Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 134 / Wednesday, July 15, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 34229 

information on the availability of this 

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

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

code_of_federal_regulations/

ibr_locations.html. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on July 2, 

2009. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. E9–16467 Filed 7–14–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Parts 61 and 121 

[Docket No. FAA–2006–26139; Amendment 

Nos. 61–123 and 121–344] 

RIN 2120–AJ01 

Part 121 Pilot Age Limit 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This action amends the Code 

of Federal Regulations to conform 

certain regulations with recent 

legislation raising the upper age limit 

for pilots serving in domestic, flag, and 

supplemental operations until they 

reach their 65th birthday. The 

legislation, known as the ‘‘Fair 

Treatment for Experienced Pilots Act,’’ 

raised the upper age limit from age 60 

to age 65. The legislation became 

effective December 13, 2007. The 

intended effect of this action is to 

update the Code of Federal Regulations 

to reflect the recent legislation. 

DATES: These amendments become 

effective July 15, 2009. Except as 

otherwise required by statute, affected 

parties do not have to comply with the 

information collection requirements in 

§§ 61.23 and 121.440 until the FAA 

publishes in the Federal Register the 

control number assigned by the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) for 

these information collection 

requirements. Publication of the control 

number notifies the public that OMB 

has approved these information 

collection requirements under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

technical questions concerning this rule 

contact Lawrence Youngblut, Air 

Transportation Division, AFS–200, 

Federal Aviation Administration, 800 

Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) 

267–9630, e-mail 

lawrence.youngblut@faa.gov. For legal 

questions concerning this rule contact 

Angela Washington, Office of the Chief 

Counsel, AGC–210, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence 

Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; 

telephone (202) 267–7556; e-mail 

angela.washington@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Availability of Rulemaking Documents 

You can get an electronic copy using 

the Internet by: 

1. Searching the Federal eRulemaking 

Portal at http://www.regulations.gov; 

2. Visiting the FAA’s Regulations and 

Policies Web page at http:// 

www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/; or 

3. Accessing the Government Printing 

Office’s Web page at http:// 

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

You can also get a copy by sending a 

request to the Federal Aviation 

Administration, Office of Rulemaking, 

ARM–1, 800 Independence Avenue, 

SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by 

calling (202) 267–9680. Make sure to 

identify the amendment number or 

docket number of this rulemaking. 

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. 

Therefore, any small entity that has a 

question regarding this document may 

contact their local FAA official, or the 

person listed under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT. You can find out 

more about SBREFA on the Internet at 

our site, http://www.faa.gov/ 

regulations_policies/rulemaking/ 

sbre_act/. 

Authority for This Rulemaking 

The FAA’s authority to issue rules 

regarding aviation safety is found in 

Title 49 of the United States Code. 

Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the 

authority of the FAA Administrator. 

Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, 

describes in more detail the scope of the 

agency’s authority. This rulemaking 

fulfills the mandate of H.R. 4343, the 

‘‘Fair Treatment for Experienced Pilots 

Act,’’ Pub. L. 110–135, hereinafter 

referred to as the Act. 

Background 

On December 13, 2007, the President 

signed into law the Act, which raised 

the upper age limit for pilots serving in 

14 CFR part 121 air carrier operations to 

age 65. The legislation took effect 

December 13, 2007. As of that date, 

§ 121.383(c) of the Code of Federal 

Regulations (14 CFR 121.383(c)) ceased 

to be effective. Section 121.383(c) 

prohibited any air carrier or commercial 

operator conducting flights under part 

121 from using the services of any 

person as a pilot, and prohibited any 

person from serving as a pilot, on an 

airplane engaged in operations under 

part 121 if that person had reached his 

or her 60th birthday. 

The Act has now been codified at 49 

U.S.C. Section 44729. Section 44729 of 

Title 49 allows a pilot to ‘‘serve in 

multicrew covered operations until 

attaining 65 years of age,’’ subject to 

certain limitations. For the purposes of 

the Act, ‘‘Covered Operations’’ means 

‘‘operations under part 121 of Title 14, 

Code of Federal Regulations.’’ The Act 

specifies a limitation for international 

flights. Pursuant to § 44729(c)(1), ‘‘A 

pilot who has attained 60 years of age 

may serve as pilot-in-command in 

covered operations between the United 

States and another country only if there 

is another pilot in the flight deck crew 

who has not yet attained 60 years of 

age.’’ Section 44729(c)(2) states that 

paragraph (c)(1) ceases to be effective 

‘‘on such date as the Convention on 

International Civil Aviation provides 

that a pilot who has attained 60 years 

of age may serve as pilot-in-command in 

international commercial operations 

without regard to whether there is 

another pilot in the flight deck crew 

who has not attained age 60.’’ 

Section 44729(e)(1) states ‘‘No person 

who has attained 60 years of age before 

the date of enactment of this section 

may serve as a pilot for an air carrier 

engaged in covered operations unless— 

(A) such person is in the employment 

of that air carrier in such operations on 

such date of enactment as a required 

flight deck crew member; or 

(B) such person is newly hired by an 

air carrier as a pilot on or after such date 

of enactment without credit for prior 

seniority or prior longevity for benefits 

or other terms related to length of 

service prior to the date rehired under 

any labor agreement or employment 

policies of the air carrier.’’ 

Section 44729(g)(1) requires that, 

except as provided by paragraph (g)(2) 

‘‘a person serving as a pilot for an air 

carrier engaged in covered operations 

shall not be subject to different medical 

standards, or different, greater, or more 

frequent medical examinations, on 

account of age unless the Secretary 

determines (based on data received or 

studies published after the date of 

enactment of this section) that different 

medical standards, or different, greater, 

or more frequent medical examinations, 

are needed to ensure an adequate level 

of safety in flight.’’ 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES
34230 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 134 / Wednesday, July 15, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

Section 44729(g)(2) states that ‘‘No 

person who has attained 60 years of age 

may serve as a pilot of an air carrier 

engaged in covered operations unless 

the person has a first-class medical 

certificate. Such a certificate shall 

expire on the last day of the 6-month 

period following the date of 

examination shown on the certificate.’’ 

Section 44729(h)(1) requires that 

‘‘Each air carrier engaged in covered 

operations shall continue to use pilot 

training and qualification programs 

approved by the Federal Aviation 

Administration, with specific emphasis 

on initial and recurrent training and 

qualification of pilots who have attained 

60 years of age, to ensure continued 

acceptable levels of pilot skill and 

judgment.’’ 

Section 44729(h)(2) requires that ‘‘Not 

later than 6 months after the date of 

enactment of this section, and every 6 

months thereafter, an air carrier engaged 

in covered operations shall evaluate the 

performance of each pilot of the air 

carrier who has attained 60 years of age 

through a line check of such pilot. 

Notwithstanding the preceding 

sentence, an air carrier shall not be 

required to conduct for a 6-month 

period a line check under this paragraph 

of a pilot serving as second-in-command 

if the pilot has undergone a regularly 

scheduled simulator evaluation during 

that period.’’ 

This final rule implements 

congressional legislation by conforming 

FAA regulations to statutory 

requirements. It was Congress’ objective 

to impact rules governing the age 

limitation requirements (and associated 

medical certificate and training 

requirements) of pilots engaged in 

operations under part 121. However, 

part 121 contains regulations imposing 

the same age limitation on check airmen 

and flight instructors. Specifically, 

check airmen and flight instructors who 

have reached their 60th birthday may 

not serve as pilot flight crewmembers in 

part 121 operations. Yet, Congress did 

not specifically amend those 

requirements. We do not believe that 

Congress intended that the age 

limitation imposed on a particular 

population of pilots should be different 

than that imposed on check airmen and 

flight instructors when they serve as 

pilot flight crewmembers, especially 

when, prior to the legislation’s 

enactment, the age limitation was the 

same for all airmen. To maintain that 

consistency, the FAA is amending 

§§ 121.411 and 121.412 to raise the age 

limit from age 60 to age 65, thus 

allowing check airmen and flight 

instructors to serve as pilot flight 

crewmembers until they reach the age of 

65. 

Likewise, part 61 contains similar age 

restrictions for pilots operating civil 

airplanes of U.S. registry. Section 61.3(j) 

prohibits a person who holds a part 61 

pilot certificate from serving as a pilot 

in certain international air services and 

air transportation operations if the pilot 

has reached the age of 60. Also, 

§ 61.77(e) prohibits a person who holds 

a part 61 special purpose pilot 

authorization from serving as a pilot in 

certain international air services and air 

transportation operations if the pilot has 

reached the age of 60. While part 61 

encompasses operations conducted 

under part 121, it could also include 

operations governed by parts 125 and 

129. These are not ‘‘covered operations’’ 

pursuant to the Act. Although Congress 

did not directly mandate amendments 

to these provisions, the FAA believes 

Congress clearly intended to implement 

the ICAO age requirements for pilots 

operating internationally, allowing them 

to conduct commercial air 

transportation operations under certain 

conditions until the age of 65. The ICAO 

standard increases the upper age limit 

for commercial pilots operating two 

pilot aircraft. In operations with more 

than one pilot, ICAO standard 2.1.10.1 

allows a person to serve as a pilot in 

command of an aircraft engaged in 

international commercial air transport 

operations until his or her 65th birthday 

if the other pilot is younger than 60 

years of age. Again, we do not think it 

was the intent of Congress to treat that 

population of pilots who conduct 

operations under parts 125 and 129 any 

differently than pilots conducting 

operations under part 121. Thus, the 

FAA is also amending the applicable 

provisions of part 61 to reflect the new 

upper age limit. 

Additionally, the ICAO standard 

places no limitation on whether a pilot 

is operating between his or her home 

state and another country or whether he 

or she is operating between two 

international territories. Because we 

believe Congress intended to implement 

ICAO standards, we do not think that it 

intended to limit pilots over the age of 

60 from operating between two 

international territories. However, the 

crew pairing provision of the Act does 

not address this scenario. The crew 

pairing provision states that a pilot over 

the age of 60 could serve as a pilot in 

command in covered operations 

between the United States and another 

country, assuming there was another 

pilot as part of the flight deck crew 

under the age of 60. This provision is 

not entirely consonant with the ICAO 

standard. The unintended consequence 

under the statute would lead to a 

contradiction with ICAO standards for 

international flights, which include 

those flights between two countries 

outside of the United States. The FAA 

believes that one of the primary 

purposes of the Fair Treatment Act is to 

harmonize FAA regulations with ICAO 

standards, and we have amended our 

regulations to reflect those standards. 

This rule allows a person over the age 

of 60 to serve as a pilot in command in 

covered operations between the United 

States and another country, and in 

operations between other countries, if 

there is another pilot in the flight deck 

crew under the age of 60. 

Good Cause for Immediate Adoption of 

This Final Rule 

Section 4 of the Administrative 

Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. section 

553(b)(B)) authorizes agencies to 

dispense with notice and comment 

procedures for rules when the agency 

for ‘‘good cause’’ finds that those 

procedures are ‘‘impracticable, 

unnecessary, or contrary to the public 

interest.’’ Under this section, an agency, 

upon finding good cause, may issue a 

final rule without seeking comment 

prior to the rulemaking. 

The FAA finds that notice and public 

comment to this final rule are 

unnecessary and contrary to the public 

interest. This final rule is a result of the 

Act. Because this rule implements 

Congressional mandates, good cause 

exists for the FAA to amend without 

notice its rules concerning pilot age 

limits. A legislative mandate of this 

nature makes it unnecessary to provide 

an opportunity for notice and comment. 

Further, good cause exists for making 

this rule effective upon publication to 

minimize any possible confusion. In 

addition, the FAA has determined good 

cause exists to amend without notice 

the part 61 and §§ 121.411 and 121.412 

provisions regarding age limitations. If 

we do not correct the language in the 

CFR, we are likely to receive numerous 

petitions for exemption, because the 

published language is not consistent 

with the statute. Since the FAA would 

not have safety or policy reasons to 

deny the exemptions, we have included 

these amendments in the final rule. 

Discussion of Dates 

The Act was effective on December 

13, 2007. However, pending publication 

of this rule, the FAA has not enforced 

the Age 60 rule since December 13, 

2007, in a manner inconsistent with the 

Act. This final rule, which promulgates 

conforming amendments to the FAA’s 

regulations as well as other amendments 

deemed necessary as a result of 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 134 / Wednesday, July 15, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 34231 

Congressional legislation, is effective 

upon publication in the Federal 

Register. 

International Compatibility 

In keeping with U.S. obligations 

under the Convention on International 

Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to 

comply with International Civil 

Aviation Organization (ICAO) Standards 

and Recommended Practices to the 

maximum extent practicable. The FAA 

has reviewed the corresponding ICAO 

Standards and Recommended Practices 

and has identified no differences with 

these conforming regulations. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

As required by the Paperwork 

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

3507(d)), the FAA submitted a copy of 

the information collection requirements 

in this final rule to the Office of 

Management and Budget for its review. 

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 OMB 

control number. The OMB control 

number for this information collection 

will be published in the Federal 

Register, after the Office of Management 

and Budget approves it. 

This final rule requires all pilots over 

the age of 60 who serve in part 121 

operations to hold an FAA first-class 

medical certificate, valid for 6 months. 

Some pilots who serve as second-incommand (or co-pilots) on certain part 

121 operations may hold an FAA 

second-class medical certificate, valid 

for 12 months. Pursuant to this 

rulemaking, those pilots who serve as 

seconds-in-command must obtain an 

FAA first-class medical certificate every 

6 months instead of the previously 

required annual second-class medical 

certificate. Also, all pilots serving in 

part 121 operations over age 60 must be 

evaluated, through a line check, every 6 

months. Current regulations only 

require pilots-in command to be 

evaluated, through a line check, every 

12 months. 

The FAA estimates that airlines, 

pilots, and the FAA will incur 

additional paperwork burdens (and 

hence an increase in paperwork costs). 

Over a 15-year period, total paperwork 

costs would be approximately $11.7 

million. Total paperwork costs are 

composed of record keeping costs and 

reporting costs. 

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. 

Regulatory Evaluation, Regulatory 

Flexibility Determination, International 

Trade Impact Assessment, and 

Unfunded Mandates Assessment 

Changes to Federal regulations must 

undergo several economic analyses. 

First, Executive Order 12866 directs that 

each Federal agency shall propose or 

adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned 

determination that the benefits of the 

intended regulation justify its costs. 

Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

of 1980 (Pub. L. 96–354) requires 

agencies to analyze the economic 

impact of regulatory changes on small 

entities. Third, the Trade Agreements 

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

from setting standards that create 

unnecessary obstacles to the foreign 

commerce of the United States. 

In developing U.S. standards, this 

Trade Act requires agencies to consider 

international standards and, where 

appropriate, that they be the basis of 

U.S. standards. Fourth, the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 

104–4) requires agencies to prepare a 

written assessment of the costs, benefits, 

and other effects of proposed or final 

rules that include a Federal mandate 

likely to result in the expenditure by 

State, local, or tribal governments, in the 

aggregate, or by the private sector, of 

$100 million or more annually (adjusted 

for inflation with base year of 1995). 

This portion of the preamble 

summarizes the FAA’s analysis of the 

economic impacts of the Act. We 

suggest readers seeking greater detail 

read the full regulatory evaluation, a 

copy of which we have placed in the 

docket for this rulemaking. 

In conducting these analyses, FAA 

has determined that the Act: (1) Has 

benefits that justify its costs; (2) is not 

an economically ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ as defined in section 3(f) of 

Executive Order 12866; (3) is 

‘‘significant’’ as defined in DOT’s 

Regulatory Policies and Procedures 

because of Congressional and public 

interest. Accordingly, this final rule has 

been reviewed by the Office of the 

Secretary of Transportation and the 

Office of Management and Budget; (4) 

will not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities; (5) will not create unnecessary 

obstacles to the foreign commerce of the 

United States; and (6) will not impose 

an unfunded mandate on state, local, or 

tribal governments, or on the private 

sector. These analyses are summarized 

below. 

Total Benefits and Costs of the Act 

The following table enumerates the 

total costs and benefits of the Act over 

a 15-year period and then summarizes 

net benefits as the discounted present 

value of the stream of benefits and costs. 

Both accounting costs and economic 

costs are shown. The accounting costs 

are relevant because they show the 

distributional effects of the Act—a net 

transfer from airlines and consumers to 

pilots. The economic net benefits of the 

Act suggest that society is better off with 

the Act than without it. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES
34232 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 134 / Wednesday, July 15, 2009 / Rules and Regulations (BENEFITS) AND

COSTS OF

CHANGING

PILOT

MANDATORY

RETIREMENT

AGE TO 65 

[Constant 2007 dollars] 

Sections 61.23, 121.383, 121.411 and 121.412 Sections 61.3(j) and 121.440 

Salary Pension contributions Disability pay Retirement Training Re- program- ming 

Additional 

pilots 

scheduling 

and 

vacation 

Medical 

certificate Salary Line check Total constant dollar costs 2 DPV total costs 2

Total (Accounting 

Costs) ........ $2,253,407,476 $155,872,313 $1,173,427,286 ($39,887,500) ($621,985,624) $0 $51,444,611 $5,306,821 $3,818,813 $31,180,154 $3,012,584,349 $1,762,743,114 

Total (Economic 

Costs) ........ 0 0 0 (39,042,500) (439,768,672) 0 35,917,440 5,060,459 3,818,813 31,180.154 (402,834,306) (333,614,036) 

Notes: (1) Results of the accounting and economic costs estimates use different unit costs and therefore show different results in each cost category. (2) Excludes paperwork costs, which are insignificant relative to the proposed rule’s other costs. See section IV for more details on these costs. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 134 / Wednesday, July 15, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 34233 

It is important to note that negative 

figures in the above table are benefits of 

the Act. Because the mandatory 

retirement age has been increased to age 

65, airlines and consumers will incur 

‘‘real costs’’ and ‘‘transfer payments’’ 

totaling $1.8 billion (present value) over 

15 years, but society will have a cost 

savings or net benefit of $334 million in 

terms of real resource use (real costs 

reflect real resource use, whereas 

transfer payments are monetary 

payments from one group to another 

that do not affect total resources 

available to society). 

In addition to the above quantified 

benefits, the FAA estimates that the Act 

will result in an increase in the supply 

of pilots of approximately 12 percent 

over 5 years. In particular, there may be 

a public interest in taking advantage of 

the experience of pilots aged 60 to 65. 

In addition, the Act makes FAA 

regulations consistent with ICAO 

Amendment 167 by increasing the 

‘‘upper age limit’’ for pilots operating in 

‘‘international commercial air transport 

operations’’ up to age 65. Previously, 

pilots certificated outside the United 

States and flying for a foreign air carrier 

on a non-U.S. registered aircraft, who 

were over age 60, were permitted to fly 

into the United States under ICAO 

standards through operation 

specifications. FAA has not estimated 

the value of these benefits because they 

are unquantifiable. 

Regulatory Flexibility Determination 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 

(RFA) establishes ‘‘as a principle of 

regulatory issuance that agencies shall 

endeavor, consistent with the objective 

of the rule and of applicable statutes, to 

fit regulatory and informational 

requirements to the scale of the 

business, organizations, and 

governmental jurisdictions subject to 

regulation.’’ To achieve that principle, 

the RFA requires agencies to solicit and 

consider flexible regulatory proposals 

and to explain the rationale for their 

actions. The RFA covers a wide-range of 

small entities, including small 

businesses, not-for-profit organizations, 

and small governmental jurisdictions. 

Agencies must perform a review to 

determine whether a proposed or final 

rule would have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. If the agency determines that it 

would, the agency must prepare a 

regulatory flexibility analysis as 

described in the Act. 

However, if an agency determines that 

a proposed or final rule is not expected 

to have a significant economic impact 

on a substantial number of small 

entities, section 605(b) of the 1980 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. The basis for such 

determination follows. 

The Small Business Administration 

suggests that ‘‘small’’ represent the 

impacted entities with 1,500 or fewer 

employees. FAA identified a total of 48 

air carriers that meet this definition, as 

shown below. 

Small Business Exposure to Act 

CLASSIFICATION OF BUSINESSES

Operator FAR Large Small Unknown Grand total 

121 ........................................................................................................................................... 55 32 5 92 

121/135 .................................................................................................................................... 1 16 2 19 

Grand Total ....................................................................................................................... 56 48 7 111 

Percentage ................................................................................................................ 50% 43% 6% 100% 

Small = 1,500 employees or less 

For each of these entities, FAA 

attempted to retrieve revenue data 

published in Form 41. The Form 41 

financial reports contain financial 

information on certificated U.S. air 

carriers. This data is collected by the 

Office of Airline Information of the 

Bureau of Transportation Statistics. 

Consideration was made for the most 

recent quarterly data available, such that 

no data is for years prior to fiscal 2005. 

If data was not available in any quarter, 

the FAA assigned the last quarterly 

figures available. FAA also employed 

sources such as Dun & Bradstreet, 

Yahoo Finance (http:// 

finance.yahoo.com/), Reuters (http:// 

www.reuters.com/investing) and the 

2006 edition of the World Airspace 

Database to estimate annual revenues. 

FAA then compared the annualized 

accounting costs with annual revenues. 

Of the 36 entities that FAA found data 

for, it expects that the projected 

annualized accounting costs of the Act 

will be higher than one percent of the 

annual revenue for three of them. For 

the group as a whole, the annualized 

cost is estimated as 0.17% of annual 

revenue. 

Therefore, as the FAA Administrator, 

I certify that this Act will not have a 

significant economic impact on any 

small entities. 

International Trade Impact Statement 

The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 

prohibits Federal agencies from 

establishing any standards or engaging 

in related activities that create 

unnecessary obstacles to the foreign 

commerce of the United States. 

Legitimate domestic objectives, such as 

safety, are not considered unnecessary 

obstacles. 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 the Act 

and determined that it will impose no 

additional costs on foreign firms, and 

will make FAA’s upper age limit for 

pilots consistent with international 

standards. 

Unfunded Mandates Assessment 

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 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 

(adjusted annually for inflation) 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 $136.1 

million in lieu of $100 million. 

The requirements of Title II do not 

apply because the Act is not a mandate, 

rather it is permissive. 

Executive Order 13132, Federalism 

The FAA has analyzed this final rule 

under the principles and criteria of 

Executive Order 13132, Federalism. We 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES
34234 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 134 / Wednesday, July 15, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

determined that this action would not 

have a substantial direct effect on the 

States, on the relationship between the 

national Government and the States, or 

on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government, and, therefore, 

would not have federalism implications. 

Environmental Analysis 

FAA Order 1050.1E identifies FAA 

actions that are categorically excluded 

from preparation of an environmental 

assessment or environmental impact 

statement under the National 

Environmental Policy Act in the 

absence of extraordinary circumstances. 

The FAA has determined this 

rulemaking action qualifies for the 

categorical exclusion identified in 

paragraph 312f and involves no 

extraordinary circumstances. 

Regulations That Significantly Affect 

Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use 

The FAA has analyzed this 

rulemaking under Executive Order 

13211, Actions Concerning Regulations 

that Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

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

have determined that it is not a 

‘‘significant energy action’’ under the 

executive order because it is not a 

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under 

Executive Order 12866, and it is not 

likely to have a significant adverse effect 

on the supply, distribution, or use of 

energy. 

List of Subjects 

14 CFR Part 61 

Airmen, Aviation safety. 

14 CFR Part 121 

Air carriers, Aircraft, Airmen, 

Aviation safety. 

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(g), 40113, 44701– 

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

45301–45302. 

■ 2. Amend § 61.3 by revising paragraph 

(j) to read as follows: 

§ 61.3 Requirement for certificates, 

ratings, and authorizations. 

* * * * * 

(j) Age limitation for certain 

operations (1) Age limitation. No person 

who holds a pilot certificate issued 

under this part may serve as a pilot on 

a civil airplane of U.S. registry in the 

following operations if the person has 

reached his or her 65th birthday: 

(i) Scheduled international air 

services carrying passengers in turbojetpowered airplanes; 

(ii) Scheduled international air 

services carrying passengers in airplanes 

having a passenger-seat configuration of 

more than nine passenger seats, 

excluding each crewmember seat; 

(iii) Nonscheduled international air 

transportation for compensation or hire 

in airplanes having a passenger-seat 

configuration of more than 30 passenger 

seats, excluding each crewmember seat; 

or 

(iv) Scheduled international air 

services, or nonscheduled international 

air transportation for compensation or 

hire, in airplanes having a payload 

capacity of more than 7,500 pounds. 

(2) Age Pairing Requirement. No 

person who has attained the age of 60 

but who has not attained the age of 65 

may serve as a pilot in command in any 

of the operations described in 

paragraphs (j)(1)(i) through (iv) of this 

section unless there is another pilot in 

the flight deck crew who has not yet 

attained 60 years of age. 

(3) Definitions. (i) ‘‘International air 

service,’’ as used in this paragraph (j), 

means scheduled air service performed 

in airplanes for the public transport of 

passengers, mail, or cargo, in which the 

service passes through the airspace over 

the territory of more than one country. 

(ii) ‘‘International air transportation,’’ 

as used in this paragraph (j), means air 

transportation performed in airplanes 

for the public transport of passengers, 

mail, or cargo, in which the service 

passes through the airspace over the 

territory of more than one country. 

* * * * * 

■ 3. Amend § 61.23 to revise paragraph 

(a)(1) to read as follows: 

§ 61.23 Medical certificates: Requirement 

and duration. 

(a) * * * 

(1) Must hold a first-class medical 

certificate: 

(i) When exercising the privileges of 

an airline transport pilot certificate; or 

(ii) If that person has reached his or 

her 60th birthday and serves as a pilot 

in 14 CFR part 121 operations. 

Notwithstanding the provisions of 

§ 61.23(d)(1)(iii), that person’s first-class 

medical certificate expires, for 14 CFR 

part 121 operations, at the end of the 

last day of the 6th month after the 

month of the date of examination shown 

on the medical certificate. 

* * * * * 

■ 4. Amend § 61.77 to revise paragraphs 

(b)(3), (e) introductory text, and (g) to 

read as follows: 

§ 61.77 Special purpose pilot 

authorization: Operation of U.S.-registered 

civil aircraft leased by a person who is not 

a U.S. citizen. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(3) Documentation showing when the 

applicant will reach the age of 65 years 

(an official copy of the applicant’s birth 

certificate or other official 

documentation); 

* * * * * 

(e) Age limitation. No person who 

holds a special purpose pilot 

authorization issued under this part, 

may serve as a pilot on a civil airplane 

of U.S. registry if the person has reached 

his or her 65th birthday, in the 

following operations: 

* * * * * 

(g) Age Pairing Requirement. No 

person who has attained the age of 60 

but who has not attained the age of 65 

may serve as a pilot in command in any 

of the operations described in 

§ 61.3(j)(1)(i) through (iv) unless there is 

another pilot in the flight deck crew 

who has not yet attained 60 years of age. 

* * * * * 

PART 121—OPERATING 

REQUIREMENTS: DOMESTIC, FLAG, 

AND SUPPLEMENTAL OPERATIONS 

■ 5. The authority citation for part 121 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 1153, 40101, 

40102, 40103, 40113, 41721, 44105, 44106, 

44111, 44701–44717, 44722, 44901, 44903, 

44904, 44906, 44912, 44914, 44936, 44938, 

46103, 46105. 

§ 121.2 [Amended] 

■ 6. Amend § 121.2 by removing 

paragraph (i) and redesignating 

paragraph (j) as paragraph (i). 

■ 7. Amend § 121.383 by removing and 

reserving paragraph (c) and adding 

paragraphs (d) and (e) to read as follows: 

§ 121.383 Airman: Limitations on use of 

services. 

* * * * * 

(d) No certificate holder may: 

(1) Use the services of any person as 

a pilot on an airplane engaged in 

operations under this part if that person 

has reached his or her 65th birthday. 

(2) Use the services of any person as 

a pilot in command in operations under 

this part between the United States and 

another country, or in operations 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 134 / Wednesday, July 15, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 34235 

between other countries, if that person 

has reached his or her 60th birthday 

unless there is another pilot in the flight 

deck crew who has not yet attained 60 

years of age. 

(e) No pilot may: 

(1) Serve as a pilot in operations 

under this part if that person has 

reached his or her 65th birthday. 

(2) Serve as a pilot in command in 

operations under this part between the 

United States and another country, or in 

operations between other countries, if 

that person has reached his or her 60th 

birthday unless there is another pilot in 

the flight deck crew who has not yet 

attained 60 years of age. 

■ 8. Amend § 121.411 by revising 

paragraph (e) to read as follows: 

§ 121.411 Qualifications: Check airmen 

(airplane) and check airmen (simulator). 

* * * * * 

(e) Check airmen who have reached 

their 65th birthday or who do not hold 

an appropriate medical certificate may 

function as check airmen, but may not 

serve as pilot flightcrew members in 

operations under this part. 

* * * * * 

9. Amend § 121.412 by revising 

paragraph (e) to read as follows: 

§ 121.412 Qualifications: Flight instructors 

(airplane) and flight instructors (simulator). 

* * * * * 

(e) Flight instructors who have 

reached their 65th birthday or who do 

not hold an appropriate medical 

certificate may function as flight 

instructors, but may not serve as pilot 

flightcrew members in operations under 

this part. 

* * * * * 

■ 10. Amend § 121.440 by adding 

paragraphs (d), (e), and (f) to read as 

follows: 

§ 121.440 Line checks. 

* * * 

(d) No certificate holder may use the 

services of any person as a pilot in 

operations under this part unless the 

certificate holder evaluates every 6 

months the performance, through a line 

check, of each pilot of the certificate 

holder who has attained 60 years of age. 

Notwithstanding the foregoing, a 

certificate holder is not required to 

conduct for a 6-month period a line 

check under this paragraph of a pilot 

serving as a second-in-command if the 

pilot has undergone a regularly 

scheduled simulator evaluation during 

that period. 

(e) No pilot who has attained 60 years 

of age may serve as a pilot in operations 

under this part unless the certificate 

holder has evaluated the pilot’s 

performance every 6 months, through a 

line check. Notwithstanding the 

foregoing, a certificate holder is not 

required to conduct for a 6-month 

period a line check under this paragraph 

of a pilot serving as a second-incommand if the pilot has undergone a 

regularly scheduled simulator 

evaluation during that period. 

(f) The training program provisions of 

§ 121.401(b) do not apply to pilots who 

have attained 60 years of age and serve 

in operations under this part. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on July 8, 2009. 

J. Randolph Babbitt, 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. E9–16777 Filed 7–14–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Food and Drug Administration 

21 CFR Parts 510 and 522 

[Docket No. FDA–2009–N–0665] 

New Animal Drugs; Ceftiofur Sodium 

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, 

HHS. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug 

Administration (FDA) is amending the 

animal drug regulations to reflect 

approval of an original abbreviated new 

animal drug application (ANADA) filed 

by Cephazone Pharma, LLC. The 

ANADA provides for the use of ceftiofur 

sodium powder for injection as a 

solution in dogs, horses, cattle, swine, 

day old chickens, turkey poults, sheep, 

and goats as therapy for various 

bacterial infections. 

DATES: This rule is effective July 15, 

2009. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John 

K. Harshman, Center for Veterinary 

Medicine (HFV–104), Food and Drug 

Administration, 7500 Standish Pl., 

Rockville, MD 20855, 240–276–8197, 

e-mail: john.harshman@fda.hhs.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Cephazone Pharma, LLC, 250 East 

Bonita Ave., Pomona, CA 91767, filed 

ANADA 200–420 that provides for use 

of Ceftiofur Sodium Sterile Powder, as 

an injectable solution, in dogs, horses, 

cattle, swine, day-old chickens, turkey 

poults, sheep, and goats as therapy for 

various bacterial infections. Cephazone 

Pharma, LLC’s Ceftiofur Sodium Sterile 

Powder is approved as a generic copy of 

NAXCEL (ceftiofur sodium) Sterile 

Powder for Injection, sponsored by 

Pharmacia & Upjohn Co., a Division of 

Pfizer, Inc., under NADA 140–338. The 

ANADA is approved as of May 27, 2009, 

and the regulations are amended in 21 

CFR 522.313c to reflect the approval. 

In addition, Cephazone Pharma, LLC, 

has not been previously listed in the 

animal drug regulations as a sponsor of 

an approved application. Accordingly, 

21 CFR 510.600(c) is being amended to 

add entries for this firm. 

In accordance with the freedom of 

information provisions of 21 CFR part 

20 and 21 CFR 514.11(e)(2)(ii), a 

summary of safety and effectiveness 

data and information submitted to 

support approval of this application 

may be seen in the Division of Dockets 

Management (HFA–305), Food and Drug 

Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 

1061, Rockville, MD 20852, between 9 

a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through 

Friday. 

The agency has determined under 21 

CFR 25.33 that this action is of a type 

that does not individually or 

cumulatively have a significant effect on 

the human environment. Therefore, 

neither an environmental assessment 

nor an environmental impact statement 

is required. 

This rule does not meet the definition 

of ‘‘rule’’ in 5 U.S.C. 804(3)(A) because 

it is a rule of ‘‘particular applicability.’’ 

Therefore, it is not subject to the 

congressional review requirements in 5 

U.S.C. 801–808. 

List of Subjects 

21 CFR Part 510 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Animal drugs, Labeling, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

21 CFR Part 522 

Animal drugs. 

■ Therefore, under the Federal Food, 

Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under 

authority delegated to the Commissioner 

of Food and Drugs and redelegated to 

the Center for Veterinary Medicine, 21 

CFR parts 510 and 522 are amended as 

follows: 

PART 510—NEW ANIMAL DRUGS 

■ 1. The authority citation for 21 CFR 

part 510 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321, 331, 351, 352, 

353, 360b, 371, 379e. 

■ 2. In § 510.600, in the table in 

paragraph (c)(1) alphabetically add an 

entry for ‘‘Cephazone Pharma, LLC’’; 

and in the table in paragraph (c)(2) 

numerically add an entry for ‘‘068330’’ 

to read as follows: 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES