AFS-12-443-E

Exemption No. 10511A

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

WASHINGTON, DC 20591

 

In the matter of the petition of 

 

BLUE RIDGE COMMUNITY

COLLEGE Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2012- 0081

 

for an exemption from 

§ 147.21(b)(1), (2), and (3)

of Title 14, Code of 

Federal Regulations 

 

DENIAL OF PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION

 By letter dated June 15, 2012, Mr. Fred D. Dyen, Coordinator, Blue Ridge Community 

College (BRCC), 43 Aviation Circle, Suite 101, Shenandoah Valley Regional Airport, Weyers 

Cave, Virginia 24486, petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for a 

reconsideration of Denial of Exemption No. 10511, dated April 18, 2012. The proposed 

exemption, if granted, would allow it to redistribute the curriculum hours of its approved 

Aviation Maintenance Technician course curriculum.

The petitioner requests relief from the following regulations:

Section 147.21(b)(1), (2), and (3) prescribes that; (b) The curriculum must offer at least 

the following number of hours of instruction for the rating shown, and the instruction 

unit hour shall not be less than 50 minutes in length—

(1) Airframe—1,150 hours (400 general plus 750 airframe).

(2) Powerplant—1,150 hours (400 general plus 750 powerplant).

(3) Combined airframe and powerplant—1,900 hours (400 general plus 750 airframe 

and 750 powerplant).

The petitioner supports its request with the following information:

The petitioner asserts that the FAA made important factual errors in the denial of the 

original petition and therefore requests reconsideration.
2

The petitioner states that the original denial of exemption was based on the fact that 

reducing the curriculum hours would jeopardize slower learning student’s progress and 

that advances in teaching delivery methods would not offset a reduction in any portion 

of current curriculum requirements of part 147 appendices. 

The petitioner stated that it requested that it be allowed to redistribute the curriculum 

hours of instruction and not an overall reduction of mandated hours. The petitioner 

states the redistribution of hours would not change the number of hours a student is in 

the classroom or the speed at which a student would need to learn the information 

presented.

The requested redistribution is as follows:

§ 147.21(b)(1) Current Requirement Requested Change

General 400 450

Airframe 750 800

Total 1150 1200

§ 147.21(b)(2) Current Requirement Requested Change

General 400 450

Powerplant 750 650

Total 1150 1100

§ 147.21(b)(3) Current Requirement Requested Change

General 400 450

Airframe 750 800

Powerplant 750 650

Total 1900 1900

The petitioner argued that the exemptions, cited by the FAA, in support of denial of 

Exemption No. 10511, are different in several key aspects. The petitioner states those 

petitions, in general, wanted to reduce the curriculum hours. The petitioner restated 

that it is requesting redistribution of curriculum hours and not an overall reduction in 

mandated hours. 

The petitioner stated its appeal also expands on its original assertion that the 

redistribution of hours would help ensure part 147 schools continue to provide industry 

with qualified technicians despite outdated curriculum regulatory requirements. The 

petitioner stated modern delivery methods allow instructors to teach the same material 

in less time.

The petitioner stated that granting the petition would set a precedent and requested a 

summary be published in the Federal Registry for public comment. The petitioner 
3

believes an opportunity for comments would be beneficial to BRCC, the industry and 

the FAA. 

A summary of the petition was published in the Federal Register on July 27, 2012 

(77 FR 44309). One comment was received.

The comment provided by the Aeronautical Repair Station Association (ARSA) agrees 

with the petitioner that the current curriculum requirements mandated under part 147 are 

outdated and hinders AMT schools from providing industry with personnel that are familiar 

with new and changing aircraft technology. ARSA further asserts that by allowing BRCC to 

redistribute mandated curriculum hours would ensure the institution remains competitive with 

industry demands.

The FAA’s analysis is as follows:

The FAA continues to support curriculum enhancements by AMT schools and 

maintains the current regulations allow for such enhancements in teaching levels and 

content without the necessity of redirecting the minimum hourly requirements as 

required by 14 CFR Part 147.21.

The FAA does not agree with the petitioner’s claim that redistribution of course hours 

would not result in an overall reduction in hours specific to a mechanics certificate 

with a powerplant rating. A powerplant rating currently has a curriculum requirement 

for completion of 1,150 hours. The BRCC redistributed hours would result in 

completion of the mechanics certificate general curriculum and powerplant rating in 

1,100 hours. The net result actually reduces the powerplant rating requirements by 

50 hours overall. The petitioner has not shown how a decrease in the instructional 

time for the powerplant portion of the airframe and powerplant mechanic curriculum 

would be in the best interest of the public.

The petitioner has not offered that advances in propulsion systems and smart aircraft 

currently in operation in today’s environment would not also require an actual increase 

in the hours allocated to a powerplant curriculum. On the contrary, the petitioner 

continues to support and request a reduction in this curriculum area without 

justification.

The petitioner asserted that the redistribution of required curriculum hours would have 

a positive impact on its program by allowing it to teach its students technical 

advancements in lieu of other material that can be taught in less time. BRCC has 

failed to show how a redistribution of curriculum hours would provide a level of safety 

equivalent to that required by § 147.21. Further, the petitioner has not described the 

technical advancements it would provide for its students, nor has it identified what 

material could be taught in less time and the justification or basis for these assertions.
4

The FAA maintains that a part 147 school is not prevented or restricted from 

improving its curriculum in order to introduce new technology developments, teach a 

more current and relevant curriculum, permit the use of computers or enhance the 

curriculum, as long as the minimum curriculum requirements are also met.

The FAA has given full consideration to all the facts presented by the petitioner and 

has come to the conclusion the reduction of instructional hours in the powerplant 

curriculum or redistribution of curriculum hours requirements would not be in the 

public’s best interest.

The FAA believes that if the petition were granted, a precedent would be established 

that eventually would lead to the deterioration of the aviation maintenance technician 

school program. The FAA has determined that the relief sought could result in transfer

inconsistencies with other approved part 147 school curriculums for those students 

seeking an airframe or powerplant rating. Further, a reduction of 100 hours in the

powerplant curriculum could have an unintended consequence for a transfer student 

completing the part 147 curriculums in less than the required 1,900 hours minimum 

requirement.

The petitioner has not presented significant additional facts to support justifying a 

redistribution of curriculum hours, nor has BRCC addressed any reduction in teaching 

level requirements currently found in appendix B, C, and or D, as a result of its

proposed redistribution.

The FAA contends we correctly interpreted the request based on current law, 

regulation and precedent setting considerations. 

The FAA’s Decision:

 In consideration of the foregoing, I find that a grant of exemption would not be in the 

public interest. Therefore, pursuant to the authority contained in 49 U.S.C. §§ 40113

and 44701, Blue Ridge Community College’s petition for reconsideration of Denial of 

Exemption No. 10511 from 14 CFR § 147.21(b)(1), (2) and (3) is hereby denied. 

Issued in Washington, D.C., on March 11, 2013. .

/s/

Michael P. Huerta

Administrator