificate, issued under part 61, 

by August 2, 2013. 

Section 217 of the Act requires the 

FAA to issue a final rule by August 2, 

2013, modifying the requirements for an 

ATP certificate in part 61. The section 

establishes minimum requirements for 

an ATP certificate which include: 

• Sufficient flight hours, as 

determined by the Administrator, to 

enable a pilot to function effectively in 

an air carrier operational environment; 

• Flight training, academic training, 

or operational experience that will 

prepare a pilot to function effectively in 

a multipilot (multicrew) environment, 

in adverse weather conditions, during 

high altitude operations, in an air carrier 

environment, and to adhere to the 

highest professional standards; and 

• Sufficient flight hours, as 

determined by the Administrator, in 

difficult operational conditions that may 

be encountered by an air carrier to 

enable a pilot to operate safely in such 

conditions. 

The section directs that the minimum 

total flight hours to be qualified for an 

ATP certificate shall be at least 1,500 

flight hours. Notwithstanding the stated 

minimum, the section permits the 

Administrator to allow specific 

academic training courses to be credited 

toward the 1,500 total flight hours, 

provided the Administrator determines 

that specific academic training courses 

will enhance safety more than requiring 

the pilot to fully comply with the flight 

hours requirement. 

Section 217 also requires the 

Administrator to consider the 

recommendations from an expert panel 

established under section 209(b) of the 

Act. That section focuses on part 121 

and part 135 training programs. A report 

to Congress and to the NTSB was 

submitted on September 23, 2011. 

D. Related Rulemakings 

On May 20, 2011, the FAA published 

a supplemental notice of proposed 

rulemaking (SNPRM) proposing to 

amend the regulations for crewmember 

and aircraft dispatcher training 

programs in domestic, flag, and 

supplemental operations. (76 FR 29336) 

This SNPRM focuses solely on part 121 

air carrier training program 

requirements. In contrast, the proposed 

changes contained within this 

rulemaking address ATP certification 

training requirements and qualification 

requirements for pilot crewmembers in 

part 121 air carrier operations. The 

comment period for the SNPRM closed 

on September 19, 2011. 

In addition, the Act led to the 

establishment of the following ARCs: 

• Flight Crewmember Mentoring, 

Leadership, and Professional 

Development ARC (section 206 of the 

Act) to develop procedures for part 121 

air carriers to establish flight 

crewmember mentoring programs, 

establish flight crewmember 

professional development committees, 

establish or modify training programs to 

accommodate substantially different 

levels and types of flight experience and 

to incorporate leadership and command 

training for all flight crewmembers. 

• Flight Crewmember Training Hours 

Requirement Review ARC (section 209 

of the Act) to assess and make 

recommendations to the Administrator 

on the best methods and optimal time 

needed for flightcrew members training 

in part 121 and 135 air carrier 

operations including determining the 

best methods to allow specific academic 

training courses to be credited toward 

the total flight-hours required to receive 

an ATP certificate; 

• Stick Pusher and Adverse Weather 

Event Training ARC (section 208 of the 

Act) to study and submit to the 

Administrator a report on methods to 

increase the familiarity and improve the 

response of flightcrew members on stick 

pusher systems, icing conditions, and 

microburst and windshear weather 

events. 

• Air Carrier Safety and Pilot 

Training ARC (section 204 of the Act) to 

establish a special task force to be 

known as the FAA Task Force on Air 

Carrier Safety and Pilot Training 

responsible for evaluating best practices 

in the air carrier industry and providing 

recommendations on air carrier 

management responsibilities for 

flightcrew member education and 

support, flightcrew member professional 

standards, flightcrew member training 

standards and performance, and 

mentoring and information sharing 

between air carriers. 

Following the FAA’s review of the 

recommendations provided by these 

ARCs, the FAA will proceed with the 

rulemaking obligations required by 

sections 206 and 209 of the Act. The 

Agency may elect to enter into 

additional rulemaking based on the 

reports and recommendations of the 

remaining ARCs. 

III. General Discussion of the Proposal 

A. ATP Certificate for All Pilots 

Operating Under Part 121 

Currently, no pilot may act as PIC of 

an aircraft in part 121 air carrier 

operations without an ATP certificate 

and an appropriate type rating for that 

aircraft. An SIC of a part 121 flag or 

supplemental operation that requires 

three or more pilots also must hold an 

ATP certificate with an appropriate type 

rating for that aircraft. SICs in all other 

part 121 air carrier operations are 

currently required to have only a 

commercial pilot certificate with the 

appropriate category and class rating for 

the aircraft being flown and an 

instrument rating. 

Section 216 of the Act mandates that, 

within 3 years of enactment, all 

flightcrew members serving in part 121 

operations must hold an ATP 

certificate.2 Therefore, the FAA 

proposes to remove the current 

certification requirements in § 121.437 

and add new §§ 121.435 and 121.436. 

Section 121.435 would contain the 

current certification requirements for 

part 121 pilots, which would expire on 

July 31, 2013. After that date, the 

requirements of § 121.436 would apply. 

The FAA believes this proposal 

would have the greatest impact on air 

carriers that operate regional jet 

airplanes and/or turbopropeller 

airplanes. These air carriers generally 

hire pilots with a commercial pilot 

certificate and typically less than 1,500 

hours total time as a pilot. 

The FAA seeks comment on the 

following: 

(1) Is a minimum of 1,500 hours 

adequate in order to receive an 

unrestricted ATP certificate? Why or 

why not? 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
12382 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 40 / Wednesday, February 29, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

(2) As a result of the new ATP 

requirement for pilots in part 121 

operations, what will be the impact on 

pilot supply for part 121 operations? For 

part 135 operations? For part 141 pilot 

schools? For Part 142 training centers? 

B. Aeronautical Experience 

Requirement in the Class of Airplane for 

the ATP Certificate Sought 

Under current regulations, an 

applicant for an ATP certificate with an 

airplane category multiengine class 

rating is not required to obtain any 

additional multiengine flight experience 

above the multiengine hours required 

for a commercial certificate with an 

airplane category multiengine class 

rating. Section 216 of the Act addresses 

the issue of multiengine experience by 

requiring all pilot flightcrew members 

serving in part 121 air carrier operations 

to have appropriate multiengine flight 

experience, as determined by the 

Administrator. 

As a result of the multiengine 

requirement in the Act, the FOQ ARC 

was tasked to identify an appropriate 

amount of multiengine time for SICs 

serving in part 121 air carrier 

operations. The FOQ ARC members 

recommended a minimum of 50 hours 

of multiengine flight time to be an SIC. 

The FAA believes that multiengine 

flight experience is essential not only 

for pilots serving in part 121 air carrier 

operations but for all pilots who apply 

for an ATP certificate with an airplane 

category multiengine class rating. The 

FAA, therefore, proposes to amend 

§ 61.159 to require 50 hours of flight 

time in the class of airplane for the ATP 

certificate sought. This requirement is 

also included in the new § 61.160. The 

proposal permits an applicant to receive 

credit for 10 hours of this flight time in 

a full flight simulator (FFS) that 

represents a multiengine airplane. The 

FAA believes that flight experience in a 

multiengine airplane provides a 

valuable foundation that prepares a 

pilot for a professional piloting career, 

including a career in part 121 air carrier 

operations. The FAA believes that this 

proposal would have minimal impact 

on pilots seeking an ATP certificate 

because the hours most often would be 

acquired while engaged in other 

commercial aviation activities such as 

flight instruction or part 135 air carrier 

operations. 

The FAA seeks comment on the 

following: 

(3) Is 50 hours in class of airplane too 

high, too low, or adequate in order to 

receive an ATP certificate with airplane 

category multiengine class rating? 

Please provide evidence for your 

response. 

C. Aircraft Type Rating for All Pilots 

Operating Under Part 121 

Currently, an SIC of a part 121 flag or 

supplemental operation that requires 

three or more pilots must also hold an 

ATP certificate with a type rating for the 

aircraft being flown. SICs in all other 

part 121 operations are not required to 

hold a type rating in the aircraft being 

flown. 

The FAA has determined that 

requiring an aircraft type rating for all 

SICs serving in part 121 operations 

would improve safety in those 

operations by exposing the pilot to an 

advanced multiengine aircraft and a 

multicrew environment. In addition, 

requiring an SIC to pass a practical test 

for the aircraft type rating would ensure 

the PIC and SIC have met the same level 

of qualification with regard to the 

aircraft to be flown. Because the 

practical test for the aircraft type rating 

would be conducted by FAA inspectors 

or FAA designees rather than check 

airmen, the proposed aircraft type rating 

would also provide an additional level 

of regulatory oversight of the pilots’ 

skills and abilities. 

This NPRM proposes to include in 

new § 121.436, the requirement that all 

SICs in part 121 operations hold an 

aircraft type rating by August 1, 2013. 

The FAA believes that this proposal 

would further the objectives of section 

216 of the Act, which requires the 

Administrator to determine the 

appropriate multiengine airplane flight 

experience for pilot flightcrew members. 

In today’s air carrier environment, the 

roles of pilot flying and pilot monitoring 

are shared by the PIC and the SIC. 

Requiring an SIC to train to the level of 

proficiency necessary to obtain a type 

rating would ensure the SIC has been 

evaluated to the same standard as the 

PIC with regard to handling a transport 

category multiengine airplane. The FAA 

believes the proposed aircraft type 

rating also addresses the requirements 

in section 217 of the Act by allowing 

pilots to gain some of the necessary 

academic and flight experience to 

operate in an air carrier environment. 

Specifically, the training and testing for 

a type rating requires a pilot to 

demonstrate proficiency in the handling 

of the airplane in difficult operating 

conditions, including adverse weather 

conditions and high altitude operations. 

The FOQ ARC members unanimously 

recommended that an SIC hold a type 

rating in the aircraft to be flown in part 

121 air carrier operations. 

This proposed amendment would 

impact any part 121 air carrier that does 

not currently provide an aircraft type 

rating to an SIC. The FAA estimates 

that, for those air carriers that do not 

currently provide aircraft type ratings 

for their SICs, the impact of the 

proposed rule to an air carriers’ training 

program would be low. Currently, all 

SICs in part 121 operations receive 

extensive training and a thorough 

proficiency evaluation at the end of the 

air carrier’s initial training program, 

such as a proficiency check or line 

operational evaluation under an 

advanced qualification program. During 

the proficiency evaluation, SICs must 

demonstrate they can perform most of 

the maneuvers and tasks that would be 

required for an aircraft type rating. The 

FAA acknowledges that an SIC may 

need to receive some additional hours of 

training on those tasks and maneuvers 

that are required for a type rating but 

that are not currently required during 

the proficiency evaluation. The FAA 

believes, however, that the practical test 

for the aircraft type rating could be 

performed in the same simulator session 

currently used for the proficiency 

evaluation. The FAA acknowledges that, 

unlike a proficiency evaluation, which 

is typically conducted by a check 

airman, the practical test for an aircraft 

type rating would have to be 

administered by an FAA inspector or 

FAA designee. 

The FAA seeks comment on the 

following: 

(4) Should SICs in part 121 air carrier 

operations be required to hold an 

aircraft type rating? Why or why not? 

(5) Should all SICs be required to hold 

an aircraft type rating if the aircraft 

currently requires a type rating for the 

PIC, regardless of the rule part the 

aircraft is operated under (e.g. part 91, 

125, or 135)? Why or why not? 

D. ATP Certification Training Program 

for an Airplane Category Multiengine 

Class Rating or Type Rating 

The current regulations do not define 

any specific academic training or flight 

training requirements that a pilot must 

complete prior to being qualified to 

apply for an ATP certificate with 

multiengine class rating. An applicant 

for an ATP certificate with an aircraft 

type rating must receive and log an 

unspecified amount of ground and flight 

training specific to the aircraft type or 

provide a training record indicating 

completion of a part 121 or part 135 

approved PIC training program for the 

aircraft type rating. 

In the NPRM, the FAA proposes 

adding § 61.154, which would require 

pilots seeking an ATP certificate with an 

airplane category multiengine class 

rating or type rating to complete specific 

training requirements prior to taking the 

ATP knowledge test. The proposed 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 40 / Wednesday, February 29, 2012 / Proposed Rules 12383 

requirements would be completed as 

part of a training course that would 

include academic training and training 

in an FSTD. The course would establish 

broader foundational knowledge and 

understanding in areas critical to 

operating high performance aircraft in a 

high altitude and complex environment. 

Section 217 of the Act indicates that, 

in order for an applicant to be eligible 

for an ATP certificate, he or she must 

have received academic training, flight 

training, or experience in a number of 

areas, including: operations in a 

multipilot [multicrew] environment; 

high altitude operations; and adverse 

weather conditions. The training and 

experience should prepare the pilot to 

function effectively in an air carrier 

operational environment. This section 

of the Act also requires the applicant to 

have experience in difficult operational 

conditions that may be encountered by 

an air carrier to enable a pilot to operate 

safely in such an environment. 

The most effective way the FAA can 

ensure applicants for an ATP certificate 

have met the requirements of section 

217 of the Act is to establish specific 

training requirements and then evaluate 

the pilot’s understanding of those areas 

of instruction. Due to the specialized 

nature of the training, the FAA is 

proposing to require that the curriculum 

be completed through an approved 

training program that would incorporate 

both the training the Act envisioned and 

training the FOQ ARC identified as 

desirable competencies of a part 121 

new hire. Due to the inherent risks 

associated with flying in difficult 

operational conditions, the FAA, 

consistent with the FOQ ARC 

recommendation, is not proposing that 

this training be accomplished in an 

actual aircraft. Additionally, due to the 

focus on air carrier operations, the FAA 

has proposed that the training be 

required only for those applicants for an 

ATP certificate with airplane category 

multiengine class rating or type rating. 

This training would not be applicable to 

single-engine airplane operations, 

rotorcraft operations, or powered-lift 

operations. 

The academic portion of the training 

course incorporates most of the 

competencies identified by the FOQ 

ARC including: swept wing 

aerodynamics, automation, air carrier 

operations, adverse weather conditions, 

transport aircraft performance, high 

altitude operations, and navigation. 

Training in all topics would be taught 

with an air carrier perspective and focus 

on the unique characteristics of large 

transport category aircraft recognizing 

this would likely be the pilots’ first 

exposure to many of these aeronautical 

knowledge areas. 

The FSTD portion of the training 

course would consolidate the 

knowledge gained from the academic 

portion of the course and include 

training in difficult operational 

conditions, as required by the Act. The 

areas to be trained in FSTDs also 

include seven of the nine competency 

areas identified by the FOQ ARC. Those 

areas are: convective activity, icing 

conditions, low-visibility conditions, 

maximum crosswind conditions, 

contaminated runways, areas of clear air 

turbulence, and areas of mountain wave 

activity. Many of the training topics, 

such as crew coordination, checklist/ 

briefing items, collision avoidance 

systems, and performance calculations, 

could be taught in lower level devices 

such as Level 4 FTDs. However, the 

FAA is specifically proposing to require 

low energy states/stalls, upset recovery 

techniques, and adverse weather 

conditions, including icing, 

thunderstorms, and crosswinds with 

gusts, be conducted in a Level C or 

higher FFS. The FAA believes only 

Level C and higher FFSs can replicate 

the sensory perceptions necessary to 

allow the applicant the opportunity to 

fully grasp these critical concepts. 

As a result of the FSTD requirement, 

the proposed ATP Certification Training 

Program could only be conducted by the 

following certificate holders: a part 141 

pilot school, a part 142 training center, 

a part 121 air carrier, or a part 135 air 

carrier. To maintain consistency of the 

ATP Certification Training Program, 

each program would receive approval 

by a single source, the Air 

Transportation Division of the Flight 

Standards Service in Washington, DC. 

The FAA is making available in the 

docket for this NPRM a proposed 

advisory circular that provides 

information and courseware guidelines 

that would enable authorized providers 

to develop a training program that 

would meet the requirements of the 

proposed § 61.154. 

The FAA proposes, for the ATP 

Certification Training Program, 

enhanced instructor requirements for 

parts 121, 135, 141, and 142. The 

proposal would require that each 

instructor of a § 61.154 training course 

must hold an ATP certificate with an 

airplane category multiengine class 

rating, meet the aeronautical experience 

requirements of § 61.159, and have at 

least 2 years of experience as a pilot in 

operations under § 91.1053(a)(2)(i) or 

§ 135.243(a)(1), or in any operation 

conducted under part 121. The FAA is 

also proposing to require that 

instructors who provide training in an 

FSTD have an appropriate aircraft type 

rating which the FSTD represents or 

have received training in the aircraft 

type from the certificate holder on those 

maneuvers they will teach. Although 

the training course contains academic 

subjects for which subject matter 

experts might be appropriate, the 

majority of the training course would 

focus on applying high level concepts to 

an air carrier environment. The FAA 

believes these concepts can only be 

properly conveyed through an instructor 

with operational experience. The FAA 

has consistently required instructors 

who provide training related to air 

carrier operations to have line 

operational experience. Therefore, the 

proposed instructor requirements for the 

ATP Certification Training Program 

would be consistent with current 

practice. 

In light of the importance of the areas 

covered in the proposed training course, 

the FAA would also revise the current 

ATP knowledge test specifically for 

applicants who are seeking an ATP 

certificate with an airplane category 

multiengine class rating or type rating. 

To facilitate the transition to the 

proposed training requirement, those 

applicants who have not successfully 

completed the knowledge test prior to 

August 1, 2013, would be required to 

complete the training course before 

applying for the knowledge test. For 

applicants who pass the knowledge test 

before that date, the test results would 

be valid until July 31, 2015. Pilots 

failing to pass the practical test prior to 

July 31, 2015, would be required to 

complete the new training course and 

retake the knowledge test before 

applying to take the practical test. The 

FAA is also proposing that, for those 

applicants who pass the knowledge test 

after completing the ATP certification 

training program, the test results will 

expire 60 calendar months after the 

knowledge test was successfully 

completed. The FAA proposes to amend 

§§ 61.35, 61.39 and 61.155 to reflect 

these changes. 

The FAA emphasizes that this ATP 

Certification Training Program would be 

a basic certification requirement, not an 

air carrier training program requirement. 

Although part 121 and part 135 air 

carriers may elect to offer this training 

for their pilots, it would remain separate 

from the air carriers’ part 121 and part 

135 training requirements. Because the 

proposed ATP Certification Training 

Program is foundational, air carriers 

who elect to offer this training would be 

required to provide the course to their 

pilots prior to beginning initial training. 

A principal operations inspector may 

approve a reduction of hours in an air 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
12384 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 40 / Wednesday, February 29, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

carrier’s initial training program based 

on material taught in the ATP 

Certification Training Program. 

However, because the ATP Certification 

Training Program requirements are basic 

certification requirements, they may not 

be reduced based on the contents of an 

air carrier’s initial training program. 

These requirements would also respond 

to NTSB Safety Recommendations 

identified in section II.C.3 of this 

preamble. 

The FAA seeks comment on the 

following: 

(6) Should pilots wanting to obtain an 

ATP certificate with airplane category 

multiengine class rating or type rating 

be required to take an additional 

training course prior to taking the 

knowledge test? Why or why not? 

(7) If academic training is required in 

an ATP certification training course, 

what topics are appropriate? How many 

hours are appropriate for such a course? 

(8) Should an ATP certification 

training course include non-type 

specific FSTD training on concepts that 

are generally universal to transport 

category aircraft? Why or why not? 

(9) If FSTD training is required, what 

level of FSTD is appropriate? How many 

hours are appropriate? 

(10) Based on the proposed content of 

the ATP Certification Training Program, 

what changes or reductions could be 

made to a part 121 air carrier training 

program? 

(11) The FAA assumes parts 121, 135, 

141, and 142 certificate holders will be 

able to provide the ATP Certification 

Training Program. What factors would 

these certificate holders principally 

consider in determining whether or not 

to offer the course? 

E. ATP Certificate With Restricted 

Privileges Based on Academic and 

Military Training 

Although section 217 of the Act 

mandates that an applicant for an ATP 

certificate must have ‘‘at least 1,500 

flight hours,’’ the section also permits 

applicants to obtain an ATP certificate 

with fewer than the minimum 1,500 

hours if they have completed ‘‘specific 

academic training courses,’’ as 

determined by the Administrator. 

Current regulations do not define the 

term ‘‘flight hours’’; therefore, the FAA 

assumes that the 1,500 flight hours 

referenced in the Act represents the 

1,500 hours total time as a pilot 

currently required by § 61.159. Under 

current rules, there is a provision that 

permits a flight engineer to obtain an 

ATP certificate with fewer than 1,500 

hours. Section 61.159 allows a pilot 

with a commercial pilot certificate to 

credit up to 500 hours of experience 

gained as a flight engineer toward the 

1,500 hours total time as a pilot. 

Based on the discretion afforded to 

the Administrator in section 217 of the 

Act, the FAA proposes a new section, 

§ 61.160. The new section would 

provide for two alternative hour 

requirements for an ATP certificate with 

airplane category multiengine class 

rating or type rating based on academic 

experience. The FAA emphasizes that a 

pilot who obtains an ATP certificate 

under the aeronautical experience 

requirements of this new section would 

have restricted privileges. As specified 

in proposed § 61.168, a pilot holding an 

ATP certificate with fewer than 1,500 

hours would not be permitted to 

perform the duties of PIC in any 

operation that currently requires an ATP 

certificate, namely, all part 121 

operations and operations conducted 

under §§ 91.1053 and 135.243. A pilot 

holding a restricted privileges ATP 

certificate would be permitted to serve 

as SIC in part 121 operations that do not 

require three or more pilots. The FAA 

is proposing to amend § 61.167 in order 

to preclude a pilot who holds an ATP 

certificate with restricted privileges 

from providing instruction in 

accordance with that section. In 

addition, the FAA is proposing to 

modify the eligibility requirements of 

§ 61.153 to establish a minimum age of 

21 years for a restricted privileges ATP 

certificate. 

The FAA is proposing the following 

alternative hour requirements for a 

restricted privileges ATP certificate with 

airplane category multiengine class 

rating or type rating: 

• 750 hours for a military pilot; and 

• 1,000 hours for a graduate of a fouryear baccalaureate aviation-degree 

program who also received their 

commercial certificate and instrument 

rating from an affiliated part 141 pilot 

school. 

Pilots who meet these alternative hour 

requirements would be required to pass 

the same ATP knowledge and practical 

tests as those pilots who obtain an ATP 

certificate at 1,500 hours. These pilots 

would have the following limitation 

placed on their certificates: ‘‘Restricted 

in accordance with 14 CFR § 61.168(a)’’ 

and ‘‘Holder does not meet the pilot in 

command aeronautical experience 

requirements of ICAO.’’ The FAA 

proposes in new § 61.168 that the 

restriction may be removed from the 

ATP certificate once the pilot provides 

satisfactory evidence that the pilot has 

met the age requirements in proposed 

§ 61.153(a)(1) and the aeronautical 

experience requirements of § 61.159. 

The proposal to allow military pilots 

and graduates of 4-year colleges and 

universities with aviation-related majors 

to obtain a restricted privileges ATP 

certificate is based on the specific 

nature of the training that those pilots 

receive. 

In order to be accepted into a pilot 

training program in one of the branches 

of the military, a person must undergo 

a rigorous screening process including 

an assessment of the individual’s 

aviation aptitude. Depending on the 

branch of the military, an applicant for 

pilot training must hold an associate’s 

degree or a bachelor’s degree. Once 

accepted into a pilot training program, 

a person is 100 percent dedicated to 

aviation training. As an example, the 

United States Air Force Specialized 

Undergraduate Pilot Training (SUPT) 

includes 4 to 6 weeks of academic and 

preflight training on aerospace 

physiology, altitude chamber tests, 

aircraft systems, aviation weather, 

mission planning, and navigation. After 

academic and preflight training, the Air 

Force student pilot undergoes 22 weeks 

of primary aircraft training before 

transitioning to a track of advanced 

aircraft training that continues for 

another 24 to 28 weeks. An Air Force 

student pilot is committed to a 12-hour 

duty day while at SUPT, and his or her 

flight proficiency is continuously 

assessed throughout training. 

Additionally, during the flight training 

phases, an Air Force student pilot 

participates in flight training every day, 

normally either in a simulator or an 

aircraft. Based on the comprehensive 

and demanding nature of this academic 

training, the FAA proposes to allow 

military pilots to apply for the ATP 

practical test after obtaining 750 hours 

of flight time and meeting the other 

aeronautical experience requirements in 

§ 61.160(a). 

Based on averages provided by the 

military, the FAA believes that the 

majority of military pilots who complete 

their service obligations will have 

acquired the 1,500 hours required for an 

unrestricted ATP certificate. Army 

pilots, who average approximately 800 

hours when they complete their service 

obligations, and pilots who are 

honorably discharged from the military 

prior to completing their service 

obligation would be most likely to 

benefit from the reduced hours 

provision. When applying for the 

practical test, military pilots would be 

required to present the documents listed 

in § 61.73(h) to substantiate their 

eligibility for a restricted privileges ATP 

certificate. These documents include an 

official U.S. Armed Forces record that 

shows the person graduated from a U.S. 

Armed Forces pilot training school and 

received a rating qualification as a 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 40 / Wednesday, February 29, 2012 / Proposed Rules 12385 

military pilot. The FAA has proposed to 

amend § 61.39 to reflect this 

documentation requirement. 

With regard to graduates of 4-year 

colleges and universities with aviationrelated majors who obtained their 

commercial pilot certificate and 

instrument rating from an affiliated part 

141 pilot school, the FAA believes that 

these students also receive concentrated 

and focused aviation training. Students 

complete a course of academic study in 

an aviation-related major while 

concurrently training at the university’s 

affiliated FAA-approved part 141 pilot 

school. Through their academic 

coursework, these students receive a 

solid foundation in various topics that 

may include aeronautical science and 

technology, aviation meteorology, air 

traffic operations, air transportation, 

aviation law, aircraft systems, and CRM. 

The coursework is comprehensive, 

structured, and focused on preparing 

the student, over the course of 4 years, 

for a professional career in the aviation 

industry. The flight training 

accomplished through the college or 

university’s part 141 pilot school is 

integrated with in-depth academic 

ground training. The student is 

continuously evaluated with academic 

testing and flight evaluations 

throughout the courses that lead to pilot 

certificates and ratings. In addition, 

these aviation programs are specifically 

focused on preparing pilots for careers 

in aviation. Under the proposed rule, a 

graduate of an accredited 4-year college 

or university who received a bachelor’s 

degree in an aviation-related field and a 

commercial pilot certificate with an 

instrument rating from an affiliated part 

141 pilot school, would be allowed to 

apply for the ATP practical test with 

1,000 hours total time as a pilot. 

The FAA would recognize those 

postsecondary educational institutions 

that satisfy the definition of 

‘‘accredited’’ as that term is used by the 

Department of Education in 34 CFR 

600.2. The Department of Education 

maintains a database of accredited 

postsecondary institutions and 

programs (http://ope.ed.gov/ 

accreditation/). Prior to taking the ATP 

practical test, pilots would be required 

to present an official transcript which 

validates their eligibility for a restricted 

privileges ATP certificate. The FAA has 

proposed to amend § 61.39 to reflect this 

documentation requirement. 

The FOQ ARC recommended 

crediting academic training as well as 

aeronautical experience. The ARC 

developed a complex system that not 

only permitted flight-hour credit for a 

variety of academic training including 

both 2- and 4-year aviation degrees, but 

also allowed weighted credit for various 

flight experiences. The weighted flight 

experience concept gave a multiplier 

effect to hours that were deemed more 

applicable to air carrier operations and 

therefore more valuable to a prospective 

air carrier flightcrew member. The 

weighted experiences valued hours such 

as providing instruction as a certified 

flight instructor and hours accrued in a 

multiengine turbine powered airplane. 

The FAA has reviewed and considered 

the FOQ ARC’s crediting system, and to 

a limited extent adopted the academic 

crediting provision. While the FAA 

finds value in the weighted flight 

experience concept, the FAA does not 

believe the Act permits giving added 

flight hour credit to certain types of 

flight experience to reduce the 

minimum required flight hours for the 

ATP certificate. 

The FAA seeks comments on the 

following: 

(12) Should the FAA offer an ATP 

certificate with restricted privileges for 

pilots with fewer than 1,500 flight hours 

based on academic training and/or 

experience? Why or why not? If so, how 

many hours would be appropriate? 

Should anyone other than military 

pilots or graduates of 4-year colleges 

and universities with aviation-related 

degrees and commercial pilot 

certificates with instrument ratings 

obtained from an affiliated part 141 

pilot school be eligible? Why or why 

not? 

(13) Should military pilots be allowed 

to receive an ATP certificate with 

restricted privileges? Why or why not? 

If so, is the proposed 750 hours too 

high, too low, or adequate? 

(14) Should graduates of 4-year 

colleges and universities with aviationrelated majors and commercial pilot 

certificates with instrument ratings 

obtained from an affiliated part 141 

pilot school be allowed to receive an 

ATP certificate with restricted 

privileges? Why or why not? If so, is the 

proposed 1,000 hours too high, too low, 

or adequate? 

(15) Should military pilots and/or 

graduates of 4-year colleges and 

universities with aviation-related majors 

and commercial pilot certificates with 

instrument ratings obtained from an 

affiliated part 141 pilot school be 

allowed to receive an ATP certificate 

without restrictions with fewer than 

1,500 hours? Why or why not? If so, 

how many hours would be appropriate? 

(16) Should a pilot who obtains a 

degree with an aviation-related major 

from a 4-year college or university and 

a commercial pilot certificate with 

instrument rating from a part 141 pilot 

school not affiliated with the college or 

university be eligible for a restricted 

privileges ATP certificate? Why or why 

not? If so, how many hours should they 

be required to have? And, should there 

be a time limit between the 

baccalaureate training and the flight 

training if they were not done 

concurrently? 

(17) Should the FAA consider an 

alternative licensing structure for pilots 

who desire only to fly for a part 121 air 

carrier (e.g. multicrew pilot license)? 

Why or why not? 

(18) If the FAA were to adopt a 

licensing structure for a multicrew pilot 

license, what would be the appropriate 

amount and type of ground and flight 

training? 

F. Minimum of 1,000 Hours in Air 

Carrier Operations To Serve as PIC in 

Part 121 Operations 

Under current regulations, a pilot may 

serve as PIC in part 121 operations with 

1,500 hours total time as a pilot. There 

is no requirement that a pilot have a 

minimum number of hours as an SIC in 

air carrier operations prior to serving as 

PIC. Historically, such a provision was 

not required due to the number of pilots 

who had well in excess of 1,500 hours 

at the time they were hired by air 

carriers. In addition, these pilots often 

served as an SIC for several years before 

serving as PIC as a result of individual 

air carrier practices. Finally, under 

current regulations, commercial pilots 

must serve for a period of time as SIC 

before obtaining sufficient hours to 

apply for an ATP certificate and 

upgrade to PIC. In light of the fact that 

the SIC lacked sufficient hours to serve 

as PIC, a natural mentoring process 

occurred for less experienced pilots. 

An unintended consequence of the 

Act’s requirement for all part 121 pilots 

to hold an ATP certificate is that the 

natural mentoring of SICs may not 

occur. The FAA believes that the time 

that an SIC spends observing a PIC plays 

an important role in preparing the SIC 

for eventual upgrade to PIC. A PIC in air 

carrier operations is expected to possess 

leadership and command abilities 

including aeronautical decisionmaking 

and sound judgment necessary to 

exercise operational control of the flight. 

The PIC should serve as a mentor and 

assist in the professional development 

of the SIC. 

Section 217 of the Act directs the 

Administrator to determine the 

sufficient flight hours ‘‘to enable a pilot 

to function effectively in an air carrier 

environment.’’ The FAA is proposing to 

add a provision to new § 121.436 that 

would require a pilot to have 1,000 

hours in air carrier operations prior to 

serving as PIC in part 121 operations. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
12386 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 40 / Wednesday, February 29, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

This requirement would ensure that, 

prior to serving as PIC in part 121 

operations, a pilot has obtained at least 

one full year of relevant operational 

experience. The 1,000 hours in air 

carrier operations may be a combination 

of time as PIC in operations conducted 

under § 91.1053(a)(2)(i) or 

§ 135.243(a)(1) or as SIC in part 121 

operations. The FAA is proposing to 

allow a pilot to count PIC time in 

operations conducted under 

§ 91.1053(a)(2)(i) or § 135.243(a)(1) 

because these operations require an ATP 

certificate and type rating and are 

similar to operations conducted under 

part 121. A PIC in these operations has 

demonstrated leadership and command 

abilities including aeronautical 

decisionmaking and the judgment 

necessary to exercise operational control 

of the flight. Additionally, a PIC in these 

operations has served as a mentor and 

assisted in the professional 

development of SICs. The FAA believes 

that the training and experience gained 

in these operations aid in the 

professional development of a pilot and 

develop the competencies required to 

serve as a PIC in part 121 operations. 

This provision would also address, in 

part, many of the concerns surrounding 

pilot professionalism identified by the 

NTSB in its Safety Recommendation 

letter to the FAA on February 23, 2010, 

and address many of the concerns of the 

FOQ ARC members. 

The FAA seeks comments on the 

following: 

(19) If all pilots in part 121 air carrier 

operations are required to hold an ATP 

certificate, should there be additional 

requirements prior to operating as a PIC 

in part 121 air carrier operations? If so, 

what should those requirements be? 

(20) Is the proposed flight hour 

requirement for serving as SIC before 

moving to PIC too long, too short, or 

adequate? 

(21) Should the proposed PIC time in 

part 91 subpart K or part 135 operations 

count towards the part 121 PIC 

requirement? Why or why not? 

(22) Should SIC time outside of part 

121 operations count towards the 

proposed requirement? Why or why 

not? 

G. Miscellaneous Amendments 

The FAA has proposed several 

miscellaneous amendments to parts 61 

and 142. These amendments are nonsubstantive technical amendments, 

mostly to define terms, remove obsolete 

provisions, and make minor conforming 

changes to existing regulations. One 

proposal would remove several 

references to SFAR No. 58 because that 

provision already was removed from 

chapter 14 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations. 

The FAA is also proposing to amend 

the definitions in § 61.1. The definitions 

of ‘‘flight training device’’ and ‘‘flight 

simulator’’ would be removed because 

those terms are defined in parts 1 and 

60. New definitions of ‘‘accredited’’ and 

‘‘nationally recognized accrediting 

agency’’ would be added in order to 

clarify which institutions’ graduates 

would qualify for an ATP certificate 

with restricted privileges. 

Additionally, the FAA is proposing 

several minor conforming amendments 

to update cross-references in various 

sections of the regulations and to make 

other editorial corrections. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

This proposal contains the following 

new information collection 

requirements. As required by the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. 3507(d)), the FAA has submitted 

the information requirements associated 

with this proposal to the Office of 

Management and Budget for its review. 

Title: Pilot Certification and 

Qualification Requirements for Air 

Carrier Operations. 

Summary: This proposal would 

amend the requirements for obtaining 

an airline transport pilot (ATP) 

certificate by requiring pilot applicants 

for an ATP certificate with airplane 

category multiengine class rating or type 

rating to complete a new ATP 

Certification Training Program. Any part 

142 training center, part 141 pilot 

school, or air carrier wishing to offer the 

new training program would be required 

to submit the curriculum to the FAA for 

approval. 

Use of: This proposed information 

collection would ensure pilots seeking 

employment in an air carrier 

environment are adequately trained on 

the knowledge and skills they need to 

function in a multicrew environment in 

a variety of operating conditions. The 

requirement to submit the ATP 

Certification Training Program 

curriculum to the FAA for approval 

would provide greater oversight of the 

training programs and ensure 

consistency of both course and 

instructional quality among the training 

centers, pilot schools, and air carriers. 

Part 121, 135, 141, or 142 certificate 

holders that wish to offer or provide the 

ATP Certification Training Program 

would be required to develop and 

submit a course for approval by the 

FAA. For those that provide this 

training, additional pilot training record 

keeping would also be required. 

The following estimate corresponds to 

section IV of the economic evaluation. 

Industry ATP Course Development 

Costs 

Initial number of certificate holders 

offering the ATP course = 20. 

Time needed to develop the ATP course 

= 120 hours. 

Salary of a ground instructor = $32.55. 

First-Year Cost 

Cost: 20 × 120 × $32.55 = $78,120. 

Time: 20 × 120 = 2,400 hours. 

Subsequent Years: Per-Year Costs 

Cost: 1 × 120 × $32.55 = $3,906. 

Time: 1 × 120 = 120 hours. 

Total Over 10 Years 

Cost: $113,274. 

Time: 3,480 hours. 

Average Per Year 

Cost: $11,327. 

Time: 348 hours. 

Industry Recordkeeping Costs 

Initial number of ATP applicants = 

2910. 

Time needed for recordkeeping per pilot 

= 0.1 hours. 

Salary of a ground instructor = $32.55. 

First-Year Cost 

Cost: 2910 × 0.1 × $32.55 = $9,472. 

Time: 2910 × 0.1 = 291 hours. 

Subsequent Years: Avg. Per-Year Costs 

Cost: 3,580 × 0.1 × $32.55 = $11,652. 

Time: 3,580 × 0.1 = 358 hours. 

Total Over 10 Years 

Cost: $114,306. 

Time: 3,512 hours. 

Average Per Year 

Cost: $11,431. 

Time: 351 hours. 

FAA ATP Course Review Costs 

Initial number of certificate holders 

requesting ATP course approval = 20. 

Time needed to review the ATP course 

= 4 hours. 

Salary of an aviation safety inspector = 

$61.50. 

First-Year Cost 

Cost: 20 × 4 × $61.50 = $4,920. 

Time: 20 × 4 = 80 hours. 

Subsequent Years: Per-Year Costs 

Cost: 1 × 4 × $61.50 = $246. 

Time: 1 × 4 = 4 hours. 

Total Over 10 Years 

Cost: $7,134. 

Time: 116 hours. 

Average Per Year 

Cost: $713. 

Time: 11.6 hours. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 40 / Wednesday, February 29, 2012 / Proposed Rules 12387 

3 Kit Darby, President, www.KitDarby.com, 

Aviation Consulting, LLC, Peachtree City, GA. 

4Owing to the expedited nature of this proposed 

rule, questionnaires were sent to the Air Transport 

Association (ATA) and the Regional Airlines 

Association (RAA), who, in turn, distributed the 

questionnaire to selected members. Five responses 

were received from the major airlines and three 

from the regional airlines. 

FAA Approval Letter Costs 

Initial number of certificate holders 

requesting ATP course approval = 20. 

Time needed to issue the approval letter 

= 0.5 hours. 

Salary of clerk/secretary = $24.67. 

First-Year Cost 

Cost: 20 × 0.5 × $24.67 = $246.70. 

Time: 20 × 0.5 = 10 hours. 

Subsequent Years: Per-Year Costs 

Cost: 1 × 0.5 × $24.67 = $12.34. 

Time: 1 × 0.5 = 0.5 hours. 

Total Over 10 Years 

Cost: $357.72. 

Time: 14.5 hours. 

Average Per Year 

Cost: $35.77. 

Time: 1.45 hours. 

The agency is soliciting comments 

to— 

(1) Evaluate whether the proposed 

information requirement is necessary for 

the proper performance of the functions 

of the agency, including whether the 

information will have practical utility; 

(2) Evaluate the accuracy of the 

agency’s estimate of the burden; 

(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and 

clarity of the information to be 

collected; and 

(4) Minimize the burden of collecting 

information on those who are to 

respond, including by using appropriate 

automated, electronic, mechanical, or 

other technological collection 

techniques or other forms of information 

technology. 

Individuals and organizations may 

send comments on the information 

collection requirement by April 30, 

2012, and should direct them to the 

address listed in the ADDRESSES section 

at the end of this preamble. Comments 

also should be submitted to the Office 

of Management and Budget, Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs, 

Attention: Desk Officer for FAA, New 

Executive Building, Room 10202, 725 

17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20053. 

According to the 1995 amendments to 

the Paperwork Reduction Act (5 CFR 

1320.8(b)(2)(vi)), an agency may not 

collect or sponsor the collection of 

information, nor may it impose an 

information collection requirement 

unless it displays a currently valid OMB 

control number. The OMB control 

number for this information collection 

will be published in the Federal 

Register, after the Office of Management 

and Budget approves it. 

International Compatibility 

In keeping with U.S. obligations 

under the Convention on International 

Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to 

conform to International Civil Aviation 

Organization (ICAO) Standards and 

Recommended Practices to the 

maximum extent practicable. The FAA 

has reviewed the corresponding ICAO 

Standards and Recommended Practices 

and has identified no differences with 

these proposed regulations except in the 

following limited respect. The FAA 

notes that, although pilots will be able 

to obtain a restricted privileges ATP 

certificate in fewer than the ICAO 

standard of 1,500 hours, those pilots 

will not have the pilot in command 

privileges of pilots who hold 

unrestricted ATP certificates. This pilot 

in command restriction will be reflected 

on the pilot’s certificate. The experience 

and qualifications of the pilots who 

hold restricted privileges ATP 

certificates will exceed the ICAO 

standards for second-in-command. 

IV. Regulatory Notices and Analyses 

Changes to Federal regulations must 

undergo several economic analyses. 

First, Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 

direct that each Federal agency shall 

propose or adopt a regulation only upon 

a reasoned determination that the 

benefits of the intended regulation 

justify its costs. Second, the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96–354) 

requires agencies to analyze the 

economic impact of regulatory changes 

on small entities. Third, the Trade 

Agreements Act (Pub. L. 96–39) 

prohibits agencies from setting 

standards that create unnecessary 

obstacles to the foreign commerce of the 

United States. In developing U.S. 

standards, this Trade Act requires 

agencies to consider international 

standards and, where appropriate, that 

they be the basis of U.S. standards. 

Fourth, the Unfunded Mandates Reform 

Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4) requires 

agencies to prepare a written assessment 

of the costs, benefits, and other effects 

of proposed or 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. Readers seeking greater 

detail should read the full regulatory 

evaluation, a copy of which has been 

placed in the docket for this rulemaking. 

In conducting these analyses, the FAA 

has determined that this proposed rule: 

(1) Satisfies a Congressional 

requirement to improve aviation safety; 

(2) is an economically ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ as defined in section 

3(f) of Executive Order 12866, (3) is 

‘‘significant’’ as defined in the 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. 

Total Costs and Benefits of This 

Proposed Rule 

The proposed rule’s requirements of 

an ATP certificate and aircraft type 

rating for part 121 SICs, 1,000 hours of 

flight experience in air carrier 

operations prior to serving as a part 121 

PIC—and 50 hours of ME time and a 

foundational ATP Certification Training 

Program for pilots seeking an ATP 

certificate with airplane category and 

multiengine class rating or type rating— 

would, as a group of requirements, 

enhance the qualifications, experience, 

and seasoning of pilots. As a 

consequence, the FAA believes that the 

proposed rule would enhance safety by 

reducing the accident rate in air carrier 

operations. 

The FAA estimates that the cost will 

be minimal for the requirement of 50 

hours of multiengine time for applicants 

for the ATP certificate with an airplane 

category multiengine class rating or type 

rating. Multiengine hours are typically 

acquired while engaged in other 

commercial aviation activities such as 

flight instruction or part 135 air carrier 

operations. Airlines currently post 

minimums for multiengine time from 50 

hours to as much as 1,500 hours.3

The FAA also estimates as minimal 

the costs of the requirement that a pilot 

have 1,000 hours of air carrier operating 

experience prior to serving as a part 121 

PIC. According to information provided 

by industry,4 the average number of 

years for an SIC to upgrade to a PIC is 

about five years for operators which use 

regional jet airplanes and/or 

turbopropeller airplanes and more than 

ten years for major airlines. Even 

without air carrier operating experience 

in part 135 or part 91, subpart K 

operations, at an average number of 750 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
12388 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 40 / Wednesday, February 29, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

5Some of these benefits are presumably 

attributable to the statute’s ATP requirement, but as 

noted in the following section, we find at most 

$23.0 million attributable to the statute, with the 

likely amount much less. As Table 1 shows part 121 

benefits to be $46.1 million greater than costs, the 

proposed rule would still be cost-beneficial even if 

the maximum $23.0 million were attributable to the 

statute. 

flight hours a year, an SIC will 

accumulate the required hours in 11⁄3

years. 

Accordingly, Table 1 shows the 

expected costs of the proposed rule 

based on the costs of the three 

remaining requirements—the ATP 

Certification Training Program, the type 

rating requirement for part 121 SICs, 

and the part 121 ATP Certificate 

requirement for SICs. Table 1 also 

shows the expected benefits of the 

proposed rule. Using a pre-statute 

baseline, the table shows the total costs 

of the proposed rule to be $2,018.5 

million, with present value cost of 

$782.4 million and annualized present 

value cost of $73.9 million. The total 

benefits of the proposed rule are $896.0 

million, with present value of $384.1 

million and annualized present value 

benefits of $36.3 million. However, 

since the FAA currently requires 1,500 

hours for an ATP certificate, and the 

requirement for an SIC to hold an ATP 

certificate will take effect whether or not 

a regulation is issued, the cost of 

$1,575.2 million ($582.0 million in 

present value) associated with this 

provision are attributable to the statute, 

not the proposed regulation. Therefore, 

using a post-statute baseline, Table 1 

shows that the proposed rule is cost 

beneficial as expected costs are $443.3 

million ($200.4 million in present 

value), which are now less than the 

expected benefits of $896.0 million 

($384.1 million in present value). In 

comparing costs and benefits, however, 

we must consider part 121 operators 

separately since all of the cost drivers 

apply to part 121 operators, while just 

the cost of the ATP Certification 

Training Program applies to part 135 

and part 91, subpart K, operators. 

As the table shows, for part 121 

operators the proposed rule is costbeneficial since present value benefits, 

at $225.1 million,5 are greater than 

present value costs, at 179.0 million. For 

part 135 operators present value benefits 

are $159.0 million, while present value 

costs are $14.8 million, so for part 135 

operators the proposed rule is 

overwhelmingly cost-beneficial. 

Although the FAA does not have an 

estimate of benefits for part 91, subpart 

K, operators, these operators have pilot 

certification and operating rules similar 

to part 135 operators. Given the 

overwhelming benefit-cost ratio for part 

135 operators, we are confident that the 

proposed rule is cost-beneficial for part 

91, subpart K, operators as well. 

TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF COSTS AND BENEFITS OF PROPOSED FOQ RULE, 2013–2032 

Total cost 

($ mil.) 

PV cost 

($ mil.) 

Annualized PV 

cost 

($ mil.) 

Part 121 ATP Certificate Requirement ...................................................................... $1,575.2 $582.0 $54.9

ATP Practical Test .............................................................................................. .............................. 23.3 2.2 

ATP 1,500 Hour Requirement ............................................................................ 2,520.4 901.8 85.1 

Savings from 750-hour ATP Military Credit ....................................................... (219.8 ) (78.6 ) (7.4 ) 

Savings from 500-hour ATP Educational Credit ................................................ (725.5 ) (264.5 ) (25.0 ) 

Type Rating (Part 121 Operators Only) .................................................................... .............................. 3.4 0.3 

ATP Certification Training Program ........................................................................... 443.3 196.9 18.6 

Part 121 Operators ............................................................................................. 396.6 175.6 16.6

Part 135 Operators ............................................................................................. 32.5 14.8 1.4 

Part 91, Subpart K, Operators ........................................................................... 14.3 6.5 0.6 

Total Social Cost—Part 121 Operators (Pre-statutory baseline) .............................. 1,971.7 761.0 71.8 

Total Social Cost (Pre-statutory baseline) ................................................................. 2,018.5 782.4 73.9 

Costs Attributable to Proposed Rule—Part 121 Operators (Post-statutory baseline) ......................................................................................................................... 396.6 179.0 16.9 

Costs Attributable to Proposed Rule (Post-statutory baseline) ................................. 443.3 200.4 18.9 

Total benefits 

($ mil.) 

PV benefits 

($ mil.) 

Annualized PV 

benefits 

Part 121 Benefits ....................................................................................................... $525.0 $25.1 $21.2 

Part 135 Benefits ....................................................................................................... 371.0 159.0 15.0 

Total Social Benefit ............................................................................................ 896.0 384.1 36.3 

Notes: 

1. Although a social cost, the cost of the ATP certificate requirement is not a cost attributable to the proposed rule, as the requirement is specifically mandated by the Airline Safety Act of 2010. 

2. Although incremental total costs of the ATP practical test and type rating are zero, incremental present value costs are positive. See discussion in the text below. 

3. The same flight test qualifies a pilot for both the ATP certificate and the type rating. The incremental present value cost of the type rating requirement ($3.4 million) occurs because more current pilots have ATP certificates than type ratings. 

4. Owing to a requirement of a preliminary version of the regulatory evaluation, the incremental cost of the type rating requirement includes the 

cost of the ATP written exam. As this is an extremely small cost, it is not reallocated here to the cost of the ATP certification requirement. 

5. Annualized PV Cost/Benefit is the annual cash flow of the 20-year annuity that yields the same present value as the cost/benefit item. 

6. Column sums may be off one or more units from totals owing to rounding. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 40 / Wednesday, February 29, 2012 / Proposed Rules 12389 

6More specifically, Section 217 of the Act 

requires that ‘‘The total flight hours required by the 

Administrator * * * shall be at least 1,500 flight 

hours.’’ 

Costs and Benefits of the ATP 1500- 

Hour Requirement 

As the ATP certificate requirement for 

part 121 SICs is mandated by the Airline 

Safety Act of 2010 and is selfexecuting,6 the FAA attributes the cost 

of the requirement to the statute and not 

the proposed rule 

The FAA’s Office of Accident 

Investigation and Prevention (AVP) 

found little relationship between the 

1,500-hour requirement and airplane 

accidents. Only 7 of the 31 accidents 

used for the part 121 benefit analysis 

had SICs with less than 1,500 hours. 

Moreover, the NTSB reports on these 

seven accidents indicate other issues 

addressed by the proposed rule. Finally, 

the 7 accidents with SICs with less than 

1,500 flight hours account for just 

10.2% of the FAA’s estimated $225.1 

million part 121 benefits, or $23.0 

million, which, accordingly, is the 

maximum that could be attributable to 

the statute’s 1500-hour requirement. 

As the 1,500-hour requirement is 

required by statute, the FAA did not 

further pursue the estimation of the 

requirement’s benefits. 

Who is potentially affected by this rule? 

The proposed requirements would 

most affect any individual seeking an 

ATP certificate with an airplane 

category multiengine class rating. The 

proposed requirements would also 

affect any person wanting to serve as 

pilot in command (PIC) in part 121 air 

carrier operations as well as an 

individual wishing to serve as PIC in 

part 91 subpart K operations or part 135 

operations as defined by 

§ 91.1053(a)(2)(i) or § 135.243(a)(1). In 

addition, persons wanting to serve as 

second in command (SIC) in part 121 air 

carrier operations would be affected by 

the proposed rules. 

Principal Assumptions and Sources of 

Information 

• The FAA uses a 20-year period of 

analysis in order to more fully account 

for costs that will accumulate over time 

as new pilots replace retiring pilots 

unaffected by the proposed rule. As the 

final rule will become effective on 

August 2, 2013, the FAA uses the 20- 

year period of analysis, 2013–2032. As 

for the most part the FAA is using 2010 

prices, in calculating present values 

discounted back to 2010. 

• Discount rate is 7 percent (Office of 

Management & Budget, Circular A–4, 

‘‘Guidelines and Discount Rates for 

Benefit-Cost Analysis of Federal 

Programs,’’ October 29, 1992, p. 8, 

www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars/ 

index.html). 

• VSL ($6 million) and value of 

prevented injuries: United States Office 

of the Secretary of Transportation. 

Memorandum: Treatment of the 

Economic Value of a Statistical Life in 

Departmental Analyses—2009 Annual 

Revision, March 18, 2009. 

• Number of rule-related accidents 

and associated number of fatalities, 

number of minor and serious injuries, 

aircraft model, and aircraft damage: 

FAA, Office of Accident Investigation 

and Prevention (AVP). 

• Market value of aircraft and 

restoration costs: APO update to 2008 of 

data in Economic Values for FAA 

Investment and Regulatory Decisions, A 

Guide, Section 5. Office of Aviation 

Policy and Plans, U.S. Federal Aviation 

Administration, Wash., DC, Dec. 31, 

2004. 

• Number of part 121 PICs and SICs 

by airline and part 135 ATP pilots; and 

part 91, subpart K, fractional ownership 

program PICs: FAA, Flight Standards 

Service, National Vital Information 

Subsystem (NVIS) database (Nov. 22, 

2010; Dec. 10, 2010). 

• Pilot growth rate (0.6%): U.S. DOT, 

FAA, Aviation Policy & Plans. FAA 

Aerospace Forecast: 2010–2030. Table 

29, ‘‘Active Pilots by Type of 

Certificate’’, Air Transport, Avg Annual 

Growth, 2009–2030. 

• Cost of ATP Certification Training 

Program and cost of type rating: 

Industry survey and FAA Flight 

Standards Service. 

• Percentage of SICs without PTC 

(major & cargo airlines and regional 

airlines): Estimated from industry 

survey. 

• Percentage of SICs without type 

rating (major & cargo airlines and 

regional airlines): Estimated from 

industry survey. 

• Typical number of years for 

upgrade from SIC to PIC (Major airlines: 

10 years, Regionals: 5 years): Estimated 

from industry survey. 

• Typical number of years after which 

PIC will move from regional airline to 

major airline (2 years): Industry survey. 

• Pilot salary data by airline (2008): 

www.airlinepilotcentral.com. 

• Number of part 121 retiring pilots 

(minimum): Calculated using 

www.faa.gov, Data and Research, U.S. 

Civil Airmen Statistics, Annual 

Statistics, 2009. Table 12, ‘‘Estimated 

Active Certificates Held As of December 

31, 2009.’’ 

• Early and medical pilot retirement 

rate (0.5%): Email from Kit Darby, 

President, www.KitDarby.com, Aviation 

Consulting, LLC, Peachtree City, GA, 

dated 12/18/2010. 

• Flight experience of military pilots 

leaving the service: FAA Flight 

Standards Service, Air Transportation 

Division (AFS–200), Air Carrier 

Training Branch (AFS–210). 

• Hiring minimums by airline & 

airline group and percentage of pilots 

hired with military training: Kit Darby, 

President, www.KitDarby.com, Aviation 

Consulting, LLC, Peachtree City, GA. 

• Number of baccalaureates with 

aviation-related degrees: Aviation 

Accreditation Board International 

(AABI), Gary W. Kiteley, Executive 

Director, 3410 Skyway Drive, Auburn, 

AL. 

• The FAA assumes safety benefits 

will grow at the annual growth rate of 

air carrier revenue passenger miles. 

Source: U.S. DOT, FAA, Aviation Policy 

& Plans. FAA Aerospace Forecast: 2010– 

2030. Table 5, ‘‘U.S. Commercial Air 

Carriers’ Total Scheduled U.S. 

Passenger Traffic’’, Revenue Passenger 

Miles, System [Domestic + Int’l], Avg 

Annual Growth, 2009–2030. 

Costs of This Proposed Rule 

As discussed above, the FAA 

estimates costs to be minimal for the 

requirement that holders of the ATP 

certificate have 50 hours of multiengine 

time and the requirement that a pilot 

have 1,000 hours of air carrier 

experience prior to serving as PIC in 

part 121 operations. The FAA estimates 

that the three remaining provisions of 

the rule—the ATP Certification Training 

Program, the type rating requirement for 

part 121 SICs, and the ATP certification 

requirement—could have cost 

implications, although, as already 

noted, since the latter requirement is 

mandated by the Airline Safety Act of 

2010, the FAA attributes that cost to the 

statute, not the proposed rule. The costs 

of each of these three requirements is 

discussed further below. 

Cost of ATP Certification Training 

Program 

The requirement for the ATP 

Certification Training Program applies 

to all new applicants for an ATP 

certificate with an airplane category 

multiengine class rating or type rating. 

Accordingly, the ATP Certification 

Training Program would apply to all 

pilots in part 121 operations, all PICs in 

part 91, subpart K, Fractional 

Ownership Operations, and all part 135 

air carrier operations requiring the PIC 

to hold an ATP certificate. Part 135 

operations requiring the PIC to hold an 

ATP certificate with an airplane 

category multiengine class rating are (1) 

commuter operations using multiengine 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
12390 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 40 / Wednesday, February 29, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

7 Very few pilots hold a type rating without also 

holding the ATP certificate. 

airplanes with nine or fewer passenger 

seats (‘‘Scheduled 135’’) and (2) ondemand operations using multiengine 

airplanes with 10 or more passenger 

seats or turbojets. 

The FAA anticipates that the ATP 

Certification Training Program would be 

a 7-day course, typically conducted by 

part 142 training center or a part 121 air 

carrier just prior to a pilot’s initial pilot 

training. The FAA anticipates the course 

would entail three days of ground 

school and four days of flight training— 

two days with an FTD and two days 

with a Level C or D simulator. Typically 

two pilots train concurrently in a 

simulator and this is reflected in the 

simulator estimates of cost per pilot. 

Table 2 reflects the estimated cost 

factors for the training program and 

Table 3 reflects the total cost per pilot 

calculations. 

TABLE 2—COST FACTORS FOR THE ATP CERTIFICATION TRAINING PROGRAM

Cost factor Rate Period 

Ground school instructor ............................................................................. $33 .............................................. per hour. 

Simulator instructor ...................................................................................... 130 .............................................. per hour. 

Level C or D simulator ................................................................................. 2,000 ........................................... 4-hr simulator event. 

FSTD ............................................................................................................ 400 .............................................. 4-hr simulator event. 

Training pay ................................................................................................. 1,302 ........................................... per month. 

Hotel ............................................................................................................. 90 ................................................ per day. 

Per diem ...................................................................................................... 45 ................................................ per day. 

Sources: 

1. Pay rates incorporate a benefits factor of 1.302—Employee Benefit Research Institute, www.ebri.org (Benefit FAQs). 

2. Other cost factors—Industry survey and FAA Flight Standards Service. 

TABLE 3—COST PER PILOT OF 7-DAY ATP CERTIFICATION TRAINING PROGRAM

Item Item cost 

Ground school instructor (3 days) ....................................................................................................................................................... $39 

Simulator instructor (four 4-hr events) ................................................................................................................................................. 2,083 

Level C or D simulator (two 4-hr events, 2 pilots) .............................................................................................................................. 2,000 

FSTD (two 4-hr events, two pilots) ...................................................................................................................................................... 400 

Training pay & benefits (7 days) ......................................................................................................................................................... 304 

Hotel (7 days) ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 630 

Per diem (7 days) ................................................................................................................................................................................ 315 

Total Cost per Pilot ....................................................................................................................................................................... 5,771 

Notes: 

1. Ground school class sizes are assumed to average 20 pilots. 

2. Simulator instructor, simulator, and FTD costs reflect the fact that flight training is typically done with two pilots concurrently. 

3. As the FAA anticipates that the training would take place just prior to initial pilot training, there would be no incremental travel costs. 

The FAA uses cost per pilot from 

Table 3 to estimate total and present 

value costs for new pilots over the 

2013–2032 estimation period. (As 

indicated in the section on type rating 

costs below, current pilots without an 

ATP will be able to obtain one at no 

additional cost when fulfilling the 

requirements for a type rating.) The 

FAA estimates the total cost of the ATP 

Certification Training Program over the 

20-year estimation period, 2013–2032 to 

be $443.3 million with present value of 

$196.9 million. 

Cost of an ATP Certificate/Aircraft Type 

Rating 

The rule proposes that all SICs in part 

121 operations hold an aircraft type 

rating for the aircraft flown by August 

2, 2013, the same date that the SICs are 

required to hold an ATP certificate by 

Congressional mandate. The ATP 

practical test standards are the same 

standards used for a type rating 

practical test. Given the statute’s 

requirement for an ATP certificate, the 

incremental cost of the proposed rule’s 

requirement for an aircraft type rating is 

zero. Some current SICs, however, 

already hold the ATP certificate. For 

these pilots, there would be an 

incremental cost for the type rating.7

Because of their close relationship, in 

this section the FAA estimates ATP 

certificate and type rating testing costs 

concurrently. Far more costly, however, 

is the requirement (retained by the 

proposed rule) that an applicant for an 

ATP certificate have a minimum of 

1,500 hours of flight time. A later 

section entitled, ‘‘Cost of the ATP 1,500- 

hour Requirement’’, will show the ATP 

1,500-hour requirement to be orders of 

magnitude more costly than ATP testing 

costs. Table 4 below shows the cost 

factors for the ATP and aircraft type 

rating practical test. 

TABLE 4—COST FACTORS FOR AN ATP CERTIFICATE/AIRCRAFT TYPE RATING

Cost factor Rate Unit 

Ground school instructor ............................................................................. $33 .............................................. per hour. 

Simulator instructor ...................................................................................... 130 .............................................. per hour. 

Check Pilot ................................................................................................... 130 .............................................. per hour. 

Aircrew Program Designee (APD) ............................................................... 143 .............................................. per hour. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 40 / Wednesday, February 29, 2012 / Proposed Rules 12391 

TABLE 4—COST FACTORS FOR AN ATP CERTIFICATE/AIRCRAFT TYPE RATING—Continued 

Cost factor Rate Unit 

Level C or D simulator ................................................................................. 2,000 ........................................... 4-hr event. 

New hire training pay ................................................................................... 1,302 ........................................... per month. 

SIC pilot pay ................................................................................................ 78 ................................................ per hour. 

Hotel ............................................................................................................. 90 ................................................ per day. 

Per diem ...................................................................................................... 45 ................................................ per day. 

ATP written test ........................................................................................... 150 .............................................. per test. 

Sources: 1. Pay rates incorporate a benefits factor of 1.302—Employee Benefit Research Institute, www.ebri.org (Benefit FAQs). 

2. Other cost factors—Industry survey and FAA Flight Standards Service. 

These cost factors are now used to 

estimate the cost per pilot, enabling the 

cost for all affected pilots to be 

estimated. The cost estimation per pilot 

differs considerably between current 

and new SICs, therefore they are 

estimated separately. 

Cost of ATP Certificate/Aircraft Type 

Rating per Pilot—New Pilots 

The FAA believes that the ATP 

practical test/aircraft type rating for new 

pilots would be conducted at the 

conclusion of initial training, so that the 

cost of the ATP/aircraft type rating for 

new pilots would be incremental to the 

initial training costs. Table 5 below 

shows the cost estimates per pilot for 

new pilots: 

TABLE 5—INCREMENTAL COST OF AN ATP CERTIFICATE/AIRCRAFT TYPE RATING PER PILOT FOR NEW PILOTS

Item Item cost 

Level C or D simulator for flight training (4-hr event, 2 pilots—two hours each) ............................................................................... $1,000 

Simulator instructor for flight training (4-hr event, 2 pilots) ................................................................................................................. 260 

Incremental cost of type rating/ATP ‘‘Check ride’’ (Incremental cost of APD) ................................................................................... 52 

Training pay & benefits (1 day) ........................................................................................................................................................... 43 

Hotel (negotiated rate) (1 day) ............................................................................................................................................................ 90 

Per diem (1 day) .................................................................................................................................................................................. 45 

ATP written test ................................................................................................................................................................................... 150 

Total .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 1,641 

Note: Column sums may be off one or more units from totals owing to rounding. 

As summarized in the table, the FAA 

estimates that after initial training, 

pilots need two additional hours of 

simulator training to be prepared to take 

the aircraft type rating check ride 

(practical test). The same check ride 

qualifies as the practical test for the ATP 

certificate so the pilots will qualify for 

both the aircraft type rating and an ATP 

certificate simultaneously. Since a 

check ride is already required during 

initial training, the incremental cost for 

the aircraft type rating/ATP check ride 

is just the incremental salary and 

benefits of the Aircrew Program 

Designee (APD) required to conduct an 

aircraft type rating or ATP practical test, 

compared to a check airman. The cost 

of the ATP written test is included here 

as it would be required for the ATP 

practical test. 

Cost of an ATP Certificate/Aircraft Type 

Rating per Pilot for Current SICs 

The FAA believes that the aircraft 

type rating for current SICs would be 

conducted most efficiently at the 

conclusion of recurrent training, so that 

the cost of type rating current SICs 

would be incremental to the cost of 

recurrent training. Table 6 below shows 

our cost estimates per pilot for current 

SICs: 

TABLE 6—INCREMENTAL COST OF AN ATP CERTIFICATE/AIRCRAFT TYPE RATING PER PILOT FOR CURRENT PILOTS

Item Item cost 

Ground school instructor (2 days) ....................................................................................................................................................... $26 

Level C or D simulator for flight training (Two 4-hr events, 2 pilots—4 hours each) ......................................................................... 2,000 

Simulator instructor for flight training (Two 4-hr events, 2 pilots) ....................................................................................................... 521 

Incremental cost of Level C or D simulator for ‘‘Check ride’’ for type rating/ATP (4-hr event) .......................................................... 1,000 

Incremental cost of type rating/ATP ‘‘Check ride’’ (Incremental cost of APD) ................................................................................... 52 

Pilot pay (four 4-hr negotiated ‘‘training days’’) ................................................................................................................................... 1,250 

Hotel (4 days) ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 360 

Per diem (4 days) ................................................................................................................................................................................ 180 

Total .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 5,389 

Notes: 

1. The FAA assumes ground school class sizes to average 20 pilots. 

2. As the FAA anticipates that the aircraft type rating would be conducted at the conclusion of recurrent pilot training, there would be no incremental travel costs. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
12392 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 40 / Wednesday, February 29, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

8The FAA believes that a small percentage of 

new SICs (less than 5%) may leave part 121 

operations prior to upgrading to PIC. By not taking 

this potential attrition into account, the FAA’s cost 

estimates for a type rating/ATP are understated by 

no more than $1.8 million in present value. A 

similar underestimation is made in the analysis for 

existing SICs who do not currently hold a type 

rating. 9Pilots will need one or more additional aircraft 

type ratings as they follow a typical career path 

from a regional airline to a major airline. However, 

the average number of years to upgrade for a major 

airline is more than 10 years, which added to an 

average 7-year regional airline career, is far into the 

future. The low cost of the initial aircraft type 

rating, combined with heavy discounting, indicates 

the cost of future additional aircraft type ratings is 

minimal. 

10A small percentage of SICs also have not passed 

the ATP written exam. The estimated total cost for 

these pilots is minimal. 

As summarized in the table, the FAA 

estimates that current SICs would need 

four hours of simulator training to be 

prepared for the aircraft type rating. The 

check ride for recurrent training is 

typically done with two pilots 

concurrently, whereas the aircraft type 

rating/ATP check ride is conducted 

with one pilot, so the incremental cost 

of a 4-hour simulator event is $2,000 ¥ 

$1,000 = $1,000. The cost estimate does 

not include a charge for the ATP written 

exam as the number of current SICs 

without the ATP written test completed 

is estimated to be minimal. 

Cost of an Aircraft Type Rating/ATP for 

New Part 121 Pilots, 2013–2032 

Under current rules and practice, 

virtually all part 121 pilots eventually 

upgrade to PIC, a position for which an 

aircraft type rating and ATP certificate 

are required. On average this occurs 5 

years into the pilot’s career, often at a 

regional airline. Under the proposed 

rule, a new part 121 pilot will be 

required to have an aircraft type rating 

and an ATP certificate at the beginning 

of his or her career as SIC. Since the 

undiscounted costs are the same under 

the proposed rule as under the current 

rule, the incremental undiscounted cost 

attributable to the proposed rule is zero. 

Nevertheless, there is an incremental 

present value cost stemming from the 

fact that the costs of the aircraft type 

rating would be incurred 5 years earlier 

under the proposed rule.8 This 

incremental cost may be expressed as 

follows: C = PV1¥PV2, where C is the 

incremental present value cost of the 

proposed rule; PV1 is the present value 

cost of the requirement that new SICs 

have an aircraft type rating and an ATP 

certificate immediately upon entering 

into revenue service; and PV2 is the 

present value cost of upgrading in year 

5 under the existing rule. When the 20- 

year cost stream is discounted with the 

usual discount factors and summed, the 

FAA obtains PV1 = $49.9 million, the 

present value cost under the proposed 

rule. When the 20-year cost stream is 

discounted by an additional 5 years, the 

FAA obtains the present value cost, PV2

= $35.6 million. The incremental 

present value cost of the proposed 

aircraft type rating requirement can then 

be calculated as the increase in present 

value cost: $49.9 mil¥$35.6 mil = $14.3 

million.9

Cost of an ATP Certificate/Aircraft Type 

Rating for Current Part 121 Pilots, 2013– 

2032 

First, the cost of an ATP certificate for 

all current pilots without an ATP 

certificate is calculated and then, 

independently, the cost for all current 

pilots without a type rating for the 

airplane flown to obtain an aircraft type 

rating is calculated. As already noted, 

the latter cost will be higher since there 

are fewer current pilots with a type 

rating than with an ATP certificate. The 

difference between the ATP certificate 

cost and the type rating cost will be the 

incremental cost of the proposed rule’s 

type rating requirement for current 

pilots. 

The total cost and present value 

estimates for current pilots for the 

estimation period, 2013–2032, are 

shown in Table 7 below: 

Assumptions 

7% Discount rate 

0.6% Pilot growth rate 

$5,389 Estimated incremental cost of an 

ATP certificate/aircraft type rating for 

current pilots 

9,986 No. of SICs, 2010—regional airlines 

29,594 No. of SICs, 2010—majors & cargo 

airlines 

25.2% of SICs at regional airlines 

85% of SICs without an ATP certificate— 

regionals 

15% of SICs without an ATP certificate— 

majors & cargo airlines 

90% of non-type rated SICs—regionals 

30% of non-type rated SICs—majors & cargo 

airlines 

TABLE 7—COST OF AN ATP CERTIFICATE/AIRCRAFT TYPE RATING FOR CURRENT PART 121 PILOTS

Year 

Number of 

part 121 

SICs 

Number of 

current part 

121 pilots 

w/o an 

ATP cert. 

Total cost of 

an ATP cert. PV Factor PV Cost of an ATP cert. 

PV Factor 

(2.5 yrs 

add’l 

discount) 

PV Cost of 

ATP (2.5 yrs 

add’l 

discount) 

Net PV Cost 

of an ATP 

Cost of an ATP Certificate 

2013 ..................... 40,177 13,161 $70,924,078 0.816 $57,895,174 0.689 $48,885,882 $12,413,978 

Year 

Number of 

part 121 

SICs 

Number of 

current part 

121 pilots 

w/o an aircraft type 

rating 

Total cost of 

an 

aircraft type 

rating 

PV Factor 

PV Cost of an 

aircraft type 

rating 

PV Factor 

(2.5 yrs 

add’l 

discount) 

PV Cost of 

type rating 

(2.5 yrs add’l 

discount) 

Net PV Cost 

of type rating 

Cost of a Type Rating 

2013 ..................... 40,177 18,189 $98,018,226 0.816 $80,012,070 0.689 $67,560,999 $12,451,071 

As noted previously, currently only 

PICs are required to hold an ATP 

certificate and an aircraft type rating for 

the airplane flown in revenue service. 

Based on information provided by 

industry, the FAA estimates that about 

85% of the SICs for regional airlines and 

approximately 15% of the SICs of major 

and cargo airlines do not have an ATP 

certificate. The corresponding figures 

for an aircraft type rating are 90% and 

30%. With the additional estimate of 

25.2% of SICs at regional airlines, more 

than 13,000 current (2013) SICs do not 

have aircraft type ratings.10 As Table 9 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 40 / Wednesday, February 29, 2012 / Proposed Rules 12393 

11 Industry survey. Confirmed by email from Kit 

Darby, President, www.KitDarby.com, Aviation 

Consulting, LLC, Peachtree City, GA, dated 12/18/ 

2010. 

12A graduate of a part 141 pilot school or a part 

142 training center can obtain a commercial license 

with as few as 190 hours of flight time. 

13www.KitDarby.com Aviation Consulting. U.S. 

Airline Pilot Job Market Overview. April 12, 2010. 

Peachtree City, Georgia. 

14The active benefits factor for Colgan Airlines 

and Mesa Airlines is 1.233 and for Delta Airlines 

it is 1.15. Kit Darby Aviation Consulting, pp. 34– 

37. 

shows, we estimate $70.9 million to be 

the total cost to upgrade current SICs 

from commercial certificates to ATP 

certificates. (But, as in the case of new 

pilots, this is the total cost under both 

the current rule and the proposed rule, 

so the incremental total cost is zero.) 

When discounted with the usual 

discount factor, a present value cost of 

$57.9 million is calculated under the 

proposed rule. As in the case of new 

part 121 pilots, however, the 

incremental present value cost owing to 

the proposed requirement that pilots 

must have the ATP certificate 

immediately when in revenue service 

must be calculated. Because the FAA 

has no information on the time in part 

121 service of current SICs without an 

ATP certificate, it is assumed that, on 

average, they have been in service for 

2.5 years and have, on average, 2.5 

additional years to serve as SICs before 

they would upgrade and be required, 

under current rules, to have an ATP 

certificate (and aircraft type rating). As 

the table shows, an additional 2.5 years 

is discounted to obtain the present value 

cost of $48.9 million under the current 

rule. The incremental PV cost of the 

earlier requirement for the aircraft type 

rating is then $57.9 ¥ $48.9 = $9.0 

million. 

The analogous independent 

calculation for the type rating cost 

yields an incremental PV cost of the 

earlier requirement for a type rating to 

be 12.4 million. $12.4 ¥ $9.0 = $3.4 

million is then the incremental net 

present value cost of the proposed rule’s 

requirement for a type rating in addition 

to the statute’s requirement for an ATP 

certificate. 

Cost of an ATP Certificate/Aircraft Type 

Rating for All Part 121 Pilots, 2013– 

2032 

The table below summarizes the cost 

of an ATP certificate/aircraft type rating 

for new and current part 121 pilots: 

TABLE 8—SUMMARY OF ATP CERTIFICATE/TYPE RATING COST FOR ALL

PART 121 PILOTS, 2013–2032 

NPV Cost 

ATP Cost—New Pilots ............... $14 .3 

ATP Cost —Current Pilots w/o 

ATP Certificate ........................ 9 .0 

Cost of ATP Requirement .......... 23 .3 

Cost of Type Rating ................... 3 .4 

Cost of ATP Certificate/Type 

Rating ...................................... 26 .7 

Notes: 

1. ‘‘Cost Current Pilots w/o ATP’’ is the cost 

of providing an ATP certificate (and type rating) to all current pilots with neither. 

2. ‘‘Cost of Type Rating’’ is the cost of type 

rating pilots already holding an ATP certificate. 

Estimated Cost of ATP 1,500–Hour 

Requirement 

As previously noted following the 

Congressional mandate of the Act, the 

proposed rule requires all SICs in part 

121 air carrier operations to have an 

ATP certificate by August 2, 2013. The 

FAA proposes to retain the current 

requirement that ATP holders have at 

least 1,500 hours of total time as a pilot, 

except for a newly created restricted 

privileges ATP certificate under which 

(1) pilots with military training would 

require only 750 hours of flight time and 

(2) pilots with an aviation-related 

bachelor degree, who also obtained their 

commercial pilot certificate with 

instrument rating from an affiliated part 

141 pilot school, would require only 

1,000 hours of flight time. Holders of a 

restricted privileges ATP certificate 

would be allowed to operate as SICs 

only in part 121 operations and would 

be required to be at least 21 years old 

and hold a first class medical certificate. 

In this section the cost of the increase 

in flight time that the ATP certificate 

requirement will entail is estimated. 

Only the cost for new pilots is 

estimated, as, given the depressed hiring 

environment for pilots in 2009 and 

2010, the number of pilots currently 

with less than 1,500 hours appears to be 

small 11, with corresponding minimal 

costs. For the future, the effect of the 

requirement would be to delay the 

careers of pilots in part 121 operations, 

so the cost of the increased flight hour 

requirement can be estimated by the 

reduced salary and benefits that the 

requirement engenders. From a social 

point of view, the reduced salary and 

benefits reflects the loss of pilot 

productivity the 1,500-hour restriction 

brings about by delaying the entrance of 

pilots into part 121 operations and, 

consequently, delaying their career 

path. 

A common career path of a pilot in 

part 121 operations is to start out as an 

SIC (first officer) in a regional airline, 

upgrade to PIC (captain) at that airline 

and, subsequently, to become an SIC 

and a PIC at a major airline. Based on 

a survey of industry, the FAA estimates 

the career path of a ‘‘typical’’ pilot in 

part 121 operations as follows: Upgrade 

to regional airline PIC after five years, 

move to a position as SIC at a major 

airline after two years as PIC at the 

regional airline, and upgrade to PIC at 

the major airline after an additional ten 

years. Under current regulations, a pilot 

is eligible for part 121 operations with 

a commercial pilot’s license, which 

requires just 250 hours of flight time.12

There is considerable cross-sectional 

variation in the hiring minimums of 

regional airlines, but the average total 

hours minimum appears to be about 750 

hours. The number of flight hours the 

FAA assumes pilots can accumulate in 

one year is also about 750 hours. 

Accordingly, the FAA estimates that the 

proposed requirement for an ATP 

certificate with 1,500 hours of flight 

time would, on average, delay a new 

pilot’s part 121 career approximately 

one year. As pilots with an aviationrelated bachelor’s degree, who also 

received their commercial pilot 

certificate with instrument rating from 

an affiliated part 141 pilot school, 

would be allowed to hold the restricted 

privileges ATP certificate with 1,000 

hours, the FAA estimates that their 

careers will be delayed by only onethird of a year. The part 121 careers of 

Air Force, Navy, and Marine pilots 

appear not to be delayed by the 

proposed rule, as these pilots appear to 

typically have more than 1,500 hours of 

flight time when leaving the service, so 

they will be eligible for the unrestricted 

ATP certificate. Army pilots typically 

have at least 750 hours of flight time 

when leaving the military, so they will 

be immediately eligible for the restricted 

privileges ATP certificate under the 

proposed rule. 

In order to calculate the cost of the 

ATP certificate 1,500-hour requirement, 

the FAA calculates the earnings and 

active benefits of a typical pilot in part 

121 operations in a 35-year career and 

then calculates the loss in earnings and 

active benefits caused by the effect of 

the hours requirements in delaying that 

career. The regional airline earnings are 

estimated by averaging salary and active 

benefits data for Colgan Air and Mesa 

Airlines, as this provides a median 

estimate for the regional airlines 

included in a recent study.13 The major 

airline earnings are estimated using 

salary and active benefits data for Delta 

Airlines as this was the median airline 

in the same study.14 (Retirement 

benefits were not included as they 

greatly complicate the analysis with 

little effect on present value.) As pilots’ 

salaries differ by type of airplane flown 

(as well as by airline), an average salary 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
12394 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 40 / Wednesday, February 29, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

15 Kit Darby Aviation Consulting, pp. 26–27. 

16Estimating the cost of a one-year delay is 

straightforward. For the year of delay, the FAA 

assumed the pilot is accumulating hours at the rate 

of 750 hours/year as a commercial pilot. The FAA 

assumed the pilot will earn the same salary as a 

commercial pilot as he or she will in their first year 

as a regional airline SIC. 

17To calculate the cost of a one-third year delay, 

the FAA assumed that delayed pilots are paid for 

1⁄3 of a year as commercial pilot. All other cash 

flows are identical to those of the undelayed pilot, 

with the exception of the last year when the pilot 

retires at age 65 two-thirds of the way through the 

35th pay year. 

18Federal Aviation Administration. Office of 

Accident Investigation and Prevention. ‘‘An 

Assessment of the Effectiveness of Public Law 111– 

216 in Reducing Accident Risk,’’ November 22, 

2010. 

19U.S. DOT, FAA, Aviation Policy & Plans. FAA 

Aerospace Forecast: 2010–2030. Table 5, ‘‘U.S. 

Commercial Air Carriers’ Total Scheduled U.S. 

Passenger Traffic’’, Revenue Passenger Miles, 

System [Domestic + Int’l], Avg Annual Growth, 

2009–2030 

for each airline was calculated as a 

weighted average using the number of 

aircraft of each type as weights. Hourly 

salary data by airline for 2008 were 

obtained from 

www.airlinepilotcentral.com and were 

converted to monthly figures by 

multiplying hourly salary by the 

airline’s average credit hours per 

month.15

Based on a 35-year career, the FAA 

estimated the total cost of a one-year 

delay in a part 121 pilot’s career to be 

$130,298, with a present value cost of 

$67,598.16 The FAA estimated the total 

cost of a one-third year delay in a part 

121 pilot’s career to be $43,433, with a 

present value cost of $21,226.17 In order 

to put these results on a basis 

comparable to the 20-year estimates of 

the other costs and of the estimated 

benefits of this proposed rule, the 

present value cost is annualized to 

$5,221 per year for a one-year delay and 

$1,639 per year for a one-third year 

delay. With these estimates, the FAA 

calculated the total cost of the ATP 

certificate 1,500-hour requirement for 

the estimation period 2013–2032. These 

calculations are shown in Table 11 of 

the initial regulatory evaluation. 

As the table shows, the total cost of 

the ATP 1,500-hour requirement for the 

estimation period, 2013–2032, is about 

$1.6 billion, with present value cost of 

$558.7 million. Since the FAA requires 

1,500 hours for an ATP certificate, and 

the requirement to hold an ATP 

certificate will take effect whether or not 

a regulation is issued, the costs 

associated with this provision are 

attributable to the statute, not this 

proposed regulation. The FAA further 

notes that this rulemaking contains a 

provision that would permit a pilot to 

obtain a restricted privileges ATP 

certificate at fewer than 1,500 hours. 

This allowance for a restricted 

privileges ATP certificate results in a 

reduction in the costs that would be 

incurred if the default provision of the 

public law went into effect without 

action by this Agency. 

Benefits of This Proposed Rule 

The FAA expects that this proposed 

rule would reduce the number of future 

accidents. The bulk of the benefits of the 

proposed rule, particularly with part 

121 operations, would be the value of 

the averted fatalities and injuries. The 

value of averted fatalities and injuries is 

based on the value of a statistical life, 

which the Office of the Secretary of 

Transportation currently estimates to be 

$6 million. 

Effectiveness of the FOQ Rule in 

Preventing Accidents 

For the 10 fiscal years from 2001 to 

2010, the FAA’s Office of Accident 

Investigation and Prevention (AVP) 

compiled a list of all part 121 accidents 

and part 135 commuter and on-demand 

accidents over that period, along with 

the number of fatalities, the number of 

minor and serious injuries, aircraft 

model, and aircraft damage. From this 

list they determined the accidents that 

would have been affected by the 

proposed rule. AVP assessed that the 

package of requirements of the proposed 

rule would have had a likelihood of 

preventing some of these accidents. 

Based on NTSB accident reports, AVP 

assigned each accident a qualitative 

effectiveness rating and corresponding 

effectiveness score, which represents 

the likelihood that the proposed rule 

would have prevented the accident.18

All scores were reviewed by a 3-person 

panel. The Initial Regulatory Evaluation 

contains a fuller discussion of accidents 

which may have been averted by the 

proposed rule and is available in the 

docket. 

(23) The FAA is seeking comment on 

the effectiveness ratings for each of the 

accidents identified in Appendix 4 of 

the Initial Regulatory Evaluation, which 

is available in the docket. 

Total Benefits of the Proposed Rule 

Table 9 below shows the estimated 

cost of accidents that would have had 

some likelihood of being prevented had 

the proposed rule been in effect in the 

period 2001–2010, taking into account 

30 part 135 accidents as well as the 31 

part 121 accidents: 

TABLE 9—ESTIMATED COST OF FOQ RULE-RELATED ACCIDENTS, FY 2001–2010 

Operations Number of 

accidents Fatalities Serious injuries 

Minor 

injuries 

Full cost of 

fatality/ 

injuries 

($ mil.) 

Full amt of 

AP dmge 

($ mil.) 

Full 

accident 

cost 

($ mil.) 

Wtd Ave. 

rule 

effectiveness 

($ mil.) 

Effective 

accident 

cost 

($ mil.) 

Part 121 ... 31 65 14 37 $409.2 $77.4 $486.6 0.344 $167.4 

Part 135 ... 30 42 14 7 267.0 131.3 398.3 0.297 118.3 

Total .. 61 107 28 44 676.2 208.7 884.9 0.323 285.8 

Notes: Column sums may be off by one or more units from totals owing to rounding. 

For the 61 accidents partially 

attributable to pilot qualification issues, 

over the 10-year sample period the FAA 

estimated the full accident cost to be 

$884.9 million. As the table shows, the 

weighted average effectiveness 

(weighting by full accident cost) for all 

accidents is 0.323. Multiplying this 

figure by the full accident cost yields 

the effective accident cost of $285.8 that 

the FAA estimated to be attributable to 

pilot qualification issues. Appendix 4 of 

the regulatory evaluation shows the 

calculations by individual accident. 

The FAA assumed the chance of an 

accident is equally likely in any year of 

the 10-year estimation period, for an 

average effective cost of $28.58 million 

per year. Without the proposed rule, the 

FAA assumed that effective costs would 

grow at an annual rate of 3.5%, the 

FAA’s forecast average annual growth 

rate for air carrier revenue passenger 

miles for the period, 2009–2030.19 With 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 40 / Wednesday, February 29, 2012 / Proposed Rules 12395 

20What is calculated here is the ‘‘effective’’ 

number of accidents and fatalities avoided since the 

most costly accidents (or, equivalently, the most beneficial avoided accidents) have greater weight in 

determining weighted average effectiveness. 

the proposed rule, these projected costs 

become, as avoided costs, benefits of the 

proposed rule, which are shown for the 

estimation period, 2013–2032 in the 

Table 10 below. 

7% Discount rate 

3.5% Estimated annual growth rate in 

benefits 

20 Number of years of estimation period 

13.880 20-year growing annuity factor 

TABLE 10—ESTIMATED BENEFITS OF PROPOSED RULE, 2013–2032 

2013 Benefits 

($ mil.) 

Benefits, 

2013–2032 

($ mil.) 

20-yr growing 

annuity factor, 

discounted 2 

years 

Present value 

benefits, 

2013–2032 

($ mil.) 

$31.68 .................................................................................................................................... $896.0 12.12335 $384.1 

As the table shows, estimated total 

benefits for the estimation period, 2013– 

2032 are almost $900 million. 

Multiplying the estimated $31.68 

million in benefits for 2013 by the 20- 

year growing annuity factor, discounted 

2 years, yields present value benefits of 

about $384 million. 

The Number of Avoided Accidents and 

Avoided Fatalities 

In this section the FAA calculated 

directly key primary variables 

underlying the expected benefits of the 

proposed rule—the number of accidents 

and the number of fatalities it expects 

the proposed rule to prevent. In Table 

11, the FAA multiplied the sample 

number of part 121 and part 135 

accidents (from Table 9) by their 

corresponding weighted average 

effectiveness rating to obtain the 

expected number of accidents and 

fatalities that would have been 

prevented had the proposed rule been in 

effect.20

TABLE 11—NUMBER OF ACCIDENTS AND FATALITIES PREVENTABLE BY PROPOSED RULE USING 2001–2010 SAMPLE

PERIOD ACCIDENTS

Operations Number of 

accidents Fatalities 

Weighted 

average 

effectiveness 

Expected 

number of 

accidents 

avoided 

Expected 

number of 

fatalities 

avoided 

Part 121 ..................................................................... 31 65 0.344 10.7 22.4 

Part 135 ..................................................................... 30 42 0.297 8.9 12.5 

Total .................................................................... 61 107 0.323 19.7 34.6 

Note: The sum of part 121 and part 135 accidents and fatalities avoided may not equal the ‘‘Total’’ number owing to the weighting scheme 

and/or rounding error. 

In Table 12 the FAA used the average 

number of expected accidents and 

fatalities avoided per year from the 

Table 11 analysis to project the total 

number of accidents and fatalities that, 

with the proposed rule, would be 

prevented over the 20-year estimation 

period, 2013–2032. As with benefits, the 

FAA assumed the number of accidents 

and fatalities would grow at the annual 

rate of 3.5%. Table 12 shows that 61.3 

is the number of accidents that would 

be prevented by the proposed rule over 

the 20-year period, 2013–2032 (33.4 for 

part 121 and 27.9 for part 135). For 

fatalities Table 12 shows that 109.2 is 

the number that would be prevented 

(70.1 for part 121 and 39.1 for part 135). 

TABLE 12—NUMBER OF ACCIDENTS AND FATALITIES AVOIDED UNDER THE PROPOSED RULE, ESTIMATION PERIOD, 2013– 

2032 

Year 

Part 121 

accidents 

avoided 

Part 135 

accidents 

avoided 

Part 121 

fatalities 

avoided 

Part 135 

fatalities 

avoided 

2010 ......................................................................................................... 1.1 0.9 2.2 1.2 

2011 ......................................................................................................... 1.1 0.9 2.3 1.3 

2012 ......................................................................................................... 1.1 1.0 2.4 1.3 

2013 ......................................................................................................... 1.2 1.0 2.5 1.4 

2014 ......................................................................................................... 1.2 1.0 2.6 1.4 

2015 ......................................................................................................... 1.3 1.1 2.7 1.5 

2016 ......................................................................................................... 1.3 1.1 2.7 1.5 

2017 ......................................................................................................... 1.4 1.1 2.8 1.6 

2018 ......................................................................................................... 1.4 1.2 2.9 1.6 

2019 ......................................................................................................... 1.5 1.2 3.0 1.7 

2020 ......................................................................................................... 1.5 1.3 3.2 1.8 

2021 ......................................................................................................... 1.6 1.3 3.3 1.8 

2022 ......................................................................................................... 1.6 1.3 3.4 1.9 

2023 ......................................................................................................... 1.7 1.4 3.5 2.0 

2024 ......................................................................................................... 1.7 1.4 3.6 2.0 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
12396 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 40 / Wednesday, February 29, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

21U.S. Small Business Administration. Table of 

Small Business Size Standards Matched to North 

American Industry Classification System Codes, 

July 21, 2006. 

TABLE 12—NUMBER OF ACCIDENTS AND FATALITIES AVOIDED UNDER THE PROPOSED RULE, ESTIMATION PERIOD, 2013– 

2032—Continued 

Year 

Part 121 

accidents 

avoided 

Part 135 

accidents 

avoided 

Part 121 

fatalities 

avoided 

Part 135 

fatalities 

avoided 

2025 ......................................................................................................... 1.8 1.5 3.7 2.1 

2026 ......................................................................................................... 1.8 1.5 3.9 2.2 

2027 ......................................................................................................... 1.9 1.6 4.0 2.2 

2028 ......................................................................................................... 2.0 1.7 4.2 2.3 

2029 ......................................................................................................... 2.1 1.7 4.3 2.4 

2030 ......................................................................................................... 2.1 1.8 4.5 2.5 

2031 ......................................................................................................... 2.2 1.8 4.6 2.6 

2032 ......................................................................................................... 2.3 1.9 4.8 2.7 

Subtotal ............................................................................................. 33.4 27.9 70.1 39.1 

Total ........................................................................................... .......................... 61.4 .......................... 109.2 

Note: Sums may not equal ‘‘Subtotal’’ or ‘‘Total’’ owing to rounding error. 

Initial Regulatory Flexibility 

Determination 

Introduction and Purpose of This 

Analysis 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 

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

principle of regulatory issuance that 

agencies shall endeavor, consistent with 

the objectives of the rule and of 

applicable statutes, to fit regulatory and 

informational requirements to the scale 

of the businesses, organizations, and 

governmental jurisdictions subject to 

regulation. To achieve this principle, 

agencies are required to solicit and 

consider flexible regulatory proposals 

and to explain the rationale for their 

actions to assure that such proposals are 

given serious consideration.’’ The RFA 

covers a wide-range of small entities, 

including small businesses, not-forprofit organizations, and small 

governmental jurisdictions. 

Agencies must perform a review to 

determine whether a 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 

RFA. 

However, if an agency determines that 

a rule is not expected to have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities, 

section 605(b) of the RFA provides that 

the head of the agency may so certify 

and a regulatory flexibility analysis is 

not required. The certification must 

include a statement providing the 

factual basis for this determination, and 

the reasoning should be clear. 

The FAA believes that this proposed 

rule would not have a significant impact 

on a substantial number of small entities 

for the following reason: The annualized 

cost of the proposed rule is less than 

0.5% of operating revenues for all small 

firms that would be affected by the 

proposed rule. 

Reasons Action by the FAA Is Being 

Considered 

The purpose of this proposed rule is 

to meet pilot certification and 

qualification requirements imposed by 

Congress in Sections 216 and 217 of the 

Airline Safety and Federal Aviation 

Extension Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 111– 

216). This Act had its genesis in the 

crash of Colgan Air Flight 3407 that 

occurred in Buffalo, New York, on 

February 12, 2009, destroying the 

airplane, damaging residential homes, 

and resulting in 50 fatalities. 

Objectives of, and Legal Basis for, the 

Proposed Rule 

The FAA’s authority to issue rules on 

aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the 

United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 

106 describes in more detail the scope 

of the agency’s authority. This 

rulemaking is promulgated under the 

authority described in Subtitle VII, Part 

A, subpart III, Section 447. 

Description of the Small Entities to 

Which the Proposed Rule Will Apply 

and an Estimate of Their Number 

The proposed rule would affect small 

firms in part 121, part 135, and part 91, 

subpart K, operations in the following 

North American Industry Classification 

System (NAICS) industries, which 

shows that the Small Business 

Administration (SBA) size standard is 

1,500 employees for all four 

industries.21 The SBA size standard is 

the largest size that a business 

(including its subsidiaries and affiliates) 

may be to remain classified as a small 

business for SBA. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 40 / Wednesday, February 29, 2012 / Proposed Rules 12397 

22www.bts.gov/programs/airline_information/ 

number_of_employees/ 

TABLE 13—SBA SIZE STANDARD FOR NAICS AIR TRANSPORTATION INDUSTRIES

NAICS Code 2002 U.S. NAICS Title SBA Size standard 

481111 ............................................... Scheduled Passenger Air Transportation ...................................................... 1,500 employees. 

481112 ............................................... Scheduled Freight Air Transportation ............................................................ 1,500 employees. 

481211 ............................................... Nonscheduled Chartered Passenger Air Transportation .............................. 1,500 employees. 

481212 ............................................... Nonscheduled Chartered Freight Air Transportation .................................... 1,500 employees. 

As the size standard is identical at 

1500 employees for all four air 

transportation industries, the FAA does 

not attempt to classify each of the 

affected firms into one of these 

industries. The FAA identifies 93 part 

121 air carrier operators, all of which 

would be affected by the proposed rule. 

Using Department of Transportation 

employment data,22 the FAA identified 

32 part 121 operators as large and an 

identical number as small. The FAA 

identified 8 more part 121 operators as 

large, 7 as subsidiaries of a group with 

more than 1,500 employees and 1 

known to be large (UPS). The FAA 

inferred 31 more operators to be small 

on the basis of pilot numbers. The 

largest small part 121 operator has 1,446 

employees and 391 pilots, the largest 

number of pilots for any part 121 

operator identified as small. In terms of 

pilot numbers, the largest operator that 

the FAA inferred to be small had 231 

pilots. So in all, the FAA identified 40 

of the part 121 operators as large and 53 

as small. 

The FAA had no corresponding 

employment data for part 135 and part 

91, subpart K, operators. The largest part 

135 operator, however, had just 55 PICs, 

so the FAA infers that all 1,106 part 135 

operators are small. The FAA also 

identified seven of the eight part 91, 

subpart K, operators as small on the 

basis of pilot numbers, the largest part 

91, subpart K, operator identified as 

small having 378 pilots. 

Description of the Projected Reporting, 

Recordkeeping and Other Compliance 

Requirements of the Proposed Rule 

Reporting and Recordkeeping 

Requirements 

The proposed rule levies 

requirements that must be met by 

certificate holders who wish to offer or 

provide the ATP Certification Training 

Program. While requiring the gathering 

and maintaining of information and, in 

certain cases, the reporting of some of 

that information to the FAA, these 

sections require no additional burdens 

on the certificate holders beyond what 

is currently required by rule or that 

which is currently borne by certificate 

holders in regular practice. Exceptions 

to this are the following: 

a. One time development and 

submission of an ATP Certification 

Training Program to the FAA for 

approval. 

b. One time recordkeeping costs for 

pilot training records pertaining to 

completion of the ATP Certification 

Training Program. 

Other Compliance Requirements 

Consistent with the requirements of 

the Act and based on some of the 

recommendations of the First Officer 

Qualifications Aviation Rulemaking 

Committee (FOQ ARC), this proposed 

rule would require the following: 

1. An ATP certificate for all pilots 

operating in part 121. The proposed 

requirement will retain the 1,500 hours 

total time as a pilot required for an ATP 

certificate but allow an ATP certificate 

with restricted privileges to be held by 

military pilots with 750 hours of flight 

experience and by baccalaureates from 

an aviation program who obtained their 

commercial pilot certificate with 

instrument rating from an affiliated part 

141 pilot school and who have 1,000 

hours of flight experience. The ATP 

with restricted privileges would allow a 

pilot to serve in part 121 air carrier 

operations as an SIC only. A first class 

medical certificate will remain the 

requirement for exercising the privileges 

of an ATP certificate (restricted or 

unrestricted). The minimum age for an 

ATP certificate with restricted privileges 

would be reduced to 21 years of age. 

The current requirement for an ATP 

certificate will remain at 23 years of age. 

2. A minimum of 50 hours of 

multiengine (ME) flight experience. This 

requirement would apply not just to 

pilots serving in part 121 operations, but 

for all pilots who apply for an ATP 

certificate with an airplane category 

multiengine class rating. This would 

include PICs in part 135 air carrier 

operations that require the PIC to hold 

an ATP certificate, and PICs in part 91, 

subpart K, Fractional Ownership 

Programs, which require the PIC to hold 

an ATP certificate. The FOQ ARC also 

recommended 50 hours of multiengine 

time. 

3. An ATP Certification Training 

Program for applicants for an ATP 

certificate with an airplane category 

multiengine class rating or type rating. 

The FOQ ARC made a similar proposal. 

This is a foundational course that the 

FAA believes should be required at the 

certification level to address the gap in 

aeronautical knowledge of a commercial 

pilot and the knowledge a pilot should 

have prior to entering an air carrier 

environment. The course would include 

academic study as well as simulator 

flight training, including training in 

difficult operational conditions. This 

requirement will necessitate changes in 

the ATP knowledge and practical tests. 

In addition to all pilots in part 121 

operations, this requirement would 

apply to PICs in part 135 air carrier 

operations that require the PIC to hold 

an ATP certificate, and PICs in part 91, 

subpart K, Fractional Ownership 

Operations, which require the PIC to 

hold an ATP certificate. 

4. An aircraft type rating for all SICs 

serving in part 121 operations. The FOQ 

ARC made the same recommendation. 

Current part 121 requirements require 

only the PIC to hold an aircraft type 

rating. The FAA has determined that 

this requirement would improve safety 

in part 121 operations by further 

exposing the pilot to an advanced 

multiengine aircraft and a multicrew 

environment. Also the training and 

testing for an aircraft type rating 

requires a pilot to be tested to the same 

standard as the PIC and demonstrate 

proficiency in difficult operational 

conditions, including adverse weather 

and high altitude operations. 

5. A minimum of 1,000 hours in air 

carrier operations to serve as PIC in part 

121 operations. An unintended 

consequence of the Act’s requirement 

for all part 121 pilots to hold an ATP 

certificate is that the natural mentoring 

of SICs may not occur. The 1,000-hour 

requirement would ensure that a pilot 

would have at least one full year of 

relevant operational experience before 

upgrading to PIC. The FAA proposes to 

allow a pilot to count SIC time in part 

121 operations as well as PIC time in 

part 135 operations and in part 91, 

subpart K, Fractional Ownership 

Operations, that require an ATP 

certificate per the operating rule part. 

The FAA estimates that cost will be 

minimal for the requirement of 50 hours 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
12398 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 40 / Wednesday, February 29, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

23 Kit Darby, President, www.KitDarby.com, 

Aviation Consulting, LLC, Peachtree City, GA. 

24As noted in the earlier section entitled ‘‘Total 

Costs and Benefits of This Proposed Rule’’, the costs 

of the 1500-hour requirement are not costs of the 

proposed rule, but rather costs attributable to the 

Airline Safety Act of 2010 since the Act specifically 

requires the Administrator to maintain a minimum 

requirement of 1500 hours for an ATP certificate. 

The same point of course applies for the costs of 

the ATP test. Even including these costs in the 

regulatory flexibility analysis, however, we find 

that the impact of the proposed rule on small firms 

would be minimal. 

25Operating Revenue—www.transtat.bts.gov, Air 

Carrier Financial Reports (Form 41 Financial Data), 

Schedules P1.1 & P1.2. We average for as many of 

the five years of data as is available. 

of ME time for the ATP with an airplane 

category multiengine class rating. As 

noted in the preamble above, 

multiengine hours are typically 

acquired while engaged in other 

commercial aviation activities such as 

flight instruction or part 135 air carrier 

operations on the way to obtaining the 

ATP. Airlines, currently post minimums 

for multiengine time from 50 hours to as 

much as 1,500 hours.23

The FAA also estimates as minimal 

the costs of the requirement that a part 

121 SIC have 1,000 hours of air carrier 

operating experience before upgrade 

from SIC to PIC. According to a survey 

of industry, the average number of years 

to upgrade is about 5 years for operators 

which use regional jet airplanes and/or 

turboprop airplanes (hereafter referred 

to as regional airlines) and more than 10 

years for major airlines. Even without 

air carrier operating experience in part 

135 or part 91, subpart K operations, at 

an average number of 750 flight hours 

a year, an SIC will accumulate the 

required hours in 11⁄3 years. 

The table below summarizes the costs 

of the three remaining requirements: 

TABLE 14—SUMMARY OF COSTS OF THE PROPOSED FOQ RULE—PART 121 OPERATORS 2013–2032 

Regional airlines Major & cargo airlines 

Total cost 

($ mil.) 

PV cost 

($ mil.) 

Total cost 

($ mil.) 

PV cost 

($ mil.) 

ATP Certification Training Program ................................................................................. 104.2 46.1 292.3 129.4 

ATP (Practical Test) ........................................................................................................ .................... 9.5 .................... 13.8 

Type Rating ..................................................................................................................... .................... 1.7 .................... 1.7 

1500-Hour Flight Time Requirement ............................................................................... 1,575.2 558.7 .................... ....................

Total .......................................................................................................................... 1,679.4 616.1 292.3 145.0 

Annualized Cost ($ Millions) ............................................................................................ .................... 58.2 .................... 13.7 

These costs represent 98% of the total 

costs and 97% of the present value costs 

of the rule, as the ATP Certification 

Training Program is the only one of the 

three requirements that affect part 135 

and part 91, subpart K operators as well 

as part 121 operators. Costs are shown 

separately for regional airlines and all 

other airlines because of the strong 

differential impact on regional airlines. 

Costs of the ATP Certification 

Training Program are conservatively 

allocated by the percentage of pilots 

employed by the regional airlines 

(26.3%, 2010) even though the FAA 

believes that the impact of the program 

will fall heavily on the regionals. The 

cost of the ATP practical test and type 

rating for new pilots is allocated on the 

same basis. For current pilots, the cost 

of the ATP practical test and type rating 

is calculated separately for the regionals 

and the major and cargo airlines because 

the regionals have high percentages of 

SICs without ATP certificates (85%) and 

type ratings (90%), whereas the major 

and cargo airlines have correspondingly 

low percentages (15%, 30%). The FAA 

allocates all of the costs of the ATP 

1500-hour requirement to the regional 

airlines as almost all major and cargo 

airlines have currently (and 

traditionally) minimum hiring 

requirements of at least 1500 hours of 

flight time.24

Economic Impact on Small Entities 

Table 14 shows the annualized cost of 

the proposed rule to be $58.2 million for 

regional airlines and $13.7 million for 

major and cargo airlines. (These costs 

include the costs of the 1500-hour 

requirement that we attribute to the 

statute, not the rule.) In order to assess 

the economic impact of the proposed 

rule on small firms, the FAA allocates 

these annualized costs to small firms on 

the basis of pilot numbers and calculate 

small firms’ annualized costs as a 

percentage of the firms’ average 5-year, 

2005–2009 operating revenues.25 Of the 

31 regional airlines, 10 are classified as 

small, but the FAA has operating 

revenue data for only one small regional 

airline, the economic impact for which 

is just 0.43%. For the 36 non-regional 

small firms for which the FAA has 

operating revenue data, the economic 

impact ranges from 0.00% to 0.08%. 

For part 135 operators, the FAA has 

operating revenue data for only three 

firms, but as measured by number of 

PICs they encompass almost the entire 

size range of these operators (4 to 45 

PICs). The economic impact on these 

firms is zero to at least two decimal 

places (0.00%). Similar results could be 

expected for part 91, subpart K, 

operators were data available. 

Based on these economic impact 

results, the FAA concludes that the 

proposed rule would not have a 

significant impact on a substantial 

number of firms. Therefore, the FAA 

certifies this proposed rule, if 

promulgated, would not have a 

significant impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. The FAA 

solicits comments regarding this 

determination. Specifically, the FAA 

requests comments on whether the 

proposed rule creates any specific 

compliance costs unique to small 

entities. Please provide detailed 

economic analysis to support any cost 

claims. The FAA also invites comments 

regarding other small entity concerns 

with respect to the proposed rule. 

Duplicative, Overlapping or Conflicting 

Federal Rules 

There are no current Federal rules 

that duplicate, overlap, or conflict with 

this proposed certification rule. The 

FAA acknowledges that there are 

concurrent rulemaking initiatives which 

involve pilot training that have some 

overlap. While this rule is a certification 

training rule, not a part 121 training 

rule, it does propose some aeronautical 

knowledge requirements for an ATP 

certificate that are also found in the 

proposed air carrier training 

requirements, which the FAA intends to 

allow for some relief in the air carrier 

training. The proposed ATP certification 

requirements have a broader scope and 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 40 / Wednesday, February 29, 2012 / Proposed Rules 12399 

applicability beyond those pilots who 

are flying only in air carrier operations. 

The concepts to be learned at the 

certification level will be a pilot’s first 

exposure and will enable a knowledge 

base to be established. For those pilots 

that then choose to enter air carrier 

operations, the air carrier training 

program can focus on building on those 

concepts with information for their 

specific operation and aircraft type. 

The proposed training rules 

referenced in the previous paragraph 

include a proposal to address pilot 

mentoring requirements required by 

Public Law 111–216 and an SNPRM for 

Qualification, Service, and Use of 

Crewmembers and Aircraft Dispatchers 

that proposes to amend the training 

requirements for crewmember and 

aircraft dispatcher training programs in 

domestic, flag, and supplemental 

operations. The SNPRM incorporates 

specific training areas identified in 

Public Law 111–216 as well. The FAA 

acknowledges that the requirements for 

these proposals must be coordinated 

prior to the issuance of any final rules. 

Alternatives to the Proposed Rule 

The FAA considered a number of 

alternatives to come up with the best 

proposal that will improve safety, meet 

pilot certification and qualification 

requirements imposed by Congress in 

Sections 216 and 217 of the Airline 

Safety and Federal Aviation Extension 

Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 111–216), and be 

reasonable in cost. A discussion of the 

alternatives for each of the provisions 

follows. 

Section 216 requires all pilots in part 

121 operations to hold an ATP 

certificate. This requirement will go into 

effect in August 2013 regardless of FAA 

action and the FAA cannot change 

public law. Therefore, there are no 

alternatives to this requirement. 

Section 216 also requires that all 

flightcrew members in part 121 

operations to ‘‘have appropriate multiengine aircraft flight experience, as 

determined by the Administrator.’’ 

Given the existing regulatory structure 

and the statutory requirement to revise 

the ATP certification requirements in 

Section 217, the FAA determined it was 

most appropriate to require a specific 

amount of time in class of airplane 

(single engine or multiengine) as a 

prerequisite to applying for an ATP 

certificate. The alternative would have 

been to impose an operational 

experience requirement for part 121. 

The FAA believes that 50 hours as a 

minimum is appropriate and not 

unreasonable when compared to the 

total time required of 1,500 hours. Any 

cost associated with this proposal 

would be minimal and would be borne 

by individual pilots rather than small 

entities. 

In addition to the defined multiengine 

hour requirement in the proposal, the 

FAA proposes all SICs hold an aircraft 

type rating in the aircraft to be flown in 

part 121 operations. The FAA 

determined the most effective 

multiengine experience for a part 121 

SIC would be the training required to 

achieve an aircraft type rating in the 

aircraft to be flown in revenue service. 

By requiring an aircraft type rating, the 

SIC would then be trained and checked 

in a multicrew air carrier environment 

to the same standard as the PIC. As 

noted above, the FAA anticipates that 

this provision would impose a minimal 

cost on all regulated entities. 

In Section 217 of the Act, Congress 

directed the FAA ‘‘to modify 

requirements for the issuance of an 

airline transport pilot certificate’’ to 

ensure pilots have specific skills 

including the ability to ‘‘function 

effectively in adverse weather 

conditions’’ and ‘‘function effectively in 

an air carrier operational environment.’’ 

Currently, there are no training 

requirements for the ATP certificate. 

The public law allowed the FAA to 

consider academic training, flight 

training, or operational experience as a 

means of ensuring pilots have the 

identified skills. Given the existing 

regulatory structure and oversight 

capabilities, the FAA determined that 

validating operational experience would 

be overly burdensome on FAA 

inspectors and would require pilots to 

seek difficult operational conditions in 

an aircraft thereby increasing risk. 

Therefore, the FAA chose to do this by 

establishing training requirements for 

the ATP certificate, similar to those 

currently required for other airman 

certificates. 

The FAA is proposing academic and 

flight training requirements and 

evaluation of the pilot on those 

requirements through an enhanced 

knowledge test and practical test. The 

FAA is proposing a structured ATP 

certification training program that 

includes training in FSTDs under parts 

121, 135, 141, or 142 rather than 

permitting instruction to be 

accomplished by certified flight 

instructors (CFIs) under part 61. 

Typically CFIs do not have air carrier 

experience and are not required under 

current regulations to have the 

knowledge that teaching the required 

concepts demands. As such, the FAA 

would have to modify the requirements 

for CFIs in addition to modifying the 

ATP certificate requirements to enable 

CFIs to teach the proposed course. 

The decision to propose the 

structured ATP Certification Training 

Program rather than permitting 

instruction to take place in actual 

aircraft under part 61 was also based on 

the fact that the areas identified in the 

public law are complex and involve 

difficult operational conditions 

including icing and high altitude 

operations. These complex 

environments are most safely trained 

through flight simulation. The FAA 

does not want pilots to seek potentially 

hazardous conditions in multiengine, 

multicrew aircraft just to obtain the 

experience requirements. In addition to 

the safety considerations, the FAA 

believes that the cost that would be 

incurred by pilots who received training 

from CFIs in part 61 would be 

prohibitively expensive due to the level 

of airplane that would be required for 

the training. 

The program hours for the ATP 

Certification Training Program were 

based on an assessment of the quantity 

and complexity of the subject matter. 

The FAA considered as an alternative 

revising the areas of operation listed in 

part 61 for the ATP certificate and 

adding or modifying the questions on 

the ATP knowledge test to include the 

subject areas in the statute. While this 

is a less costly alternative, it does not 

capture the intent of the statute. The 

pilot would not be required to receive 

training in these critical areas and could 

likely get most, if not all, questions on 

those topic areas wrong and still pass 

the written test. 

In addition, Section 217 of the Act 

permits the Administrator to allow 

‘‘specific academic training courses’’ to 

be credited towards the 1,500-hour 

requirement for an ATP certificate if the 

FAA determines that the academic 

courses enhance safety more than full 

compliance with the total hour 

requirement for an ATP certificate. 

While the FAA had the option to not 

propose an allowance for academic 

credit towards the time required for an 

ATP certificate, the FAA believes a 

combination of training and flight 

experience is what makes a candidate 

qualified to fly in part 121 operations. 

The FAA chose to allow credit for 

academic coursework accomplished in 

the military and by students pursuing 

aviation-related majors at four-year 

colleges or universities. There are 

numerous alternate scenarios that could 

be considered here, including different 

levels of credit for academic coursework 

and expanding the credit beyond the 

military and four-year colleges and 

universities. 

An applicant for an ATP certificate 

does not have to acquire any hours in 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
12400 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 40 / Wednesday, February 29, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

air carrier operations. Recognizing the 

potential loss of natural mentoring 

opportunities, the FAA proposed a 

requirement for a pilot to have at least 

1,000 hours of air carrier experience 

prior to serving as PIC in part 121 

operations. This provision is aimed at 

preventing two inexperienced pilots in 

air carrier operations from flying 

together in part 121 operations (e.g. PIC 

and SIC both have 1,500 hours and an 

ATP, but little experience in air carrier 

operations). The FAA could have 

chosen not to include this provision. As 

noted above, the FAA anticipates that 

this provision would impose a minimal 

cost on all regulated entities. 

Initial Trade Impact Assessment 

The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 

(Pub. L. 96–39), as amended by the 

Uruguay Round Agreements Act (Pub. 

L. 103–465), prohibits Federal agencies 

from establishing standards or engaging 

in related activities that create 

unnecessary obstacles to the foreign 

commerce of the United States. 

Pursuant to these Acts, the 

establishment of standards is not 

considered an unnecessary obstacle to 

the foreign commerce of the United 

States, so long as the standard has a 

legitimate domestic objective, such the 

protection of safety, and does not 

operate in a manner that excludes 

imports that meet this objective. The 

statute also requires consideration of 

international standards and, where 

appropriate, that they be the basis for 

U.S. standards. The FAA has assessed 

the potential effect of this proposed rule 

and determined that it would have only 

a domestic impact and therefore would 

not create unnecessary obstacles to the 

foreign commerce of the United States. 

Unfunded Mandates Assessment 

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4) 

requires each Federal agency to prepare 

a written statement assessing the effects 

of any Federal mandate in a proposed or 

final agency rule that may result in an 

expenditure of $100 million or more 

(adjusted annually for inflation with the 

base year 1995) 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 

$140.8 million. 

This proposed rule does not contain 

such a mandate. 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. The 

FAA has 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. 

Environmental Analysis 

FAA Order 1050.1E identifies FAA 

actions that are categorically excluded 

from preparation of an environmental 

assessment or environmental impact 

statement under the National 

Environmental Policy Act in the 

absence of extraordinary circumstances. 

The FAA has determined this proposed 

rulemaking action qualifies for the 

categorical exclusion identified in 

paragraph 308(c) 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). The 

FAA has determined that it is not a 

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under 

the executive order because while it is 

a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under 

Executive Order 12866, and DOT’s 

Regulatory Policies and Procedures, it is 

not likely to have a significant adverse 

effect on the supply, distribution, or use 

of energy. 

Additional Information 

Comments Invited 

The FAA invites interested persons to 

participate in this rulemaking by 

submitting written comments, data, or 

views. The FAA also invites 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 only one time. 

The FAA 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. 

The FAA will consider comments filed 

after the comment period has closed if 

it is possible to do so without incurring 

expense or delay. The FAA may change 

this proposal in light of the comments 

we receive. 

Availability of Rulemaking Documents 

You can get an electronic copy of 

rulemaking documents using the 

Internet by— 

1. Searching the Federal Rulemaking 

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 or notice 

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 

Rulemaking Portal referenced in the 

ADDRESSES section. 

List of Subjects 

14 CFR Part 61 

Aircraft, Airmen, Aviation safety. 

14 CFR Part 121 

Air carriers, Aircraft, Airmen, 

Aviation safety. 

14 CFR Part 135 

Air taxis, Aircraft, Airmen, Aviation 

safety. 

14 CFR Part 141 

Airmen, Educational facilities. 

14 CFR Part 142 

Airmen, Educational facilities. 

The Proposed Amendment 

In consideration of the foregoing, the 

Federal Aviation Administration 

proposes to amend Chapter I of Title 14, 

Code of Federal Regulations, as follows: 

PART 61—CERTIFICATION: PILOTS, 

FLIGHT INSTRUCTORS, AND GROUND 

INSTRUCTORS 

1. The authority citation for part 61 

continues to read as follows: 

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

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

45301–45302. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 40 / Wednesday, February 29, 2012 / Proposed Rules 12401 

2. Amend § 61.1 as follows: 

A. Remove paragraph designations 

(b)(1) through (b)(19); 

B. Add new definitions of Accredited 

and Nationally recognized accrediting 

agency to paragraph (b) in alphabetical 

order to read as set forth below; 

C. Revise paragraph (iii) of the 

definition of Authorized instructor in 

paragraph (b) to read as set forth below; 

The additions and revisions read as 

follows: 

§ 61.1 Applicability and definitions. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

Accredited means the same as defined 

by the Department of Education in 34 

CFR 600.2. 

* * * * * 

Authorized instructor means— 

* * * * * 

(iii) A person authorized by the 

Administrator to provide ground 

training or flight training under part 61, 

121, 135, or 142 of this chapter when 

conducting ground training or flight 

training in accordance with that 

authority. 

* * * * * 

Nationally recognized accrediting 

agency means the same as defined by 

the Department of Education in 34 CFR 

600.2. 

* * * * * 

3. Amend § 61.35 by removing the 

word ‘‘and’’ at the end of paragraph 

(a)(1), redesignating paragraph (a)(2) as 

paragraph (a)(3), and adding a new 

paragraph (a)(2) to read as follows: 

§ 61.35 Knowledge test: Prerequisites and 

passing grades. 

(a) * * * 

(2) After July 31, 2013, for the 

knowledge test for an airline transport 

pilot certificate with an airplane 

category multiengine class rating or type 

rating, a certificate of completion for the 

ATP certification training program 

specified in § 61.154; and 

* * * * * 

4. Amend § 61.39 by revising 

paragraph (b) to read as follows: 

§ 61.39 Prerequisites for practical tests. 

* * * * * 

(b) To be eligible for a practical test 

for an airline transport pilot certificate 

with an airplane category multiengine 

class rating or type rating issued under 

this part, an applicant must: 

(1) After July 31, 2013, complete the 

ATP certification training program 

required by § 61.154; 

(2) Pass the required knowledge test; 

(i) For those applicants who pass the 

knowledge test prior to August 1, 2013, 

those knowledge test results will expire 

on July 31, 2015; 

(ii) For those applicants who pass the 

knowledge test after completing the 

ATP certification training program, the 

knowledge test results will expire 60 

calendar months after the knowledge 

test was successfully completed. 

(3) Present the knowledge test report 

and, if applicable, the certificate of 

completion for the ATP certification 

training program in § 61.154, at the time 

of application for the practical test; 

(4) Have satisfactorily accomplished 

the required training and obtained the 

aeronautical experience prescribed by 

this part for the certificate or rating 

sought; 

(i) If applying for the practical test 

under the aeronautical experience 

requirements of § 61.160(a), the 

applicant must present the documents 

required by that section to substantiate 

eligibility; 

(ii) If applying for the practical test 

under the aeronautical experience 

requirements of § 61.160(b), the 

applicant must present official 

transcripts from an accredited 4-year 

post secondary institution 

substantiating eligibility; 

(5) Hold at least a third-class medical 

certificate, if a medical certificate is 

required; 

(6) Meet the prescribed age 

requirement of this part for the issuance 

of the certificate or rating sought; 

(7) If applying for a type rating to be 

concurrently completed with an airline 

transport pilot certificate, have the 

endorsement required by § 61.157(b) in 

the applicant’s logbook or training 

record; and 

(8) Have a completed and signed 

application form. 

* * * * * 

5. Amend § 61.55 by revising 

paragraph (a) introductory text and by 

removing the phrase ‘‘part 121,’’ from 

paragraph (e) introductory text to read 

as follows: 

§ 61.55 Second-in-command 

qualifications. 

(a) Except for pilots in part 121 

operations after July 31, 2013, a person 

may serve as a second-in-command of 

an aircraft type certificated for more 

than one required pilot flight 

crewmember or in operations requiring 

a second-in-command pilot flight 

crewmember only if that person holds: 

* * * * * 

6. Amend § 61.57 by revising 

paragraph (e)(2) to read as follows: 

§ 61.57 Recent flight experience: Pilot in 

command. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

(2) This section does not apply to a 

pilot in command who is employed by 

an air carrier certificated under part 121 

or 135 and is engaged in a flight 

operation under part 91, 121, or 135 for 

that air carrier if the pilot is in 

compliance with §§ 121.435 or 121.436, 

as applicable, and § 121.439, or 

§§ 135.243 and 135.247 of this chapter, 

as appropriate. 

* * * * * 

7. Amend § 61.71 by redesignating 

paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2) as 

paragraphs (b)(2) and (b)(3), 

respectively, and by adding a new 

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

§ 61.71 Graduates of an approved training 

program other than under this part: Special 

rules. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(1) After July 31, 2013, satisfactorily 

completed the ATP certification training 

program specified in § 61.154. 

* * * * * 

8. Amend § 61.153 as follows: 

A. Revise paragraph (a); 

B. Redesignate paragraphs (e) through 

(h) as paragraphs (f) through (i); and 

C. Add a new paragraph (e). 

The addition and revisions read as 

follows: 

§ 61.153 Eligibility requirements: General. 

* * * * * 

(a) Meet the following age 

requirements: 

(1) For an ATP certificate obtained 

under the aeronautical experience 

requirements of § 61.159, be at least 

23 years of age; or 

(2) For an ATP certificate obtained 

under the aeronautical experience 

requirements of § 61.160, be at least 

21 years of age. 

* * * * * 

(e) After July 31, 2013, for an airline 

transport pilot certificate with an 

airplane category multiengine class 

rating or type rating, receive a certificate 

of completion from an authorized 

training provider certifying completion 

of the ATP certification training 

program specified in § 61.154 before 

applying for the knowledge test required 

by paragraph (g) of this section; 

* * * * * 

9. Add § 61.154 to read as follows: 

§ 61.154 ATP Certification training 

program: Airplane category—multiengine 

class rating or aircraft type rating. 

After July 31, 2013, a person who 

applies for the knowledge test for an 

airline transport pilot certificate with an 

airplane category multiengine class 

rating or an aircraft type rating must 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
12402 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 40 / Wednesday, February 29, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

present a certificate of completion from 

an authorized training provider 

certifying the applicant has completed 

the following training in a course 

approved by the Administrator under 

part 121, 135, 141, or 142 of this 

chapter. 

(a) Academic training. The applicant 

for the knowledge test must receive at 

least 24 hours of classroom instruction 

that includes the following: 

(1) At least 5 hours of instruction on 

high altitude operations, including 

aerodynamics and physiology; 

(2) At least 3 hours of instruction on 

meteorology, including adverse weather 

phenomena and weather radar; and 

(3) At least 12 hours of instruction on 

air carrier operations, including turbine 

engines, transport category aircraft 

performance, automation, 

communications, checklist philosophy, 

and operational control. 

(b) FSTD Training. The applicant for 

the knowledge test must receive at least 

16 hours of training in a flight 

simulation training device qualified 

under part 60 of this chapter that 

represents a multiengine turbine 

airplane. The training must include the 

following: 

(1) At least 8 hours of training in a 

Level C or higher full flight simulator on 

(i) Low energy states/stalls; 

(ii) Upset recovery techniques; and 

(iii) Adverse weather conditions, 

including icing, thunderstorms, and 

crosswinds with gusts; and 

(2) At least 8 hours of training in a 

Level 4 or higher flight training device 

or a full flight simulator on 

(i) Aircraft performance; 

(ii) Navigation; 

(iii) Automation; and 

(iv) Crew resource management. 

10. Amend § 61.155 as follows: 

A. Remove the word ‘‘and’’ after the 

semicolon in paragraph (c)(12); 

B. Remove the period from the end of 

paragraph (c)(13) and add the phrase ‘‘; 

and’’ in its place; and 

C. Add paragraphs (c)(14) and (d). 

The additions read as follows: 

§ 61.155 Aeronautical knowledge. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(14) After July 31, 2013, for airplane 

category multiengine class rating or 

aircraft type rating, the approved 

training course in § 61.154. 

(d) An applicant who successfully 

completes the knowledge test for an 

airline transport pilot certificate with an 

airplane category multiengine class 

rating or aircraft type rating prior to 

August 1, 2013, must successfully 

complete the practical test for that 

category and class by July 31, 2015. An 

applicant who passes the knowledge 

test prior to August 1, 2013, but fails to 

successfully complete the practical test 

by July 31, 2015, must complete the 

ATP certification training program 

specified in § 61.154 and retake the 

knowledge test prior to applying for the 

practical test. 

11. Amend § 61.157 as follows: 

A. Remove the word ‘‘and’’ from after 

the semicolon in paragraph (a)(2)(i); 

B. Remove the period from the end of 

paragraph (a)(2)(ii) and add a semicolon 

in its place; and 

C. Add paragraph (a)(2)(iii). 

The addition reads as follows: 

§ 61.157 Flight proficiency. 

(a) * * * 

(2) * * * 

(iii) After July 31, 2013, if applying for 

an airplane category multiengine class 

rating or aircraft type rating, the training 

requirements of § 61.154. 

* * * * * 

12. Amend § 61.159 as follows: 

A. Redesignate paragraphs (a)(3) 

through (a)(5) as paragraphs (a)(4) 

through (a)(6); 

B. Add a new paragraph (a)(3); 

C. Remove the phrase ‘‘paragraph 

(a)(3)(ii)’’ from newly redesignated 

paragraph (a)(4)(i) and add the phrase 

‘‘paragraph (a)(4)(ii)’’ in its place; and 

D. Remove the phrase ‘‘paragraph 

(a)(3)’’ from newly redesignated 

paragraph (a)(4)(ii) and add the phrase 

‘‘paragraph (a)(4)’’ in its place. 

The addition reads as follows 

§ 61.159 Aeronautical experience: Airplane 

category rating. 

(a) * * * 

(3) 50 hours of flight time in the class 

of aircraft for which the rating is sought. 

An applicant may receive credit for not 

more than 10 hours in a full flight 

simulator that represents the class of 

airplane. 

* * * * * 

13. Add § 61.160 to read as follows: 

§ 61.160 Aeronautical experience: Airplane 

category rating—restricted privileges. 

A person may apply for an airline 

transport pilot certificate with an 

airplane category multiengine class 

rating if they meet the following 

aeronautical experience requirements. 

(a) A person who meets the eligibility 

requirements of § 61.153 and presents 

the evidentiary documents described in 

§ 61.73(h)(1), (2), and (3), may apply for 

an airline transport pilot certificate with 

a minimum of 750 hours of total time 

as a pilot that includes at least: 

(1) 250 hours of cross-country flight 

time. 

(2) 100 hours of night flight time. 

(3) 50 hours of flight time in a 

multiengine airplane. An applicant may 

receive credit for not more than 10 

hours in a simulator that represents a 

multiengine airplane. 

(4) 75 hours of instrument flight time, 

in actual or simulated instrument 

conditions, subject to the following: 

(i) Except as provided in paragraph 

(a)(4)(ii) of this section, an applicant 

may not receive credit for more than a 

total of 25 hours of simulated 

instrument time in a flight simulator or 

flight training device. 

(ii) A maximum of 50 hours of 

training in a flight simulator or flight 

training device may be credited toward 

the instrument flight time requirements 

of paragraph (a)(4) of this section if the 

training was accomplished in a course 

conducted by a training center 

certificated under part 142 of this 

chapter. 

(iii) Training in a flight simulator or 

flight training device must be 

accomplished in a flight simulator or 

flight training device representing an 

airplane. 

(5) 250 hours of flight time in an 

airplane as a pilot in command, or as 

second in command performing the 

duties of pilot in command while under 

the supervision of a pilot in command, 

or any combination thereof, which 

includes at least— 

(i) 100 hours of cross-country flight 

time; and 

(ii) 25 hours of night flight time. 

(6) Not more than 100 hours of the 

total aeronautical experience 

requirements of paragraph (a) of this 

section may be obtained in a flight 

simulator or flight training device that 

represents an airplane, provided the 

aeronautical experience was obtained in 

an approved course conducted by a 

training center certificated under part 

142 of this chapter. 

(b) A person who holds a Bachelor’s 

degree with an aviation major from an 

accredited 4-year postsecondary 

institution, as defined in § 61.1, and 

holds a commercial pilot certificate with 

an airplane category and instrument 

rating obtained from an affiliated part 

141 pilot school may apply for an 

airline transport pilot certificate with a 

minimum of 1,000 hours of total time as 

a pilot that includes at least: 

(1) 325 hours of cross-country flight 

time. 

(2) 100 hours of night flight time. 

(3) 50 hours of flight time in a 

multiengine airplane. An applicant may 

receive credit for not more than 10 

hours in a simulator that represents a 

multiengine airplane. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 40 / Wednesday, February 29, 2012 / Proposed Rules 12403 

(4) 75 hours of instrument flight time, 

in actual or simulated instrument 

conditions, subject to the following: 

(i) Except as provided in paragraph 

(a)(4)(ii) of this section, an applicant 

may not receive credit for more than a 

total of 25 hours of simulated 

instrument time in a flight simulator or 

flight training device. 

(ii) A maximum of 50 hours of 

training in a flight simulator or flight 

training device may be credited toward 

the instrument flight time requirements 

of paragraph (a)(4) of this section if the 

training was accomplished in a course 

conducted by a training center 

certificated under part 142 of this 

chapter. 

(iii) Training in a flight simulator or 

flight training device must be 

accomplished in a flight simulator or 

flight training device, representing an 

airplane. 

(5) 250 hours of flight time in an 

airplane as a pilot in command, or as 

second in command performing the 

duties of pilot in command while under 

the supervision of a pilot in command, 

or any combination thereof, which 

includes at least— 

(i) 100 hours of cross-country flight 

time; and 

(ii) 25 hours of night flight time. 

(6) Not more than 100 hours of the 

total aeronautical experience 

requirements of paragraph (a) of this 

section may be obtained in a flight 

simulator or flight training device that 

represents an airplane, provided the 

aeronautical experience was obtained in 

an approved course conducted by a 

training center certificated under part 

142 of this chapter. 

(c) A person who has performed at 

least 20 night takeoffs and landings to 

a full stop may substitute each 

additional night takeoff and landing to 

a full stop for 1 hour of night flight time 

to satisfy the requirements of paragraph 

(a)(2) of this section; however, not more 

than 25 hours of night flight time may 

be credited in this manner. 

(d) An airline transport pilot 

certificate obtained under this section is 

subject to the pilot in command 

limitations set forth in § 61.168. 

14. Amend § 61.165 as follows: 

A. Revise paragraph (c)(2); 

B. Redesignate paragraphs (c)(3) 

through (c)(5) as paragraphs (c)(4) 

through (c)(6); 

C. Add new paragraph (c)(3); 

D. Remove the phrase ‘‘§ 61.159 of 

this part’’ in newly redesignated 

paragraph (c)(5) and add the phrase 

‘‘§ 61.159 or § 61.160’’ in its place; 

E. Revise paragraph (e) introductory 

text and paragraph (e)(1); 

F. Redesignate paragraph (f) as 

paragraph (g); 

G. Add new paragraph (f); 

H. Remove the phrase ‘‘paragraphs (a) 

through (e)’’ from newly redesignated 

paragraph (g) introductory text and add 

the phrase ‘‘paragraphs (a) through (f)’’ 

in its place; and 

I. Remove the phrase ‘‘paragraph 

(f)(1)’’ from newly redesignated 

paragraph (g)(3) and add the phrase 

‘‘paragraph (g)(1)’’ in its place. 

The revisions and additions read as 

follows: 

§ 61.165 Additional aircraft class category 

and ratings. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(2) After July 31, 2013, successfully 

complete the ATP certification training 

program specified in § 61.154; 

(3) Pass a knowledge test for an 

airplane category multiengine class 

rating or type rating on the aeronautical 

knowledge areas of § 61.155(c); 

* * * * * 

(e) Additional class rating within the 

same aircraft category. Except as 

provided in paragraph (f) of this section, 

a person applying for an airline 

transport pilot certificate with an 

additional class rating who holds an 

airline transport certificate in the same 

aircraft category must— 

(1) Meet the eligibility requirements 

of § 61.153, except paragraph (g) of that 

section; 

* * * * * 

(f) Adding a multiengine class rating 

or type rating to an airline transport 

pilot certificate with a single engine 

class rating. A person applying to add 

a multiengine class rating or airplane 

type rating to an airline transport pilot 

certificate with an airplane category 

single engine class rating must— 

(1) Meet the eligibility requirements 

of § 61.153; 

(2) Pass a required knowledge test on 

the aeronautical knowledge areas of 

§ 61.155(c), as applicable to multiengine 

airplanes; 

(3) Comply with the requirements in 

§ 61.157(b), if applicable; 

(4) Meet the applicable aeronautical 

experience requirements of § 61.159; 

and 

(5) Pass a practical test on the areas 

of operation of § 61.157(e)(2). 

* * * * * 

15. Amend § 61.167 by revising 

paragraph (b) introductory text to read 

as follows: 

§ 61.167 Privileges. 

* * * * * 

(b) A person who holds an airline 

transport pilot certificate and has met 

the aeronautical experience 

requirements of § 61.159 of this part 

may instruct— 

* * * * * 

16. Add § 61.168 to read as follows: 

§ 61.168 Limitations. 

(a) A person who holds an airline 

transport pilot certificate and has not 

satisfied the age requirement of 

§ 61.153(a)(1) and the aeronautical 

experience requirements of § 61.159 

may not act as pilot in command in 

operations under § 91.1053(a)(2)(i) or 

§ 135.243(a)(1) of this chapter, or in any 

operation conducted under part 121 of 

this chapter. 

(b) An airline transport pilot 

certificate issued to a pilot who has not 

satisfied the requirements of § 61.159 

must contain the following limitation, 

‘‘Restricted in accordance with 14 CFR 

61.168(a)’’ and ‘‘Holder does not meet 

the pilot in command aeronautical 

experience requirements of ICAO.’’ 

(c) The pilot is entitled to an airline 

transport pilot certificate without the 

limitation specified in paragraph (b) of 

this section when the applicant presents 

satisfactory evidence of having met the 

aeronautical experience requirements of 

§ 61.159 and the age requirement of 

§ 61.153(a)(1). 

PART 121—OPERATING 

REQUIREMENTS: DOMESTIC, FLAG, 

AND SUPPLEMENTAL OPERATIONS 

17. The authority citation for part 121 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 40119, 

41706, 44101, 44701–44702, 44705, 44709– 

44711, 44713, 44716–44717, 44722, 46105.2. 

18. Amend § 121.403 by adding 

paragraph (c) to read as follows: 

§ 121.403 Training program: Curriculum. 

* * * * * 

(c) Each certificate holder required to 

have a training program under this part 

may elect to provide the training 

required by § 61.154 of this chapter. If 

a certificate holder elects to provide the 

training in § 61.154, that training must 

take place prior to initial training. 

19. Amend § 121.409 by revising 

paragraph (b) introductory text to read 

as follows: 

§ 121.409 Training courses using airplane 

simulators and other training devices. 

* * * * * 

(b) Except for a training course 

approved to satisfy the requirements of 

§ 61.154 of this chapter, a course of 

training in an airplane simulator may be 

included for use as provided in 

§ 121.441 if that course— 

* * * * * 

20. Amend § 121.412 by revising 

paragraphs (c) introductory text and (f) 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
12404 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 40 / Wednesday, February 29, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

introductory text and by adding 

paragraph (h) to read as follows: 

§ 121.412 Qualifications: Flight instructors 

(airplane) and flight instructors (simulator). 

* * * * * 

(c) Except as provided in paragraph 

(h) of this section, no certificate holder 

may use a person, nor may any person 

serve as a flight instructor (simulator) in 

a training program established under 

this subpart, unless, with respect to the 

airplane type involved, that person 

meets the provisions of paragraph (b) of 

this section, or— 

* * * * * 

(f) Except for a training course 

approved to satisfy the requirements of 

§ 61.154 of this chapter, a flight 

instructor (simulator) must accomplish 

the following— 

* * * * * 

(h) A person providing instruction in 

a flight simulation training device in a 

course approved to satisfy the 

requirements of § 61.154 of this chapter 

must hold an airline transport pilot 

certificate with an airplane category 

multiengine class rating, meet the 

aeronautical experience requirements of 

§ 61.159 of this chapter, and have at 

least 2 years of experience as a pilot in 

operations under § 91.1053(a)(2)(i) or 

§ 135.243(a)(1) of this chapter, or in any 

operation conducted under part 121 of 

this chapter. Additionally, instructors 

must have an appropriate aircraft type 

rating for the aircraft that the FSTD 

represents or have received instruction 

from the certificate holder on any 

maneuvers or concepts they will 

demonstrate in the FSTD. 

21. Amend § 121.414 by revising 

paragraph (a) introductory text to read 

as follows: 

§ 121.414 Initial and transition training and 

checking requirements: Flight instructors 

(airplane), Flight instructors (simulator). 

(a) Except for a training course 

approved to satisfy the requirements of 

§ 61.154 of this chapter, no certificate 

holder may use a person nor may any 

person serve as a flight instructor 

unless— 

* * * * * 

22. Add § 121.435 to read as follows: 

§ 121.435 Pilot qualification: Certificate 

and experience requirements. 

(a) No pilot may act as pilot in 

command of an aircraft (or as second in 

command of an aircraft in a flag or 

supplemental operation that requires 

three or more pilots) unless he holds an 

airline transport pilot certificate and an 

appropriate type rating for that aircraft. 

(b) No certificate holder may use nor 

may any pilot act as a pilot in a capacity 

other than those specified in paragraph 

(a) of this section unless the pilot holds 

at least a commercial pilot certificate 

with appropriate category and class 

ratings for the aircraft concerned, and an 

instrument rating. Notwithstanding the 

requirements of § 61.63 (b) and (c) of 

this chapter, a pilot who is currently 

employed by a certificate holder and 

meets applicable training requirements 

of subpart N of this part, and the 

proficiency check requirements of 

§ 121.441, may be issued the 

appropriate category and class ratings 

by presenting proof of compliance with 

those requirements to a Flight Standards 

District Office. 

(c) The requirements of this section 

will expire on July 31, 2013. After that 

date, the requirements of § 121.436 

apply. 

23. Add § 121.436 to read as follows: 

§ 121.436 Pilot qualification: Certificates 

and experience requirements. 

(a) No pilot may act as pilot in 

command of an aircraft unless he holds 

an airline transport pilot certificate, an 

appropriate aircraft type rating for the 

aircraft being flown, and has 1,000 

hours as second in command in part 121 

operations, pilot in command in 

operations under § 91.1053(a)(2)(i) or 

§ 135.243(a)(1) of this chapter, or any 

combination thereof. 

(b) No certificate holder may use nor 

may any pilot act as second in 

command unless the pilot holds an 

airline transport pilot certificate and an 

appropriate aircraft type rating for the 

aircraft being flown. A pilot type rating 

obtained under § 61.55 does not satisfy 

the requirements of this section. 

(c) Compliance with the requirements 

of this section is required by August 1, 

2013. 

§ 121.437 [Removed] 

24. Remove § 121.437. 

Appendix H to Part 121 [Amended] 

25. Amend Appendix H to Part 121 by 

removing the reference ‘‘§ 61.153(g)’’ 

from the last paragraph of the appendix 

and adding the reference ‘‘§ 61.153(h)’’ 

in its place. 

PART 135—OPERATING 

REQUIREMENTS: COMMUTER AND 

ON DEMAND OPERATIONS AND 

RULES GOVERNING PERSON 

ONBOARD SUCH AIRCRAFT 

26. The authority citation for part 135 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 41706, 40113, 

44701–44702, 44705, 44709, 44711–44713, 

44715–44717, 44722, 45101–45105. 

27. Amend § 135.338 by revising 

paragraphs (b) introductory text, (c) 

introductory text, and (f) introductory 

text, and by adding paragraph (h) to 

read as follows: 

§ 135.338 Qualifications: Flight instructors 

(aircraft) and flight instructors (simulator). 

* * * * * 

(b) Except as provided in paragraph 

(h) of this section, no certificate holder 

may use a person, nor may any person 

serve as a flight instructor (aircraft) in a 

training program established under this 

subpart unless, with respect to the type, 

class, or category aircraft involved, that 

person— 

* * * * * 

(c) Except as provided in paragraph 

(h) of this section, no certificate holder 

may use a person, nor may any person 

serve as a flight instructor (simulator) in 

a training program established under 

this subpart, unless, with respect to the 

type, class, or category aircraft involved, 

that person meets the provisions of 

paragraph (b) of this section, or— 

* * * * * 

(f) Except for a training course 

approved to satisfy the requirements of 

§ 61.154 of this chapter, a flight 

instructor (simulator) must accomplish 

the following— 

* * * * * 

(h) A person providing instruction in 

a flight simulation training device in a 

course approved to satisfy the 

requirements of § 61.154 of this chapter 

must hold an airline transport pilot 

certificate with an airplane category 

multiengine class rating, meet the 

aeronautical experience requirements of 

§ 61.159 of this chapter, and have at 

least 2 years of experience as a pilot in 

operations under § 91.1053(a)(2)(i) or 

§ 135.243(a)(1) of this chapter, or in any 

operation conducted under part 121 of 

this chapter. Additionally, instructors 

must have an appropriate aircraft type 

rating for the aircraft that the FSTD 

represents or have received instruction 

from the certificate holder on any 

maneuvers or concepts they will 

demonstrate in the FSTD. 

28. Amend § 135.340 by revising 

paragraph (a) introductory text to read 

as follows: 

§ 135.340 Initial and transition training and 

checking: flight instructors (aircraft), flight 

instructors (simulator). 

(a) Except for a training course 

approved to satisfy the requirements of 

§ 61.154 of this chapter, no certificate 

holder may use a person nor may any 

person serve as a flight instructor 

unless— 

* * * * * 

29. Amend § 135.341 by adding a 

sentence to the end of paragraph (a), 

redesignating paragraphs (c) and (d) as 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 40 / Wednesday, February 29, 2012 / Proposed Rules 12405 

paragraphs (d) and (e), and adding new 

paragraph (c) to read as follows: 

§ 135.341 Pilot and flight attendant 

crewmember training programs. 

(a) * * * This deviation authority 

does not extend to the training provided 

under paragraph (c) of this section. 

* * * * * 

(c) Each certificate holder required to 

have a training program by paragraph (a) 

of this section may elect to provide the 

training required by § 61.154 of this 

chapter. If a certificate holder elects to 

provide the training in § 61.154, that 

training must take place prior to the 

training curriculums set forth in 

paragraph (b) of this section. 

* * * * * 

PART 141—PILOT SCHOOLS 

30. The authority citation for part 141 

continues to read as follows: 

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

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

45301–45302. 

31. Amend § 141.33 by adding 

paragraph (a)(4) to read as follows: 

§ 141.33 Personnel. 

(a) * * * 

(4) For a training course approved by 

the Administrator to satisfy the 

requirements of § 61.154 of this 

chapter— 

(i) Each instructor used for ground 

training must hold an airline transport 

pilot certificate with an airplane 

category multiengine class rating. 

(ii) Each instructor used for training 

in a flight simulation training device 

must hold an airline transport pilot 

certificate with an airplane category 

multiengine class rating, meet the 

aeronautical experience requirements of 

§ 61.159 of this chapter, and have at 

least 2 years of experience as a pilot in 

operations under § 91.1053(a)(2)(i) or 

§ 135.243(a)(1) of this chapter, or in any 

operation conducted under part 121 of 

this chapter. Additionally, instructors 

must have an appropriate aircraft type 

rating for the aircraft that the FSTD 

represents or have received instruction 

from the certificate holder on any 

maneuvers or concepts they will 

demonstrate in the FSTD. 

* * * * * 

32. Amend Appendix E to part 141 by 

revising section 1 to read as follows: 

Appendix E to Part 141—Airline 

Transport Pilot Certification Course 

1. Applicability. (a) Except as provided in 

paragraph (b) of this section, this appendix 

prescribes the minimum curriculum for an 

airline transport pilot certification course 

under this part, for the following ratings: 

(1) Airplane single-engine. 

(2) Airplane multiengine. 

(3) Rotorcraft helicopter. 

(4) Powered-lift. 

(b) In addition to the requirements set forth 

in this appendix, an applicant for an airline 

transport pilot certificate with airplane 

category multiengine class rating must also 

satisfy the training requirements of § 61.154 

of this chapter. 

* * * * * 

PART 142—TRAINING CENTERS 

33. The authority citation for part 142 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 40119, 

44101, 44701–44703, 44705, 44707, 44709– 

44711, 45102–45103, 45301–45302. 

34. Amend § 142.1 by revising 

paragraphs (a) and (b)(2) to read as 

follows: 

§ 142.1 Applicability. 

(a) This subpart prescribes the 

requirements governing the certification 

and operation of training centers. Except 

as provided in paragraph (b) of this 

section, this part provides an alternative 

means to accomplish training required 

by parts 61, 63, 65, 91, 121, 125, 135, 

or 137 of this chapter. 

(b) * * * 

(2) Approved under subpart Y of part 

121 of this chapter, Advanced 

Qualification Programs, for the 

authorization holder’s own employees; 

* * * * * 

35. Amend § 142.3 by revising 

paragraph (3) of the definition of Course 

and the definition of Flight training 

equipment to read as follows: 

§ 142.3 Definitions. 

* * * * * 

Course means— 

* * * * * 

(3) A curriculum, or curriculum 

segment, as defined in subpart Y of part 

121 of this chapter. 

* * * * * 

Flight training equipment means full 

flight simulators, as defined in § 1.1 of 

this chapter, flight training devices, as 

defined in § 1.1 of this chapter, and 

aircraft. 

* * * * * 

36. Amend § 142.47 as follows: 

A. Redesignate paragraphs (a)(3) 

through (a)(5) as paragraphs (a)(4) 

through (a)(6); 

B. Add new paragraph (a)(3); 

C. Add the phrase ‘‘of part 61’’ after 

the words ‘‘subpart H’’ in newly 

redesignated paragraph (a)(4); 

D. Remove the phrase ‘‘paragraph 

(a)(5)(ii)’’ from newly redesignated 

paragraph (a)(6)(i) and add in its place 

the phrase ‘‘paragraphs (a)(6)(ii) and 

(a)(6)(iii)’’; 

E. Remove the phrase ‘‘flight 

simulator or flight training device’’ from 

newly redesignated paragraph (a)(6)(ii) 

and add in its place the phrase ‘‘flight 

simulation training device (FSTD)’’; 

F. Revise newly redesignated 

paragraph (a)(6)(iii); and 

G. Add paragraph (a)(6)(iv). 

The additions and revision read as 

follows: 

§ 142.47 Training center instructor 

eligibility requirements. 

(a) * * * 

(3) For a training course approved by 

the Administrator to satisfy the 

requirements of § 61.154 of this chapter, 

each instructor used for ground training 

must hold an airline transport pilot 

certificate with multiengine class rating. 

* * * * * 

(6) * * * 

(iii) If instructing in an FSTD for a 

curriculum approved under § 61.154 of 

this chapter, holds an airline transport 

pilot certificate with an airplane 

category multiengine class rating, meets 

the aeronautical experience 

requirements of § 61.159 of this chapter, 

and has at least 2 years of experience as 

a pilot in operations under 

§ 91.1053(a)(2)(i) or § 135.243(a)(1) of 

this chapter, or in any operation 

conducted under part 121 of this 

chapter. Additionally, instructors must 

have an appropriate aircraft type rating 

for the aircraft that the FSTD represents 

or have received instruction from the 

certificate holder on any maneuvers or 

concepts they will demonstrate in the 

FSTD; or 

(iv) Is employed as an FSTD 

instructor for a training center providing 

instruction and testing to meet the 

requirements of part 61 of this chapter 

on August 1, 1996. 

* * * * * 

37. Amend § 142.49 by revising 

paragraph (c)(3)(iv) to read as follows: 

§ 142.49 Training center instructor and 

evaluator privileges and limitations. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(3) * * * 

(iv) If instructing or evaluating in an 

aircraft in flight while serving as a 

required crewmember, holds at least a 

valid second class medical certificate; 

and 

* * * * * 

§ 142.55 [Amended] 

38. Amend § 142.55 as follows: 

A. In paragraph (a)(2), remove the 

phrase ‘‘part 187’’ and add in its place 

the phrase ‘‘part 183’’; and 

B. In paragraph (d), remove the phrase 

‘‘SFAR 58’’ and add in its place the 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
12406 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 40 / Wednesday, February 29, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

phrase ‘‘subpart Y of part 121 of this 

chapter’’. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on February 22, 

2012. 

John W. McGraw, 

Deputy Director, Flight Standards Service. 

[FR Doc. 2012–4627 Filed 2–27–12; 4:15 pm] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2