AFS

- 13

- 571

- E Exemption No. 11386

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION WASHINGTON, DC 20591

In the matter of the petition of

MR. WILLIAM G. OGILVIE Regulatory Docket No. FAA

- 2013

- 0 861

for an exemption from § 141.33(a )( 4 ) (ii) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations

DENIAL OF EXEMPTION

By letter dated September 25 , 2013, M r

. William G. Ogilvie

, 2423 Beacon Drive

, Salt Lake City, UT 84108 petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for an exemption from § 1 41

. 33 ( a )( 4 ) ( i i) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). The proposed exemption, if granted, would allow Mr. Ogilvie’s prior military flight experience to be substituted for the minimum experience requirements as an instructor for a part 141 pilot

school’s approved airline transport pilot certification training program (ATP CTP)

.

T he petitioner request s reli ef from the following regulation s :

Section 141.33 ( a )( 4 )(i i ) prescribes, in pertinent part

, that a n instructor for a part 141 pilot

school’s approved ATP CTP in § 61.156 must :

(ii) Have at least 2 years of experience as a pilot in command in operations conducted under § 91.1053(a)(2)(i) or § 135.243(a)(1) of this chapter, or as a pilot in command or second in command in any operation conducted under part 121 of this chapter;

The petitioner support s his request with the following information:

Mr. Ogilvi e is a retired United States Air Force Major who has acquired military experience in a multitude of airplanes and airspace as a first officer, captain, and instructor. He holds an FAA airline transport pilot (ATP) certificate with an airplane category, multiengine class rating , and holds commercial pilot privileges for single engine airplanes and gliders. He also holds an FAA flight instructor certificate with glider and airplane categor ies ( single and multiengine class es) , and an instrument airplane ra ting

.2

The petitioner states his military experience is comparable to an instructor with two years of experience as a part 121 first officer, part 91K captain, or part 135 captain. The petitioner supported his statement by providing a brief history of h is assignments and experience.

Mr. Ogilvie noted that while he did not obtain his experience while operating under operations specifications issued by the FAA for part 121 or part 135 operations, his experience was governed by documents of similar nature and scope. Furthermore, he stated

that many of the operations were conducted in accordance with regulations that differed from the FAA’s regulations by title only. The petitioner also stated that his military experience in approach procedures, ATC operat ions, navigation, airspace rules, f l ight duty and rest requirements, flight deck procedures, and transport category airplane flight operations were

similar to those found in civil aviation. The petitioner stated that the FAA has demonstrated willingness t o consider military flying experience as equivalent to civil aviation experience in the past. He provided several examples within 14 CFR and stated that the precedent has been set for awarding civilian equivalency for military experience.

The petitioner stated that one of t he primary responsibilities as the Aircraft Safety Program

Director within the Air Mobility Command Operational Support was the investigation of major aircraft accidents. He asserted that during the investigation of two majo r accidents, he

was able to observe the influences that crew resource management (CRM) would foster

, and

he championed the development of the concept.

Furthermore, the petitioner cited his experience operating aircraft internationally at altitudes

above t he normal cruise ceiling and at maximum endurance speeds. This operation, he stated, was conducted on the edge of the airplane’s capability. Additionally, the petitioner stated that many of the operations that were conducted to move passengers and cargo are similar to

part 121 supplemental air carrier operations.

Mr. Ogilvie is an aviation instructor at Westminster College in Salt Lake City, Utah and has previously instructed at the Utah Valley State College. He has taught courses on large airplane syst ems, flight theory, human factors, meteorology, aircraft certification, advanced aviation physiology, aircraft dispatch procedures, and approved part 141 pilot school ground courses for private, instrument, and commercial certificates including multi

- engin e airplane.

A summary of the petition was published in the Federal Register on November 11 , 2013 (78 FR 67441 )

. The FAA received one comment from an individual who was supportive of granting the exemption.3

The FAA’ s analysis is as follows:

The FAA has fully considered the petitioner ’ s supporting information and the public comment to the petition

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

.

In t he Pilot Certification and Qualification Requirements for Air Carrier Operations f inal

r ule

, 7 8 FR at 42324, 423 4 5

, (July 15, 2013), the FAA addressed the issue of military experience and took it into account in formulating its requirements. The FAA acknowledged

the quality and structure of tra ining acquired by military pilots by permitting a reduction in aeronautical experience towards an ATP certificate with restricted privileges in the airplane

category with multiengine class rating . A military pilot is eligible for this certificate upon

com pletion of a military pilot training program and the accumulation of 750 hours of total time as a pilot . However, the FAA also acknowledged the difference in operating procedures between air carrier operations and military operations since pilots with military experience are still required to complete the ATP CTP in accordance with § 61.156, pass the ATP knowledge test, and pass the ATP practical test ( or an air carrier evaluation that results in the issuance of

an ATP certificate )

. In addition, prior to serving in part 121 operations, military pilots are required to complete an air carrier’s initial training program and pass a proficiency evaluation. Accordingly, a current or former military pilot is still required to demonstrate knowledge of

civilian aviation prior to serving as a pilot in air carrier operations

.

The FAA believes the experience required by part 121, and the pilot in command ( PIC ) experience required by parts 135 1 and 91 2

, do not comparatively relate to military experience since many of the operational functions differ significantly

. Civilian experience is necessary for instructing in a program that bridges the gap between the competencies necessary to

obtain a commercial pilot certificate to the competencies required by that of a pil ot exercising privileges of an ATP certificate in air carrier operations. The concept and structure of the ATP CTP focuses on delivering the academic subjects and applying that knowledge through

scenario

- based training emphasizing how each subject area sp ecifically relates to large turbine airplanes and its use in air carrier operations. T he FAA will only recognize instructors with the required civilian pilot experience as being able to teach the course because only those

instructors can effectively link the academic content of the course to the practical application

of that knowledge in an air carrier environment

, 78 FR at 42337

.

Furthermore, air carrier operational experience for an instructor of the ATP CTP is consistent

with longstanding instructor requirements in other parts of the 14 CFR

. As highlighted in the final rule preamble

, 78 FR at 42337

, while p art 142 training centers are not air carriers, part

142 instructors who provide air carrier training must meet operational experience requirements for part 121 and part 135 instructors. The operational experience is necessary to ensure that each subject s pecifically relates to transport aircraft and their use in air carrier operations. H aving an instructor with air carrier experience is critical to delivering this type of training

.

1 As defined by § 135.243(a)(1)

. 2 As defined by § 91.1053(a)(2)(i)

.4

The FAA notes that the petitioner’s knowledge and experience is invaluable and would be

beneficial in the training and development of prospective ATP certificate holders. Therefore, the petitioner would be an appropriate subject matter expert (SME) instructor for the ATP CTP. The FAA permits SME instructors to deliver content in an ATP CTP in the presence of an instructor with the required air carrier operational experience

. This allows the ATP CTP to

use a SME instructor while ensuring that the material presented is focused toward air carrier operations. Further description of SME utilization in an ATP CTP can be found in FAA Advisory Circular 61

- 138, paragraph 10.

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 i n 49 U.S.C. §§ 106(f), 40113

, and
44701, delegated to me by the Administrator, the petition of Mr. William G. Ogilvie f or an exempt ion from 14 CFR § 141.33(a )( 4 ) (ii) is hereby denied.

Issued in Washington, D

. C

. , on April 16 , 2015.

/s/

John S. Duncan Director, Flight Standards Service