Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 169 / Wednesday, August 31, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 54095 

dated February 6, 2008; Revision B, dated 

March 6, 2008; or Revision C, dated August 

20, 2008; is acceptable for compliance with 

the corresponding requirements of 

paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD. However, 

the repetitive inspections required by 

paragraph (g) of this AD must be continued 

at the time specified. 

FAA AD Differences 

Note 1: This AD differs from the MCAI 

and/or service information as follows: No 

differences. 

Special Flight Permits 

(k) Special flight permits, as described in 

Section 21.197 and Section 21.199 of the 

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197 

and 21.199), may be issued to operate the 

airplane to a location where the requirements 

of this AD can be accomplished, but 

concurrence by the Manager, New York 

Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, is 

required prior to issuance of the special flight 

permit. Before using any approved special 

flight permits, notify your principal 

maintenance inspector (PMI) or principal 

avionics inspector (PAI), as appropriate, or 

lacking a principal inspector, your local 

Flight Standards District Office (FSDO). 

Operators must request a repair drawing from 

Bombardier which provides 

recommendations for a one-time special 

flight permit. The repair drawing will be 

applicable to the operator’s aircraft serial 

number only. Special flight permits may be 

permitted provided that the conditions 

specified in paragraphs (k)(1), (k)(2), (k)(3), 

(k)(4), and (k)(5) of this AD are met. 

(1) Only one barrel nut out of four is 

cracked, one cradle is cracked, or one washer 

is loose; all other strut bolt locations must be 

free of damage. 

(2) The airplane must operate with reduced 

airspeed not to exceed 180 KIAS [knots 

indicated air speed]. No passengers and no 

cargo are onboard. 

(3) The airplane must not operate in known 

or forecast turbulence, other than light 

turbulence. 

(4) The airplane descent rate on landing 

flare-out is not to exceed 5 feet per second. 

(5) Heavy braking or hard turning of the 

airplane upon landing is to be avoided if 

possible. 

Other FAA AD Provisions 

(l) The following provisions also apply to 

this AD: 

(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs): The Manager, ANE–170, New York 

Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has 

the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, 

if requested using the procedures found in 14 

CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, 

send your request to your principal inspector 

or local Flight Standards District Office, as 

appropriate. If sending information directly 

to the ACO, send it to Attn: Program 

Manager, Continuing Operational Safety, 

FAA, New York ACO, 1600 Stewart Avenue, 

Suite 410, Westbury, New York 11590; 

telephone 516–228–7300; fax 516–794–5531. 

Before using any approved AMOC, notify 

your appropriate principal inspector, or 

lacking a principal inspector, the manager of 

the local flight standards district office/ 

certificate holding district office. The AMOC 

approval letter must specifically reference 

this AD. 

(2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement 

in this AD to obtain corrective actions from 

a manufacturer or other source, use these 

actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective 

actions are considered FAA-approved if they 

are approved by the State of Design Authority 

(or their delegated agent). You are required 

to assure the product is airworthy before it 

is returned to service. 

Related Information 

(m) Refer to MCAI Canadian Emergency 

Airworthiness Directive CF–2011–24, dated 

July 21, 2011; and Bombardier Alert Service 

Bulletin A84–57–25, dated July 20, 2011; for 

related information. 

Material Incorporated by Reference 

(n) You must use Bombardier Alert Service 

Bulletin A84–57–25, dated July 20, 2011, to 

do the actions required by this AD, unless the 

AD specifies otherwise. 

(1) The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference of 

this service information under 5 U.S.C. 

552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. 

(2) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Bombardier, Inc., Q-Series 

Technical Help Desk, 123 Garratt Boulevard, 

Toronto, Ontario M3K 1Y5, Canada; 

telephone 416–375–4000; fax 416–375–4539; 

e-mail thd.qseries@aero.bombardier.com; 

Internet http://www.bombardier.com. 

(3) You may review copies of the service 

information at the FAA, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 

Washington. For information on the 

availability of this material at the FAA, call 

425–227–1221. 

(4) You may also review copies of the 

service information that is incorporated by 

reference at the National Archives and 

Records Administration (NARA). For 

information on the availability of this 

material at NARA, call 202–741–6030, or go 

to: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/ 

code_of_federal_regulations/ 

ibr_locations.html. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on 

August 19, 2011. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2011–22013 Filed 8–30–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Parts 61, 91, 141, and 142 

[Docket No.: FAA–2008–0938; Amendment 

Nos. 61–128, 91–324, 141–15, and 142–7] 

RIN 2120–AJ18 

Pilot in Command Proficiency Check 

and Other Changes to the Pilot and 

Pilot School Certification Rules 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This final rule amends the 

FAA’s regulations concerning pilot, 

flight instructor, and pilot school 

certification. This rule will require 

pilot-in-command (PIC) proficiency 

checks for pilots who act as PIC of 

turbojet-powered aircraft except for 

pilots of single seat experimental jets 

and pilots of experimental jets who do 

not carry passengers. It allows pilot 

applicants to apply concurrently for a 

private pilot certificate and an 

instrument rating and permits pilot 

schools and provisional pilot schools to 

apply for a combined private pilot 

certification and instrument rating 

course. In addition, the rule will: Allow 

pilot schools to use internet-based 

training programs without requiring 

schools to have a physical ground 

training facility; revise the definition of 

‘‘complex airplane;’’ and allow the use 

of airplanes with throwover control 

wheels for expanded flight training. The 

final rule also amends the FAA’s 

regulations concerning pilot certificates 

to allow the conversion of a foreign pilot 

license to a U.S. pilot certificate under 

the provisions of a Bilateral Aviation 

Safety Agreement (BASA) and 

Implementing Procedures for Licensing 

(IPL). The FAA has determined these 

amendments are needed to enhance 

safety, respond to changes in the 

aviation industry, and reduce 

unnecessary regulatory burdens. 

DATES: These amendments become 

effective October 31, 2011. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

technical questions concerning this final 

rule contact Gregory French, Airman 

Certification and Training Branch, 

General Aviation and Commercial 

Division, AFS–810, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence 

Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; 

telephone (202) 493–5474; e-mail 

Gregory.French@faa.gov. For legal 

questions concerning this final rule 

contact Michael Chase, Esq., Office of 

Chief Counsel, AGC–240, Regulations 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
54096 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 169 / Wednesday, August 31, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

Division, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence 

Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; 

telephone (202) 267–3110; e-mail 

Michael.Chase@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Authority for This Rulemaking 

The FAA’s authority to issue rules 

regarding aviation safety is found in 

Title 49 of the United States Code. 

Subtitle I, section 106 describes the 

authority of the FAA Administrator, 

including the 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 promulgated 

under the authority described in 

Subtitle VII, Part A, Chapter 447—Safety 

Regulation. Under section 44701, the 

FAA is charged with promoting safe 

flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by 

prescribing regulations necessary for 

safety. Under section 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 amend the training, 

qualification, certification, and 

operating requirements for pilots. 

These changes are intended to ensure 

that flight crewmembers have the 

training and qualifications to operate 

aircraft safely. For this reason, the 

changes are within the scope of our 

authority and are a reasonable and 

necessary exercise of our statutory 

obligations. 

II. Executive Summary 

The notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM) published on August 31, 2009, 

(74 FR 44779) included 16 proposed 

changes to the FAA’s existing pilot, 

flight instructor, and pilot school 

certification regulations. Of the 

proposed rule changes, proposal 2, 

which would require proficiency checks 

for PICs of single-piloted turbojetpowered aircraft, and proposal 3, which 

would permit application for an 

instrument rating concurrently with a 

private pilot certificate, raised the 

largest response by commenters. Upon 

review of the comments, the FAA has 

concluded that the rule requiring 

proficiency checks for single-piloted 

turbojet-powered aircraft was not well 

suited to experimental turbojet-powered 

aircraft and had the potential to add 

significant expense for the pilots of 

those aircraft. The final rule allows 

alternative methods of compliance for 

pilots of experimental jets that possess 

more than a single seat. It excludes from 

the proficiency check requirement those 

pilots of experimental jets that possess 

more than a single seat who do not carry 

passengers and those pilots of 

experimental jets that possess a single 

seat. The FAA has also modified the 

rule permitting concurrent application 

for a private pilot certificate and 

instrument rating because the rule as 

proposed in the original NPRM failed to 

recognize that the prerequisite of 

50 hours of cross-country time for the 

instrument rating could not easily be 

met by a student pilot. The FAA has 

added a provision to § 61.65 to 

accommodate an alternative method of 

compliance with that requirement. 

Finally, the NPRM proposed to 

replace the 10 hours of training in a 

complex airplane required for pilots 

applying for a commercial pilot 

certificate with 10 hours of advanced 

instrument training. These proposals 

would have resulted in changes to both 

Part 61 and Part 141. However, in 

response to the public comments 

received and in light of the recently 

passed Airline Safety and Federal 

Aviation Administration Extension Act 

of 2010 (Pub. L. 111–2163) that 

addresses flight crewmember training, 

the FAA has elected not to adopt these 

proposals. 

III. Background 

A. Summary of the NPRM 

The following proposals were 

contained in the NPRM. 

Proposal No. CFR designation Summary of the proposed changes 

1 .......................... § 61.1(b)(3) .............................................. Proposal to revise the definition of ‘‘complex airplane’’ to include airplanes 

equipped with a full authority digital engine control (FADEC) and move it from 

§ 61.31(e) to § 61.1(b)(3). 

2 .......................... § 61.58(a)(1) & (2) and (d)(1)–(4) ........... Proposal to require a § 61.58 PIC proficiency check for PICs of single piloted, turbojet-powered airplanes. 

3 .......................... § 61.65(a)(1) ............................................ Proposal to permit the application for and the issuance of an instrument rating 

concurrently with a private pilot certificate for pilots. 

4 .......................... § 61.71(c) ................................................ Proposal to allow the conversion of a foreign pilot license to a U.S. pilot certificate based on an Implementation Procedures for Licensing (IPL) agreement. 

5 .......................... § 61.129(a)(3)(ii) ...................................... Commercial pilot certificate, airplane single engine class rating—Proposal to replace the 10 hours of complex airplane aeronautical experience with 10 hours 

of advanced instrument training. 

6 .......................... § 61.129(b)(3)(ii) ...................................... Commercial pilot certificate, airplane multiengine class rating—Proposal to replace the 10 hours of complex multiengine airplane aeronautical experience 

with 10 hours of advanced instrument training. 

7 .......................... § 91.109(a) and (b)(3) ............................. Proposal to expand the use of airplanes with a single, functioning throwover control wheel for providing expanded flight training. This proposal parallels the 

long standing grants of exemptions that the FAA has issued to many petitioners for use with certain airplanes with a single, functioning throwover control wheel. 

8 .......................... § 141.45 ................................................... Proposal to allow pilot schools and provisional pilot schools an exception to the 

requirement to have a ground training facility when the training course is an 

online, computer-based training program. 

9 .......................... § 141.55(c)(1) .......................................... Proposal to allow pilot schools and provisional pilot schools an exception to the 

requirement to describe each room used for ground training when the training 

course is an online, computer-based training program. 

10 ........................ Part 141, Appx. D, para. 4.(b)(1)(ii) ........ Commercial pilot certification course for an airplane single engine class rating— 

Proposal to replace the 10 hours of complex airplane training with 10 hours of 

advanced instrument training. 

11 ........................ Part 141, Appx. D, para. 4.(b)(2)(ii) ........ Commercial pilot certification course for an airplane multiengine class rating— 

Proposal to replace the 10 hours of complex multiengine airplane training with 

10 hours of advanced instrument training. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 169 / Wednesday, August 31, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 54097 

Proposal No. CFR designation Summary of the proposed changes 

12 ........................ Part 141, Appx. I, para. 4.(a)(3)(ii) ......... Additional airplane single engine class rating at the commercial pilot certification 

level—Proposal to replace the 10 hours of complex airplane training with 10 

hours of advanced instrument training. 

13 ........................ Part 141, Appx. I, para. 4.(b)(2)(ii) ......... Additional airplane multiengine class rating at the commercial pilot certification 

level—Proposal to replace the 10 hours of complex multiengine airplane training with 10 hours of advanced instrument training. 

14 ........................ Part 141, Appx. I, para. 4.(j)(2)(ii) ........... Additional airplane single engine class rating at the commercial pilot certification 

level—Proposal to replace the 10 hours of complex airplane training with 10 

hours of advanced instrument training. 

15 ........................ Part 141, Appx. I, para. 4.(k)(2)(ii) .......... Additional airplane multiengine class rating at the commercial pilot certification 

level—Proposal to replace the 10 hours of complex multiengine airplane training with 10 hours of advanced instrument training. 

16 ........................ Part 141, Appx. M ................................... Proposal to establish a combined private pilot certification and instrument rating 

course. 

The public comment period closed on 

November 30, 2009. 

B. Summary of Comments 

The FAA received 441 comments on 

the NPRM. Commenters consisted of 

aviation industry associations, flight 

schools, flight instructors, and pilots. 

Most commenters expressed multiple 

opinions, concerns, and suggestions, 

which were often repeated by others. 

Common areas of concern are grouped 

by subject for response. 

C. Changes From the NPRM to the Final 

Rule 

The single most significant change 

from the original proposal relates to 

§ 61.58, which will require a PIC of a 

turbojet-powered aircraft to receive an 

annual pilot proficiency check. As 

proposed in the NPRM, those pilots who 

operated experimental jets would have 

incurred the most significant costs; 

however, those costs were inadvertently 

not included in the initial cost analysis. 

The language as proposed would have 

required annual checks in virtually 

every experimental jet for which the 

pilot held an authorization to operate if 

the pilot intended to serve as PIC in that 

aircraft. Because of the inherent nature 

of operating historic turbojet-powered 

aircraft, this would have entailed, in 

some cases, debilitating expenses for the 

pilot(s). Therefore, we have modified 

the rule by adding a paragraph to 

§ 61.58 to exclude from the proficiency 

check requirement those pilots of 

experimental jets that, by original 

design, possess only a single seat 

because those aircraft cannot carry 

passengers. Existing limitations to the 

operation of those aircraft adequately 

address any other potential safety 

issues. Another provision, also not 

proposed in the NPRM, was added to 

§ 61.58(d) to accommodate pilots of 

experimental jets that, by original 

design or through modification, possess 

more than a single seat. Pilots of those 

aircraft who wish to carry passengers 

may use any single § 61.58 proficiency 

check or equivalent check taken in 

another turbojet-powered aircraft to 

exercise the PIC privileges for all 

experimental jet aircraft for which the 

pilot holds an authorization. This 

§ 61.58 proficiency check or equivalent 

must have been accomplished in the 

prior 12 months. The requirement for 

experimental jet pilots of multi-seat 

aircraft to receive annual proficiency 

checks is based on the carriage of 

passengers on those aircraft. Another 

provision was added to accommodate 

pilots of multi-seat experimental jet 

aircraft who have not received a 

proficiency check within the prior 

12 months. These pilots may continue 

to operate those experimental jet aircraft 

in accordance with their authorizations; 

however, they are prohibited from 

carriage of any passengers other than 

authorized designees, instructors, or 

FAA personnel until such time as they 

successfully complete the proficiency 

check. 

This final rule amends § 61.65(a)(1) to 

allow a student pilot to train 

concurrently for both the private pilot 

certificate and instrument rating. The 

amendment as proposed in the NPRM 

had a potential for decreasing safety and 

adding unnecessary economic burden to 

pilots engaged in a combined course 

because it would have required a 

student pilot to obtain 50 hours of crosscountry flight time as PIC through a 

series of endorsements for solo flights. 

The FAA has added a new paragraph (g) 

to § 61.65 to allow an applicant for a 

combined private pilot certificate with 

instrument rating to credit cross-country 

time performing the duties of pilot in 

command, when accompanied by an 

instructor to satisfy a majority of the 

cross-country PIC time required by 

§ 61.65(d)(1), (e)(1) and (f)(1). A similar 

privilege already exists under 

§ 61.129(b)(4). The intent is to limit this 

credit to no more than the 45 hours of 

cross-country PIC time remaining after 

the student pilot has completed the 

5 hours of solo cross-country flight time 

required by §§ 61.109(a)(5)(i) for a single 

engine rating, 61.109(b)(5)(i) for a 

multiengine rating, and 61.109(e)(5)(i) 

for a powered-lift rating. For a private 

pilot helicopter rating, the credit for 

cross-country time as PIC is limited to 

the 47 hours of cross-country PIC time 

remaining after completion of the 

3 hours of solo cross-country flight time 

required by § 61.109(c)(4)(i). Any credit 

allowed under this rule is limited to 

those students enrolled in a combined 

private pilot instrument rating course of 

training that culminates in a combined 

practical test. If at the conclusion of a 

program of combined training under 

this rule, the student instead elects to 

take only the private pilot practical test, 

then any solo cross-country time 

accrued while accompanied by an 

instructor prior to the completion of the 

private pilot practical test will not be 

creditable as solo PIC time. 

The FAA will not adopt the proposed 

amendments to replace the 10 hours of 

complex aeronautical experience with 

10 hours of advanced instrument 

training for commercial pilot applicants 

as required by § 61.129 and Part 141, 

Appendices D and I. A complete 

discussion of this issue is included in 

this final rule under ‘‘IV. Discussion of 

the Final Rule, C. Replace Complex 

Airplane Aeronautical Experience with 

Advanced Instrument Training.’’ 

IV. Discussion of the Final Rule 

A. Recurrent Proficiency Check for a 

Pilot in Command of a Single-Piloted 

Turbojet-Powered Aircraft 

This rule extends the requirement for 

recurrent proficiency checks to pilots 

operating single-piloted turbojetpowered aircraft. 

This proposal garnered a significant 

number of comments. The 

overwhelming majority opposed the 

proposed rule as written. None of the 

commenters expressed resistance to the 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
54098 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 169 / Wednesday, August 31, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

imposition of an annual proficiency 

check for standard category, singlepiloted turbojet-powered aircraft. Some 

expressed the opinion that this proposal 

was appropriate for the Very Light Jet 

(VLJ) community. Their concern 

focused exclusively on the effect that 

such a rule, as proposed, would have on 

the owners and pilots of experimental 

jets which are not type certificated 

aircraft. 

Commenters expressed concern in 

two principal areas related to 

experimental jets. First, they cited the 

prohibitive costs of the annual checks in 

each of the experimental jets that they 

are authorized to operate—estimates for 

which ranged from $10,000 to more 

than $50,000 per year. A number of 

commenters stated they would no 

longer be able to operate due to the 

costs. Many commented that the FAA 

had not adequately examined the 

anticipated cost to owners of 

experimental jets before proposing this 

rule. The second issue that commenters 

expressed concern over was the 

extremely limited availability of 

Experimental Aircraft Examiners (EAE) 

to conduct the required tests. Currently, 

the FAA has authorized nine EAEs that 

are qualified in experimental jets. With 

the limited pool of EAEs, many 

commenters stated that it would be 

physically impossible to provide the 

number of annual proficiency checks 

that would be required. 

A small subset of those commenting 

on this proposed rule change expressed 

approval for the proposal as applied to 

the VLJ community. They stated that it 

would be appropriate because singlepilot operations are more demanding 

since such pilots do not have a co-pilot 

to share the workload and, thus, should 

be checked annually for competency. 

Some commenters asked us to clarify 

the requirements for a § 61.58 

proficiency check for single-pilot 

operations in standard category aircraft. 

Specifically, they wanted to know 

whether existing annual training 

requirements required by most 

insurance companies would qualify. 

The FAA believes that annual training 

required by insurance companies will 

culminate in a proficiency check which 

will satisfy the requirement for a § 61.58 

proficiency check if conducted in 

accordance with this section, § 61.58. 

One commenter requested that, in 

addition to the changes already 

proposed, the FAA further amend 

§ 61.58 to allow the check to serve as an 

acceptable means of completing the 

instrument proficiency check under 

§ 61.57(d) if conducted in an airplane 

certified for instrument flight rules (IFR) 

flight and given to the pilot holding a 

type rating that does not contain the 

visual flight rules (VFR) limitation ‘‘VFR 

ONLY.’’ We recognize that in many 

cases a § 61.58 check may meet the 

requirements of a § 61.57(d) check. If it 

does so, then the authorized official may 

so endorse the pilot’s training and 

currency record. However, in many 

cases, a § 61.58 check may not cover 

everything required for a § 61.57(d) 

check and therefore would not qualify 

for one. The individual providing the 

check must make that distinction. It is 

the pilot’s responsibility to ensure that 

he or she remains in regulatory 

compliance. The FAA does not believe 

it is necessary to amend § 61.58 as 

suggested by the commenter. 

Finally, one commenter suggested 

that the PIC proficiency check for pilots 

of single-piloted turbojet-powered 

airplanes should be applicable only to 

those who are using the aircraft for hire. 

Commercial pilots of these aircraft may 

carry passengers or conduct other 

operations for hire under certain 

conditions and rules. Any pilot at the 

private or higher level may carry nonpaying passengers on not-for-hire 

flights. Their responsibility for the 

safety of their passengers and their 

environment is no less than if they 

operated for hire. Therefore, the FAA 

does not see any safety benefit in 

limiting the proficiency checks to forhire operations. 

The FAA has concluded, upon 

analysis of the comments, that the 

proposed revision to § 61.58 cannot 

work for the experimental jet 

community for several reasons. The 

experimental jet fleet is not 

standardized; even among the same 

make and model virtually no two are 

identical although they frequently share 

similar handling characteristics. Full 

compliance with the rule as proposed 

would require a proficiency check in 

each individual aircraft (not just make 

and model) for which the pilot holds a 

letter of authorization. The costs 

incurred for proficiency checks in 

experimental jets are extremely high 

due to the unique historic value and 

technology of the aircraft. For example, 

the majority of these aircraft are historic 

military jets that employ outdated 

technology that requires high levels of 

specialized maintenance making them 

expensive to operate. In addition, the 

vintage jet engines in most of these 

aircraft typically are inefficient in fuel 

use as opposed to modern jet engines 

resulting in additional expenses in their 

operation. 

The FAA believes that the operation 

of experimental jet aircraft does not 

represent a significant hazard in the 

United States. There are a limited 

number of aircraft in the experimental 

jet fleet (just over 1,200). Experimental 

jets are limited in both time and activity 

when measured against standard 

category turbojet aircraft. Under current 

regulations and policies, experimental 

jets are limited to demonstration and 

exhibition flights only and are not 

permitted to fly over populated areas. 

See § 91.319; Flight Standards 

Information Management System 

[FSIMS], Order 8900.1, Volume 5, 

Chapter 9, Section 2. The relatively high 

operating costs of these aircraft 

compared to those of standard category 

aircraft limits their operation even 

further. This combination of low 

numbers of aircraft, high operational 

costs, and strict existing regulatory 

policies limits their exposure to risk 

significantly. Further, unlike most 

standard category turbojet aircraft, there 

are no alternatives to conducting 

proficiency check flights in an airplane 

because there are presently no approved 

simulators for the fleet of experimental 

jets. Finally, there are an inadequate 

number of qualified experimental jet 

check pilots to conduct the number of 

annual checks that would be necessary 

under the proposed rule. 

Notwithstanding these considerations, 

the FAA firmly believes that pilots 

conducting flight in turbojet-powered 

experimental aircraft with more than 

one seat, who wish to carry a passenger, 

must receive annual proficiency checks 

to ensure their continued understanding 

of the unique operating characteristics 

common to turbojet-powered aircraft. 

An experimental jet aircraft that by 

original design or through modification 

possesses more than a single seat, has 

the potential to carry one or more 

passengers. In such a case, the pilot will 

be directly responsible for those 

passengers. We believe these 

circumstances demand a higher level of 

confirmation of the pilot’s ability to 

operate safely in a turbojet- powered 

aircraft. For the reasons outlined 

previously, however, the FAA believes 

it is impractical to implement § 61.58 as 

published in the NPRM. Therefore, for 

the purpose of meeting the regulatory 

intent of the proposed rule as applied to 

the pilots of experimental jets, the FAA 

will accept any of the following as an 

alternative to requiring a proficiency 

check in any multi-seat experimental jet 

for which the pilot holds an 

authorization: 

1. A single proficiency check by an 

EAE in any one of the experimental jet 

aircraft for which the airman holds an 

authorization to operate if conducted 

within the prior 12 months; 

2. A single proficiency check by an 

EAE in any experimental jet (e.g., if a 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 169 / Wednesday, August 31, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 54099 

pilot acquires a new authorization to 

operate an additional experimental jet 

aircraft, the check for that new 

authorization will meet the intent), if 

conducted within the prior 12 months; 

3. Maintaining qualification under an 

Advanced Qualification Program (AQP) 

under Subpart Y of part 121; 

4. Any pilot proficiency check given 

in accordance with subpart K of part 91, 

parts 121, 125, or 135 conducted within 

the prior 12 months if conducted in a 

turbojet-powered aircraft; 

5. Any other § 61.58 proficiency check 

conducted within the prior 12 months if 

conducted in a turbojet-powered 

aircraft. 

Any one of the listed checks will 

apply to the PIC privileges for all of the 

experimental jets for which the pilot 

holds an authorization for a given 12- 

month period. 

A pilot of a multi-seat turbojet 

experimental jet aircraft who has not 

received a proficiency check within the 

prior 12 months as outlined here may 

continue to operate such aircraft in 

accordance with the pilot’s 

authorizations. However, the pilot is 

prohibited from carriage of any persons 

in any turbojet-powered experimental 

jet aircraft with the exception of 

individuals authorized by the 

Administrator to conduct training, flight 

checks, or perform pilot certification 

functions in such aircraft during flights 

specifically related to training, flight 

checks, or certification. 

The FAA has determined that those 

experimental jet aircraft that have only 

a single seat do not pose a risk to the 

public due to the strict constraints 

placed on the pilot’s authorizations and 

the aircraft’s inherent inability to 

transport anyone other than the pilot. 

Therefore, this section will not apply to 

those pilots of experimental jet aircraft 

that, through original design, possess 

only a single seat. 

For the reasons stated, this final rule 

adopts § 61.58 with modifications to 

accommodate pilots of experimental 

jets. 

B. Application for and Issuance of an 

Instrument Rating Concurrently With a 

Private Pilot Certificate 

In the NPRM, the FAA proposed to 

revise § 61.65(a) to permit the 

application for an instrument rating 

concurrently with a private pilot 

certificate. Several commenters 

expressed concern that the proposal 

would result in a reduction in the 

experience that would otherwise be 

gained when a pilot completes the 

private pilot certificate first and then 

returns later for the instrument rating. 

This concern arose because 

§ 61.65(d)(1), (e)(1), and (f)(1) require, as 

a prerequisite to application for an 

instrument rating, that the pilot have 

acquired 50 hours of cross-country 

pilot-in-command (PIC) time for singleengine, multiengine, or powered-lift 

aircraft, respectively. Commenters 

believed that, if the rule were published 

as proposed, the cross-country 

requirements would be eliminated. This 

perception was inaccurate. However, 

upon further analysis, the FAA 

recognized that those specific 

requirements had not been fully 

addressed in the NPRM. As proposed in 

the NPRM, it would be possible, 

although difficult, for the pilot 

concurrently training for the private 

pilot certificate and instrument rating to 

acquire the required PIC cross-country 

time because the pilot would hold only 

a student pilot certificate. In such cases, 

the student pilot could acquire the 

requisite 50 hours of PIC cross-country 

time only through a series of 

individually endorsed solo flights. 

Under current regulations, student 

pilots may log PIC time only when 

flying solo as the sole occupant of the 

aircraft and are not permitted to carry 

passengers. See 14 CFR 61.89. 

Currently, under § 61.109(a)(5)(i) (single 

engine), § 61.109(b)(5)(i) (multiengine), 

and § 61.109(e)(5)(i) (powered-lift), a 

student pilot seeking private pilot 

certification is required to complete 5 

hours of solo cross-country flight. Under 

§ 61.109(c)(4)(i) a student pilot is 

required to complete 3 hours for the 

helicopter rating. These hours qualify as 

PIC time since the student pilot is the 

sole occupant of the aircraft. The 

original intent of § 61.65(d)(1), (e)(1), 

and (f)(1) was to have the pilot develop 

a basis of experience as a certificated 

pilot prior to pursuing the instrument 

rating. Requiring a student pilot to 

complete an additional 45 hours (47 

hours for the helicopter rating) of crosscountry solo flight would not be in the 

best interest of safety. The additional 

hours of cross-country solo flight would 

also impose significant additional costs 

on the pilot. 

The FAA recognizes the value of the 

experience gained during cross-country 

flight and does not intend to eliminate 

the 50-hour requirement. We also 

recognize that requiring the pilot to 

acquire 50 hours of cross-country flight 

time under a series of student-pilot solo 

endorsements would not enhance safety 

and would largely negate the purpose of 

this combined training. Therefore, 

although not proposed in the NPRM, a 

new paragraph (g) has been added to 

§ 61.65 to allow the pilot seeking 

combined private pilot certification and 

an instrument rating to credit up to 45 

hours (47 hours for the helicopter 

rating) of the required 50 hours of crosscountry flight time as PIC when the 

student pilot is performing the duties of 

pilot in command while accompanied 

by an instructor. This provision is 

similar to the privilege already offered 

under § 61.129(b)(4). 

The 5 hours of solo flight, as the sole 

occupant of the aircraft, required under 

§ 61.109(a)(5)(i) (single-engine), 

§ 61.109(b)(5)(i) (multiengine), and 

§ 61.109(e)(5)(i) (powered-lift), or 3 

hours of solo flight required under 

§ 61.109(c)(5)(i) (helicopter) must still 

be met. The student pilot may log crosscountry PIC time toward the balance of 

the 50-hour requirement if the training 

is conducted during cross-country flight 

with an instructor on board the aircraft. 

This provision applies only to training 

conducted for a combined private pilot 

certificate and instrument rating. The 

credit for cross-country PIC time when 

accompanied by an instructor is limited 

to 45 hours (47 hours for the helicopter 

rating) of the required 50 hours of crosscountry PIC time. 

The FAA has determined that this 

allowance will result in a better 

prepared and more competent private 

pilot with an instrument rating at the 

conclusion of the combined training. A 

significant portion of the combined 

training will, of necessity, have been 

conducted during cross-country flight, 

which represents an environment more 

representative of the environment in 

which the pilot can be expected to 

operate upon completion of their 

training. In addition, this cross-country 

flight time will be more useful to the 

pilot than an equivalent number of 

hours of solo flight. The pilot will be 

directly under the supervision of an 

instructor who, presumably, will better 

ensure that correct habits are firmly 

established. 

Because there was no proposed 

requirement for 50 hours of crosscountry PIC time for an instrument 

rating under Appendix M to part 141, 

this final rule adopts Appendix M to 

part 141 as proposed in the NPRM with 

minor editorial changes. The FAA 

anticipates, however, that any approved 

training program under part 141 will 

include cross-country flight time as 

pilot in command due to the value of 

such aeronautical experience. 

C. Replace Complex Airplane 

Aeronautical Experience With 

Advanced Instrument Training 

The NPRM proposed to replace the 

requirement for 10 hours of training in 

a complex airplane with 10 hours of 

advanced instrument training for pilots 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
54100 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 169 / Wednesday, August 31, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

who apply for the commercial pilot 

certificate. Accordingly, the FAA 

proposed to amend §§ 61.129(a)(3)(ii), 

61.129(b)(3)(ii), Appendix D to part 141 

paragraphs 4.(b)(1)(ii), 4.(b)(2)(ii); 

Appendix I to part 141 paragraphs 

4.(a)(3)(ii), 4.(b)(2)(ii), 4.(j)(2)(ii), and 

4.(k)(2)(ii). The FAA has elected not to 

adopt these proposed amendments. 

The FAA received a wide variety of 

comments on this set of regulatory 

amendments, with approximately half 

of the comments in favor of 

implementing the changes. Some in 

favor of the proposals felt that 

maintaining and operating complex 

aircraft was too costly, placing burden 

on flight training providers and those 

seeking a commercial pilot certificate. 

Another portion of supporters felt that 

advanced instrument experience would 

be more valuable than the current 

complex training requirement because 

the additional instrument time would 

better prepare airmen for employment 

as commercial pilots. One commenter 

expressed belief that complex training 

should only be required prior to 

operating a complex aircraft and the 

current regulation requiring a complex 

endorsement is sufficient. Although the 

advanced instrument training need not 

have been conducted in a 

technologically advanced aircraft, some 

commenters offered that these proposals 

are appropriate given the technological 

advancements in aircraft avionics. 

The remaining comments were either 

against adopting all provisions of 

proposed changes or suggested that only 

a portion of the proposed changes 

should be implemented. A number of 

commenters were opposed to the 

removal of the 10 hours of complex 

training citing the potential for an 

increase in gear up landing incidences. 

Some commenters felt that the 

experience gained operating complex 

aircraft is essential for safety since 

commercial pilots may encounter 

complex aircraft in their career. One 

commenter suggested that a minimum 

number of complex training hours be 

required for a complex endorsement 

instead of requiring complex training for 

a commercial pilot applicant. Other 

commenters felt that the requirement of 

advanced instrument training would be 

redundant and would present 

unnecessary cost for those individuals 

who already hold an instrument rating. 

Further, those commercial pilots who 

do not have an instrument rating are 

already limited in privilege by existing 

regulations. One commenter urged the 

FAA to consider the differences 

between those aircraft that are 

mechanically complex and those aircraft 

that are electronically complex in 

amendments to the regulations. 

The recent enactment of the Airline 

Safety and Federal Aviation 

Administration Extension Act of 2010 

also influenced the FAA’s decision not 

to adopt the proposals affecting 

commercial pilot requirements. Section 

208 of this law directs the FAA to 

‘‘conduct rulemaking proceedings to 

require part 121 air carriers to provide 

flight crew members with ground 

training and flight training or flight 

simulator training...to recognize and 

avoid the stall of an aircraft or, if not 

avoided, to recover from the stall’ and 

‘to recognize and avoid an upset of an 

aircraft or, if not avoided, to execute 

such techniques as available data 

indicate are appropriate to recover from 

the upset.’’ Although this section 

specifically addresses training for 

crewmembers operating in the air 

carrier environment, the FAA believes 

that conforming changes to the 

commercial pilot requirements may be 

prudent and necessary in the near 

future. 

The FAA finds validity in the points 

raised through the public comments. 

Additional time is necessary to analyze 

changes to the regulations that were the 

subject of these proposals. The FAA also 

feels compelled to review the 

commercial pilot certification 

regulations alongside the requirements 

of Public Law 111–216. Therefore, the 

FAA will not adopt the proposed 

amendments that replace the 10 hours 

of complex training with the 10 hours 

of advanced instrument training. The 

FAA intends to devote additional 

consideration to the commercial pilot 

requirements and may publish a future 

notice of proposed rulemaking to amend 

these regulations. 

D. Conversion of a Foreign Pilot License 

to a U.S. Pilot Certificate 

This final rule amends the FAA’s 

regulations concerning pilot licenses to 

allow the conversion of a foreign pilot 

license to a U.S. certificate under the 

provisions of a Bilateral Aviation Safety 

Agreement (BASA) and Implementing 

Procedures for Licensing (IPL). 

On June 12, 2000, the United States 

and Transport Canada Civil Aviation 

(TCCA) signed a BASA that permits a 

pilot holding certain pilot licenses or 

certificates from either country to obtain 

a pilot license or certificate from the 

other county after the pilot applicant 

has met the appropriate qualifications 

and certification requirements. Before 

executing an IPL, the BASA process 

requires the FAA and a foreign civil 

aviation authority to first evaluate each 

other’s pilot licensing standards and 

procedures and compare them to their 

own to determine what, if any, 

additional requirements would be 

necessary to assure that the pilot is in 

compliance with their own standards. 

The FAA and TCCA completed the 

conformity analysis and executed an IPL 

on July 14, 2006, that establishes the 

procedures each country must follow to 

achieve the objectives of the BASA. The 

FAA–Canada IPL allows holders of FAA 

pilot certificates and TCCA pilot 

licenses to convert to Canadian pilot 

licenses and U.S. pilot certificates, 

respectively. The IPL currently is 

limited to the airplane category of 

aircraft at the private, commercial, and 

airline transport pilot levels of licenses 

or certificates. The IPL includes the 

following ratings or qualifications: 

instrument rating, class ratings of 

airplane single-engine land (ASEL) and 

airplane multiengine (AMEL), type 

ratings, and night qualification 

addressed under part 61 and Canadian 

Aviation Regulations Part IV. The FAA 

and TCCA have agreed that they may 

amend the IPL to allow conversion of 

other licenses or certificates in the 

future. 

The amendment to § 61.71(c) would 

not only provide the legal basis for 

expansion of the FAA–TCCA BASA/ 

IPL, but would also allow similar 

BASA/IPL arrangements with other 

ICAO Contracting States, as determined 

by the Administrator in the interest of 

safety. Therefore, the FAA revises 

§ 61.71 to allow holders of foreign pilot 

licenses to convert to U.S. pilot 

certificates where the U.S. Government 

and the foreign government have 

concluded a BASA and associated IPL. 

The issuance of a U.S. private pilot 

certificate and ratings under § 61.75 is a 

separate pilot certification process, as is 

the process described in § 61.153. 

A majority of the commenters 

approved of this proposal. However, 

several commenters suggested that 

holders of foreign pilot certificates 

receive inferior training and were not up 

to the standards of pilots trained in the 

United States. One commenter asked for 

assurance that any country that the 

United States entered into a BASA with 

would allow conversion of a U.S. pilot 

certificate to a foreign pilot license in 

that country. Finally, one organization 

expressed concern that there would be 

lack of oversight of the foreign pilot 

training program and that the influx of 

foreign IPL certificate holders would 

erode the wages, benefits, and working 

conditions of U.S. airline pilots, and 

would have a detrimental effect on U.S. 

flight schools. 

As discussed above, the FAA has fully 

considered these issues. The FAA 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 169 / Wednesday, August 31, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 54101 

believes that countries which enter into 

BASA with the United States will fully 

meet both the mutually agreed upon 

U.S. and International Civil Aviation 

Organization (ICAO) standards, and that 

such agreements are reciprocal. 

Oversight of the foreign flight training 

facilities has and will continue to be the 

responsibility of the ICAO affiliate 

nations. Additionally, the FAA does not 

anticipate such agreements will 

interfere with the ability of U.S. flight 

schools to conduct business and may, in 

fact, enhance their success. For many 

years, foreign students have come to the 

United States to receive both primary 

and advanced flight training, largely for 

economic reasons. In light of these 

considerations, entering into BASA with 

other ICAO contracting states will 

encourage pilots from those countries to 

seek more economical training because 

their U.S. certificates may be converted 

to a license issued by their national 

licensing authority. 

This final rule adopts 61.71(c) as 

proposed in the NPRM with one 

editorial change to include a reference 

to the bilateral agreement which is the 

basis for entering into an IPL with an 

ICAO Contracting State. 

E. Proposal To Revise the Definition of 

‘‘Complex Airplane’’ 

In the NPRM, the FAA proposed to 

revise the definition of ‘‘complex’’ 

airplane to include airplanes equipped 

with a full authority digital engine 

control (FADEC) and move the 

definition from § 61.31(e) to § 61.1(b)(3). 

The majority of commenters 

supported this rule. Those who 

disapproved were consistent in their 

concern that this proposal was oversimplifying the practical test for the 

commercial pilot certificate. They 

expressed concern that the complex 

aircraft, with propeller and other thrust 

controls, still existed and that 

‘‘professional pilots’’ should be able to 

operate those aircraft. The FAA 

recognizes that the technology is 

changing and that FADEC aircraft are 

growing in availability. The FAA also 

recognizes that professional pilots may 

never encounter the type of controls that 

FADEC aircraft replace. This is 

particularly true for those who 

transition directly from flight academies 

to the airlines. This proposal simply 

reflects the changing duties and 

activities of a professional pilot. 

Several commenters misunderstood 

an important aspect of the proposal and 

expressed concern that the proposal 

would require use of a FADEC-equipped 

airplane for complex training, 

supplanting the more conventionallyequipped light training airplane. This is 

not the case. Those aircraft that were 

previously defined as complex will 

continue to qualify for any application 

where a complex aircraft is required. 

This amendment simply adds the option 

to use a FADEC-equipped airplane with 

retractable landing gear and flaps for 

complex airplane training if the pilot 

chooses to do so. 

This final rule adopts §§ 61.31(e) and 

61.1(b) as proposed in the NPRM with 

clarifying changes as related to the 

definition of complex seaplanes. 

F. Expanded Use of Airplane With a 

Single Functioning Throwover Control 

Wheel for Certain Kinds of Flight 

Training 

The amendment to § 91.109 permits 

the use of a functioning throwover 

control wheel for certain flight training 

that includes the flight review required 

by § 61.56, and the recent flight 

experience and instrument proficiency 

check required by § 61.57. 

Several commenters expressed 

concern over the lack of instructor 

control during the training. The fact that 

the FAA has been issuing exemptions to 

allow the use of a functioning throwover 

control wheel for flight training for 

many years has provided demonstrated 

evidence of the safety of such 

operations. This amendment will 

eliminate the need for future 

exemptions for this purpose. 

One commenter who opposed the 

proposal stated that it was unnecessary 

because it applied to a limited, aging 

fleet. The commenter indicated that the 

current practice of issuing exemptions 

to allow for the use of such aircraft for 

flight training is adequate. The purpose 

of the amendment is to eliminate the 

need to issue exemptions for a practice 

that has a proven record of safety. The 

fact that this rule will be applicable only 

to a limited fleet is not relevant. 

One commenter described the 

discrepancy over the wording in the 

NPRM, expressing that the description 

of the rule change did not coincide with 

the verbiage in the proposed regulation. 

Upon review, the FAA found validity in 

this comment. The NPRM indicates that 

the amendments to this rule aim to 

parallel certain exemptions that have 

been issued in the past for § 91.109 (a) 

and (b). The final rule has been 

modified to increase clarity in this 

regard. 

Another commenter expressed 

concern about obtaining the recent flight 

experience required by § 61.57. The 

commenter believed that permitting the 

use of a throwover control wheel for 

§ 61.57 did not make sense because a 

pilot not already meeting the recency 

requirements of that section cannot 

legally act as PIC when a certified flight 

instructor (CFI) is on board. The 

commenter is partially correct in stating 

that a pilot whose recency has lapsed 

under § 61.57 may not complete the 

requirements of § 61.57 in an airplane 

equipped with a throwover control 

wheel because the pilot may not act as 

PIC. The commenter’s assertion is true 

if the airman had allowed a lapse in the 

takeoff and landing experience 

requirements dictated by § 61.57 (a) and 

(b). An airman would, however, be 

allowed to obtain flight instruction to 

acquire takeoffs and landings prior to 

such a lapse in these experience 

requirements. The key concept in this 

example is whether the airman is able 

to act as PIC and therefore meet the 

requirement stipulated by § 91.109 (b) 

(2). 

That same commenter expressed 

concern over the language in § 91.109 

that requires a flight instructor in an 

airplane with only a single functioning 

throwover control wheel to ‘‘have 

logged at least 25 hours of pilot in 

command flight time’’ in the make and 

model of airplane with a single 

functioning throwover control wheel 

involved in the instruction. The 

commenter stated that the language 

could be interpreted to require that the 

25 hours must be flown with a single 

wheel and throwover yoke. The 

commenter’s interpretation was correct; 

however, upon further review the FAA 

has concluded that this requirement is 

unnecessarily burdensome. The 

requirement in the final rule will not 

demand that the instructor have logged 

25 hours of PIC flight time in a make 

and model of an aircraft that was 

obtained in aircraft having a throwover 

control wheel. The intent of the 25 

hours in make and model that remains 

in the final rule is to ensure that the 

instructor has the proficiency and skill 

in that type of aircraft to safely provide 

instruction without the benefit of direct 

elevator and aileron control. 

There was also confusion expressed 

over whether the 25 hours must be as 

acting PIC, or as logged PIC time, e.g., 

as the sole manipulator or CFI providing 

dual instruction. The answer is yes to 

all. If the CFI’s flight history involved 

PIC time logged as a student, a pilot, 

and/or a CFI in an aircraft that is of the 

particular make and model involved, 

then that time may be applied to the 25- 

hour requirement. The FAA received a 

similar comment expressing a request 

that ‘‘model’’ be defined as ‘‘all versions 

of a manufacturer’s type or series in the 

same class of aircraft.’’ As stated 

previously, the 25-hour requirement is 

in place to ensure that the instructor has 

the proficiency and skill in that type of 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
54102 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 169 / Wednesday, August 31, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

aircraft to safely provide instruction. 

Therefore, the 25-hour requirement in 

the particular make and model of 

airplane will remain in the final rule. 

Based on the established safety record 

of these operations, the FAA adopts 

§ 91.109(a) and (b)(3) as proposed in the 

NPRM with the changes described 

above. 

G. Exception to Requirement for Ground 

Training Facility When Training Is an 

Online Computer-Based Training 

Program 

In the NPRM, the FAA proposed to 

except pilot schools and provisional 

pilot schools from the requirement to 

describe each room used for ground 

training when the training course is an 

online computer-based training 

program. 

The responses to this proposal were 

overwhelmingly favorable. A few 

commenters expressed concern over the 

lack of personal interaction between the 

instructor and the student when 

receiving knowledge training over the 

internet. 

The FAA fully understands the 

concerns that distance learning seems 

counterintuitive. However, for many 

years, knowledge training under 14 CFR 

part 61 has been conducted successfully 

via remote learning through the internet 

or home video, or even with books 

alone. Additionally, colleges and 

universities have embraced distance 

learning and have found such training 

to be highly effective for multiple degree 

programs. Nevertheless, an endeavor 

such as flight training must include 

personal, one-on-one training with a 

flight instructor. Naturally, all actual 

flight training will involve such direct 

interaction. The flight training will 

reinforce the academic knowledge 

training that the student receives. Many 

schools already divide the one-on-one 

flight training portion of the student’s 

learning experience from the groundbased classroom training, with different 

instructors serving each capacity. This 

has proven to be very effective. Any 

training that would be allowed in any 

online computer-based training program 

under 14 CFR part 141 will be reviewed, 

approved, and overseen by the FAA. 

Distance learning has been available to 

students training under 14 CFR part 61 

for many years. This amendment, with 

additional oversight, simply extends 

distance learning to schools operating 

under 14 CFR part 141. 

Upon further review, it was found 

that some of the proposed text presented 

in the NPRM pertained to existing 

regulations found in Part 141, and 

therefore these portions have been 

moved to other sections of this Part or 

removed. In addition, minor editorial 

changes have been made for consistency 

with current regulations or to reflect 

current practice. 

This final rule adopts §§ 141.45 and 

141.55(c)(1) as proposed in the NPRM 

with clarifying changes described above. 

H. Conforming Amendments 

Since this rule amends § 61.1, the rule 

includes conforming amendments to 

§ 142.3 to make it consistent with the 

amendment to § 61.1. 

Miscellaneous Issues 

One organization submitted 

recommendations regarding the 

duration, renewal, and reinstatement 

requirements of flight instructor 

certificates. The arguments presented 

were cogent, thoroughly developed, and 

offered insightful observations. 

However, the FAA believes that 

pursuing that regulatory path is beyond 

the scope of this rulemaking effort and 

will not address those issues at this 

time. 

V. Regulatory Notices and Analyses 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

Information collection requirements 

associated with this final rule have been 

approved previously by the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) under 

the provisions of the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 

3507(d)), and have been assigned OMB 

Control Numbers 2120–0021 and 2120– 

0009. 

An agency may not collect or sponsor 

the collection of information, nor may it 

impose an information collection 

requirement unless it displays a 

currently valid Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) control number. 

International Compatibility 

In keeping with U.S. obligations 

under the Convention on International 

Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to 

conform to International Civil Aviation 

Organization (ICAO) Standards and 

Recommended Practices to the 

maximum extent practicable. The FAA 

has reviewed the corresponding ICAO 

Standards and Recommended Practices 

and has identified no differences with 

these regulations. 

Regulatory Evaluation, Regulatory 

Flexibility Determination, International 

Trade Impact Assessment, and 

Unfunded Mandates Assessment 

Changes to Federal regulations must 

undergo several economic analyses. 

First, Executive Order 12866 directs that 

each Federal agency shall propose or 

adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned 

determination that the benefits of the 

intended regulation justify its costs. 

Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

of 1980 (Pub. L. 96–354) requires 

agencies to analyze the economic 

impact of regulatory changes on small 

entities. Third, the Trade Agreements 

Act (Pub. L. 96–39) prohibits agencies 

from setting standards that create 

unnecessary obstacles to the foreign 

commerce of the United States. In 

developing U.S. standards, this Trade 

Act requires agencies to consider 

international standards and, where 

appropriate, that they be the basis of 

U.S. standards. Fourth, the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 

104–4) requires agencies to prepare a 

written assessment of the costs, benefits, 

and other effects of proposed or final 

rules that include a Federal mandate 

likely to result in the expenditure by 

State, local, or tribal governments, in the 

aggregate, or by the private sector, of 

$100 million or more annually (adjusted 

for inflation with base year of 1995). 

This portion of the preamble 

summarizes the FAA’s analysis of the 

economic impacts of this final rule. 

Readers seeking greater detail should 

read the full regulatory evaluation, a 

copy of which we have placed in the 

docket for this rulemaking. 

In conducting these analyses, the FAA 

has determined that this final rule: (1) 

Has benefits that justify its costs, (2) is 

not an economically ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ as defined in section 

3(f) of Executive Order 12866, (3) is 

‘‘significant’’ as defined in DOT’s 

Regulatory Policies and Procedures; (4) 

will have a significant economic impact 

on a substantial number of small 

entities; (5) will not create unnecessary 

obstacles to the foreign commerce of the 

United States; and (6) will not impose 

an unfunded mandate on state, local, or 

tribal governments, or on the private 

sector by exceeding the threshold 

identified above. These analyses are 

summarized below. 

Total Benefits and Costs of This Rule 

Over 10 years (2011 through 2020), 

the estimated total costs sum to $38.4 

million with $1.8 million of cost savings 

for a net cost of approximately $36.6 

million ($25.3 million discounted by 

7% and $31.0 million discounted by 

3%). Total estimated benefits over the 

10 years are approximately $96.5 

million ($66.7 million discounted by 

7% and $81.8 million discounted by 

3%). 

Who is potentially affected by this rule? 

• Pilots who act as pilot in command 

of single-piloted turbojet-powered 

aircraft; 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 169 / Wednesday, August 31, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 54103 

• Pilot Examiners who give 

proficiency checks in these aircraft; 

• Corporations that own these 

aircraft; 

• Applicants for private pilot 

certificates who may opt to apply for a 

combined private pilot certificate with 

instrument rating; 

• Holders of foreign pilot licenses; 

• Operators of aircraft with throwover 

control wheels; 

• Providers of internet-based training 

under part 141; and 

• Operators of complex aircraft. 

Assumptions: 

Estimates are in 2010 Dollars. 

Discount rates—7% and 3%. 

Period of analysis—2011 through 

2020. 

Value of a fatality avoided—$6.0 

million, value of serious injury— 

$345,000, value of minor injury— 

$12,000. 

Changes From the NPRM to the Final 

Rule 

The following summarizes changes 

from the NPRM to the final rule that are 

relevant to the regulatory evaluation and 

differences in the final regulatory 

evaluation from the initial regulatory 

evaluation. 

To mitigate the impact on 

experimental turbojet-powered aircraft 

pilots and owners, the final rule allows 

alternative methods of compliance for 

pilots of experimental jets who possess 

more than a single seat and excludes 

from the proficiency check requirement 

those pilots of experimental jets that 

possess a single seat and those who are 

not carrying passengers or who are 

carrying persons authorized by the 

Administrator. Pilots of experimental 

jets that possess more than a single seat, 

either by original design, or through 

modification, will be allowed to perform 

their annual proficiency checks in any 

turbojet-powered aircraft, and will not 

be required to have the check in an 

experimental jet, and one annual 

proficiency check in a turbojet-powered 

aircraft will suffice. Therefore, if the 

pilot is type rated in other turbojetpowered aircraft and is taking annual 

proficiency checks in these aircraft that 

comply with § 61.58, he or she will not 

need an additional check to be in 

compliance with the final revision to 

§ 61.58. 

However, in the NPRM regulatory 

evaluation, the FAA inadvertently did 

not include the cost of proficiency 

checks for pilots of experimental jets. 

The final rule regulatory evaluation 

includes those costs, but the costs are 

significantly less than they would have 

been under the more stringent 

requirements proposed in the NPRM. 

In the NPRM, the FAA proposed 

replacing the commercial pilot 

certificate requirement for 10 hours of 

training in a complex airplane with 10 

hours of advanced instrument training. 

For reasons cited previously, the FAA 

has elected not to adopt this proposal. 

Benefits of This Rule 

The quantified benefits of this rule 

consist of the value of fatalities, injuries 

and medical and legal expenses as the 

rule may avert more than 20 accidents 

if an annual proficiency check is 

required of pilots in command of those 

turbojet aircraft that are type certificated 

for single pilot operation and multi-seat 

experimental jets. The estimated safety 

benefits from flights in type certificated 

turbojets are $38.3 million; and from 

flights in experimental jets the 

estimated safety benefits are $58 

million. These benefits are associated 

with the revisions to § 61.58. 

Non-quantified benefits include: 

• Less work for pilots and aviation 

authorities and more cooperation that 

are expected to result from the revision 

to § 61.71 which will allow the 

conversion of a foreign pilot license to 

a U.S. pilot certificate; 

• Relieving part 141 schools from the 

requirements to have a ground training 

facility and to meet heating, lighting, 

ventilation, and location requirements 

for ground training space which is 

expected to result from the revisions to 

§ 141.45 and § 141.55. 

Costs of This Rule 

Costs: Total quantifiable costs of the 

changes, over 10 years, sum to 

approximately $38.4 million, with cost 

savings of approximately $1.8 million 

for a net cost of $36.6 million ($25.3 

million discounted by 7% and $31.0 

million discounted by 3%). 

The FAA estimated $38.4 million of 

costs associated with the revision to 

§ 61.58, which extended the 

requirement for annual proficiency 

checks to pilots in command of singlepiloted, turbojet-powered aircraft with 

an exclusion for those pilots serving as 

PIC in an experimental jet that 

possesses, by original design, a single 

seat and those not carrying passengers. 

These 10 year costs are based on: 

• An estimated 3,006 proficiency 

checks for pilots of type certificated 

turbojets at an net average cost of $3,914 

per check for a total cost of $11.8 

million; and 

• An estimated 5,880 proficiency 

checks for pilots of experimental jets at 

an net average cost of $4,529 per check 

for a total cost of $26.6 million. 

Cost Savings: The FAA also estimated 

a total of $1.8 million in cost savings 

associated with the revisions to § 61.65 

and Appendix M to Part 141. These 

revisions will allow the application for 

and issuance of an instrument rating 

concurrently with a private pilot 

certificate for pilots. Pilots are expected 

to save money by completing the 

combined course in less time and taking 

one exam rather than two. 

Regulatory Flexibility Determination 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 

(Pub. L. 96–354) (RFA) establishes ‘‘as a 

principle of regulatory issuance that 

agencies shall endeavor, consistent with 

the objectives of the rule and of 

applicable statutes, to fit regulatory and 

informational requirements to the scale 

of the businesses, organizations, and 

governmental jurisdictions subject to 

regulation. To achieve this principle, 

agencies are required to solicit and 

consider flexible regulatory proposals 

and to explain the rationale for their 

actions to assure that such proposals are 

given serious consideration.’’ The RFA 

covers a wide-range of small entities, 

including small businesses, not-forprofit organizations, and small 

governmental jurisdictions. Agencies 

must perform a review to determine 

whether a rule will have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. If the agency 

determines that it will, the agency must 

prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis 

as described in the RFA. 

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Section 603 of the Act requires 

agencies to prepare and make available 

for public comment a final regulatory 

flexibility analysis (FRFA) describing 

the impact of final rules on small 

entities. Section 603 of the Act specifies 

the content of a FRFA. Each FRFA must 

contain: 

• A description of the reasons why 

action by the agency is being 

considered; 

• A succinct statement of the 

objectives of, and legal basis for, the 

final rule; 

• A description of and, where 

feasible, an estimate of the number of 

small entities to which the rule will 

apply; 

• A description of the projected 

reporting, record keeping and other 

compliance requirements of the final 

rule, including an estimate of the classes 

of small entities which will be subject 

to the requirement and the type of 

professional skills necessary for 

preparation of the report or record; 

• An identification, to the extent 

practicable, of all relevant Federal rules 

which may duplicate, overlap, or 

conflict with the final rule; and 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
54104 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 169 / Wednesday, August 31, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

• Each final regulatory flexibility 

analysis shall also contain a description 

of any significant alternatives to the 

final rule which accomplish the stated 

objectives of applicable statutes and 

which minimize any significant 

economic impact of the final rule on 

small entities. 

Reasons Why the Final Rule Is Being 

Promulgated 

This rulemaking is being promulgated 

to ensure that flight crewmembers have 

the training and qualifications to 

operate aircraft safely. For this reason, 

the changes are within the scope of our 

authority and are a reasonable and 

necessary exercise of our statutory 

obligations. 

Objectives and Legal Basis for the Rule 

The FAA’s authority to issue rules 

regarding aviation safety is found in 

Title 49 of the United States Code. 

Subtitle I, section 106 describes the 

authority of the FAA Administrator, 

including the 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 promulgated 

under the authority described in 

Subtitle VII, Part A, Chapter 447—Safety 

Regulation. Under section 44701, the 

FAA is charged with promoting safe 

flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by 

prescribing regulations necessary for 

safety. Under section 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 amend the training, 

qualification, certification, and 

operating requirements for pilots. 

A description of the small entities the 

rule will apply to: 

Some commenters contested the 

statement in the NPRM that ‘‘pilots are 

not entities, so there would not be a 

small entity impact with regards to 

pilots.’’ However, the Small Business 

Administration identifies three types of 

small entities: small business, small 

organization, and small governmental 

jurisdiction. Pilots are therefore not 

considered small entities for purposes of 

the regulatory flexibility analysis. 

However, contrary to our statement in 

the NPRM, the FAA believes that this 

rule, by revising § 61.58, will have a 

significant impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. The revision to 

§ 61.58 may apply to small corporations 

that provide air transportation in type 

certificated single-piloted turbojetpowered aircraft, small businesses that 

participate in air shows using an 

experimental jet and small businesses 

which provide training in multi-seat 

experimental jet aircraft under an A–115 

authorization. 

Other revisions that are being 

finalized with this rule are not expected 

to have a significant impact on a 

substantial number of small entities, as 

was described in the NPRM. The 

revision allowing foreign pilot 

applicants to convert their foreign pilot 

license to a U.S. pilot certificate will 

affect pilots not small entities. The 

revision allowing pilot schools to use 

online training without requiring a 

physical ground facility is cost relieving 

and might encourage more schools to 

provide internet-based ground training, 

but only if the schools believe the 

revenues will outweigh the costs. The 

revision allowing applicants for a 

private pilot certificate to apply for a 

combined private pilot certification and 

instrument rating is expected to be cost 

relieving to pilots. 

Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping and 

Other Requirements 

There are no new paperwork 

requirements associated with this final 

rule. 

Overlapping, Duplicative, or Conflicting 

Federal Rules 

The FAA has concluded that the final 

rule will not overlap, duplicate or 

conflict with existing Federal Rules. 

Mitigation of Higher Cost Alternatives 

The final rule is expected to have a 

significant impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. The most 

likely net cost for each § 61.58 

proficiency check averages $3,914 for 

type certificated aircraft and $4,529 for 

experimental aircraft. These costs are 

expected to have a significant economic 

impact on operators/owners of one or 

two aircraft with limited revenue. The 

FAA however, has revised § 61.58 in the 

final rule relative to the NPRM by 

adding several cost relieving elements 

for experimental jet pilots. Each element 

can be viewed as a cost relieving 

alternative. One element excludes pilots 

who serve as pilot in command of an 

experimental jet with one seat by 

original design from the requirement to 

complete a proficiency check. Another 

element that applies to pilots of 

experimental aircraft will allow 

proficiency checks taken in any 

turbojet-powered aircraft, consistent 

with § 61.58, to fulfill the requirement. 

The FAA expects this to be cost 

relieving to about 60% of experimental 

jet pilots who are type rated in other 

turbojets and who the agency thinks are 

already completing proficiency checks 

either because of insurance 

requirements or employment 

requirements. Also, the additions to the 

final rule will relieve the experimental 

jet pilot from having to take a § 61.58 

proficiency check in every experimental 

jet that he or she pilots: One proficiency 

check in a turbojet will be sufficient. 

Another cost relieving element in the 

final rule that was not in the NPRM is 

the addition of § 61.58(e), which allows 

pilots of experimental jets with more 

than one seat who have not taken 

proficiency checks to continue to pilot 

an experimental jet if they do not carry 

passengers. These provisions will 

substantially relieve costs of the NPRM 

requirements. 

Although there have been changes 

from the NPRM to the final rule to 

mitigate possible costs, the rule will still 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

International Trade Impact Assessment 

The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 

(Pub. L. 96–39), as amended by the 

Uruguay Round Agreements Act (Pub. 

L. 103–465), prohibits Federal agencies 

from establishing standards or engaging 

in related activities that create 

unnecessary obstacles to the foreign 

commerce of the United States. 

Pursuant to these Acts, the 

establishment of standards is not 

considered an unnecessary obstacle to 

the foreign commerce of the United 

States, so long as the standard has a 

legitimate domestic objective, such as 

the protection of safety, and does not 

operate in a manner that excludes 

imports that meet this objective. The 

statute also requires consideration of 

international standards and, where 

appropriate, that they be the basis for 

U.S. standards. The FAA has assessed 

the potential effect of this final rule and 

determined that it ensures the safety of 

the American public. As a result, this 

rule is not considered as creating an 

unnecessary obstacle to foreign 

commerce. 

Unfunded Mandates Assessment 

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4) 

requires each Federal agency to prepare 

a written statement assessing the effects 

of any Federal mandate in a proposed or 

final agency rule that may result in an 

expenditure of $100 million or more (in 

1995 dollars) in any one year by State, 

local, and tribal governments, in the 

aggregate, or by the private sector; such 

a mandate is deemed to be a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action.’’ The FAA currently 

uses an inflation-adjusted value of 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 169 / Wednesday, August 31, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 54105 

$143.1 million in lieu of $100 million. 

This final rule does not contain such a 

mandate; therefore, the requirements of 

Title II of the Act do not apply. 

Executive Order 13132, Federalism 

The FAA has analyzed this final rule 

under the principles and criteria of 

Executive Order 13132, Federalism. The 

agency has determined that this action 

will not have a substantial direct effect 

on the States, or the relationship 

between the Federal Government and 

the States, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities among the 

various levels of government, and, 

therefore, does not have federalism 

implications. 

Environmental Analysis 

FAA Order 1050.1E identifies FAA 

actions that are categorically excluded 

from preparation of an environmental 

assessment or environmental impact 

statement under the National 

Environmental Policy Act in the 

absence of extraordinary circumstances. 

The FAA has determined this 

rulemaking action qualifies for the 

categorical exclusion identified in 

paragraph 307(k) and involves no 

extraordinary circumstances. 

Regulations That Significantly Affect 

Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use 

The FAA has analyzed this final rule 

under Executive Order 13211, Actions 

Concerning Regulations that 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use (May 18, 2001). The 

FAA has determined that it is not a 

‘‘significant energy action’’ under the 

executive order because while a 

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under 

DOT’s Regulatory Policies and 

Procedures, it is not likely to have a 

significant adverse effect on the supply, 

distribution, or use of energy. 

Availability of Rulemaking Documents 

You can get an electronic copy of 

rulemaking documents using the 

Internet by— 

1. Searching the Federal eRulemaking 

Portal (http://www.regulations.gov); 

2. Visiting the FAA’s Regulations and 

Policies Web page at http:// 

www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/ or 

3. Accessing the Government Printing 

Office’s Web page at http:// 

www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/index.html. 

You can also get a copy by sending a 

request to the Federal Aviation 

Administration, Office of Rulemaking, 

ARM–1, 800 Independence Avenue, 

SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by 

calling (202) 267–9680. Make sure to 

identify the notice, amendment, or 

docket number of this rulemaking. 

Anyone is able to search the 

electronic form of all comments 

received into any of our dockets by the 

name of the individual submitting the 

comment (or signing the comment, if 

submitted on behalf of an association, 

business, labor union, etc.). You may 

review DOT’s complete Privacy Act 

statement in the Federal Register 

published on April 11, 2000 (Volume 

65, Number 70; Pages 19477–78) or you 

may visit http://DocketsInfo.dot.gov. 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act 

The Small Business Regulatory 

Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 

1996 requires FAA to comply with 

small entity requests for information or 

advice about compliance with statutes 

and regulations within its jurisdiction. If 

you are a small entity and you have a 

question regarding this document, you 

may contact your local FAA official, or 

the person listed under the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT heading at the 

beginning of the preamble. You can find 

out more about SBREFA on the Internet 

at http://www.faa.gov/ 

regulations_policies/rulemaking/ 

sbre_act/. 

List of Subjects 

14 CFR Part 61 

Aircraft, Airmen, Alcohol abuse, 

Aviation safety, Drug abuse, Recreation 

and recreation areas, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Security 

measures, Teachers. 

14 CFR Part 91 

Afghanistan, Agriculture, Air traffic 

control, Aircraft, Airmen, Airports, 

Aviation safety, Canada, Cuba, Ethiopia, 

Freight, Mexico, Noise control, Political 

candidates, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, 

Yugoslavia. 

14 CFR Part 141 

Airmen, Educational facilities, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Schools. 

14 CFR Part 142 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Airmen, Educational 

facilities, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Schools, Teachers. 

The Amendment 

In consideration of the foregoing, the 

Federal Aviation Administration 

amends Chapter I of Title 14, Code of 

Federal Regulations as follows: 

PART 61—CERTIFICATION: PILOTS 

AND FLIGHT INSTRUCTORS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 61 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701– 

44703, 44707, 44709–44711, 45102–45103, 

45301–45302. 

■ 2. Amend § 61.1 as follows: 

■ a. Redesignating paragraphs (b)(3) 

through (18) as paragraphs (b)(4) 

through (19) respectively; 

■ b. Add new paragraph (b)(3); and 

■ c. Amend newly redesignated (b)(4)(i) 

introductory text by removing the 

phrase ‘‘(b)(3)(ii) through (b)(3)(vi)’’ and 

adding the phrase ‘‘(b)(4)(ii) through 

(b)(4)(vi)’’ in its place. 

The addition reads as follows: 

§ 61.1 Applicability and definitions. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(3) Complex airplane means an 

airplane that has a retractable landing 

gear, flaps, and a controllable pitch 

propeller, including airplanes equipped 

with an engine control system 

consisting of a digital computer and 

associated accessories for controlling 

the engine and propeller, such as a full 

authority digital engine control; or, in 

the case of a seaplane, flaps and a 

controllable pitch propeller, including 

seaplanes equipped with an engine 

control system consisting of a digital 

computer and associated accessories for 

controlling the engine and propeller, 

such as a full authority digital engine 

control. 

* * * * * 

■ 3. Amend § 61.31 by revising 

paragraph (e)(1) introductory text to 

read as follows: 

§ 61.31 Type rating requirements, 

additional training, and authorization 

requirements. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

(1) Except as provided in paragraph 

(e)(2) of this section, no person may act 

as pilot in command of a complex 

airplane, unless the person has— 

* * * * * 

■ 4. Amend § 61.51 by revising 

paragraph (b)(1)(v) to read as follows: 

§ 61.51 Pilot logbooks. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(v) The name of a safety pilot, if 

required by § 91.109 of this chapter. 

* * * * * 

■ 5. Amend § 61.55 by revising 

paragraph (f)(4) to read as follows: 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
54106 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 169 / Wednesday, August 31, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

§ 61.55 Second-in-command 

qualifications. 

* * * * * 

(f) * * * 

(4) Designated as a safety pilot for 

purposes required by § 91.109 of this 

chapter. 

* * * * * 

■ 6. Amend § 61.58 as follows: 

■ a. Revise the section heading and 

paragraphs (a) and (d)(1) through (4); 

■ b. Add paragraph (d)(5); 

■ c. Redesignate paragraphs (e) through 

(g) as paragraphs (g) through (i), 

respectively; 

■ d. Add new paragraphs (e) and (f); 

■ e. Amend newly redesignated 

paragraph (g) introductory text by 

removing the phrase ‘‘paragraphs (d)(1) 

through (d)(4)’’ and adding in its place 

the phrase ‘‘paragraphs (d)(1) through 

(5)’’: 

■ f. Amend newly redesignated 

paragraph (g)(1) introductory text by 

removing the phrase ‘‘paragraphs (e)(2) 

and (e)(3)’’ and adding in its place the 

phrase ‘‘paragraphs (g)(2) and (3)’’; 

■ g. Amend newly redesignated 

paragraph (g)(2) introductory text by 

removing the phrase ‘‘paragraph (e)’’ 

and adding in its place the phrase 

‘‘paragraph (g)’’; and 

■ h. Amend newly redesignated 

paragraph (g)(3) introductory text by 

removing the phrase ‘‘paragraph (e)’’ 

and adding in its place the phrase 

‘‘paragraph (g)’’. 

The revisions and additions read as 

follows: 

§ 61.58 Pilot-in-command proficiency 

check: Operation of an aircraft that requires 

more than one pilot flight crewmember or 

is turbojet-powered. 

(a) Except as otherwise provided in 

this section, to serve as pilot in 

command of an aircraft that is type 

certificated for more than one required 

pilot flight crewmember or is turbojetpowered, a person must— 

(1) Within the preceding 12 calendar 

months, complete a pilot-in-command 

proficiency check in an aircraft that is 

type certificated for more than one 

required pilot flight crewmember or is 

turbojet-powered; and 

(2) Within the preceding 24 calendar 

months, complete a pilot-in-command 

proficiency check in the particular type 

of aircraft in which that person will 

serve as pilot in command, that is type 

certificated for more than one required 

pilot flight crewmember or is turbojetpowered. 

* * * * * 

(d) * * * 

(1) A pilot-in-command proficiency 

check conducted by a person authorized 

by the Administrator, consisting of the 

aeronautical knowledge areas, areas of 

operations, and tasks required for a type 

rating, in an aircraft that is type 

certificated for more than one pilot 

flight crewmember or is turbojetpowered; 

(2) The practical test required for a 

type rating, in an aircraft that is type 

certificated for more than one required 

pilot flight crewmember or is turbojetpowered; 

(3) The initial or periodic practical 

test required for the issuance of a pilot 

examiner or check airman designation, 

in an aircraft that is type certificated for 

more than one required pilot flight 

crewmember or is turbojet-powered; 

(4) A pilot proficiency check 

administered by a U.S. Armed Force 

that qualifies the military pilot for pilotin-command designation with 

instrument privileges, and was 

performed in a military aircraft that the 

military requires to be operated by more 

than one pilot flight crewmember or is 

turbojet-powered; 

(5) For a pilot authorized by the 

Administrator to operate an 

experimental turbojet-powered aircraft 

that possesses, by original design or 

through modification, more than a 

single seat, the required proficiency 

check for all of the experimental 

turbojet-powered aircraft for which the 

pilot holds an authorization may be 

accomplished by completing any one of 

the following: 

(i) A single proficiency check, 

conducted by an examiner authorized 

by the Administrator, in any one of the 

experimental turbojet-powered aircraft 

for which the airman holds an 

authorization to operate if conducted 

within the prior 12 months; 

(ii) A single proficiency check, 

conducted by an examiner authorized 

by the Administrator, in any 

experimental turbojet-powered aircraft 

(e.g., if a pilot acquires a new 

authorization to operate an additional 

experimental turbojet-powered aircraft, 

the check for that new authorization 

will meet the intent), if conducted 

within the prior 12 months; 

(iii) Current qualification under an 

Advanced Qualification Program (AQP) 

under subpart Y of part 121 of this 

chapter; 

(iv) Any proficiency check conducted 

under subpart K of part 91, part 121, or 

part 135 of this chapter within the prior 

12 months if conducted in a turbojetpowered aircraft; or 

(v) Any other § 61.58 proficiency 

check conducted within the prior 12 

months if conducted in a turbojetpowered aircraft. 

(e) The pilot of a multi-seat 

experimental turbojet-powered aircraft 

who has not received a proficiency 

check within the prior 12 months in 

accordance with this section may 

continue to operate such aircraft in 

accordance with the pilot’s 

authorizations. However, the pilot is 

prohibited from carriage of any persons 

in any experimental turbojet-powered 

aircraft with the exception of those 

individuals authorized by the 

Administrator to conduct training, 

conduct flight checks, or perform pilot 

certification functions in such aircraft, 

and only during flights specifically 

related to training, flight checks, or 

certification in such aircraft. 

(f) This section will not apply to a 

pilot authorized by the Administrator to 

serve as pilot in command in 

experimental turbojet-powered aircraft 

that possesses, by original design, a 

single seat, when operating such singleseat aircraft. 

* * * * * 

■ 7. Amend § 61.65 as follows: 

■ a. Revise paragraphs (a)(1), (d)(1), 

(e)(1), and (f)(1); 

■ b. Redesignate paragraphs (g) and (h) 

as paragraphs (h) and (i); 

■ c. Add new paragraph (g). 

The revisions and additions read as 

follows: 

§ 61.65 Instrument rating requirements. 

(a) * * * 

(1) Hold at least a current private pilot 

certificate, or be concurrently applying 

for a private pilot certificate, with an 

airplane, helicopter, or powered-lift 

rating appropriate to the instrument 

rating sought; 

* * * * * 

(d) * * * 

(1) Except as provided in paragraph 

(g) of this section, 50 hours of crosscountry flight time as pilot in command, 

of which 10 hours must have been in an 

airplane; and 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

(1) Except as provided in paragraph 

(g) of this section, 50 hours of crosscountry flight time as pilot in command, 

of which 10 hours must have been in a 

helicopter; and 

* * * * * 

(f) * * * 

(1) Except as provided in paragraph 

(g) of this section, 50 hours of crosscountry flight time as pilot in command, 

of which 10 hours must have been in a 

powered-lift; and 

* * * * * 

(g) An applicant for a combined 

private pilot certificate with an 

instrument rating may satisfy the crosscountry flight time requirements of this 

section by crediting: 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 169 / Wednesday, August 31, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 54107 

(1) For an instrument-airplane rating 

or an instrument-powered-lift rating, up 

to 45 hours of cross-country flight time 

performing the duties of pilot in 

command with an authorized instructor; 

or 

(2) For an instrument-helicopter 

rating, up to 47 hours of cross-country 

flight time performing the duties of pilot 

in command with an authorized 

instructor. 

* * * * * 

■ 8. Amend § 61.71 by adding paragraph 

(c) to read as follows: 

§ 61.71 Graduates of an approved training 

program other than under this part: Special 

rules. 

* * * * * 

(c) A person who holds a foreign pilot 

license and is applying for an equivalent 

U.S. pilot certificate on the basis of a 

Bilateral Aviation Safety Agreement and 

associated Implementation Procedures 

for Licensing is considered to have met 

the applicable aeronautical experience, 

aeronautical knowledge, and areas of 

operation requirements of this part. 

PART 91—GENERAL OPERATING AND 

FLIGHT RULES 

■ 9. The authority citation for part 91 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 1155, 40103, 

40113, 40120, 44101, 44111, 44701, 44704, 

44709, 44711, 44712, 44715, 44716, 44717, 

44722, 46306, 46315, 46316, 46504, 46506– 

46507, 47122, 47508, 47528–47531, articles 

12 and 29 of the Convention on International 

Civil Aviation (61 stat. 1180). 

■ 10. Amend SFAR No. 108 by revising 

paragraph (b)(3) of section 2 to read as 

follows: 

Special Federal Aviation Regulation No. 

108—Mitsubishi MU–28 Series Special 

Training, Experience, and Operating 

Requirements 

* * * * * 

2. * * * 

(b) * * * 

(3) The pilot-in-command is conducting a 

simulated instrument flight and is using a 

safety pilot other than the pilot-in-command 

who manipulates the controls for the 

purposes of 14 CFR 91.109, and no 

passengers or cargo are carried on board the 

airplane. 

* * * * * 

■ 11. Amend § 91.109 as follows: 

■ a. Revise paragraph (a) introductory 

text; 

■ b. Redesignating paragraphs (b) and 

(c) as paragraphs (c) and (d), 

respectively; 

■ c. Add new paragraph (b). 

The revision and addition read as 

follows: 

§ 91.109 Flight instruction; simulated 

instrument flight and certain flight tests. 

(a) No person may operate a civil 

aircraft (except a manned free balloon) 

that is being used for flight instruction 

unless that aircraft has fully functioning 

dual controls. However, instrument 

flight instruction may be given in an 

airplane that is equipped with a single, 

functioning throwover control wheel 

that controls the elevator and ailerons, 

in place of fixed, dual controls, when— 

* * * * * 

(b) An airplane equipped with a 

single, functioning throwover control 

wheel that controls the elevator and 

ailerons, in place of fixed, dual controls 

may be used for flight instruction to 

conduct a flight review required by 

§ 61.56 of this chapter, or to obtain 

recent flight experience or an 

instrument proficiency check required 

by § 61.57 when— 

(1) The airplane is equipped with 

operable rudder pedals at both pilot 

stations; 

(2) The pilot manipulating the 

controls is qualified to serve and serves 

as pilot in command during the entire 

flight; 

(3) The instructor is current and 

qualified to serve as pilot in command 

of the airplane, meets the requirements 

of § 61.195(b), and has logged at least 25 

hours of pilot-in-command flight time in 

the make and model of airplane; and 

(4) The pilot in command and the 

instructor have determined the flight 

can be conducted safely. 

* * * * * 

PART 141—PILOT SCHOOLS 

■ 12. The authority citation for 14 CFR 

part 141 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701– 

44703, 44707, 44709, 44711, 45102–45103, 

45301–45302. 

■ 13. Revise § 141.45 to read as follows: 

§ 141.45 Ground training facilities. 

An applicant for a pilot school or 

provisional pilot school certificate must 

show that: 

(a) Except as provided in paragraph 

(c) of this section, each room, training 

booth, or other space used for 

instructional purposes is heated, 

lighted, and ventilated to conform to 

local building, sanitation, and health 

codes. 

(b) Except as provided in paragraph 

(c) of this section, the training facility is 

so located that the students in that 

facility are not distracted by the training 

conducted in other rooms, or by flight 

and maintenance operations on the 

airport. 

(c) If a training course is conducted 

through an internet-based medium, the 

holder of a pilot school certificate or 

provisional pilot school certificate that 

provides such training need not comply 

with paragraphs (a) and (b) of this 

section but must maintain in current 

status a permanent business location 

and business telephone number. 

■ 14. Amend § 141.53 by adding 

paragraph (d) to read as follows: 

§ 141.53 Approval procedures for a 

training course: General. 

* * * * * 

(d) Additional rules for internet based 

training courses. An application for an 

initial or amended training course 

offered through an internet based 

medium must comply with the 

following: 

(1) All amendments must be 

identified numerically by page, date, 

and screen. Minor editorial and 

typographical changes do not require 

FAA approval, provided the school 

notifies the FAA within 30 days of their 

insertion. 

(2) For monitoring purposes, the 

school must provide the FAA an 

acceptable means to log-in and log-off 

from a remote location to review all 

elements of the course as viewed by 

attendees and to by-pass the normal 

attendee restrictions. 

(3) The school must incorporate 

adequate security measures into its 

internet-based courseware information 

system and into its operating and 

maintenance procedures to ensure the 

following fundamental areas of security 

and protection: 

(i) Integrity. 

(ii) Identification/Authentication. 

(iii) Confidentiality. 

(iv) Availability. 

(v) Access control. 

■ 15. Amend § 141.55 by revising 

paragraph (c)(1) to read as follows: 

§ 141.55 Training course: Contents. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(1) A description of each room used 

for ground training, including the 

room’s size and the maximum number 

of students that may be trained in the 

room at one time, unless the course is 

provided via an internet-based training 

medium; 

* * * * * 

■ 16. Amend § 141.93 by revising 

paragraph (a)(3) introductory text to 

read as follows: 

§ 141.93 Enrollment. 

(a) * * * 

(3) Except for a training course offered 

through an internet based medium, a 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
54108 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 169 / Wednesday, August 31, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

copy of the safety procedures and 

practices developed by the school that 

describe the use of the school’s facilities 

and the operation of its aircraft. Those 

procedures and practices shall include 

training on at least the following 

information— 

* * * * * 

■ 17. Amend § 141.95 by adding 

paragraph (b)(8) to read as follows: 

§ 141.95 Graduation Certificate. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(8) Certificates issued upon 

graduating from a course based on 

internet media must be uniquely 

identified using an alphanumeric code 

that is specific to the student graduating 

from that course. 

■ 18. Amend § 141.101 by revising 

paragraph (a)(3) to read as follows: 

§ 141.101 Training records. 

(a) * * * 

(3) The date the student graduated, 

terminated training, or transferred to 

another school. In the case of graduation 

from a course based on internet media, 

the school must maintain the 

identifying graduation certificate code 

required by § 141.95(b)(8). 

* * * * * 

■ 19. Add new Appendix M to Part 141 

to read as follows: 

Appendix M to Part 141—Combined 

Private Pilot Certification and 

Instrument Rating Course 

1. Applicability. This appendix prescribes 

the minimum curriculum for a combined 

private pilot certification and instrument 

rating course required under this part, for the 

following ratings: 

(a) Airplane. 

(1) Airplane single-engine. 

(2) Airplane multiengine. 

(b) Rotorcraft helicopter. 

(c) Powered-lift. 

2. Eligibility for enrollment. A person must 

hold a sport pilot, recreational, or student 

pilot certificate prior to enrolling in the flight 

portion of a combined private pilot 

certification and instrument rating course. 

3. Aeronautical knowledge training. 

(a) Each approved course must include at 

least 65 hours of ground training on the 

aeronautical knowledge areas listed in 

paragraph (b) of this section that are 

appropriate to the aircraft category and class 

rating of the course: 

(b) Ground training must include the 

following aeronautical knowledge areas: 

(1) Applicable Federal Aviation 

Regulations for private pilot privileges, 

limitations, flight operations, and instrument 

flight rules (IFR) flight operations. 

(2) Accident reporting requirements of the 

National Transportation Safety Board. 

(3) Applicable subjects of the 

‘‘Aeronautical Information Manual’’ and the 

appropriate FAA advisory circulars. 

(4) Aeronautical charts for visual flight 

rules (VFR) navigation using pilotage, dead 

reckoning, and navigation systems. 

(5) Radio communication procedures. 

(6) Recognition of critical weather 

situations from the ground and in flight, 

windshear avoidance, and the procurement 

and use of aeronautical weather reports and 

forecasts. 

(7) Safe and efficient operation of aircraft 

under instrument flight rules and conditions. 

(8) Collision avoidance and recognition 

and avoidance of wake turbulence. 

(9) Effects of density altitude on takeoff 

and climb performance. 

(10) Weight and balance computations. 

(11) Principles of aerodynamics, 

powerplants, and aircraft systems. 

(12) If the course of training is for an 

airplane category, stall awareness, spin entry, 

spins, and spin recovery techniques. 

(13) Air traffic control system and 

procedures for instrument flight operations. 

(14) IFR navigation and approaches by use 

of navigation systems. 

(15) Use of IFR en route and instrument 

approach procedure charts. 

(16) Aeronautical decision making and 

judgment. 

(17) Preflight action that includes— 

(i) How to obtain information on runway 

lengths at airports of intended use, data on 

takeoff and landing distances, weather 

reports and forecasts, and fuel requirements. 

(ii) How to plan for alternatives if the 

planned flight cannot be completed or delays 

are encountered. 

(iii) Procurement and use of aviation 

weather reports and forecasts, and the 

elements of forecasting weather trends on the 

basis of that information and personal 

observation of weather conditions. 

4. Flight training. 

(a) Each approved course must include at 

least 70 hours of training, as described in 

section 4 and section 5 of this appendix, on 

the approved areas of operation listed in 

paragraph (d) of section 4 of this appendix 

that are appropriate to the aircraft category 

and class rating of the course: 

(b) Each approved course must include at 

least the following flight training: 

(1) For an airplane single engine course: 70 

hours of flight training from an authorized 

instructor on the approved areas of operation 

in paragraph (d)(1) of this section that 

includes at least— 

(i) Except as provided in § 61.111 of this 

chapter, 3 hours of cross-country flight 

training in a single engine airplane. 

(ii) 3 hours of night flight training in a 

single-engine airplane that includes— 

(A) One cross-country flight of more than 

100 nautical miles total distance. 

(B) 10 takeoffs and 10 landings to a full 

stop (with each landing involving a flight in 

the traffic pattern) at an airport. 

(iii) 35 hours of instrument flight training 

in a single-engine airplane that includes at 

least one cross-country flight that is 

performed under IFR and— 

(A) Is a distance of at least 250 nautical 

miles along airways or air traffic controldirected (ATC-directed) routing with one 

segment of the flight consisting of at least a 

straight-line distance of 100 nautical miles 

between airports. 

(B) Involves an instrument approach at 

each airport. 

(C) Involves three different kinds of 

approaches with the use of navigation 

systems. 

(iv) 3 hours of flight training in a singleengine airplane in preparation for the 

practical test within 60 days preceding the 

date of the test. 

(2) For an airplane multiengine course: 70 

hours of training from an authorized 

instructor on the approved areas of operation 

in paragraph (d)(2) of this section that 

includes at least— 

(i) Except as provided in § 61.111 of this 

chapter, 3 hours of cross-country flight 

training in a multiengine airplane. 

(ii) 3 hours of night flight training in a 

multiengine airplane that includes— 

(A) One cross-country flight of more than 

100 nautical miles total distance. 

(B) 10 takeoffs and 10 landings to a full 

stop (with each landing involving a flight in 

the traffic pattern) at an airport. 

(iii) 35 hours of instrument flight training 

in a multiengine airplane that includes at 

least one cross-country flight that is 

performed under IFR and— 

(A) Is a distance of at least 250 nautical 

miles along airways or ATC-directed routing 

with one segment of the flight consisting of 

at least a straight-line distance of 100 

nautical miles between airports. 

(B) Involves an instrument approach at 

each airport. 

(C) Involves three different kinds of 

approaches with the use of navigation 

systems. 

(iv) 3 hours of flight training in a 

multiengine airplane in preparation for the 

practical test within 60 days preceding the 

date of the test. 

(3) For a rotorcraft helicopter course: 70 

hours of training from an authorized 

instructor on the approved areas of operation 

in paragraph (d)(3) of this section that 

includes at least— 

(i) Except as provided in § 61.111 of this 

chapter, 3 hours of cross-country flight 

training in a helicopter. 

(ii) 3 hours of night flight training in a 

helicopter that includes— 

(A) One cross-country flight of more than 

50 nautical miles total distance. 

(B) 10 takeoffs and 10 landings to a full 

stop (with each landing involving a flight in 

the traffic pattern) at an airport. 

(iii) 35 hours of instrument flight training 

in a helicopter that includes at least one 

cross-country flight that is performed under 

IFR and— 

(A) Is a distance of at least 100 nautical 

miles along airways or ATC-directed routing 

with one segment of the flight consisting of 

at least a straight-line distance of 50 nautical 

miles between airports. 

(B) Involves an instrument approach at 

each airport. 

(C) Involves three different kinds of 

approaches with the use of navigation 

systems. 

(iv) 3 hours of flight training in a helicopter 

in preparation for the practical test within 60 

days preceding the date of the test. 

(4) For a powered-lift course: 70 hours of 

training from an authorized instructor on the 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 169 / Wednesday, August 31, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 54109 

approved areas of operation in paragraph 

(d)(4) of this section that includes at least— 

(i) Except as provided in § 61.111 of this 

chapter, 3 hours of cross-country flight 

training in a powered-lift. 

(ii) 3 hours of night flight training in a 

powered-lift that includes— 

(A) One cross-country flight of more than 

100 nautical miles total distance. 

(B) 10 takeoffs and 10 landings to a full 

stop (with each landing involving a flight in 

the traffic pattern) at an airport. 

(iii) 35 hours of instrument flight training 

in a powered-lift that includes at least one 

cross-country flight that is performed under 

IFR and— 

(A) Is a distance of at least 250 nautical 

miles along airways or ATC-directed routing 

with one segment of the flight consisting of 

at least a straight-line distance of 100 

nautical miles between airports. 

(B) Involves an instrument approach at 

each airport. 

(C) Involves three different kinds of 

approaches with the use of navigation 

systems. 

(iv) 3 hours of flight training in a poweredlift in preparation for the practical test, 

within 60 days preceding the date of the test. 

(c) For use of flight simulators or flight 

training devices: 

(1) The course may include training in a 

combination of flight simulators, flight 

training devices, and aviation training 

device, provided it is representative of the 

aircraft for which the course is approved, 

meets the requirements of this section, and 

the training is given by an authorized 

instructor. 

(2) Training in a flight simulator that meets 

the requirements of § 141.41(a) of this part 

may be credited for a maximum of 35 percent 

of the total flight training hour requirements 

of the approved course, or of this section, 

whichever is less. 

(3) Training in a flight training device or 

aviation training device that meets the 

requirements of § 141.41(b) of this part may 

be credited for a maximum of 25 percent of 

the total flight training hour requirements of 

the approved course, or of this section, 

whichever is less. 

(4) Training in a combination of flight 

simulators, flight training devices, or aviation 

training devices, described in paragraphs 

(c)(2) and (c)(3) of this section, may be 

credited for a maximum of 35 percent of the 

total flight training hour requirements of the 

approved course, or of this section, 

whichever is less. However, credit for 

training in a flight training device and 

aviation training device, that meets the 

requirements of § 141.41(b), cannot exceed 

the limitation provided for in paragraph 

(c)(3) of this section. 

(d) Each approved course must include the 

flight training on the approved areas of 

operation listed in this section that are 

appropriate to the aircraft category and class 

rating course— 

(1) For a combined private pilot 

certification and instrument rating course 

involving a single-engine airplane: 

(i) Preflight preparation. 

(ii) Preflight procedures. 

(iii) Airport and seaplane base operations. 

(iv) Takeoffs, landings, and go-arounds. 

(v) Performance maneuvers. 

(vi) Ground reference maneuvers. 

(vii) Navigation and navigation systems. 

(viii) Slow flight and stalls. 

(ix) Basic instrument maneuvers and flight 

by reference to instruments. 

(x) Instrument approach procedures. 

(xi) Air traffic control clearances and 

procedures. 

(xii) Emergency operations. 

(xiii) Night operations. 

(xiv) Postflight procedures. 

(2) For a combined private pilot 

certification and instrument rating course 

involving a multiengine airplane: 

(i) Preflight preparation. 

(ii) Preflight procedures. 

(iii) Airport and seaplane base operations. 

(iv) Takeoffs, landings, and go-arounds. 

(v) Performance maneuvers. 

(vi) Ground reference maneuvers. 

(vii) Navigation and navigation systems. 

(viii) Slow flight and stalls. 

(ix) Basic instrument maneuvers and flight 

by reference to instruments. 

(x) Instrument approach procedures. 

(xi) Air traffic control clearances and 

procedures. 

(xii) Emergency operations. 

(xiii) Multiengine operations. 

(xiv) Night operations. 

(xv) Postflight procedures. 

(3) For a combined private pilot 

certification and instrument rating course 

involving a rotorcraft helicopter: 

(i) Preflight preparation. 

(ii) Preflight procedures. 

(iii) Airport and heliport operations. 

(iv) Hovering maneuvers. 

(v) Takeoffs, landings, and go-arounds. 

(vi) Performance maneuvers. 

(vii) Navigation and navigation systems. 

(viii) Basic instrument maneuvers and 

flight by reference to instruments. 

(ix) Instrument approach procedures. 

(x) Air traffic control clearances and 

procedures. 

(xi) Emergency operations. 

(xii) Night operations. 

(xiii) Postflight procedures. 

(4) For a combined private pilot 

certification and instrument rating course 

involving a powered-lift: 

(i) Preflight preparation. 

(ii) Preflight procedures. 

(iii) Airport and heliport operations. 

(iv) Hovering maneuvers. 

(v) Takeoffs, landings, and go-arounds. 

(vi) Performance maneuvers. 

(vii) Ground reference maneuvers. 

(viii) Navigation and navigation systems. 

(ix) Slow flight and stalls. 

(x) Basic instrument maneuvers and flight 

by reference to instruments. 

(xi) Instrument approach procedures. 

(xii) Air traffic control clearances and 

procedures. 

(xiii) Emergency operations. 

(xiv) Night operations. 

(xv) Postflight procedures. 

5. Solo flight training. Each approved 

course must include at least the following 

solo flight training: 

(a) For a combined private pilot 

certification and instrument rating course 

involving an airplane single engine: Five 

hours of flying solo in a single-engine 

airplane on the appropriate areas of operation 

in paragraph (d)(1) of section 4 of this 

appendix that includes at least— 

(1) One solo cross-country flight of at least 

100 nautical miles with landings at a 

minimum of three points, and one segment 

of the flight consisting of a straight-line 

distance of at least 50 nautical miles between 

the takeoff and landing locations. 

(2) Three takeoffs and three landings to a 

full stop (with each landing involving a flight 

in the traffic pattern) at an airport with an 

operating control tower. 

(b) For a combined private pilot 

certification and instrument rating course 

involving an airplane multiengine: Five 

hours of flying solo in a multiengine airplane 

or 5 hours of performing the duties of a pilot 

in command while under the supervision of 

an authorized instructor. The training must 

consist of the appropriate areas of operation 

in paragraph (d)(2) of section 4 of this 

appendix, and include at least— 

(1) One cross-country flight of at least 100 

nautical miles with landings at a minimum 

of three points, and one segment of the flight 

consisting of a straight-line distance of at 

least 50 nautical miles between the takeoff 

and landing locations. 

(2) Three takeoffs and three landings to a 

full stop (with each landing involving a flight 

in the traffic pattern) at an airport with an 

operating control tower. 

(c) For a combined private pilot 

certification and instrument rating course 

involving a helicopter: Five hours of flying 

solo in a helicopter on the appropriate areas 

of operation in paragraph (d)(3) of section 4 

of this appendix that includes at least— 

(1) One solo cross-country flight of more 

than 50 nautical miles with landings at a 

minimum of three points, and one segment 

of the flight consisting of a straight-line 

distance of at least 25 nautical miles between 

the takeoff and landing locations. 

(2) Three takeoffs and three landings to a 

full stop (with each landing involving a flight 

in the traffic pattern) at an airport with an 

operating control tower. 

(d) For a combined private pilot 

certification and instrument rating course 

involving a powered-lift: Five hours of flying 

solo in a powered-lift on the appropriate 

areas of operation in paragraph (d)(4) of 

section 4 of this appendix that includes at 

least— 

(1) One solo cross-country flight of at least 

100 nautical miles with landings at a 

minimum of three points, and one segment 

of the flight consisting of a straight-line 

distance of at least 50 nautical miles between 

the takeoff and landing locations. 

(2) Three takeoffs and three landings to a 

full stop (with each landing involving a flight 

in the traffic pattern) at an airport with an 

operating control tower. 

6. Stage checks and end-of-course tests. 

(a) Each student enrolled in a private pilot 

course must satisfactorily accomplish the 

stage checks and end-of-course tests in 

accordance with the school’s approved 

training course that consists of the approved 

areas of operation listed in paragraph (d) of 

section 4 of this appendix that are 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
54110 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 169 / Wednesday, August 31, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

appropriate to the aircraft category and class 

rating for which the course applies. 

(b) Each student must demonstrate 

satisfactory proficiency prior to receiving an 

endorsement to operate an aircraft in solo 

flight. 

PART 142—TRAINING CENTERS 

■ 20. The authority citation for 14 CFR 

part 142 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 40119, 

44101, 44701–44703, 44705, 44707, 44709– 

44711, 45102–45103, 45301–45302. 

■ 21. Amend § 142.3 by revising the 

definition of Flight training equipment 

to read as follows: 

§ 142.3 Definitions. 

* * * * * 

Flight training equipment means 

flight simulators, as defined in 

§ 61.1(b)(6) of this chapter, flight 

training devices, as defined in 

§ 61.1(b)(8) of this chapter, and aircraft. 

* * * * * 

Issued in Washington, DC, on August 19, 

2011. 

J. Randolph Babbitt, 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2011–22308 Filed 8–30–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

28 CFR Part 55 

[CRT Docket No. 121; A.G. Order No. 3291– 

2011] 

Attorney General’s Guidelines on 

Implementation of the Provisions of 

the Voting Rights Act Regarding 

Language Minority Groups 

AGENCY: Civil Rights Division, 

Department of Justice. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This rule updates the 

Attorney General’s interpretative 

guidelines under the language minority 

provisions of the Voting Rights Act, 

which require certain states and 

political subdivisions to conduct 

elections in the language of certain 

‘‘language minority groups’’ in addition 

to English. The rule reflects 2006 

statutory amendments extending the 

time period for which covered 

jurisdictions must adhere to the 

minority language requirements in 

sections 4(f)(4) and 203 of the Voting 

Rights Act. The rule also amends the 

Appendix to the guidelines to reflect 

2002 coverage determinations based 

upon the 2000 Census made by the 

Director of the Census pursuant to 

section 203(b) of the Act. It also makes 

technical changes to conform the 

guidelines to the 2006 and 2008 

amendments to the Voting Rights Act, 

the 2002 Census determinations, and a 

2009 Supreme Court decision, as well as 

to add or correct statutory citations. 

DATES: Effective Date: August 31, 2011. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: T. 

Christian Herren, Jr., Chief, Voting 

Section, Civil Rights Division, United 

States Department of Justice, Room 

7254–NWB, 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, 

NW., Washington, DC 20530, or by 

telephone at 800–253–3931. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 

203 of the Voting Rights Act, which 

requires covered jurisdictions to use 

languages in addition to English in the 

electoral process, was added to the 

Voting Rights Act in 1975, and was 

amended and extended in 1982, 1992, 

and, most recently, on July 27, 2006. 

120 Stat. 577, Public Law 109–246. The 

2006 amendments to the Voting Rights 

Act extended the requirements of 

section 203 until August 6, 2032. 

Section 4(f)(4) of the Voting Rights Act, 

which requires certain jurisdictions 

covered by the other special provisions 

of the Act to use languages in addition 

to English in the electoral process, was 

added to the Voting Rights Act in 1975, 

and was extended in 1982 and in 2006. 

The 2006 amendments to the Voting 

Rights Act extended the requirements of 

section 4(f)(4) until 25 years from the 

July 27, 2006 date of the enactment of 

those amendments. 

Pursuant to section 203(b) of the 

Voting Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. 1973aa– 

1a(b), the Director of the Census 

published in the Federal Register on 

July 26, 2002, new determinations of 

coverage based upon the 2000 Census. 

67 FR 48871. Under the terms of section 

203(b)(4), these determinations became 

effective upon publication in the 

Federal Register and are not subject to 

judicial review. Also, on July 26, 2002, 

the Assistant Attorney General of the 

Civil Rights Division sent a letter to 

each covered jurisdiction to notify the 

jurisdiction of the determinations of 

coverage, the language minority group 

or groups for which the jurisdiction is 

covered, and to provide suggestions to 

the jurisdiction for developing a 

successful program of compliance. 

These letters provided the jurisdictions 

with a copy of the Census 

determinations, as published on July 26, 

2002, in the Federal Register, and a 

copy of the then-existing Attorney 

General’s interpretative guidelines, 28 

CFR part 55. 

This rule conforms the Attorney 

General’s language minority 

interpretative guidelines, 28 CFR part 

55, to the new determinations of 

coverage. No new determinations of 

coverage have been made pursuant to 

section 4(f)(4) of the Act. Further 

information about the language minority 

requirements of the Act can be found on 

the Web site of the Voting Section of the 

U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights 

Division at http://www.justice.gov/crt/ 

voting. 

The definition of ‘‘Act’’ in § 55.1 

(describing the amendments to the 

Voting Rights Act) has been amended to 

reflect the fact of the enactment of the 

2006 and 2008 amendments to the 

Voting Rights Act. Paragraph (a) of 

§ 55.4 has been amended to add 

statutory citations. Paragraphs (a) and 

(b) of § 55.7 have been amended to 

reflect the extension of the time period 

for the requirements of sections 4(f)(4) 

and 203 contained in the 2006 

amendments to the Voting Rights Act. 

These paragraphs also have been 

amended to clarify that earlier 

termination of these requirements is 

possible through a bailout action, and to 

incorporate the United States Supreme 

Court’s interpretation of the bailout 

provision of section 4(a) of the Voting 

Rights Act contained in Northwest 

Austin Municipal Utility District 

Number One v. Holder, 557 U.S. ll, 

129 S. Ct. 2504 (2009). Paragraph (b) of 

§ 55.8 has been amended to reflect the 

change in the 2006 amendments to the 

Voting Rights Act repealing provisions 

relating to Federal examiners and 

substituting references to federal 

observers. The last sentence in § 55.11 

has been amended to reflect the manner 

in which the Director of the Census 

reported the new coverage 

determinations under Section 203 after 

the 2000 Census. Paragraph (b) of 

§ 55.23 is amended to correct an 

erroneous statutory citation. The 

Appendix to Part 55 has been revised to 

reflect the 2002 determinations of the 

Director of the Census based upon 2000 

Census data. 

Administrative Procedure Act 5 U.S.C. 

553 

This rule amends interpretative rules 

and is therefore exempt from the notice 

requirement of 5 U.S.C. 553(b) and the 

opportunity for public participation 

requirement of 5 U.S.C. 553(c), and the 

delayed effective date requirement of 5 

U.S.C. 553(d) is not mandatory. As 

provided in 28 CFR 55.24, comments 

and suggestions from interested persons 

on the Attorney General’s language 

minority guidelines are always 

welcome. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES