This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains regulatory documents having general

applicability and legal effect, most of which

are keyed to and codified in the Code of

Federal Regulations, which is published under

50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by

the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of

new books are listed in the first FEDERAL

REGISTER issue of each week.

Rules and Regulations Federal Register

61583 

Vol. 81, No. 173 

Wednesday, September 7, 2016 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Parts 61, 91, 135 

[Docket No.: FAA–2006–24981; Amdt. Nos. 

61–138, 91–344, and 135–134] 

RIN 2120–AK63 

MU–2B Series Airplane Training 

Requirements Update 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: This action relocates and 

updates the content of SFAR No. 108 to 

the newly created subpart N of part 91 

in order to improve the safety of 

operating the Mitsubishi Heavy 

Industries (MHI) MU–2B series airplane. 

SFAR No. 108 will be eliminated from 

the Code of Federal Regulations on 

November 7, 2017, after which time all 

MU–2B operators must comply with 

this subpart. The FAA is relocating the 

training program from the SFAR No. 108 

appendices to advisory material in order 

to allow the FAA to update policy while 

ensuring significant training 

adjustments still go through notice-andcomment rulemaking. The FAA is also 

correcting and updating several 

inaccurate maneuver profiles to reflect 

current FAA training philosophy and 

adding new FAA procedures not 

previously part of the MU–2B training 

under SFAR No. 108. This rule will 

require all MU–2B training programs to 

meet the requirements of this subpart 

and to be approved by the FAA to 

ensure safety is maintained. As a result 

of this action, operators, training 

providers, and safety officials will have 

more timely access to standardized, 

accurate training material. 

DATES: This rule is effective on 

September 7, 2016, except for the 

removal of SFAR No. 108 to part 91 

which is effective on November 7, 2017. 

The compliance date for this final rule 

is November 7, 2016. The incorporation 

by reference of certain publications 

listed in the rule is approved by the 

Director of the Federal Register as of 

September 7, 2016. 

Submit comments on or before 

November 7, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified 

by docket number FAA–2006–24981 

using any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov and follow 

the online instructions for sending your 

comments electronically. 

• Mail: Send comments to Docket 

Operations, M–30; U.S. Department of 

Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., Room W12–140, West 

Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 

20590–0001. 

• Hand Delivery or Courier: Take 

comments to Docket Operations in 

Room W12–140 of the West Building 

Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 

a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. 

• Fax: Fax comments to Docket 

Operations at 202–493–2251. 

Privacy: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 

553(c), DOT solicits comments from the 

public to better inform its rulemaking 

process. DOT posts these comments, 

without edit, including any personal 

information the commenter provides, to 

www.regulations.gov, as described in 

the system of records notice (DOT/ALL– 

14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at 

www.dot.gov/privacy. 

Docket: Background documents or 

comments received may be read at 

http://www.regulations.gov at any time. 

Follow the online instructions for 

accessing the docket or Docket 

Operations in Room W12–140 of the 

West Building Ground Floor at 1200 

New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, 

DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

technical questions concerning this 

action, contact Joseph Hemler, 

Commercial Operations Branch, Flight 

Standards Service, AFS–820, Federal 

Aviation Administration, 55 M Street 

SE., 8th floor, Washington, DC 20003– 

3522; telephone (202) 267–1100; email 

joseph.k.hemler-jr@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

Although the FAA is inviting 

comments, we have made the 

determination to adopt this final rule 

without prior notice and public 

comment in order to mitigate the safety 

risks where current Special Federal 

Aviation Regulation (SFAR) No. 108 

conflicts with the FAA’s current policy 

and guidance. The Regulatory Policies 

and Procedures of the Department of 

Transportation (DOT), 44 FR 1134 

(February 26, 1979), provide that to the 

maximum extent possible, operating 

administrations for the DOT should 

provide an opportunity for public 

comment on regulations issued without 

prior notice. 

Authority for This Rulemaking 

The FAA’s authority to issue rules on 

aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the 

United States Code (U.S.C.). Subtitle I, 

Section 106 describes the authority of 

the FAA Administrator. 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, Subpart III, Section 

44701, ‘‘General Requirements.’’ Under 

that section, Congress charged the FAA 

with prescribing regulations that set the 

minimum standards for practices, 

methods, and procedures necessary for 

safety in air commerce. This regulation 

is within the scope of that authority 

because it will set the minimum level of 

safety for operation of the Mitsubishi 

MU–2B. 

SFAR No. 108 contained inaccurate 

MU–2B flight training profiles, and the 

National Transportation Safety Board 

(NTSB) recommended that the FAA 

remedy these inaccuracies as soon as is 

practical due to serious safety concerns 

(NTSB Rec. A–14–96 and –97). The 

FAA concludes that immediate action is 

necessary to correct the inaccuracies in 

SFAR No. 108 and, therefore, finds that 

notice and public comment under 5 

U.S.C. 553(b) are impracticable and 

contrary to the public interest. Further, 

the FAA finds that good cause exists 

under 5 U.S.C. 553(d) for making this 

rule effective immediately upon 

publication. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
61584 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 173 / Wednesday, September 7, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 

1An FSB’s primary responsibility is to determine 

requirements for pilot type ratings, to develop 

minimum training recommendations, and to ensure 

flight crew member competency. 8900.1, Volume 8, 

Chapter 2, Section 5. 

2The AEG serves as Flight Standard Service 

(AFS) technical subject matter experts for 

operational and engineering activities. 8900.1, 

Volume 8, Chapter 2, Section 2. 

I. Final Rule With Request for 

Comments 

Special Federal Aviation Regulation 

No. 108 mandated training, experience, 

and operating requirements to improve 

the safety of operating the MHI MU–2B 

series airplane. The SFAR contained 

inaccurate training maneuver profiles 

and is misaligned with current FAA 

flight training policy. This action 

corrects safety-related inaccuracies in 

the regulation and streamlines the 

process for updating MU–2B flight 

training requirements by removing them 

from regulations and placing them in 

advisory material. This change will 

permit the FAA to be more responsive 

by issuing guidance should any 

inaccuracies be discovered or should 

training requirements or policy need to 

be revised and updated in the future. As 

a result of this action, pilots, operators, 

training providers, and safety officials 

will have more timely and accurate 

training material. 

II. Background 

A. Background 

In 2008, the FAA published SFAR No. 

108 to mandate flight training and 

experience requirements for operators of 

the MHI MU–2B twin-turboprop 

aircraft. The rule became effective in 

2009 and did not have an expiration 

date. The flight training and experience 

requirements were based on an FAA 

safety evaluation of the aircraft, which 

has unique control surfaces and 

characteristics. There is a fleet of 

approximately 300 aircraft operating 

today in accordance with 14 CFR parts 

91 and 135. In the 20 years leading up 

to SFAR No. 108, the MU–2B series 

aircraft experienced 80 accidents with 

40 fatalities. Since the effective date of 

SFAR No. 108, there have only been two 

fatal accidents. In addition to 

experience and annual training 

requirements for pilots, SFAR No. 108 

mandated training curriculum and flight 

profiles for operators and training 

providers. 

Following the issuance of SFAR No. 

108 on February 5, 2008, with a 

compliance date of February 5, 2009, 

Mitsubishi Heavy Industries of America 

(MHIA) and Turbine Aircraft Services 

(TAS), an industry party, began an 

evaluation to identify errors in flight 

profiles published in SFAR No. 108. At 

that time, minor spelling errors and 

technical items were identified. 

Additionally, MHIA and TAS notified 

the FAA of at least one error in 

procedure in the One Engine 

Inoperative Maneuvering Loss of 

Directional Control (Vmc 

Demonstration) profile. 

Additionally, since the publication of 

SFAR No. 108, the FAA has approved 

the use of Continued Descent Final 

Approach (CDFA) procedures in all 

training programs, including the 

training programs for the MU–2B. The 

MU–2B FAA Flight Standardization 

Board (FSB) 1 subsequently included 

CDFA profiles in its FSB Report for use 

in MU–2B training programs. Because 

the FAA did not include CDFA 

procedures in SFAR No. 108, pilots 

were not permitted to train on these 

procedures or operate the aircraft 

consistent with them. 

In 2012, the FAA revised its stall 

recognition and recovery procedures for 

all aircraft and all training programs by 

removing the emphasis to ensure a 

‘‘minimum loss of altitude’’ when 

performing stall training maneuvers and 

by emphasizing a positive reduction in 

angle of attack procedure as the proper 

stall recovery method (Advisory 

Circular (AC) 120–109). The FAA also 

introduced the use of ‘‘startle factor’’ 

training through the use of the autopilot 

during stall recognition and recovery 

practice in all aircraft training programs. 

However, the FAA did not include the 

‘‘startle factor’’ training in SFAR No. 

108. 

Both MHIA and TAS requested by 

letter in early 2012 that the FAA change 

the MU–2B flight training profiles in 

SFAR No. 108 and make them 

consistent with the new stall 

recognition and recovery procedures. 

They also suggested the FAA remove 

the flight training maneuver profiles 

from SFAR No. 108, for ease of 

subsequent modification in the event of 

regulatory or training procedural 

changes made by the FAA. The FAA 

recognized that proper stall recognition 

and recovery is a safety-of-flight concern 

and concurred that distributing 

information on how to recover from a 

stall was essential to proper MU–2B 

training and safety of flight. 

B. Statement of the Problem 

There were a number of conflicts 

between SFAR No. 108 and best 

practices and FAA guidance, which 

demonstrate a better safety record. The 

FAA’s Kansas City Aircraft Evaluation 

Group (AEG) 2 and MHI have 

documented that the SFAR conflicted 

with new and revised FAA training 

requirements, policy, guidance and safe 

operating practices set forth in the 

Airline Transport Pilot Practical Test 

Standards (PTS), Commercial Pilot PTS, 

FAA Notice N8900.205, Enhanced Stall 

and Stick Pusher Training; Advisory 

Circular (AC) 120–109, Stall and Stick 

Pusher Training, and AC 120–108, 

Continuous Descent Final Approach 

(CDFA). SFAR No. 108 conflicted with 

FAA guidance in the following 

instances: 

First, SFAR No. 108 mandated power 

and trim settings for the demonstration 

of a one-engine-inoperative maneuver 

with loss of directional control. Those 

settings did not meet the safety 

standards of current FAA guidance and 

best practices. The ‘‘One Engine 

Inoperative Maneuvering—Loss of 

Directional Control’’ profile in the SFAR 

differed from current FAA guidance and 

best practices described in the FAA 

Airplane Flying Handbook (FAA–H– 

8083–3A). 

Second, CDFA Procedures published 

in AC 120–108 and published in the 

MU–2 FSB Report, Revision 4, were not 

included in the training profiles in 

SFAR No. 108. Though published in the 

MU–2 FSB Report, Revision 4, CDFA 

procedures were not included in the 

SFAR No. 108 flight training profiles 

and therefore operators could not use 

these procedures while operating an 

MU–2B. 

Third, SFAR No. 108 stall-recovery 

profiles required operators to perform 

all stall recoveries with a ‘‘minimal loss 

of altitude.’’ This was inconsistent with 

stall recovery guidance because the FAA 

now emphasizes successful recovery 

from a stall over minimizing the loss of 

altitude which can lead to a secondary 

stall. Recent changes to the FAA’s stall 

training policy in AC 120–109 and PTS 

created conflicts with several flight 

profiles. 

Finally, as identified by Aircraft 

Evaluation Group (AEG) of the Flight 

Standards Service and MHI, SFAR No. 

108 mandates several airspeeds in 

appendix D flight profiles that are 

incorrect. 

C. NTSB Recommendations 

On October 23, 2014, NTSB urged the 

FAA to take action on the safety 

recommendations derived from the 

NTSB’s investigation of a Mitsubishi 

MU–2B–25 airplane accident in 

Owasso, Oklahoma. (NTSB Rec. A–14– 

96 and –97). These recommendations 

addressed operational training and 

checklist usage for Mitsubishi MU–2B 

series airplanes. 

The NTSB’s investigation found that 

since SFAR No. 108 became effective in 

2008, the FAA has revised its general 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 173 / Wednesday, September 7, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 61585 

stall recovery guidance and procedures 

for stall and stick pusher training for 

pilot certification and evaluation 

contained in AC 120–109, dated August 

6, 2012. Advisory Circular 120–109 

introduced a procedure for stall 

recovery that conflicted with related 

instruction provided in the SFAR. 

Therefore, the NTSB recommended in 

NTSB recommendation A–14–96 that 

the FAA revise, as soon as is practical, 

the ‘‘Approach to Stall’’ flight profile 

currently contained in SFAR No. 108 so 

that it is consistent with AC 120–109. 

The NTSB also recommended in 

recommendation A–14–97 that ‘‘the 

FAA separate the flight training profiles 

from the SFAR such that any updates to 

the profiles can be made without having 

to go through the rulemaking process.’’ 

The FAA interprets this 

recommendation from the NTSB to 

mean that the more prescriptive rule in 

SFAR No. 108 should be revised to a 

more flexible rule, such as a 

performance standard. This change will 

allow flight training profiles to be 

updated more rapidly in response to 

improved training best practices and 

guidance, thus improving operational 

safety of the MU–2B aircraft. 

III. Discussion of Final Rule 

In order to provide a more flexible 

regulatory framework for MU–2B 

training, the FAA is removing all 

appendices to SFAR No. 108 which 

contained many prescriptive 

requirements. With implementation of 

this rule, all MU–2B training must take 

place under an FAA approved MU–2B 

training program. Approval of all MU– 

2B training programs will be based on 

whether that program meets the 

standards of § 91.1705(h). 

The following figure describes the 

changes made from SFAR No. 108 as a 

result of this final rule and this 

references the specific sections in the 

codifications of these requirements in 

part 91. 

FIGURE 1—SUMMARY OF CHANGES TO SPECIAL FEDERAL AVIATION REGULATION NO. 108 MADE BY THIS FINAL RULE

Old section/paragraph The new part 91, Subpart N reference Description of change 

Section 1, Applicability ....................................... § 91.1701 Applicability ................................... Provides new compliance dates. 

References approved MU–2B training program. 

Section 2, Compliance and eligibility ................. § 91.1703 Compliance and Eligibility ............. No substantive changes. 

Minor language change in paragraph (b) for 

clarity. 

Paragraph (g) revised to reference approved 

training program, adds a cross-reference to 

§ 91.1705(h). 

Section 3, Required pilot training .......................

Paragraphs (a) through (g) ................................

§ 91.1705 Required Pilot Training ................. No change other than to revise cross-references and reference approved training 

programs. 

Table 1, Manufacturer’s checklists ..................... § 91.1705(g) ..................................................... No change. 

Section 4, Aeronautical experience .................... § 91.1711 Training Program Approval ........... No change. 

Section 5, Instruction, checking and evaluation § 91.1713 Instruction, Checking, and Evaluation.No change. 

Section 6, Currency requirements and flight review.§ 91.1715 Currency Requirements and Flight 

Review.

No change. 

Section 7, Operating requirements .................... § 91.1717 Operating Requirements ............... No change. 

Section 8, Credit for prior training ...................... § 91.1719 Credit for Prior Testing ................. Updated to give credit for previous training 

under SFAR No. 108. 

Section 9, Incorporation by reference ................ § 91.1721 Incorporation by Reference .......... Revised to address current incorporation by 

reference requirements. 

Section 10, Expiration ........................................ No Expiration ................................................... No change. 

Appendix A, MU–2B General Training Requirements.§ 91.1707(a), § 91.1707(b), § 91.1707(c) ......... Removed. 

Table 1, Table 2, and Table 3 moved to 

§ 91.1707. 

Appendix B, MU–2B Ground Training Curriculum Contents.§ 91.1705(h)(1) ................................................. Removed. 

Training program standard added to 

§ 91.1705(h)(1). 

Appendix C, MU–2B Final Phase Check and 

Flight Training Requirements.

§ 91.1705(h)(3) ................................................. Removed. 

Phase check requirements added to 

§ 91.1705(h)(3). 

Appendix D, MU–2B Maneuver Profiles ............ § 91.1705(h)(2) ................................................. Removed. 

Training program standard added to 

§ 91.1705(h)(2). 

The following discussion describes 

the training program standard 

established for MU–2B training and 

contained in subpart N of part 91. These 

standards are found in § 91.1705(h), and 

an example of a training program 

implementing these standards may be 

found in Advisory Circular 

accompanying this rule. 

Paragraph 91.1705(h) contains the 

training program standard which 

replaces the prescriptive content of the 

former SFAR No. 108’s appendices. 

Paragraph 91.1705(h) requires all MU– 

2B training programs to include a 

ground training curriculum, a flight 

training curriculum, differences training 

for operators of modified MU–2B 

aircraft, icing training, and training 

program hours for ground and flight 

training. The standard in § 91.1705(h) 

will allow for updates to MU–2B 

training programs and allow training 

providers to keep training programs up 

to date with current best practices while 

ensuring that the programs meet the 

FAA’s safety standards. By placing the 

specific guidance regarding training 

program content in an AC, the FAA will 

ensure that the training program specific 

guidelines can be updated as agency 

safety philosophy regarding training 

evolves. However, the requirements for 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
61586 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 173 / Wednesday, September 7, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 

3The MU–2B checklists were incorporated by 

reference into SFAR No. 108 by the Final Rule 

published on 02/06/2008, 73 FR 7034. 

the training program will be retained in 

the regulations, ensuring that significant 

training adjustments would go through 

notice and comment rulemaking. 

As required by § 91.1705(h)(1), an 

MU–2B training program must include 

a ground training curriculum sufficient 

to ensure pilot knowledge of MU–2B 

aircraft systems and procedures 

necessary for safe operation and 

proficient pilot knowledge of MU–2B 

aircraft. The FAA has replaced the 

prescriptive list of specific items listed 

in Appendix B to SFAR No. 108 with 

this performance standard. 

As required by § 91.1705(h)(2), an 

MU–2B training program must also 

include a flight training curriculum 

with flight training maneuver profiles 

sufficient in number and detail to 

ensure pilot proficiency in all MU–2B 

operations for each MU–2B Model in 

accordance with MU–2B aircraft 

limitations, procedures, and MU–2B 

cockpit checklist 3 procedures 

applicable to the MU–2B Model being 

trained. Examples of MU–2B flight 

training maneuver profiles may be 

found in the FAA recommended MU– 

2B training program in the appendix of 

Advisory Circular (AC) AC 91–MU2B 

Mitsubishi MU–2B Training Program. 

The FAA has included in subpart N 

of part 91 a list of specific maneuvers 

that an MU–2B training program must 

include in order to ensure pilots are 

adequately prepared for the unique 

safety challenges of operating an MU– 

2B. SFAR No. 108 was more 

prescriptive because it required these 

maneuvers in addition to requiring 

operators to follow all specific airspeeds 

and the order of procedures of the flight 

training maneuver profiles. The revised 

regulation allows for maneuver profiles 

to be updated with developing training 

and operational best practices. In order 

to obtain FAA approval, an MU–2B 

training program must contain the 

following flight training maneuver 

profiles for the MU–2B Model being 

trained: 

• Normal takeoff with 5- and 20- 

degrees of flaps; 

• Takeoff engine failure with 5- and 

20- degrees of flaps; 

• Takeoff engine failure on a runway 

or a rejected takeoff; 

• Takeoff engine failure after liftoff 

when unable to climb. This maneuver 

may be completed in classroom or a 

flight training device only; 

• Steep turns; 

• Slow flight maneuvers; 

• One engine inoperative 

maneuvering with a loss of directional 

control; 

• Approach to stall in clean 

configuration and with wings level; 

• Approach to stall in takeoff 

configuration with 15- to 30- degrees 

bank; 

• Approach to stall in landing 

configuration with gear down and 40- 

degrees of flaps; 

• Accelerated stall with no flaps; 

• Emergency descent at low speed; 

• Emergency descent at high speed; 

• Unusual attitude recovery with the 

nose high; 

• Unusual attitude recovery with the 

nose low; 

• Normal landing with 20- and 40- 

degrees flaps; 

• Go around and rejected landing; 

• No flaps or 5- degrees flaps landing; 

• One engine inoperative landing 

with 5- and 20- degrees of flaps; 

• Crosswind landing; 

• Instrument landing system (ILS) 

and missed approach; 

• Two engine missed approach; 

• One engine inoperative ILS and 

missed approach; 

• One engine inoperative missed 

approach; 

• Non-precision and missed 

approach; 

• Non-precision CDFA and missed 

approach; 

• One engine inoperative nonprecision and missed approach; 

• One engine inoperative nonprecision CDFA and missed approach; 

• Circling approach at weather 

minimums; 

• One engine inoperative circling 

approach at weather minimums. 

As required by § 91.1705(h)(3), an 

MU–2B training program must also 

include a final phase check sufficient to 

document pilot proficiency in the flight 

maneuvers as specified in the approved 

training programs phase check. This 

standard replaces the final phase check 

requirements in former Appendix C to 

the SFAR No. 108. 

As required by § 91.1705(h)(4), an 

MU–2B training program must also 

include differences training sufficient to 

ensure pilot proficiency in each model 

of the MU–2B aircraft operated by a 

pilot who operates multiple MU–2B 

model variants concurrently. The 

differences training requirement is 

unchanged from the prior version of 

SFAR No. 108. Due to the age of the 

MU–2B fleet currently in operation, 

many MU–2B aircraft have been 

modified from the original factory 

configuration. Therefore, the FAA will 

continue to mandate differences training 

in order to ensure that those operators 

who operate multiple versions of the 

MU–2B aircraft are adequately trained 

to safely operate various MU–2B 

configurations. MU–2B differences 

requirements have been removed from 

Appendix A of SFAR No. 108 and are 

now specified in § 91.1705(h)(4). 

Section 91.1705(h)(4) only includes 

differences for factory type design MU– 

2 aircraft while other applicable MU–2 

differences are required by other FAA 

approved training programs (e.g. part 

135 and 142 operations) and AC 91– 

MU2B. The hours requirement for 

Differences Training can be found in 

§ 91.1707(c). Differences other than 

factory type design MU–2B differences 

applicable to MU–2B aircraft are highly 

recommended for part 91 MU–2B 

training. Due to the magnitude of these 

changes to the MU–2B fleet, additional 

training is necessary to ensure pilot 

proficiency. 

As required by § 91.1705(h)(5), an 

MU–2B training program must also 

include icing training sufficient to 

ensure pilot knowledge and safe 

operation of the MU–2B aircraft in icing 

conditions as established by 

Airworthiness Directive 1997–20–14 or 

an Alternate Means of Compliance to 

Airworthiness Directive 2000–09–15, as 

amended. 

As required by § 91.1705(h)(6), an 

MU–2B ground and flight training 

program must include the training hours 

identified by § 91.1707(a) for ground 

instruction, § 91.1707(b) for flight 

instruction and § 91.1707(c) for 

differences training. These training 

hours are identical to SFAR–108 

training hours which were initially 

determined by the FAA’s MU–2B FSB 

as the number of hours necessary to 

ensure the safe operation of the MU–2B 

aircraft. 

As required by § 91.1707(e), an MU– 

2B training program must include 

examples of endorsements for 

compliance with § 91.1705(f) 

appropriate to the content of that 

specific MU–2B training program’s 

compliance with the standards of SFAR 

No. 108. Section 91.1705(f) describes 

the endorsement required under 

§ 91.1705 (a) and (b) must be made by: 

(1) A certificated flight instructor 

under part 61 or part 141 meeting the 

qualifications of § 91.1713; or 

(2) a training center evaluator 

authorized by the FAA to conduct MU– 

2B evaluation events at a part 142 

Training Center meeting the 

qualifications of § 91.1713 or, 

(3) for persons operating the MU–2B 

for a part 119 certificate holder within 

the last 12 calendar months, the part 

119 certificate holder’s flight instructor 

if that instructor is authorized by the 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 173 / Wednesday, September 7, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 61587 

FAA meets the requirements of 

§ 91.1713. 

This section has been revised to include 

endorsements made by an authorized 

simulator instructor at an FAA 142 

Training Center. 

As required by § 91.1709(a), to obtain 

approval for an MU–2B training 

program, training providers must submit 

a proposed training program to the 

Administrator. Only training programs 

approved by the Administrator may be 

used to satisfy the standards of subpart 

N of part 91. Training providers may 

submit for approval the most current 

version of the appendix to AC 91– 

MU2B, which the FAA has determined 

meets the standards of this subpart. 

Parts 135, 141, and 142 training 

providers must submit their proposed 

training program to their Principal 

Operations Inspector (POI) or Training 

Center Program Manager (TCPM) for 

approval and inclusion in their 

approved training curriculum. 

Part 91 training providers do not have 

an established process for seeking 

approval of a training program; 

therefore, part 91 training providers 

must submit for approval a proposed 

training program to their jurisdictional 

FAA Flight Standards District Office 

(FSDO). The term ‘part 91 training 

providers’ refers to training providers 

providing training under part 61 

authority for a part 91 operation. Part 91 

training providers may submit for 

approval the most current version of the 

appendix to AC 91–MU2B which the 

FAA has determined meets the 

standards of subpart N of part 91. The 

FAA FSDO will issue a Letter of 

Authorization (LOA) to the training 

provider if the proposed training 

program meets the standards of subpart 

N of part 91. For MU–2B training 

providers providing training under part 

91, training programs will be approved 

for 24 months, unless sooner 

superseded or rescinded. For more 

details on how to submit an MU–2B 

training program for approval, please 

see AC 91–MU2B. 

Under § 91.1709(a)(3), the 

Administrator may require revision of 

an approved MU–2B training program at 

any time. A training provider must 

present its approved training program 

and FAA approval documentation to 

any representative of the Administrator, 

upon request. 

IV. Advisory Circular 

The FAA is publishing an approved 

MU–2B training program as an 

appendix in the AC 91–MU2B 

Mitsubishi MU–2B Training Program. 

This AC may be used by training 

providers to meet the requirements of 

subpart N of part 91. Training providers 

may also use this AC as a reference for 

developing their own MU–2B training 

programs to submit for FAA approval 

pursuant to § 91.1709. The AC includes 

the SFAR No. 108 flight training 

maneuver profiles with appropriate 

revisions consistent with current 

training policy and guidance. 

The following updates have been 

made to the MU–2B flight training 

profiles which have been removed from 

SFAR No. 108 and moved to AC 91– 

MU2B. 

One Engine Inoperative Maneuvering 

Loss of Directional Control 

The flight training maneuver profiles 

A–7, B–7, C–7 in the former Appendix 

D of SFAR No. 108 were incorrect 

regarding the procedures for setting 

power and trim for the demonstration of 

the one-engine-inoperative maneuver 

with a loss of directional control. The 

appendix D profile called for the MU– 

2B aircraft to be configured and 

trimmed for single engine flight prior to 

starting the maneuver. The FAA’s 

Airplane Flying Handbook calls for the 

aircraft to be trimmed for two-engine 

flight at a slow airspeed and then for the 

power to be configured for single engine 

flight without re-trimming. Setting the 

configuration of the aircraft in the 

manner SFAR No. 108 required results 

in the rudder forces required prior to 

reaching the Velocity Minimum Control 

(Vmc) being less than the actual rudder 

forces required to maintain zero sideslip 

flight. The consequence of setting the 

configuration in that manner promotes 

an adverse training condition causing 

the pilot to under-control the aircraft in 

the event of an actual Vmc experience. 

The FAA has revised these maneuver 

profiles to reflect the proper settings and 

relocated them to the AC. Section 

91.1705(h)(2) retains the requirement 

that MU–2B pilots train on this item. 

Continued Descent Final Approach 

(CDFA) 

An Advisory Circular (AC) published 

on January 20, 2011, for all aircraft 

operators, AC 120–108, would enhance 

the operational safety of an MU–2B 

aircraft during a non-precision 

instrument approach. The only nonprecision approaches contained in the 

former version of SFAR No. 108 were 

those that use the ‘‘dive and drive’’ 

method, which consists of descending 

immediately after the final approach fix 

to the Minimum Descent Altitude 

(MDA) and then leveling off until 

reaching the next step down fix or the 

missed approach point, as appropriate. 

This SFAR 108 procedure, when 

accomplished with one engine 

inoperative, required that the landing 

gear remain retracted until the pilot had 

visual contact with the landing runway 

environment. This SFAR 108 procedure 

could have resulted in the pilot 

forgetting to extend the landing gear 

prior to landing and was seen by many 

as an unstabilized approach. It also 

could have resulted in under shooting 

the visual approach path to the runway, 

causing a possible controlled-flight-intoterrain (CFIT) accident. 

The SFAR 108 ‘‘dive and drive’’ 

procedure, with gear extension 

restrictions, was originally approved for 

the MU–2 by the FAA in 2006 during 

the FSB review of the MU–2 single 

engine capabilities. Demonstrations 

showed a limited or negative climb 

capability for the MU–2 with the gear in 

the down position during single engine 

operations. Since most single engine 

non-precision approaches result in the 

need to maintain altitude for a period of 

time prior to final descent to the landing 

runway, the FAA determined that a 

non-standard landing gear configuration 

would be necessary to safely accomplish 

the level off. The ‘‘dive and drive’’ 

procedure is described in the AC 120– 

108. 

The revised procedure allows the 

pilot the option to extend the landing 

gear at the normal, final approach fix 

location and to fly a calculated glide 

path to the missed approach point, or 

derived decision altitude. This revised 

procedure prevents the need to maintain 

altitude at the MDA with the gear down 

which, in turn, improves safety. The 

FAA recognizes this new procedure and 

the FSB and Aircraft Evaluations Group 

(AEG) have now revised and published 

Revision 4 of the FSB Report for the 

MU–2. This version of the FSB Report 

contains provisions for incorporating 

the new procedures into MU–2B 

training and operation. 

The CDFA procedure was not 

contained in the SFAR No. 108 flight 

training profiles. The FAA is adding 

CDFA procedures to the list of required 

flight training procedures as an 

additional procedure in § 91.1705(h)(2). 

These new profiles, in addition to the 

existing profiles, have been relocated to 

AC 91–MU2B. 

Stall Procedures 

Advisory Circular 120–109 

introduced a new procedure for the 

proper recognition and recovery from a 

stall for all aircraft. The AC 120–109 is 

supplemented by Safety Advisory for 

Operators (SAFO) 10012 standardizing 

the procedure for all aircraft and 

training programs. The latest revision of 

the FAA’s Commercial Practical Test 

Standards calls for a change to the 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
61588 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 173 / Wednesday, September 7, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 

standard for performance and 

evaluation of stall procedures. 

AC 120–109 resulted from an FAA 

and industry study of two wellpublicized accidents, Colgan Air Flight 

3407 and Air France Flight 447. In both 

of these accidents, the pilots were not 

immediately aware that the aircraft were 

stalled, and the pilots did not attempt to 

recover correctly, resulting in the loss of 

the aircraft and all passengers. 

The maneuver profiles in SFAR No. 

108 (profiles A–8 through A–11. B–8 

through B–11, and C–8 through C–11) 

required operators to perform all stall 

recoveries with a ‘‘minimal loss of 

altitude.’’ This standard of performance 

has been redefined for all FAA and 

industry training for other aircraft, and 

new profiles have been published in 

MU–2B Training Program AC to instruct 

pilots to perform a stall recovery using 

a positive reduction of angle of attack 

method. This procedure change is 

important to ensure that pilots safely 

recover from a stall and do not cause a 

secondary stall of the aircraft. 

Also, in the past, during advanced 

training in high performance aircraft 

like the MU–2B, pilot training did not 

include full stall recoveries. 

Historically, recovery would be initiated 

at the first indication of the stall, which 

in the case of the MU–2B is a stick 

shaker vibrating the yoke in order to 

warn the pilot of an impending stall. 

Most MU–2B stall training never 

reaches a full aerodynamic stall or even 

pre-stall buffet. In those cases, recovery 

without having to substantially lower 

the nose of the aircraft is possible, 

resulting in a minimum loss of altitude. 

In a full stall, however, a pilot must 

positively lower the nose to reattach the 

flow of air to the wing prior to adding 

power. Otherwise, the pilot risks a 

secondary stall as the nose rises from 

addition of power, and/or a torque roll 

occurs opposite the propeller rotational 

direction. The new standardized 

method of recovery from any level of 

stall condition is to substantially lower 

the nose. 

Recent changes to the FAA’s Practical 

Test Standards direct examiners to 

assess a pilot’s ability to recover 

promptly at the ‘‘onset’’ (buffeting) stall 

condition. These revised profiles and 

AC 120–109 call out procedures for 

accomplishing this stall recognition and 

recovery from an autopilot ‘ON’ flight 

configuration, thereby simulating a stall 

catching the pilot by surprise and 

creating more realistic surprise and 

startle in training. The revised 

maneuver profiles for stall recognition 

and recovery have been relocated to the 

AC. 

Compliance Dates 

As required by § 91.1701, after 

November 7, 2016, all training 

conducted in an MU–2B must follow an 

MU–2B training program that meets the 

standards of this Subpart of part 91. 

This 60-day period gives training 

providers time to adjust their training 

programs to meet the standards of this 

subpart and to seek FAA approval for 

training provider developed training 

programs. 

Also required by § 91.1701, this 

subpart is immediately applicable when 

effective to all persons who operate a 

Mitsubishi MU–2B series airplane, 

including those who act as pilot-incommand (PIC), act as second-incommand (SIC), or other persons who 

manipulate the controls while under the 

supervision of a PIC. 

As required by § 91.1719, Initial/ 

transition, requalification, or recurrent 

training conducted prior to November 7, 

2016, compliant with SFAR No. 108, 

Section 3, effective March 6, 2008, is 

considered to be compliant with this 

subpart, if the student met the eligibility 

requirements for the applicable category 

of training and the student’s instructor 

met the experience requirements of this 

subpart. This 60-day period allows 

current operators to continue training 

under SFAR No. 108 and allows for a 

seamless transition to training programs 

under this subpart. 

The FAA is immediately relocating 

and updating the content of SFAR No. 

108 to this subpart in order to be in 

accordance with current FAA policy 

regarding the safest and most effective 

means to conduct training in the area of 

stall recognition and recovery, 

continuous descent final approach 

procedures, and one engine inoperative 

maneuvering. The FAA understands 

that MU–2B training is currently being 

conducted consistently with FAA policy 

and considers such training to be 

critical to the safe operation of the 

aircraft. For that reason, the FAA does 

not anticipate any disruptions in 

training or operations of MU–2B aircraft 

as a result of the immediate effective 

date for this rule. This rulemaking is 

necessary to align the regulation with 

the safest, best means to conduct 

training in the MU–2B. 

V. Regulatory Notices and Analyses 

A. Regulatory Evaluation 

Changes to Federal regulations must 

undergo several economic analyses. 

First, Executive Order 12866 and 

Executive Order 13563 direct 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, the 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 rule. 

Department of Transportation Order 

DOT 2100.5 prescribes policies and 

procedures for simplification, analysis, 

and review of regulations. If the 

expected cost impact is so minimal that 

a proposed or final rule does not 

warrant a full evaluation, this order 

permits that a statement to that effect 

and the basis for it are to be included 

in the preamble if a full regulatory 

evaluation of the cost and benefits is not 

prepared. Such a determination has 

been made for this rule. The reasoning 

for this determination follows: 

The purpose and benefit of this action 

is to correct safety related inaccuracies 

in the regulation and streamline the 

process for updating MU–2B flight 

training profiles should any 

inaccuracies be discovered or should 

training requirements or policy need to 

be revised and updated in the future. As 

a result of this action, operators, training 

providers, and safety officials will have 

timely, accurate training material. This 

action is important to minimize future 

accidents. 

Pilots in need of MU–2B training can 

choose from either a training center or 

hiring one of the approximately 20 MU– 

2B qualified instructors. Currently, there 

are three primary training providers that 

offer FAA approved MU–2B training. 

There were a number of conflicts 

between former SFAR No. 108 and best 

practices and FAA guidance, which 

demonstrate a better safety record. The 

FAA’s Kansas City Aircraft Evaluation 

Group (AEG) and Mitsubishi Heavy 

Industries (MHI) have documented that 

the SFAR conflicted with new and 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 173 / Wednesday, September 7, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 61589 

revised FAA training requirements, 

policy, guidance and safe operating 

practices. These practices are set forth 

in the Airline Transport Pilot Practical 

Test Standards (PTS); Commercial Pilot 

PTS; FAA Notice N8900.205, Enhanced 

Stall and Stick Pusher Training; 

Advisory Circular (AC) 120–109; Stall 

and Stick Pusher Training; and AC 120– 

108, Continuous Descent Final 

Approach (CDFA). 

SFAR No. 108 mandates training, 

experience, and operating requirements 

to improve the level of operational 

safety for the MHI MU–2B series 

airplane. SFAR No. 108 contained 

inaccurate training profiles and was 

misaligned with current FAA flight 

training policy. Since the enactment of 

SFAR No. 108, there have been two 

accidents with five fatalities. The SFAR 

required training in accordance with 

inaccurate MU–2B flight training 

profiles. The National Transportation 

Safety Board (NTSB) recommended that 

the FAA correct these inaccuracies as 

soon as is practical. New stall profiles 

have been created for instructing the 

pilot to perform a stall recovery using a 

positive reduction of angle of attack 

method. This procedure change is 

important to ensure that pilots safely 

recover from a stall and do not cause a 

secondary stall of the aircraft. 

Besides the inaccurate training 

profiles, SFAR 108 was not aligned with 

current FAA Continuous Descent Final 

Approach (CDFA) procedures flight 

training policy published in AC 120– 

108 and published in the MU–2 FSB 

Report, Revision 4. FAA CDFA 

procedures were not contained in the 

SFAR No. 108 MU–2B flight training 

profiles. Including these procedures in 

subpart N of part 91 will allow operators 

of the MHI MU–2B series airplane to 

follow the most current procedures 

when operating an appropriately 

equipped MHI MU–2B series airplane. 

The new CDFA flight training 

supplements training already contained 

in the SFAR and provides an alternate 

procedure that may be used at the 

discretion of the pilot. 

The flight training maneuver profiles 

A–7, B–7, C–7 in former Appendix D of 

the SFAR No. 108 were incorrect 

regarding the procedures for setting 

power and trim for the demonstration of 

the one-engine-inoperative maneuver 

with a loss of directional control. 

Furthermore, the maneuver profiles in 

the SFAR No. 108 (profiles A–8 through 

A–11, B–8 through B–11, and C–8 

through C–11) required operators to 

perform all stall recoveries with a 

‘‘minimal loss of altitude’’. This 

requirement has been removed from all 

FAA and industry training documents 

for other aircraft. This rule relocates and 

updates the content of SFAR No. 108 to 

this subpart in order to eliminate safety 

concerns resulting from mandating 

incorrect and out-of-date best practices 

for training in and operating the MU– 

2B. 

With this action, all MU–2B training 

must take place under an FAA approved 

MU–2B training program. FAA approval 

of all MU–2B training programs will be 

based on whether that program meets 

the performance standards of 

§ 91.1705(h). The FAA is also 

publishing an AC for the Mitsubishi 

MU–2B Training Program. This AC 

Appendix contains a recommended 

MU–2B training program which may be 

used by training providers to meet the 

requirements this subpart, or as a 

reference for the training providers to 

develop their own MU–2B training 

programs. 

By following the AC training 

guidance, there will be no new training 

costs associated with this revised 

training guidance. The requalification 

and recurrent training hours for ground 

instruction and flight instruction remain 

the same. All MU–2B pilots will have to 

take training compliant with this 

subpart when their 12-month recurrent 

training requirement comes due, but not 

before. Nothing in this subpart 

mandates new training outside the 

existing currency cycle. 

By following the AC training 

guidance, the change in existing 

training, results in no new costs. Thus, 

the cost of the rule will be minimal. 

The FAA has, therefore, determined 

that this rule is not a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ as defined in section 

3(f) of Executive Order 12866, and is not 

‘‘significant’’ as defined in DOT’s 

Regulatory Policies and Procedures. 

B. Regulatory Flexibility Determination 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 

(Public Law 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. 

However, if an agency determines that 

a rule is not expected to have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities, 

section 605(b) of the RFA provides that 

the head of the agency may so certify 

and a regulatory flexibility analysis is 

not required. The certification must 

include a statement providing the 

factual basis for this determination, and 

the reasoning should be clear. 

MU–2 aircraft are owned by a 

substantial number of small entities. 

However, the FAA believes that this 

rule does not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities for the 

following reasons. With this rule, the 

updated procedures and new profiles 

that are already in place for other FAA 

approved training programs will become 

mandatory for MU–2B pilots. By 

following the AC training guidance, the 

change in existing training, results in no 

new costs. Nothing in this rule 

mandates new training outside the 

existing cycle. 

Therefore, as provided in section 

605(b), the head of the FAA certifies 

that this rulemaking will not result in a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

C. 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 the rule would protect 

safety and is not considered an 

unnecessary obstacle to foreign 

commerce. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
61590 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 173 / Wednesday, September 7, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 

D. 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 $155 

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. 

E. Paperwork Reduction Act 

The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

(44 U.S.C. 3507(d)) requires that the 

FAA consider the impact of paperwork 

and other information collection 

burdens imposed on the public. 

According to the 1995 amendments to 

the Paperwork Reduction Act (5 CFR 

1320.8(b)(2)(vi)), 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. The FAA has 

determined that there is a new 

requirement for information collection 

associated with this immediately 

adopted final rule and is requesting the 

Office of Management and Budget to 

grant an immediate emergency 

clearance on the paperwork package 

that it is submitting. Therefore, 

notification will be made to the public 

when a clearance is received. Following 

is a summary of the information 

collection activity. 

Title: MU–2B Series Airplane 

Training Requirements Update 

Summary/Need: This subpart requires 

qualified instructors providing MU–2B 

training in part 91 operations to submit 

a proposed MU–2B training program to 

the FAA for approval. This information 

collection is necessary to the FAA’s 

mission to ensure aviation safety 

because it will enable the FAA to 

identify MU–2B qualified instructors 

providing training under this subpart 

and to oversee compliance. 

Respondents: The respondents are an 

estimated 20-training providers 

operating under part 91 that are 

qualified to provide training for the 

MU–2B aircraft in accordance with 

subpart N of part 91. 

Burden: The burden associated with 

this subpart is minimal to the part 91 

training providers. 

Use: It will enable the FAA to identify 

MU–2B qualified instructors currently 

providing training under SFAR No. 108 

and oversee compliance with subpart N 

of part 91. 

Frequency: Part 91 training providers 

will have to submit their training 

programs to the FAA every two years. 

F. International Compatibility and 

Cooperation 

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 determined that there are no ICAO 

Standards and Recommended Practices 

that correspond to these proposed 

regulations. 

Executive Order 13609, Promoting 

International Regulatory Cooperation, 

promotes international regulatory 

cooperation to meet shared challenges 

involving health, safety, labor, security, 

environmental, and other issues and to 

reduce, eliminate, or prevent 

unnecessary differences in regulatory 

requirements. The FAA has analyzed 

this action under the policies and 

agency responsibilities of Executive 

Order 13609, and has determined that 

this action would have no effect on 

international regulatory cooperation. 

G. Environmental Analysis 

FAA Order 1050.1F 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 5–6.6 and involves no 

extraordinary circumstances. 

VI. Executive Order Determinations 

A. Executive Order 13132, Federalism 

The FAA has analyzed this 

immediately adopted final rule under 

the principles and criteria of Executive 

Order 13132, Federalism. The agency 

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. 

B. Executive Order 13211, Regulations 

that Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

The FAA analyzed this immediately 

adopted final rule under Executive 

Order 13211, Actions Concerning 

Regulations that Significantly Affect 

Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use 

(May 18, 2001). The agency has 

determined that it is not a ‘‘significant 

energy action’’ under the executive 

order and it is not likely to have a 

significant adverse effect on the supply, 

distribution, or use of energy. 

VII. How To Obtain Additional 

Information 

A. Rulemaking Documents 

An electronic copy of a rulemaking 

document may be obtained by using the 

Internet— 

1. Search the Federal eRulemaking 

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

2. Visit the FAA’s Regulations and 

Policies Web page at http://

www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/ or 

3. Access the Government Publishing 

Office’s Web page at: http://

www.gpo.gov/fdsys/. 

Copies may also be obtained by 

sending a request (identified by 

amendment or docket number of this 

rulemaking) to the Federal Aviation 

Administration, Office of Rulemaking, 

ARM–1, 800 Independence Avenue 

SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by 

calling (202) 267–9677. 

B. Comments Submitted to the Docket 

Comments received may be viewed by 

going to http://www.regulations.gov and 

following the online instructions to 

search the docket number for this 

action. Anyone is able to search the 

electronic form of all comments 

received into any of the FAA’s 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.). 

C. 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. 

A small entity with questions regarding 

this document, may contact its local 

FAA official, or the person listed under 

the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

heading at the beginning of the 

preamble. To find out more about 

SBREFA on the Internet, visit http://

www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/ 

rulemaking/sbre_act/. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 173 / Wednesday, September 7, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 61591 

List of Subjects 

14 CFR Part 35 

Aircraft, Aviation safety. 

14 CFR Part 91 

Aircraft, Airmen, Airports, Aviation 

safety, Freight, Incorporation by 

reference, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

14 CFR Part 135 

Air taxis, Aircraft, Airmen, Alcohol 

abuse, Aviation safety, Drug abuse, Drug 

testing, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

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, 

FLIGHT INSTRUCTORS, AND GROUND 

INSTRUCTORS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 61 

continues to read as follows: 

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

44701–44703, 44707, 44709–44711, 44729, 

44903, 45102–45103, 45301–45302. 

■ 2. Remove Special Federal Aviation 

Regulation No. 108. 

PART 91—GENERAL OPERATING AND 

FLIGHT RULES 

■ 3. The authority citation for part 91 

continues to read as follows: 

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

40101, 40103, 40105, 40113, 40120, 44101, 

44111, 44701, 44704, 44709, 44711, 44712, 

44715, 44716, 44717, 44722, 46306, 46315, 

46316, 46504, 46506–46507, 47122, 47508, 

47528–47531, 47534, articles 12 and 29 of the 

Convention on International Civil Aviation 

(61 stat. 1180), (126 Stat. 11). 

■ 4. Effective November 7, 2017, remove 

Special Federal Aviation Regulation No. 

108—Mitsubishi MU–2B Series Special 

Training, Experience, and Operating 

Requirements. 

■ 5. Amend part 91 by adding subpart 

N to read as follows: 

Subpart N—Mitsubishi MU–2B Series 

Special Training, Experience, and 

Operating Requirements 

Sec. 

91.1701 Applicability 

91.1703 Compliance and eligibility. 

91.1705 Required pilot training. 

91.1707 Training program hours. 

91.1709 Training program approval. 

91.1711 Aeronautical experience. 

91.1713 Instruction, checking, and 

evaluation. 

91.1715 Currency requirements and flight 

review. 

91.1717 Operating requirements. 

91.1719 Credit for prior training. 

91.1721 Incorporation by reference. 

§ 91.1701 Applicability. 

(a) On and after November 7, 2016, all 

training conducted in an MU–2B must 

follow an approved MU–2B training 

program that meets the standards of this 

subpart. 

(b) This subpart applies to all persons 

who operate a Mitsubishi MU–2B series 

airplane, including those who act as 

pilot in command, act as second-incommand, or other persons who 

manipulate the controls while under the 

supervision of a pilot in command. 

(c) This subpart also applies to those 

persons who provide pilot training for a 

Mitsubishi MU–2B series airplane. The 

requirements in this subpart are in 

addition to the requirements of parts 61, 

91, and 135 of this chapter. 

§ 91.1703 Compliance and eligibility. 

(a) Except as provided in paragraph 

(b) of this section, no person may 

manipulate the controls, act as PIC, act 

as second-in-command, or provide pilot 

training for a Mitsubishi MU–2B series 

airplane unless that person meets the 

requirements of this subpart. 

(b) A person who does not meet the 

requirements of this subpart may 

manipulate the controls of a Mitsubishi 

MU–2B series airplane if a pilot in 

command who meets the requirements 

of this subpart is occupying a pilot 

station, no passengers or cargo are 

carried on board the airplane, and the 

flight is being conducted for one of the 

following reasons— 

(1) The pilot in command is providing 

pilot training to the manipulator of the 

controls; 

(2) The pilot in command is 

conducting a maintenance test flight 

with a second pilot or certificated 

mechanic; or 

(3) The pilot in command is 

conducting simulated instrument flight 

and is using a safety pilot other than the 

pilot in command who manipulates the 

controls for the purposes of § 91.109(b). 

(c) A person is required to complete 

Initial/transition training if that person 

has fewer than— 

(1) 50 hours of documented flight 

time manipulating the controls while 

serving as pilot in command of a 

Mitsubishi MU–2B series airplane in the 

preceding 24 months; or 

(2) 500 hours of documented flight 

time manipulating the controls while 

serving as pilot in command of a 

Mitsubishi MU–2B series airplane. 

(d) A person is eligible to receive 

Requalification training in lieu of 

Initial/transition training if that person 

has at least— 

(1) 50 hours of documented flight 

time manipulating the controls while 

serving as pilot in command of a 

Mitsubishi MU–2B series airplane in the 

preceding 24 months; or 

(2) 500 hours of documented flight 

time manipulating the controls while 

serving as pilot in command of a 

Mitsubishi MU–2B series airplane. 

(e) A person is required to complete 

Recurrent training within the preceding 

12 months. Successful completion of 

Initial/transition or Requalification 

training within the preceding 12 months 

satisfies the requirement of Recurrent 

training. A person must successfully 

complete Initial/transition training or 

Requalification training before being 

eligible to receive Recurrent training. 

(f) Successful completion of Initial/ 

transition training or Requalification 

training is a one-time requirement. A 

person may elect to retake Initial/ 

transition training or Requalification 

training in lieu of Recurrent training. 

(g) A person is required to complete 

Differences training in accordance with 

an FAA approved MU–2B training 

program if that person operates more 

than one MU–2B model as specified in 

§ 91.1707(c). 

§ 91.1705 Required pilot training. 

(a) Except as provided in § 91.1703(b), 

no person may manipulate the controls, 

act as pilot in command, or act as 

second-in-command of a Mitsubishi 

MU–2B series airplane for the purpose 

of flight unless— 

(1) The requirements for ground and 

flight training on Initial/transition, 

Requalification, Recurrent, and 

Differences training have been 

completed in accordance with an FAA 

approved MU–2B training program that 

meets the standards of this subpart; and 

(2) That person’s logbook has been 

endorsed in accordance with paragraph 

(f) of this section. 

(b) Except as provided in § 91.1703(b), 

no person may manipulate the controls, 

act as pilot in command, or act as 

second-in-command, of a Mitsubishi 

MU–2B series airplane for the purpose 

of flight unless— 

(1) That person satisfactorily 

completes, if applicable, annual 

Recurrent pilot training on the Special 

Emphasis Items, and all items listed in 

the Training Course Final Phase Check 

in accordance with an FAA approved 

MU–2B training program that meets the 

standards of this subpart; and 

(2) That person’s logbook has been 

endorsed in accordance with paragraph 

(f) of this section. 

(c) Satisfactory completion of the 

competency check required by § 135.293 

of this chapter within the preceding 12 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
61592 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 173 / Wednesday, September 7, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 

calendar months may not be substituted 

for the Mitsubishi MU–2B series 

airplane annual recurrent flight training 

of this section. 

(d) Satisfactory completion of a 

Federal Aviation Administration 

sponsored pilot proficiency program, as 

described in § 61.56(e) of this chapter 

may not be substituted for the 

Mitsubishi MU–2B series airplane 

annual recurrent flight training of this 

section. 

(e) If a person complies with the 

requirements of paragraph (a) or (b) of 

this section in the calendar month 

before or the calendar month after the 

month in which compliance with these 

paragraphs are required, that person is 

considered to have accomplished the 

training requirement in the month the 

training is due. 

(f) The endorsement required under 

paragraph (a) and (b) of this section 

must be made by— 

(1) A certificated flight instructor or a 

simulator instructor authorized by a 

Training Center certificated under part 

142 of this chapter and meeting the 

qualifications of § 91.1713; or 

(2) For persons operating the 

Mitsubishi MU–2B series airplane for a 

14 CFR part 119 certificate holder 

within the last 12 calendar months, the 

part 119 certificate holder’s flight 

instructor if authorized by the FAA and 

if that flight instructor meets the 

requirements of § 91.1713. 

(g) All training conducted for a 

Mitsubishi MU–2B series airplane must 

be completed in accordance with an 

MU–2B series airplane checklist that 

has been accepted by the Federal 

Aviation Administration’s MU–2B 

Flight Standardization Board or the 

applicable MU–2B series checklist 

(incorporated by reference, see 

§ 91.1721). 

(h) MU–2B training programs must 

contain ground training and flight 

training sufficient to ensure pilot 

proficiency for the safe operation of 

MU–2B aircraft, including: 

(1) A ground training curriculum 

sufficient to ensure pilot knowledge of 

MU–2B aircraft, aircraft systems, and 

procedures, necessary for safe operation; 

and 

(2) Flight training curriculum 

including flight training maneuver 

profiles sufficient in number and detail 

to ensure pilot proficiency in all MU– 

2B operations for each MU–2B model in 

correlation with MU–2B limitations, 

procedures, aircraft performance, and 

MU–2B Cockpit Checklist procedures 

applicable to the MU–2B model being 

trained. A MU–2B training program 

must contain, at a minimum, the 

following flight training maneuver 

profiles applicable to the MU–2B model 

being trained: 

(i) Normal takeoff with 5- and 20- 

degrees flaps; 

(ii) Takeoff engine failure with 5- and 

20- degrees flaps; 

(iii) Takeoff engine failure on runway 

or rejected takeoff; 

(iv) Takeoff engine failure after 

liftoff—unable to climb (may be 

completed in classroom or flight 

training device only); 

(v) Steep turns; 

(vi) Slow flight maneuvers; 

(vii) One engine inoperative 

maneuvering with loss of directional 

control; 

(viii) Approach to stall in clean 

configuration and with wings level; 

(ix) Approach to stall in takeoff 

configuration with 15- to 30- degrees 

bank; 

(x) Approach to stall in landing 

configuration with gear down and 40- 

degrees of flaps; 

(xi) Accelerated stall with no flaps; 

(xii) Emergency descent at low speed; 

(xiii) Emergency descent at high 

speed; 

(xiv) Unusual attitude recovery with 

the nose high; 

(xv) Unusual attitude recovery with 

the nose low; 

(xvi) Normal landing with 20- and 40- 

degrees flaps; 

(xvii) Go around and rejected landing; 

(xviii) No flap or 5- degrees flaps 

landing; 

(xix) One engine inoperative landing 

with 5- and 20- degrees flaps; 

(xx) Crosswind landing; 

(xxi) Instrument landing system (ILS) 

and missed approach ; 

(xxii) Two engine missed approach; 

(xxiii) One engine inoperative ILS and 

missed approach; 

(xxiv) One engine inoperative missed 

approach; 

(xxv) Non-precision and missed 

approach; 

(xxvi) Non-precision continuous 

descent final approach and missed 

approach; 

(xxvii) One engine inoperative nonprecision and missed approach; 

(xxviii) One engine inoperative nonprecision CDFA and missed approach; 

(xxix) Circling approach at weather 

minimums; 

(xxx) One engine inoperative circling 

approach at weather minimums. 

(3) Flight training must include a final 

phase check sufficient to document 

pilot proficiency in the flight training 

maneuver profiles at the completion of 

training; and 

(4) Differences training for applicable 

MU–2B model variants sufficient to 

ensure pilot proficiency in each model 

operated. Current MU–2B differences 

requirements are specified in 

§ 91.1707(c). A person must complete 

Differences training if a person operates 

more than one MU–2B model as 

specified in § 91.1707(c). Differences 

training between the factory type design 

K and M models of the MU–2B airplane, 

and the factory type design J and L 

models of the MU–2B airplane, may be 

accomplished with Level A training. All 

other factory type design differences 

training must be accomplished with 

Level B training unless otherwise 

specified in § 91.1707(c) . A Level A or 

B differences training is not a recurring 

annual requirement. Once a person has 

completed Initial Level A or B 

Differences training between the 

applicable different models, no 

additional differences training between 

those models is required. 

(5) Icing training sufficient to ensure 

pilot knowledge and safe operation of 

the MU–2B aircraft in icing conditions 

as established by the FAA; 

(6) Ground and flight training 

programs must include training hours 

identified by § 91.1707(a) for ground 

instruction, § 91.1707(b) for flight 

instruction, and § 91.1707(c) for 

differences training. 

(i) No training credit is given for 

second-in-command training and no 

credit is given for right seat time under 

this program. Only the sole manipulator 

of the controls of the MU–2B airplane, 

flight training device, or Level C or D 

simulator can receive training credit 

under this program; 

(ii) An MU–2B airplane must be 

operated in accordance with an FAA 

approved MU–2B training program that 

meets the standards of this subpart and 

the training hours in § 91.1707. 

(7) Endorsements given for 

compliance with paragraph (f) of this 

section must be appropriate to the 

content of that specific MU–2B training 

program’s compliance with standards of 

this subpart. 

§ 91.1707 Training program hours. 

(a) Ground instruction hours are listed 

in the following table: 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 173 / Wednesday, September 7, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 61593 

Initial/transition Requalificaton Recurrent 

20 hours ............................................................ 12 hours ............................................................ 8 hours. 

(b) Flight instruction hours are listed 

in the following table: 

Initial/transition Requalification Recurrent 

12 hours with a minimum of 6 hours at level E 8 hours level C or level E ................................ 4 hours at level E, or 6 hours at level C. 

(c) Differences training hours are 

listed in the following table: 

2 factory type design models concurrently .................................................................................................... 1.5 hours required at level B. 

More than 2 factory type design models concurrently .................................................................................. 3 hours at level B. 

Each additional factory type design model added separately ...................................................................... 1.5 hours at level B. 

(d) Definitions of levels of training as 

used in this subpart: 

(1) LEVEL A Training—Training that 

is conducted through self-instruction by 

the pilot. 

(2) LEVEL B Training—Training that 

is conducted in the classroom 

environment with the aid of a qualified 

instructor who meets the requirements 

of this subpart. 

(3) LEVEL C Training—Training that 

is accomplished in an FAA-approved 

Level 5 or 6 flight training device. In 

addition to the basic FTD requirements, 

the FTD must be representative of the 

MU–2B cockpit controls and be 

specifically approved by the FAA for 

the MU–2B airplane. 

(4) Level E Training—Training that 

must be accomplished in the MU–2B 

airplane, Level C simulator, or Level D 

simulator. 

§ 91.1709 Training program approval. 

To obtain approval for an MU–2B 

training program, training providers 

must submit a proposed training 

program to the Administrator. 

(a) Only training programs approved 

by the Administrator may be used to 

satisfy the standards of this subpart. 

(b) For part 91 training providers, 

training programs will be approved for 

24 months, unless sooner superseded or 

rescinded. 

(c) The Administrator may require 

revision of an approved MU–2B training 

program at any time. 

(d) A training provider must present 

its approved training program and FAA 

approval documentation to any 

representative of the Administrator, 

upon request. 

§ 91.1711 Aeronautical experience. 

No person may act as a pilot in 

command of a Mitsubishi MU–2B series 

airplane for the purpose of flight unless 

that person holds an airplane category 

and multi-engine land class rating, and 

has logged a minimum of 100 flight 

hours of PIC time in multi-engine 

airplanes. 

§ 91.1713 Instruction, checking, and 

evaluation. 

(a) Flight Instructor (Airplane). No 

flight instructor may provide instruction 

or conduct a flight review in a 

Mitsubishi MU–2B series airplane 

unless that flight instructor 

(1) Meets the pilot training and 

documentation requirements of 

§ 91.1705 before giving flight instruction 

in the Mitsubishi MU–2B series 

airplane; 

(2) Meets the currency requirements 

of §§ 91.1715(a) and 91.1715(c) 

(3) Has a minimum total pilot time of 

2,000 pilot-in-command hours and 800 

pilot-in-command hours in multiengine 

airplanes; and 

(4) Has: 

(i) 300 pilot-in-command hours in the 

Mitsubishi MU–2B series airplane, 50 

hours of which must have been within 

the preceding 12 months; or 

(ii) 100 pilot-in-command hours in 

the Mitsubishi MU–2B series airplane, 

25 hours of which must have been 

within the preceding 12 months, and 

300 hours providing instruction in a 

FAA-approved Mitsubishi MU–2B 

simulator or FAA-approved Mitsubishi 

MU–2B flight training device, 25 hours 

of which must have been within the 

preceding 12 months. 

(b) Flight Instructor (Simulator/Flight 

Training Device). No flight instructor 

may provide instruction for the 

Mitsubishi MU–2B series airplane 

unless that instructor meets the 

requirements of this paragraph— 

(1) Each flight instructor who 

provides flight training for the 

Mitsubishi MU–2B series airplane must 

meet the pilot training and 

documentation requirements of 

§ 91.1705 before giving flight instruction 

for the Mitsubishi MU–2B series 

airplane; 

(2) Each flight instructor who 

provides flight training for the 

Mitsubishi MU–2B series airplane must 

meet the currency requirements of 

§ 91.1715(c) before giving flight 

instruction for the Mitsubishi MU–2B 

series airplane; 

(3) Each flight instructor who 

provides flight training for the 

Mitsubishi MU–2B series airplane must 

have: 

(i) A minimum total pilot time of 2000 

pilot–in-command hours and 800 pilotin-command hours in multiengine 

airplanes; and 

(ii) Within the preceding 12 months, 

either 50 hours of Mitsubishi MU–2B 

series airplane pilot-in-command 

experience or 50 hours providing 

simulator or flight training device 

instruction for the Mitsubishi MU–2B. 

(c) Checking and evaluation. No 

person may provide checking or 

evaluation for the Mitsubishi MU–2B 

series airplane unless that person meets 

the requirements of this paragraph— 

(1) For the purpose of checking, 

designated pilot examiners, training 

center evaluators, and check airmen 

must have completed the appropriate 

training in the Mitsubishi MU–2B series 

airplane in accordance with § 91.1705; 

(2) For checking conducted in the 

Mitsubishi MU–2B series airplane, each 

designated pilot examiner and check 

airman must have 100 hours pilot-incommand flight time in the Mitsubishi 

MU–2B series airplane and maintain 

currency in accordance with § 91.1715. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
61594 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 173 / Wednesday, September 7, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 

§ 91.1715 Currency requirements and 

flight review. 

(a) The takeoff and landing currency 

requirements of § 61.57 of this chapter 

must be maintained in the Mitsubishi 

MU–2B series airplane. Takeoff and 

landings in other multiengine airplanes 

do not meet the takeoff landing currency 

requirements for the Mitsubishi MU–2B 

series airplane. Takeoff and landings in 

either the short-body or long-body 

Mitsubishi MU–2B model airplane may 

be credited toward takeoff and landing 

currency for both Mitsubishi MU–2B 

model groups. 

(b) Instrument experience obtained in 

other category and class of aircraft may 

be used to satisfy the instrument 

currency requirements of § 61.57 of this 

chapter for the Mitsubishi MU–2B series 

airplane. 

(c) Satisfactory completion of a flight 

review to satisfy the requirements of 

§ 61.56 of this chapter is valid for 

operation of a Mitsubishi MU–2B series 

airplane only if that flight review is 

conducted in a Mitsubishi MU–2B 

series airplane or an MU–2B Simulator 

approved for landings with an approved 

course conducted under part 142 of this 

chapter. The flight review for Mitsubishi 

MU–2B series airplanes must include 

the Special Emphasis Items, and all 

items listed in the Training Course Final 

Phase Check in accordance with an 

approved MU–2B Training Program. 

(d) A person who successfully 

completes the Initial/transition, 

Requalification, or Recurrent training 

requirements under § 91.1705 of this 

chapter also meet the requirements of 

§ 61.56 of this chapter and need not 

accomplish a separate flight review 

provided that at least 1 hour of the flight 

training was conducted in the 

Mitsubishi MU–2B series airplane or an 

MU–2B Simulator approved for 

landings with an approved course 

conducted under part 142 of this 

chapter. 

§ 91.1717 Operating requirements. 

(a) Except as provided in paragraph 

(b) of this section, no person may 

operate a Mitsubishi MU–2B airplane in 

single pilot operations unless that 

airplane has a functional autopilot. 

(b) A person may operate a Mitsubishi 

MU–2B airplane in single pilot 

operations without a functional 

autopilot when— 

(1) Operating under day visual flight 

rule requirements; or 

(2) Authorized under a FAA approved 

minimum equipment list for that 

airplane, operating under instrument 

flight rule requirements in daytime 

visual meteorological conditions. 

(c) No person may operate a 

Mitsubishi MU–2B series airplane 

unless a copy of the appropriate 

Mitsubishi Heavy Industries MU–2B 

Airplane Flight Manual is carried on 

board the airplane and is accessible 

during each flight at the pilot station. 

(d) No person may operate a 

Mitsubishi MU–2B series airplane 

unless an MU–2B series airplane 

checklist, appropriate for the model 

being operated and accepted by the 

Federal Aviation Administration MU– 

2B Flight Standardization Board, is 

accessible for each flight at the pilot 

station and is used by the flight 

crewmembers when operating the 

airplane. 

(e) No person may operate a 

Mitsubishi MU–2B series airplane 

contrary to the standards of this subpart. 

(f) If there are any differences between 

the training and operating requirements 

of this subpart and the MU–2B Airplane 

Flight Manual’s procedures sections 

(Normal, Abnormal, and Emergency) 

and the MU–2B airplane series checklist 

incorporated by reference in § 91.1721, 

the person operating the airplane must 

operate the airplane in accordance with 

the training specified in this subpart. 

§ 91.1719 Credit for prior training. 

Initial/transition, requalification, 

recurrent or Level B differences training 

conducted prior to November 7, 2016, 

compliant with SFAR No. 108, Section 

3 of this part, is considered to be 

compliant with this subpart, if the 

student met the eligibility requirements 

for the applicable category of training 

and the student’s instructor met the 

experience requirements of this subpart. 

§ 91.1721 Incorporation by reference. 

(a) The Mitsubishi Heavy Industries 

MU–2B Cockpit Checklists are 

incorporated by reference into this part. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved this incorporation by 

reference in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 

552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. All approved 

material is available for inspection at 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 

Docket Management Facility, Room W 

12–140, West Building Ground Floor, 

1200 New Jersey Ave. SE., Washington, 

DC 20590–0001, or at the National 

Archives and Records Administration, 

call 202–741–6030, or go to: http://

www.archives.gov/federal_register/ 

code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_

locations.html. 

(b) Turbine Aircraft Services, Inc., 

4550 Jimmy Doolittle Drive, Addison, 

Texas 75001, USA. 

(1) Mitsubishi Heavy Industries MU– 

2B Checklists: 

(i) Cockpit Checklist, Model MU–2B– 

60, Type Certificate A10SW, MHI 

Document No. YET06220C, accepted by 

FSB on February 12, 2007. 

(ii) Cockpit Checklist, Model MU–2B– 

40, Type Certificate A10SW, MHI 

Document No. YET06256A, accepted by 

FSB on February 12, 2007. 

(iii) Cockpit Checklist, Model MU– 

2B–36A, Type Certificate A10SW, MHI 

Document No. YET06257B, accepted by 

FSB on February 12, 2007. 

(iv) Cockpit Checklist, Model MU– 

2B–36, Type Certificate A2PC, MHI 

Document No. YET06252B, accepted by 

FSB on February 12, 2007. 

(v) Cockpit Checklist, Model MU–2B– 

35, Type Certificate A2PC, MHI 

Document No. YET06251B, accepted by 

FSB on February 12, 2007. 

(vi) Cockpit Checklist, Model MU– 

2B–30, Type Certificate A2PC, MHI 

Document No. YET06250A, accepted by 

FSB on March 2, 2007. 

(vii) Cockpit Checklist, Model MU– 

2B–26A, Type Certificate A10SW, MHI 

Document No. YET06255A, accepted by 

FSB on February 12, 2007. 

(viii) Cockpit Checklist, Model MU– 

2B–26, Type Certificate A2PC, MHI 

Document No. YET06249A, accepted by 

FSB on March 2, 2007. 

(ix) Cockpit Checklist, Model MU– 

2B–26, Type Certificate A10SW, MHI 

Document No. YET06254A, accepted by 

FSB on March 2, 2007. 

(x) Cockpit Checklist, Model MU–2B– 

25, Type Certificate A10SW, MHI 

Document No. YET06253A, accepted by 

FSB on March 2, 2007. 

(xi) Cockpit Checklist, Model MU– 

2B–25, Type Certificate A2PC, MHI 

Document No. YET06248A, accepted by 

FSB on March 2, 2007. 

(xii) Cockpit Checklist, Model MU– 

2B–20, Type Certificate A2PC, MHI 

Document No. YET06247A, accepted by 

FSB on February 12, 2007. 

(xv) Cockpit Checklist, Model MU– 

2B–15, Type Certificate A2PC, MHI 

Document No. YET06246A, accepted by 

FSB on March 2, 2007. 

(xvi) Cockpit Checklist, Model MU– 

2B–10, Type Certificate A2PC, MHI 

Document No. YET06245A, accepted by 

FSB on March 2, 2007. 

(xvii) Cockpit Checklist, Model MU– 

2B, Type Certificate A2PC, MHI 

Document No. YET06244A, accepted by 

FSB on March 2, 2007. 

(2) [Reserved] 

PART 135—OPERATING 

REQUIREMENTS: COMMUTER AND 

ON DEMAND OPERATIONS AND 

RULES GOVERNING PERSONS ON 

BOARD SUCH AIRCRAFT 

■ 6. The authority citation for part 135 

continues to read as follows: 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 173 / Wednesday, September 7, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 61595 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 41706, 

40113, 44701–44702, 44705, 44709, 44711– 

44713, 44715–44717, 44722, 44730, 45101– 

45105; Pub. L. 112–95, 126 Stat. 58 (49 U.S.C. 

44730). 

■ 7. Remove Special Federal Aviation 

Regulation No. 108. 

Issued under authority provided by 49 

U.S.C. 106(f), 44701(a), and 44703 in 

Washington, DC, on July 11, 2016. 

Michael P. Huerta, 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2016–21356 Filed 9–6–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

Bureau of Industry and Security 

15 CFR Part 744 

[Docket No. 160617543–6543–01] 

RIN 0694–AH02 

Russian Sanctions: Addition of Certain 

Entities to the Entity List 

AGENCY: Bureau of Industry and 

Security, Commerce. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Bureau of Industry and 

Security (BIS) amends the Export 

Administration Regulations (EAR) by 

adding eighty-one entities under eightysix entries to the Entity List. The eightyone entities who are added to the Entity 

List have been determined by the U.S. 

Government to be acting contrary to the 

national security or foreign policy 

interests of the United States. BIS is 

taking this action to ensure the efficacy 

of existing sanctions on the Russian 

Federation (Russia) for violating 

international law and fueling the 

conflict in eastern Ukraine. These 

entities will be listed on the Entity List 

under the destinations of the Crimea 

region of Ukraine, Hong Kong, India, 

and Russia. 

DATES: This rule is effective September 

7, 2016. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Chair, End-User Review Committee, 

Office of the Assistant Secretary, Export 

Administration, Bureau of Industry and 

Security, Department of Commerce, 

Phone: (202) 482–5991, Email: ERC@

bis.doc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The Entity List (Supplement No. 4 to 

Part 744 of the EAR) identifies entities 

and other persons reasonably believed 

to be involved in, or that pose a 

significant risk of being or becoming 

involved in, activities that are contrary 

to the national security or foreign policy 

of the United States. The EAR imposes 

additional licensing requirements on, 

and limits the availability of most 

license exceptions for, exports, 

reexports, and transfers (in-country) to 

those persons or entities listed on the 

Entity List. The license review policy 

for each listed entity is identified in the 

License Review Policy column on the 

Entity List and the impact on the 

availability of license exceptions is 

described in the Federal Register notice 

adding entities or other persons to the 

Entity List. BIS places entities on the 

Entity List based on certain sections of 

part 744 (Control Policy: End-User and 

End-Use Based) and part 746 

(Embargoes and Other Special Controls) 

of the EAR. 

The End-user Review Committee 

(ERC) is composed of representatives of 

the Departments of Commerce (Chair), 

State, Defense, Energy, and where 

appropriate, the Treasury. The ERC 

makes decisions to add an entry to the 

Entity List by majority vote and to 

remove or modify an entry by 

unanimous vote. The Departments 

represented on the ERC have approved 

these changes to the Entity List. 

Entity List Additions 

Additions to the Entity List 

This rule implements the decision of 

the ERC to add eighty-one entities under 

eighty-six entries to the Entity List. 

These eighty-one entities are being 

added on the basis of § 744.11 (License 

requirements that apply to entities 

acting contrary to the national security 

or foreign policy interests of the United 

States) of the EAR. The eighty-six 

entries being added to the Entity List 

consist of seven entries in the Crimea 

region of Ukraine, two entries in Hong 

Kong, two entries in India, and seventyfive entries in Russia. There are eightysix entries for the eighty-one entities 

because five entities are listed in 

multiple locations, resulting in five 

additional entries. 

Under § 744.11(b) (Criteria for 

revising the Entity List) of the EAR, 

persons for whom there is reasonable 

cause to believe, based on specific and 

articulable facts, have been involved, 

are involved, or pose a significant risk 

of being or becoming involved in, 

activities that are contrary to the 

national security or foreign policy 

interests of the United States and those 

acting on behalf of such persons may be 

added to the Entity List. The entities 

being added to the Entity List have been 

determined to be involved in activities 

that are contrary to the national security 

or foreign policy interests of the United 

States. Specifically, in this rule, BIS 

adds entities to the Entity List for 

violating international law and fueling 

the conflict in eastern Ukraine. These 

additions ensure the efficacy of existing 

sanctions on Russia. The particular 

additions to the Entity List and related 

authorities are as follows. 

A. Entity Additions Consistent With 

Executive Order 13660 

One entity is added based on 

activities that are described in Executive 

Order 13660 (79 FR 13493), Blocking 

Property of Certain Persons Contributing 

to the Situation in Ukraine, issued by 

the President on March 6, 2014. As 

described in the Order, the President 

found that the actions and policies of 

persons who have asserted 

governmental authority in Crimea 

without the authorization of the 

Government of Ukraine undermine 

democratic processes and institutions in 

Ukraine; threaten its peace, security, 

stability, sovereignty, and territorial 

integrity; and contribute to the 

misappropriation of its assets; and 

thereby constitute an unusual and 

extraordinary threat to the national 

security and foreign policy of the United 

States. The President also declared a 

national emergency to deal with that 

threat. 

Executive Order 13660 blocks all 

property and interests in property that 

are in the United States, that come 

within the United States, or that are or 

come within the possession or control of 

any United States person (including any 

foreign branch) of any person 

determined by the Secretary of the 

Treasury, in consultation with the 

Secretary of State, to be responsible for 

or complicit in, or to have engaged in, 

directly or indirectly, misappropriation 

of state assets of Ukraine or of an 

economically significant entity in 

Ukraine, among other activities. Under 

Section 8 of the Order, all agencies of 

the United States Government are 

directed to take all appropriate 

measures within their authority to carry 

out the provisions of the Order. 

The Department of the Treasury’s 

Office of Foreign Assets Control, 

pursuant to Executive Order 13660, has 

designated the following entity: 

Salvation Committee of Ukraine, as 

being within the scope of the Order. In 

conjunction with that designation, BIS 

adds Salvation Committee of Ukraine to 

the Entity List under this rule and 

imposes a license requirement for 

exports, reexports, or transfers (incountry) of all items subject to the EAR 

to this blocked entity. This license 

requirement implements an appropriate 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES