U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS I ' '' ' ff " ^ 1 ^ / fi; r% 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 1 ^^ '^J 1^, U 

•;• ir;;; o 

IN THE MATTER OF { , i^AHi W G DOGK E f 

RECURRENT TRAINING CENTER, INC. 

•—a 

FAA DOCKET NO. CP009GL0008 Q 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

i n 

DMS No. FAA-2009-0971 

Complainant's Opening Brief jr 

The Complainant, the FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION ("FAA" or 

"Agency"), hereby files its Opening Brief as required by Judge Goodwin's April 5,2010 Order 

on Motions. The Complainant states as follows: 

I. AGREED STATEMENT OF FACTS* 

1. On September 21, 2009, Respondent, Recurrent Training Centers, Inc., was 

advised through a Final Notice of Proposed Civil Penalty that the FAA proposed 

to assess a civil penalty in the amount of $3,850. 

2. On October 5, 2009, the FAA received Respondent's timely written request for a 

hearing. 

3. Respondent holds and at all times mentioned herein held an Air Agency 

Certificate Number R9KS949K for an approved Provisional Pilot School with a 

'• Special Preparation Courses rating issued by the FAA. 

4. RTC also holds and at all times mentioned herein held Training Center Certificate 

Number R9KX049K with Training Specifications to conduct training courses 

with respect to 14 C.F.R. 142. 

5. On or about January 16, 2008, RTC certified that Mr. VanBerkom successfiilly 

completed an Instrument Proficiency Check and on December 17,2007, RTC 

certified that Mr. Moore successfiilly completed an Instrument Proficiency Check. 

These IPCs were performed in a Flight Training Device ("FTD"), Level 1, 3, or 6. 

c5 

' See Agency Exhibit A-1, Agreed Statement of Facts filed on April 23,2010. 
6. Circling Approaches and Landing from a Straight-in or Circling Approach 

maneuvers cannot be performed with a Flight Training Device ("FTD") Level 1,3 

or 6. 

7. FTD Level 1, 3 and 6 are the FTDs approved for RTC. 

II. ISSUE 

Respondent, Recurrent Training Centers ("RTC"), appeals from the proposed assessment 

of a civil penalty which the FAA issued after finding that RTC was not equipped or authorized to 

perform the above IPCs using Flight Training Devices, as set forth more folly below. 

III. ARGUMENT 

A. All TASKS Contained in the Instrument Rating Practical Test Are 

Required to Successfully Conduct an IPC 

1. The language of 14 CFR § 61.57(d) incorporates the Instrument 

Rating Practical Test requirements. 

The Code of Federal Regulations at 14 CFR § 61.57(d) read as follows at the time of the 

violation: 

Instrument proficiency check. Except as provided in paragraph (e) of this section, a 

person who does not meet the instrument experience requirements of paragraph (c) of this 

section within the prescribed time, or within 6 calendar months after the prescribed time, 

may not serve as pilot in command under IFR or in weather conditions less than the 

minimums prescribed for VFR until that person passes an instrument proficiency check 

consisting of a representative nimiber of tasks required by the instrument rating practical 

test, (emphasis added). 

(1) The instrument proficiency check must be— 

(i) In an aircraft that is appropriate to the aircraft category; 

(ii) For other than a glider, in a flight simulator or flight training device that is 

representative of the aircraft category; or 

(iii)For a glider, in a single-engine airplane or a glider. 

The clear, unambiguous language of §61.57(d) refers to "tasks required by the instrument 

rating practical test," and, therefore, the "instrument rating practical test" is incorporated into 

§61.57(d) by reference. The requirements of the instrument rating practical test become a 
mandatory part of the IPC regulation and these requirements must be concurrently considered to 

properly interpret §61.57(d). 

Furthermore, the introductory page of the Instrument Rating Practical Test Standards 

("PTS"), number FAA-S-8081-4D clearly states, in italic and bold wording, "Adherence to the 

provisions of the regulations and the practical test standards is mandatory for evaluation of 

instrument pilot applicants." (Exhibit A-2, page 2/16)(Note the emphasis in original). The PTS 

additionally states, "Applicants for an instrument proficiency check required by 14 CFR section 

61.57 must perform to the standards of the TASKs listed in the guidance provided on page 16." 

Id. Not only does §61.57(d) specifically incorporate the PTS, but also the PTS' unambiguous, 

strong wording mandates that the PTS be adhered to in order to successfiilly complete an IPC. 

Therefore, the PTS must be analyzed to determine whether RTC violated the regulations. 

2. The Instrument Rating Practical Test Standards, incorporated into 14 

C.F.R. §61.57(d), require minimum TASKS be performed. 

The substantive requirements of the Instrument Rating Practical Test Standards ("PTS"), 

number FAA-S-8081-4D state as follows: 

"... 14 CFR Part 61.57(d) sets forth the requirements for an instrument proficiency 

check. The person giving that check shall use the standards and procedures 

contained in this PTS when administering the check. A representative number of 

tasks, as determined by the examiner/instructor, must be selected to assure the 

competence of the applicant to operate in the IFR environment. As a minimum, the 

applicant must demonstrate the ability to perform the tasks as listed in the above 

chart. The person giving the check should develop scenarios to assess the pilot's 

ADM and risk management skills during the IPD." (Exhibit A-2, page 

2/16)(emphasis added). 

The PTS, incorporated into §61.57(d), require that an instructor ensure the applicant 

demonstrate the ability to perform specific TASKs, or titles of knowledge areas, flight 

procedures, or maneuvers, listed in the PTS chart. Therefore, to comply with §61.5 7(d), an 

instrument proficiency check must satisfy the requirements of the PTS chart. 
The PTS chart, copied below, lists the minimum TASKs required when conducting an 

IPC. (Exhibit A-2, page 2/16). 

ADDITIONAL INSTRUMENT RATING DESIRED' 

AREA 

OF OPERATION 

1 

II 

III 

IV 

V 

VI 

VII 

VIII 

Required TASKS are indicated by either the TASK letter(s) that apply(s) or an indication that all or none of the 

TASKS must be tested. 

lA 

NONE 

A, C 

NONE 

ALL 

NONE 

ALL 

ALL -

ALL 

IH 

NONE 

A,C 

NONE 

ALL 

NONE 

ALL 

ALL** 

ALL 

IPL 

NONE 

A,C 

NONE 

ALL 

NONE 

ALL 

ALL** 

ALL 

IPC 

NONE 

NONE 

0 

B 

ALL 

ALL* 

B, C, D 

ALL 

According to the chart, the required TASK for Area of Operation IV is Task B. The PTS 

at Appendix 1-2, indicates that TASK B refers to "Recovery from Unusual Flight Attitudes." 

(Exhibit A-2, page 3/Appendix 1-2). According to the above chart, the required TASKS for 

Area of Operation VI are ALL TASKS. The PTS at Appendix 1-2, indicates that ALL TASKS 

for Area VI includes Circling Approach and Landing from a Straight-in or Circling Approach. 

Again, the PTS, incorporated into § 61.57(d) clearly state that to successfolly complete an IPC, 

"the applicant must demonstrate the ability to perform the tasks as listed in the above chart." 

(Exhibit A-2, page 2/16). 

Appendix 1 of the Instrument Rating Practical Tests Standard also indicates what TASKs 

are permitted in each type of FTD. (Exhibit A-3, page 3/Appendix 1-2). According to the 

Appendix, and as admitted by Respondent, Recovery from Unusual Flight Attitudes and Circling 

Approaches are not permitted in Level 1 through Level 6 FTDs. Yet, these TASKs are required 

for an IPC in Area of Operation IV and VI. Therefore, Respondent's performance of IPCs in 

FTDs is contrary to the provisions of §61.57(d), which incorporates the Instrument Rating 

Exhibit A-2, page 2/16 
Practical Test Standards or "PTS." Recovery from Unusual Flight Attitudes and Circling 

Approaches cannot be omitted from the "representative tasks" described in §61.57(d) nor can 

they be conducted in Level 1 through Level 6 FTDs. 

Respondent admits that "Circling Approaches and Landing from a Straight-in or Circling 

Approach maneuvers cannot be performed with a FTD Level 1,3 or 6. Level 1, 3 and 6 are the 

FTDs approved for RTC." (See Exhibit A-1). Respondent certified that two airmen successfiilly 

completed IPCs. Id. Section 61.57(d) and the instrument practical test standards require certain 

maneuvers (specifically "Recovery from Unusual Flight Attitudes," "Circling Approach," and 

"Landing from Straight-in or Circling Approach") be completed to successfially complete an 

IPC. 14 C.F.R. 61.57(d); Exhibit A-2, page 2-3. As admitted by Respondent, these required 

maneuvers cannot be performed with a FTD Level 1, 3, or 6, which are the FTDs approved for 

RTC. Therefore, RTC violated 14 C.F.R. §61.57,14 C.F.R. 141.41(b)(3), and 14 C.F.R. 

141.83(a)(1), as set forth in the Complaint. 

3. Recent Change to 14 CFR § 61.57(d) 

As Respondent noted in its Motion for Decision filed March 23, 2010,14 C.F.R. 61.57(d) 

was recently amended. In the version of § 61.57(d) in place at the time of the violation, the 

pertinent portion of the regulation required that "an instrument proficiency check consist[] of a 

representative nuiriber of tasks required by the instrument rating practical test." The regulation, 

revised on October 20,2009, now states that an instrument proficiency check must "consist[] of 

the areas of operation and instrument tasks required in the instrument rating practical test 

standards." 14 C.F.R. § 61.57(d). Respondent attempted to argue in its Motion to Dismiss that 

the amendment to § 61.57(d) "is fiirther evidence that the requirement [to follow the instrument 
rating practical test standards] did not exist prior to the new rulemaking." Respondent's 

argument is flawed. 

The fact that § 61.57(d) has been recently reworded is not evidence of what the regulation 

required at the time of Respondent's alleged violation. The requirement that an IPC consist of 

all TASKs required by the Instrument Rating Practical Test Standards was evident prior to the 

language change in § 61.57(d). The prior version of § 61.57(d) clearly incorporated the 

instrument rating practical test standards which tmdoubtedly mandate that an instrument 

proficiency check applicant "demonstrate the ability to perform the tasks as listed" in the PTS' 

chart. (Exhibit A-2, page 2/16) 

Moreover, the Federal Register, discussing the recent rewording of §61.57(d), labels the 

change as a clarification of when a person must perform an IPC to act as pilot in command under 

instrument flight rules. It does not label the change as a new rule, just now requiring compliance 

with the practical test standards. See Vol. 74 No. 161, pg. 42519, Exhibit A-3. Had the wording 

change been a departure from the prior regulation, now implementing new requirements for an 

IPC, the revision would not be labeled a "clarification." Like the version in place at the time of 

RTC's violation, the new version also requires that an IPC fiilfill the requirements in the 

instrument rating practical test standards. The notes in the Federal Register state: 

"The revision to §61.57(d) concerning the instrument proficiency check does not 

prohibit the use of a flight simulator or flight fraining device for performing an IPC 

check, nor did the proposal in the NPRM propose eliminating use of FS or FTDs for 

performing an IPC. An FS or FTD may be used for accomplishing an IPC if the 

training devise is approved for performing an instrument proficiency check. The 

content of an instrument proficiency check is addressed on page 16 of the 

Instrument Rating Practical Test Standards." Id. (emphasis added). 
Both the prior and current versions of 14 C.F.R. § 61.57(d) require compliance with the 

instrument rating practical test standards. The fact that the regulation was reworded has no effect 

on that requirement and does not support Respondent's argument. 

B. Respondent violated § 141.41(b)(3) and § 141.83(a)(1). 

As discussed above, RTC holds an Air Agency Certificate for an approved Provisional 

Pilot School with a Special Preparation Course rating and a Training Center Certificate with 

Training Specifications to conduct training covirses with respect to 14 C.F.R. Part 142. These 

authorizations, and the approved training course, do not permit RTC to conduct IPCs using FTDs 

that cannot perform required TASKs. 

On August 22,2007, RTC received a Letter of Authorization for the continued use of its 

Level 1 FTD. (Exhibit A-4, page 1-2, attached). This authorization specifically authorizes RTC, 

a Part 141 pilot school, to continue use of the Level 1 FTD accepted or approved by the FAA in 

an FAA-approved flight-training program and/or under 14 CFR Part 61. Id. Under this 

authorization, RTC is permitted to use the Level 1 FTD for specific uses, which includes 

"Section 61.57(d), Instrument Proficiency Check (Excludes Recovery From Unusual Attitudes, 

Circling Approach, and Landing From Straight-in or Circling)." Id (emphasis added). This 

Authorization again illusfrates that RTC is not authorized to conduct these particular maneuvers; 

therefore, imder its certificates and authorizations, it is not capable of successfully completing a 

full IPC, which requires these maneuvers. 

Moreover, on August 22,2007, RTC received another Letter of Authorization for its 

Level 2, 3, and 5 FTDs. (Exhibit A-4, pages 3-5). This authorization specifically authorizes the 

"use of the FTDs... for the purpose of fraining, testing, or checking of maneuvers, procedures, or 

crewmember functions which are listed in the appendices of the following Practical Test 
Standards:...(b) Instrument Rating (Airplane) Practical Test in accordance with FAA-S-8081-

4D, Practical Test." Id. This Authorization clearly requires IPCs to be conducted in compliance 

with the PTS found in FAA-S-8081-4D, which RTC did not adhere to, as outlined above. 

Consequently, Respondent is in violation of 14 C.F.R. § 141.41(b)(3) which provides that 

"each flight training device used to obtain flight fraining credit allowed for flight fraining devices 

in an approved pilot fraining course curriculum must have been evaluated, qualified, and 

approved by the Adminisfrator." Respondent is also in violation of 14 C.F.R. § 141.83(a)(1) 

which requires that Respondent comply with its approved fraining course. By certifying IPCs 

without performing all required TASKS, as evidenced by the inability of the FTDs to complete 

certain TASKS, Respondent violated the Letters of Authorization which are a part of its 

approved training course. 

Even if the IPCs were conducted under Part 61, they were not conducted in accordance 

with § 61.57(d) which requires that the IPC review "a representative number of tasks required by 

the instrument rating practical test." (emphasis added). Therefore, Respondent violated 14 

C.F.R. §61.57,14 C.F.R. 141.41(b)(3), and 14 C.F.R. 141.83(a)(1), as set forth in the Complaint. 

C. The Agency's proposed sanction is appropriate and is within the range 

provided by the Agency's sanction guidance. 

The proposed civil penalty of $3,850 is sustainable for any of the cited alleged violations 

individually and is in accordance with the Agency's Compliance and Enforcement Program as 

outlined in FAA Order 2150.3B, Appendix B, Sanction Guidance Table. (Exhibit A-5, 

attached). 

FAA Order 2150.3B, Appendix B, Sanction Guidance Table, paragraph B-3-d-(7), page 

B-22 provides for a sanction in the range of moderate to maximum civil penalty for unqualified 

or imauthorized instruction. For a small business concern, such as RTC, the Sanction Guidance 

8 
Table sets out the civil penalty range per violation as follows: minimum, $935 to $3,849; 

moderate, $3,840 to $8,249; and maximum, $8,250 to $11,000. The Agency seeks a civil 

penalty of $3,850, which is within the range provided in the Sanction Guidance Table, based on 

any of the cited regulation violations, even when considered independent of one another. 

rV. CONCLUSION 

The Respondent certified that two airman successfiilly completed IPCs using its Flight 

Training Devices; however. Respondent's FTDs do not perform certain maneuvers which are 

required under §61.57(d) and the incorporated instrument rating practical test standards. To 

comply with the requirements of 14 C.F.R. § 61.57(d) and complete an IPC, all of the TASKs 

required by the Instrument Rating Practical Test Standards ("PTS"), number FAA-S-8081-4D 

must be completed. RTC's FTD cannot perform all of the required TASKs. Therefore, 

Respondent has violated 14 C.F.R. 61.57(d), 14 C.F.R. 141.83(a)(1), and 14 C.F.R. 141.41(b)(3). 

The proposed civil penalty of $3,850 is sustainable for any of the cited alleged violations 

individually and is in accordance with the Agency's Compliance and Enforcement Program as 

outiined in FAA Order 2150.3B. 

WHEREFORE, Complainant asserts that there is no genuine issue of material fact 

disputed by the parties and respectfully requests a summary decision on the record be entered 

sustaining the Agency's issuance of a Civil Penalty in the amotmt of $3,850 against Respondent. 

Pursuant to the same arguments above, the Complainant fiirther respectfiilly requests that 

Respondent's Motion for Decision be denied. 
i List of Attached Exhibits 

I 

I Exhibit Number Document Number of Pages 

i A-1 Agreed Statement of Facts 3 

J A-2 Instrument Rating Practical Test Standards FAA-S-8081-4D 3 

I A-3 Federal Register, Vol. 74, No. 161, pages 42500,42518, 3 

I 42519 

I A-4 Letters of Authorization 5 

I A-5 Excerpts fi-om FAA Order 2150.3B 2 

I 

I Dated: May 5,2010 Respectfiilly submitted, 

oA^J^yiS' 

Briaaa^ Martino 

Attorney, AGL-7M 

Federal Aviation Adminisfration 

Office of Regional Counsel 

2300 E. Devon Avenue 

Des Plaines, IL 60018 

Phone:847-294-7313 

FAX: 847-294-7498 

briana.martino@faa. gov 

I 10 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that I have, this date, served the foregoing Complainant's Opening 

Brief by mailing copies thereof, via Regular Mail, as follows 

Original and One Copy 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building, Suite 2W1000 

One Copy 

Charles R. Harnett, III 

Respondent's Counsel 

1664 Moorland Lane 

Crystal Lake, IL 60014-2985 

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin 

Adminisfrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

East Building Ground Floor 

Room E12-320 

Washington, DC 20590 

FAX: 202-366-7536 

Dated this 5'*' day of April, 2010 

11 
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

^ ( 

IN THE MATTER OF 

RECURRENT TRAINING CENTER, INC. 

FAA DOCKET NO. CP009GL0008 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

DMS No. FAA-2009-0971 

Agreed Upon Statement of Facts 

The Complainant, the FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION (hereinafter "FAA" 

or "Agency"), in agreement with the Respondent, RECURRENT TRAINING CENTER, INC. 

(hereinafter "Respondent") hereby submits the below agreed upon Statement of Facts. 

1. On September 21,2009, Respondent, Recurrent Training Centers, Inc., was 

advised through a Final Notice of Proposed Civil Penalty that the FAA proposed 

to assess a civil penalty in the amount of $3,850. 

2. On October 5, 2009, the FAA received Respondent's timely written request for a 

hearing. 

3. Respondent holds and at all times mentioned herein held an Air Agency 

Certificate Number R9KS949K for an approved Provisional Pilot School with a 

Special Preparation Courses rating issued by the FAA. 

4. RTC also holds and at all times mentioned herein held Training Center Certificate 

Number R9KX049K with Training Specifications to conduct training courses 

with respect to 14 C.F.R. 142. 

5. On or about January 16,2008, RTC certified that Mr. VanBerkom successfully 

completed an Instrument Proficiency Check and on December 17,2007, RTC 

certified that Mr. Moore successfully completed an Instrument Proficiency Check. 

These IPCs were performed in a Flight Training Device ("FTD"), Level 1, 3, or 6. 

6. Circling Approaches and Landing from a Sfraight-in or Circling Approach 

maneuvers cannot be performed with a Flight Training Device ("FTD") Level 1,3 

or 6. 

M 
7. FTD Level 1, 3 and 6 are the FTDs approved for RTC. 

Respectfully submitted. Respectfiilly submitted, 

Complainant's Counsel 

(jreall^akes Regioru AGL-7M 

Federal Aviation Administration 

230_0.E._Pevpn Avenue 

Des Plaines,TL 60018 

Phone: 847-294-7313 

FAX: 847-294-7498 

Charles R. Bajpett, £0. 

Respondent's Counsel 

Barnett Law Offices,.P.C^__ 

1664 Moorland Lane 

Crystal Lake, JL-6il014-298 5 

TEL: 815-356-8647 

FAX: 815-356-7042 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that I have, this date, served the foregoing Agreed Upon Statement of 

Facts by mailing copies thereof, via Regular Mail and Facsimile, as follows 

Original and One Copy 

Federal Aviation Adminisfration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building, Suite 2W1000 

FAX: 202-493-5141 

One Copy 

Charles R. Barnett, IH 

Respondent's Counsel 

1664 Moorland Lane 

Crystal Lake, IL 60014-2985 

FAX: 815-356-7042 

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin 

Adminisfrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

East Building Ground Floor 

RoomE12-320 

Washington, DC 20590 

FAX: 202-366-7536 

Dated this Ck' A j day of April, 2010 

Yolanda Quiles 

Legal Technician 
( ( ' 

"U _ 

3 3 - " 

11 

in 

ID 

Tl 

> 

§ 

4^ 

o 

m 

m 

a 

r; 

•n 

m 

o 

O 

m 

33 

> 

r-

> 

z 

m 

o 

o" 

SL 

5" 

CO 

CO 

3 a 

fl) 

Q. 

0) 

till O 

0) 

H 

3} 

C 

m 

33 

z 

o 

S s: if 

• 

00 

o 

09 

5§ 

m H 

> m 

?S m a 

§ ^ o | 

z - g 

HSS. 

CO ® 

s. 

I 

c» 

I 

I 

(g^ 

? 

111 I 

r ? C" - k 9 >* ? 

D i S3 

III 

CO a 3 

il l l 

^ « 

2.g 

® S 

CO " • 

13 

S 3 

§1 

Is if 

t^ 

g l 

— ® 

a> 

It 

3 " 

«Q « 

| | 

Ii 

I" 

o 

It 

3 =>• 

« ffi. 

S g' 

CD Q> 

1° 

|i Ii 

a —I 

P 

as 

> o 

m 5^ 

> o 

0 1 

• n a> it 

i-2 = : 

• C O 

• o 

CD 

cn 

g"?-© > 

(» 0) 

IS 1^8 

S" a- o 

O 

m 

31 

i 

3 

a 2 s s. 3 CO 

stilts. 

5 ». <» ST 3 

0 » 3 ^ S 

t|i'lt 

||if = 

» 

» a s.» 

to n> g 3^ 

flu 

lift 

CO M S± CD S- S- ? CA 

a. 

Ill 

— » — 

3 S 

3.® a S 

^ r^i 3 

"•o f 03= 0 

If II 

«» o-o" — 

-0-- O 0) 

i|8 

!ii 

s " s 

s-i a III 

1 1 1 

(D 

Si 

^ H 5 M 

D 

o 

o 

o 

3 

° si : 

§•©3 0 

af#i I I 5^ Q. =^ ^ • 3 _ £ 

§.s|i: 

lip 

th-a » ss H 

a. -- « a 

3 2 ^ 3- gt o = : J O 

lb ^ CO « - n 

• ^ h* CD n 

O 3 E » 

I 

H 

o 

3 . 

a 

a 

3 

I 

9 o 

o j s a ^"^ a o 

B §:^ a 

f aas 

, § a 

lis 

(D 3 3 

Q. S> 

?«§- « Ii^ = 

2 . » _ j » " 

! ^ tt (B a> 

^ 

\ 16L3 
(' RATING TAsC ABLE 

ADOmONALINSTRUMBNT RATING DESIRED . i 

AREA 

OF 

OPERATION 

Required TA8K8 BIB indicated by either the TASK letter(8) 

that apply(8) or an Indication that all or none dt the TASI<S| 

must be tested. 

• - , 

1 

n 

in 

IV 

V 

VI 

VII 

vin 

>A 

NONE 

A.C 

NONE 

ALL 

NONE 

ALL 

ALL -

ALL 

IH 

NONE 

A C 

NONE 

A U 

NONE 

A U 

ALL" 

Aa 

IPL 

NONE 

A.C 

NONE 

ALL 

NONE 

Aa 

ALLAa 

IPC 

NONE 

NONE 

C 

B 

Aa 

Aa* 

B. C, D 

Aa 

LEGEND 

lA - instrument airplane 

IH - Instmment he!tcopter 

IPL • Instmment powered lift. 

IPC - instrument Proficiency check 

NOTE: Except as noted, all TASKs are required for iniSal issuance of 

an instalment rating. 

* TASK D, Circling Approach, is applicable only to Vne airplane 

category. 

** TASKS B and C are applicable on//to multiengine airplanes. 

Instrument Proficiency Check. U CFR part 61.57(d) sets forth the 

requirements for an instrument proficiency check. The person giving 

that check shedl use the stsmdards and procedures contEuned in this 

PTS when administering the check. A representative number of TASKs, 

as determined tiy the examiner/instructor, must be selected to assure 

the competence of the applicant to operate in tiie IFR environnnent As 

a minimum, the applicant must demonstrate the atiility to perform the 

TASKS as listed in ttie above chart The person giving the check should 

develop scenarios to assess the pilots ADM and risk mEunagement 

skills during the IPC. 

/ 

16 

EXHJBIi: 

n ^ ^ 

i3». 
( 

Appendix 1—Levels of Simulation Devices 

TASK VS. SIMULATION DEVICE CREDIT 

Ewnine n condudino th* instrumsm raflng pracfical tests Mdh ffighi simultflcin dovioes should consult appraptistB doeumenlaiian to 

ensurs that ttw dsvios has bam oppcDvod for trnMng. tastbta. or cheoidns. 71w doeumantatkm for each device slwukt naAect that the 

following adivHias hove occurmd: 

1. the device must be evaluated, detennned to meet the apprapiMe standaids, and assigned the appropriate quaDficatton 

l«val tiy the Noltanal Simulator Progiam Monager. The device must continue to meal quaBRcation standards thnugh continuing svaluattons 

as outbied In the appropriate odvboiy droular (AC). For ^rplane flight training devtoss (FTDs), AC 12(M5 (ss amended), Airplane Rg M 

Training Device Qutlfficaiions. 1MB be used F«r simulators, AC 12(M0 (as amended). Airplane Simulator Ouaim^ 

2. The FAA must approve the device for tiBinino, tasting, and checking the spsdRc tRght TASKS Kstad in this sppendbc. 

3. The device nuntcotiUnue to support the level of studartt or applicampeiformaricerBC|tiiradbyr this ptBCttcsl test stonciard. 

NOTE: IJseis of the foOoMfngchoit are cautkined that use cf the chart alone is Incomplate. The deseriptian and Ot^ective of 00 ^ 

listed In the body of the practical teat standard. Including aB NOTEs, must also be incorporrtad lor accurate simulation device use. 

USE OF CHART 

Credltafala. 

A Creditable If appropriate systems are installed and aperating. 

NOTE: 1. Lsvall FTI>s that have been issued a lettor authorizing their use by the FAA AdmlnistiBtor, may continue to be used only for 

those TASICs originally found acceptable. Use of Level 1,2, or 3 FTDs may not be used for eiicraft lequirlhg a type rating. 

2. If s FTD or a simulator Is used for the pracllcsl test, the Instnmient approach procedures conducted in that FTD or simulator 

are limited to one precisian and one nonprseislon approach procedure. 

3. PostfDght procedures means, closing ITight plans, cheoldng for discreponcieB sixl malfunctions, and noting them on a log or 

maintenance fomt 

Appendix 1-1 FM-S-S081-4D 

FUQIfTTASK 

Areas of Operation 

j»PENDIX\ 

FUGHT SIMULATION DEVICE LEVEL 

2 3 4 5 6 7 A 

A JL A A X 

_ A 

X 

A A 

_ X _ _ JL X 

IL Preflight Procedures 

C. Instnjment Codqait Check * 

lit. Air Traffic Control Clearances and Procedures 

A Air Traffic Control CleaFBnoee * 

B. Departure, En Route arwl Anival Clearances * 

C. Hoidino Procedures 

IV. Right tiy Reference to Inetrufnente 

A Basic instrument Right Maneuvers 

B. l^ecovBiy from UnusuttI Riglrt Attitudes 

V. Navigation Systems 

A intercepting and Tracking l^vigational Systems 

andDMEARCS 

VL instrument Approach Procedures 

A Nonprecision Approach (NPA/ 

B. Predsion Approach (PA) 

C. Missed Approach 

D. Circling Approach 

E. Landing from a Stratght-in or Circling Approach 

VIL Emergency Opwatlons -

A LASS of Communications 

B. One Engine inoperatwe during Straigirt-and-LBvei 

Flight and Turns (Multiengine Airplane) 

C. One Engine Inoperaflve—inSttiiment Approach - ^ ^ 

(MuttienginB Airplane) _ — — — — 

D. Loss of Gyro Altitude aiKl/or Heading indicators 

VIIL PostniBhtProeeduras 

A Cfieeidng Instmrnents and Equipment A X — A 

* Aircraft required for those items that cannot be chedced using a fligfit training device or flight 

** Multiengine - Single Engine 

— Appendix 1-2 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X, 

X 

_ A X _ A X X 

_ _ X _ _ X X 

_ _ X _ _ X X 

- _ _ X _ _ X X 

IT X X _ — X X 

•_ _ X _ — X X 

Z Z Z Z Z X X 

X X 

simulator. 

X 

X 

B 

X X . X X 

X X . X X 

X X . X JJ 

X X . X X 

X X . X J5 

X X . X JS 

X 

X 

X. X Ji 
ua/iu/iuu a u»:4u TAA ^L I IHH i»4 / o r i roL»u 

4250 0 Federal Register/Vol. 74, No. 161/Friday, August 21, 2009/RuIes and Regulations 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Parts 61, 91, and 141 

[Docket No. FAA-2006-26661; Amendment 

Nos. 61-124, 91-309, and 141-12] 

RIN212jO-AI86 

Pilot, Flight Instructor, and Pilot 

School Certification 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMIMARY: This final rule revises the 

training, qualification, certification, and 

operating requirements for pilots, flight 

instructors, ground instructors, and 

pilot schools. These changes are needed 

to clarify, update, and correct our 

existing regulations. These changes are 

intended to update and clarify the 

training and qualifications rules for 

pilots, flight instructors, ground 

instructors, and pilot schools to ensure 

a better understanding of these rules 

that relate to_airsiflfLQpgra.^i9^s in the 

NglioBTtttflrspace System. • ••-..,.^^ 

"^TES: This final rule is effective ) 

October 20, 2009. ^ -'- ^ 

f OR RJRTHEn^MFORI««ntff^CONTACT: John 

• D. Lynch, Certification and General 

Aviation Operations Branch, AFS-810, 

General Aviation and Commercial 

Division, Flight StEtndards Service, 

Federal Aviation Administration, 800 

Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) 

267-3844; e-mail to 

john.d.lynch®faa.gov. For legal 

interpretative questions about this final 

rule, contact: Michael Chase, AGC-240, 

OSice of Chief Counsel, Regulations 

Division, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence 

Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; 

telephone (202) 267-3110; e-mail to 

niiciiaeJ.c/iase®faa,gov. 

Executive Summary '. 

The Federal Aviation Administration 

(FAA) is amending several regulations 

to further our safety nussion, 

incorporate international flight 

standards, and respond to recent 

technological advances In aviation. The 

essence of these interlocking changes is 

pilot, fiight instructor, and pilot school 

certification. The Instruction and 

trEiining taking place in pilot schools is 

for many their first exposure to recent 

aviation, technological, and industry 

changes. For the above reasons, the FAA 

has found it necessary to update, 

correct, and clarify our rules and 

requirements for pilots, flight instructor, 

and pilot school certification. Many of 

our changes reflect and incorporate 

comments and suggestions made by 

trade organizations, fiight schools, 

manufacturers, individual pilots, and 

others. 

On February 7, 2007, the FAA 

published the notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) for airmen 

certification entitled "Pilots, flight 

instructors, ground instructors, and 

pilot schools; training, certification, etnd 

operating requirements" (Notice No, 06 -

20; 72 FR 5806-5854). The NPRM 

follows an earlier final rule amending 

the pilot and fiight instructor 

certification, training, and experience 

rules of part 61 (See 62 FR 16220; April 

4, 1997). Since the 1997 final rule, vie 

determined changes were needed to 

clarify and refine these regulations and 

address prohlems discovered postpublication. We also received a number 

of helpful comments and interpretation 

requests from the pilot, flight instructor, 

and training community. In order to 

make our rule revisions more 

comprehensive, the NPRM included 

changes to 14 CFR part 91 and part 141 

appendices. 

We made two significant proposals in 

the NPRM: The first one details pilot 

and flight instructor training and 

qualifications for night vision goggle 

(NVG) operations; and, the second one 

converts military fiight instructor 

training experience to civilian teaching. 

We also made a number of other 

changes reflected in the following table 

and discussed in the rule preamble. 

The FAA received considerable 

public response to the NPRM. We 

received 1,970 different comments from 

231 commenters. These commenters 

represented a diverse "cross-section" of 

the aviation communify including: 

Commenters who identified themselves 

as actively serving in the United States 

Armed Forces or Armed Forces 

Reserves; flight schools (commercial 

and educational), flight training 

fecilities, or other organizations 

associated with fiight training; aircraft 

manufacturers or aircraft manufacturer 

associations, pilot, aircraft, and 

helicopter ovtmer associations; civil 

aviation associations; and law 

enforcement agencies or organizations 

associated with NVG operations. The 

substantive conunents on both the 

overarching issues and specific rule 

changes are detailed in the "General 

Comments" and "Editorial Comments" 

sections of this preamble. 

Authority for This Rulemaking 

The FAA's authorify to issue rules 

regarding aviation safefy is found in 

Title 49 of the United States Code. 

Subtitle I, § 106 describes the authority 

of the FAA Administrator, including tiie 

authority to issue, rescind, and revise 

regulations. Subtitle VII, Aviation 

Programs, describes in more detail the 

scope of the agency's authority. 

This rulemaking is promiilgated 

under the authority described in 

Subtitle VII, Part A, Chapter 447—Safety 

Regulation. Under § 44701, the FAA is 

charged with promoting safe flight of 

civil aircraft in air commerce by 

prescribing regulations necessary for 

safety. Under § 44703, the FAA issues 

an airman certificate to an individual 

when we find, after investigation, that 

the individual is qualified for, and 

physically able to perform the duties 

related to, the position authorized by 

the certificate. In this final rule, we are 

amending certain training, qualification, 

certification, and operating 

reqiurements for pilots, flight 

instructors, ground instructors, and 

pilot schools. 

These revisions are intended to 

ensure that flight crewmembers have the 

training and qualifications to enable 

them to operate aircraft safely. For this 

reason, these revisions are within the 

scope of our authority and are a 

reasonable and necessary exercise of our 

statutory obligations. 

Sununary Table on the Revisions 

The table below is a listing of the 

changes that are contained in this final 

rule in order of their Code of Federal 

Regulations (CFR) designations. The 

table is organized as follows: The first 

column, identified as "Revision No.," 

refers to the paragraph number in the 

"Description of Revision." portion of 

this preamble where a detailed 

discussion of the revision appears. The 

second column gives the CFR 

designation of the regulation we are 

revising. The third column, identified as 

"Summary of the Revisions," provides a 

brief summary of the revision. 

This final rule revises and makes 

clarifications imder part 61 that pertain 

to pilot, flight instructor, and ground 

instructor certification requirements. 

This final rule revises § 91.205(h) which 

is the rule that establishes the required 

Instruments and equipment for use in 

NVG operations. This final rule also 

revises part 141 and its appendixes, 

which apply to part 141 approved pilot 

schools and provisional pilot schools. 

EXHIBIT 

i2_ 

09/10/2009 THU 09:46 [TX/RX NO 8962] [2002 
09/10/2009 09:41 FAX 217 744 1947 fAA, ijt^l fSUU \ ^ uuo 

42518 Federal Register/Vol. 74, No. 161/Friday, August 21, 2009/Rule s and Regulations 

test standards prescribing recovery from 

unusual attitudes (both nose-high and 

nose-low) is preferable. Another 

commenter noted VNB is not an 

appropriate specification for all aircraft. 

We believe that instnunent currency 

tasks, involving unusual attitude 

recovery parameters are for maintaining 

instrument cxurency and can be 

achieved in aviation training devices. 

We are not revising the instnunent 

currency tasks in aircraft, flight 

simulators, and flight training devices. 

The instrument currency tasks, 

involving unusual attitude recovery 

parameters are for maintaining 

instrument currency in aviation training 

devices, and the FAA believes this task 

is appropriate. 

One commenter asserted that the 

requirements of proposed § 61.57(c)(4) 

include all of the requirements of 

§ 61.57(c)(2) or (3), plus one hour of 

cross country time in the aircraft. In 

other words, a pilot completing the 

requirements of §61.57(c)(4)(iiJ will 

have already met the requirements of 

§ 61.57(c)(2) or (3). The commenter 

argued that § 61.57(c)(4) is redundant 

and should be eliminated. The same 

commenter argued that proposed 

§ 61.57(c)(5) is redundant to 

§ 61.57(c)(3) and should be eliminated. 

Throe commenters noted that the steep 

turns requirement has been removed 

from the instrument rating PTS. Fifteen 

conunenters objected to the proposed 

provision requiring use of a viewlimiting device when using a flight 

simulation device to maintain 

instrument cmrency, because such 

devices can be configured not to provide 

visual cues. The FAA acknowledges the 

comments received about this proposal. 

We are not revising the instrument 

currency tasks. The FAA is allowing 

different means to maintain instrument 

currency and the pilot may use the 

means best suited for his or her needs. 

The FAA also acknowledges the 

conunents received on recommending 

the rule use the terms "basic aviation 

training devices" (BATD) and 

"advanced aviation training devices" 

(AATD). The terms "basic aviation 

training device" (BATD) and "advanced 

aviation training device" (AATD) as 

being aviation training devices (ATD) 

are defined in AC 61-TD "FAA 

Approval of Basic Aviation Training 

Devices and Advanced Aviation 

Training Devices." 

The FAA is allowing different means 

to maintain instnunent currency. The 

pilot may use whatever method best 

suits his or her needs to maintain 

instrument currency by using the actual 

aircraft, flight simulator, flight training 

device, aviation training device, or a 

combination of all. Furthermore, the use 

of flight simulators and flight training 

devices has always been allowed for 

pilots to maintain their instrument 

currency so we are not making new 

rules. ATDs are relatively new; yet the 

FAA has determined that the 

technological advancements of these 

devices make their use for maintaining 

instrument currency also possible. 

Regarding the comment on unusual 

attitude recovery parameters prescribed 

by the proposed rule, we previously 

answered this question this way: 

"Reference §61.51(g)(3)(ii) and 

§ 61.57(c)(1); Provided the person is 

instrument cinrent or is vrithin the 

second 6-calendar month period" (See 

§ 61.57(d) for currency). A person would 

not need a flight instructor or ground 

instructor present when accomplishing 

the approaches, holding, and coinse 

intercepting/tracking tasks of 

§61.57(c){l)(i), (ii), and (iii) in an 

approved flight training device or flight 

simulator. Only when a person is 

required to submit to an instnunent 

proficiency check must a flight 

instructor or ground instructor be 

present. 

The rationale is that a person is not 

required to have a flight instructor or 

ground instructor present when 

performing the approaches, holding, 

and course intercepting/tracking tasks 

in an aircraft If the person is using a 

view-limiting device (i.e., hood device) 

when performing the approaches, 

holding, and course intercepting/ 

tracking tasks in an aircraft, only a 

safety pilot is required to be present. If 

a person is performing approaches, 

holding, and course intercepting/ 

tracking tasks in an aircraft in IMC, it is 

permissible to log the tasks without a 

flight instructor being present. 

Therefore, a person who is instrument 

current or is within the second 6-

calendar month period (See § 61.57(d) 

for currency) need not have a flight 

instructor or ground instructor present 

when accomplishing the approaches, 

holding, and course intercepting/ 

tracking tasks of § 61.57(c)(l)(i), (ii), and 

(iii) in an approved flight training 

device or flight simulator. 

31. This revision of§61.57[d) clarifies 

when a person must perform an 

instrument proficiency check to act as 

the PIC under IFR or in weather 

conditions less than the minima 

prescribed for VFR 

This final rule amends § 61.57(d) to 

clarify when a person, who has not met 

the instrument recent flight experience 

of § 61.57(0), must perform an 

instrument proficiency check to act as 

the PIC imder IFR or in weather 

conditions less than the minima 

prescribed for VFR. Revised § 61.57(d) 

requires a pilot who has not complied 

with the instnunent recent experience 

requirement of § 61.57(c) vrtthin the 

twelve calendar months preceding the 

month of the flight to complete an 

instrument proficiency check to regain 

PIC instrument qualifications. The 

proficienoy..dieck"VviirK5veto-be... 

perfprnled in the aircraft category tiiS 

Ipnpriate to the instrument privileged 

desired. The instrument proficiency 

check consists of operation areas and 

tasks listed for an instrument 

proficiency check in the practical te^ 

standards (PTS). 

-Asnoted in>aur,eKrIigi:_di8CTission of 

revised § 61.57(c), we virill require a 

pilot to have performed and logged the 

instrument recent flight experience 

within the preceding six calendar 

months preceding the month of the 

flight in order to act as the PIC under 

IFR or in weather conditions less then 

the minima prescribed for VFR. Under 

revised § 61.57(d), if the pilot has not 

performed and logged the required 

instrument recent flight experience 

virithin the six calendar months 

preceding the month of the flight, the 

pilot is given an additional six calendar 

months to perform and log the required 

instrument recent flight experience. 

However, during this six-calendar 

month period, the pilot may not act as 

the PIC under IFR or in weather 

conditions less than the minima 

prescribed for VFR until the pilot has 

performed and logged the required 

.instrument recent flight experience of 

revised § 61.57(c). If during this sixcalendar month period, the pilot does 

not accomplish the required instrument 

recent flight experience, then he/she 

must perform an instrument proficiency 

check to regain his/her instrument 

currency. 

Two commenters generally supported 

the proposed clarifications. One 

commenter supported the use of the 

instrument rating PTS as a guide for the 

proficiency check. One commenter 

questioned whether the preamble (i.e., 

proposal No. 31) is meant to indicate 

proficiency checks may n o longer be 

performed using a simulator or flight 

training device, but may now only be 

performed in an aircraft. 

Two commenters were concerned that 

§ 61.57(d) will be interpreted as 

requiring an entire instrument rating 

practical exam to satisfy the instrument 

proficiency check requirements. One 

commenter recommended the check 

consist of tasks required by the 

instrument practical test standards. One 

commenter objected to the language 

requiring that an instrument proficiency 

09/10/2009 THU 09:46 [TX/RX NO 89621 12003 
09/1U/200 9 oa:4 i tAX z n t a I»4 Y i*AA, a n tiiuu 1(A| UU 4 

Federal Register/Vol. 74, No. 161/Friday, August 21 , 2009/Rule s and Regulations 4251 9 

check (IPC) requires an instrument 

rating practical test. The commenter 

argued that the requirement would limit 

instructors' discretion and that 

completion of an IPC in aircraft lacking 

certain equipment woiild be difficult. 

The revision to § 61.57(d) concerning 

the instrument proficiency check does 

not prohibit the use of a flight simulator 

or flight training device farjsMforming 

an IPC checkjgDP-dlti'ffi.e prop osaTT 

the NPR^trpfopose eliminating use of 

FS Qf^PTDs for performing an IPC. An 

ES'nr FTD may be used for 

'liccomplishing an IPC if the training 

device is approved for performing an 

instrument proficiency check. The 

content of an instrument proficiency 

check is addressed on page 16 of the 

Instmment Rating Practical Test 

''Standards. 

32. Tfeis revision oU^JLBTfff establishes 

a receni'flighf experience requirement 

for acting as PIC in a night vision goggle 

operation 

Revised § 61.57(f) establishes as a 

recent flight experience requirement to 

remain PIC qu^ified for night vision 

goggle (NVG) operations. To understand 

"NVG operations," it is necessary to 

further clarify the term "fiight." 

"Flight" means a takeoff and landing, 

vnth each landing involving a fiight in 

the traftic pattern. For example, a 

person who performs six takeoffs and 

landings, with each landing involving a 

flight in the traffic pattern, and uses 

NVGs to mEtintain visual reference may 

log six "NVG operations." 

For a pilot to act as PIC using NVGs 

with passengers on board, the pilot, 

within the preceding two calendar 

months, will have to perform and 

document the tasks under new § 61.57(f) 

as the sole manipulator of the controls 

during the time period beginning one 

hour after sunset and ending one hour 

before sunrise. If the pilot has not 

performed and logged the tasks under 

§ 61.57(f), then the FAA will allow the 

pilot an additional two calendar months 

to perform and log the tasks under 

§ 61.57(f). However, the pilot will not be 

allowed to carry passengers diuing this 

second two-montii period. If the pilot 

still has not perfonned and logged the 

NVG tasks in revised § 61.57(f) during 

those additional two calendar months, 

then the pilot wall be required to pass 

a NVG proficiency check to act as PIC 

using night vision goggles. 

Two commenters asserted existing 

§§ 61.51(b) and 61.57(b) are adequate to 

address logging and recency of NVG 

time, and this rule only requires adding 

"while using night vision goggles." The 

commenters further argued existing 

§61.57(a)(3) is adequate to address use 

of a flight training device or flight 

simulator for NVG recency. Two 

commenters argued that the currency 

interval should be ninety days instead 

of two months to correspond with the 

existing night flight currency interval. 

The FAA acknowledges the comments 

received about this proposal. We are 

adopting the above revisions for the 

final rule. 

^ 3 . This revision of §61.57(g) 

rtablishes a NVG proficiency check 

hquirement to act as PIC of a night 

•jsion goggle operation 

Revised §61.5 7(g) establishes a 

/proficiency check to be PIC qualified for 

NVG operations. This revision also 

establishes a proficiency check to regain 

PIC qualifications for NVG operations 

when the pilot's NVG privileges have 

lapsed. 

Revised § 61.57(g) will require a pilot 

who has not complied with the NVG 

operating experience requirement of 

revised § 61.57(f) to complete a NVG 

proficiency check to regain PIC NVG 

qualifications. The proficiency check 

will have to be performed in the same 

aircraft category that is appropriate to 

the NVG operation desired. The 

proficiency check will consist of the 

tasks listed in revised § 61.31(k) and 

will be administered by an individual 

listed under § 61.31(k). 

American Eurocopter and HAI each 

supported the proposed requirement to 

restore lapsed NVG currency. The 

commenters recommended that 

proficiency check requirements be set 

forth in the PTS, with an interim 

advisory circular (AC) issued because 

the standards for NVG and non-NVG 

maneuvers are the same. The 

commenters also recommended 

proficiency checks be administered by a 

qualified instructor. Examiner, or 

inspector, as applicable under parts 61, 

141 or 142, to an air carrier employee 

in accordance with the carrier's -

^ approved training program, or to a 

"military check pilot 

The FAA acknowledges the comments 

received on this proposal. The rule 

(§ 61.57(g)(1) through (6)) clearly 

establishes the qualifications of the 

person who can administer the NVG 

proficiency check; therefore, the rule 

does not need further clarification. 

34. This proposed change to § 61.59 

would have paralleled this section vnth 

the language contained in § 67.403 

We had proposed to revise § 61.59 to 

parallel it with the existing § 67.403. 

However, we have reconsidered this 

proposal and the existing § 61.59 will 

remain without change. 

Four commenters objected to the 

proposed changes, arguing the existing 

rule already prohibits submission of 

fraudulent or intentionally false data, 

and.that the proposed rule will allow 

the FAA to deny or revoke privileges for 

an inadvertent inaccuracy. One 

commenter also noted the proposed rule 

does not parallel § 67.403 because that 

section includes a requirement that the 

FAA rely on incorrect data. One 

commenter also asserted that the 

proposed rule could effectively 

invalidate existing regulatory 

requirements for recording flight 

experience. 

The FAA acknowledges the comments 

received on the proposal. We agree that 

trying to parallel the language of § 61.59 

and § 67.403 raises additional concerns. 

The implications of incorrect 

information in the context of part 61 

certification are different than those in 

the context of medical certification 

under part 67. Therefore, existing 

§ 61.59 remains without change. 

35. This revision of §61.63 changes the 

format and restructures rule 

This final rule simplifies the format 

and structure of §61.63, and moves 

paragraphs (e), (f), and (g) (addressing 

usage and limitations of the flight 

simulator and flight training device) to 

new § 61.64. This final rule also revises 

§ 61.63(c)(3) to clarify applicability to 

those applicants holding only a lighterthan-air (LTA)-Balloon rating and who 

seek an LTA-Airship rating. Currently, 

the word "only" does not appear in 

§ 61.63(c)(3). 

This final rule has made minor 

revisions to § 61.63(d) to clarify the 

requirements for an additional type 

rating and a type rating sought 

concurrenUy with an additional aircraft 

category and class rating. We have also 

revised existing paragraph (h) in § 61.63 

and re-designated it as paragraph (e). 

Furthermore, re-designated § 61.63(e) 

clarifies the pilot certification 

procedures for aircraft used on a 

practical test for a type rating. Such 

aircraft cannot be used for instrument 

maneuvers and procedures for the 

issuance of a type rating with a VFR 

limitation under these circumstances. 

This final rule revises paragraph (i) in 

§ 61.63 and re-designates it as §61.63(f]. 

This re-designated § 61.63(f) clarifies 

that an applicant for a type rating in a 

multiengine airplane with a single-pilot 

station must perform the practical test 

in the multi-pUot seat version of that 

multiengine airplane. Alternatively, the 

practical test may be performed in the 

single-seat version of that airplane if the 

Examiner can observe the applicant 

during the practical test -when there is 

09/10/200 9 THU 09:4 6 [TX/RX NO 8962 ] [2|004 
U.S. Department 

of Transportation 

Federal Aviaiion 

AdmintstraUon 

14 CFR Part 141 Pilot Schools 

Letter of Authorization 

Cpntinaed Use of Levell Flight Traiiim£ Deviees rFTD^ 

1. Authorization. This Letter of Authorization (LOA) authorizes the part 141 certificate holder in 

accordance with 14 CFR Section 61.4 (b), continued use of the Level 1 Flight Training Devices (FID) 

accepted or approved by the Administrator prior to August 1,1996, in an FAA-approved flight-training 

program and/or under CFR Part 61. Table 1 liste the FID(s) authorized and flie limitations and provisions 

for the continued use of each. 

Serial 

Number 

1153 

1189 

Make and 

Model 

AST 300 

AST 300 

1 able 1 - Approved JLevel 1 t"ms 

Standard Authorized Use of i< 11> 

See Specific Use 

See Specific Use 

Limitations and Provisionfi 

N/A 

N/A 

2. Specific Use. The standard authorized uses that the FTD was originally designed for witii sufficient 

features for use m accordance with 14 CFR Part 61 and/or 141 and any limitations and provisions of the 

approved FTDs are listed in Table 1 above. These may include any or all the following which must be 

selected for authorization in Table 1 above: 

a. Section 61.57(c)(1), Instrument Experience (Simulated); 

b. Section 61.57(d), Instrument Proficiency Check (Excludes Recovery From Unusual Attitudes, 

Circling Approach, and Landing From Stiaight-in or Circling); 

c. Section61.65(e)(2), Instrument Rating: Maximum 20 Hours; 

d. Section 61.65(a)(8)(ii), Instrument Rating: Practical Test (One precision & One Non-precision 

Approach); 

e. Section 61.129(i)(l)(i), Commercial Pilot Certificate: Maximum 50 Hours; 

£ Section 61.159(a)(3)(i), Airline Transport Pilot Certificate: Maximum 25 hours; 

g. Section 141.41(b), FUght Training Devices or as limited by Appendices B and C. 

3. Instmction in the FTDs must be given by an authorized instructor who has demonstrated con^etency in 

the operations and use of the FTD as authorized in Table 1 above. 

4. Expiration. The authorization is valid until modified or rescinded by the FAA, and provided the 

certificate holder submits an annual report regarding its status and continued use to the jurisdictional Flight 

Standards District Of&ce. The FAA may perform periodic evaluations of the device(s) to ensure that its 

ability to perform its authorized and intended use has not deteriorated. The annual report is due: July 01, 

subsequent years.. ' '• 

5. References. 

a. Flight Training Devices (FTD) Level 1: Order 8700.1 Volume 2, Chapter 34, Section 2, 

Paragraph 5, Figure 34-1. 

b. ContinuedUse of Flight Training Devices Level 1: 14 CFR Section 61.4(b) and Order 8700.L, 

Chapter 34, AccepfApprove Flight Trairung Devices And Certain Other Devices Previously Authorize d 

For Use. 

c. AC 120-45A - Airplane Flight Training Device (Jualification. 

d. HBGA 99-06 Reporting Qualification and Approval of Flight Training Devices Levels 1 

through 5. 

Print Date: 8/22/2O07 TOOl-1 

RECURRENT TRAINING CENTER INC 

Certificate No. 
U.S. (Department 

of Transportation 

Federal Aviation 

Administration 

14 CFR Part 141 Pilot Schools 

e. HBGA 99-15 Letter of Audiorization for Continued Use of Level 1 Flight Training devices in 

Accordance with 14 CFR Section 61.4 (b). 

HQCon(rol: 06/09/06 HQ Revision: 000 

1. Issued by the Federal Aviation Administration. 

2. TtjBse TraJBTiyg Specifications are approved by direction of the Administrator. 

Principal Operations Inspector GL19 

3. Date Approval is effective: 8/22/07 Amendment Number. 1 

4. I hereby accept and receive the Training Specifications in this paragrapL 

Agent for Service Date: 8/22/07 

A-A, ^ ?-

Print Date: 8/22/2007 TOOl-2 

RECURRENT TRAINING CENTER INC 

Certificate No.: R9KS049K 
U.S. Department 

of Transportation 

Federal Aviation 

Administration 

7 

14 CFR Part 141 Pilot Schools 

Letter of Authorization 

Flight Training Devices rFTDV Levels 2,3 . and 5 

1. Authorization. This Letter of Authorization (LOA) authorizes the Part 141 certificate holder to use the 

approved Flight Training Device(s) (FTD) listed in Table 1 below. This LOA is vahd until modified or 

rescinded by the FAA and provided that an annual report regarding its sta.tus and continued use is submitted 

-to the juiisdictional Fhght Standards District Office: 

1 Serial 

1 Number 

1 1695 

5014 

1684 

7700 

1633 

Make and 

Model 

AST Hawk 

AST Hawk 

AST Hawk 

Vector 

Victory 1 

1 AST Hawk 

iable 1 - laentiflcation or Approved i<li> 

Evaluated Level of Standard 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 .;. 

Exceptions 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

Annual Report 1 

Due 1 

07/01/08 and 1 

subsequent 

07/01/08 and 

subsequent 

07/01/08 and 

subsequent 

07/01/08 and 

subsequent 

07/01/08 and 

subsequent 

2. Qualification and Approval This approval authorizes the use of the FTDs listed in Table 1 above tmder 

14 CFR section 61.4(a), for the purposes of training, testing, or checking of maneuvers, procedures, or 

crewmember functions which are listed in the appendices of the following Practical Test Standards: 

a. Commercial Pilot Airplane Practical Test in accordance with FAA-S-8081-12B, Practical Test 

Standards 

b. Instrument Rating (Airplane) Practical Test in accordance with FAA-S-8081-4D, Practical Test: 

c. Airline Transport Pilot and Aircraft Type Rating (Airplane) Practical Test in accordance with 

FAA-S-8081-5D, Practical Test Standards: 

d. The use of Levels 2 and 3 FTDs are authorized only for airplanes not requiring a type rating. 

3. Provisions and Limitations. This authorization is contingent upon the following: 

a. Instruction in this device must be given by an authorized instructor who has demonstrated 

conqjctency in the operation and use of the device as auti^orized; 

b. The FA^ must conduct a periodic evaluation of the FTDs listed in Table 1 above to ensure that 

each maintain the ability to perform the approved Tasks and/or Maneuvers authorized has not deteriorated. 

c. The manufecturer/certificate holder maintains continuous qualification of the approved FTDs in 

accordance with AC 120-45A, Airplane FUght Training Device Qualification 

d. Any modifications of the FTDs listed in Table 1 will be made in accordance with AC 120-4 5 A. 

e. The approved FTDs must retain their original qualification and evaluation for performance, 

fimctions, and othra characteristics, and-raust be evaluated on a recmrcnt basis using the approved Master 

Approval Test Guide (MATG). 

4. Relocation of FTD. In the event the certificate holder moves an FTD to a new location and its level of 

qualification is not changed, die following procedures shall apply: 

a. The certificate holder must advise the POI and NSPM, if appropriate, prior to the move. t\"\P 

3 

Print Date: 8/22/2007 T002-1 Certificate No.: R9KS049K 

RECURRENT TRAINING CENTER INC 
U.S. Department 

of Transportation 14 CFR Part 141 Pilot Schools 

Federal Aviaiion 

Administration 

b. Prior to returning the FTD to service at the new location, the certificate holder should perform a 

typical recurrent validation and fimctions test The resulte of such tests will be retained by die certificate 

holder and be available for inspection by die FAA at the next evaluation or as requested. 

c. The FAA may schedule an evaluation ofthe affected FTD(s) prior to returning it to service. 

5. Inactive Status of FTD. If the certificate holder plans to remove a FTD fi-om active status for 

prolonged periods, the FTD shall be re-qualified pmrsuant to AC 120-45 A as amended: 

a. The FAA shall be advised in writing with an estimate of the period of time ihaX the device will be 

inactive. 

b. The FAA will remove tiie FTD from qualified status on a mutually established date not later than 

the date on which the first missed recurrent evaluation would have been scheduled and recurrent evaluations 

will not be scheduled during the inactive period. 

c. Before an FTD can be restored to FAA-qualified status, the FAA will evaluate the time required 

for accon^Ushment based on the nmnber of recurrent evaltiations missed during the inactive period. 

d. The certificate holder will notify the FAA of any changes to die original scheduled time out of 

service. 

e. The FTD will normally be re-qualified using the FAA-approved MATG and criteria that was in 

effect prior to its removal from qualification; however, inactive periods exceeding 1 year will require a 

review of the qualification basis. 

1 If these procedures are not possible, the establishment of a new qualification basis will be 

necessary. 

6. References. 

a. Flight Training Devices (FTD) Levels 2,3, and 5: Order 8700.1 Volume 2, Chapter 34, Section 2, 

Paragraphs 5-7, Figure 34-2. 

b. AC 120-45A - Airplane Flight Training Device Qualification. 

c. HBGA 99-06 Reporting Qualification and Approval of Flight Training Devices Levels 1 

through 5. 

d. HBGA 99-15 Letter of Authorization for Continued Use of Level 1 Fhght Training devices in 

Accordance with 14 CFR Section 61.4 (b). 

HQ Control: 06/09/06 HQ Revision: 000 

1 

M ftS' 

Print Date: 8/22/2007 T002-2 Certificate No.: R9KS049K 

RECURRENT TRAINING CENTER m e 
U.S. Department 

of Transportation 

Federal Aviation 

Administration 

14 CFR Part 141 Pilot Schools 

1. Issued by the Federal Aviation Administration. 

2. These Trairrmg Spepifications are approved by direction of the Administrator. 

Cooley,' Principal Operations Inspector GL19 

3. Date Approval is effective: 8/22/07 Amendment Number 1 

4. I hereby accept and receive the Training Specifications in this paragraph. 

Agent for Service Date: 8/22/07 

/h^.O^ 

Print Date: 8/22/2007 T002-3 Certificate No.: R9KS049K 

RECURRENT TRAINING CENTER INC /io f f ^ 
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

National Policy 

ORDER 

2150.3B 

Effective Date: 

10/01/07 

SUBJ: FAA Compliance and Enforcement Program 

This order contains policies, procedures, and guidelines for the Federal Aviation Administration's 

compliance and enforcement program. The order also articulates the FAA's philosophy for using 

various remedies, including education, corrective action, informal action, remedial training, 

administrative action, and legal enforcement action, to address noncompliance with statutory and 

regulatory requirements enforced by the FAA. It provides for the public a written statement of the 

Administrator's policy guidance for imposing sanctions for violations of such requirements. 

The order is used at all levels by agency personnel who are engaged in the investigation, reporting, 

and processing of enforcement actions. It applies to all offices with regulatory responsibilities. 

This revision ofthe order comprehensively updates policies, procedures, guidance, and assignments of 

responsibility. It reorganizes the order in a manner more useful for agency personnel and is available 

electronically to agency personnel and the public. The revision amends agency sanction guidance to 

conform to statutory changes resulting from Vision lOOCentury of Aviation Reauthorization Act and 

incorporates guidance into the agency's compliance and enforcement program order on policies and 

programs that have developed since the last comprehensive order revision in 1988. Those include 

policies relating to the FAA's exercise of its authority to administratively assess civil penalties and 

guidance on the agency's voluntary safety programs. 

A workgroup of agency personnel from the field and headquarters with extensive experience in 

statutory and regulatory enforcement reviewed the agency's policies and programs in this area to 

produce this comprehensive revision ofthe agency order on its compliance and enforcement program. 

£ 

Robert A. Sturg; 

Acting Admini 

Distribution: A-W-1;A-W (AT/PS/SM)-2;A-W (PP/AM/SF/ 

GCIFS/IAA'S)-3;A-XYZ (A T/AF/CS)-2;Z-X (AS/AM/GC/FS)-3; 

A-Y (AM/AR1GC)-3;A-Z (AM/AN/GC)-3;A-FAC/FACIFCS-0; 

A-F AF/FA T/FIA-0(L TD);ZFS-325 

Initiated By: AGC-300 
10/01/07 2150.3B 

Fig. B-3-b. Repair Stations cont. 

(22) Posing an immediate security risk as determined by 

BTS under 49 U.S.C. § 44924(c)(2) 

Civil Penalty Certificate 

Action 

Mandatory 

Revocation 

Fig. B-3-C. ID Plate Violations 

(1) 14 C.F.R. 45.13(b), Improper removal, changing, or 

placing of identification information on a product 

(a) Inadvertent 

(b) latentional misrepresenting identity of product 

(2) 14 CFR 45.23(c), Improper removal or installation of 

identification plate 

(a) Inadvertent 

(b) Intentional misrepresenting identity of product 

CivU Penalty 

Minimimi 

Maximum 

Minimum 

Maximum 

Certificate 

Action 

Revocation 

Revocation 

Fig. B-3-d. Part 141 Pilot Schools 

(1) Knowingly permitting school aircraft to be used for 

tmlawful carriage of controlled substances 

(2) Refusal to permit inspection of facilities, equipment, 

personnel, records, or certificate 

(3) False advertising 

(4) Failure to carry checklist or operator's handbook 

(5) Improper crediting to, or graduation of, student 

(a) Inadvertent 

(b) Intentional 

(6) Refusal to permit FAA test, check, or examination of 

student 

(7) Unqualified or imauthorized instruction 

(8) Failure to establish or maintain training record 

Civil Penalty 

Maximum 

Maximum 

Minimum 

Moderate to Maximum 

Maximum 

Moderate to Maximmn 

Moderate to Maximum 

Certificate 

Action 

Revocation 

Indefinite 

Suspension 

until 

Compliance 

to 

Revocation 

Revocation 

Indefmite 

Suspension 

until 

Compliance 

to 

Revocation 

Fig. B-3-e. General Aviation Maintenance Personnel 

(1) Failure to revise aircraft data after major repair or 

alteration 

(2) Failure to perform or improper performance of 

maintenance 

Civil Penalty Certificate 

Action 

30- to 60-day 

Suspension 

30- to 120-

day 

Suspension 

B-22