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-2013-0861

 

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, Mr. William G. Ogilvie, 2423 Beacon Drive, Salt Lake 

City, UT 84108 petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for an exemption from

§ 141.33(a)(4)(ii) 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).

The petitioner requests relief from the following regulations:

Section 141.33(a)(4)(ii) prescribes, in pertinent part, that an 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 supports his request with the following information:

Mr. Ogilvie 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 categories (single and 

multiengine classes), and an instrument airplane rating. 
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 his 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 operations, navigation, airspace rules, flight 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 to 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 the 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 major 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 the 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 systems, 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-engine 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 the Pilot Certification and Qualification Requirements for Air Carrier Operations final 

rule, 78 FR at 42324, 42345, (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 training 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 

completion 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 1351 and 912

, 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 pilot 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 specifically relates to large turbine 

airplanes and its use in air carrier operations. The 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 part 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 specifically relates to transport aircraft and their use in air carrier 

operations. Having 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 in 49 U.S.C. §§ 106(f), 40113, and 

44701, delegated to me by the Administrator, the petition of Mr. William G. Ogilvie for an 

exemption 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