Exemption No. 10129

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION WASHINGTON, DC 20591

In the matter of the petition of

EMBRY-RIDDLE AERONAUTICAL UNIVERSITY Regu latory Docket No. FAA-2010-0262

for an exemption from §§ 61.65(d)(1), 61.129(a)(2)(ii), and 61.129(b)(3)(ii) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations

DENIAL OF EXEMPTION

By letter dated March 9, 2010, Mr. W ayne Ceynowa, Manager, Flight Standards, EmbryRiddle Aeronautical University (ERAU), 600 South Clyde Morris Boulevard, Daytona Beach, Florida, 32114 petitioned the Federal Aviation Ad ministration (FAA) on behalf of ERAU for exemption from §§ 61.65(d)(1), 61.129(a)(2)(ii) and a third regulation of Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR).

Mr. Ceynowa’s letter variously refers to this third regulation as § 61.129(b)(3)(ii) and repetitively as § 61.129(a)(2)(ii). Based upon the content of the letter, the FAA believes the third regulation that ERAU intended to petition for exemption from is actually § 61.129(b)(2)(ii).

These proposed exemptions, if granted, would presumably serve as a basis to request relief from the requirement that each trainee enrolled in ERAU’s part 142 curriculums must complete 50 hours of cross country flight time as pilot in command as a prerequisite for application for a commercial pilot certificate with an instrument airplane rating.

AFS-10-197-E2

The petitioner requests relief from the following sections of 14 CFR:

Sections 61.65(d)(1), 61.129(a)(2)(ii) and, the FAA assumes, 61.129(b)(2)(ii). Section 61.65(d)(1) prescribes in pertinent part that each person who applies for an instrument airplane rating must have logged 50 hours of cross-country flight time as pilot in command.

Section 61.129(a)(2)(ii) prescribes in pertinent part that each person who applies for a commercial pilot certificate with an airplane category and single-engine class rating must have logged at least 50 hours of cross country flight time.

Section 61.129(b)(2)(ii) prescribes in pertinent part that each person who applies for a commercial pilot certificate with an airplane category and multiengine class rating must have logged at least 50 hours of cross country flight time.

The petitioner supports its request with the following information:

The petitioner asserts that on August 4, 1997, the FAA eliminated the 50-hour cross-country requirement for syllabuses approved pursuant to part 141. The petitioner further states that, beginning in 1997, ERAU conducted part 141 courses resulting in commercial pilot certification of applicants with instrument airplane ratings that did not meet the 50-hour cross-country requirement of part 61.

Relative to its status as a part 142 training center, ERAU asserts that:

 It received FAA authorization in 2004 to conduct part 142 commercial pilot certificate/instrument airplane rating curriculums without its trainees meeting the 50 hours of pilot in command (PIC) cross country time requirement;

 It wishes to operate curriculums that lead to commercial pilot certification with instrument airplane ratings as part 141 pilot schools do without the requirement of 50 hours of PIC cross country time; and

 It is subject to more detailed and structured standards than part 141 pilot schools in the areas of training programs, instru ctor qualifications and FAA oversight.

The petitioner believes that a grant of exemption in no way compromises the quality of pilot training, the integrity of pilot certification, or th e level of public safety. ERAU states that this is further supported by the fact that the FAA has not taken action to reverse or modify any portion of the 1997 [part 141] final rule as it pertains to the 50-hour PIC cross-country requirement.

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for waiving the requirement for publication

in the Federal Register because any delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to

ERAU.3

The FAA’s analysis is as follows:

The FAA has considered the petitioner’s request and supporting materials and finds that a grant of exemption is not in the interest of public safety.

In its petition, ERAU stated that in 2004 it received authorization to conduct training for an instrument rating and commercial pilot certification without its trainees meeting the 50-hour cross-country flight time requirements set forth in §§ 61.65 and 61.129. In 2009, the FAA reviewed data supplied by ERAU covering the period from August 2006 to December 2008

for its Commercial Pilot Certificate curriculum and its authorization to train trainees for commercial pilot certification with less than 50 hours of pilot-in-command cross-country flight time. The data showed that ERAU’s pass rate at the minimum hours permitted by this curriculum was virtually zero. In the period covered by the data, a single trainee completed the program with airplane flight time between 90-100 hours, representing a success rate of approximately two-tenths of one percent. This is an unacceptable rate by any objective

standard.

Pursuant to the Administrator’s authority to require revisions to a training program, ERAU was notified by letter dated September 30, 2009 (copy enclosed), that, on or before August 31, 2010, part 142 curriculums leading to private and commercial pilot certification and/or an instrument or other rating must meet all part 61 aeronautical experience requirements for those certificates and ratings. See 14 C.F.R. § 142.37(e). For curriculums designed to lead to commercial pilot certification, the regulatory minimum aeronautical experience requirement under § 61.129(i) is 190 total hours, which must include (among other requirements) 50 hours of cross-country flight time as pilot in command. The FAA based the decision to increase the curriculum hours on ERAU’s failure to demonstrate that it could operate a successful program with reduced hours of training and aeronautical experience. See 14 C.F.R. § 142.39(d).

In this petition, ERAU seeks a blanket exemption for its trainees from the 50-hour crosscountry flight time requirements that have been incorporated from part 61 into its approved part 142 training curriculum. As noted, ERAU ha s not demonstrated that its trainees are capable of accomplishing commercial pilot certification and an instrument rating at a reduced number of hours. Accordingly, for those trainees who begin their training during the fall 2010 semester and later, ERAU must conduct training intended to result in certification events in accordance with all part 61 aeronautical experience requirements.

Finally, to the extent that the petitioner raises the issue of part 141 requirements, those provisions are not relevant to part 142 curriculums.4

The FAA’s Decision:

In consideration of the foregoing, I find that a grant of exemption would not be in the public interest and would not provide a level of safety equivalent to that provided by the current regulations. Therefore, pursuant to the authority contained in Title 49 of the United States Code §§ 40113 and 44701, delegated to me by the Administrator, the petition of Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University for exemption from 14 CFR §§ 61.65(d)(1), 61.129(a)(2)(ii) and 61.129(b)(2)(ii) is hereby denied.

Issued in Washington, DC, on August 25, 2010.

/s/

John W. McGraw Acting Director, Flight Standards

Service

Enclosure