[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 135 (Monday, July 15, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42323-42380]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-16849]



[[Page 42323]]

Vol. 78

Monday,

No. 135

July 15, 2013

Part III





Department of Transportation





-----------------------------------------------------------------------





Federal Aviation Administration





-----------------------------------------------------------------------





14 CFR Parts 61, 121, 135, et al.





Pilot Certification and Qualification Requirements for Air Carrier 
Operations; Final Rule

Federal Register / Vol. 78 , No. 135 / Monday, July 15, 2013 / Rules 
and Regulations

[[Page 42324]]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Parts 61, 121, 135, 141, and 142

[Docket No. FAA-2010-0100; Amdt. Nos. 61-130; 121-365; 135-127; 141-1; 
142-9]
RIN 2120-AJ67


Pilot Certification and Qualification Requirements for Air 
Carrier Operations

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This action creates new certification and qualification 
requirements for pilots in air carrier operations. As a result of this 
action, a second in command (first officer) in domestic, flag, and 
supplemental operations must now hold an airline transport pilot 
certificate and an airplane type rating for the aircraft to be flown. 
An airline transport pilot certificate requires that a pilot be 23 
years of age and have 1,500 hours total time as a pilot. Pilots with 
fewer than 1,500 flight hours may qualify for a restricted privileges 
airline transport pilot certificate beginning at 21 years of age if 
they are a military-trained pilot, have a bachelor's degree with an 
aviation major, or have an associate's degree with an aviation major. 
The restricted privileges airline transport pilot certificate will also 
be available to pilots with 1,500 flight hours who are at least 21 
years of age. This restricted privileges airline transport pilot 
certificate allows a pilot to serve as second in command in domestic, 
flag, and supplemental operations not requiring more than two pilot 
flightcrew members. This rule also retains the second-class medical 
certification requirement for a second in command in part 121 
operations. Pilots serving as an air carrier pilot in command (captain) 
must have, in addition to an airline transport pilot certificate, at 
least 1,000 flight hours in air carrier operations. This rule also adds 
to the eligibility requirements for an airline transport pilot 
certificate with an airplane category multiengine class rating or an 
airline transport pilot certificate obtained concurrently with a type 
rating. To receive an airline transport pilot certificate with a 
multiengine class rating a pilot must have 50 hours of multiengine 
flight experience and must have completed a new FAA-approved Airline 
Transport Pilot Certification Training Program. This new training 
program will include academic coursework and training in a flight 
simulation training device. These requirements will ensure that a pilot 
has the proper qualifications, training, and experience before entering 
an air carrier environment as a pilot flightcrew member.

DATES: Effective Date: July 15, 2013.
    This final rule will be effective immediately upon publication in 
the Federal Register. Section 553(d)(3) of the Administrative Procedure 
Act provides that publication of a rule shall be made not less than 30 
days before its effective date, except ``for good cause found and 
published with the rule.'' 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3). Consistent with section 
553(d)(3), and for reasons discussed in Section III.H.6, the FAA finds 
good cause exists to publish this final rule with an immediate 
effective date.
    Compliance Date: Unless otherwise noted in the regulatory text, 
compliance with the provisions of this rule is required by August 1, 
2013.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical questions concerning 
this final rule contact Barbara Adams, Air Transportation Division, 
AFS-200, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW., 
Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) 267-8166; facsimile (202) 267-
5299, email barbara.adams@faa.gov.
    For legal questions concerning this final rule contact Anne Moore, 
Office of the Chief Counsel--International Law, Legislation, and 
Regulations Division, AGC-240, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 
Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) 267-
3123; facsimile (202) 267-7971, email anne.moore@faa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The Airline Safety and Federal Aviation Administration Extension 
Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 111-216) directed the FAA to conduct a rulemaking 
to improve the qualifications and training for pilots serving in air 
carrier operations. Specifically, section 216 of the Act focused on the 
qualifications of air carrier pilots and directed the FAA to issue a 
rule that would require all pilots serving in part 121 air carrier 
operations to hold an ATP certificate by August 2, 2013. Section 217 of 
the Act directed the FAA to amend 14 CFR part 61 to modify ATP 
certification requirements to prepare a pilot to function effectively 
in a multipilot (multicrew) environment, in adverse weather conditions, 
during high altitude operations, and in an air carrier environment, as 
well as to adhere to the highest professional standards. Section 217 
also directed the FAA to ensure pilots have sufficient flight hours in 
difficult operational conditions that may be encountered in air carrier 
operations and stated that the minimum total flight hours to be 
qualified for an ATP certificate shall be at least 1,500 flight hours. 
Notwithstanding the stated minimum, the section gave the FAA discretion 
to allow specific academic training courses to be credited toward the 
1,500 total flight hours, provided the academic training courses will 
enhance safety more than requiring the pilot to comply fully with the 
flight hour requirement.
    In addition to the authority provided in the Act, the FAA has 
authority under Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 
106 to issue rules on aviation safety. This rulemaking is consistent 
with the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, 
Section 447--Safety Regulation. Under Sec.  44703, the FAA is charged 
with prescribing regulations for the issuance of airman certificates 
when the Administrator finds, after investigation, that an individual 
is qualified for, and physically able to perform the duties related to, 
the position authorized by the certificate. This rulemaking is intended 
to ensure that flightcrew members have training and qualifications that 
will enable them to operate aircraft safely. For these reasons, the 
regulation is within the scope of our authority and is a reasonable and 
necessary exercise of our statutory obligations.

List of Abbreviations and Acronyms Frequently Used In This Document

ANPRM Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
ARC Aviation Rulemaking Committee
ATP Airline Transport Pilot
ATP CTP Airline Transport Pilot Certification Training Program
FFS Full Flight Simulator
FOQ ARC First Officer Qualifications Aviation Rulemaking Committee
FSTD Flight Simulation Training Device
FTD Flight Training Device
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
PIC Pilot in Command (Captain)
R-ATP Restricted Privileges Airline Transport Pilot
SIC Second in Command (First Officer)

Table of Contents

I. Overview of Final Rule
II. Background
    A. Statement of the Problem
    B. FAA Accident Analysis and National Transportation Safety 
Board (NTSB) Recommendations

[[Page 42325]]

    C. Airline Safety and Federal Aviation Administration Extension 
Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 111-216)
    D. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM)
    E. Differences Between the NPRM and the Final Rule
    F. Related Actions
III. General Discussion of Public Comments and the Final Rule
    A. ATP Certificate for All Pilots Operating Under Part 121 
(Sec.  121.436)
    B. Medical Certificate (Sec.  61.23)
    C. Aeronautical Experience Requirement in the Class of Airplane 
for the ATP Certificate Sought (Sec.  61.159)
    D. ATP Certification Training Program for an Airplane Category 
Multiengine Class Rating or ATP Certificate Obtained Concurrently 
with an Airplane Type Rating (Sec.  61.156)
    1. Required Training for an ATP Certificate
    2. Training Providers
    3. Instructor Requirements
    a. Operational Experience
    b. Instructor Training
    c. Type Rating
    d. Subject Matter Experts
    4. Training Topics and Hours
    a. Academic Topics and Hours
    b. FSTD Topics
    c. Level of FSTD and Hours
    5. FAA Knowledge Test for an ATP Certificate
    6. Credit Toward Air Carrier Training Programs
    7. Additional Course Requirements
    E. ATP Certificate with Restricted Privileges (Sec.  61.160)
    1. Public Law and NPRM
    2. General Support for and Opposition to an ATP Certificate with 
Reduced Hours
    3. FOQ ARC Recommendation
    4. Military Pilots
    5. Graduates with a Bachelor's Degree in an Aviation Major
    a. Flight Hour Requirement
    b. Institutional Accreditation and ``Aviation Degree Programs''
    c. Cross Country Time for the R-ATP Certificate
    d. The role of the institution of higher education in certifying 
its students
    6. Recommendations for Expanding Eligibility for the R-ATP 
Certificate
    a. Graduates with an Associate's degree in an Aviation Major
    b. Transfer students
    c. Pilots with 1,500 hours who are not yet 23 years old
    d. Other Degree Programs
    e. Other Approved Training and Specialized Courses
    f. Certified Flight Instructors
    7. Summary of FAA Decision
    F. Aircraft Type Rating for All Pilots Operating Under Part 121 
(Sec.  121.436)
    1. Aircraft Type Rating Requirement for Part 121 SICs
    2. Compliance Time
    3. Aircraft Type Rating Requirement for SICs Outside of Part 121
    G. Minimum of 1,000 Hours in Air Carrier Operations to Serve as 
PIC in Part 121 Operations (Sec.  121.436)
    1. Air Carrier Experience Requirement
    2. Part 135 and Part 91, Subpart K Time
    3. Military Time
    4. Other Time
    H. Miscellaneous Issues
    1. Pilot Supply
    a. Part 121 Pilot Supply
    b. Part 135, 141, and 142 Pilot Supply
    c. FAA Response
    2. Benefits and Cost
    3. Alternative Licensing Structure
    4. Accident Effectiveness Ratings
    5. Considerations for Offering the ATP CTP
    6. Administrative Law Issues
    7. Miscellaneous Amendments
IV. Regulatory Notices and Analyses
V. Executive Order Determinations
VI. How To Obtain Additional Information

I. Overview of Final Rule

    This rulemaking modifies requirements for pilots who fly in part 
121 air carrier operations. It changes requirements for all pilots 
seeking an airline transport pilot (ATP) certificate with an airplane 
category multiengine class rating or an ATP certificate obtained 
concurrently with an airplane type rating. These new requirements will 
ensure that all pilots entering air carrier operations have a 
background of training and experience that will allow them to adapt to 
a complex, multicrew environment in a variety of operating conditions.
    Those most affected by these changes will be pilots applying for an 
ATP certificate with an airplane category multiengine class rating or 
an ATP certificate concurrently with an airplane type rating. The 
changed requirements will also affect anyone wanting to serve as pilot 
in command (PIC) in part 121 air carrier operations and anyone wanting 
to serve as PIC in part 91 subpart K operations or part 135 operations 
as defined by Sec.  91.1053(a)(2)(i) or Sec.  135.243(a)(1).\1\ Those 
wanting to serve as second in command (SIC) in part 121 air carrier 
operations will also be affected by this final rule. Certificate 
holders approved under parts 121, 135, 141, or 142 will be affected if 
they choose to offer the ATP Certification Training Program (ATP CTP).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ These operations currently require the pilot in command to 
hold an ATP certificate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A general summary of the previous pilot certification requirements 
versus the pilot certification requirements as defined by this final 
rule is included in the following table.

    Table 1--How Previous Requirements Are Changed by This Final Rule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
       Previous requirements              Requirements in final rule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Scenario: (1) Receive an ATP certificate with an airplane category and
                        multiengine class rating
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Be at least 23 years old;        (1) Meet all of the previous
                                      requirements;
(2) Hold a commercial pilot          (2) Prior to taking the ATP
 certificate with instrument          knowledge test successfully
 rating;                              complete an ATP CTP;\2\ and
(3) Pass the ATP knowledge test and  (3) have a minimum of 50 hours in
 practical test; and                  class of airplane.
(4) Have at least 1,500 hours total
 time as a pilot.                    (Ref. Sec.  Sec.   61.153, 61.156
                                      and 61.159)
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 42326]]

 
   Scenario: (2) Receive an ATP certificate with restricted privileges
 (restricted to serving as SIC in part 121 operations--multiengine class
                              rating only)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
None.                                (1) Be at least 21 years old;
                                     (2) Hold a commercial pilot
                                      certificate with instrument
                                      rating;
                                     (3) Prior to taking the ATP
                                      knowledge test successfully
                                      complete an ATP CTP;
                                     (4) Pass the ATP knowledge test and
                                      practical test; and
                                     (5) Meet the aeronautical
                                      experience requirements of Sec.
                                      61.160. A pilot may be eligible if
                                      he or she was a military-trained
                                      pilot; a graduate of a four-year
                                      bachelor degree program with an
                                      aviation major; a graduate of a
                                      two-year associate degree program
                                      with an aviation major; or has
                                      1,500 hours total time as a pilot.
                                     ...................................
                                     (Ref. Sec.  Sec.   61.153 and
                                      61.160)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Scenario: (3) Serve as an SIC (first officer) in part 121 operations
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hold:                                Hold:
(1) An ATP certificate with          (1) At least a commercial pilot
 appropriate aircraft type rating     certificate with an appropriate
 OR--An ATP certificate with          category and class rating;
 restricted privileges and an
 appropriate aircraft type rating;
 and
(2) An instrument rating; and        (2) At least a second-class medical
                                      certificate.
(3) At least a second-class medical
 certificate.
 
(Ref. Sec.  Sec.   121.436 and
 61.23)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scenario: (4) Serve as SIC in a flag or supplemental operation requiring
                          three or more pilots
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hold:                                Hold:
(1) An ATP certificate with          (1) An ATP certificate \3\ with
 appropriate aircraft type rating;    appropriate aircraft type rating;
 and                                  and
(2) A first class medical            (2) A first class medical
 certificate.                         certificate.
                                     ...................................
                                     (Ref. Sec.  Sec.   121.436 and
                                      61.23)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Scenario: (5) Serve as PIC in part 121 operations
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Have at least 1,500 hours of     (1) Meet all of the previous
 total time as a pilot;               requirements; and
(2) Hold an ATP certificate with     (2) Have a minimum of 1,000 flight
 appropriate aircraft type rating;    hours in air carrier operations as
 and                                  an SIC in part 121 operations, a
(3) Hold a first class medical        PIC in operations under either
 certificate.                         Sec.   135.243(a)(1) or Sec.
                                      91.1053(a)(2)(i), or any
                                      combination of these.\4\
                                     ...................................
                                     (Ref. Sec.   121.436)
------------------------------------------------------------------------

     
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ This requirement takes effect after July 31, 2014.
    \3\ In this scenario a pilot must hold an ATP certificate issued 
per the requirements of Sec.  61.159. An ATP certificate issued per 
the reduced flight hours in Sec.  61.160 is not sufficient.
    \4\ In addition, military PIC time (up to 500 hours) in a 
multiengine turbine-powered, fixed-wing airplane in an operation 
requiring more than one pilot may also be credited towards the 1,000 
hours.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The costs and benefits of this rule are best described as three 
major elements--statutory costs, discretionary cost savings, and 
additional rule provisions, which sum to the total costs and benefits. 
While the FAA already requires an ATP certificate with 1,500 hours 
total time as a pilot minimum for part 121 PICs, the statute 
requirement that SICs in part 121 operations have an ATP certificate is 
new and will take effect whether or not the FAA issues a regulation. 
Thus, the costs associated with the requirement for SICs to have an ATP 
certificate are attributable to the statute, not to this regulation. 
The FAA exercised its discretion permitted under the statute and 
reduced the mandated ATP certificate cost by establishing offsetting 
academic credits. To ensure the intent of increasing safety, the FAA 
established additional training provisions in the final rule which are 
justified by expected accident prevention benefits. Table 2 reflects 
the costs of the ATP certificate requirement for part 121 SICs as well 
as the discretionary cost savings. In addition, the table shows the 
expected costs and benefits of the remaining two primary cost drivers 
of the rule: the aircraft type rating and the ATP CTP.

 Table 2--Statutory Costs and Benefits/ Final Rule Cost Savings, Costs,
                              and Benefits
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Total cost  ($
            Statute costs                   mil.)       PVcost  ($ mil.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Part 121 ATP Certificate Requirement         $ 6,374.4         $ 2,213.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 42327]]

 
          Statute benefits              Total benefit      PV benefit
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Part 121 ATP Certificate Requirement   No Identifiable Accident Benefits
------------------------------------------------------------------------


------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                         Total cost
     Discretionary cost savings          savings  ($     PV cost savings
                                            mil.)           ($ mil.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Academic Training and Experience           $ <2,309.3>         $ <789.8>
 Credits............................
------------------------------------------------------------------------


------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Total cost  ($    PV \5\ cost  ($
   Rule additional provision costs          mil.)             mil.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ATP CTP and Type Rating Total Costs.           $ 312.7           $ 138.7
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Rule additional provision benefits     Total benefit      PV benefit
                                              ($ mil.)          ($ mil.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
All Safety Benefits \6\.............           $ 576.8           $ 251.7
------------------------------------------------------------------------

     
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Present value 7 percent discount rate over 10 years.
    \6\ Part 121 total safety benefits of $292.5 million are greater 
than part 121 total costs of $280.4 million. Part 135 total safety 
benefits of $284.3 million are greater than part 135 total costs of 
$22.4 million. The FAA does not have a quantitative estimate of 
benefits for part 91, subpart K. The part 91, subpart K operational 
rules, to include requiring the PIC of a multiengine airplane to 
hold an ATP certificate, were modeled after the part 135 on-demand 
operational rules therefore we believe there is a safety benefit due 
to the similarity of operations.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Total cost  ($    PV \5\ cost  ($
                                            mil.)             mil.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Cost of Statute Cost + Cost            $ 4,377.8         $ 1,561.9
 Savings + Rule Cost................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        Total benefit      PV benefit
                                              ($ mil.)          ($ mil.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Benefits from Statute + Rule..           $ 576.8           $ 251.7
------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Background

A. Statement of the Problem

    On February 12, 2009, a Colgan Air Bombardier DHC-8-400, operating 
as Continental Connection flight 3407, was on an instrument approach to 
the Buffalo-Niagara airport in upstate New York. About 5 nautical miles 
from the airport, the pilot lost control of the airplane. It crashed 
into a house in Clarence Center, New York, killing everyone aboard and 
one person on the ground. This accident focused FAA, NTSB, 
Congressional, and public attention on multiple aspects of pilot 
qualifications and air carrier training requirements.
    The NTSB's investigation revealed that the pilot had not followed 
appropriate procedures in handling the aircraft. As the plane leveled 
at an assigned altitude the captain applied power to increase the 
airspeed, but the increase in power was insufficient. The airplane's 
flight displays indicated that its airspeed was slowing, but the 
flightcrew failed to recognize this. The airspeed continued to 
decrease, resulting in the stick shaker activating, and warning the 
pilots of a potential aerodynamic stall (insufficient airflow over the 
wings). The flightcrew's response to the stall warning system was 
incorrect and the airplane stalled. The flightcrew subsequently lost 
control of the aircraft resulting in the accident.
    The NTSB's final accident report identified a number of safety 
issues, including improper handling of the airplane, a failure to 
adhere to sterile cockpit rules, and questions about the adequacy of 
flightcrew member training and qualifications. The accident raised 
questions about whether SICs should be held to the same training and 
flight hour requirements as PICs, and whether a pilot's overall 
academic training and quality of flight training were as important as 
the total number of flight hours. The accident also raised questions 
about pilot professionalism and whether pilots receive sufficient 
experience in a multicrew environment.
    In early 2010, as a response to the Colgan Air accident, the FAA 
published an advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) entitled 
``New Pilot Certification Requirements for Air Carrier Operations'' (75 
FR 6164 (February 8, 2010)), asking for input on current part 121 pilot 
eligibility, training, and qualification requirements for SICs. In July 
2010, as a result of public response to the ANPRM, the FAA chartered 
the First Officer Qualification Aviation Rulemaking Committee (FOQ ARC) 
which was comprised of a cross section of the aviation industry.
    In August 2010, before the ARC submitted its final recommendations, 
President Obama signed into law the Airline Safety and Federal Aviation 
Administration Extension Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 111-216 (August 1, 2010)) 
(the ``Act''). The Act included several specific provisions for 
modifying ATP certification requirements to prepare air

[[Page 42328]]

carrier pilots to operate more safely. Among those provisions was the 
requirement that by August 2, 2013, all part 121 flightcrew members 
hold an ATP certificate. Public Law 111-216, section 216(a)(2)(B)(i). 
The FAA asked the FOQ ARC to consider the provisions of sections 216 
and 217 of the Act in developing its final recommendations. Those 
recommendations were submitted to the FAA in September 2010.
    In addition to the FOQ ARC recommendations, the FAA reviewed recent 
accidents in parts 121 and 135 to find out whether the certification 
requirements were sufficient to produce pilots who can enter an air 
carrier environment and train and perform their duties effectively. The 
accident reports revealed deficiencies in--
     Training in aircraft manual handling skills,
     stall and upset recognition and recovery,
     high altitude operations,
     pilot monitoring skills,
     effective crew resource management,
     pilot leadership, professionalism, and mentoring skills,
     stabilized approaches, and
     operations in icing conditions.
    The FAA considered its accident analysis, the FOQ ARC 
recommendations, and numerous NTSB Safety Recommendations in developing 
the Pilot Certification and Qualification Requirements for Air Carrier 
Operations NPRM (77 FR 12374), which published in the Federal Register 
on February 29, 2012. It proposed to amend the FAA's existing 
requirements to obtain an ATP certificate with an airplane category 
multiengine class rating and raise the qualifications of part 121 pilot 
flightcrew members.
    In developing this final rule, the FAA reviewed the requirements 
set forth in the Act, reconsidered the FOQ ARC recommendations, 
conducted a new accident analysis,\7\ reviewed NTSB Safety 
Recommendations,\8\ and considered the public comments to the NPRM. The 
provisions of this final rule are consistent with the statutory 
mandates set forth in the Act. The table below outlines the provisions 
of sections 216 and 217 of the Act and the parts of the final rule that 
correspond to them.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ As a result of modifications to the ATP Certification 
Training Program and comments made regarding some of the accidents 
used for benefits in the NPRM the FAA conducted a new accident 
analysis.
    \8\ The FAA has placed a document in the docket for this 
rulemaking that provides greater detail on which aspects of the 
final rule--in particular which items in the curriculum for the ATP 
CTP--respond to specific NTSB recommendations. That supplementary 
material can be found at www.regulations.gov, Docket No. FAA-2010-
0100.

    Table 3--Provisions of Public Law 111-216 and Corresponding Rule
                               Provisions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Public Law 111-216, The Airline Safety Act,
              Sections 216 & 217                       Final rule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. All part 121 flightcrew members must hold   1. An SIC in part 121
 an ATP certificate by August 2, 2013.          operations must have one
 (216(c)).                                      of the following:
                                                ATP certificate
                                                ATP certificate
                                                with restricted
                                                privileges (Sec.  Sec.
                                                61.160, 61.167)
2. To be qualified to receive an ATP
 certificate, an individual shall have
 sufficient flight hours, as determined by
 the Administrator, to enable a pilot to
 function effectively in an air carrier
 operational environment; and have received
 flight training, academic training, or
 operational experience* * *to function
 effectively in an air carrier operational
 environment. (217(b)).
Minimum number of flight hours shall be at
 least 1,500 flight hours. (217(c)).
A pilot need not fully comply with the flight  2. ATP certificate with
 hours requirement above provided that the      restricted privileges
 pilot has taken specific academic training     (Sec.   61.160).
 courses, beyond those listed below, as
 determined by the Administrator. (217(d)).
3. All part 121 flightcrew members must have   3. (a) 50 hours of
 an appropriate amount of multi-engine flight   aeronautical experience
 experience, as determined by the               in class of airplane
 Administrator. (216(a)(2)(B)(ii)).             required for an ATP
                                                certificate (Sec.
                                                61.159);
                                               (b) Aircraft type rating
                                                for part 121 SICs (Sec.
                                                 121.436(a)(2)); and
                                               (c) 1,000-hour minimum
                                                air carrier experience
                                                to serve as a PIC in
                                                part 121 operations
                                                (Sec.   121.436(a)(3)).
4. To be qualified to receive an ATP
 certificate an individual shall have
 received flight training, academic training,
 or operational experience that will prepare
 a pilot to:.
a. function in a multipilot environment;.....
b. function in adverse weather conditions
 (icing);.
c. function during high altitude operations;.
d. adhere to the highest professional
 standards; and.
e. function in an air carrier operational
 environment. (217(b)(2)(A)-(E)).
The total flight hours should include          4. ATP CTP (Sec.  Sec.
 sufficient flight hours in difficult           61.156, 121.410,
 operational conditions. (217(c)(2)).           135.336, 141.11,
                                                142.54).
5. Prospective flightcrew members must         5. (a) Revised ATP
 undergo comprehensive pre-employment           requirements (ATP CTP,
 screening, including an assessment of the      increased minimum total
 skills, aptitudes, airmanship, and             time as a pilot, and
 suitability * * * for operating in an air      increased minimum
 carrier operational environment. (216(a)(2)).  multiengine time);
                                               (b) Aircraft type rating
                                                for the aircraft to be
                                                flown in part 121
                                                operations (SIC) (Sec.
                                                121.436(a)(2)); and
                                               (c) 1,000-hour minimum
                                                air carrier experience
                                                to serve as a PIC in
                                                part 121 operations
                                                (Sec.   121.436(a)(3)).
------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 42329]]

B. FAA Accident Analysis and National Transportation Safety Board 
(NTSB) Recommendations

    Human error, as evidenced in the Colgan Air accident, has been a 
major factor in many of the commercial airline accidents over the past 
10 years. The FAA has identified 31 accidents in part 121 air carrier 
operations and 27 in part 135 commuter and on-demand operations from 
fiscal year 2001 through fiscal year 2010 that could have been 
prevented if the enhanced ATP qualification standards and part 121 
requirements required by this final rule had been in effect. Those 
accidents resulted in 99 fatalities, 28 serious injuries, and 44 minor 
injuries. A detailed description of this analysis, and how it was 
conducted, is provided in Section E of the final regulatory evaluation 
and can also be found in Docket  FAA-2010-0100.
    The NTSB investigated these accidents and the changes enacted in 
this rule address, at least in part, the following NTSB 
recommendations--
     Train flightcrews to respond to sudden, unusual, or 
unexpected aircraft upsets (Recommendations A-96-120, A-04-62, A-07-3, 
and A-09-113);
     Develop and conduct stall recovery training and provide 
stick pusher familiarization training for pilots of stick-pusher 
equipped aircraft (Recommendations A-10-22 and A-10-23);
     Enhance training syllabi for operations in high altitude 
(Recommendations A-07-1 and A-07-2);
     Review training for unusual and emergency situations in 
transport-category aircraft to make sure pilots are not trained to use 
the rudder in ways that could result in dangerous situations 
(Recommendation A-02-2);
     Require procedures and guidance for airport situational 
awareness (Recommendation A-07-44);
     Ensure that all carriers include criteria for stabilized 
approach in their flight manuals and training programs (Recommendations 
A-01-69 and A-08-18);
     Require operators to provide clear guidance to pilots 
about landing performance calculations (Recommendations A-07-59 and A-
08-41);
     Require Crew Resource Management training (Recommendation 
A-03-52);
     Require operators to verify that their pilot monitoring 
duties are consistent with AC 120-71A (Recommendation A-10-10);
     Require flight crewmember academic training in leadership, 
professionalism, and first officer assertiveness (Recommendation A-10-
15 and A-11-39);
     Require training in icing conditions (Recommendation A-07-
14 and A-11-47);
     Require hypoxia awareness training (Recommendation A-00-
110); and
     Require training in crosswinds with gusts (Recommendations 
A-10-110 and A-10-111).

C. Airline Safety and Federal Aviation Administration Extension Act of 
2010 (Pub. L. 111-216)

    The Airline Safety and Federal Aviation Administration Act included 
provisions to improve airline safety and pilot training. Specifically, 
section 216, Flight Crewmember Screening and Qualifications, focused on 
the qualifications of airline pilots operating under part 121. In 
section 217, Airline Transport Pilot Certification, the FAA was 
directed to modify the requirements for an ATP certificate to better 
prepare pilots for operating in an air carrier environment. Both 
sections of the Act are addressed in this rulemaking.
    Section 216 directs the FAA to conduct a rulemaking proceeding to 
require:
     Part 121 air carriers to develop and implement means and 
methods for ensuring flightcrew members have proper qualifications and 
experience;
     All flightcrew members in part 121 air carrier operations 
to hold an ATP certificate and to have obtained appropriate multiengine 
flight experience, as determined by the Administrator by August 2, 
2013; and
     Prospective flightcrew members to undergo comprehensive 
pre-employment screening, including an assessment of the skills, 
aptitudes, airmanship, and suitability, of each applicant for a 
position as a flightcrew member in terms of functioning effectively in 
the air carrier's operational environment.
    Section 216 requires the FAA to issue an NPRM by January 28, 2011, 
and a final rule by August 2, 2012. Independent of any rulemaking 
proceeding by the FAA, this section directs that all flightcrew members 
in part 121 air carrier operations must hold an ATP certificate, issued 
under part 61, by August 2, 2013.
    Section 217 of the Act requires the FAA to issue a final rule by 
August 2, 2013, modifying the requirements for an ATP certificate in 
part 61. The section establishes minimum requirements for an ATP 
certificate that include:
     Sufficient flight hours, as determined by the 
Administrator, to enable a pilot to function effectively in an air 
carrier operational environment;
     Flight training, academic training, or operational 
experience that will prepare a pilot to function effectively in a 
multipilot (multicrew) environment, in adverse weather conditions, 
during high altitude operations, and in an air carrier environment, as 
well as to adhere to the highest professional standards; and
     Sufficient flight hours, as determined by the 
Administrator, in difficult operational conditions that may be 
encountered by an air carrier to enable a pilot to operate safely in 
such conditions.
    Section 217 also directs that the minimum total flight hours to be 
qualified for an ATP certificate shall be at least 1,500 flight hours. 
Notwithstanding the stated minimum, the section permits the 
Administrator to allow specific academic training courses to be 
credited toward the 1,500 total flight hours, provided the 
Administrator determines that specific academic training courses will 
enhance safety more than requiring the pilot to comply fully with the 
flight hours requirement.
    Section 217 also requires the Administrator to consider the 
recommendations from an expert panel established under section 209(b) 
of the Act. That section focuses on part 121 and part 135 training 
programs. A report to Congress and to the NTSB was submitted on 
September 23, 2011.

D. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM)

    In the Pilot Certification and Qualification Requirements for Air 
Carrier Operations NPRM (77 FR 12374), the FAA proposed to amend the 
existing requirements to obtain an ATP certificate with an airplane 
category multiengine class rating and raise the qualifications of part 
121 pilot flightcrew members. Specifically the NPRM proposed to--
     Require an ATP certificate for all pilots operating under 
part 121 consistent with the self-enacting provision in section 216 of 
the Act.
     Establish an aeronautical experience requirement for 50 
hours in the class of airplane for the ATP certificate sought.
     Establish a requirement for all pilots operating under 
part 121 to obtain an aircraft type rating for the aircraft to be 
flown. An SIC in a part 121 flag or supplemental operation that 
requires three or more pilots is required by existing regulations to 
hold an ATP certificate with an aircraft type rating for the aircraft 
being flown, but SICs in

[[Page 42330]]

other part 121 operations are not required to have it.
     Establish a requirement for pilots seeking an ATP 
certificate with an airplane category multiengine class rating or an 
ATP certificate obtained concurrently with an airplane type rating to 
complete specific training before taking the ATP knowledge test. The 
proposed requirements would include academic training and training in a 
flight simulation training device \9\ (FSTD). A draft advisory circular 
providing additional guidance as to the content of the course and how 
to obtain FAA-approval was placed in the docket for comment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ A flight simulation training device (FSTD) incorporates both 
full flight simulators (FFS) and flight training devices (FTD).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Based on the discretion provided to the Administrator in 
section 217 of the Act, permit applicants who have completed ``specific 
academic training courses'' to obtain an ATP certificate with fewer 
than the minimum 1,500 hours.
     Allow specific academic coursework to be credited towards 
the total flight hours required for an ATP certificate. The proposed 
alternative hour requirements for a restricted privileges ATP 
certificate were--
    [cir] 750 hours for a military pilot; and
    [cir] 1,000 hours for a graduate of a four-year baccalaureate 
aviation-degree program who also received a commercial certificate and 
instrument rating from an affiliated part 141 pilot school.
     Establish a requirement that a pilot must have 1,000 hours 
in air carrier operations to serve as PIC in part 121 operations.
    The NPRM provided for a 60-day comment period, which ended on April 
30, 2012. One request for extension to the comment period was received, 
but the FAA declined to extend given the industry input it had received 
from the advanced noticed of proposed rulemaking published in February 
2010, as well as the input it received from the FOQ ARC. In addition, 
the statutory deadlines imposed by the Act did not afford the FAA 
additional time to receive comments. The FAA received nearly 600 
comments posted to the docket. Commenters included major air carriers, 
regional air carriers, part 135 operators, cargo air carriers, 
associations and industry groups, colleges and universities, training 
centers, flight schools, pilots, and private citizens.

E. Differences Between the NPRM and the Final Rule

                            Table 4--Differences Between the NPRM and the Final Rule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Issue                                 NPRM                                 Final rule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. R-ATP certificate.............  1. Eligible pilots:                     1. Eligible pilots:
                                   [cir] Military-trained;                 [cir] Military-trained;
                                   [cir] Graduates of a bachelor's degree  [cir] Graduates of a bachelor's
                                    program with an aviation major;         degree program with an aviation
                                   2. Proposed minimum age is 21 years;     major;
                                    and                                    [cir] Graduates of an associate's
                                   3. Proposed minimum cross country time   degree program with an aviation
                                    for military pilots is 250 hours;       major;
                                    proposed minimum cross country time    [cir] Pilots with 1,500 hours total
                                    for graduates with a bachelor's         time as a pilot;
                                    degree is 375 hours.                   2. Minimum age is 21 years; and
                                                                           3. Minimum cross country time for all
                                                                            eligible pilots is 200 hours.
B. Aviation Degree Program.......  A pilot eligible for academic credit    1. Established criteria to define
                                    towards a restricted privileges ATP     what coursework must be completed as
                                    certificate needs to have:.             part of a bachelor's or associate's
                                   1. Graduated from a four-year aviation-  degree program with an aviation
                                    related degree program (bachelor's      major;
                                    degree with an aviation major); and    2. Further defined what an associated
                                   2. Obtained their commercial pilot       part 141 school is;
                                    certificate and instrument rating      3. Created a process by which
                                    from an affiliated part 141 pilot       colleges and universities can obtain
                                    school.                                 authority from the FAA to certify
                                                                            their graduates for an R-ATP
                                                                            certificate (new advisory circular
                                                                            61-School); and
                                                                           4. More clearly defined what a
                                                                            graduate has to present at the time
                                                                            of the practical test to show
                                                                            eligibility for a restricted
                                                                            privileges ATP certificate.
C. ATP CTP.......................  1. Academic training: 24 hours;         1. Academic training: 30 hours;
                                   2. FSTD training: 16 hours              2. FSTD training: 10 hours
                                   [cir] Level C or higher FFS: 8 hours;   [cir] Level C or higher FFS: 6 hours;
                                   [cir] Level 4 or higher FTD: 8 hours;   [cir] Level 4 or higher FTD: 4 hours;
                                    and                                     and
                                   3. Draft advisory circular.             3. Advisory circular 61-ATP.
D. ATP CTP Instructor              1. Hold an ATP certificate with an      1. Hold an ATP certificate with an
 Requirements.                      airplane category multiengine class     airplane category multiengine class
                                    rating;                                 rating;
                                   2. Meet the aeronautical experience     2. Meet the aeronautical experience
                                    requirements of Sec.   61.159;          requirements of Sec.   61.159;
                                   3. Have 2-years of air carrier          3. Have 2-years of air carrier
                                    experience; and                         experience;
                                   4. For training in an FSTD--have an     4. For training in an FSTD--(a) have
                                    appropriate aircraft type rating        an appropriate aircraft type rating
                                    which the FSTD represents or have       which the FSTD represents, (b) have
                                    received training in the aircraft       received training in the aircraft
                                    type from the certificate holder on     type from the certificate holder on
                                    those maneuvers they will teach.        those maneuvers they will teach, and
                                                                            (c) received training on data and
                                                                            motion limitations of simulation;
                                                                            and
                                   ......................................  5. Hold a certified flight instructor
                                                                            certificate or complete training in
                                                                            fundamentals of instruction.

[[Page 42331]]

 
E. Reduction in an air carriers'   A principal operations inspector may    A principal operations inspector may
 initial training program for       approve a reduction to an air           approve a reduction to an air
 Pilots Who Have Completed the      carrier's initial training program      carrier's initial training program
 ATP CTP.                           based on material taught by that        if the pilot beginning initial
                                    carrier in the ATP CTP.                 training has successfully completed
                                                                            the ATP CTP. The carrier does not
                                                                            have to provide the ATP CTP training
                                                                            to be eligible for a reduction.
F. Medical Certificate...........  No change proposed to medical           Section 61.23 requires only those
                                    requirements in Sec.   61.23. Pilots    pilots exercising the PIC privileges
                                    exercising the privileges of an ATP     of an ATP certificate and SIC
                                    certificate would be required to hold   privileges in flag and supplemental
                                    a first-class medical certificate.      operations requiring three or more
                                                                            pilots to hold a first-class medical
                                                                            certificate. An SIC in part 121 may
                                                                            continue to hold a second-class
                                                                            medical certificate.
G. FFS Credit Towards 50 hours of  10 hours of FFS time that represents a  25 hours of FFS training time that
 Multiengine Aeronautical           multiengine airplane.                   represents a multiengine airplane
 Experience.                                                                and is part of an approved training
                                                                            program.
H. Time Eligible for the 1,000     1. All time in part 121 operations;     1. All time in part 121 operations;
 hours of Air Carrier Experience.  2. PIC time in Sec.   135.243(a)(1)     2. PIC time in Sec.   135.243(a)(1)
                                    operations; and                         operations;
                                   3. PIC time in Sec.   91.1053(a)(2)(i)  3. PIC time in Sec.
                                    operations                              91.1053(a)(2)(i) operations; and
                                   ......................................  4. Military PIC time in a multiengine
                                                                            turbine-powered, fixed-wing airplane
                                                                            in an operation requiring more than
                                                                            one pilot--up to 500 hours.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

F. Related Actions

    The Act led to the establishment of ARCs on additional subjects--
     Flight Crewmember Mentoring, Leadership, and Professional 
Development (Section 206 of the Act)
     Flight Crewmember Training Hours Requirement Review 
(Section 209 of the Act)
     Stick Pusher and Adverse Weather Event Training (Section 
208 of the Act)
     Air Carrier Safety and Pilot Training (Section 204 of the 
Act)
    The FAA has reviewed the recommendations provided by these ARCs and 
has initiated two rulemaking projects as a result: (1) Flight 
Crewmember Mentoring Leadership, and Professional Development; and (2) 
Revisions to the Qualification and Performance Standards in Part 60.
    In addition, on May 20, 2011, the FAA published a supplemental 
notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM) proposing to amend the 
regulations for crewmember and aircraft dispatcher training programs in 
domestic, flag, and supplemental operations (76 FR 29336). This SNPRM, 
which was specifically cited in section 209 of the Act, focused solely 
on part 121 air carrier training program requirements. The comment 
period for the SNPRM closed on September 19, 2011.
    Congress addressed these related topics within discrete sections of 
the Act, which has resulted in the related rulemaking projects 
identified. Drafting proposals on related topics simultaneously can 
give the appearance of overlapping or duplicative requirements. As the 
final rules are drafted and published to address the discrete sections 
of the Act, the FAA will minimize any overlapping or duplicative 
requirements.
    The FAA has made regulatory decisions within this rule based upon 
the best currently available scientific data and information, and is 
confident the rule incorporates the best available information 
regarding the relationship between flight hours and types of training. 
In the future, however, FAA is likely to gather and analyze additional 
data in this area; for example, through safety outcomes resulting from 
this rule, and additional information collections associated with other 
rulemakings. FAA may also consider additional collections of 
information, and would notify the public of these collections through 
separate Federal Register Notices promulgated under the Paperwork 
Reduction Act. Further information collected by FAA could be used to 
inform future analysis.
    Because of the likely availability of such data in the future, the 
FAA may obtain additional empirical evidence relevant to the precise 
relationship between flight hours and types of training. For example, 
Phase III of the Pilot Source Study, explained elsewhere in this 
preamble, suggests areas for further research. The FAA, consistent with 
its obligations under Executive Order (E.O.) 13563, Improving 
Regulation and Regulatory Review (Jan. 18, 2011), and E.O. 13610 on the 
retrospective review of regulations, will review this evidence and may 
make modifications as necessary and appropriate to improve the 
effectiveness of this regulatory program. The FAA will consider whether 
such changes would be necessary or appropriate, and therefore whether 
this rulemaking would represent a good candidate for a formal 
retrospective review under E.O. 13610.

III. Discussion of Public Comments and Final Rule

A. ATP Certificate for All Pilots Operating Under Part 121 (Sec.  
121.436)

    In the NPRM, the FAA proposed requiring that all SICs in part 121 
operations hold an ATP certificate by August 2013. This proposal was 
meant to be consistent with section 216 of the Act, which mandates that 
within 3 years of enactment (August 2, 2013), all flightcrew members 
serving in part 121 operations must hold an ATP certificate. At the 
time the Act was signed into law, PICs in part 121 air carrier 
operations as well as SICs of a part 121 flag or supplemental operation 
requiring three or more pilots were already required to hold ATP 
certificates. All other SICs in part 121 air carrier operations, 
however, were not required to hold ATP certificates and were permitted 
to hold an instrument rating and a commercial pilot certificate with 
the appropriate category and class rating for the aircraft.
    The FAA received more than 200 comments both in support of and in 
opposition to the ATP certification requirement for part 121 pilots. 
American Eagle Airlines, Inc., citing a lack of an identified safety 
benefit, specifically suggested grandfathering all incumbent SICs if 
they have at least 1,000 hours in the type of aircraft they are flying. 
American Airlines (AAL) suggested a similar grandfathering provision, 
but only for pilots who have

[[Page 42332]]

been an SIC for at least six years, accrued 1,000 hours in aircraft 
type as an SIC, and attended recurrent training more than three times.
    While the FAA has considered and appreciates all of the comments 
received, the FAA was not given any discretion to allow pilots serving 
in part 121 operations to hold any certificate other than an ATP 
certificate. There is no latitude in the Act to permit a pilot with a 
commercial pilot certificate who is flying in part 121 today to 
continue flying beyond the date of this self-enacting provision without 
having obtained an ATP certificate. Accordingly, the FAA has removed 
the current certification requirements in Sec.  121.437 and added new 
Sec. Sec.  121.435 and 121.436. New Sec.  121.435 contains the existing 
certification requirements for part 121 pilots; they will be in effect 
until July 31, 2013. After that date, the requirements of Sec.  121.436 
will apply.

B. Medical Certificate (Sec.  61.23)

    Medical certificate requirements are determined by the level of 
pilot certificate that is required for the operation being conducted. 
Section 61.23 requires a pilot exercising the privileges of an ATP 
certificate to hold a first-class medical certificate and a pilot 
exercising the privileges of a commercial pilot certificate to hold at 
least a second-class medical certificate.
    As a result of the statutory requirement for all pilots in part 121 
to hold an ATP certificate, UPS and Spartan College sought 
clarification regarding whether all SICs in part 121 operations would 
be required to hold a first-class medical certificate and whether the 
proposed rule would affect existing SICs who hold only second-class 
medical certificates.
    The FAA did not address medical certification requirements in the 
NPRM or propose any change to the first-class medical certificate 
requirement in Sec.  61.23. Without a change, the statutory requirement 
for all part 121 flightcrew members to hold an ATP certificate would 
require SICs to hold first-class medical certificates after August 1, 
2013.
    Requiring a first-class medical certificate for all part 121 SICs 
could potentially remove qualified and experienced SICs who cannot hold 
a first-class medical certificate from part 121 air carrier operations. 
It would also impose additional costs on industry, individual pilots, 
and the FAA that were not reflected in the initial regulatory 
evaluation.\10\ Rather than impose new requirements without a 
corresponding safety benefit, the FAA is modifying Sec.  61.23(a)(1), 
(a)(2), (d)(1), and (d)(2) in the final rule so pilots in part 121 
operations exercising SIC privileges (excluding flag or supplemental 
operations requiring three or more pilots) may continue to hold only a 
second-class medical certificate. In this regard, the amendment 
alleviates any increased cost and removes the possibility of 
inadvertently disqualifying incumbent SICs from part 121 air carrier 
operations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ A first-class medical certificate must be renewed every 12 
months for pilots under age 40 and every six months for pilots age 
40 and over. A second-class medical certificate, on the other hand, 
must be renewed every 12 months for all pilots regardless of age. If 
first-class medical certificates are required, SICs who are age 40 
and over will be required to renew their medical certificates every 
six months (as opposed to every 12 months for a second-class medical 
certificate). In addition, electrocardiography (EKG) testing is 
specifically required under first class medical certificate 
standards while EKG testing is used on a case-by-case basis for 
second class medical certificates. The FAA has reviewed part 121 
accident and incident data dating back to 2001 and found no 
accidents or incidents attributable to an SIC with a medical 
condition that may have been detected by electrocardiography 
testing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Aeronautical Experience Requirement in the Class of Airplane for the 
ATP Certificate Sought (Sec.  61.159)

    Prior to the issuance of this final rule, an applicant for an ATP 
certificate with an airplane category multiengine class rating was not 
required to obtain any additional multiengine flight experience above 
what is required for a commercial pilot certificate with an airplane 
category multiengine class rating. Section 216 of the Act addresses 
this issue by requiring all pilot flightcrew members serving in part 
121 air carrier operations to have appropriate multiengine flight 
experience, as determined by the Administrator.
    One method the FAA used to address the Act's focus on multiengine 
experience was by proposing a requirement that pilots obtain 50 hours 
of flight time \11\ in the class of airplane for the ATP certificate 
sought. The FAA also proposed allowing an applicant to receive credit 
for up to 10 hours of this flight time in a full flight simulator (FFS) 
that replicates a multiengine airplane.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ The FAA notes that this 50 hours of flight time counts 
towards the 1,500 hours of total time required for an ATP 
certificate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Ninety-three commenters addressed the proposed 50-hour requirement. 
Fifty-nine commenters, including the Airline Pilots Association (ALPA), 
Airlines for America (A4A), AAL, Aviation Professional Development, 
LLC, Cargo Airline Association (CAA), Coalition of Airline Pilots 
Association (CAPA), Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University (ERAU), 
ExpressJet Airlines, Inc. (ExpressJet), Flight Safety International 
(FSI), Hyannis Air Service, Inc. (Cape Air), National Air 
Transportation Association (NATA), Purdue University (Purdue), Saint 
Louis University--Parks College (Parks College), San Jose State 
University (SJSU), and the U.S. Airline Pilots Association (USAPA) 
indicated that 50 hours is adequate to be eligible for an ATP 
certificate.
    The National Association of Flight Instructors (NAFI) added that 
obtaining 50 hours would not be a significant problem in the industry 
and would establish a minimum number of hours as a base for pilots to 
build upon. Farmingdale State College (FSC) added that 50 hours is 
adequate but it is not a good measure of competencies. The 
International Air Transport Association (IATA) stated that requiring 
these 50 hours is appropriate if they are used to develop and reinforce 
core competencies. Aerosim Flight Academy (Aerosim) stated the 50 hours 
would be ``okay'' but ``too costly and difficult to obtain.'' JetBlue 
Airways Corporation (JetBlue) agreed that 50 hours in the class of 
airplane is sufficient and pertinent and believes it is representative 
of quality flight experience.
    Four commenters, including FSI, said that there would be no 
additional burden for those who obtain an ATP certificate. FSI said 
that most pilot candidates exceed the 50-hour requirement before 
obtaining an ATP certificate. An individual commenter noted that most 
pilots would earn this by getting a multiengine instructor rating and 
instructing students.
    Six individual commenters did not object to having such a 
requirement but stated 50 hours is too high. One of them suggested 25 
hours in the class of airplane as an alternative. The Ohio State 
University (OSU) added that current commercial certificate requirements 
are sufficient and suggested giving credit towards this requirement 
through completion of an Advanced Jet Training (AJT) program. Boeing 
also said that 50 hours is too high and that the structured and focused 
FSTD training proposed in the ATP certification training program 
provides any needed additional multiengine experience above that which 
is minimally required by the commercial pilot certificate. The Regional 
Air Cargo Carrier Association (RACCA) stated that 50 hours is probably 
adequate but may be unnecessarily high ``presuming the flight time 
includes adequate training, experience, and motivation by the pilot.''

[[Page 42333]]

    Three individual commenters noted that 50 hours in class is too 
low. Two of these commenters recommended 100 hours in class. 
Ameriflight, LLC (Ameriflight) added that 50 hours of multiengine 
experience is insufficient for part 121 operations because the 
remaining 1,450 hours could be in a single-engine airplane. The Allied 
Pilots Association (APA) recommended 100 hours of flight time in the 
type of aircraft before a pilot could be eligible for a restricted 
privileges ATP certificate, because time in the aircraft type makes for 
a safer pilot.
    Thirteen commenters, including, Delta Airlines (Delta), Bemidji 
Aviation Services, Inc., the Professional Aviation Board of 
Certification (PABC), Prairie Air Service, Kansas State University--
Salina (KSU), and the University Aviation Association (UAA), found the 
50-hour requirement unnecessary. Sporty's Academy added that there is 
no evidence of accident rates to support the requirement. Southern 
Illinois University--Carbondale (SIU), Western Michigan University 
(WMU) and CAE, Inc. (CAE) added that the requirement should be 
competency based. Human Capital Management and Performance, LLC added 
that time gained in light twin-engine piston aircraft does not prepare 
pilots for high altitude, swept-wing turbojet operations. The IFL Group 
believes pilots will get that time in any way possible without a 
guarantee of receiving specific training, and this may increase the 
accident rate. The IFL Group also believes there will be an ``increase 
in the number of pilots who make fake flight time entries into their 
logbooks because of the cost of obtaining the additional multiengine 
flight time, thus offsetting any safety benefit and increasing FAA cost 
as a proportion of them are caught and the FAA incurs the cost of 
revoking their certificates.''
    Six commenters, including Purdue, Spartan College, and the 
University of Dubuque noted the FAA should consider credit for 
simulation. An individual commenter stated allowance for simulators 
should be expanded. CAE stated 50% of the hours should be allowed in a 
level C or D FFS due to the numerous training advantages of that 
training environment. Based on hiring data and success rates in airline 
training and line operations, ExpressJet highly recommended that AJT 
simulation time (in either a level 5 flight training device (FTD) or 
FFS) be credited towards the 50 hours of multiengine time. JetBlue 
believes the capabilities and quality of training possible in an 
advanced simulation device far exceeds those of the actual aircraft and 
therefore recommends any time in an FFS should be credited towards the 
50 hours.
    Congress directed the FAA to ensure that all flightcrew members 
have an appropriate amount of multiengine experience. Since the ATP 
certificate is the highest level of pilot certificate currently 
available, the FAA has determined the minimum multiengine experience 
required to apply for an ATP certificate should exceed the minimum 
requirements for a commercial pilot certificate. Additional experience 
in inherently faster and more complex multiengine airplanes establishes 
a foundation that provides quality experience to prepare a pilot for a 
professional piloting career. Multiengine flight experience is 
essential not only for pilots serving in part 121 air carrier 
operations but for all pilots who apply for an ATP certificate with an 
airplane category multiengine class rating. The FAA concedes there are 
no air carrier accidents that specifically cite a lack of multiengine 
experience as a probable cause. However, establishing a minimum 
experience requirement in the class of airplane is consistent with 
other pilot certificates and supports the requirements of section 216 
of the Act, which placed significant emphasis on increased multiengine 
experience. As proposed, such an hour requirement would have minimal 
impact on pilots seeking an ATP certificate because the hours will 
likely be acquired by pilots engaged in other commercial aviation 
activities such as flight instruction or part 135 operations. This 
assertion was not disputed by many of the commenters. Additionally, the 
FAA reviewed the hiring minimums for part 121 air carriers and found 
most have established hiring minimums for multiengine time which equal 
or exceed the proposed rule, further minimizing the cost of this 
provision.
    In response to commenters who suggested increasing the minimum 
hours in class of airplane above 50 hours, the FAA accepts the 
recommendation of the FOQ ARC. The FAA agrees that time in the class of 
airplane alone may not prepare a pilot for operating a large swept-wing 
turbojet at high altitudes nor does it necessarily ensure competency. 
For that reason there are additional building block requirements in 
this final rule for obtaining an ATP certificate with a multiengine 
class rating, such as the ATP certification training program and a 
practical test to determine a pilot's competency prior to issuance of 
an ATP certificate. The FAA notes that pilots will seek opportunities 
to acquire time in the class of airplane, which is no different than 
current practice. For that reason the FAA disagrees with the IFL 
Group's assertion that pilots seeking experience in multiengine 
aircraft will result in an increase in accidents. To the extent that 
commenters have suggested that, as a result of the multiengine flight 
time requirement, pilots may be encouraged to falsify their logbooks, 
the FAA cautions that the regulations (14 CFR 61.59) prohibit the 
falsification of logbooks.
    A majority of the commenters supported the proposed requirement for 
50 hours in the class of airplane to obtain an ATP certificate; 
therefore, the FAA has retained this provision in the final rule. Based 
on the comments suggesting that the FAA increase the amount of FFS time 
that may be credited towards the 50 hours, the FAA agrees that the 
quality of training and experience gained from flying an FFS is 
valuable and additional time should count. Advanced simulation training 
devices readily provide additional training opportunities in turbine 
aircraft utilizing multicrew concepts and may include training in 
difficult operational conditions beyond that required of existing pilot 
licensing requirements. The FAA disagrees with commenters that believe 
all of the multiengine experience could be gained in an FFS. The FAA 
believes accruing multiengine experience in an airplane is important 
and would eliminate the possibility of a pilot carrying passengers in a 
multiengine airplane without previous multiengine airplane experience. 
Accordingly, the FAA has amended Sec.  61.159 in the final rule. 
Specifically, Sec.  61.159(a)(3) will permit pilots to credit 25 hours 
of flight training in an FFS that represents a multiengine airplane 
toward the 50 hours of flight time in the class of airplane. The 25 
hours must be accomplished as part of an FAA approved training course 
(e.g., part 121 air carrier training program).\12\ The FAA notes that 
an aviation training device (ATD) or an FTD cannot be substituted for 
the FFS in order to obtain the credit toward the 50 hours of 
multiengine flight time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ The FAA has modified section 61.159(a)(5) to permit pilots 
to credit FSTD time accomplished in approved training programs under 
parts 121, 135, and 141 toward the aeronautical experience 
requirements for the ATP certificate. Under the prior rule, only 
FSTD time accomplished as part of an approved training course in 
part 142 could be credited.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 42334]]

D. ATP Certification Training Program for an Airplane Category 
Multiengine Class Rating or ATP Certificate Obtained Concurrently with 
an Airplane Type Rating (Sec.  61.156)

    In Section 217 of the Act, Congress directed the FAA ``to modify 
requirements for the issuance of an airline transport pilot 
certificate'' to ensure pilots can function effectively in an air 
carrier/multipilot environment, in adverse weather conditions, during 
high altitude and icing operations while adhering to the highest 
professional standards. The public law stated that the FAA could 
consider academic training, flight training, or operational experience 
as a means of ensuring pilots have the skills identified in the public 
law.
    In the NPRM, the FAA proposed to require applicants for the ATP 
knowledge test complete an ATP Certification Training Program (ATP CTP) 
comprised of academic and FSTD training. The training program, as 
proposed, focused on the areas set forth in the Act and a majority of 
the competencies identified in the FOQ ARC report. The FAA included a 
draft advisory circular (AC) in the docket that provided further detail 
on the content and the structure of the course.
1. Required Training for an ATP Certificate
    The FAA received over 120 comments regarding whether the FAA should 
require a training course prior to taking the ATP knowledge test. More 
than 30 commenters, including Delta, A4A, CAPA, CAA, Parks College, and 
the Families of Continental Flight 3407, generally supported such a 
training course. An equal number of commenters including the University 
of Dubuque, Delaware State University (DSU), and numerous individual 
commenters generally stated such a course is unnecessary. Many 
commenters addressed specific elements of the proposal and suggested 
some alternatives which will be addressed later in the document.
    IATA stated that the additional training for the ATP certificate is 
appropriate because the current requirements are inadequate and have 
become irrelevant. Boeing agreed with the FAA's rationale for the ATP 
CTP and asserted that pilots who successfully complete the program 
would have the needed ``foundational knowledge to operate as second in 
command (SIC) in part 121 operations.'' AAL echoed Boeing, indicating 
that the added training would provide valuable experience to future 
part 121 pilots. The National Air Disaster Alliance Foundation (NADA/F) 
was also supportive of the proposed course and highlighted the use of a 
standardized course of training. USAPA supports the additional training 
maintaining that it is more effective than just having a multiple 
choice exam. UAA supported pilots completing ground training prior to 
taking a knowledge test.
    Several commenters, including Aerosim, Middle Tennessee State 
University (MTSU), FSC, and WMU, support additional training but 
disagree with it being required for the knowledge test. ERAU, KSU, and 
20 individual commenters support the additional training being part of 
a degree program or collegiate flight training program. Spartan College 
suggested it be part of an overall collegiate curriculum rather than a 
single course.
    Purdue, OSU, and the University of North Dakota (UND) suggested 
allowing the academic and FSTD portions of the proposed course to be 
completed at separate times enabling students to complete the academic 
portion as part of their degree program. The universities added that 
many of the topics are already covered as part of the degree program 
and graduates should get credit for the academic portion of the 
proposed course and therefore only have to complete the FSTD portion at 
a later time. They also suggested allowing the knowledge test to be 
completed following the academic portion, which falls more in line with 
how knowledge areas for other FAA pilot certificates are tested.
    ExpressJet supported imbedding the ATP CTP training into an air 
carrier's initial training program. The Aircraft Owners and Pilots 
Association (AOPA) equated the ATP CTP to the AJT course the FOQ ARC 
recommended for pilots entering part 121 service and therefore 
disagrees that the ATP CTP should apply to all pilots required to have 
an ATP certificate. AOPA suggested the FAA ``reword the AJT requirement 
so it is required only of individuals employed by part 121 air 
carriers, prior to flying in revenue service and not as a prerequisite 
to all ATP certificates.''
    OSU generally agreed with the academic portion of the course but 
believed the FSTD portion of the course ``represents an overwhelming 
financial burden'' to ATP certificate applicants. Many other individual 
commenters disagreed with imposing additional training requirements on 
pilots seeking an ATP certificate, in part due to the additional cost. 
The General Aviation Manufacturers Association (GAMA) stated an ATP 
applicant has already gone through ample training and this course would 
just be an extra cost burden and was unlikely to provide any additional 
safety benefit. GAMA, however, expressed support for the proposed FSTD 
portion of the training course, indicating that such training can be 
``extremely beneficial.'' NATA believes the course as proposed is too 
costly. NATA is supportive of modifications to the ATP certification 
regulations, but indicated the delivery of any new training should be 
made available through lower cost methods, such as on-line course 
delivery.
    Based on the support for additional training expressed by many of 
the commenters, the FAA has decided to require academic and FSTD 
training for the ATP certificate multiengine class rating and the ATP 
certificate when obtained concurrently with an airplane type 
rating.\13\ This training, required at the ATP certification level, 
will address the gap in knowledge between a commercial pilot 
certificate and the knowledge a pilot should have prior to entering an 
air carrier environment. In addition, the FAA has decided that the 
safest and most effective way to ensure that applicants for an ATP 
certificate have met the requirements of section 217 of the Act is to 
establish specific training requirements and evaluate the pilot's 
understanding of those areas of instruction consistent with the 
regulatory framework for other pilot certificates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ The FAA notes that a pilot is not required to take the ATP 
CTP for a type rating added to any other pilot certificate. The 
requirement only applies to pilots obtaining an ATP certificate 
concurrently with an airplane type rating. In addition, subsequent 
airplane type ratings added to an ATP certificate that already has a 
multiengine class rating would not require taking the ATP CTP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To the extent that several commenters suggested that the coursework 
in university aviation degree programs already may satisfy the academic 
training requirements of the ATP CTP, the FAA does not agree. Many 
colleges and universities teach ground school for other certificates 
and ratings as part of their academic curriculum that include a general 
overview of topics for which the collegiate program has comprehensive 
standalone courses. For example, despite most collegiate programs 
having a separate aerodynamics course, this topic remains a component 
of private pilot ground school and is generally reinforced in a 
concurrent flight training lab. The aerodynamics training for private 
pilots generally applies to small, single-engine, piston-powered 
aircraft--the type of airplane most people initially learn to fly. 
Similarly, the academic portion of the ATP CTP (essentially

[[Page 42335]]

ground training for ATP certification) will focus on the aerodynamic 
principles for large turbine aircraft--the type of aircraft flown in 
part 121 operations as well as many operations in part 135 and subpart 
K of part 91. The ATP CTP will then incorporate those concepts learned 
in the academic portion of the course into practical scenarios during 
the FSTD training to reinforce the critical concepts of operating at 
high altitudes and its effects on the airplane and the importance of 
stall recognition and recovery. The FAA supports colleges and 
universities with FAA certificated part 141 pilot schools teaching the 
ATP CTP but as a standalone course, just as they do with ground schools 
and flight labs for other pilot certificates and ratings.
    The FAA also maintains that the academic training requirements 
cannot be separated from the FSTD training. The FAA has acknowledged 
the value of structured university aviation degree programs in other 
parts of this final rule; however, the design of the ATP CTP ensures 
the knowledge gained in the academic portion of the course is directly 
applicable to air carrier operations and operating sophisticated, high 
performance, large, turbine aircraft. The training in the FSTD portion 
of the course consolidates the academic concepts with scenario-based 
training, practical applications, demonstrations, and multiengine 
experience. The course will consolidate many broader topics and focus 
on its applicability to air carrier-like operations. For many pilots 
who take the ATP CTP, it will likely be their first exposure to large 
turbine aircraft and how those aircraft perform at high altitude, how 
they perform in low energy states, and in adverse weather phenomena, 
like thunderstorms and icing conditions. Combining the academic 
training requirements with the FSTD experience is the most effective 
method to consolidate the learning and deliver the training and 
experience mandated by the Act.
    Additionally, the FAA has determined that students must complete 
both the academic and FSTD training prior to taking the knowledge test. 
By separating the academics and flight training, possibly by years 
since a pilot may wait until he or she is further in a professional 
career, the learning objectives are less likely to be achieved. In 
light of that fact, the knowledge test cannot be taken following 
completion of only the academic portion of the course. The FAA is 
retaining the requirement that a pilot complete all of the ATP CTP to 
be eligible to take the knowledge test.
    To those commenters that suggested the ATP CTP be incorporated into 
air carrier initial training because the subjects are already taught or 
because the training only applies to pilots in part 121 operations, the 
FAA disagrees. The ATP CTP is the base upon which a pilot must build. 
The concepts in the course will apply to any pilot who flies a large 
turbine aircraft regardless of operating rule part and therefore has 
value to pilots flying outside of part 121. The ATP CTP will cover 
topics the air carrier is not required to teach. For those general 
knowledge areas that are currently part of a part 121 initial training 
program, the FAA has modified subpart N to remove those requirements 
and reduce ground training for those pilots who have completed the ATP 
CTP. A pilot in an air carrier training program receives training 
specific to the air carrier's operation and the specific aircraft that 
pilot is going to fly. Even if the subjects are offered by an air 
carrier in initial training, the pilot is focused primarily on learning 
the company operation and the specific type of aircraft they will fly, 
not on broader, foundational concepts that the ATP CTP is designed to 
provide.
    The FAA recognizes commenters' concerns regarding the cost of the 
proposed ATP CTP and considered these costs when establishing the 
requirements for the course. Section 217 of the Act directed the FAA to 
modify the requirements for ATP certification to include ensuring that 
applicants for the ATP certificate have sufficient flight hours in 
difficult operational conditions ``that may be encountered by an air 
carrier.'' The FAA sought input from the FOQ ARC on how to define 
difficult operational conditions and how a pilot can best obtain 
experience in those conditions. As indicated it its report, the FOQ ARC 
``extensively discussed the issue of difficult operating conditions and 
determined that simulator training is an important tool by which to 
provide flight experience to the pilot for recognition and appropriate 
response in the difficult environments experienced by air carriers.'' 
Because of safety concerns, the FOQ ARC did not recommend that pilots 
be intentionally placed in these difficult conditions in actual 
aircraft. The FOQ ARC recommended scenario-based training to address 
difficult operating conditions including thunderstorms, icing, low 
visibility, maximum crosswinds for takeoff and landing, and 
contaminated runways.
    Generally, pilots from their earliest training are taught to avoid 
thunderstorms and icing conditions. Even when flying an airplane 
approved for flight in icing conditions, a pilot is cautioned to 
minimize time flying in icing conditions. The FAA will not encourage 
pilots to seek experience in hazardous conditions for the purpose of 
meeting the aeronautical experience requirements for the ATP 
certificate required by the Act. The FAA has long recognized that 
flight simulators and flight training devices provide a safe flight 
training environment that can reduce the number of training accidents 
by allowing training for emergency situations, such as fire, total loss 
of thrust, and systems failures, that cannot be safely conducted in 
flight. 61 FR 34508 (July 2, 1996). Therefore, the FAA has determined 
that many of the difficult operational conditions can be most safely 
demonstrated to students through simulation. Simulation will be 
discussed in greater detail later in this section.
    Although the Act permitted the FAA to consider operational 
experience as a means of ensuring that a pilot has received adequate 
flight hours in conditions such as adverse weather, high altitude 
operations, and an air carrier operational environment, the FAA has 
determined that it is not appropriate to encourage pilots to seek such 
conditions in an aircraft. In addition it would be difficult to 
validate experience in those conditions. Moreover, it would be 
difficult for pilots to obtain experience in the complex aircraft that 
would be required to replicate an air carrier operational environment.
    Therefore, the FAA has determined that academic and FSTD training, 
followed by an evaluation through a revised knowledge test that 
includes the content of the course and subsequent completion of a 
practical test will meet the requirements of the Act and provide 
valuable training for the ATP certificate.
2. Training Providers
    Due to the FSTD requirement in the ATP CTP, the FAA proposed that 
the course be conducted only by the following certificate holders who 
are approved to sponsor an FSTD under 14 CFR part 60: A part 141 pilot 
school, a part 142 training center, or a part 119 certificate holder 
authorized to conduct operations under parts 121 or 135.
    AOPA was concerned that the FAA ``did not consider the negative 
impact on independent part 61 flight schools, other training providers 
who conduct ATP certification training or [designated pilot examiners] 
who currently conduct ATP certificate testing.'' NAFI commented the 
proposal completely excludes ``the very broad base of part 61 training 
providers who have traditionally helped maintain training capacity.'' 
NAFI further stated that part

[[Page 42336]]

61 instructors provide a significant amount of training toward 
professional pilot careers and to eliminate these instructors may 
reduce overall training capacity and result in a negative economic 
impact on these training providers. ALPA recommends the proposed 
``authorized training provider'' be clearly defined in the regulations 
to assure the highest standards and quality of training for ATP 
applicants. NATA disagreed with part 135 operators being eligible to 
offer the ATP CTP stating it is impractical for part 135 operators 
because the required FSTDs are too expensive to acquire and the 
training must be outsourced. In addition, NATA stated the proposed 
requirements are a disincentive for part 135 pilots to get an ATP 
certificate because the proposed training requirements are not all 
relevant to operations outside of 14 CFR part 121.
    The FAA acknowledges that, as a practical matter, pilots preparing 
for the ATP practical test have sought flight training from certified 
flight instructors even without explicit regulatory training 
requirements. Although such training may have covered ground training 
on the aeronautical knowledge areas in Sec.  61.155, pilots primarily 
sought flight training in the specific type of aircraft in which they 
planned to take the ATP practical test. Although fewer pilots may 
choose to pursue an ATP certificate with a multiengine class rating as 
a result of the new training requirements, the pilots who seek an ATP 
certificate outside of an air carrier will continue to seek flight 
training from certified flight instructors as preparation for the 
practical test. Additionally, the practical test in many cases will 
still be given by designated pilot examiners who currently evaluate ATP 
applicants.
    The specified training providers for the ATP CTP were chiefly 
determined by two factors: (1) The ability to sponsor an FSTD as set 
forth in 14 CFR part 60; and (2) the structure, systems, and management 
personnel required to develop, implement and maintain the FAA approved 
training program. This structure does not typically exist and is not 
required in part 61 training.
    The FAA disagrees with those commenters who suggested part 135 
certificate holders should not be eligible to provide this course. Part 
135 operators are eligible to sponsor a simulator per the regulations 
and have approved designated examiners who are authorized to conduct 
proficiency checks that result in ATP certification. A part 135 
certificate holder may choose not to provide the course because its 
pilots do not require ATP certificates or because it is cost 
prohibitive to provide to those pilots that do require ATP 
certificates, but that is not a regulatory decision.
    The FAA has determined authorized training providers for the ATP 
CTP will be limited to certificate holders conducting operations under 
parts 121 or 135, and pilot schools and training centers certificated 
under parts 141 or 142, respectively. Each of these certificate holders 
have defined management structures, FAA approved training programs, and 
pilot training record retention requirements. Further, each ATP CTP 
submitted for approval will be reviewed by FAA Headquarters to ensure 
standardization. The FAA has modified the regulations for parts 121, 
135, and 141 to permit those certificate holders to provide the 
training. Specifically, the FAA has: (1) Added the ATP CTP to the list 
of pilot school ratings in Sec.  141.11 and to the list of special 
preparation courses in appendix K of part 141; and (2) established new 
Sec. Sec.  121.410 and 135.336 to permit part 121 and part 135 
certificate holders to obtain approval to provide the ATP CTP. The 
applicability provision in part 142 permits those training centers to 
provide training required by 14 CFR part 61.
3. Instructor Requirements
    In the NPRM, the FAA proposed that instructors for the ATP CTP must 
meet the following requirements:
    (1) Hold an ATP certificate with an airplane category multiengine 
class rating;
    (2) have two years' experience in operations that require an ATP 
certificate to serve as PIC; and
    (3) for those instructors that will provide training in an FSTD, 
have an appropriate aircraft type rating which the FSTD represents or 
have received training in the aircraft type from the certificate holder 
on those maneuvers they will teach.

As set forth in the NPRM, the instructors would also meet the 
individual requirements associated with the applicable part under which 
they provide the ATP CTP (unless specifically excepted in the proposed 
regulatory text) to ensure the quality of instruction.
    Northern Michigan College supported the proposed instructor 
requirements and stated an ATP training course taught by qualified 
training providers should provide higher quality course content than 
that provided by a local flight instructor, thereby increasing the 
chance for improved flight safety.'' CAE stated the instructor must 
have the necessary qualifications and experience requirements to teach 
the ATP CTP. KSU stated the academic training requirements should be 
administered by a qualified instructor as part of a collegiate flight 
education program.
    AOPA, UAA, and several individual commenters disagreed with 
stipulating instructor qualification requirements for the ATP CTP. 
Boeing recommended removing the two-year experience requirement from 
the ATP CTP for instructors under 14 CFR parts 121, 135, and 142, and 
devising an equitable solution for instructors under part 141 to gain 
line operational experience in order to instruct. Utah Valley 
University concurred with the requirement for instructors to hold an 
ATP certificate but was unsupportive of the air carrier experience 
requirement because very few highly qualified instructor pilots would 
be interested in low-paying educational positions.
    NAFI raised concerns over the apparent prohibition of subject 
matter experts (SMEs) from teaching in the course, stating ``such a 
limitation could force the hiring of less knowledgeable instructors who 
have met the requirements for instruction based solely upon the 
acquisition of Part 121 experience, and not on individual 
qualifications.''
    In the development of the final rule's instructor requirements, the 
FAA analyzed the existing training requirements for instructors in each 
rule part authorized to teach the ATP CTP. Whereas each rule part's 
instructor requirements are designed to meet the needs of the specific 
part (e.g. airman certification for part 141, simulator instruction for 
part 142, and air carrier operations for parts 121 and 135), none 
sufficiently cover all the competencies necessary to deliver the ATP 
CTP as designed.
    Based on this regulatory review and the public comments, the FAA 
has assembled a specific set of instructor requirements designed to 
ensure the ATP CTP instructor: (1) Understands fundamental principles 
of instruction; (2) has the requisite experience to deliver the 
training topics with sufficient context to air carrier operations; and 
(3) if teaching in an FSTD, receives training on the limitations of 
simulation in order to mitigate the possibility of negative learning. 
Specifically, the FAA created new Sec. Sec.  121.410, 135.336, and 
142.54 and modified Sec.  141.33 to standardize the instructor 
requirements for the ATP CTP.
a. Operational Experience
    The FAA has determined only instructors with air carrier experience 
may teach the course because only

[[Page 42337]]

pilots with experience in part 121, and PIC experience in parts 135 and 
91, subpart K--as defined by Sec.  135.243(a)(1) and Sec.  
91.1053(a)(2)(i)--can effectively link the academic content of the 
course to the practical application of that knowledge in an air carrier 
environment. The concept and structure of the ATP CTP focuses on 
delivering the academic subjects and applying that knowledge in an FSTD 
through scenario-based training emphasizing how each subject area 
specifically relates to large turbine airplanes and air carrier 
operations.
    In order to clarify the position on the operational experience 
requirement, the FAA proposed that instructors have at least two years 
of experience as a pilot in command in operations under Sec.  
91.1053(a)(2)(i) or Sec.  135.243(a)(1), or in any operation conducted 
under 14 CFR part 121. Whereas the experience in part 121 operations is 
directly applicable, the FAA chose these particular operations in 
subpart K of part 91 and part 135 because they are air carrier-like 
operations that require the PIC to hold an ATP certificate. The ability 
to fly at the ATP certificate level and have demonstrated this 
proficiency during evaluation is an important regulatory 
differentiation. Specifically, these pilots will have gained experience 
as a PIC of a turbojet airplane or an aircraft with seating of 10 or 
more in operations very closely aligned to part 121 operations.
    In addition, requiring air carrier operational experience is 
consistent with existing instructor requirements. Part 142 training 
centers are not air carriers, but those part 142 instructors who 
provide air carrier training must meet operational experience 
requirements for part 121 and part 135 instructors. The operational 
experience is necessary to ensure that each subject area specifically 
relates to transport aircraft and air carrier operations. For that 
reason, having an instructor with air carrier experience is critical. 
Further, the FAA believes there are a sufficient number of instructors 
with the required experience available, many of whom are already 
employed at likely ATP CTP providers. For example, air carriers that 
conduct their own training often use their own line pilots for the FSTD 
training. The FAA recognizes ATP CTP instructors with the requisite 
experience may require higher pay in comparison to current part 141 
instructors and even some part 142 instructors. As a result, the FAA 
has accounted for a higher hourly wage in its economic analysis of the 
costs associated with the course.
    The FAA also recognizes due to many factors, including air carriers 
that have terminated operations, employment records to verify air 
carrier experience may not always be available. The FAA has developed 
guidance in AC 61-138, Airline Transport Pilot Certification Training 
Program, which provides a method for a pilot to attest to previous 
experience.
b. Instructor Training
    As part of this final rule, each instructor who provides training 
for the ATP CTP must receive initial training in the following topics:
     The fundamental principles of the learning process;
     Elements of effective teaching, instruction methods, and 
techniques;
     Instructor duties, privileges, responsibilities, and 
limitations;
     Training policies and procedures; and
     Evaluation.
    The FAA recognizes that some of these training requirements may be 
duplicative for holders of a flight instructor certificate that has not 
expired as well as instructors already qualified under certain rule 
parts. For example, the fundamentals of instruction are trained and 
evaluated as part of the practical test standards for receiving a 
flight instructor certificate under part 61 and as part of the training 
for instructors under part 142. The fundamentals of instruction are 
reemphasized for an active flight instructor or through instructor 
refresher courses and annual training center evaluator/instructor 
training. As such, with sufficient documentation, the FAA does not 
believe pilots with current flight instructor certificates or currently 
qualified part 142 training center personnel need to repeat such 
training. This accommodation is reflected in the final regulatory text.
    With regard to FSTD training the FAA believes well-trained 
instructors are the best means of ensuring that pilots are receiving 
effective training through simulation. There are two necessary 
components for ATP CTP instructors: (1) Training on the use and 
limitations of simulation; and (2) training on the tasks and maneuvers 
required in the ATP CTP. With the exception of part 142, no rule part 
specifically requires this training as a prerequisite to instructing in 
a simulator. These requirements are especially critical for the 
delivery of stall training, upset prevention and recovery training, and 
operations in icing conditions where the risk for negative learning is 
high.
    The final rule ensures that instructors receive initial and 
recurrent training on the following topics: \14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ The FAA notes that any instructor providing training in an 
FSTD should receive training on the topics listed. Making such a 
regulatory adjustment, however, would be outside of the scope of 
this rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Proper operation of flight simulator and flight training 
device controls and systems;
     Proper operation of environmental and fault panels;
     Data and motion limitations of simulation;
     Minimum equipment requirements for each curriculum; and
     The tasks and maneuvers that will be demonstrated in the 
FSTD. The specific training requirements have been added to Sec.  
141.33 for those instructors who will provide FSTD training for the ATP 
CTP. In addition, because part 121 and part 135 instructor requirements 
for simulator operations and limitations are specific to air carrier 
training conducted under those parts, the FAA has added this 
requirement to new Sec. Sec.  121.410 and 135.336 to ensure that the 
training across rule parts is consistent with the objectives and 
requirements of the ATP CTP.
c. Type Rating
    The NPRM also proposed the FSTD instructor must either have an 
appropriate aircraft type rating which the FSTD represents or have 
received training in the maneuvers they will teach. As noted above, 
several commenters expressed concern over the potential for negative 
learning during the FSTD portion of the ATP CTP. As a result the FAA 
has determined that instructors for the ATP CTP must have a type rating 
in the airplane that is replicated by the FSTD and receive training on 
the maneuvers they will teach. Requiring a type rating of instructors 
is consistent with current regulations for existing air carriers. For 
the purposes of the ATP CTP, the type rating requirement has been added 
to new Sec. Sec.  121.410, 135.336, and 142.54. The requirement for a 
type rating was not included in part 141 regulatory text because those 
instructors must already hold a type rating on their pilot certificate 
in order to conduct training in a type specific aircraft or FSTD.
d. Subject Matter Experts
    The FAA has clarified its position on SMEs delivering academic 
training in the ATP CTP. As identified by commenters, the ATP CTP 
contains academic subjects for which SMEs might be appropriate. The FAA 
sees benefit in a SME delivering a

[[Page 42338]]

specialized subject such as meteorology, human factors, or flight 
dispatch. Because the subjects focus on applying knowledge to an air 
carrier environment, the FAA will allow SMEs to deliver content in the 
ATP CTP while requiring an instructor with the required air carrier 
operational experience be present to ensure that the material presented 
is applied to air carrier operations. The FAA has determined these 
concepts can only be properly conveyed through an instructor with 
practical operational experience to meet the objectives of the course.
4. Training Topics and Hours
a. Academic Topics and Hours
    The proposed ATP CTP incorporated most of the academic and FSTD 
competencies identified by the FOQ ARC and also addressed in part 
numerous NTSB safety recommendations. The proposed program hours for 
the ATP CTP were based on an assessment of the quantity and complexity 
of the subject matter. In the NPRM, the FAA was prescriptive for 20 of 
the 24 proposed academic hours, leaving some discretion to the training 
providers to determine what subject areas needed additional time. The 
FAA believed 24 hours of academic training was the minimum amount of 
time necessary to cover the material and be effective. The FAA further 
described the academic content in a draft AC that was posted to the 
docket.
    The FAA received more than 80 comments regarding the training 
topics and training hours for the ATP CTP. Commenters including ALPA, 
Boeing, and Rocky Mountain College were generally supportive of the 
topics proposed in the academic portion of the ATP CTP.
    Commenters such as A4A, Delta, NTSB, and IATA offered additional 
academic training topics for the ATP CTP such as human factors, 
fatigue, error trapping, United States Standard for Terminal Instrument 
Procedures (TERPS), air law, mentoring, leadership, professional 
development, decision making, dispatch and flight following. Additional 
commenters, including NAFI, recommended using the topics presented in 
the FOQ ARC report. A4A, FedEx Corporation (FedEx), and Parks College 
recommended additional training hours to teach the material, with total 
hours ranging between 30 and 50 hours. IATA commented that there should 
not be a specified number of hours for the ATP CTP, but rather a 
curriculum should be established and approved by the FAA based on the 
concept of demonstrated competency for course completion. An individual 
commenter stated the FAA had not accounted for pre-brief and post-brief 
time that is generally part of FSTD training.
    The FAA concurs with major commenters that additional topics should 
be added and the training time should increase. Based on the specific 
topic areas proposed by commenters and the new accident analysis the 
FAA completed, the FAA reassessed the entire course and expanded the 
academic portion of the ATP CTP to emphasize certain areas proposed in 
the NPRM. In particular, the FAA has expanded training on leadership, 
professional development, CRM, and safety culture. Section Sec.  61.156 
requires six hours of training on these topics. Enhancing these 
training topics in the ATP CTP supports the objectives of Section 206 
of the Act by raising the baseline knowledge level of new-hire pilots 
on these topics; however these provisions do not fully meet the intent 
of the statute. This will be addressed in the Flight Crewmember 
Mentoring Leadership, and Professional Development rulemaking project.
    Additionally, some subjects, including checklist and MEL/CDL usage 
and weight and balance, were moved from the FTD portion of the course 
to the academic portion. The FAA determined these subjects could be 
taught effectively in the academic portion of the course using 
alternative devices, if appropriate, that do not require approval under 
part 60. The expansion of training topics and focus on particular topic 
areas will remove the 4 hours of discretion to training providers 
allotted in the NPRM and will increase the total minimum academic 
program hours from 24 to 30.
    As noted by one commenter, the FAA did not account for briefing and 
debriefing time for FSTD training sessions; a typical component of 
flight training. The FAA agrees that briefing and debriefing are an 
important part of flight training because it allows for an explanation 
of the learning objectives for the training session and the opportunity 
for the instructor to reinforce the academic topic areas prior to the 
session and following the training event. As such, the FAA has decided 
to emphasize briefing and debriefing time before and after each FSTD 
period in the 61-ATP advisory circular. This additional briefing time 
(3 hours) will provide a review of the training topics before each FSTD 
period and tie them directly to the academic portion of the course. 
Briefing time before and after a flight is not normally a prescriptive 
time accounted for in the regulations. As such, the FAA has not 
incorporated this time into the programmatic hours for the ATP CTP in 
Sec.  61.156; however, the time is accounted for in the economic 
analysis.
    To the extent that commenters recommended that the ATP CTP be 
competency-based rather than have specific hour requirements, such an 
approach is not appropriate given the objectives of the ATP CTP. The 
FAA is very aware of competency-based training and is clearly 
supportive of its concepts in air carrier training by allowing advanced 
qualification programs (AQP), which use air carrier-specific data to 
establish and revise curricula. Training for certification, however, is 
traditionally and necessarily more prescriptive and based on program 
hours. Competency-based programs are most effective when the pilot is 
continually trained and evaluated within the same training program over 
the course of multiple years like at an air carrier. A pilot typically 
spends weeks in an air carrier initial training program receiving 
multiple evaluations prior to the qualification event. Once qualified, 
the pilot's performance is measured by multiple data sources including 
line operations. An air carrier's training programs and even its hiring 
practices can be altered to adjust to inadequacies of its training 
programs whereas part 61 certification is typically a one-time 
evaluation of the pilot's skills during a practical test. As such, 
standardized training requirements are necessary to achieve the level 
of safety desired. Further, since the training program could be 
provided across four different rule parts by different certificated air 
agencies and operators, a structured and approved curriculum combined 
with mandatory program hours will allow for the consistency desired by 
the FAA from all providers.
b. FSTD Topics
    In the NPRM, the FAA proposed as part of the ATP CTP 16 hours of 
training in an FSTD qualified under 14 CFR part 60 on topics including 
low energy states/stalls, upset recovery techniques, adverse weather 
conditions, aircraft performance, navigation, automation, and CRM. The 
draft AC that was placed in the docket further defined those subject 
areas. Because the proposed training was focused on introducing pilots 
to general concepts affecting all transport category aircraft, the NPRM 
did not propose that the FSTD training be conducted in a particular 
aircraft type (non-type specific) as is required for air carrier 
training. The FAA stated in the AC, however, that the training should 
take place in an FSTD that

[[Page 42339]]

represents an aircraft with a maximum take-off weight of at least 
40,000 pounds.
    The FAA received nearly 70 comments regarding the appropriateness 
of requiring FSTD training that is not specific to any aircraft type. 
Many of the commenters, including AAL, agreed the training course 
should and can include concepts that are generally universal to 
transport category aircraft. CAPA noted aircraft performance and high 
altitude flight environments are universal across the transport 
category spectrum.
    IATA stated the ATP CTP should include training in a non-type 
specific FSTD because ``the intention of the course is the development 
of core competencies independent of airplane type and applicable to all 
types of multi-crew transport category airplane operations.'' KSU 
stated training on non-type specific FSTDs would be beneficial and 
would add significant value to the ATP CTP. The University of Dubuque 
and SCSU stated training in non-type specific FSTDs reinforces and 
demonstrates concepts covered academically. A4A agreed with this 
proposal and stated principles of transport category jet operations do 
not need to be type specific. Boeing noted the concepts proposed to be 
trained in FSTDs are among those that have been consistently identified 
as lacking in recent accidents.
    Several commenters, including Ameriflight, FSI, and IFL Group, 
disagreed with permitting portions of the ATP certification training 
course in a non-type specific FSTD. The UAA disagreed with any FSTD 
requirement as part of the ATP CTP and noted the phrase ``generally 
universal to transport category aircraft'' causes problems because it 
is onerous to pilots seeking an ATP certificate for non-transport 
category aircraft.
    NATA opposed the requirement for general instruction in an FSTD 
because it shifts the cost to pilots with no benefit because the 
training would be superseded by air carrier initial training.
    The FAA received several comments concerning the possibility for 
negative training when conducting non-type specific training. NATA 
acknowledged value in additional training for prospective ATP 
certificate candidates but stated that the ATP CTP will create negative 
learning situations by forcing pilots into non-applicable training. 
NATA believes there are many pilots operating turboprop or piston 
engine aircraft that will be required to accomplish the training in 
turbine simulators as part of the ATP CTP. NATA and RACCA believe that 
requiring these pilots to obtain training that does not apply to their 
experience and operational goals will lead to a negative experience 
that does not increase safety.
    The FAA has concluded the ATP CTP FSTD training topics are 
necessary to reinforce the academic topics and to address the 
requirements of the Act. In addition, the FAA agrees with those 
commenters that believe the FSTD training can be non-type specific and 
not result in negative learning and therefore has decided to retain the 
non-type specific training in an FSTD.
    First, the FAA reiterates that this framework of academic training 
and flight training is consistent with that of other pilot 
certificates. Pilots routinely receive basic certification flight 
training in one type of aircraft and then move on to fly many other 
types of aircraft without a negative transfer of learning. The training 
received in the ATP CTP will also be the last basic certification 
training a pilot receives. It will address topics not covered at the 
commercial pilot certificate level and establish a knowledge base that 
additional aircraft type-specific and air carrier-specific training can 
build upon when a pilot is trained to fly for an air carrier.
    Second, the ATP CTP is designed to teach high-level concepts that 
are applicable to operating all large transport aircraft. It will 
increase knowledge through academic introduction to concepts that are 
generally true across all large aircraft types and then consolidate 
those same concepts through demonstration and experience in FSTDs. None 
of the training tasks will require applicants to perform maneuvers to 
proficiency, but rather experience critical events (stall onset, low 
energy states, upset prevention and recovery) with continuous 
instructor explanation and feedback. By combining this training 
experience with instructor explanation, the academic portion of the 
course will be effectively consolidated while reducing the possibility 
of negative transfer of learning for those pilots who may fly different 
aircraft types than those used in the course.
c. Level of FSTD and Hours
    The FAA proposed 16 hours in an FSTD--8 hours in a Level C or D FFS 
and 8 hours in a Level 4 or higher FTD. The FAA received more than 130 
comments regarding the level of the appropriate device but very little 
comment concerning the appropriate number of hours.
    Many commenters, including the Regional Airline Association (RAA), 
UND, and FIT, stated that a level 4 or 5 FTD would be an appropriate 
level of FSTD for the entire course as long as it has visual 
capabilities and a stick shaker/pusher. Cape Air proposed that a level 
5 or 6 FTD with realistic visuals would be sufficient for the course. 
OSU indicated a level 5 or higher device with visuals would be just as 
effective as a Level C FFS and would result in reduced costs. The 
commenters added that FTDs are an acceptable and safe alternative to 
FFSs. AOPA was particularly concerned that the FAA had not considered 
whether there was an adequate number of available FSTDs in the United 
States to accommodate the number of ATP applicants who will require 
training and raised concerns that compliance may be difficult.
    ERAU cited various studies in their response that raised concerns 
regarding the use of motion-based training devices, including the value 
of using motion-based training devices in upset maneuvers, and disputed 
the need for simulator training in extended envelopes. One study 
asserts there are compromises made between cost and fidelity with the 
goal of getting the highest degree of transfer of training from the 
simulation device to the real world (Roscoe, 1980). An additional study 
that was cited by ERAU expanded upon that finding, indicating that FAA-
qualified FFSs are unable to accurately portray how an airplane would 
react outside of the normal flight envelope--often referred to as 
extended envelope operations (Schroeder & Grant, 2010). ERAU noted the 
FAA participates in the International Committee for Aviation Training 
in Extended Envelopes (ICATEE). ERAU added ICATEE (2012) proposes an 
approach to examining the issue by first defining training needs and 
then proposing solutions. The ICATEE solution for training extended 
envelope flight tasks includes using flight simulation within its 
limitations. The eight hours of training with motion-based simulation 
in the ATP CTP will be for tasks in, or near, the extended envelope 
where the correlation to actual flight conditions is problematic. ERAU 
concluded its comment with the statement ``[n]o motion is preferable to 
incorrect motion.''
    NTSB commented that, because simulators may not be able to 
accurately portray stalls and upset recovery, the FAA should allow 
flexibility in determining what level of simulation or automation is 
appropriate for specific training.
    A number of colleges and universities, including Utah Valley 
University (UVU) and Rocky Mountain College stated the FFS requirement 
in the ATP CTP creates a significant obstacle for colleges and 
universities with aviation degree

[[Page 42340]]

programs due to the high costs of obtaining and maintaining those 
devices. Aims Community College, which operates a Level C FFS, was 
supportive of the proposed minimum FFS level. Commenters, including 
KSU, SCSU, USAPA, and WMU, stated the approved curriculum should have 
specified goals and competencies, not required hours.
    The FAA concurs with many of the commenters' assertions regarding 
the ability to utilize FTDs in an effective training program. While an 
FTD does not provide the sensory input of motion, the fidelity of the 
aircraft data and replication of the aircraft controls can be very 
high. These high fidelity devices without motion can offer effective 
training benefits for tasks that do not require motion inputs to meet 
the learning objective (e.g., use of automation and navigational 
instruments and CRM).
    Following a review of the comments and a training task analysis 
consisting of a re-evaluation of the FSTD topics and proposed device 
level, the FAA has reaffirmed that it is not possible to train all of 
the topics in an FTD. Therefore, the FAA has retained the requirement 
for training certain topics in an FFS. A flight training program that 
combines effective use of Level 4 and higher FTDs and the benefits of 
Level C or higher FFSs best ensures that the learning objectives will 
be effectively met. Notwithstanding the decision to retain training in 
FSTD, the FAA has modified the training hours in the final rule. Based 
on the task analysis, rather than the 16 hours of FSTD training 
proposed in the NRPM, the final rule requires 10 hours of training in 
FSTDs: Six hours in a Level C or higher FFS and four hours in Level 4 
or higher FTD.
    As previously stated, the FAA has moved some topics that were 
originally proposed for the FSTD portion of the course to the academic 
portion. The FAA has matched the remaining flight training objectives 
from the ATP CTP with the appropriate level of device and determined 
the ``FTD topics'' (e.g. flight management systems) could be trained in 
four hours rather than the eight hours proposed in the NPRM. As a 
result, the regulatory text of Sec.  61.156 permits up to four hours of 
the ten hours of FSTD training to be completed in an FTD--which may be 
conducted in a Level 4 or higher FTD or Level A or higher FFS (with or 
without motion activated).
    In completing the task analysis of the ATP CTP, the FAA also 
determined that the training that must be completed in a Level C or 
higher FFS could be accomplished in six hours rather than the eight 
hours proposed in the NPRM. Many of the maneuvers such as taxi, 
takeoff, and landing can be conducted only in a Level C or higher FFSs. 
Neither FTDs nor Level A or B FFSs are evaluated to perform such 
maneuvers. Additionally, low energy states, stall events, upset 
prevention and recovery techniques, and adverse weather conditions, 
including icing, thunderstorms, and crosswinds, require devices with 
motion cueing to achieve the learning objective. Only Level C or higher 
FFSs can replicate both the specific aerodynamic characteristics of the 
aircraft and the sensory perceptions that motion provides, which are 
necessary to allow the applicant the opportunity to fully grasp the 
critical concepts of the course. Level C or higher FFSs offer superior 
training benefits for maneuver-based training that cannot be replicated 
adequately by an FTD. This determination is based on the conclusion 
that, while both visual and vestibular systems are directly impacted by 
simulation, the element of these systems that is critical to 
satisfactory training is motion on-set (or acceleration) cueing. In 
addition, for a pilot's first exposure to critical concepts, such as 
high altitude handling, low energy states, and aircraft handling in 
adverse weather conditions, Level C or higher devices are necessary in 
order for the pilot to achieve the learning envisioned by the Act.
    Various studies have shown an increase in pilot performance when 
pilots use simulators with motion. See Showalter, T.W.; Parris, B.L., 
``The Effects Of Motion And GSeat Cues On Pilot Simulator Performance 
Of Three Piloting Tasks,'' Ames Research Center, Jan 1, 1980 
(indicating 40% improvement on yaw performance and roll performance, 
engine out on takeoff with use of motion simulators); Parris, B.L.; 
Cook, A.M., ``Effects of visual and motion simulation cueing systems on 
pilot performance during takeoffs with engine failures,'' Ames Research 
Center, Dec 1, 1978; Hosman, R.J.A.W., & van der Vaart, J.C. ``Effects 
of vestibular and visual motion perception on task performance,'' 
(1981); Heintzman, Richard J. ``Determination of Force Cueing 
Requirements for Tactical Combat Flight Training Devices,'' Training 
Systems Product Group Aeronautical Systems Center Air Force Materiel 
Command Wright Patterson AFB, February 1997; Gebman, J.R.; Stanley, 
W.L.; Barbour, A.A.; Berg, R.T.; Birkler, J.L., ``Assessing the 
Benefits and Costs of Motion for C-17 Flight Simulators,'' Department 
of The Air Force, Washington, DC, June 1986. Accordingly, the FAA has 
determined that maneuver-based tasks must be conducted in a Level C or 
higher FFSs because the FFSs provide the level of motion cueing 
necessary to ensure proper response in real flight operations. These 
simulators most closely represent an aircraft with respect to 
aerodynamic handling characteristics and possess the motion required to 
achieve the learning objective of many tasks.
    The FAA agrees with ERAU's assertion regarding the limitations of 
FFS in extended envelope maneuvering and modeling; however, none of the 
requirements in the ATP CTP involve training in these extended 
envelopes. The FAA believes the commenter's use of the term extended 
envelope is referring to theoretical or analytical data used in 
simulation which may exceed typical manufacturer-captured flight test 
data. As set forth in AC 61-138, low energy states (slow flight), 
approach to stalls, and even the upset prevention and recovery training 
will all be conducted within the manufacturer's supplied and FAA's 
National Simulator Program validated aerodynamic envelope.
    As noted by ERAU, the FAA participates in ICATEE and other research 
projects in order to develop training tasks within current limitations 
and research adjusting future simulator modeling where appropriate. The 
commenter also expresses concerns over the lack of available 
displacement of hexapod motion platforms that could induce negative 
transfer training if the training task exceeds the motion capabilities 
of the device. We concur with this thought but re-emphasize all the 
training tasks proposed will occur within the validated aerodynamic and 
simulator motion envelopes. The upset training maneuvers used in the 
ATP CTP are supported through the research and development of the 
Airplane Upset Recovery Training Aid (AURTA) and recently validated by 
the 2012 Loss of Control Avoidance and Recovery Training (LOCART) ARC. 
The LOCART ARC was sponsored by the FAA and additionally supported by 
International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), the European Aviation 
Safety Agency, and Transport Canada to develop recommendations for 
upset prevention and recovery maneuvers in order to minimize the loss 
of control inflight accidents worldwide. The AURTA was developed by 
Airbus, Boeing, and the Flight Safety Foundation; it contains effective 
upset recovery training tools designed to work within the simulator's 
designed motion platform. This training is intended to increase a 
pilot's ability to recognize and avoid situations that

[[Page 42341]]

can lead to airplane upsets and improve the pilot's ability to recover 
control of an airplane that has exceeded the normal flight regime. To 
further mitigate the possibility of negative transfer of training, the 
FAA has published AC 120-109, Stall and Stick Pusher Training, 
comprehensive guidance for the training and checking of stall events. 
The FAA will publish additional guidance material in AC 61-138 for the 
academic training portion of the course for the aerodynamics, and upset 
prevention and recovery topics based on the recommendations of the 
LOCART ARC. The FAA emphasizes instructor training in all of its 
guidance material relating to stall and upset, for both the operation 
of the training device and training in the device's limitations, in 
order to avoid a student's potential for negative learning.
    In the draft AC for the ATP CTP that was placed in the docket when 
the NPRM published, the FAA stated that in order to replicate the high 
altitude and low energy handling characteristics desired, the FFS 
should represent a swept-wing transport category airplane with a 
maximum gross takeoff weight of 50,000 pounds or greater. The FAA did 
not propose this standard in the regulatory text. Despite receiving 
significant comment on the training topics listed in the AC as well as 
what level of device would be appropriate, the FAA received only one 
comment--which was supportive--regarding the proposed takeoff weight or 
wing design of the type of airplane the FFS should represent. As part 
of the evaluation of the FFS training topics and learning objectives, 
the FAA reviewed all of the approved FFSs under 14 CFR part 60 
including the associated weights of the aircraft they represent. Based 
on that review, the FAA has determined an FFS representing an aircraft 
with a maximum takeoff weight of at least 40,000 pounds is necessary to 
meet the objectives of the ATP CTP.
    The weight of the aircraft the simulator represents is an important 
factor in ensuring handling characteristics of a typical transport 
aircraft. The 40,000 pound minimum requirement will ensure the device 
can replicate the lower performance margins and handling qualities 
inherent in transport category aircraft when being operated near their 
maximum operating weight at altitudes near their service ceiling. 
Critical concepts such as high speed slowdowns and approach to stall 
recoveries, which can take thousands of feet to recover at high 
altitudes, cannot be achieved in lighter aircraft types with higher 
thrust-to-weight ratios. The FAA notes that 40,000 pounds generally 
captures most regional aircraft including larger turboprops like the 
Bombardier DHC-8-400. To ensure that the objectives of the ATP CTP are 
met, the FAA has incorporated the weight requirement from the AC into 
Sec.  61.156. Due to the potential for differing interpretations 
associated with the terms ``swept-wing'' or ``straight wing,'' the FAA 
has decided to remove that language from the FSTD requirements. The 
weight requirements described above and listed in the final regulatory 
language will produce the desired handling qualities sought in order to 
achieve the objectives of the course.
    In response to commenters' concerns over the lack of sufficient 
number of training devices to deliver the ATP CTP, currently there are 
407 FAA-evaluated Level C or higher FFS devices that replicate aircraft 
with a maximum takeoff weight at or exceeding 40,000 pounds. These 
devices represent 98% of all Level C and D FFSs that have been approved 
by the FAA. The FAA has evaluated the average number of ATP certificate 
applicants per year over the last 10 years (5,500), compared to the 
number of devices (81 FTDs and 407 FFSs) defined by the rule and 
recommended for use in the ATP CTP. Being conservative, the FAA assumed 
that all 10 hours of FSTD training would occur in Level C or higher 
FFSs. Assuming each FFS is capable of five 4-hour simulator periods per 
day (allowing for one 4-hour maintenance period per day), the U.S. 
inventory of these FFSs offers over 700,000 simulator periods. The 
5,500 ATP certificate applicants will require 16,500 FFS periods from 
the U.S. inventory--less than 2% of available simulator time. Use of 
FTDs in the course will only improve availability. The AC suggests the 
FTD should replicate multicrew aircraft and be equipped with a flight 
management system (FMS) and autoflight. Currently, 68% of FAA-evaluated 
Level 4 or higher FTDs (a total of 81 FTDs) replicate the desired 
aircraft as defined by AC 61-138. Therefore, the FAA has determined 
even with moderate usage for non ATP CTP training, there is ample 
inventory of available FSTD time to accommodate the requirements of the 
course.
    Finally, the FAA has decided to allow for consideration of a 
deviation from the weight requirement set forth in Sec.  61.156. The 
FAA established a baseline weight because it believes that having all 
FFSs representing aircraft weighing 40,000 pounds or more allows for 
adequate demonstration of the learning objectives described in AC 61-
138. The FAA recognizes, however, that there may be FFSs that represent 
an aircraft weighing less than 40,000 pounds that may be capable of 
replicating the lower performance margins and handling qualities 
desired at higher altitudes to meet the learning objectives of the 
course. If a training provider seeks to use a device that does not meet 
the weight criteria set forth in Sec.  61.156, it must apply for a 
deviation. In considering a deviation request, the Air Transportation 
Division, the National Simulator Program, and the certificate holder's 
assigned principal inspector or TCPM will work together to determine if 
the training platform ensures quality, effective training for ATP 
applicants and provides an equivalent level of safety.
d. FSTD Cost
    As reflected in the final regulatory evaluation, the cost to 
provide the training is estimated to be equivalent across all possible 
training providers. Although part 121, 135, 141 and 142 certificate 
holders may sponsor a simulator under part 60, there is no requirement 
to own a simulator. Many part 121 and part 135 certificate holders 
currently utilize simulation for training without the ownership and 
maintenance of the devices. It is common practice for many air carriers 
to enter into agreements with other carriers and part 142 training 
centers to lease time in FSTDs. Additionally, there is no requirement 
to deliver the ATP CTP training program, and each certificate holder 
must individually determine if providing the course best meets its 
needs and ability. Although the FAA considered cost when aligning the 
appropriate device to the training task, meeting the learning objective 
was the paramount consideration.
5. FAA Knowledge Test for an ATP Certificate
    In the NPRM, the FAA proposed to revise the aeronautical knowledge 
areas in Sec.  61.155 to incorporate the new knowledge areas in the ATP 
CTP. We noted that such a revision would result in changes to the ATP 
knowledge test. Commenters such as IATA and the IFL Group believed the 
current ATP knowledge test is inadequate. Commenters assert the current 
preparatory products available to applicants of the knowledge test only 
ensure rapid rote memorization of the material and not knowledge 
retention. The FAA concurs and has determined academic knowledge gained 
and evaluated in a classroom setting, reinforced with demonstration and 
experience in an FSTD, and then validated by a revised written 
knowledge test gives the applicant the

[[Page 42342]]

best chance of knowledge retention. This knowledge will allow the 
student to perform more effectively upon entering an air carrier 
environment--the ultimate goal of the Act.
    The FAA also proposed to extend the validity period for the 
knowledge test for an ATP certificate to five years in consideration of 
the applicant's time and financial commitment to the ATP CTP. The FAA 
considered the extension appropriate due to the proposed elimination of 
the ability for air carrier pilots to use expired knowledge tests. The 
FAA received no comments on this proposal. In the final rule, FAA has 
retained the five-year validity period for the ATP knowledge test only 
for those pilots who pass the knowledge test after having completed the 
ATP CTP--meaning any test passed after July 31, 2014. The FAA has also 
retained the provision that allows pilots employed by certificate 
holders in parts 121, 125, or 135 to use expired knowledge tests. As 
set forth in Sec.  61.39, pilots employed in parts 125 and 135 may use 
an expired knowledge test if they have completed the ATP CTP and the 
operator's approved pilot-in-command training or checking program. New 
hire pilots in part 121 operations may use an expired knowledge test if 
they have completed the ATP CTP and the operator's initial training 
program.\15\ These pilots employed by air carriers are subject to 
additional training and evaluation requirements that will ensure that 
they have a continued understanding of the general concepts of the ATP 
CTP. If an applicant outside of an air carrier environment fails to 
take the practical test within five years of taking the knowledge test, 
he or she must retake the knowledge test to validate retention of the 
subject areas of the ATP CTP. The FAA has modified Sec.  61.35 to make 
clear that a person may not take the knowledge test for the ATP 
certificate with an airplane category multiengine class rating until 
the person is 18 years of age.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ As set forth in Sec.  61.39(b), the knowledge test results 
for pilots who pass the knowledge test before August 2014--meaning 
they have not completed the ATP CTP--will expire 24 months after the 
date the test was passed. These pilots may not use an expired 
knowledge test to take the practical test even if they are employed 
by an air carrier.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, as set forth in existing Sec.  61.49, those applicants who 
fail the knowledge test for the ATP certificate after completing the 
ATP CTP are required to receive the necessary remedial training from an 
approved ATP CTP training provider and receive an endorsement before 
retaking the knowledge test.
6. Credit Toward Air Carrier Training Programs
    In the NPRM, the FAA proposed that the ATP CTP would be a basic 
certification requirement, not an air carrier training program 
requirement. This position was consistent with the provision in the Act 
that directed the FAA to modify the ATP certificate to require the 
specific training previously discussed in this final rule. The FAA 
specifically asked commenters whether changes or reductions could be 
made to a part 121 air carrier training program based on the proposed 
content of the ATP CTP. There were 27 respondents who indicated that 
air carriers could either incorporate the ATP CTP into their initial 
program or reduce initial training hours based on the air carrier 
providing the ATP CTP. Whereas most of the respondents were favorable 
to air carriers offering the course, commenters were split on the issue 
of reducing an air carrier's initial training program as a result of 
the ATP CTP. FlightSafety and Aerosim supported a reduction of initial 
training if additional subjects were covered by the ATP CTP. RAA 
indicated that reductions to air carrier flight training programs based 
on the proposed content of required ATP CTP would be difficult because 
the content of the ATP CTP was more generic than air carrier training. 
A4A stated ``a review of initial training should be accomplished'' 
without further explanation for why such a review should occur. 
Ameriflight claimed there is no legal basis for air carriers to provide 
part 61 training.
    Although part 121 and part 135 operators may elect to offer this 
training for their pilots, it would remain separate from part 121 and 
part 135 training requirements. Because the proposed ATP CTP is part of 
the basic certification requirements for an ATP certificate, air 
carriers who elect to offer this training would be required to provide 
the course to their pilots prior to beginning initial training. The FAA 
proposed that principal operations inspectors may approve a reduction 
of hours in an air carrier's initial training program based on material 
taught in the ATP CTP. However, because the ATP CTP requirements are 
basic certification requirements, these hours could not be reduced 
based on the contents of an air carrier's initial training program.
    The FAA agrees with many commenters that the initial flight 
training should not be reduced because type-specific and operator-
specific training is critical in the development of air carrier pilots. 
The FAA conducted a review of the ground training required for initial 
training in part 121, subpart N. The general subjects that are listed 
in Sec.  121.419(a)(1) contain many of the more basic knowledge 
requirements now addressed by the ATP CTP.
    The FAA has determined that some reductions in initial training for 
those more generic items listed in Sec.  121.419(a)(1) can occur. 
However, in place of requiring POI approval for these reductions, as 
was proposed in the NPRM, the FAA has decided to amend the general 
subject areas of initial training for those air carrier new hire pilots 
who have completed the ATP CTP prior to initial training. As these 
general subjects will now be taught in the ATP CTP, it will raise the 
baseline knowledge for all new hire pilots entering part 121 
operations. This change will allow for more air carrier specific 
training to occur in initial training while allowing for reductions in 
the required program hours. The FAA notes that, until August 1, 2016--
the date that all knowledge test results completed without completion 
of the ATP CTP will have expired--air carrier training classes could be 
comprised of some pilots who have completed the ATP CTP and some pilots 
who have not completed the course.
    With regard to Ameriflight's comment regarding the impropriety of 
air carriers providing training that results in part 61 certification, 
the FAA is unclear of the basis of Amerifight's confusion. Regulations 
have recognized part 61 certification events for ATP certification and 
type ratings through air carrier training programs for many years.
7. Additional Course Requirements
    The FAA has added provisions to new Sec. Sec.  121.410, 135.336, 
and 142.54 to ensure that certificate holders maintain certain 
standards for the ATP CTP. First, there is a provision in the final 
rule that prevents certificate holders from issuing graduation 
certificates unless a student has satisfactorily completed all of the 
training requirements for the ATP CTP. Second, the FAA is requiring 
certificate holders to establish a mechanism that insures continued 
evaluation of the ATP CTP to guarantee that training techniques, 
procedures, and standards are acceptable to the Administrator. These 
requirements are in addition to the administrative requirements that 
are already contained in the various rule parts. Because part 141 pilot 
schools currently have similar requirements for training courses and 
are required to renew their certificates every two years, no provisions 
have been added to that part.

[[Page 42343]]

E. ATP Certificate With Restricted Privileges (Sec.  61.160)

1. Public Law and NPRM
    Section 217 of the Act mandates that an applicant for an ATP 
certificate have ``at least 1,500 flight hours.'' The section gave the 
FAA discretion to permit applicants to obtain an ATP certificate with 
fewer than the minimum 1,500 hours if they have completed ``specific 
academic training courses,'' \16\ as determined by the Administrator. 
The Act permitted a reduction only upon a determination by the 
Administrator that the courses would ``enhance safety more than 
requiring the pilot to fully comply with the flight hours 
requirement.''\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ The Act specified that these training courses must be 
beyond the additional training required by the Act itself. In other 
words, the new training mandated by the Act could not be a basis for 
a reduction in flight hours below 1,500 hours.
    \17\ Current regulations do not define the term ``flight 
hours;'' therefore, the FAA assumes that the 1,500 flight hours 
referenced in the Act represents the 1,500 hours total time as a 
pilot currently required by Sec.  61.159.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on the discretion afforded to the Administrator in section 
217, the FAA proposed a new section, Sec.  61.160,which set forth two 
alternative flight hour requirements for an ATP certificate with 
airplane category multiengine class rating based on academic 
experience. Specifically, the FAA proposed to permit military pilots 
who have graduated from an Armed Forces undergraduate pilot training 
school to obtain an ATP certificate with 750 total flight hours and 
graduates of four-year aviation degree programs with integrated flight 
training to obtain an ATP certificate with 1,000 total flight hours.
    The FAA proposed to limit the privileges of any pilot who obtains 
an ATP certificate under the aeronautical experience requirements of 
new Sec.  61.160. As set forth in the NRPM, a pilot holding an ATP 
certificate with fewer than 1,500 hours (an R-ATP certificate) would 
not be permitted to act as PIC in part 121 operations or as PIC in 
operations conducted under Sec.  91.1053 and Sec.  135.243--the only 
operations under parts 91 and 135 that require the PIC to hold an ATP 
certificate. A pilot holding an R-ATP certificate would also not be 
permitted to serve as SIC of an aircraft in flag or supplemental 
operations that require three or more pilots because, even prior to the 
statutory requirement, SICs in those operations were required to hold 
an ATP certificate.
    In addition, the FAA proposed to modify the eligibility 
requirements of Sec.  61.153 to establish a minimum age of 21 years for 
an R-ATP certificate. The FAA also proposed amending Sec.  61.167 to 
preclude a pilot who holds an R-ATP certificate from providing 
instruction under that section.
2. General Support for and Opposition to an ATP Certificate With 
Reduced Hours
    Sixteen commenters, including APA, CAPA, USAPA, and Kestrel 
Aviation, LLC, (Kestrel) believe reducing the flight hour requirement 
to be eligible for an ATP certificate should not be allowed. The 
Families of Continental Flight 3407 stated that they would like to see 
``every pilot required to have the minimum 1,500 actual flight hours 
before being eligible for an ATP certificate.'' Four New York 
Congressmen and RACCA opposed a reduction in flight time for everyone 
except military pilots. Several individual commenters added that 
completing flight training through a part 141 pilot school or part 142 
training center cannot replace flight experience.
    CAPA commented that ATP certification is a well-proven system and 
the 1,500-hour minimum time requirement provides an undeniable basic 
level of safety and operational proficiency. APA stated: (1) The 1,500 
flight hour requirement helps ensure that a mature, experienced aviator 
will be at the controls; (2) there is no substitute for experience; and 
(3) the most effective way for pilots to gain essential experience is 
to fly aircraft. APA noted that, along with total flight hours, ATP 
certificate requirements include cross country, night, and instrument 
flight hours that develop pilot skills that cannot be taught in a 
classroom or properly developed in a simulator. CAPA stated that real-
world experience is vital.
    NAFI submitted results of a survey it conducted with 427 of its 
members regarding the proposals and questions presented in the NPRM. A 
majority of the responders indicated that they did not support an ATP 
certificate with restricted privileges for pilots with fewer than 1,500 
flight hours based on academic training or experience. However, the 
results of the survey also showed that a significant number of NAFI 
members (327 respondents) believed that segments of the pilot community 
other than military pilots and graduates of four-year aviation degree 
programs should be eligible for an R-ATP certificate.
    AmeriFlight commented that the proposed rule will isolate many 
factions of the industry and funnel students to the cost-prohibitive 
four-year college flight training programs. AmeriFlight questioned 
whether the FAA believed that the knowledge gained while attending a 
four-year postsecondary institution is an adequate replacement for 500 
hours of flight time and 175 hours of flight time in cross-country 
operations. Delta stated that a reduction in hours, training, or 
experience for pilots exercising the PIC privileges of an ATP 
certificate is not appropriate based on the statute.
    The majority of commenters, including representatives of air 
carriers, educational institutions, and aviation organizations, were 
generally supportive of a restricted privileges ATP certificate but 
recommended alternatives to the proposal and suggested that it be made 
available to a greater number of pilots.
    Fifteen commenters offered opinions and comments on what they 
referred to as arbitrary hour requirements, including CAA and IATA. A4A 
stated that flight time alone does not ensure pilot proficiency or 
professionalism and added that formal education combined with good 
hiring practices, training, and mentoring will produce the most highly 
qualified pilots. American Flyers/Nova Southeastern University argued 
that the FAA should not consider flight hours alone as a satisfactory 
indicator or piloting ability, judgment, or experience. It stated that 
the qualification for the R-ATP certificate should be based on a 
combination of academic training and experience. Several commenters, 
including AOPA, RACCA, and the University of Dubuque thought the 
minimum age of 21 for an R-ATP was also arbitrary. One individual 
commenter added that there was no evidence to suggest age 18 undermined 
safety.
    SAFE stated that academic experience should only be used to reduce 
flight hours if there is demonstrable evidence to support it. Four 
commenters, including WMU, and John A. O'Brien Consulting, LLC, agreed 
that a R-ATP certificate should be permitted based on training or 
experience.
    GAMA argued that there should be no flight hour minimum; rather, 
the FAA should focus on ensuring the quality of flight training. It 
added that eligibility for an R-ATP certificate should be determined 
through evaluation of the quality of the applicant's academic and 
practical flight training. Three commenters noted that the quality of 
flight experience was a better indicator of pilot success than only 
quantity of flight hours. Six commenters contended that the FAA needs 
to allocate resources to develop a better formula for rating the formal 
training, education, and experience of candidates for an R-ATP 
certificate.
    The FAA continues to support an ATP certificate with restricted 
privileges

[[Page 42344]]

for pilots who are at least 21 years of age. The majority of commenters 
asserted that allowing a reduction in flight hours based on academic 
coursework is safe, appropriate, and meets the intent of Congress. For 
the commenters who disagree with establishing an ATP certificate with 
fewer than 1,500 hours, the FAA also maintains that flight experience 
in an aircraft is an important component in developing the knowledge 
and skills necessary for a pilot to perform effectively in the air 
carrier environment. However, by granting the FAA discretion to reduce 
the required flight hours based on specific academic training, the Act 
acknowledged that flight time is not necessarily the only component to 
developing a safe and qualified pilot. The FAA concurs and has 
determined structured academic training integrated with flight training 
programs can provide more safety benefit than simply meeting the 1,500 
hour flight time requirement alone.
    Accordingly, the FAA will permit a pilot to obtain an ATP 
certificate with restricted privileges and serve as an SIC in part 121 
operations. The minimum aeronautical experience requirements and age 
requirements of an R-ATP certificate will greatly exceed the commercial 
pilot certificate requirements previously required to serve as SIC in 
part 121 operations. As discussed in greater detail below, the academic 
coursework prerequisites for the R-ATP certificate together with the 
additional flight hour experience and the new training required for ATP 
certification will result in a pilot who is better prepared to enter an 
air carrier environment than meeting the 1,500 hour requirement alone.
    The FAA emphasizes that pilots who meet these alternative hour 
requirements will be required to pass the same ATP knowledge test and 
practical test as pilots who obtain an ATP certificate at 1,500 hours. 
In addition, in the final rule, the FAA is retaining the limitations on 
the certificates of pilots who obtain an ATP certificate with the 
reduced flight hours. These pilots will have the following limitation 
placed on their certificates: ``Restricted in accordance with 14 CFR 
61.167'' and ``Holder does not meet the pilot-in-command aeronautical 
experience requirements of ICAO.'' Pilots who hold ATP certificates 
with these limitations will not be permitted to act as PIC in any 
operation that requires an ATP certificate or serve as SIC in flag or 
supplemental operations that require three or more pilots. The FAA will 
remove the restriction from the ATP certificate once the pilot provides 
satisfactory evidence of having met the age requirements in Sec.  
61.153(a)(1) and the aeronautical experience requirements of Sec.  
61.159.
    The flight time requirements for an ATP certificate under Sec.  
61.159 are not being altered by this rule. Therefore, pilots acting as 
PIC under part 121, Sec.  135.243(a)(1), and Sec.  91.1053(a)(2)(i) are 
still required to have at least 1,500 hours of total time as a pilot. 
Additionally, the age requirement for obtaining an ATP certificate to 
serve as PIC is not being altered in Sec.  61.153. Pilots must continue 
to be at least 23 years old to act as PIC in operations that require an 
ATP certificate or to serve as SIC in flag or supplemental operations 
requiring three or more pilots. The FAA agrees with many of the 
commenters that the existing total time requirements for an ATP 
certificate are appropriate to act as PIC.
    The following sections address specific comments about alternative 
crediting systems, the eligibility of military pilots and graduates of 
four-year aviation degree programs as proposed in the NPRM, and 
specific recommendations from commenters regarding expanding 
eligibility for the R-ATP certificate beyond those proposed in the 
NPRM.
3. FOQ ARC Recommendation
    The FOQ ARC recommended crediting academic training as well as 
aeronautical experience. The ARC developed a complex system that not 
only permitted flight-hour credit for a variety of academic training 
including both two- and four-year aviation degrees but also allowed 
weighted credit for various flight experience.
    Eleven commenters, including NAFI, Boeing Commercial Airplanes 
(Boeing), NATA, RAA, JetBlue, WMU, Purdue, and FSC suggested that the 
FAA implement a system of weighted flight hour reductions based on 
pilot experience. NAFI noted that the Pilot Source Study and the 
recommendations of the FAA's FOQ ARC should be referenced in any 
consideration of credit options. Boeing stated that the FAA should 
credit all manner of training that would better prepare pilots for air 
carrier operations. Boeing noted that this would include all college 
aviation programs, approved courses from part 141 and part 142 
certificate holders, and all related experience and courses.
    The RAA argued that the FAA should adopt the recommendations of the 
FOQ ARC. It noted the FOQ ARC recommended an aeronautical experience 
credit system that incorporated many of the individual recommendations 
identified by other commenters. The RAA contended that the FOQ ARC 
credit system is the model for establishing the proper level of 
eligibility and academic credit levels that should be provided for 
students of worthy programs. Finally, the RAA added that the NPRM fails 
to recognize the myriad of important providers of academic education 
and relevant flight experience that should be considered for flight 
hour reductions. Additional supporters of the FOQ ARC crediting system 
included A4A, CAA, American Eagle Airlines, Inc., ExpressJet, Aerosim, 
FedEx, Cape Air, AAL, John O'Brien Consulting, MTSU, Spartan College, 
and numerous individual commenters.
    The National Training Aircraft Symposium (NTAS), which consisted of 
80 industry members from academia, air carriers, and flight training 
providers, recommended a crediting system very similar to the FOQ ARC 
crediting system with the only difference in the amount of credit 
allowed for flight instruction. Supporters of the NTAS system included 
JetBlue, WMU, Purdue University, and FSC.
    The FAA has reconsidered the FOQ ARC crediting system and 
determined that implementation and oversight of such a complex system, 
or a variation of it, would be too burdensome. Allowing a large number 
of crediting options creates a much more complicated process for FAA 
examiners and designees in determining and validating how much credit a 
pilot can get to be eligible for an R-ATP certificate. In addition, the 
weighted flight experience concept gives a multiplier effect to hours 
that were deemed more applicable to air carrier operations and 
therefore more valuable to a prospective air carrier flightcrew member. 
While the FAA finds value in the weighted flight experience concept, 
the Act does not permit giving flight hour credit to certain types of 
flight experience to reduce the minimum required flight hours for the 
ATP certificate.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ The FAA notes that Section 217 of the Act directed the FAA 
to ensure that applicants for an ATP certificate had received 
``flight training, academic training, or operational experience'' 
that would prepare the pilot to function effectively in an air 
carrier environment. Several paragraphs later in Section 217, 
Congress gave the Administrator discretion to reduce flight hours 
for the ATP certificate based on ``specific academic training 
courses.'' The FAA has determined that the failure to list 
operational experience in this provision of the Act does not permit 
the FAA to reduce flight hours based on operational experience.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Considering phases I and III of the Pilot Source Study, the 
crediting system proposed by the ARC, and the structured academic 
coursework a graduate completes for an aviation

[[Page 42345]]

degree, the FAA has determined that a reduction in flight hours is 
appropriate, and we have retained credit for academic training in the 
final rule. In addition to decisions surrounding the crediting system 
proposed by the ARC, the FAA also engaged in extensive qualitative 
evaluation of aviation degree programs and courses, which will be 
discussed in more detail later in this final rule. This evaluation, 
coupled with the documentation that will be provided by the aviation 
programs, will help to ensure that crediting hours are only granted for 
legitimate aviation program coursework.
4. Military Pilots
    Commenters submitted 95 responses regarding the proposal to allow 
military pilots to obtain an R-ATP certificate with 750 hours of flight 
time. Eighty-eight commenters agreed a restricted privileges ATP 
certificate is appropriate for military pilots. Several other 
individual commenters observed that the military operational 
environment is different than the air carrier environment, so 
reductions based on military experience are not justified. CAPA 
specifically stated there is no empirical evidence that a graduate from 
a military program has better experience or skill than other airman.
    Four New York congressmen and RACCA opposed a reduction in flight 
time for anyone except military pilots. These commenters acknowledged 
the highly specialized disciplined screening and training procedures 
military pilots undergo.
    Twenty-eight commenters, including Delta, CAA, and RAA, indicated a 
750-hour requirement for former military pilots is too high. Most 
commenters stated 500 hours is more appropriate. Spartan College stated 
``the rigor and quality selection process for military pilots linked 
with highly structured training meets or exceeds the requirements of 
the NPRM'' and added that 500 hours is appropriate for military pilots 
who operate in a multi-crew environment.
    An additional 17 commenters including ERAU, KSU, JetBlue, NAFI, 
PABC, GAMA, FSC, CAE, NATA, DSU, and a number of individuals agree 
military pilots should be eligible for a restricted privileges ATP 
certificate but did not suggest how much experience is appropriate. 
Three commenters, including Aerosim, stated 750 hours is too low and 
suggested 1,000 hours instead. Aerosim conducted a survey of over 300 
of its part 141 flight training institutions that indicated that 71% of 
the respondents support a reduction in flight hours for military 
pilots, with 55% of respondents stating that 750 hours was adequate.
    The FAA has determined that permitting military pilots to obtain an 
R-ATP certificate with fewer than 1,500 hours is appropriate due to the 
quality and structure of military training. To be accepted into a pilot 
training program in one of the branches of the military, a person must 
undergo a rigorous screening process including an assessment of 
aviation aptitude. Depending on the branch of the military, an 
applicant for pilot training must hold an associate's degree or a 
bachelor's degree. Once accepted into a pilot training program, a 
person is assigned full-time to aviation training.
    As an example, the United States Air Force Specialized 
Undergraduate Pilot Training (SUPT) includes four to six weeks of 
academic and preflight training on aerospace physiology, altitude 
chamber tests, aircraft systems, aviation weather, mission planning, 
and navigation. After initial academic and preflight training, the Air 
Force student pilot undergoes 22 weeks of primary aircraft training 
before transitioning to a track of advanced aircraft training that 
continues for another 24 to 28 weeks. During flight training, military 
pilots continue their academic training through detailed briefings and 
debriefings of their flight training. An Air Force student pilot is 
committed to a 12-hour duty day while at SUPT, and his or her flight 
proficiency is continuously assessed. Additionally, during the flight 
training phases, an Air Force student pilot participates in flight 
training every day, either in a simulator or an aircraft.
    Similarly, a Navy pilot completes a six-week indoctrination program 
which includes classes in aerodynamics, air navigation, aviation 
physiology, and engineering. The Navy pilot next completes primary 
training in approximately 22 weeks. It includes ground-based academics, 
FSTDs, and flight training. The Navy pilot then continues to advanced 
flight training.
    Based on the comprehensive and demanding nature of military pilot 
training, the FAA is adopting the proposed requirement to allow 
military pilots who have graduated from an Armed Forces flight training 
program to apply for the ATP practical test after obtaining 750 hours 
of flight time. To the extent that some commenters have suggested a 
reduction is not appropriate due to operational differences in military 
operations, the FAA responds that the completion of military pilot 
training and the accumulation of 750 flight hours does not 
automatically result in an R-ATP certificate. Rather, a military pilot 
will still be required to complete the ATP certification training 
program in new Sec.  61.156, pass the ATP knowledge test, and pass the 
ATP practical test or air carrier evaluation that results in the 
issuance of an ATP certificate. In addition, prior to serving in part 
121 operations, military pilots will be required to complete an air 
carrier's initial training program and pass a proficiency evaluation. 
Accordingly, a military pilot will be required to demonstrate knowledge 
of civilian operations.
    The FAA has modified Sec.  61.39 to require military pilots 
applying for the ATP practical test to present the documents listed in 
Sec.  61.160(a) to substantiate eligibility for an R-ATP certificate. 
These documents include an official U.S. Armed Forces record that shows 
that the applicant graduated from a U.S. Armed Forces pilot training 
school and received a rating qualification as a military pilot. 
Graduation from a training program designed to qualify a military pilot 
solely for operation of unmanned aircraft systems will not satisfy the 
requirement in Sec.  61.160(a). Additionally, the FAA notes that 
regulations do not currently permit the time acquired while operating 
an unmanned aircraft system to be logged to meet aeronautical 
experience requirements for FAA certification.
    Although several commenters have suggested the FAA allow a further 
reduction in flight hours for military pilots, the FAA has received no 
compelling data to support such a reduction. In addition, the FAA notes 
that, based on averages provided by the military, an additional 
reduction would have limited impact on those that could take advantage 
of this provision. Specifically, the majority of military pilots who 
complete their service obligations will have acquired the 1,500 hours 
required for an unrestricted ATP certificate. Army pilots who average 
approximately 800 hours when they complete their service obligations 
and pilots who are honorably discharged from the military prior to 
completing their service obligation would be most likely to benefit 
from the R-ATP certificate.
5. Graduates With a Bachelor's Degree in an Aviation Major
    One hundred and seventy-five commenters supported an R-ATP 
certificate for applicants with a bachelor's degree with an aviation 
major. Several academic institutions including the Council for Higher 
Education Accreditation (CHEA), the American Association of Community

[[Page 42346]]

Colleges, UAA, Fox Valley Technical College of Aeronautics, WMU, Aims 
Community College, ERAU, Hesston College, Purdue, KSU, FSC, Westminster 
College, UVU, SIU, OSU, MTSU, DSU, Spartan College, Nova Southeastern 
University, and Florida Institute of Technology were supportive of the 
flight experience reduction based on academics. In addition, several 
individual commenters stated that graduates of an aviation degree 
program should be eligible to obtain an R-ATP certificate because the 
quality of training received at such schools is superior to that 
received under part 61.
    CAPA commented that there is no empirical evidence that a graduate 
of an aviation degree program has better experience or skill than an 
airman who has not. CAPA also stated that, because most pilots cannot 
afford the ``extraordinarily high cost of specialized aviation 
institutions,'' the reduction in flight hours for these graduates is 
unfair because an applicant with financial resources can ``purchase'' 
their qualifications without having to gain flying experience. Moore 
Air, Inc. stated that permitting pilots from aviation bachelor's degree 
programs affiliated with part 141 schools discriminates against pilots 
with fewer economic resources. John A. O'Brien Aviation Consulting, 
LLC, stated the restricted privileges ATP certificate should not be 
limited to college graduates from ``select universities.'' AAL 
commented that the NPRM encourages pilots to attend a four-year 
aviation college or university but fails to recognize that such paths 
are available only to those willing and able to afford such educational 
paths. AAL acknowledges that higher education and quality training 
should be encouraged but quality training is also available in places 
outside accredited four-year aviation colleges.
    In support of a reduction based on academic credit, Parks College 
(Parks) stated that its aviation graduates accomplish approximately 220 
``hours of ground and classroom instruction leading to a [commercial 
pilot certificate] with an instrument rating.'' Parks noted that, in 
addition to this classroom training for pilot certification, its 
students complete an additional 480 hours (32 credit hours) of academic 
coursework on topics related to aviation and air carrier operations. 
UND also provided information demonstrating that graduates of its 
professional flight curriculum must complete 464 hours of instruction 
in required aviation coursework that includes courses on human factors, 
flight physiology, advanced aerodynamics, and aviation weather. These 
students must also complete ground and flight training toward a 
commercial pilot certificate and instrument rating.
    Based on the fact that the academic coursework completed as part of 
an aviation major generally exceeds the time a pilot might spend in 
ground school outside of that environment, the FAA continues to support 
a reduction of flight hours for graduates with an aviation major from a 
four-year institution of higher education who complete ground and 
flight training as part of approved training courses at a part 141 
pilot school that is associated with the institution of higher 
education. Over the course of several years, these graduates complete 
significant aviation coursework well above the hours of ground training 
required for commercial pilot certification. In addition, a student's 
knowledge and flight proficiency are continuously evaluated throughout 
the degree program.
    Notwithstanding the FAA's continued support for a reduction in 
required flight hours for these applicants, the FAA has refined, 
clarified, and expanded some elements of the R-ATP certificate as it 
applies to graduates of degree programs with aviation majors in the 
final rule. These modifications are discussed in the following 
sections.
a. Flight Hour Requirement
    Notwithstanding general support for a reduction in hours for these 
pilots, many commenters recommended reducing the hours below the 1,000 
hours proposed in the NPRM.
    One hundred sixty-five commenters stated that 1,000 hours is too 
high, including OSU, Aviation Professional Development, LLC (APD), DSU, 
and the Pilot Career Initiative. AAL and Westminster College stated 
1,000 hours is much too high to provide an incentive for pilots to 
pursue a formal education.
    Most commenters responded that a total flight time of 500 to 750 
hours is more appropriate for graduates of a four-year aviation degree 
program. Many commenters, including Delta, ERAU, and Rocky Mountain 
College cited the Pilot Source Study as evidence that the FAA should 
allow pilots with fewer than 1,000 hours to be employed by air 
carriers. The American Aviation Institute (AAI) along with several 
other commenters suggested the rule be simplified by establishing the 
750-hour threshold for an R-ATP certificate to civilian candidates who 
have graduated from accredited programs including two- and four-year 
universities, programs designed for university graduates, and other 
structured academies run by training organizations and by airlines. AAI 
also recommended the FAA establish requirements for academies to 
qualify them. Other commenters suggested that the FAA offer an R-ATP 
certificate to graduates of a four-year collegiate flight program with 
fewer total flight hours, generally in the range between 500 and 1,000 
flight hours.
    Ten commenters, including KSU, SJSU, WMU, UVU, Aerosim, ALPA, 
American Flyers, and Nova Southeastern University believe the proposed 
1,000 hours of flight experience is adequate. Approximately 47 percent 
of NAFI's members indicated that 1,000 hours is too low but did not 
specify how many of those responding generally oppose an R-ATP 
certificate.
    The FAA has considered the 2010 and 2012 Pilot Source Studies, the 
FOQ ARC report, and the structured academic coursework in aviation a 
graduate receives \19\ and has determined that, based on the best 
currently available information, it is appropriate to retain the 
minimum 1,000-hour aeronautical experience requirement for graduates of 
four-year degree program with an aviation major who obtain their 
commercial pilot certificate and instrument rating from an associated 
part 141 pilot school. Commenters have not provided compelling evidence 
to support a further reduction in hours for graduates of these 
programs. Many commenters referenced the 2010 Pilot Source Study (which 
indicated that the most successful pilots in initial training, without 
any consideration of the manner in which they received their aviation 
training, were those pilots hired with 500-1,000 hours) to justify why 
they felt the FAA should reduce the hour requirement further.\20\ The 
FAA notes that the third phase of the Pilot Source Study, which was 
submitted to the docket, indicated that pilots with 1,001-1,500 total 
flight hours had more completions in training than any other group, 
including the group with 500-1,000 total flight hours.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ There is further discussion of the FAA's review of academic 
curriculum later in this document. This review provided additional 
support to the agency's decision to retain the credit for graduates 
of aviation degree programs.
    \21\ A summary of the findings of the 2012 Pilot Source Study 
was submitted to the rulemaking docket. The FAA considered the 
results along with additional factors during development of the 
final rule. A recent journal article discussing the results of the 
2012 Pilot Source Study concluded that ``flight hours are not a good 
predictor of performance.'' The journal article can be found in the 
Journal of Aviation Technology and Engineering, Vol.II, Issue 2 
(2013) at: http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/jate/vol2/iss2/2/.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 42347]]

b. Institutional Accreditation and ``Aviation Degree Programs''
    The FAA proposed in the NPRM to permit a reduced flight hour 
requirement for applicants who hold a bachelor's degree with an 
aviation major obtained from a postsecondary educational institution 
that satisfies the definition of ``accredited'' as established by 
Department of Education in 34 CFR 600.2. The Department of Education 
maintains a database of accredited postsecondary institutions and 
programs available at the following Web site: http://ope.ed.gov/accreditation/.
    UAA fully supported the proposed requirement that any degree-
granting institution qualifying its graduates for reduced flight hours 
must be accredited by a nationally recognized accrediting agency as 
defined by the Department of Education in 34 CFR 600.2. UAA contended 
that this type of accreditation insures the validity of the institution 
granting the degree and provides the most inclusive form of 
accreditation possible by which to prepare pilots for the proposed R-
ATP certificate. UAA added some of their member institutions hold 
program-specific accreditation in addition to institutional 
accreditation, but the majority do not have program accreditation at 
this time. UAA looked at current, national collegiate flight training 
and indicated the number of eligible institutions will decrease from 
over 164 to 29 if program specific accreditation becomes a requirement. 
UAA noted that two institutions that currently hold program 
accreditation are phasing out their pilot training programs.
    KSU stated that the relationship between the academic institution 
and the flight training provider signifies a strong commitment to 
quality pilot education and fosters an environment of professional 
pilot training. KSU added that Aviation Accreditation Board 
International (AABI) accreditation and part 141 approval by the FAA 
provide the needed quality assurances for the quality and integrity of 
flight training. Purdue added that the same credit should be given to 
graduates of AABI-accredited flight programs regardless of the part 
under which the school operates. APD agreed with the proposal to 
provide an R-ATP certificate but indicated that those R-ATP 
certificates should be available only for those students attending an 
AABI-accredited flight school.
    The FAA received several comments requesting the FAA further define 
``aviation degree program.'' The NTSB supported an ATP certificate with 
restricted privileges provided standards are established for student 
performance and the type of degree programs are more clearly defined. 
An individual commenter also suggested ``aviation-related degree'' is 
too broad. The commenter suggested the FAA specify the number of hours 
as well as the subject areas that should be taught. Barbary Coast 
Consulting expressed concern that the determination of what degree 
credits would qualify for a reduction in hours would fall to the 
academic institution and recommended that the FAA should make this 
determination based on how these classes will actually enhance aviation 
safety.
    The Families of Continental Flight 3407 stated that, while there is 
value to aeronautical knowledge and training provided by four-year 
accredited institutions that offer aviation degrees, such graduates 
should not ``blindly be accorded flight hour credit without carefully 
evaluating each course to determine if it meets the law's specific 
criteria[.]'' The Families of Continental Flight 3407 specifically 
noted that the law required that academic training courses ``enhance 
safety more than requiring the pilot to fully comply with the flight 
hours requirement.'' P.L. 111-216, sec. 217(d). The Families of 
Continental Flight 3407 further stated that the FAA should develop a 
procedure to carefully evaluate the coursework in each graduate's 
academic program and only give credit to courses that enhance aviation 
safety and not courses that focus on ``tangential areas of aviation.'' 
They indicated that credit should be based on a course-by-course basis 
and not a blanket 500-hour reduction.
    NATA noted that the Act gave the FAA authority to allow for reduced 
hours based on a safety assessment. It argued that the FAA failed to 
demonstrate in the NPRM that it had performed a comprehensive analysis. 
AAI indicated that the FAA should set specific program standards that 
can be met at the undergraduate or graduate levels at accredited 
schools and universities.
    Spartan College commented that the education program must be well 
integrated with the university to make sure that classroom and flight 
lab time match the learning objectives. Spartan College recommended 
that all academic and ground school courses be taught by faculty and 
instructional staff employed by the institution. Spartan College 
indicated, however, that flight training could be taught either by an 
institution's instructional staff or by one or more qualified 
contractors through written contract.
    The FAA is retaining the requirement for institutional 
accreditation in this final rule because accreditation ensures that 
education provided by institutions of higher education meet acceptable 
levels of quality. Accrediting agencies, as defined by the Department 
of Education in 34 CFR 600.2, develop evaluation criteria and conduct 
peer evaluations to assess whether those criteria are met. According to 
CHEA, accredited status is a signal to students and the public that an 
institution meets at least threshold standards for its faculty, 
curriculum, student services, and libraries.
    The FAA acknowledges the value of programmatic accreditation, but 
it is not the sole means of assuring the quality of an aviation degree 
program for the purpose of qualifying students for an R-ATP 
certificate. Currently, AABI is the only organization that provides 
accreditation to aviation degree programs. As noted by UAA, if program-
specific accreditation becomes a requirement for the R-ATP certificate, 
the number of eligible institutions will be reduced to 29.
    The FAA agrees, however, with commenters who believe that the 
requirements of ``aviation degree programs'' must be better defined. 
The FAA has reviewed aviation degree curriculum requirements from over 
100 colleges and universities and found that graduates of four-year 
universities receive bachelor's degrees with as few as 27 credit hours 
and as many as 85 credit hours in aviation and aviation-related 
courses. In addition, required courses and electives within aviation 
degree programs vary significantly. Many aviation degree programs are 
not focused primarily on preparing a student for a career as a 
professional pilot but rather for careers in areas such as air traffic 
control, aerospace engineering, aircraft maintenance, or business 
aviation. If the requirements proposed in the NPRM were not refined, 
graduates of those degree programs could be eligible for an R-ATP 
certificate without having completed relevant coursework designed to 
improve their knowledge and skills as a pilot.
    For this reason, the FAA has decided that broad approval of 
aviation degree programs based on accreditation alone is not 
sufficient. Rather, the most critical element for determining whether a 
graduate should be eligible for an R-ATP certificate is the body of 
coursework completed prior to graduating with a degree in an aviation 
major. Establishing more specific program criteria for eligibility for 
an R-ATP certificate will better ensure that

[[Page 42348]]

academic training courses enhance safety such that a reduction in 
flight hours is consistent with the Act.
    The FAA has modified Sec.  61.160 from that proposed in the NPRM to 
clarify the academic requirements a student must complete to be 
eligible for an R-ATP certificate. In the final rule, the FAA has 
established that a student must:
     Earn a bachelor's degree in an aviation major;
     Complete 60 semester credit hours in aviation and 
aviation-related coursework designed to improve and enhance the 
knowledge and skills of a person seeking a career as a professional 
pilot;
     Complete ground training for a commercial pilot 
certificate and an instrument rating under approved part 141 curricula 
at the institution of higher education;
     Complete flight training for commercial pilot certificate 
and an instrument rating under approved part 141 curricula at the 
institution of higher education or at a part 141 pilot school 
associated with the institution of higher education; and
     Obtain a commercial pilot certificate with airplane rating 
and an instrument rating upon completion of ground and flight training.
    The FAA has established 60 semester credit hours in aviation and 
aviation-related coursework designed to improve and enhance the 
knowledge and skills of a person seeking a career as a professional 
pilot as the minimum requirement. In determining whether a course is 
designed to improve and enhance the knowledge and skills of a person 
seeking a career as a professional pilot, the institution should 
consider the objective and purpose of the course. For instance, an 
introductory course on air traffic control could be designed to provide 
a foundation for both pilots and for students intending to pursue a 
career as an air traffic controller. On the other hand, an upper-level 
or advanced air traffic control course is primarily intended to prepare 
a person to work as an air traffic controller with little additional 
benefit to a person seeking a career as a pilot. Although knowledge of 
tower operations is instructive, an upper-level air traffic control 
course is not generally designed with the goal of improving and 
enhancing the knowledge and skills of a person seeking a career as a 
professional pilot.
    These credit hours may include coursework outside the aviation 
department so long as the course focuses on an aviation-related topic. 
For example, credit hours obtained in a meteorology course outside the 
aviation department could count toward the required 60 credit hours 
because it introduces the student to basic weather theory that will 
affect flight decisions. As further explained in AC 61-139, Institution 
of Higher Education's Application for Authority to Certify its 
Graduates for an Airline Transport Pilot Certificate with Reduced 
Aeronautical Experience, the FAA believes that courses in subject areas 
like aircraft performance and aerodynamics, aircraft systems, aviation 
human factors, air traffic control and airspace, aviation law and 
regulations, aviation weather, and aviation safety represent courses 
that are designed to enhance and improve the knowledge and skills of a 
person seeking a career as a professional pilot. The FAA expects that, 
in addition to the ground and flight training required for FAA 
certification, aviation students will have completed coursework in all 
of these areas as part of their aviation degree.
    Finally, an R-ATP certificate applicant must have a commercial 
pilot certificate with an airplane category and instrument rating 
earned from a part 141 pilot school that is part of the academic 
institution or associated with the academic institution through a 
formal training agreement. Under Sec.  61.160, a graduate must have 
completed all ground training for the commercial pilot certificate and 
instrument rating at the institution of higher education. Accordingly, 
the academic institution must, at a minimum, hold a part 141 pilot 
school certificate for ground training. This requirement will ensure 
that the ground training for certification is integrated into the 
institution's broader academic curriculum. The flight training for the 
commercial pilot certificate and instrument rating may be completed 
either at the institution, if it holds a part 141 pilot school 
certificate for flight training, or at a part 141 pilot school that is 
associated with the undergraduate institution through a formal training 
agreement. The FAA notes it has revised Sec.  141.26 to require a pilot 
school that provides flight training for an institution of higher 
education that holds a letter of authorization under Sec.  61.169 must 
have a formal training agreement with that institution of higher 
education.
    Under the standards established in the final rule, the FAA 
estimates that students who are eligible for an R-ATP certificate will 
complete over 600 instructional hours \22\ in aviation and aviation-
related coursework designed to prepare them for a career as a 
professional pilot. Concurrently with their broader aviation 
coursework, students will complete the required ground and flight 
training and pass the practical tests for a commercial pilot 
certificate and instrument rating. These students are continuously 
evaluated with academic testing and flight evaluations over the course 
of several years. Based on these factors, a graduate of a bachelor's 
degree program who completes the requirements set forth in Sec.  61.160 
is eligible for an R-ATP and may apply for the ATP practical test with 
1,000 hours total time as a pilot.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ The FAA estimated that, as part of a degree program, 
students will complete an average of 12-15 credit hours of ground 
and flight training toward FAA certificates and ratings. Students 
will complete an additional 45-48 credit hours of broader aviation 
and aviation-related coursework during 15-week semesters.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In setting the criterion for 60 semester credit hours in aviation 
and aviation-related coursework, the FAA decided to allow partial 
recognition for applicants with bachelor's degrees with aviation majors 
who fall short of the 60 credit hour requirement. Applicants who have 
completed at least 30 semester credit hours in aviation and aviation-
related coursework designed to improve and enhance the knowledge and 
skills of a person seeking a career as a professional pilot may apply 
for an R-ATP certificate with 1,250 hours total time as a pilot. The 
applicant's coursework must include all of the ground and flight 
training for a commercial pilot certificate and instrument rating.
c. Cross Country Time for the R-ATP Certificate
    To apply for an ATP certificate under Sec.  61.159, a pilot must 
accumulate 1,500 hours total time as a pilot that must include 500 
hours of cross-country flight time. In the NPRM, the FAA proposed to 
require military pilots who apply for an R-ATP certificate with 750 
hours total time as a pilot to have 250 hours of cross-country flight 
time. The NPRM proposed requiring graduates with aviation majors who 
apply for an R-ATP certificate with 1,000 hours total time as a pilot 
to have 375 hours of cross-country flight time. The reduction in the 
required cross-country flight time was proportional to the reduction in 
total flight hours.
    UND's John D. Odegard School of Aerospace Sciences submitted a 
research study that was conducted to assess the impact of the proposed 
rule on the supply of pilots who primarily obtain their flight 
experience from flight instructing. UND's study concentrated on the 
nature of flight time acquired as a flight instructor as it relates to 
the 500 hours of cross-country flight time required to apply for the 
ATP certificate.

[[Page 42349]]

The participants in the study included line flight instructors from 17 
collegiate aviation programs. Based on its research, UND concluded that 
the average flight instructor would have to log 2,100 total flight 
hours before accumulating 500 hours of cross-country flight time. UND 
recommended that the FAA amend the rule to require a minimum of 200 
hours of cross-country flight experience to obtain an R-ATP certificate 
rather than the 375 hours proposed in the NPRM for graduates of four-
year aviation programs.
    The FAA has reviewed the information provided by UND and determined 
that it is appropriate to reduce the cross-country flight time required 
for all applicants for an R-ATP certificate to 200 hours. In reaching 
this decision, the FAA considered the past and current requirements of 
both the commercial pilot and ATP certificates. Although 200 hours is 
below the requirements for an ATP certificate under Sec.  61.159, the 
FAA believes pilots will accumulate a significant and relevant amount 
of cross-country experience as SICs in part 121 operations before being 
eligible to obtain an unrestricted ATP certificate and upgrade to PIC. 
The 200 hours of cross-country experience represents a significant 
increase over the 50 hours of cross-country flight time required for 
the commercial pilot certificate--the prior requirement to serve as SIC 
in part 121 operations. Pilots who hold an R-ATP certificate will be 
required to meet the 500 hours of cross-country flight time required in 
Sec.  61.159 prior to having the limitation removed from their 
certificate. The FAA notes that the 200 hours of cross-country flight 
time is consistent with the ICAO standard for an unrestricted ATP 
certificate.
d. The Role of the Institution of Higher Education in Certifying Its 
Students
    Under new Sec.  61.169, an institution of higher education may 
apply for authority to certify that its graduates have met the academic 
eligibility requirements for an R-ATP certificate. The institution may 
not certify a student based solely on the degree received or the 
aviation major that has been completed. Rather, it will be required to 
evaluate each student's coursework before certifying that a graduate 
has met all of the academic eligibility requirements.
    To obtain authority to certify students for eligibility for the R-
ATP certificate under new Sec.  61.160, an institution of higher 
education must submit an application and supporting documentation, as 
appropriate, to the FAA that includes:
     List of aviation majors offered by the institution;
     Type of degree offered;
     Institutional accreditation information;
     Part 141 pilot school information;
     List of substantial changes to degree programs in past 
five years;
     Course descriptions of aviation and aviation-related 
courses that may be used to satisfy the credit hours required by Sec.  
61.160; and
     Training agreements for flight training provided by a part 
141 pilot school, if applicable.
    The institution must identify on the form those academic courses 
that satisfy the requirements of Sec.  61.160. Specifically, the 
institution must demonstrate that a course is designed to improve and 
enhance the skills and knowledge of a person seeking a career as a 
professional pilot. These courses will include the ground and flight 
training courses required for FAA certification as well as other 
coursework within the aviation department, such as Aviation Law, Human 
Factors, or Advanced Aircraft Systems. Courses outside the aviation 
department may also satisfy the requirements of Sec.  61.160. For 
example, a physics course may qualify as an aviation-related course 
provided the course description clearly indicates aircraft performance 
and aerodynamics are the primary focus of the course. The institution 
must demonstrate that it offers sufficient aviation and aviation-
related courses that a graduate could rely upon to meet at least 30 
semester credit hours.
    The application and FAA review process for institutions seeking a 
letter of authorization to certify students is further explained in AC 
61-139. The AC provides greater detail on the aviation and aviation-
related coursework used to satisfy the semester credit hour 
requirement. In addition, the AC provides information related to the 
part 141 pilot school requirements, including training agreements, and 
the institution's responsibility to notify the FAA of any changes that 
will affect its letter of authorization. Once the FAA has determined 
that an institution of higher education has met all the requirements, 
it will issue a letter of authorization granting the school authority 
to add a certifying statement to a student's transcript or other 
document deemed acceptable by the Administrator. The certifying 
statement must denote whether the graduate is eligible to apply for an 
R-ATP certificate based on the applicable criteria in Sec.  61.160 at 
1,000 hours (graduates who have completed at least 60 credit hours), or 
1,250 hours (graduates who have completed at least 30 credit hours). A 
graduate will then be required to present the certifying document, 
along with all other documentation required in Sec.  61.39, when 
applying for the practical test for an R-ATP certificate.
6. Recommendations for Expanding Eligibility for the R-ATP Certificate
    A significant number of commenters, including air carriers, 
educational institutions, training providers, instructors, and aviation 
organizations suggested that a greater number of pilots should be 
eligible for an ATP certificate with reduced flight hours. 
Specifically, commenters suggested that the FAA make the R-ATP 
certificate available to the following candidates:
     Graduates of two-year aviation degree programs with 
commercial pilot certificates and instrument ratings from an affiliated 
part 141 pilot school;
     Students who come to eligible programs already holding 
commercial pilot certificates and instrument ratings;
     Students from non-eligible programs who transfer into and 
graduate from eligible programs;
     Pilots who are age 21 and have 1,500 hours of flight time;
     Graduates with bachelor's degrees with aviation majors and 
obtain commercial pilot certificates and instrument ratings from a non-
affiliated part 141 pilot school;
     Graduates with bachelor's degrees with aviation majors and 
obtain commercial pilot certificates and instrument ratings from an 
affiliated part 61 flight training program;
     Graduates with associate's degrees with aviation majors 
and obtain commercial pilot certificates and instrument ratings from a 
non-affiliated part 141 pilot school;
     Graduates with associate's degrees with aviation majors 
who obtain commercial pilot certificates and instrument ratings from an 
affiliated part 61 flight training program;
     Pilots who have completed training programs at ``Aviation 
Academies'' (part 141 pilot school or part 142 training center);
     Pilots who have completed ``other'' aviation courses (e.g. 
AJT, Upset Prevention and Recovery Training (UPRT));
     Certified Flight Instructors (CFI); and
     Graduates of colleges and universities who do not have 
aviation degrees
    A discussion of the options suggested by commenters follows.

[[Page 42350]]

a. Graduates With an Associate's Degree in an Aviation Major
    In the NPRM, the FAA did not propose any reduction in total flight 
time for graduates of two-year aviation degree programs. Thirty six 
commenters, including Fox Valley Technical College Aeronautics Advisory 
Committee (FVTC), Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA), Aims 
Community College, NAFI, Jet Transitions, American Association of 
Community Colleges, Hesston College, Spartan College, UAA, CAE, and 
ExpressJet, argued that graduates of pilot schools not associated with 
a four-year aviation degree program should also be eligible for reduced 
flight time to be eligible for an R-ATP certificate. Most of the thirty 
six commenters stated that two-year college flight training programs 
should be eligible for an R-ATP certificate.
    Fox Valley Technical College and the American Association of 
Community Colleges contended that the proposed rule is arbitrary and 
discriminatory and that graduates of two-year colleges and universities 
should be allowed to obtain an R-ATP certificate.
    Aims Community College added that its students receive the same 
focused aviation training discussed in the NPRM and should be eligible 
for the same credit that graduates of four-year degree programs 
receive. According to Aims, these students complete the same flight 
hour and academic instruction requirements as students at four-year 
institutions, even though they do not complete as many courses 
unrelated to aviation. Aims indicated that students who earn an 
Associate of Applied Science degree complete 72 credit hours as part of 
its fixed-wing professional pilot program. They also stated the two-
year college and university system nationwide has been providing well-
trained pilots for the airlines and other aviation employers for 
decades. They suggested that, with the high cost of flight training and 
college in general, now is not the time to take away an efficient, 
effective, reasonably priced, educational opportunity from those who 
cannot afford the cost and time required for a four-year degree 
program.
    CAE contended that quality instruction and flight experience can be 
delivered in two-year programs affiliated with part 141 pilot schools 
or part 142 training centers. Spartan College supported academic credit 
based on a variety of educational tracks including four-year and two-
year collegiate aviation degrees. UAA, ExpressJet, and several other 
commenters argued that the FAA failed to include two-year programs, 
which should be afforded academic credit as provided in the FOQ ARC 
report.
    The UAA added that two-year college and university aviation degree 
programs are a key part of the overall collegiate aviation-related 
pilot supply. To validate the assertion, the UAA conducted a telephone 
survey in April 2012, which reached a total of 29 community college 
aviation degree programs out of 40 identified as flight training 
providers. Based on the data obtained in the survey, the UAA estimates 
more than 2,000 aviation students are currently enrolled in two-year 
degree programs. For the 29 respondents, it was found that: ``(1) 1,474 
total students were enrolled in aviation flight-related degrees at 
these institutions, or, on average, 51 students per institution; (2) 
the student enrollment ranged from a low of 7 students to a high of 292 
students; and (3) of the 29 institutions reporting, 18 conducted flight 
training solely under part 141, 6 operated under part 61, and 5 used a 
combination of parts 61 and 141.''
    UAA recommended changing the proposed Sec.  61.160 to eliminate the 
differentiation between two- and four-year schools and recommended a 
750-hour minimum for the R-ATP certificate. The EAA contended that the 
FAA should form a working group to explore what modifications should be 
made to these two-year school accreditation standards in order for 
their programs and students to qualify for the revised ATP aeronautical 
experience requirements in Sec.  61.160.
    The AAI recommended that the FAA adopt a program-based standard and 
not define acceptability solely by the length of the program. AAI 
commented that a student at a four-year institution pursues coursework 
in non-aviation fields, which is far less relevant than the aviation 
coursework actually taken.
    Based on the FAA's extensive review of two-year and four-year 
aviation degree programs, the FAA has determined that it is appropriate 
to permit graduates who obtain an associate's degree with an aviation 
major to apply for an R-ATP certificate with fewer than 1,500 total 
hours. The two-year colleges, universities, and their graduates who 
responded to the NPRM have provided sufficient information to support a 
reduction in the flight hour requirement for an R-ATP certificate.
    The FAA has found that these graduates receive degrees with a range 
of 24 to 56 credit hours in aviation and aviation-related coursework. 
On average, however, graduates of associate degree programs complete 
fewer credit hours in aviation coursework than graduates of bachelor's 
degree programs. For that reason, the FAA disagrees with giving the 
same credit to two-year programs. Accordingly, the FAA has modified 
Sec.  61.160 to permit graduates of approved two-year degree programs 
with aviation majors to apply for an R-ATP certificate with 1,250 total 
hours of flight time.
    As set forth in Sec.  61.160(c), graduates of two-year programs 
must complete a minimum of 30 semester credit hours in aviation and 
aviation-related coursework designed to improve and enhance the 
knowledge and skills of a person seeking a career as a professional 
pilot. The 30 credit hours may include coursework outside of the 
aviation department so long as the course focuses on an aviation 
related topic. The FAA assumes on average courses are offered at three 
semester credit hours per course. The 30 credit hours therefore will 
include the ground and flight training courses for a commercial pilot 
certificate and instrument rating and other aviation and aviation-
related courses.
    As with bachelor's degree programs, the graduate will need to 
acquire a commercial pilot certificate with an airplane category and 
instrument rating from a part 141 pilot school that is part of the 
undergraduate institution. The institution of higher education must 
hold a part 141 pilot school certificate and provide all ground 
training for the commercial pilot certificate and instrument rating. 
This requirement will ensure that the ground training is integrated 
into the broader academic curriculum. The flight training may be 
completed either at the institution, if it holds a part 141 pilot 
school certificate for flight training, or at a part 141 pilot school 
that is associated with the undergraduate institution through a 
training agreement.
b. Transfer Students
    SIU believes students who move from a two-year aviation degree 
program to an affiliated four-year aviation program and complete their 
bachelor's degree and the required flight training under part 141 
should be eligible for a restricted privileges ATP certificate. KSU 
similarly states students who transfer to a four-year collegiate flight 
training degree program with an affiliated part 141 pilot school should 
have the same eligibility as a student who solely attends a four-year 
collegiate flight training degree program with an affiliated part 141 
pilot school. KSU noted, however, that the school receiving a transfer 
student must evaluate the student's performance and

[[Page 42351]]

ensure that the school's own performance standard is met before 
graduation can occur.
    The FAA acknowledges students follow a number of different paths 
for completing post-secondary education at a college or university. 
Some students start at community colleges and transfer to four-year 
degree programs while other students transfer between different four-
year institutions of higher education. The FAA does not want to deter 
individuals from seeking alternative paths to achieving an aviation 
degree and therefore has determined that students who transfer into a 
two-year or four-year degree program with an aviation major could be 
eligible for an R-ATP certificate. These graduates would be eligible 
for an R-ATP certificate provided they complete the applicable 
requirements of Sec.  61.160, including the semester credit hours and 
ground and flight training.
    The FAA acknowledges that many of the larger four-year degree 
programs with aviation majors have satellite programs that are two-year 
programs. The satellite schools follow the same ground and flight 
training curriculum as the parent school which makes for a smooth 
transition from the two-year program to the four-year program. The FAA 
believes those graduates should also be eligible for an R-ATP 
certificate provided the requirements of Sec.  61.160 are met and 
documented through official college transcripts and records. Further 
guidance and clarification on transfer credit is provided in AC 61-139.
c. Pilots With 1,500 Hours Who Are Not Yet 23 Years Old
    Three commenters stated pilots should be able to obtain an R-ATP 
certificate at the age of 21 or less as long as they meet the full 
aeronautical experience requirements for the ATP certificate, including 
the 1,500 hours of total flight time. The commenters added that the 
existing age 23 requirement for the ATP certificate is arbitrary, 
discriminatory, and not based on science. AOPA commented that the FAA 
should allow any applicant to obtain an ATP certificate at the age of 
21 and receive restricted privileges. NATA supports no age requirement 
if the ATP minimums are met, stating those pilots should be eligible 
for a restricted privileges ATP certificate.
    Many pilots who have not yet reached the age of 23 have met or 
exceeded the 1,500 hours of total time as a pilot required for an ATP 
certificate. The FAA has remained consistent through denials of 
requests for exemption and previous rulemaking efforts to maintain the 
eligibility requirement of 23 years of age for an ATP certificate. The 
FAA has stated that the minimum age requirement of 23 years ensures ``a 
high maturity level for those pilots who are permitted to operate as 
PIC in operations requiring an ATP certificate.'' Exemption No. 7472. 
Commenters have failed to provide any compelling evidence to support a 
change to the long-standing requirement that a pilot exercising the PIC 
privileges of an ATP certificate be at least 23 years of age. 
Therefore, the FAA has not changed the age requirements for pilots 
serving as PIC in part 121 air carrier operations, SIC in part 121 flag 
or supplemental operations requiring three or more pilots, or 
operations conducted under Sec. Sec.  91.1053(a)(2)(i) and 
135.243(a)(1).
    Based on the comments, however, the FAA has determined that a pilot 
who has reached the age of 21, has logged 1,500 hours total time as a 
pilot, and satisfies the remaining aeronautical experience requirements 
for an R-ATP certificate should be permitted to apply for an R-ATP 
certificate and serve as an SIC in part 121 operations. These pilots 
will exceed the age requirement of 18 years old that is currently 
required to obtain a commercial pilot certificate which, prior to the 
final rule, allowed a pilot to serve as SIC in part 121. Additionally, 
these pilots will have achieved the total flight time for an ATP 
certificate obtained under Sec.  61.159. The FAA has determined that 
permitting such pilots to serve as SICs is an increase in the level of 
safety under current regulations and is consistent with the public 
law's focus on a higher level of flight experience for pilots serving 
in part 121 air carrier operations.
    As with other applicants for an R-ATP certificate, these pilots 
will be required to complete 200 hours of cross-country flight time. 
The remaining 300 hours of cross-country flight time can be completed 
as an SIC in part 121 operations. The minimum age of 21 for an R-ATP 
certificate will allow those pilots currently serving as SICs in part 
121 operations to continue serving in their current role provided they 
meet the required aeronautical knowledge and experience requirements 
and successfully accomplish an evaluation that results in ATP 
certification and an aircraft type rating.
d. Other Degree Programs
    Twenty-seven commenters stated that graduates from four-year 
universities affiliated with part 61 schools should also be eligible 
for an R-ATP certificate. One commenter suggested that the FAA 
establish a fair method whereby flight proficiency could be measured 
against part 141 standards to allow part 61 students a reduction in 
flight hours. Another individual commenter pointed out that part 141 
schools are given an unfair advantage over part 61 schools. UVU stated 
that graduates from four-year aviation programs with integrated flight 
training should qualify for an R-ATP certificate regardless of whether 
their training was conducted under part 61 or part 141.
    Numerous commenters stated that AABI accredited institutions with 
part 61 schools should be eligible for a restricted privileges ATP 
certificate at 1,000 flight hours. Purdue believes any AABI-accredited 
aviation program should be eligible for credit regardless of whether 
the associated flight training is conducted under 14 CFR parts 61, 141, 
or 142.
    Several commenters, including DSU and CAE, believed pilots with an 
aviation-related degree and part 141 flight training from a separate 
organization should be eligible for a restricted privileges ATP 
certificate. SIU, AAL, and Prairie Air Service, Inc. argued that the 
FAA should extend eligibility for the R-ATP certificate to any four-
year college graduate, regardless of academic major or where flight 
training was obtained. Westminster College supported academic credit as 
a substitute for flight experience adding that credit should be 
extended to graduates of a part 141 pilot school with any four-year 
college degree or associate's degrees in aviation.
    Many commenters disagreed with allowing credit for an ATP 
certificate for training received from non-affiliated part 141 pilot 
school. IATA stated that, if this proposition were to become a reality, 
it would require an unreasonable amount of FAA oversight in determining 
the adequacy of each applicant's training. ALPA's support of flight 
hour reduction for the restricted ATP certificate for college or 
university educated pilots is based on a comprehensive flight training 
curriculum integrated with the student's education. Several of the 
individual commenters stated that graduates of an aviation degree 
program should be eligible to obtain an R-ATP certificate because the 
quality of training received at such schools is superior to that 
received under part 61.
    The FAA has considered all of the various methods for obtaining 
academic and flight experience proposed by commenters but decided that 
degree programs with non-aviation majors, flight training conducted 
under part 61, and non-integrated flight training

[[Page 42352]]

should not be eligible for an ATP certificate with fewer than 1,500 
hours. The FAA has permitted a reduction for graduates who receive 
bachelor's degrees and associate's degrees with aviation majors and 
receive part 141 ground and flight training for a commercial pilot 
certificate and an instrument rating as part of a broader aviation 
curriculum.
    The FAA does not agree with those commenters who believe that 
graduates with degrees unrelated to aviation should be eligible for an 
R-ATP certificate. These graduates have not completed coursework that 
prepares them for a career as a professional pilot and such an 
allowance would not be consistent with the Act. As discussed above, the 
FAA has emphasized the importance of an aviation curriculum in 
permitting a reduction in flight hours. It is the significance of 
aviation coursework above and beyond what is required for pilot 
certification that is the primary basis for permitting a reduction in 
flight hours. To underscore this fact, the FAA has established a 
minimum number of credit hours in aviation and aviation-related 
coursework designed to improve and enhance the knowledge and skills of 
a person seeking a career as a professional pilot that these students 
must complete to be eligible for an R-ATP certificate. Although 
completing a bachelor's degree may develop certain qualities in an 
individual that may assist them in a career as a professional pilot, 
those qualities are not directly relevant to aviation and should not be 
the basis for a reduction in flight hours.
    For those commenters who believe that the reduction should apply to 
graduates irrespective of whether they complete ground and flight 
training through a part 141 pilot school or under part 61, or whether 
or not the flight training is integrated with the academic coursework, 
the FAA disagrees. By requiring the institution of higher education to 
hold a part 141 certificate to teach at least the ground training, the 
FAA ensures that the training for a commercial certificate and 
instrument rating is incorporated into the broader academic aviation 
curriculum. In addition, the FAA has oversight of the training 
conducted through part 141 program approval. Those pilot schools must 
renew their certificates every 24 months and demonstrate the quality of 
the training through an established training standard.
e. Other Approved Training and Specialized Courses
    Forty-one commenters, including the Pilot Career Initiative (PCI), 
AOPA, Paradigm Shift Solutions, Inc., Prairie Air Service, Inc., SIU, 
MTSU, and Spartan College, encouraged the FAA to permit pilots with 
other training experiences to qualify for an R-ATP certificate.
    AOPA and AAI contend that the FAA defined ``academic credit'' too 
narrowly. NAFI advised consideration of what would constitute 
``academic study'' and recommended that it not be limited only to 
university or college training programs. NAFI stated that it was 
possible that other institutions or training providers could develop 
highly effective ``academic study'' training programs. NAFI added that 
a standardized criterion that could be applied across various programs 
would be necessary to allow such a condition to be successful and 
measurable.
    PCI contended that the structured flight academies should qualify 
for a reduction in hours because they have strong academic and flight 
training programs conducted through an approved FAA curriculum. John A. 
O'Brien Aviation Consulting, LLC indicated that aviation academies 
should be eligible since they provide interaction with experienced 
airline professionals and flight instruction in accordance with FAA 
regulations to individuals seeking employment as a pilot at an airline. 
The training is specialized and regimented for an individual with very 
little aviation background to acquire the skills and knowledge to 
graduate from a program, in a short timeframe, with all of the pilot 
certificates necessary to fly at an air carrier. AOPA is also 
supportive of credit for training completed at aviation ``academies.''
    AOPA and two other commenters stated that the FAA should allow 
credit for individual academic courses and not simply apply a blanket 
reduction at graduation. Paradigm Shift Solutions and four additional 
commenters noted the FAA had not considered Advanced Jet Training for 
credit--a unanimous recommendation from the FOQ ARC. Another commenter 
noted the FAA had not considered pilots enrolled in FAA-Industry 
Training Standards programs or those pilots who complete air carrier 
training through an Advanced Qualification Program. The Upset 
Prevention and Recovery Training Association (UPRTA) added that the FAA 
should issue restricted ATP certificates with reduced flight hour 
requirements to all ATP candidates, provided they have received 
academic and flight instruction in upset prevention and recovery from 
qualified instructors.
    NATA recommended that the FAA expand the flight hour credit ``to 
include a comprehensive framework similar to the recommendations of the 
FOQ ARC and any other science-based advanced training courses that 
provide a benefit to safety.'' NATA stated that, if the FAA did not 
expand the proposal, the NPRM should be withdrawn in its entirety until 
such time as a more comprehensive framework could be created. The AAI 
contended that credit should be applied to other structured academies 
run by training organizations or air carriers.
    Twelve commenters, including John A. O'Brien Aviation Consulting, 
LLC, the AAI, PABC, UAA, Sporty's Academy, and the IFL Group argued 
that students attending flight schools that are not associated with an 
accrediting entity, also referred to as flight academies, should be 
eligible for reduced time to qualify for a restricted ATP certificate.
    A4A argued all part 141-trained pilots should be eligible for a 
restricted ATP because part 141 pilot schools are subject to the same 
standards, regardless of their affiliation with a four-year college. 
IFL Group similarly argued that the FAA should extend credit to any 
commercial, instrument, multi-engine pilot who has graduated from a 
part 141 pilot school. Aerosim also argued graduates from independent 
part 141 schools that offer a structured training program, with air 
carrier procedures, policies, and standards, should be eligible for 
academic credit.
    The FAA does not support a reduction in flight hours for pilots who 
complete training at an ``aviation academy,'' or for pilots who 
complete their ground and flight training at a part 141 pilot school. 
The reduction for graduates who receive bachelor's or associate's 
degrees with aviation majors was not based solely on the completion of 
ground and flight training for certification at a part 141 pilot 
school. Rather, the reduction was based on the content and substance of 
a broader academic curriculum completed concurrently with ground and 
flight training for certification. The FAA notes that the regulations 
already reflect a reduction in flight hours for a commercial pilot 
certificate completed at a part 141 pilot school or part 142 training 
center. Pilots who complete a commercial pilot certificate as part of 
an approved part 141 or part 142 curriculum can apply for a commercial 
pilot certificate with 190 total flight hours, as opposed to the 250 
hours required for those pilots who train under part 61.

[[Page 42353]]

    The FAA acknowledges that flight academies generally provide 
focused training to prepare pilots for a professional pilot career; 
however, the FAA does not agree that the academic curriculum is 
sufficient to meet the intent of the Act. Flight academies do not spend 
an abundance of time in aviation coursework, separate from the 
minimally required ground school, over a period of several years. These 
academies lack the accredited and structured academic environment that 
the aviation colleges and universities provide. The courses taught by 
aviation academies are primarily focused on flight training and 
obtaining certificates and ratings rapidly. Many programs advertise a 
person can obtain their private pilot certificate, commercial pilot 
certificate, instrument rating, and certified flight instructor 
certificates in 12 months or less.
    The FAA also does not support a reduction in flight hours for 
specialized courses such as upset recovery training and advanced jet 
training. The FAA encourages pilots to seek additional training that 
will enhance their skills and abilities; however, the FAA does not have 
the resources to evaluate every possible course that could be the basis 
for a reduction in flight hours. The FAA also does not support a 
reduction in flight hours for those pilots who obtain FAA certificates 
through a FITS program or who complete air carrier training through 
AQP. These programs are designed to meet existing regulatory 
requirements and do not represent additional training courses that 
merit a reduction in flight time. In addition, allowing a large number 
of crediting options creates an increasingly complicated process for 
FAA examiners and designees in determining and validating how much 
credit a pilot can get to be eligible for an R-ATP certificate.
f. Certified Flight Instructors
    Many commenters indicated that the individuals who perform best in 
air carrier initial training are those that have CFI certificates and 
were hired with 500 to 1,000 hours. The commenters contended that the 
Pilot Source Study in 2010 and 2012 provided support with statistically 
significant results for the argument that CFIs perform better in part 
121 training. The pilots that had CFI certificates had more training 
completions and required fewer extra training events in part 121 
training. NTAS, AABI, Spartan College, and one individual commenter 
stated that credit for CFI ratings and flight instruction given should 
qualify for a reduction in flight hours. Another individual commenter 
suggested that a restricted ATP should be available to active CFIs.
    The FAA recognizes that, while completing the ground and flight 
training for a CFI certificate is valuable, it is not the predominant 
reason that a CFI is recognized for his or her knowledge and skill. It 
is the time spent in the training environment teaching other pilots 
that reinforces a CFI's skills and abilities. Therefore, the FAA does 
not agree with commenters who suggest that this time meets the intent 
of the academic crediting provision in the statute. The operational 
experience gained from teaching is what is valuable, not the academic 
coursework to obtain the certificate. As with specialized courses, the 
FAA encourages pilots to seek additional training that will enhance 
their skills and abilities like CFI certificates; however, CFI ground 
schools are designed to meet existing regulatory requirements and do 
not represent additional training courses that merit a reduction in 
flight time as permitted under the Act. In addition, allowing a large 
number of crediting options creates a much more complicated process for 
FAA examiners and designees in determining and validating how much 
credit a pilot can get to be eligible.
7. Summary of FAA Decision
    The FAA is adopting the following alternative total flight hour 
requirements for an R-ATP certificate with airplane category 
multiengine class rating or an ATP certificate obtained concurrently 
with an airplane type rating:
     750 hours for a military pilot who has graduated from a 
flight training program in the Armed Forces;
     1,000 hours for a graduate who holds a bachelor's degree 
with an aviation major (60+ aviation semester credits) from an 
institution of higher education who also receives a commercial 
certificate and instrument rating from an associated part 141 pilot 
school;
     1,250 hours for a graduate who holds a bachelor's or an 
associate's degree with an aviation major (30+ aviation semester 
credits) from an institution of higher education who also receives a 
commercial certificate and instrument rating from an associated part 
141 pilot school; and
     Pilots who have reached age 21, have logged 1,500 hours 
total time as a pilot, and satisfy the remaining aeronautical 
experience requirements defined in Sec.  61.160.

F. Aircraft Type Rating for All Pilots Operating Under Part 121 (Sec.  
121.436)

    In the NPRM, the FAA proposed requiring all SICs in part 121 
operations hold an aircraft type rating for the aircraft flown in 
revenue service by August 1, 2013. A total of 113 commenters responded 
to this proposed requirement.
1. Aircraft Type Rating Requirement for Part 121 SICs
    Seventy-eight commenters, including A4A, AOPA, APA, CAA, CAPA, Cape 
Air, Delta, ExpressJet, Parks College, NADA/F, PABC, Aviation 
Professional Development, FSC, FedEx, IATA, NAFI, UAA, USAPA, and WMU, 
agreed with the proposed aircraft type rating requirement. ALPA, CAE, 
and FSI support the proposed requirement because it would require a 
type rating for part 121 SICs flying domestically; thus harmonizing the 
U.S. with current ICAO standards. Boeing supported the proposed 
aircraft type rating requirement for part 121 SICs because it 
encourages one level of safety for operations involving aircraft that 
require type ratings. ERAU, Purdue, Rocky Mountain College, and SIU, 
agreed with the proposed rule requiring SICs in part 121 air carrier 
operations to hold an aircraft type rating, provided the air carrier is 
responsible for supplying the type rating to the SIC. An individual 
commenter said that operators should provide the type rating to 
decrease costs for new hire pilots. Rocky Mountain College noted that 
pilot supply would diminish if the cost of the type rating is 
transferred to the pilot.
    Twenty-two commenters, including KSU and GAMA generally disagreed 
with requiring SICs in part 121 air carrier operations to hold an 
aircraft type rating. Four commenters, including AAL and the IFL Group, 
said that requiring SICs in part 121 air carrier operations to hold an 
aircraft type rating is not necessary and that current regulations and 
air carrier training programs are sufficient. Ameriflight stated 
experience, not certification, is the problem. Prairie Air Services 
``doubted'' that any accidents would have been prevented if the SIC had 
a type rating. Bemidji Aviation Services, Inc. indicated that SIC 
checks achieve the same goal. UPRTA supports upset prevention and 
recovery training as an alternative to obtaining a type rating. Aerosim 
and an individual commenter noted that a type rating has not 
historically been an indicator that SICs are properly trained.
    The FAA agrees with the large number of commenters who said that

[[Page 42354]]

requiring an aircraft type rating for all SICs serving in part 121 
operations would improve safety in part 121 air carrier operations. In 
addition, this requirement responds to the objectives of section 216 of 
the Act, which requires the Administrator to determine the appropriate 
multiengine airplane flight experience for pilot flightcrew members.
    The historic division of responsibilities between the PIC and SIC 
have changed. In today's air carrier environment, both the PIC and SIC 
share the role of pilot flying and pilot monitoring. Therefore, the FAA 
has determined that requiring an SIC to train to the same level of 
aircraft handling proficiency as the PIC by obtaining an aircraft type 
rating is appropriate. The FAA assumes most pilots will obtain an 
aircraft type rating at the air carrier as part of initial training. 
The practical test for an SIC to obtain an aircraft type rating will 
include the same tasks and maneuvers as those required for a PIC 
receiving a type rating. Because this practical test would be 
administered by an FAA inspector or designee, the test would serve as 
an additional level of oversight of the SICs aircraft handling skills 
and abilities. The FOQ ARC members unanimously recommended that an SIC 
hold a type rating in the aircraft to be flown in part 121 air carrier 
operations.
2. Compliance Time
    JetBlue and AAL requested a grandfather clause for existing SICs to 
enable additional compliance time and reduce the financial burden that 
would be incurred by requiring unplanned training and evaluation 
sessions. JetBlue estimated it would cost $6 million to provide a type 
rating to its current 1,120 SICs who do not hold a type rating for the 
aircraft they fly. This estimate is based on the cost provided in the 
FAA's initial regulatory evaluation, which estimated the incremental 
per-pilot cost of a type rating for existing SICs at $5,389. AAL is 
concerned about the additional cost burden of providing a type rating 
to their 852 current SICs who do not have type ratings. AAL added that 
the FAA should consider allowing qualified simulator instructors or 
check airmen to validate flying skills for those pilots with at least 
1,000 hours in type during their next recurrent training cycle. Upon 
completion of the evaluation event, AAL suggested having a letter 
issued to the pilot to take to an FAA office to obtain their ATP 
certificate. Delta estimated the short-term cost to provide the type 
rating to its more than 1,800 SICs who already have ATP certificates 
but not the type rating for the aircraft flown to be $11.6 million 
dollars.
    AAI, A4A, Delta, FedEx, and UPS also requested that the proposed 
compliance deadline of August 1, 2013 be extended. They specifically 
proposed a compliance deadline of 5 years or during transition or 
upgrade training. JetBlue proposed aligning the compliance time frame 
with initial, transition, or upgrade training. Some commenters 
indicated that, for current SICs, the compliance period for the type 
rating requirement should be five years or be aligned with upgrade 
training. UVU, SJSU, and four individual commenters discussed 
implementation of a grandfather clause for current students currently 
enrolled in college to become a pilot.
    The FAA estimates that even if an air carrier does not currently 
provide aircraft type ratings to its SICs, the impact of the proposed 
rule to its training program would be low. Currently, all SICs in part 
121 operations receive extensive training and a thorough evaluation at 
the end of the air carrier's initial training program. During the 
evaluation, SICs must demonstrate that they can perform most of the 
maneuvers and tasks that would be required for an aircraft type rating. 
The FAA acknowledges that an SIC may need some additional hours of 
training on tasks and maneuvers required for an aircraft type rating 
that are not currently required during the SIC evaluation. The FAA 
believes, however, that the practical test for the aircraft type rating 
could be performed in the same simulator session currently used for the 
evaluation. The FAA acknowledges that, unlike an evaluation, which is 
typically conducted by a check airman, the practical test for an 
aircraft type rating would have to be administered by an FAA inspector 
or FAA designee.
    As a result of the statutory deadline requiring all part 121 SICs 
to hold ATP certificates by August 2, 2013, most current part 121 SICs 
that hold only a commercial pilot certificate will likely receive an 
aircraft type rating during an ATP certification event administered by 
the air carrier prior to the deadline. Many air carriers have already 
initiated a change to their approved training programs to provide ATP 
certificates and type ratings to SICs who hold only commercial pilot 
certificates. The FAA assumes the proposed compliance date for the type 
rating will not be an issue because this population of SICs will 
receive a type rating simultaneously with an ATP certificate.
    In the initial regulatory evaluation, the FAA assumed that air 
carriers would provide a type rating to their SICs who already hold ATP 
certificates during annual recurrent training. With the publication of 
the final rule so close to the proposed compliance date, it is likely 
that air carriers will have to schedule additional training and testing 
events for these SICs to obtain a type rating by August 2013 unless the 
FAA extends the compliance date. To the extent commenters suggested 
aligning the type rating requirement and upgrade training, the FAA has 
determined that would result in an unnecessary delay given the 
assumptions in the initial regulatory evaluation. The time period for 
upgrade to PIC is approximately 5 years for regional carriers and 10 
years for major air carriers.
    To balance the cost and timing concerns raised by commenters with 
the benefits of requiring SICs to hold an aircraft type rating, the FAA 
has decided to extend the compliance date to January 1, 2016 for pilots 
who have been employed as part 121 SICs on or before July 31, 2013. 
This change is reflected in the new Sec.  121.436(c). The extended 
compliance period will allow air carriers to make the appropriate 
modifications to their approved training programs and incorporate the 
type rating requirement into their recurrent training and transition 
training. In addition, it will alleviate the burden placed on the 
aircrew program designees and FAA employees who will need to administer 
the certification event for the large number of SICs who may require 
aircraft type ratings. The FAA notes that the extended compliance date 
will most benefit current SICs who hold ATP certificates and already 
have relevant experience operating the aircraft they are flying.
    The FAA does not support a grandfather provision that would result 
in differing SIC certification requirements. Nor does it support 
certification by air carrier employees who are not designees of the 
Administrator. There is no precedent for an evaluation event that 
results in the issuance of an FAA certificate or rating being conducted 
by someone other than a designee of the Administrator. The commenters 
did not offer any persuasive arguments for why non-FAA employees or 
designees should be allowed to administer these evaluation events.
3. Aircraft Type Rating Requirement for SICs Serving in Operations 
Outside of Part 121
    Fifteen commenters stated that SICs serving in operations outside 
of 14 CFR part 121 should hold a type rating if the PIC is also 
required to hold a type rating under the rule part. CAPA supported

[[Page 42355]]

the idea of requiring SICs serving in operations conducted under parts 
91, 125, and 135 to hold a type rating because flying tasks are based 
on the pilot flying and pilot monitoring designations, not on seat 
specific maneuvers, as was once the case. FSI commented that even under 
normal operations there may be scenarios where the SIC does not have 
the knowledge and experience to successfully land the aircraft. FSI and 
an individual commenter also noted that SICs should hold a type rating 
as a way of ensuring they can safely fly the aircraft in the event the 
PIC is incapacitated. IATA stated in its comments that a type rating 
gives SICs more insight into the technical and operational 
characteristics and specifics of the aircraft and generates more 
confidence, which can be translated into increased operational safety. 
APA stated that all pilots should be required to accomplish the same 
training to the same standards. Delta commented that requiring SICs 
flying operations outside of part 121 to hold a type rating issued in 
accordance with the practical test standard would ensure that all 
pilots serving as flightcrew members and carrying passengers for hire 
meet the same standard.
    Forty-five commenters including Rocky Mountain College, IFL Group, 
and Prairie Air Services, disagreed with requiring SICs serving in 
operations outside of part 121 to hold an aircraft type rating. KSU, 
Purdue, FSC, and Aviation Professional Development, LLC stated that the 
current rules for parts 91, 125 and 135 are sufficient and there is no 
need for a type rating requirement. GAMA also commented that there are 
sufficient regulations in place for parts 91, 125 and 135 operations 
and added there are no safety issues related to the SIC not having a 
type rating. Spartan College also stated that current regulations are 
sufficient and that the training received by SICs is adequately 
preparing them for line operations. Bemidji Aviation Services Inc. 
commented that a type rating evaluation is no different than the 
checkride that most airlines already make an SIC pass. Aerosim 
commented that type-rating training has not historically been any 
indicator of a properly trained pilot. Aerosim stated that real 
scenario-based training coupled with a structured training program 
would result in a more competent pilot.
    AAL, RAA, Pilot Career Initiative, Cape Air, and PABC expressed 
concern that a type rating requirement for SICs serving in parts 91, 
125, or 135 would restrict an important time building avenue for pilots 
aspiring to serve in part 121 operations. Additionally, the Pilot 
Career Initiative, Cape Air, ExpressJet Airlines, and Airlines for 
America noted that the Act only addresses part 121 operations. For this 
reason the type rating requirement should be limited to part 121 
operations.
    NATA commented that an SIC type rating requirement outside of part 
121 is not relevant because the FAA did not propose such a requirement 
in the NPRM, nor did the FAA present conclusive evidence of a need for 
requiring a type rating for SIC serving in operations under parts 91, 
125 or 135. Parks College commented that there is a clear potential 
safety benefit to requiring SICs under parts 91, 125 and 135 to possess 
a type rating; however, there is not enough data regarding the 
potential economic impacts of the proposal to offer a cost-benefit 
based recommendation. ERAU commented that it is unnecessary because 
operations under other rule parts are not similar.
    The FAA agrees with commenters that the flight-related tasks are no 
longer based on seat position, but rather by the pilot flying versus 
pilot monitoring designations. Additionally, the FAA agrees that type-
specific training could increase the technical and operational 
knowledge level of SICs on specific aircraft. The Act was specific to 
modifying the ATP certificate and part 121 operations. As such, the 
NPRM did not propose that SICs under other operating parts obtain an 
ATP certificate or aircraft type rating. Even though the FAA 
specifically solicited comments on requiring SICs serving outside of 
part 121 to obtain a type rating, a specific requirement was not 
included in the draft regulatory text in the NPRM. Additionally, the 
FAA did not provide any economic impact information in the regulatory 
evaluation that was provided with the NPRM. While the FAA did receive 
comments that supported extending the type rating requirement to 
operations outside of part 121, a majority of the commenters did not 
support such a requirement. As a result the FAA intends no action at 
this time.

G. Minimum of 1,000 Hours in Air Carrier Operations To Serve as PIC in 
Part 121 Operations (Sec.  121.436)

    Prior to the issuance of this final rule, SICs in part 121 
operations were only required to hold a commercial pilot certificate 
with an instrument rating, which can be obtained in as few as 190 
flight hours. If hired by a part 121 air carrier with these minimums, 
SICs would acquire over 1,000 hours in air carrier operations before 
meeting the regulatory requirements for the ATP certificate, which is 
required to serve as PIC in part 121 operations. Therefore, regulations 
minimized the chance that two pilots with little or no air carrier 
experience could be paired together as a flightcrew. The Act's 
requirement for part 121 SICs to hold ATP certificates significantly 
changes the flightcrew composition for those operators who hire pilots 
with the minimum flight time requirements. By raising the certificate 
requirement of part 121 SICs, the natural mentoring period may no 
longer exist without additional regulation. The FAA notes that this 
requirement will create time for mentoring to occur for pilots new to 
the air carrier environment, which supports in part the objectives of 
Section 206 of the Act. That statutory requirement will be addressed in 
the Flight Crewmember Mentoring Leadership, and Professional 
Development rulemaking project.
    The intent of the proposed 1,000-hour air carrier experience 
requirement in Sec.  121.436 was to prevent two pilots in part 121 
operations with little or no air carrier experience from being paired 
together as a flightcrew in line operations. In addition, it would 
ensure that pilots obtain at least one full year of relevant air 
carrier operational experience before assuming the authority and 
responsibility of a PIC in operations conducted in part 121 operations. 
As proposed, the 1,000 hours in air carrier operations could be a 
combination of time as PIC in operations conducted under Sec.  
91.1053(a)(2)(i), Sec.  135.243(a)(1), or as an SIC in part 121 
operations.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ The FAA has included an exception from this requirement for 
pilots who are serving as pilot in command in part 121 operations on 
July 31, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Air Carrier Experience Requirement
    Twenty-nine commenters, including AAL, A4A, ALPA, CAA, CAPA, PABC, 
Pilot Career Initiative, The Families of Continental Flight 3407, 
USAPA, UVU, and WMU, stated the proposed 1,000 hour requirement is 
appropriate.
    Over 40 commenters, including CAE and KSU, believe the proposed 
rule is excessive with some proposing alternative hours of air carrier 
experience. Delta specifically stated that 750 hours is enough time for 
a pilot to complete initial training, meet operating experience 
requirements, and acquire approximately 18 months of flying experience. 
Additionally, over the 18-month period the pilot would be exposed to 
seasonal weather differences, mechanical issues, passenger issues, and 
air traffic control issues. GAMA, Rocky Mountain College, FSC, Purdue,

[[Page 42356]]

and Spartan College commented that the proposed time was too long and 
that upgrade from SIC to PIC should be based on competency, not on the 
number of flight hours. The UAA and SIU commented that the requirements 
for a PIC should be established by the air carrier and the air 
carrier's POI. UAA and SUI also commented that pilots who obtain an 
unrestricted ATP certificate with 1,500 hours would need a minimum of 
2,500 total flight hours to upgrade to a part 121 PIC. SICs with an R-
ATP certificate would need a minimum of 1,750 (military pilots) to 
2,000 total flight hours (graduates of qualifying four-year aviation 
degree programs) to upgrade to a part 121 PIC. UAA and SIU are 
concerned that these flight hours may exceed what is necessary to train 
safe, competent PICs.
    Fifteen commenters contended the requirement is unnecessary. 
Ameriflight, Inc., Boeing, JetBlue, and Kestrel commented that setting 
a flight time requirement for upgrade will not guarantee an increased 
level of operational safety or competency. These commenters assert that 
minimum hour requirements are not a guarantee that a desired experience 
has been gained and that flight time alone does not provide an 
opportunity to assess the pilot's ability to act as PIC. ExpressJet 
Airlines stated that the current requirements for a PIC in part 121 are 
sufficient because air carrier PIC candidates complete a rigorous 
training program, which is approved by the FAA. These pilots also 
receive continuous oversight through recurrent training and checking 
events. ERAU noted the proposed requirement is arbitrary, too long, and 
limits the air carrier's flexibility.
    RAA supported the requirement for 1,000 hours of experience in air 
carrier operations for part 121 passenger service, but believes that 
requirement is excessive for part 121 all-cargo supplemental 
operations. RAA is concerned that because supplemental carriers 
providing feeder service are often limited to shorter flight legs, it 
could take three or more years for a pilot to gain 1,000 hours as an 
SIC. RAA states that these operations pose no threat to the flying 
public and a more suitable time requirement should be considered for 
part 121 supplemental carriers.
    The FAA has considered all of the comments and determined that 
keeping the 1,000-hour air carrier experience requirement is 
appropriate for all operations under part 121. This requirement will 
ensure that an SIC has experienced an entire year of relevant air 
carrier operational experience before assuming the authority and 
responsibility of a part 121 operation as PIC. The FAA does not 
differentiate part 121 flightcrew member certification and 
qualification requirements based upon whether they are conducting 
passenger or supplemental (cargo) operations. The FAA acknowledges that 
this requirement will increase the minimum time required for a pilot 
prior to serving as PIC in part 121 operations. If a pilot is entering 
part 121 service with no previous air carrier experience, it may take 
more than one year for the pilot to upgrade to PIC. The FAA estimated 
in the initial regulatory evaluation for the NPRM that flightcrew 
members serving in part 121 operations fly on average 750 hours per 
year. However, the FAA notes that part 121 pilots are permitted by 
regulations to fly up to 1,000 hours per calendar year (Sec.  121.471). 
The FAA also notes that for most operators the 1,000-hour requirement 
will not be a factor given actual upgrade times for SICs exceed the 
minimum time it would take to acquire 1,000 hours, and thus we believe 
there will be minimal costs and benefits from this provision.
2. Part 135 and Part 91, Subpart K Time
    The FAA received over fifty comments on whether to credit flight 
time earned in part 135 and subpart K of part 91 towards the 1,000 
hours of air carrier experience requirement. The majority of commenters 
supported including the PIC flight time in these operations as proposed 
in the NPRM as part of the requirement. AAL, GAMA, KSU, and RACCA 
stated this time is similar to part 121 operations and provides a 
useful base of experience. FedEx, ExpressJet, ALPA, IFL Group, and 
Purdue specifically commented that other PIC time in part 135 
operations should also count toward the 1,000-hour requirement. 
Conversely, five commenters, including APA, CAPA, and USAPA, stated 
operations under part 135 and subpart K of part 91 and should not count 
towards the proposed 1,000-hour experience requirement.
    In the NPRM the FAA also asked commenters if SIC time outside of 
part 121 should count towards the 1,000 hour requirement to upgrade to 
PIC in part 121. The majority of commenters on this question offered 
that some SIC time outside of part 121 operations should count toward 
the requirement. Cape Air said that flight time as an SIC in scheduled 
part 135 operations should count. ExpressJet said that SIC time in 
subpart K of part 91 and part 135 operations should count. FedEx 
commented that subpart K to part 91, part 125, and part 135 operations 
can involve complex aircraft and experience relevant to part 121 
operations; therefore, that time should count. FSI said that multicrew 
time accrued by SICs in subpart K of part 91 and parts 135 and 125 
should count toward the 1,000 hours. ALPA commented that SIC time in 
part 135 and subpart K of part 91 should count if the time was acquired 
in a multiengine turboprop or turbojet airplane. NATA commented that 
SIC time outside part 121 should count because experience in multiple 
operational scenarios is beneficial. Purdue said that SIC time should 
count as long as it was acquired while flying in a multi-pilot crew 
under subpart K of part 91 or part 135. UPRTA said that SIC time 
outside of part 121 should count only if the SIC has completed upset 
prevention and recovery training.
    Aviation Professional Development and FSC said that SIC time 
accrued outside of part 121 operations should not count because other 
operations are dissimilar. The PABC stated that SIC time accrued 
outside of part 121 operations should not count towards this 
requirement because the mentoring and experience needed to become an 
effective part 121 PIC cannot be received outside of part 121 
operations. USAPA does not support counting flight time in subpart K of 
part 91 or part 135 operations towards the 1,000 hour requirement.
    The FAA has decided that pilots should not be permitted to count 
any time as a required SIC in operations conducted outside of 14 CFR 
part 121. These SICs are not exercising the privileges of an ATP 
certificate and have not demonstrated leadership and command abilities 
necessary to exercise operational control of a flight in conditions 
most similar to operations conducted under part 121. The FAA has 
concluded that the time an SIC spends observing a PIC in part 121 
operations plays an important role in preparing the SIC for eventual 
upgrade to PIC. A PIC in part 121 air carrier operations is expected to 
possess leadership and command abilities, including aeronautical 
decision making and the sound judgment necessary to exercise 
operational control of the flight. The FAA has determined that 
developing these abilities is most effectively done by performing the 
duties of an SIC in part 121 air carrier operations while under the 
supervision of an experienced PIC.
    The FAA has determined that the ability to fly at the ATP 
certificate level and have demonstrated this proficiency during 
evaluation is an important regulatory differentiation. The FAA first 
proposed that certain operations under part 135 should require an ATP 
certificate in 1977. In that NPRM, the

[[Page 42357]]

FAA stated the requirement to hold an ATP certificate to act as PIC in 
some part 135 operations was ``[. . . ] based in part on operational 
complexity and the number of persons carried, would provide a level of 
safety more comparable to that provided by Part 121.'' For these same 
reasons the FAA has determined that flight time acquired as a PIC in 
operations under Sec.  91.1053(a)(2)(i),and Sec.  135.243(a)(1) and 
flight time acquired as an SIC in part 121 operations should count 
towards the 1,000 hour air carrier experience requirement. Operations 
under Sec.  91.1053(a)(2)(i) or Sec.  135.243(a)(1) require an ATP 
certificate, are multicrew operations, and generally use turbine 
aircraft and therefore are the most applicable to part 121 operations. 
The FAA has determined that, while other part 91 and part 135 
operations may involve certain elements that are relatable to part 121 
operations, the varied nature of operations does not make credit toward 
the 1,000 hour requirement appropriate. As such, the proposed 
requirement that the 1,000 hours in air carrier operations may be a 
combination of time as PIC in operations conducted under Sec.  
91.1053(a)(2)(i) or Sec.  135.243(a)(1) or as SIC in part 121 
operations remains unchanged from the NPRM.
3. Military Time
    Delta, A4A, AAL, and FedEx commented that flight time in military 
operations should count toward the 1,000-hour air carrier experience 
requirement. UPS specifically asked whether military flight time 
counted towards the 1,000-hour air carrier operating experience 
requirement. FSI indicated that multicrew flight time in the military 
should count. An individual commenter stated that military pilots who 
fly transport category aircraft as PIC should be able to credit up to 
500 hours of their transport category military flight time. The 
commenter stated that this would still require them to fly 500 hours 
for an air carrier before being eligible to act as PIC for a part 121 
operation.
    The FAA recognizes that many pilots in the course of their military 
careers will obtain significant multicrew experience as PICs of 
transport category aircraft and therefore has added paragraph (c) to 
new Sec.  121.436 to allow 500 hours of military flight time accrued as 
PIC of a multiengine turbine-powered, fixed-wing airplane in an 
operation requiring more than one pilot to be credited to the 1,000-
hour requirement. While there is value in this experience, the FAA does 
agree with some of the commenters that these pilots operate in a unique 
system that is different from a part 121 air carrier environment. The 
FAA has determined that military pilots would benefit from spending 
some time serving as a required crewmember in a civilian air carrier 
operation before upgrading to PIC. This time would prepare them for 
operating in compliance with the regulations that govern civil 
aviation, the air carrier's particular operating specifications, and 
the airplane's operations manual.
4. Other Time
    FedEx, A4A, and FSI said that flight time in part 125 should count 
toward the 1,000 hours of air carrier experience required to serve as 
PIC in part 121 operations. The FAA determined that flight time in part 
125 should not count because, although these operations share certain 
characteristics with part 121 operations, they are not sufficiently 
similar to count toward the 1,000 hours of air carrier experience. Part 
125 does not involve common carriage, a pilot is only required to have 
a commercial pilot certificate, and the operating rules in part 125 
differ significantly from the operating rules in part 121.
    FedEx, AA, A4A, and FSI commented that flight time in international 
air carrier operations should count toward the 1,000 hours required to 
serve as PIC in part 121 operations. The FAA concluded that, although 
foreign air carrier operations are similar to U.S. air carrier 
operations, there are significant differences related to the 
environment under which foreign air carrier operations are conducted, 
including possible cultural differences. Most importantly, pilots 
serving for foreign air carriers do not operate under U.S. regulations 
and may not have experience in the U.S. national airspace system. The 
FAA concluded that requiring these pilots to serve first as an SIC in 
part 121 operations before upgrading to PIC is appropriate.
    CAE commented that the FAA should consider a minimum time in 
aircraft type if a pilot does not have sufficient flight time in 
subpart K of part 91, part 135, or part 121 to meet the requirement. 
While time in type is valuable, the proposed requirement is directed at 
gaining relevant experience in complex air carrier operational 
environments rather than in aircraft handling. The FAA has determined 
that the proposed requirement for SICs to obtain a type rating will 
provide additional experience and proficiency in aircraft-specific 
handling and knowledge. Therefore, the FAA has decided not to allow 
credit for time in the type of aircraft towards the 1,000 hours of air 
carrier operating experience.

H. Miscellaneous Issues

1. Pilot Supply
    In the NPRM the FAA sought comment on the potential impact to pilot 
supply on part 121 and part 135 air carriers as well as part 141 pilot 
schools and part 142 training centers as a result of the requirement 
for all SICs in part 121 to hold an ATP certificate. The FAA received 
267 comments regarding pilot supply from airlines, industry/trade 
groups, colleges and universities, pilot training centers, and pilots.
a. Part 121 Pilot Supply
    More than 100 commenters specifically stated the proposed ATP 
requirements for part 121 SICs would hurt part 121 pilot supply. The 
University of Dubuque, SIU, and 58 other commenters stated the ATP 
certificate requirement for part 121 SICs would significantly affect 
air carriers' ability to hire new pilots, particularly regional air 
carriers.
    Only a handful of commenters provided specific information to 
support the assertion that part 121 pilot supply will diminish. Among 
these commenters was the UAA. Their comments included data that 
suggests there is a diminishing supply of pilots in general at a time 
when forecasts suggest a consistent and growing global demand for 
pilots. UAA stated in their comments:
     Overall, U.S. airline domestic revenue passenger 
enplanements are expected to grow an average of 2.2 percent per year 
from 2011 to 2032 and international revenue passenger enplanements by 
U.S. carriers are expected to grow 4.2 percent per year from 2011 to 
2032.
     Currently, Boeing forecasts a global need for 460,000 
pilots through the year 2030, with 97,350 of those needed for North 
America. This demand is based upon projected fleet growth and pilot 
retirements.
     Pilots who turned 60 in the years 2007 to 2012 will be 
forced to retire beginning in 2012. UAA estimated that, beginning in 
2018 or 2019, as many as 2,000 part 121 pilots will be forced to retire 
each year due to the Age 65 rule.
     FAA statistics demonstrate the number of new student pilot 
certificates issued has declined from 2007 to 2010 by more than 12,000. 
The number of new commercial pilot certificates issued also declined 
significantly from 2007 through 2010.
     A study conducted by the University of North Dakota 
indicates

[[Page 42358]]

only slightly more than half the flight instructors surveyed who 
initially planned on an airline career still have that long-term goal.
     The Pilot Source Study (2010) indicates a decrease in 
military pilots moving to air carriers. As the U.S. Armed Forces 
continue contraction, fewer military pilots are needed.
    ALPA stated in their comments that there will be no impact on the 
pilot supply based on this rule because there are thousands of 
qualified pilots currently on furlough. They also noted that the 
availability of pilots is a function of the health of the air carrier 
industry.
    CAPA stated the business practices and models of many of our 
nation's carriers have reduced the career expectations of entry-level 
pilots to a standard that will not allow a pilot to support a family. 
This new economic reality is what is driving many qualified pilots out 
of the job market. CAPA stated there will not be a pilot shortage but a 
shortage of pilots willing to work for low wages.
    Several commenters, including RAA, ExpressJet, JetBlue, 
Ameriflight, Paradigm Shift Solutions, Inc., and GAMA stated this rule 
will exacerbate the pilot shortage caused by the Age 65 rule. 
Ameriflight added that no pilots will be available for operators of 
small aircraft as a result of talent drain to larger operators.
    The AAI contended that within five years the proposed rule will 
result in a severe flight shortage to small communities. It also 
contends that the rule will threaten feeder routes and hub operations.
    IATA contended that the proposed rule will be felt first in 
regional carriers but will eventually affect legacy carriers as well. 
ExpressJet, Delta, Parks College, and two other commenters state that 
the rule sacrifices quality pilot candidates by focusing on flight time 
instead of the quality of training. American Eagle Airlines, Inc., 
states that the rule will put U.S. air carriers at a disadvantage with 
foreign carriers.
    Cape Air, UPS, FSC, CAA, ERAU, A4A, CAE, Human Capital Management 
and Performance, LLC, Aviation Professional Development, LLC, DSU, 
Spartan College, LeTourneau University, and three other commenters 
predict that the arbitrary hour requirements of the proposed ATP 
certificate with restricted privileges will discourage students from 
seeking air carrier careers.
b. Part 135, 141, and 142 Pilot Supply
    The FAA also received comments on the impact the proposed rule 
would have on part 135 operators, 141 pilot schools, and 142 training 
centers. The RAA commented that students will be less attracted to part 
141 schools that are not associated with a four-year university and 
college accredited aviation degree programs because those students 
could not take advantage of the R-ATP hour requirements.
    SJSU commented that part 141 pilot schools and 142 training centers 
may see a decline in new student enrollment because some students 
already struggle to afford training costs and will not be willing to 
spend the extra money needed to meet the new requirements of a part 121 
SIC position. On the other hand, ALPA commented that it expects 
enrollment at accredited colleges and universities with part 141 pilot 
training programs to increase. It also anticipates the rule ``could 
result in the creation of training partnerships between those 
accredited colleges and universities and training academies (e.g., CAE 
and FlightSafety International) that possess part 141/142 certificates 
to utilize the certified flight training simulators that these flight 
training academies may have.''
    DSU commented that it already has a high attrition rate because the 
flight training component of its program doubles the cost of the 
aviation degree compared to other degrees offered by the university 
despite the fact that it makes no money on the flight training. It is 
concerned the rule would increase the attrition rate further.
    CAE commented that part 141 operators might retain their 
instructors longer but may also suffer from reduced customer throughput 
as the new rule virtually eliminates their options to provide training 
at any level of reduction below the 1,500 hours.
    Parks College commented that part 135 operators and part 91 subpart 
K operators may face negative impacts in two ways. First, if the supply 
of pilots qualified for part 121 operations diminishes significantly, 
causing entry wages to increase, there may be a shift of employees from 
part 91 and part 135 operations to part 121 operations. Secondly, the 
supply of pilots that gain their initial crew experience in part 121 
operations as SIC, then move to part 135 operations or part 91 subpart 
K as PIC may decrease. It also anticipates that the proposed ATP CTP 
would increase training volume at part 142 training centers, as they 
currently operate the majority of Level ``C'' and ``D'' simulators. 
Additionally, training volume at part 142 certified training facilities 
would significantly increase, as only a limited number of part 141 and 
collegiate programs currently operate approved Level \4/5\ FSTD 
devices.
    NADA/F commented that the 1,500 flight hours and ATP requirement 
should benefit part 141 training centers and should have no impact on 
part 135 carriers as they already require an ATP and 1,500 hours.
    Cape Air commented that it is likely that many part 135 pilots with 
ATP certificates will be recruited by the larger part 121 carriers who 
would then not have to incur the costs of the ATP CTP. This natural 
career progression essentially places the majority of the burden of 
acquiring ATP certificates to smaller airlines, with limited resources.
c. FAA Response
    The FAA does not dispute the factual numbers of decreased pilot 
starts and the decreased number of commercial and flight instructor 
certificates issued over the past 10 years. However, the FAA also 
cannot change the requirement under the Act that all pilots in part 121 
operations have an ATP certificate by August 2013. The FAA has decided 
to take advantage of the relieving option within the Act to offer an 
ATP certificate with restricted privileges, which would permit some 
pilots to obtain the ATP certificate with less than 1,500 hours. While 
pilot supply was not the reason the FAA considered such an option, the 
FAA has determined it would be a cost-relieving measure and would 
address some of the pilot supply concerns.
    Despite the reduced pool of eligible pilots (i.e. pilots with the 
total flight hours for an ATP certificate), the current level of safety 
will be maintained because pilots must continue to meet certification 
and qualification standards before serving as a pilot in part 121 
operations. As under current regulations, any pilot who fails to 
demonstrate satisfactory performance for the ATP certificate or 
successfully complete all of the requirements within the air carrier 
training program will not serve in part 121 operations. We do not see 
safety compromised because of a reduced eligible pilot pool.
    The FAA acknowledges it is possible that as a result of the reduced 
pool of eligible pilots, some carriers with less competitive 
compensation packages may experience a higher failure rate due to an 
inability to attract the best candidates, which in turn is a cost to 
that carrier. Determining the actual cost is very difficult to identify 
due to lack of available data and long term hiring data is difficult to 
forecast. The FAA notes, however, the candidates who have traditionally 
performed the best in initial training, as identified by the ARC

[[Page 42359]]

and the pilot source study, are those candidates that will be eligible 
for a restricted privileges ATP certificate.
2. Benefits and Cost
    Ameriflight questioned why the FAA calculated the cost of the 
proposed rule post-statute (meaning without the costs associated with 
the self-executing ATP certificate requirement), but claimed a $23 
million dollar benefit \24\ from the ATP certificate requirement. 
Ameriflight recommended the FAA not be allowed to take a benefit from 
any proposed rule it is not accounting for in its costs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ In the NPRM initial regulatory evaluation, the FAA 
estimated that the total benefit for accidents involving SICs with 
fewer than 1,500 hours of flight time was $23 million. The final 
rule regulatory evaluation estimates it to be $16 million.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA's Office of Accident Investigation and Prevention (AVP) 
conducted an accident analysis accidents of those accidents where the 
SIC had less than 1,500 hours and found no relationship with the ATP 
certificate requirement. AVP found the probable cause and contributing 
factors for those accidents to be other issues that are addressed by 
the ATP CTP and the aircraft type rating requirement. Therefore, the 
FAA did not attribute any benefit to the ATP certificate requirement. 
However, as reflected in the final regulatory evaluation, if one were 
to attribute all of the benefits claimed for those accidents to the ATP 
certificate requirement (meaning there was no other attributable cause 
for the accident other than the fact that the SIC did not have an ATP 
certificate and 1,500 hours), it would total $23 million (NPRM).
    Ameriflight and RACCA believe that the cost of the final rule will 
exceed $141 million for the airline industry and should therefore 
precipitate a review under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995. 
The $141 million dollar figure that triggers the Unfunded Mandates 
assessment relates to costs imposed in any one year on the private 
sector, which is not the case for this rule. The total costs 
attributable to the rule over a 20-year period are just $312.7 million 
and the highest cost in any year is under $20 million (2032). 
Consequently, the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act is not implicated by 
this final rule.
    Ameriflight and RACCA objected to the finding of no economic impact 
on part 135 operators. RACCA questioned ``the thoroughness and validity 
of the economic impact analyses'' and suggested ``one reason for the 
FAA's inaccuracy is their complete disregard of Part 135 on-demand 
flying.'' Ameriflight and RACCA also object to the FAA's finding that 
the (annualized) cost of the rule is less than 0.5% of the operating 
revenues of all small firms affected by the rule and request that this 
finding be reevaluated taking into account RACCA members and other 
similarly-placed part 135 carriers.
    In conducting the economic analysis, the FAA did not disregard part 
135 on-demand operations as evidenced by the accident analysis 
conducted by AVP. For part 135 operators, the FAA determined that this 
rule would have had no economic impact on those operators. Operating 
revenue data is not available for most part 135 operators as most are 
privately held. However, the three part 135 operators for which we do 
have operating revenue, as measured by number of PICs (4 to 45 PICs), 
encompass almost the entire size range of part 135 operators (1 to 55 
PICs). The finding that there would be an insignificant economic impact 
therefore applies to RACCA members and other similarly-placed part 135 
carriers.
    In commenting on the costs of the ATP CTP, AOPA indicated the FAA 
did not calculate the time required of air carriers to ``navigate the 
cumbersome schedules of part 142 training centers or airline in-house 
training centers'' to schedule simulator training and estimated the 
cost to be a minimum of two hours per ATP applicant. AOPA also stated 
the ATP CTP costs did not account for travel expenses because the FAA 
assumed the ATP CTP training would take place immediately prior to 
initial training for the air carrier, but ``the FAA does not address 
pilots seeking ATP certification outside of the air carrier 
environment.'' AOPA also questioned the training pay assumption, 
stating that ``It seems highly unlikely a pilot earns only $43 a day--
$2 per day less than their daily per diem--while training. . . .''
    The FAA estimates the social cost of the ATP CTP by estimating the 
impact on the low-cost providers of the training--part 121 air carriers 
and part 142 training centers. To also include the pecuniary impact on 
training schools would be double counting. The FAA does not agree with 
costing two hours per applicant to schedule training. Given the 
inventory availability of FSTDs discussed previously, the FAA believes 
the impact to training department administrators will be minimal. With 
respect to travel costs, the FAA has modified its assumption and 
believes that 50% of pilots will be trained directly by air carriers 
and 50% will be trained by part 142 training centers. We believe it is 
highly reasonable to assume that ATP certification training by air 
carriers will take place just prior to initial pilot training so there 
will be no incremental travel costs. However, we now include travel 
costs for pilots undergoing ATP certification training at part 142 
training centers. We agree that we underestimated training pay in the 
NPRM and have increased our estimate for the final rule.
    In reference to our estimate of the cost of the 1,500-hour 
requirement, the IFL Group disputed the assertion that a new pilot can 
easily fly 750 hours in a year outside of part 121 operations. The IFL 
group noted that kind of flight time has historically been obtained 
working for an air carrier, which the pilot will no longer be able to 
do. The commenter added, although flight instructing is another way to 
build time, as a result of the declining student pilot starts, the 
ability for pilots to earn that much time annually is not realistic. 
Upon review, the FAA has reduced its assumption to 500 hours of flight 
time annually.
    With respect to the cost of the ATP CTP, NATA asserted the costs 
are borne by the individual, not an air carrier. ``Should the FAA 
reject NATA's comment that costs of the ATP CTP should be computed 
based upon impact to the regulated individual pilot, NATA asserts that 
the FAA still must modify its estimates to reflect the higher training 
costs faced by Part 135 and 91 subpart K operators'' due to smaller 
class sizes and the need to contract with training providers.
    The FAA believes that most pilots will receive the ATP CTP through 
employment--either at large air carriers, with their own training 
facilities and simulators, or at part 142 training centers through 
training agreements. The inefficiencies of small size can be greatly 
mitigated by contracting out, and, in fact, many small operators 
already use contract training to meet existing training requirements. 
Moreover, the ATP CTP, as a general program, is not specific to any 
type aircraft, nor to any rule part (121, 135, 91K). Therefore, we 
believe that competitive part 142 training centers will deliver generic 
ATP CTP training to individuals, as well as air carriers, at costs no 
higher than our conservative estimate.
3. Alternative Licensing Structure
    In the NPRM the FAA posed two questions which focused on an 
alternative pilot licensing structure for part 121 pilots. The FAA 
asked if it should consider an alternative licensing structure for 
pilots who desire only to fly for a part 121 air carrier (e.g. 
multicrew pilot license). The FAA also asked if it were to adopt a 
licensing

[[Page 42360]]

structure for a multicrew pilot license (MPL), what would be the 
appropriate amount and type of ground and flight training.
    With respect to the question of whether the FAA should consider an 
alternative licensing structure for prospective part 121 pilots, a 
total of 79 commenters including IATA, JetBlue, NAFI, Boeing, PABC, 
FedEx, A4A, CAE, RAA, Delta, NADA/F, USAPA, ERAU, Spartan College, and 
UAA provided input. Just over half of the commenters were supportive of 
the FAA considering an alternative method to certificate part 121 air 
carrier pilots. NTAS supplied the results of their industry polling; 
their responders reflected similar results. Sixty-two percent of their 
responders were in favor of the FAA considering an MPL-like structure. 
FAA's harmonization with ICAO was the most selected reasoning for 
support according to the NTAS poll.
    Some commenters including IATA and Boeing, noted the benefits of an 
alternative licensing structure for pilots who desire only to fly for a 
part 121 air carrier. IATA noted results show pilots training in a 
multicrew environment exhibit proficiency and safety. Boeing stated the 
graduates of these programs are highly competent in the knowledge and 
skills required for air carrier operations. An individual commenter 
stated training for such a license specifically develops the core 
competencies necessary to operate as a part 121 SIC. Another individual 
commenter noted MPL is one of the most rigorous structured pilot 
training programs.
    CAE stated its top recommendation is for the FAA to adopt a U.S. 
MPL. Another individual commenter noted the MPL would allow applicant 
pilots to save time and money in reaching their goal. Aerosim stated 
the MPL has been proven to be effective training outside the United 
States and should be considered in the United States. LETU noted many 
other countries are using the ICAO MPL to address pilot shortage. The 
RAA stated there is more than enough experience in alternate pilot 
training and licensing approaches elsewhere in the world to support FAA 
consideration of such an approach.
    Several commenters including ERAU disagreed with an alternative 
licensing structure for pilots who desire only to fly for a part 121 
air carrier and noted the lack of information regarding MPL programs. 
ERAU noted not enough performance data exists on pilots from MPL 
programs. CAPA stated an MPL-like structure would replace fully 
qualified and type rated pilots with ones that have limited knowledge 
and experience thus reducing safety.
    The Families of Continental Flight 3407, NADA/F, GAMA, USAPA, and 
Bemidji Aviation Services, Inc., disagreed with an alternative 
licensing structure for pilots who desire only to fly for a part 121 
air carrier. Families of Continental Flight 3407 suggested an ATP 
should be the minimum for SICs. NADA/F stated they are opposed to 
altering the ATP requirements and noted the option of multicrew license 
is not part of the legislation. USAPA stated the FAA should keep the 
current ATP standard. Bemidji Aviation Services, Inc., stated pilots 
need to have more experience than an MPL. FSI noted their ATP courses 
already include appropriate CRM training. American Flyers and NOVA 
Southeastern University stated the FAA should not accept a lower 
standard of skill.
    With respect to the question of what would be the appropriate 
amount and type of ground and flight training for an MPL-like 
certification structure, 35 commenters provided specific 
recommendations on the ground and flight training for an MPL-like 
structure. Seventeen commenters recommended looking to existing ICAO 
standards or rules in place in other countries. ExpressJet recommended 
the FAA should review the existing MPL structure as outlined in Annex 1 
to the International Convention on Civil Aviation and consider the 
desired outcomes and harmonizing with ICAO before determining the 
amounts and types of training.
    JetBlue supported an alternative licensing structure and stated 
ground and flight training should be determined by a comprehensive task 
analysis and qualification standard, derived from an Instructional 
Systems Design (ISD) process, and in alignment with the requirements of 
ICAO. Similarly, CAE states MPL candidates meet the requirements of a 
pilot operating in multicrew transport category aircraft in all 
environments developed through an ISD approach. It is not determined by 
hours, but by meeting objectives of the required competencies through 
theoretical and flight training, as specified by the ICAO Procedures 
for Air Navigation Services (PANS) Training Document. Consistent with 
the concepts of Advanced Qualification Program (AQP), MPL is a 
continuous improvement training process validated by empirical data.
    FedEx, AAL, and A4A each stated the FAA should consider MPL 
requirements in accordance with ICAO standards or as recommended from 
an ARC. JetBlue recommended an ARC be convened to propose an alternate 
licensing structure for pilots seeking employment with a part 121 air 
carrier. Delta, ALPA, and CAE also recommended the FAA form an MPL ARC 
to develop recommendations for the adoption of MPL program.
    The FAA is appreciative of the comments received regarding an 
alternative certification avenue for part 121 air carrier pilots. 
Whereas the FAA recognizes the potential benefits of such a 
certification structure, it is also cognizant of the potential risks 
such a dramatic departure from traditional certification and experience 
requirements could present. The FAA also agrees with commenters on the 
limited data points available for a comprehensive evaluation of 
existing MPL programs abroad. Although the FAA cannot commit to a 
timetable for the organization of an ARC, the FAA believes such an 
industry group could properly research, study, and provide detailed 
recommendations to the FAA for additional consideration.
4. Accident Effectiveness Ratings
    In the NPRM the FAA sought comment on the effectiveness ratings for 
the specific accidents identified in Appendix 4 of the Initial 
Regulatory Evaluation. Appendix 4 contained the list of part 121 and 
part 135 accidents that may have been prevented as a result of this 
rulemaking. The accident analysis was conducted by the FAA's Office of 
Accident Investigation and Prevention (AVP) in the Assessment of the 
Effectiveness of Public Law 111-216 in Reducing Accident Risk posted to 
the docket. Only six commenters addressed the effectiveness ratings of 
the accident analysis.
    Ameriflight and an individual commenter quoted AVP's assessment 
that it found little relationship between the 1,500 hour requirement 
and airplane accidents, and therefore found little benefit for that 
requirement. Only seven of the 31 accidents used for the 14 CFR Part 
121 benefit analysis had SICs with less than 1,500 hours. The 
individual commenter also stated that it appears that since the 1,500 
hour requirement is mandated by statute, the FAA found it unnecessary 
to examine the 1,500 hour requirement as a tool for improving safety. 
Aerosim disagreed with the accident analysis because none of the 
accidents reviewed were caused by low time SIC. UPS commented that it 
was unaware of any evidence to suggest the accidents cited by the FAA 
as the benchmark for both benefit and prevention would have been 
avoided if the proposals in this NPRM had been in place.

[[Page 42361]]

    A4A states that the FAA should ``exclude the 24 part 121 accidents 
that include SICs with more than 1,500 hours as not relevant to this 
rulemaking.'' A4A questioned the effectiveness ratios on several 
specific accidents \25\ because the NTSB determined that the probable 
causes of the accidents were failures by the PIC not the SIC. A4A based 
its conclusion on the fact that this final rule ``mandates additional 
experience for a SIC'' and, therefore, any accident based primarily on 
an NTSB finding that the PIC was primarily responsible for the accident 
should be excluded.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ A4A specifically questioned the effectiveness ratios in 
Great Lakes Aviation accident (6/20/2007), the Air Tahoma accident 
(8/13/2004), the Mesa Airlines accident (10/16/2001), and the Avjet 
accident (3/29/2001).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA did consider the 1,500 hour requirement for SICs as a 
regulatory baseline, since it is required by the Act, when reviewing 
the accidents. However, both the proposed rule and final rule would 
have affected the eligibility of both the PIC and the SIC involved in 
the accidents cited in AVP's analysis. The eligibility of flight crews 
is based on the ATP certificate requirement for SICs and the 1,000 
hours of air carrier experience for the PIC. In all 3 accidents that 
received ``high'' effectiveness scores (meaning there is a 75% 
reduction in the likelihood of the accident under the proposed rule), 
crew performance essentially explained the accidents and the rule would 
have affected the eligibility of both pilots, as neither the PIC nor 
the SIC met the proposed minimum experience for their respective 
positions under the proposed and final rule. AVP concluded that more 
experience and seasoning would have affected the outcome of these 
accidents.
    AVP also acknowledged in its analysis that, as a matter of 
analytical principle, no accident received an effectiveness score 
higher than 0.9 based on the assumption that the FAA can never be 
certain that any intervention would eliminate all risk in a particular 
scenario. The accident analysis considered the entire proposal, not 
just the requirement for part 121 SICs to hold an ATP certificate. AVP 
found the rulemaking to be effective at least to some degree against 31 
accidents analyzed, and in most cases the effectiveness scores were 
``low'' or ``low-to-moderate.''
    As a result of the comments and the changes incorporated into the 
final rule, AVP re-evaluated the part 121 and part 135 accidents and 
made some adjustments. The full review of the accident analysis is 
available as part of the Final Regulatory Impact Analysis for the final 
rule, which is included in the docket for this rulemaking.
5. Considerations for Offering the ATP CTP
    In the NPRM, the FAA sought comment on what factors parts 121, 135, 
141, and 142 certificate holders would principally consider in 
determining whether to offer the ATP CTP. The FAA received 39 comments 
to this question.
    Of the comments received, a majority of the commenters including 
Ameriflight, CAE, SIU, and ERAU, indicated having a Level C or higher 
FFS would be a consideration. UND commented that it does not have a 
Level C or D FFS. The cost to acquire, house, operate, and maintain the 
device would be prohibitive. UND was quoted $8 million dollars to 
purchase a Level C FFS. This means UND would have to charge $1,000 per 
hour to operate the simulator. This cost does not include the cost to 
build a building to house the FSTD or the cost to hire staff to operate 
the equipment. The UAA commented that the proposed requirement for a 
Level C FFS severely limits the number of 141 certificate holders who 
could provide the training. UAA stated that none of its member colleges 
or universities own Level C FFSs. UAA stated the proposal would thrust 
more training on part 121 operators and the large part 141 pilot 
schools and 142 training centers.
    Another consideration by many of the commenters was whether the 
certificate holder had instructors that met the proposed requirement of 
two years of experience in airline operations. Boeing, SIU, and UAA 
commented that the requirement for ATP CTP instructors to have two 
years of experience under Sec.  91.1053(a)(2)(i), or Sec.  
135.243(a)(1), or in any part 121 operation does not assure proficiency 
in instructing. Boeing further commented that the instructor 
requirement is overly burdensome on part 141 and 142 certificate 
holders as these organizations have no ability to qualify instructors 
that did not already meet the requirement.
    Additional comments focused on which certificate holders might need 
to provide the ATP CTP. American Airlines commented that aviation 
colleges will be incentivized to offer the course; however costs to the 
certificate holder would be a significant factor in determining whether 
to develop and offer such a course. JetBlue speculates the ATP CTP 
requirement would necessitate part 135, regional part 121 carriers, and 
parts 141 and 142 certificate holders to offer the ATP CTP immediately 
to help alleviate pilot supply concerns. JetBlue added that an ATP 
certificate is a prerequisite to pilot employment for it, however, 
market forces and future pilot supply ``will ultimately determine our 
and other part 121 major airlines' decision to offer the course.''
    The FAA appreciates the commenters input on what the considerations 
will be for offering the ATP CTP and took the identified concerns into 
consideration in developing this final rule.
6. Administrative Law Issues
    This final rule will be effective immediately upon publication in 
the Federal Register. Section 553(d)(3) of the Administrative Procedure 
Act provides that publication of a rule shall be made not less than 30 
days before its effective date, except ``for good cause found and 
published with the rule.'' 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3). Consistent with section 
553(d)(3) and for reasons discussed below, the FAA finds good cause 
exists to publish this final rule with an immediate effective date.
    As noted earlier, independent of any rulemaking action by the FAA, 
all flightcrew members in part 121 operations must hold an ATP 
certificate by August 2, 2013. Under this final rule, certain pilots 
will be able to obtain an ATP certificate with fewer than 1,500 hours 
based on specific academic training courses. The FAA has established a 
process by which institutions of higher education may apply for 
authority to certify graduates for an R-ATP certificate. Without an 
immediate effective date, the FAA cannot begin to issue this authority, 
which will delay issuance of R-ATP certificates. Such a delay could 
result in hardship for those pilots currently serving in part 121 air 
carrier operations who would otherwise qualify for an R-ATP 
certificate. To minimize disruptions to part 121 operations and reduce 
the impact on pilots currently serving in part 121 with commercial 
pilot certificates, the FAA finds good cause exists for this rule to 
take effect immediately upon publication in the Federal Register.
7. Miscellaneous Amendments
    The FAA proposed several miscellaneous amendments to parts 61 and 
142. These amendments--maintained in the final rule--are non-
substantive technical amendments intended to define terms, remove 
obsolete provisions, and make minor conforming changes to existing 
regulations. In addition, the FAA has made a slight modification to 
Sec.  61.71(c). This change makes clear that a person may be considered 
to meet the aeronautical experience, aeronautical

[[Page 42362]]

knowledge, and areas of operation requirements of part 61 under the 
terms of a Bilateral Aviation Safety Agreement (BASA) and associated 
Implementation Procedures for Licensing (IPL). As previously written, 
the provision could have given the impression that a person who holds a 
foreign pilot license and is applying for a U.S. pilot certificate on 
the basis of a BASA is automatically considered to have met the 
requirements of part 61. In fact, a foreign pilot is only considered to 
have met those requirements specifically identified in the BASA and 
IPL.

IV. 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, this Trade Act requires agencies to consider 
international standards and, where appropriate, that they be the basis 
of U.S. standards. Fourth, the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 
(Pub. L. 104-4) requires agencies to prepare a written assessment of 
the costs, benefits, and other effects of proposed or final rules that 
include a Federal mandate likely to result in the expenditure by State, 
local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private 
sector, of $100 million or more annually (adjusted for inflation with 
base year of 1995). This portion of the preamble summarizes the FAA's 
analysis of the economic impacts of this final rule. 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 this final rule 
has benefits that justify its costs, satisfies a Congressional 
requirement to improve aviation safety, and is a ``significant 
regulatory action'' as defined in section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 
because it raises novel policy issues contemplated under that executive 
order. The rule is also ``significant'' as defined in DOT's Regulatory 
Policies and Procedures. The final rule, if adopted, will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, 
will not create unnecessary obstacles to international trade, and will 
not impose an unfunded mandate on state, local, or tribal governments, 
or on the private sector.
Total Benefits and Costs of This Rule
    In the Act, Congress mandated that all part 121 pilots serving as 
second in command (SICs) have an airline transport pilot (ATP) 
certificate with at least 1,500 flight hours. This statutory 
requirement is self-executing, it will take effect whether or not the 
FAA issues a regulation. We estimate the costs of the ATP certificate 
requirement to be $6.4 billion ($2.2 billion in present value), almost 
all of which stems from the 1,500-hour flight time requirement. The 
statute allows the FAA Administrator to specify academic training as an 
offset to the 1,500-hour flight time requirement provided the training 
enhances safety. This rule provides cost savings benefits from its 
provision of such academic training credits toward the 1,500-hour 
requirement (by means of the R-ATP certificate) and also by its 
provision allowing pilots with a minimum age of 21 to be eligible for 
the R-ATP certificate. Our estimate of these cost savings are $2.3 
billion with a present value savings of $0.8 billion.
    The final rule requires that all SICs serving in part 121 
operations hold a type rating in the airplane flown and requires that 
an ATP CTP be completed by all applicants for an ATP certificate with 
an airplane category multiengine class rating (or an ATP certificate 
obtained concurrently with an airplane type rating). The costs of the 
final rule training and aircraft type rating requirements total $312.7 
million ($138.7 million in present value). The expected benefits from 
the new training requirements are $576.8 million with a present value 
of $251.7 million.
    For part 121 operators the final rule is cost-beneficial as present 
value benefits, at $127.5 million, exceed present value costs, at 
$124.6 million. For part 135 operators present value benefits, at 
$124.2 million, exceed present value costs, at $9.8 million. Although 
the FAA does not have a quantitative estimate of benefits for part 91, 
subpart K, operators, we believe that the ATP CTP will sufficiently 
enhance safety for part 91, subpart K, operators to make the rule cost-
beneficial for these operators as well. Because of the similarity of 
their operations, we believe that part 91 subpart K operators are 
subject to similar risks as part 135 operators. The lack of 
identifiable rule-related accidents reflects the significantly smaller 
scope of part 91 subpart K operations compared to part 135 operations 
and a possible under-recording of part 91 subpart K accidents. 
Additional discussion can be found in the full regulatory evaluation.
Statute and Rule Costs and Benefits

                  Table 5A--Statute Costs and Benefits
------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Statute costs           Total cost ($ mil)    PV cost ($ mil)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ATP Certificate Requirement--                  $29.9               $31.1
 Knowledge & Practical Tests....
ATP Certificate Requirement--                6,344.5             2,181.9
 Eligibility Restrictions.......
                                 ---------------------------------------
    Part 121 ATP Certificate                 6,374.4             2,213.0
     Requirement................
                                 ---------------------------------------
Statute Benefits................    No Identifiable Accident Benefits.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


                       Table 5B--Final Rule Costs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Final rule costs          Total cost ($ mil)    PV cost ($ mil)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Part 121 Operators..............              $280.4              $124.6
Part 135 Operators..............                22.4                 9.8

[[Page 42363]]

 
Part 91, Subpart K, Operators...                 9.8                 4.3
                                 ---------------------------------------
    Total Training/Type Rating                 312.7               138.7
     Costs......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------


                  Table 5C--Final Rule Safety Benefits
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   Total benefits ($    PV benefits ($
   Final rule safety benefits            mil)                mil)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Part 121 Safety Benefits........              $292.5              $127.5
Part 135 Safety Benefits........               284.3               124.2
                                 ---------------------------------------
    All Safety Benefits.........               576.8               251.7
------------------------------------------------------------------------


              Table 5D--Cost Savings Benefits of Final Rule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  Total cost savings  PV cost savings ($
     Final rule cost savings            ($ mil)              mil)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Military Academic Training                    $547.1              $188.2
 Credit (750 hrs)...............
4-Year Degree Academic Training                972.0               333.0
 Credit (500 hrs)...............
2-Year Degree Academic Training                490.1               165.8
 Credit (250 hrs)...............
Pilots with 1,500 Hrs Flight                   300.1               102.8
 Time Eligible for Restricted
 ATP Certificate at Age 21......
                                 ---------------------------------------
    Cost Savings from Rule                   2,309.3              789.8
     Relief.....................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes: 1. Part 121 PV cost of $124.6 million includes $123.1 million in
  ATP CTP costs and $1.5 million in type rating costs.
2. Details may not add up to totals due to rounding.

Who is potentially affected by this rule?
    Pilots working for or seeking employment by air carriers operating 
under part 121 will be affected. It could also impact pilots working 
for or seeking employment by operators in parts 135 and 91, subpart K. 
Certificate holders approved under parts 121, 135, 141, or 142 will be 
affected if they choose to offer the ATP CTP. Institutions of higher 
education that seek the authority to certify their graduates have met 
the requirements for a restricted privileges ATP certificate may also 
be affected.
    Assumptions:
     We use a 20-year period of analysis in order to more fully 
account for costs that will accumulate over time as new pilots replace 
retiring pilots unaffected by the rule. All monetary values are 
expressed in 2010 dollars. In calculating present values, we discount 
back to the end of 2010/beginning of 2011.
     All monetary values are expressed in 2010 dollars. Present 
value discount rate is 7 percent (Office of Management & Budget, 
Circular A-4, ``Guidelines and Discount Rates for Benefit-Cost Analysis 
of Federal Programs,'' October 29, 1992, p. 8, www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars/index.html).
     Value of statistical life (VSL) begins at $8.86 million in 
2010, and increases to $10.7 million in 2032 by an annual growth factor 
of 1.0107.\26\ Memorandum: Guidance on Treatment of the Economic Value 
of a Statistical Life in Departmental Analyses [February 2013]. United 
States Office of the Secretary of Transportation (OST).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ Due to a decline in real income in 2011 and 2012, the 
growth factors for these years are 0.98246 and 0.99702, 
respectively. Email from OST, March 7, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Number of rule-related accidents and associated number of 
fatalities, number of minor & serious injuries, and aircraft damage: 
FAA, Office of Accident Investigation and Prevention (AVP).
     Market value of aircraft and restoration costs: APO update 
to 2008 of data in Economic Values for FAA Investment and Regulatory 
Decisions, A Guide, Section 5, Office of Aviation Policy and Plans, 
U.S. Federal Aviation Administration, Wash., DC, Dec. 31, 2004. The 
2008 data is updated from 2008 to 2010 by the GDP implicit price 
deflator.
     Number of part 121 PICs and SICs by airline, part 135 ATP 
pilots, and part 91, subpart K, fractional ownership program PICs: FAA, 
Flight Standards Service, National Vital Information Subsystem (NVIS) 
database (Nov. 22, 2010; Dec. 10, 2010).
     Pilot growth rate (0.6%): U.S. DOT, FAA, Aviation Policy & 
Plans. FAA Aerospace Forecast: 2010-2030. Table 29, ``Active Pilots by 
Type of Certificate'', Air Transport, Avg Annual Growth, 2009-2030.
     Cost of ATP CTP and cost of type rating: Estimated from 
2010 FAA industry survey and FAA Flight Standards Service.
     Percentage of part 121 SICs without an ATP certificate 
(regional = 85 percent; major/cargo = 15 percent): Estimated from 2010 
FAA industry survey.
     Percentage of part 121 SICs without a type rating 
(regional = 90 percent; major/cargo = 30 percent): Estimated from 2010 
FAA industry survey.
     Typical number of years for upgrade from SIC to PIC (Major 
airlines: 10 years, Regional airlines: 5 years): Estimated from 2010 
FAA industry survey.
     Typical number of years after which PIC will move from 
regional airline to major airline (2 years): Estimated from 2010 FAA 
industry survey.
     Pilot salary data by airline (2008): 
www.airlinepilotcentral.com.
     Early and medical part 121 pilot retirement rate (0.5%): 
Email from Kit Darby, President, KitDarby.com Aviation Consulting, LLC, 
Peachtree City, GA, 12/18/2010.
     Part 121 pilot retirement rate (3.6%): Email from Kit 
Darby, President, KitDarby.com Aviation Consulting, LLC, Peachtree 
City, GA, 12/20/2010.

[[Page 42364]]

     Part 135 and part 91, subpart K, retirement rate (3.0%): 
We used this rate in the FOQ Initial Regulatory Evaluation (p. 17) and 
received no comments.
     Flight experience of military pilots leaving the service: 
FAA Flight Standards Service.
     Hiring minimums by airline & airline group and percentage 
of pilots hired with military training: Kit Darby, President, 
KitDarby.com Aviation Consulting, LLC, Peachtree City, GA.
     Number of baccalaureates with aviation-related degrees: 
Aviation Accreditation Board International (AABI), Gary W. Kiteley, 
Executive Director, 3410 Skyway Drive, Auburn, AL.
Benefits of This Rule
    The benefits of this final rule are that it provides some 
mitigation of the cost of the Airline Safety and Federal Aviation 
Extension Act of 2010 mandate and will provide accident prevention 
safety benefits from the rule's training program in response to 
Congressional direction. We estimate the cost to be $6.4 billion ($2.2 
billion in present value) to be the Congressionally-mandated self-
executing requirement that all part 121 SICs have an ATP certificate 
with at least 1,500 flight hours. The FAA found no quantifiable 
relationship between the 1,500-hour requirement and airplane accidents 
because all part 121 PICs have an ATP certificate and 1,500 flight 
hours, and, in most accident cases, the SICs had 1,500 flight hours. 
Very importantly, because the 1,500-hour requirement will become law 
regardless of FAA action, the costs for this requirement do not require 
an FAA benefit justification for such costs. Congress allowed, and the 
final rule provides, cost-savings benefits from the rule's provision 
for academic training credits (including credit for military training) 
toward the 1,500-hour requirement. The final rule also provides cost 
savings by reducing the minimum age requirement for pilots with 1,500 
flight hours to 21 years. The cost savings that result from these 
provisions are $2.3 billion, with a present value of $0.8 billion.
    Primarily because of the training requirements of this rule, the 
FAA expects that the rule will reduce the number of future accidents. 
The quantified benefits from this rule are based upon the value of 
preventing future accidents. The methodology begins by identifying 
previous accidents that this rule could have prevented, or mitigated. 
We then estimate the probability that such accidents would be prevented 
in the future were the rule in place.
    The ATP CTP is designed to address the gap in knowledge identified 
by the FOQ ARC between a commercial pilot and the knowledge a pilot 
should have when entering an air carrier environment. The basic 
concepts addressed by these requirements are applicable to pilots 
operating in part 135 and part 91, subpart K operations as well as 
pilots in part 121 operations. The ATP CTP has a comprehensive topic 
list to address these deficiencies that are the underlying causes of 
many airplane accidents:
     Aerodynamics
    [cir] Stall recognition/recovery
    [cir] Upset prevention/recovery
    [cir] High altitude operations
    [cir] Energy management
    [cir] Operating in a multicrew environment
     Air Carrier Operations
    [cir] Physiology/Fitness for duty
    [cir] Communications
    [cir] Ground operations
    [cir] Aircraft systems and performance
     Crew Resource Management
     Knowledge-based decision-making
     Leadership and Professional development
     Manual Aircraft Handling Skills
     Pilot Monitoring Responsibilities
    [cir] Communication
    [cir] Risk management
    [cir] Decision making
    [cir] Threat and error management
    The FAA determined that 58 accidents were partially attributable to 
pilot qualification issues, over the 2001-2010 period of accident 
analysis. We estimated the value of preventing these 58 accidents in 
the future to be worth $838.6 million. After taking into account 
probability that pilot certification and qualification training would 
prevent these accidents, we derived part 121 safety benefits of about 
$292.5 million, with present value $127.5 million, and part 135 safety 
benefits of about $284.3 million, with present value $124.2 million.
Costs of This Rule
    Without this final rule, the Act's mandate would cost $6.4 billion 
($2.2 billion in present value). Because the mandate of the SIC 1,500-
hour requirement will become law regardless of FAA action, the costs 
for this requirement are not a cost of this rule. The final rule 
provides cost savings by reducing the minimum total hours for an ATP 
certificate for military pilots and graduates of bachelor's and 
associate's degree programs with aviation majors, and by reducing the 
minimum age requirement for pilots with 1,500 flight hours to 21 years. 
The cost savings that result from these provisions are $2.3 billion, 
with a present value of $0.8 billion. The costs of the final rule 
training requirements for ATP certificate applicants and the aircraft 
type rating requirement total $312.7 million ($138.7 million in present 
value). Of these costs part 121 operators are estimated to incur $280.4 
million ($124.6 million in present value).
Cost Benefit Summary
    The purpose of this final rule is to meet pilot certification and 
qualification requirements imposed by Congress in Sections 216 and 217 
of the Act. Congress mandated the ATP certificate requirement--the most 
expensive requirement of this final rule, $6.4 billion ($2.2 billion in 
present value), although Congress allowed the FAA to provide academic 
training credits (by means of the R-ATP) which result in cost savings 
of $2.0 billion ($0.7 billion in present value) that partially offset 
the requirement. The final rule also partially offsets the requirement 
by reducing the R-ATP minimum age requirement for pilots with 1,500 
hours to age 21. This relief provides an additional cost savings of 
$0.3 billion ($0.1 billion in present value). Lastly, the costs of the 
final rule training requirements for ATP certificate applicants and the 
aircraft type rating requirement total $312.7 million ($138.7 million 
in present value) with expected benefits of $576.8 million ($251.7 
million in present value).

B. Regulatory Flexibility Determination

1. Introduction and Purpose of This Analysis
    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-354) (RFA) 
establishes ``as a principle of regulatory issuance that agencies shall 
endeavor, consistent with the objectives of the rule and of applicable 
statutes, to fit regulatory and informational requirements to the scale 
of the businesses, organizations, and governmental jurisdictions 
subject to regulation. To achieve this principle, agencies are required 
to solicit and consider flexible regulatory proposals and to explain 
the rationale for their actions to assure that such proposals are given 
serious consideration.'' The RFA covers a wide-range of small entities, 
including small businesses, not-for-profit 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

[[Page 42365]]

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.
    As required by Section 603(a) of the RFA, we prepared and published 
an initial regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA) as part of the NPRM 
for this rule (77 FR 12374, February 29, 2012). As a result of that 
analysis we determined this rule would not have a significant impact on 
a substantial number of small entities for the following reason: The 
annualized cost \27\ of the rule is less than 2% of operating revenues 
for all small firms that would be affected by the rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ Annualized cost is the annual cash flow of an annuity that 
yields the same present value as the total present value cost.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 604 of the RFA also requires an agency to publish a final 
regulatory flexibility analysis (FRFA) in the Federal Register when 
issuing a final rule. Section 604(a) requires that each FRFA contain:
    (1) A succinct statement of the need for, and objectives of, the 
rule;
    (2) a summary of the significant issues raised by the public 
comments in response to the IRFA, a summary of agency's assessment of 
such issues, and a statement of any changes made to the proposed rule 
resulting from such comments;
    (3) a description of and an estimate of the number of small 
entities for which the final rule will apply;
    (4) a description of the projected reporting, recordkeeping and 
other compliance requirements of the rule, including an estimate of the 
classes of small entities which will be subject to the requirement and 
the type of professional skills necessary for preparation of the report 
or record; and
    (5) a description of the steps the agency has taken to minimize the 
significant economic impact on small entities consistent with the 
stated objectives of applicable statues, including a statement of the 
factual, policy, and legal reasons for selecting the alternative 
adopted in the final rule and why each one of the other significant 
alternatives to the rule considered by the agency which affect the 
impact on small entities was rejected.
2. Objectives of This Rule
    The purpose of this final rule is to meet pilot certification and 
qualification requirements imposed by Congress in Sections 216 and 217 
of the Airline Safety and Federal Aviation Extension Act of 2010 (Pub. 
L. 111-216). The provisions of this Act were the result of the fatal 
accident of Colgan Air Flight 3407 that occurred in Buffalo, New York, 
on February 12, 2009. In addition to specific mandated requirements, 
the Act requires the FAA to address certain issues in pilot 
qualification and certification. This rule addresses those issues, most 
importantly with training requirements to qualify pilots for the ATP 
certificate mandated by the Act.
3A. Summary of the Significant Issues Raised by the Public Comments in 
Response to the IRFA, a Summary of the Assessment of the Agency of Such 
Issues, and a Statement of Any Changes Made to the Proposed Rule 
Resulting From Such Comments
    The FAA received more than 200 comments on the requirement that all 
pilots, including SICs, hold an ATP certificate (requiring 1,500 flight 
hours), many in opposition to the requirement. These comments were made 
in response to the proposed rule, not the IRFA per se. Several 
commenters also objected to our finding in the Initial Regulatory 
Flexibility Analysis that there was no significant impact on a 
substantial number of small entities. These objections appear to stem 
from the commenters' belief that the cost we attribute to the statute 
is a cost of the rule. But the requirement for all pilots in part 121 
operations to hold an ATP certificate is Congressionally-mandated and 
self-executing, so the significant costs associated with this 
requirement are attributable to the statute, not the rule.
    The statute allows the FAA to grant academic training credits, 
effectively reducing the costs of the 1,500-hour requirement. As a 
result of the comments on the ATP certificate requirement and the R-ATP 
certificate, in the final rule the FAA will broaden the scope of 
academic credits to include pilots with a two-year degree with an 
aviation major. The FAA will also permit a pilot with 1,500 hours of 
flight time to obtain an R-ATP certificate at the age of 21.
    With regard to the costs associated with the ATP certification 
training program, NATA stated that ``Since no requirement exists or is 
proposed that require air carriers to provide the ATP CTP, we believe 
the FAA must perform its analysis of this proposal assuming the impact 
is on individual pilots pursuing ATP certification.'' NATA also stated 
that the FAA failed to account for dramatically higher training costs 
for part 135 and 91 subpart K operators compared to part 121 operators 
owing to far smaller class sizes, often one or two pilots at a time, 
and their inability to use in-house training personnel to the same 
extent as a large airline. This lack of ability to use efficiencies the 
way large airlines do would lead to significantly higher costs.
    The FAA believes that most pilots will receive the ATP CTP through 
employment--either at air carriers, with their own training facilities 
and simulators, or at part 142 training centers through training 
agreements, as these are the organizations that have the FFSs required 
for the ATP CTP. The inefficiencies of small size can be greatly 
mitigated by contracting out this training, and, in fact, many of the 
smallest operators already use contract training to meet existing 
training requirements. Moreover, the ATP CTP, as a general program, is 
not specific to any type aircraft, nor to any rule part (121, 135, 
91K). Therefore, we believe that competitive part 142 training centers 
will deliver generic ATP CTP training to individuals, as well as air 
carriers, at costs no higher than our conservative estimate.
3.B. A Description of the Steps the Agency Has Taken To Minimize a 
Significant Economic Impact on Small Entities and * * * Why Other 
Significant Alternatives to the Rule That Affect Small Entities Were 
Rejected
    The FAA has no discretion with respect to the Congressionally-
mandated requirement that all part 121 pilots hold an ATP certificate. 
Although not specific to small entities, the FAA has mitigated the cost 
of the 1,500 flight hour requirement for an ATP certificate by allowing 
credits towards total flight time based on academic training courses. 
These credits are provided by means of a new R-ATP certificate. The 
final rule also reduces the minimum age requirement for the R-ATP 
certificate to age 21. The regulatory evaluation estimates this relief 
provided in the final rule will reduce the cost of the Congressionally-
mandated ATP certificate requirement by $2.3 billion (present value 
cost: $0.8 billion).\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ The FAA has also modified the compliance date for the ATP 
CTP and the type rating requirements to provide additional time to 
all pilots and operators to accommodate the new requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Several commenters believe removing the ability for pilots to 
receive training for the multiengine airplane ATP

[[Page 42366]]

certificate under part 61 will hurt local fixed-base operators (FBOs) 
and CFIs. These commenters believe that allowing FBOs and CFIs to 
provide the ATP CTP would reduce the cost of the training and the 
negative impact on part 61 instructors and part 61 flight schools. The 
FAA notes that prior to this final rule there were no training 
requirements for the multiengine airplane ATP certificate so pilots who 
sought the certificate on their own did not seek training with an 
instructor except when they were ready to take their practical test. 
Because most ATP certificates are currently accomplished through 
evaluation events conducted by employers under other rule parts (i.e., 
parts 121 or 135) rather than through part 61 instruction, the FAA does 
not believe that there will be a significant impact on part 61 
instructors and part 61 flight schools by excluding those groups from 
providing the ATP CTP.
    As for the new requirement for pilots to complete the ATP CTP, the 
FAA has determined that the safest and most effective way to ensure 
that applicants for an ATP certificate have met the requirements of 
section 217 of the Act is to establish specific requirements that 
include training in an FSTD. The requirements specifically relating to 
training at high altitude, in adverse weather, and in difficult 
operational conditions cannot be safely or effectively accomplished in 
aircraft. For that reason, the ATP CTP can be provided only by 
certificate holders who can sponsor an FSTD.
    The FAA does not believe that there is an alternative to the ATP 
CTP requirement that could be applied to small entities. The Act 
identified several critical areas that must be part of the training 
required to apply for an ATP certificate to prepare pilots to operate 
in an air carrier environment. To allow smaller operators who conduct 
operations that require pilots to hold an ATP certificate to meet a 
reduced training standard would not be responsive to the Act and would 
create two different standards for pilots who are exercising the 
privileges of an ATP certificate.
    To the extent that small businesses were concerned about the costs 
associated with the type rating, as noted earlier, the FAA has adjusted 
the compliance date from August 2, 2013, to January 1, 2016, for those 
pilots who are employed as a pilot by a part 121 certificate holder by 
July 31, 2013. Although not specific to small entities, this will 
reduce the impact on small entities. In any case, type rating costs for 
new-hire pilots are minimal given the statutory requirement for an ATP 
certificate.
4. Description of the Small Entities to Which the Final Rule Will Apply 
and an Estimate of Their Number
    The final rule would affect firms in part 121, part 135, and part 
91, subpart K, operations in the following North American Industry 
Classification System (NAICS) industries, for all four of which the 
Small Business Administration (SBA) size standard is 1,500 
employees.\29\ The SBA size standard as defined in 13 CFR 121.201, is 
the largest size that a business (including its subsidiaries and 
affiliates) may be to remain classified as a small business by the SBA. 
As the size standard is identical at 1,500 employees for all four air 
transportation industries, we do not attempt to classify affected firms 
by particular air transportation industry.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ U.S. Small Business Administration. Table of Small Business 
Size Standards Matched to North American Industry Classification 
System Codes, July 21, 2006. Web site: www.SBA.gov.

   Table 6--SBA Size Standard for NAICS Air Transportation Industries
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    NAICS code            2002 U.S. NAICS title        SBA Size standard
------------------------------------------------------------------------
481111............  Scheduled Passenger Air           1,500 employees.
                     Transportation.
481112............  Scheduled Freight Air             1,500 employees.
                     Transportation.
481211............  Nonscheduled Chartered Passenger  1,500 employees.
                     Air Transportation.
481212............  Nonscheduled Chartered Freight    1,500 employees.
                     Air Transportation.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA database (2010) has 92 operators classified as part 121 air 
carriers. Using Department of Transportation 2009 employment data,\30\ 
we identified 32 of these part 121 operators as large and an identical 
number as small. Using other employment data, we identified eight more 
part 121 operators as large, seven as subsidiaries of a group with more 
than 1,500 employees and one known to be large (UPS). We identified one 
more part 121 operator as small, as a subsidiary of a group with less 
than 1,500 employees. We inferred 19 more operators to be small on the 
basis of pilot numbers.\31\ So in all, we identified 40 of the 92 part 
121 operators as large and 52 as small. Therefore, there are a 
substantial number of small entities operating as part 121 air 
carriers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ www.bts.gov/programs/airline_information/number_of_employees/.
    \31\ The largest small part 121 operator has 1,446 employees and 
391 pilots, the largest number of pilots for any part 121 operator 
identified as small. The largest operator that we inferred to be 
small had 231 pilots.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We also identified five of the nine part 91, subpart K, operators 
as small on the basis of employment data available from the FAA 
database. We had no corresponding employment data for part 135 
operators. The largest part 135 operator, however, had just 55 PICs, so 
we infer that all 1,106 part 135 operators are small. Table 7 below 
lists our identified small entities operating under part 121, part 135, 
and part 91 subpart K operators along with data to assess the impact of 
the final rule on them, as discussed below. We list all 52 small part 
121 operators and all nine small part 91 subpart K operators, but, 
owing to their large numbers, only the three part 135 operators for 
which we have operating revenue data. Revenue data is not available for 
most part 135 operators as most are privately held. However, the three 
part 135 operators for which we do have operating revenue, as measured 
by number of PICs (4 to 45 PICs), encompass almost the entire size 
range of part 135 operators.
5. Description of the Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping and Other 
Compliance Requirements of the Final Rule
Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements
    The final rule levies requirements that must be met by certificate 
holders who wish to offer or provide the ATP CTP. While requiring the 
gathering and maintaining of information and, in certain cases, the 
reporting of some of that information to the FAA, these sections 
require no additional burdens on the certificate holders beyond what is 
required by the current rule or that which is currently borne by 
certificate holders in regular practice. Exceptions to this are the 
following:

[[Page 42367]]

    a. One-time development and submission of an ATP CTP to the FAA for 
approval.
    b. One-time record keeping costs for pilot training pertaining to 
completion of the ATP CTP.
    c. One-time application to the FAA by an institution of higher 
education seeking the authority to certify its graduates of a degree 
program with an aviation major for an R-ATP certificate.
    d. One-time cost per student to the institution of higher education 
for an academic advisor to review graduate transcripts to determine 
eligibility for an R-ATP certificate.

                         Table 7--Economic Impact of the Final Rule on Small Part 121, Part 135, and Part 91 Subpart K Operators
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                              Pilots
                                                                                              (parts              Cost as %  Operating
          Operator name              Air carrier         Primary        Pilot      Total    121, 135,  Ann. cost      of      revenue       Operating
                                      category         operations      numbers    2009 emp   or 91K)    ($1000s)  operating   ($1000)    revenue source
                                                                                            (percent)              revenue
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ABX AIR INC.....................  Cargo...........  Part 121........        313       1435       0.54         46       0.00  1,173,146  DOT.
AEKO KULA INC (Aloha Air Cargo).  Cargo...........  Part 121........         22        315       0.04          3       0.00    280,309  DOT.
AERO MICRONESIA INC.............  Cargo...........  Part 121........         12
AIR TRANSPORT INTERNATIONAL LLC.  Cargo...........  Part 121........        113        396       0.20         17       0.01    273,016  DOT.
AMERIJET INTERNATIONAL INC......  Cargo...........  Part 121........         56        540       0.10          8       0.01    138,372  DOT.
AMERISTAR AIR CARGO INC.........  Cargo...........  Part 121........         17                  0.03          3       0.04      6,942  DOT.
ARROW AIR INC...................  Cargo...........  Part 121........         50        613       0.09          7       0.00    206,805  DOT.
ASTAR AIR CARGO INC.............  Cargo...........  Part 121........         85        631       0.15         13       0.00    347,018  DOT.
AVIATION SERVICES LTD...........  Cargo...........  Part 121........         18
CAPITAL CARGO INTERNATIONAL       Cargo...........  Part 121........        100        223       0.17         15       0.03     53,209  DOT.
 AIRLINES INC.
CENTURION AIR CARGO INC.........  Cargo...........  Part 121........         47        567       0.08          7       0.00    164,905  DOT.
CORPORATE AIR...................  Cargo...........  Part 121........         75
EVERGREEN INTERNATIONAL AIRLINES  Cargo...........  Part 121........        132        442       0.23         19       0.00    518,843  DOT.
 INC.
FALCON AIR EXPRESS INC..........  Cargo...........  Part 121........         25                  0.04          4       0.03     11,665  DOT.
FLORIDA WEST INTERNATIONAL        Cargo...........  Part 121........         32         51       0.06          5       0.00    113,736  DOT.
 AIRWAYS INC.
GULF AND CARIBBEAN CARGO INC....  Cargo...........  Part 121........         42         63       0.07          6       0.02     25,270  DOT.
KALITTA AIR LLC.................  Cargo...........  Part 121........        231        860       0.40         34       0.01    666,161  DOT.
KALITTA CHARTERS II LLC.........  Cargo...........  Part 121........         23                  0.04          3       0.02     14,048  DOT.
LYNDEN AIR CARGO L L C..........  Cargo...........  Part 121........         49        175       0.08          7       0.01     88,289  DOT.
MERIDIAN ASSOCIATES.............  Cargo...........  Part 121........          8
MIAMI AIR INTERNATIONAL INC.....  Cargo...........  Part 121........         80        409       0.14         12       0.01    151,868  DOT.
MOUNTAIN AIR CARGO INC..........  Cargo...........  Part 121........        126
NATIONAL AIR CARGO GROUP INC....  Cargo...........  Part 121........         23        500       0.04          3       0.02     20,882  DOT.
NORTHERN AIR CARGO INC..........  Cargo...........  Part 121........         24        197       0.04          4       0.01     47,197  DOT.
OMNI AIR INTERNATIONAL INC......  Cargo...........  Part 121........        255       1032       0.44         38       0.01    438,327  DOT.
PRESCOTT SUPPORT CO.............  Cargo...........  Part 121........         13                  0.02          2       0.02      8,614  DOT.
RHOADES AVIATION INC............  Cargo...........  Part 121........          4
SIERRA PACIFIC AIRLINES INC.....  Cargo...........  Part 121........         10                  0.02          1       0.01     11,199  DOT.
SKY KING INC....................  Cargo...........  Part 121........         32                  0.06          5       0.03     16,583  DOT.
SKY LEASE I INC (Tradewinds       Cargo...........  Part 121........         49         47       0.08          7       0.01     63,683  DOT.
 Airlines).
SOUTHERN AIR INC................  Cargo...........  Part 121........        186        589       0.32         27       0.02    170,478  DOT.
SWIFT AIR L L C.................  Cargo...........  Part 121........         29                  0.05          4       0.05      8,643  DOT.
TATONDUK OUTFITTERS LTD.........  Cargo...........  Part 121........         47        288       0.08          7       0.02     40,371  DOT.
USA JET AIRLINES INC............  Cargo...........  Part 121........         70        244       0.12         10       0.01    128,053  DOT.
DYNAMIC AIRWAYS LLC.............  Charter.........  Part 121........          8
AERODYNAMICS INC................  Charter PAX.....  Part 121........         14        211       0.02          2       0.00     53,595  DOT.
RYAN INTERNATIONAL AIRLINES INC.  Charter PAX.....  Part 121........        151        540       0.26         22       0.02    142,069  DOT.
TEM ENTERPRISES INC (Xtra         Charter PAX.....  Part 121........         40        120
 Airways).
VISION AIRLINES INC.............  Charter PAX.....  Part 121........        116        131       0.20         17       0.03     62,366  DOT.
WORLD AIRWAYS INC...............  Charter PAX.....  Part 121........        391       1446       0.68         58       0.01    653,144  DOT.
BRENDAN AIRWAYS LLC (USA 3000     Mainline........  Part 121........         54        390       0.09          8       0.00    227,850  DOT.
 Airlines).
MN AIRLINES LLC (Sun Country      Mainline........  Part 121........        143        642       0.25         21       0.01    224,232  DOT.
 Airlines).
VIRGIN AMERICA INC..............  Mainline........  Part 121........        330       1421       0.57         49       0.01    326,023  DOT.
CHAMPLAIN ENTERPRISES INC         Regional........  Part 121........        150        300
 (CommutAir).
EMPIRE AIRLINES INC.............  Regional........  Part 121........        111        250
ERA AVIATION INC (In Frontier     Regional........  Part 121........         57
 Alaska Group).
GREAT LAKES AVIATION LTD........  Regional........  Part 121........        231                  1.12        128       0.13    100,033  10-K.
GULFSTREAM INTERNATIONAL          Regional........  Part 121........        156
 AIRLINES INC.
HAWAII ISLAND AIR INC...........  Regional........  Part 121........         38                  0.18         21       0.08     24,907  DOT.
HYANNIS AIR SERVICE INC.........  Regional........  Part 121........        212        850
PENINSULA AIRWAYS INC...........  Regional........  Part 121........        119
SEABORNE VIRGIN ISLAND INC......  Regional........  Part 121........         21                  0.10         12       1.73        670  CLEAR.
USA JET AIRLINES INC............                    Part 135........         45                  0.62          6       0.02     27,380  DOT.
AVIATION CONCEPTS...............                    Part 135........         10                  0.14          1       0.05      2,568  DOT.
VICTORY AIR TRANSPORT INC.......                    Part 135........          4                  0.05          0       0.02      2,745  DOT.
AIRSPRINT US....................                    Part 91K........          5         27       0.16          1
AVANTAIR........................                    Part 91K........        136        340       4.25         17       0.01    149,001  CLEAR.
CORPORATE EAGLE MGT SVCS........                    Part 91K........         13         33       0.41          2       0.01     11,419  CLEAR.
EXECUTIVE FLT SVCS..............                    Part 91K........         60        100       1.87          7       0.00  2,024,000  CLEAR.
PLANE SENSE.....................                    Part 91K........         61        160       1.90          7       0.01     94,000  CLEAR.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 42368]]

Other Compliance Requirements
    This final rule will require the following:
    1. An ATP certificate for all pilots operating in part 121. This 
requirement codifies the Congressionally-mandated 1,500 hours flight 
time required for an ATP certificate, but will allow an R-ATP 
certificate to be held by (a) military pilots with 750 hours of flight 
experience and (b) graduates of four-year or two-year degree programs 
with aviation majors who obtain their commercial pilot certificate with 
instrument rating from an affiliated part 141 pilot school. To be 
eligible for an R-ATP, graduates of a four-year program will be 
required to have 1,000 hours of flight experience, while graduates of a 
two-year program will be required to have 1,250 hours of flight 
experience.
    a. The R-ATP certificate will allow a pilot to serve in part 121 
air carrier operations as an SIC only. With an R-ATP certificate, 
however, part 121 SICs need only hold a second class medical 
certificate, not the first class medical certificate that is the 
requirement for PICs.
    b. The minimum age for an R-ATP certificate will be reduced to 21 
years.\32\ The current age requirement for an ATP certificate will 
remain at 23 years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ This is a change from the NPRM that will allow pilots of 
age 21 or 22, with 1,500 hours flight time, to obtain the R-ATP 
certificate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. A minimum of 50 hours of multiengine flight experience. This 
requirement will apply not just to pilots serving in part 121 
operations, but to all pilots who apply for an ATP certificate with an 
airplane category multiengine class rating.\33\ This will include PICs 
in part 135 operations that require an ATP certificate, and PICs in 
part 91, subpart K, Fractional Ownership Programs, which require the 
PIC to hold an ATP certificate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ The rule applies to the airplane class, so applicants for 
an ATP certificate with single-engine class rating will be required 
to have 50 hours of single-engine time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. An ATP Certification Training Program for applicants for an ATP 
certificate with an airplane category multiengine class rating or an 
ATP certificate obtained concurrently with an aircraft type rating. 
This is a foundational course that will include academic study as well 
as flight training in FSTDs to meet the Act's requirements that pilots 
have the necessary training and experience discussed previously to 
function effectively in an air carrier environment. The course will 
provide training necessary to overcome the knowledge gap (between the 
commercial pilot certificate and the knowledge required for an air 
carrier SIC) and will address the current lack of a training 
requirement for ATP certification. These competencies include crew 
coordination, checklist/briefing items, low energy states/stalls, and 
adverse weather conditions, including icing, thunderstorms, and 
crosswinds with gusts. The course topics will be incorporated into the 
ATP knowledge test. In addition to applying to all pilots in part 121 
operations, this requirement will apply to PICs in part 135 operations 
that require an ATP certificate, and PICs in part 91, subpart K, 
Fractional Ownership Operations, which require the PIC to hold an ATP 
certificate.
    4. An aircraft type rating for all SICs serving in part 121 
operations. The FOQ ARC made the same recommendation and this 
requirement responds to the objectives of section 216 of the Act, which 
requires the Administrator to determine the appropriate multiengine 
airplane flight experience for pilot flightcrew members. Currently only 
PICs in part 121 operations, and SICs in flag or supplemental 
operations requiring three or more pilots, are required to hold an 
aircraft type rating. The FAA has determined that requiring aircraft 
type ratings for all pilots in part 121 operations will improve safety 
by further exposing pilots to an advanced multiengine aircraft and a 
multicrew environment. Also the provision for an airplane type rating 
requires a pilot who serves as SIC to be tested to the same standard as 
the PIC and to demonstrate proficiency in difficult operational 
conditions, including adverse weather and high altitude operations.
    5. A minimum of 1,000 hours in air carrier operations to serve as 
PIC in part 121 operations. Under the final rule, SICs must accumulate 
1,000 flight hours in air carrier operations before becoming eligible 
for upgrade to PIC. Without the 1,000-hour requirement, SICs with an 
unrestricted ATP certificate would be eligible to upgrade to PIC as 
soon as they attain 1,500 flight hours, regardless of their experience. 
The 1,000-hour requirement will ensure that a pilot will have at least 
one full year of relevant operational experience before upgrading to 
PIC. The final rule allows a pilot to count PIC time in part 135 
operations that require an ATP and in part 91, subpart K, operations, 
as well as SIC time in part 121 operations. Pilots with experience as 
PICs in military transport operations will be allowed to count up to 
500 hours of such experience as well.
    The FAA estimates that cost will be minimal for the requirement of 
50 hours of multiengine time for the ATP certificate with an airplane 
category multiengine class rating. As noted in the regulatory 
evaluation and preamble, multiengine hours are typically acquired while 
engaged in other commercial aviation activities such as flight 
instruction or part 135 operations on the way to obtaining the ATP 
certificate. Moreover, minimums for multiengine time vary among 
airlines from 50 hours to as much as 1,500 hours.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ Kit Darby, President, www.KitDarby.com, Aviation 
Consulting, LLC, Peachtree City, GA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA also estimates as minimal the costs of the requirement that 
a part 121 SIC have 1,000 hours of air carrier operating experience 
before upgrade from SIC to PIC. According to a 2010 FAA survey of 
industry, the average number of years to upgrade is about five years 
for regional airlines and more than ten years for major airlines. Even 
without air carrier operating experience in part 135 or part 91, 
subpart K operations, at an average number of 750 flight hours a year, 
an SIC will accumulate the required hours in less than one and a half 
years.
Compliance Cost by Part 121 Operators
    Table 5 shows the cost of the final rule for the part 121 
operators. Costs of the ATP CTP are allocated between the regional 
airlines and the major/cargo airlines by the percentage of pilots 
employed by the two airlines (Nov. 2010 part 121 pilots, 78,258: 
Regionals--20,565 [26.3%], Major/cargo airlines--57,693 [73.7%]).
    As explained in the regulatory evaluation, the FAA expects that the 
compliance cost of the ATP CTP for part 121 air carriers will fall 
heavily, if not exclusively, on the regional airlines. So in assessing 
the economic impact on small regional airlines, we assume the entire 
ATP CTP costs fall on regional airlines. But in order to assess the 
economic impact on small cargo airlines, we assume the impact is 
proportional to the number of pilots. We do the same with the type 
rating costs, although the magnitudes are small compared to the ATP CTP 
costs.
Economic Impact on Small Entities
    In order to assess the economic impact of this final rule on small 
firms, we allocate annualized costs to small firms based on the number 
of affected pilots and measure the economic impact on small firms by 
each firms' annualized costs as a percentage of their average 5-year, 
2005-2009 operating revenues.\35\ While the economic burden

[[Page 42369]]

of this rule will have a disproportionate impact on small entities, the 
compliance cost will not result in a significant economic cost on small 
entities. This analysis measures the economic impact on small entities 
in a two-step process. All of the compliance costs are training costs 
for new pilots (plus type rating costs for part 121 operators). Again, 
the Congressional mandate that all pilots have an ATP certificate is 
self-enacting and not an FAA requirement. Thus the 1,500 hour 
requirement costs are not included in these compliance costs. While the 
FAA believes the annual estimates of new pilots are reasonably accurate 
for the part 121, part 135, or part 91 subpart K industry, we do not 
know the turnover per operator. The annual new pilot hires per operator 
are estimated as a percentage of total industry pilots (part 121, part 
135, or par 91 subpart K) multiplied by the system-wide number of new 
pilots. The estimated new pilot hires for each operator are then 
multiplied by the annualized training cost to obtain the total 
annualized cost per operator.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ Operating Revenue--www.transtat.bts.gov, Air Carrier 
Financial Reports (Form 41 Financial Data), Schedules P1.1 & P1.2. 
We average for as many of the five years of data as is available. 
Operating revenue for Great Lakes Aviation is from its SEC 10-K 
filing. Operating revenues for part 91 subpart K air carriers is 
from the CLEAR database and is for 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The annual training cost is simply the per-pilot training cost 
multiplied by the annual number of newly hired pilots. The annualized 
training cost is less than $3,300 per pilot. This per-pilot training 
cost estimate is $3,242 for a part 121 operator and $3,178 for a part 
135 operator and also for a part 91 subpart K operator. The higher cost 
for part 121 operators is due to the additional type rating cost. As a 
point of reference, the average cost per pilot over the 20-year 
estimation period of the rule is approximately $4,000 (based on total 
cost, not present value). Clearly the per-pilot training cost is not a 
significant economic impact.
    The number of new pilots per year equals the number of retired 
pilots plus the additional pilots above the previous year (net growth). 
On average the annual number of new pilots is 3,531 for part 121; 282 
for part 135; and 124 for part 91, subpart K. The estimated number of 
new pilots per operator equals the operator's current percentage of 
industry pilots (part 121, part 135, or part 91 subpart K) \36\ 
multiplied by the total number of new pilots. Table 7 lists that 
percentage for many small entities. To calculate the cost per operator, 
that percentage per operator is then multiplied by the total annualized 
cost, $11.51 million for part 121 operators, $0.897 million for part 
135 operators, and $0.394 million for part 91, subpart K operators. 
These annualized costs are based on the present value training costs 
(and type rating costs for part 121 operators) calculated in the 
regulatory evaluation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ For part 121 operations since regional airlines and major/
cargo airlines are analyzed separately, operator pilot percentages 
are calculated with respect to the total number of pilots in the 
relevant group.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    While Table 7 provides economic impact estimates for many 
operators, a generic estimate more simply makes the point that the 
compliance costs of this rule do not create a significant economic 
impact per operator. In general, the annual number of new pilots per 
operator is substantially less than 10 percent of the operator's total 
pilots. For this case, an operator with a 100 pilots will have no more 
than 10 new pilots per year. With training costs of $3,300 per pilot 
the annual training cost is less than $33,000. As long as the operator 
receives operating revenue greater than $2 million these costs will be 
less than 2 percent of annual operating revenue. The FAA does not 
believe costs less than 2 percent of annual operating revenue to have a 
significant economic impact. As Table 7 shows the percentage of annual 
compliance cost is nearly always less than 0.05 percent and never over 
2 percent of annual operating revenue.
    The rule will have a disproportionate impact on small entities. 
Given the Congressional mandate that all pilots have an ATP certificate 
and that this mandate disproportionally affects small entities, the FAA 
considered, but had limited alternatives with which to provide more 
relief to small operators. In considering the economic impact of this 
rule, the FAA created the R-ATP certificate based on education credits, 
and for pilots with 1,500 flight hours, a minimum age of 21, instead of 
age 23. This rule imposes only training costs on new pilots and small 
type rating costs on part 121 pilots. The compliance period for the 
type rating requirement for those pilots serving in part 121 by July 
31, 2013, has been extended in the final rule. As both the per-pilot 
training costs are modest and the annual number of new pilots is small, 
the compliance cost relative to annual operating revenue is always less 
than 2 percent and almost always less than 0.05 percent. Therefore, as 
the FAA Administrator, I certify that this final rule will not have 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 the protection of safety, and does not operate in a 
manner that excludes imports that meet this objective. The statute also 
requires consideration of international standards and, where 
appropriate, that they be the basis for U.S. standards. The FAA has 
assessed the potential effect of this final rule and determined that it 
would have only a domestic impact and therefore would not create 
unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United States.

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 
(adjusted annually for inflation with the base year 1995) 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 $143.1 million. Excluding the Congressionally driven costs, the 
compliance costs of this rule never exceed $100 million in any one 
year. This final rule does not contain such an unfunded mandate; 
therefore, the requirements of Title II of the Act do not apply.

E. Paperwork Reduction Act

    Title: Pilot Certification and Qualification Requirements for Air 
Carrier Operations.
    This proposal contains the following new information collection 
requirements. As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 
U.S.C. 3507(d)), the FAA has submitted the information requirements 
associated with this proposal to the Office of Management and Budget 
for its review.
    The Office of Management and Budget approved these new information 
collection requirements associated with this final rule and assigned 
OMB Control Number 2120-0755.
    Summary: The paperwork burden is comprised of two areas. First, 
this final rule amends the requirements for

[[Page 42370]]

obtaining an airline transport pilot (ATP) certificate by requiring 
pilot applicants for an ATP certificate with an airplane category 
multiengine class rating or an ATP certificate obtained concurrently 
with an airplane type rating to complete a new ATP Certification 
Training Program. Any part 142 training center, part 141 pilot school, 
or air carrier wishing to offer the new training program would be 
required to submit the curriculum to the FAA for approval.
    In addition, the final rule provides a method for an institution of 
higher education to seek the authority to certify its graduates of a 
degree program with an aviation major to apply for a restricted 
privileges ATP certificate. The final rule will require the institution 
to hold a part 141 pilot school certificate from the FAA to provide 
pilot training within the degree program(s) listed in their letter of 
authorization. The institution of higher education seeking this 
authority will be required to submit an application on a new form that 
was developed for this purpose.
    Public Comments: With regard to the FAA's paperwork estimates, NAFI 
was the only commenter. Their comment stated--without providing 
specific details--that ``the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the 
burden is significantly lacking in areas of consideration that have 
been included, representative estimates of costs, and the effects that 
will result from the proposed changes.'' NAFI added that it was unaware 
of any data that has been developed that accurately allows for proper 
costing of these effects and recommended ``that this data be sought 
prior to any long term changes in order to more accurately study and 
make decisions regarding proposed changes.''
    Without additional detail from the commenter, the FAA is uncertain 
how to respond to NAFI's concerns regarding the accuracy of its 
estimates. The FAA believes that the estimates in the NPRM accurately 
reflected the paperwork burden of the proposal. Notwithstanding, the 
FAA has reevaluated the paperwork burden of the final rule and has made 
some adjustments to the ATP CTP paperwork costs. In addition, the FAA 
has added additional paperwork costs for institutions of higher 
education who seek the authority to certify its graduates of a degree 
program with an aviation major to apply for a restricted privileges ATP 
certificate by requiring them to submit an application.
    Use of: The information collection for the ATP Certification 
Training Program will ensure pilots seeking employment in an air 
carrier environment are adequately trained on the knowledge and skills 
they need to function in a multicrew environment in a variety of 
operating conditions. The requirement to submit the ATP Certification 
Training Program curriculum to the FAA for approval will provide 
greater oversight of the training programs and ensure consistency of 
both course and instructional quality among the training centers, pilot 
schools, and air carriers. Part 121, 135, 141, or 142 certificate 
holders that wish to offer or provide the ATP Certification Training 
Program are required to develop and submit a course for approval by the 
FAA. For those that provide this training, additional pilot training 
record keeping would also be required.
Industry ATP CTP Development Costs
Initial number of certificate holders offering the ATP CTP = 20
Time needed to develop the ATP CTP = 120 hours
Salary of a ground instructor = $32.55
First-Year Cost (2014) \37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ For 2013 there are no Paperwork Reduction Act costs for the 
ATP CTP. All costs begin in 2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Cost: 20 x 120 x $32.55 = $78,120
    Time: 20 x 120 = 2,400 hours
Subsequent Years: Per-Year Costs
    Cost: 1 x 120 x $32.55 = $3,906
    Time: 1 x 120 = 120 hours
Total Costs Over 20 Years (2013-2032)
    Cost: $78,120 + (18 x $3,906) = $148,428
    Time: 2,400 + (18 x 120) = 4,560 hours
Average per Year
    Cost: $148,428/20 = $7,421
    Time: 4,560/20 = 228 hours
Industry Record Keeping Costs
    Initial number of ATP certificate applicants = 3,731
    Time needed for record keeping per pilot = 0.1 hours
    Salary of a ground instructor = $32.55
First-Year Cost (2014)
    Cost: 3,731 x 0.1 x $32.55 = $12,145
    Time: 3,731 x 0.1 = 373 hours
Subsequent Years Costs (assume 0.6% annual growth rate)
    Cost: $231,501
    Time: 7,112 hours
Total Costs Over 20 Years (2013-2032)
    Cost: $12,145 + $231,501 = $243,646
    Time: 373 + 7,112 = 7,485 hours
Average per Year
    Cost: $243,646/20 = $12,182
    Time: 7,485/20 = 374 hours
FAA ATP CTP Review Costs
    Initial number of certificate holders requesting ATP CTP approval = 
20
    Time needed to review the ATP CTP for initial and final approval = 
44 hours
    Salary of an aviation safety inspector = $61.50
First-Year Cost (2014)
    Cost: 20 x 44 x $61.50 = $54,120
    Time: 20 x 44 = 880 hours
Subsequent Years: Per-Year Costs
    Cost: 1 x 44 x $61.50 = $2,706
    Time: 1 x 44 = 44 hours
Total Over 20 Years (2013-2032)
    Cost: $54,120 + (18 x $2,706) = $102,828
    Time: 880 + (18 x 44) = 1,672 hours
Average per Year
    Cost: $102,828/20 = $5,141
    Time: 1,672/20 = 83.6 hours
FAA Approval Letter Costs
    Initial number of certificate holders requesting ATP CTP approval = 
20
    Time needed to issue the approval letter = 0.5 hours
    Salary of clerk/secretary = $24.67
First-Year Cost (2014)
    Cost: 20 x 0.5 x $24.67 = $246.70
    Time: 20 x 0.5 = 10 hours
Subsequent Years: Per-Year Costs
    Cost: 1 x 0.5 x $24.67 = $12.34
    Time: 1 x 0.5 = 0.5 hours
Total Over 20 Years (2013-2032)
    Cost: $246.70 + (18 x $12.34) = $469
    Time: 10 + (18 x 0.5) = 19 hours
Average per Year
    Cost: $469/20 = $23
    Time: 19/20 = 0.95 hours
    The information collection for the authority to certify graduates 
of a degree program in an aviation major will ensure pilots who seek 
eligibility for a restricted privileges ATP certificate based on 
academic training at an institution of higher education have the option 
to complete aviation coursework designed to improve and enhance the 
knowledge and skills of a person seeking a career as a professional 
pilot. Institutions of higher education who seek the authority to 
certify its graduates of a degree program with an aviation major to 
apply for a restricted privileges ATP certificate are required to 
submit the necessary information about the degree program(s), including 
aviation and aviation-related coursework, in order to obtain the 
authority to certify a graduate has met the restricted privileges ATP 
certificate requirements established in this final rule.
Institution of Higher Education Application Costs
    Initial number of institutions of higher education applying for the 
authority to certify graduates = 150
    Time needed to complete the application = 8 hours
    College professor hourly wage = $53.33
First-Year Cost (2013)
    Cost: 150 x 8 x $53.33 = $63,966

[[Page 42371]]

    Time: 150 x 8 = 1,200 hours
Subsequent Years: Per-Year Costs
    Cost: 1 x 8 x $53.33 = $427
    Time: 1 x 8 = 8 hours
Total Over 20 Years (2013-2032)
    Cost: $63,966 + (19 x $427) = $72,109
    Time: 1,200 + (19 x 8) = 1,352 hours
Average per Year
    Cost: $72,109/20 = $3,605
    Time: 1,352/20 = 68 hours
Review of Transcripts Costs
    Initial number of graduates = 648
    Time needed to review a graduate's transcript = 0.5 hours
    Academic advisor hourly wage = $53.33
First-Year Cost (2013)
    Cost: 648 x 0.5 x $53.33 = $17,279
    Time: 648 x 0.5 = 324 hours
Subsequent Years Costs (assume 0.6% annual growth rate)
    Cost: $348,696
    Time: 6,538 hours
Total Over 20 Years (2013-2032)
    Cost: $17,279 + $348,696 = $365,973
    Time: 324 + 6,538 = 6,862 hours
Average per-Year
    Cost: $365,973/20 = $18,299
    Time: 6,862/20 = 343 hours
FAA Review of Application Costs
    Initial number of applications to review = 150
    Time needed to review the application = 6 hours
    Salary of an aviation safety inspector = $61.50
First-Year Cost (2013)
    Cost: 150 x 6 x $61.50 = $55,350
    Time: 150 x 6 = 900 hours
Subsequent Years: Per-Year Costs
    Cost: 1 x 6 x $61.50 = $369
    Time: 1 x 6 = 6 hours
Total Over 20 Years (2013-2032)
    Cost: $55,350 + (19 x $369) = $62,361
    Time: 900 + (19 x 6) = 1,014 hours
Average per Year
    Cost: $62,361/20 = $3,118
    Time: 1,014/20 = 51 hours

F. International Compatibility

    In keeping with U.S. obligations under the Convention on 
International Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to conform to 
International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Standards and 
Recommended Practices to the maximum extent practicable. The FAA has 
reviewed the corresponding ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices and 
has identified the following differences.
    The FAA notes that, although pilots will be able to obtain a 
restricted privileges ATP certificate in fewer than the ICAO standard 
of 1,500 hours, those pilots will not have the pilot in command 
privileges of pilots who hold unrestricted ATP certificates. This pilot 
in command restriction will be reflected on the pilot's certificate. 
The experience and qualifications of the pilots who hold restricted 
privileges ATP certificates will exceed the ICAO standards for second-
in-command.
    The FAA also notes certain long-standing U.S. differences on file 
with certain ICAO Medical Assessment standards continue to apply under 
this action. Although this rule permits SICs in part 121 to hold only a 
second-class medical certificate, those SICs who serve in international 
operations will need to obtain an FAA first-class medical certificate 
to compensate for the electrocardiography difference between a first 
class medical certificate and a second class medical certificate. As 
such, U.S. pilots who fly internationally must continue to comply with 
this international aviation standard.

G. 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 308(c) and involves no extraordinary 
circumstances.

V. Executive Order Determinations

A. Executive Order 13132, Federalism

    The FAA has analyzed this 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 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.

VI. 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 Printing Office's Web page at http://www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/index.html.
    Copies may also be obtained by sending a request (identified by 
notice, 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) 267-9680.

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/.

List of Subjects

14 CFR Part 61

    Aircraft, Airmen, Aviation safety.

14 CFR Part 121

    Air carriers, Aircraft, Airmen, Aviation safety.

14 CFR Part 135

    Air taxis, Aircraft, Airmen, Aviation safety.

14 CFR Part 141

    Airmen, Educational facilities.

[[Page 42372]]

14 CFR Part 142

    Airmen, Educational facilities.

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

0
1. The authority citation for part 61 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40113, 44701-44703, 44707, 
44709-44711, 45102-45103, 45301-45302.


0
2. Amend Sec.  61.1 as follows:
0
A. Remove paragraph designations (b)(1) through (b)(19);
0
B. Add new definitions of Accredited, Institution of higher education, 
and Nationally recognized accrediting agency to paragraph (b) in 
alphabetical order;
0
C. Revise paragraph (iii) of the definition of Authorized instructor in 
paragraph (b);
0
D. Revise the definition of Cross country time; and
0
E. Remove definitions of Flight simulator and Flight training device.
    The additions and revisions read as follows:


Sec.  61.1  Applicability and definitions.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    Accredited has the same meaning as defined by the Department of 
Education in 34 CFR 600.2.
* * * * *
    Authorized instructor means--
* * * * *
    (iii) A person authorized by the Administrator to provide ground 
training or flight training under part 61, 121, 135, or 142 of this 
chapter when conducting ground training or flight training in 
accordance with that authority.
    Cross-country time means--
    (i) Except as provided in paragraphs (ii) through (vi) of this 
definition, time acquired during flight--
    (A) Conducted by a person who holds a pilot certificate;
    (B) Conducted in an aircraft;
    (C) That includes a landing at a point other than the point of 
departure; and
    (D) That involves the use of dead reckoning, pilotage, electronic 
navigation aids, radio aids, or other navigation systems to navigate to 
the landing point.
    (ii) For the purpose of meeting the aeronautical experience 
requirements (except for a rotorcraft category rating), for a private 
pilot certificate (except for a powered parachute category rating), a 
commercial pilot certificate, or an instrument rating, or for the 
purpose of exercising recreational pilot privileges (except in a 
rotorcraft) under Sec.  61.101 (c), time acquired during a flight--
    (A) Conducted in an appropriate aircraft;
    (B) That includes a point of landing that was at least a straight-
line distance of more than 50 nautical miles from the original point of 
departure; and
    (C) That involves the use of dead reckoning, pilotage, electronic 
navigation aids, radio aids, or other navigation systems to navigate to 
the landing point.
    (iii) For the purpose of meeting the aeronautical experience 
requirements for a sport pilot certificate (except for powered 
parachute privileges), time acquired during a flight conducted in an 
appropriate aircraft that--
    (A) Includes a point of landing at least a straight line distance 
of more than 25 nautical miles from the original point of departure; 
and
    (B) Involves, as applicable, the use of dead reckoning; pilotage; 
electronic navigation aids; radio aids; or other navigation systems to 
navigate to the landing point.
    (iv) For the purpose of meeting the aeronautical experience 
requirements for a sport pilot certificate with powered parachute 
privileges or a private pilot certificate with a powered parachute 
category rating, time acquired during a flight conducted in an 
appropriate aircraft that--
    (A) Includes a point of landing at least a straight line distance 
of more than 15 nautical miles from the original point of departure; 
and
    (B) Involves, as applicable, the use of dead reckoning; pilotage; 
electronic navigation aids; radio aids; or other navigation systems to 
navigate to the landing point.
    (v) For the purpose of meeting the aeronautical experience 
requirements for any pilot certificate with a rotorcraft category 
rating or an instrument-helicopter rating, or for the purpose of 
exercising recreational pilot privileges, in a rotorcraft, under Sec.  
61.101(c), time acquired during a flight--
    (A) Conducted in an appropriate aircraft;
    (B) That includes a point of landing that was at least a straight-
line distance of more than 25 nautical miles from the original point of 
departure; and
    (C) That involves the use of dead reckoning, pilotage, electronic 
navigation aids, radio aids, or other navigation systems to navigate to 
the landing point.
    (vi) For the purpose of meeting the aeronautical experience 
requirements for an airline transport pilot certificate (except with a 
rotorcraft category rating), time acquired during a flight--
    (A) Conducted in an appropriate aircraft;
    (B) That is at least a straight-line distance of more than 50 
nautical miles from the original point of departure; and
    (C) That involves the use of dead reckoning, pilotage, electronic 
navigation aids, radio aids, or other navigation systems.
    (vii) For a military pilot who qualifies for a commercial pilot 
certificate (except with a rotorcraft category rating) under Sec.  
61.73 of this part, time acquired during a flight--
    (A) Conducted in an appropriate aircraft;
    (B) That is at least a straight-line distance of more than 50 
nautical miles from the original point of departure; and
    (C) That involves the use of dead reckoning, pilotage, electronic 
navigation aids, radio aids, or other navigation systems.
* * * * *
    Institution of higher education has the same meaning as defined by 
the Department of Education in 34 CFR 600.4.
* * * * *
    Nationally recognized accrediting agency has the same meaning as 
defined by the Department of Education in 34 CFR 600.2.
* * * * *


0
3. Amend Sec.  61.23 as follows:
0
A. Revise paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2);
0
B. Revise paragraphs (d)(1)(i) and (ii) and (d)(2)(i).
    The additions and revisions read as follows:


Sec.  61.23  Medical certificates: Requirement and duration.

    (a) * * *
    (1) Must hold a first-class medical certificate:
    (i) When exercising the pilot-in-command privileges of an airline 
transport pilot certificate;
    (ii) When exercising the second-in-command privileges of an airline 
transport pilot certificate in a flag or supplemental operation in part 
121 of this chapter that requires three or more pilots; or
    (iii) When serving as a required pilot flightcrew member in an 
operation conducted under part 121 of this chapter if the pilot has 
reached his or her 60th birthday.
    (2) Must hold at least a second class medical certificate when 
exercising:

[[Page 42373]]

    (i) Second-in-command privileges of an airline transport pilot 
certificate in part 121 of this chapter (other than operations 
specified in paragraph (a)(1)(ii) of this section); or
    (ii) Privileges of a commercial pilot certificate; or
* * * * *
    (d) Duration of a medical certificate. Use the following table to 
determine duration for each class of medical certificate:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                           Then your medical
                                      And on the date of                                certificate expires, for
            If you hold              examination for your   And you are conducting an    that operation, at the
                                     most recent medical       operation requiring       end of the last day of
                                     certificate you were                                         the
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) A first-class medical           (i) Under age 40.....  an airline transport pilot  12th month after the
 certificate.                                               certificate for pilot-in-   month of the date of
                                                            command privileges, or      examination shown on the
                                                            for second-in-command       medical certificate.
                                                            privileges in a flag or
                                                            supplemental operation in
                                                            part 121 requiring three
                                                            or more pilots.
                                    (ii) Age 40 or older.  an airline transport pilot  6th month after the month
                                                            certificate for pilot-in-   of the date of
                                                            command privileges, for     examination shown on the
                                                            second-in-command           medical certificate.
                                                            privileges in a flag or
                                                            supplemental operation in
                                                            part 121 requiring three
                                                            or more pilots, or for a
                                                            pilot flightcrew member
                                                            in part 121 operations
                                                            who has reached his or
                                                            her 60th birthday..
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
(2) A second-class medical          (i) Any age..........  an airline transport pilot  12th month after the
 certificate.                                               certificate for second-in-  month of the date of
                                                            command privileges (other   examination shown on the
                                                            than the operations         medical certificate.
                                                            specified in paragraph
                                                            (d)(1) of this section),
                                                            a commercial pilot
                                                            certificate, or an air
                                                            traffic control tower
                                                            operator certificate.
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


0
4. Amend Sec.  61.35 by removing the word ``and'' at the end of 
paragraph (a)(1), redesignating paragraph (a)(2) as paragraph (a)(3), 
adding a new paragraph (a)(2), and revising redesignated paragraph 
(a)(3)(iii) to read as follows:


Sec.  61.35  Knowledge test: Prerequisites and passing grades.

    (a) * * *
    (2) After July 31, 2014, for the knowledge test for an airline 
transport pilot certificate with an airplane category multiengine class 
rating, a graduation certificate for the airline transport pilot 
certification training program specified in Sec.  61.156; and
    (3) * * *
    (iii) Date of birth, which shows:
    (A) For issuance of certificates other than the ATP certificate 
with an airplane category multiengine class rating, the applicant meets 
or will meet the age requirements of this part for the certificate 
sought before the expiration date of the airman knowledge test report; 
and
    (B) For issuance of an ATP certificate with an airplane category 
multiengine class rating obtained under the aeronautical experience 
requirements of Sec.  61.159 or Sec.  61.160, the applicant is at least 
18 years of age at the time of the knowledge test;
* * * * *

0
5. Amend Sec.  61.39 to revise paragraphs (a) and (b); redesignate 
paragraphs (c) through (e) as paragraphs (e) through (g); and add 
paragraphs (c) and (d) to read as follows:


Sec.  61.39  Prerequisites for practical tests.

    (a) Except as provided in paragraphs (b), (c), and (e) of this 
section, to be eligible for a practical test for a certificate or 
rating issued under this part, an applicant must:
    (1) Pass the required knowledge test:
    (i) Within the 24-calendar-month period preceding the month the 
applicant completes the practical test, if a knowledge test is 
required; or
    (ii) Within the 60-calendar month period preceding the month the 
applicant completes the practical for those applicants who pass the 
knowledge test after completing the airline transport pilot 
certification training program in Sec.  61.156;
    (2) Present the knowledge test report at the time of application 
for the practical test, if a knowledge test is required;
    (3) Have satisfactorily accomplished the required training and 
obtained the aeronautical experience prescribed by this part for the 
certificate or rating sought;
    (4) Hold at least a third-class medical certificate, if a medical 
certificate is required;
    (5) Meet the prescribed age requirement of this part for the 
issuance of the certificate or rating sought;
    (6) Have an endorsement, if required by this part, in the 
applicant's logbook or training record that has been signed by an 
authorized instructor who certifies that the applicant--
    (i) Has received and logged training time within 2 calendar months 
preceding the month of application in preparation for the practical 
test;
    (ii) Is prepared for the required practical test; and
    (iii) Has demonstrated satisfactory knowledge of the subject areas 
in which the applicant was deficient on the airman knowledge test; and
    (7) Have a completed and signed application form.
    (b) An applicant for an airline transport pilot certificate with an 
airplane category multiengine class rating or an airline transport 
pilot certificate with an airplane type rating may take the practical 
test with an expired knowledge test only if the applicant passed the 
knowledge test after July 31, 2014, and is employed:
    (1) As a flightcrew member by a part 119 certificate holder 
conducting operations under parts 125 or 135 of this chapter at the 
time of the practical test and has satisfactorily accomplished that 
operator's approved pilot-in-command training or checking program; or

[[Page 42374]]

    (2) As a flightcrew member by a part 119 certificate holder 
conducting operations under part 121 of this chapter at the time of the 
practical test and has satisfactorily accomplished that operator's 
approved initial training program; or
    (3) By the U.S. Armed Forces as a flight crewmember in U.S. 
military air transport operations at the time of the practical test and 
has completed the pilot in command aircraft qualification training 
program that is appropriate to the pilot certificate and rating sought.
    (c) An applicant for an airline transport pilot certificate with a 
rating other than those ratings set forth in paragraph (b) of this 
section may take the practical test for that certificate or rating with 
an expired knowledge test report, provided that the applicant is 
employed:
    (1) As a flightcrew member by a part 119 certificate holder 
conducting operations under parts 125 or 135 of this chapter at the 
time of the practical test and has satisfactorily accomplished that 
operator's approved pilot-in-command training or checking program; or
    (2) By the U.S. Armed Forces as a flight crewmember in U.S. 
military air transport operations at the time of the practical test and 
has completed the pilot in command aircraft qualification training 
program that is appropriate to the pilot certificate and rating sought.
    (d) In addition to the requirements in paragraph (a) of this 
section, to be eligible for a practical test for an airline transport 
pilot certificate with an airplane category multiengine class rating or 
airline transport pilot certificate obtained concurrently with an 
airplane type rating, an applicant must:
    (1) If the applicant passed the knowledge test after July 31, 2014, 
present the graduation certificate for the airline transport pilot 
certification training program in Sec.  61.156, at the time of 
application for the practical test;
    (2) If applying for the practical test under the aeronautical 
experience requirements of Sec.  61.160(a), the applicant must present 
the documents required by that section to substantiate eligibility; and
    (3) If applying for the practical test under the aeronautical 
experience requirements of Sec.  61.160(b), (c), or (d), the applicant 
must present an official transcript and certifying document from an 
institution of higher education that holds a letter of authorization 
from the Administrator under Sec.  61.169.
* * * * *

0
6. Amend Sec.  61.55 by revising paragraph (a)(3) and by removing the 
phrase ``part 121,'' from paragraph (e) introductory text to read as 
follows:


Sec.  61.55  Second-in-command qualifications.

    (a) * * *
    (3) At least a pilot type rating for the aircraft being flown 
unless the flight will be conducted as domestic flight operations 
within the United States airspace.
* * * * *

0
7. Amend Sec.  61.57 by revising paragraph (e)(2) to read as follows:


Sec.  61.57  Recent flight experience: Pilot in command.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (2) This section does not apply to a pilot in command who is 
employed by an air carrier certificated under part 121 or 135 and is 
engaged in a flight operation under part 91, 121, or 135 for that air 
carrier if the pilot is in compliance with Sec. Sec.  121.435 or 
121.436, as applicable, and Sec.  121.439, or Sec. Sec.  135.243 and 
135.247 of this chapter, as appropriate.
* * * * *

0
8. Amend Sec.  61.71 by revising paragraphs (b) and (c) to read as 
follows;


Sec.  61.71  Graduates of an approved training program other than under 
this part: Special rules.

* * * * *
    (b) A person may apply for an airline transport pilot certificate, 
type rating, or both under this part, and will be considered to have 
met the applicable requirements under Sec.  61.157, except for the 
airline transport pilot certification training program required by 
Sec.  61.156, for that certificate and rating, if that person has:
    (1) Satisfactorily accomplished an approved training program and a 
proficiency check for that airplane type that includes all the tasks 
and maneuvers required to serve as pilot in command in accordance with 
the requirements of subparts N and O of part 121 of this chapter; and
    (2) Applied for an airline transport pilot certificate, type 
rating, or both within the 60-day period from the date the person 
satisfactorily accomplished the requirements of paragraph (b)(1) for 
that airplane type.
    (c) A person who holds a foreign pilot license and is applying for 
an equivalent U.S. pilot certificate on the basis of a Bilateral 
Aviation Safety Agreement and associated Implementation Procedures for 
Licensing may be considered to have met the applicable aeronautical 
experience, aeronautical knowledge, and areas of operation requirements 
of this part.

0
9. Amend Sec.  61.153 as follows:
0
A. Revise paragraph (a);
0
B. Redesignate paragraphs (e) through (h) as paragraphs (f) through 
(i); and
0
C. Add a new paragraph (e).
    The addition and revisions read as follows:


Sec.  61.153  Eligibility requirements: General.

* * * * *
    (a) Meet the following age requirements:
    (1) For an airline transport pilot certificate obtained under the 
aeronautical experience requirements of Sec. Sec.  61.159, 61.161, or 
61.163, be at least 23 years of age; or
    (2) For an airline transport pilot certificate obtained under the 
aeronautical experience requirements of Sec.  61.160, be at least 21 
years of age.
* * * * *
    (e) After July 31, 2014, for an airline transport pilot certificate 
with an airplane category multiengine class rating or an airline 
transport pilot certificate obtained concurrently with an airplane type 
rating, receive a graduation certificate from an authorized training 
provider certifying completion of the airline transport pilot 
certification training program specified in Sec.  61.156 before 
applying for the knowledge test required by paragraph (g) of this 
section;
* * * * *

0
10. Amend Sec.  61.155 as follows:
0
A. Remove the word ``and'' after the semicolon in paragraph (c)(12);
0
B. Remove the period from the end of paragraph (c)(13) and add the 
phrase ``; and'' in its place; and
0
C. Add paragraphs (c)(14) and (d).
    The additions read as follows:


Sec.  61.155  Aeronautical knowledge.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (14) After July 31, 2014, for airplane category multiengine class 
rating or airplane type rating, the content of the airline transport 
pilot certification training program in Sec.  61.156.
    (d) An applicant who successfully completes the knowledge test for 
an airline transport pilot certificate prior to August 1, 2014, must 
successfully complete the practical test within 24 months from the 
month in which the knowledge test was successfully completed. An 
applicant who passes the knowledge test prior to August 1, 2014, but 
fails to successfully complete the practical test within 24 months must 
complete the airline transport pilot certification training program 
specified

[[Page 42375]]

in Sec.  61.156 and retake the knowledge test prior to applying for the 
practical test.

0
11. Add Sec.  61.156 to read as follows:


Sec.  61.156  Training requirements: Airplane category--multiengine 
class rating or airplane type rating concurrently with airline 
transport pilot certificate.

    After July 31, 2014, a person who applies for the knowledge test 
for an airline transport pilot certificate with an airplane category 
multiengine class rating must present a graduation certificate from an 
authorized training provider under part 121, 135, 141, or 142 of this 
chapter certifying the applicant has completed the following training 
in a course approved by the Administrator.
    (a) Academic training. The applicant for the knowledge test must 
receive at least 30 hours of classroom instruction that includes the 
following:
    (1) At least 8 hours of instruction on aerodynamics including high 
altitude operations;
    (2) At least 2 hours of instruction on meteorology, including 
adverse weather phenomena and weather detection systems; and
    (3) At least 14 hours of instruction on air carrier operations, 
including the following areas:
    (i) Physiology;
    (ii) Communications;
    (iii) Checklist philosophy;
    (iv) Operational control;
    (v) Minimum equipment list/configuration deviation list;
    (vi) Ground operations;
    (vii) Turbine engines;
    (viii) Transport category aircraft performance;
    (ix) Automation, navigation, and flight path warning systems.
    (4) At least 6 hours of instruction on leadership, professional 
development, crew resource management, and safety culture.
    (b) FSTD training. The applicant for the knowledge test must 
receive at least 10 hours of training in a flight simulation training 
device qualified under part 60 of this chapter that represents a 
multiengine turbine airplane. The training must include the following:
    (1) At least 6 hours of training in a Level C or higher full flight 
simulator qualified under part 60 of this chapter that represents a 
multiengine turbine airplane with a maximum takeoff weight of 40,000 
pounds or greater. The training must include the following areas:
    (i) Low energy states/stalls;
    (ii) Upset recovery techniques; and
    (iii) Adverse weather conditions, including icing, thunderstorms, 
and crosswinds with gusts.
    (2) The remaining FSTD training may be completed in a Level 4 or 
higher flight simulation training device. The training must include the 
following areas:
    (i) Navigation including flight management systems; and
    (ii) Automation including autoflight.
    (c) Deviation authority. The Administrator may issue deviation 
authority from the weight requirement in paragraph (b)(1) of this 
section upon a determination that the objectives of the training can be 
met in an alternative device.

0
12. Amend Sec.  61.157 by revising paragraph (c) to read as follows:


Sec.  61.157  Flight proficiency.

* * * * *
    (c) Exceptions. A person who applies for an aircraft type rating to 
be added to an airline transport pilot certificate or an aircraft type 
rating concurrently with an airline transport pilot certificate, and 
who is an employee of a certificate holder operating under part 121 or 
part 135 of this chapter, does not need to comply with the requirements 
of paragraph (b) of this section if the applicant presents a training 
record that shows completion of that certificate holder's approved 
training program for the aircraft type rating.
* * * * *

0
13. Amend Sec.  61.159 as follows:
0
A. Redesignate paragraphs (a)(3) through (a)(5) as paragraphs (a)(4) 
through (a)(6);
0
B. Add a new paragraph (a)(3);
0
C. Remove the phrase ``paragraph (a)(3)(ii)'' from newly redesignated 
paragraph (a)(4)(i) and add the phrase ``paragraph (a)(4)(ii)'' in its 
place;
0
D. Remove the phrase ``paragraph (a)(3)'' from newly redesignated 
paragraph (a)(4)(ii) and add the phrase ``paragraph (a)(4)'' in its 
place; and
0
E. Revise newly redesignated paragraph (a)(5).
    The addition and revision read as follows


Sec.  61.159  Aeronautical experience: Airplane category rating.

    (a) * * *
    (3) 50 hours of flight time in the class of aircraft for which the 
rating is sought. A maximum of 25 hours of training in a full flight 
simulator representing a multiengine airplane may be credited toward 
the flight time requirement of this paragraph if the training was 
accomplished as part of an approved training course in parts 121, 135, 
141, or 142 of this chapter. A flight training device or aviation 
training device may not be used to satisfy this requirement.
* * * * *
    (5) Not more than 100 hours of the total aeronautical experience 
requirements of paragraph (a) of this section may be obtained in a full 
flight simulator or flight training device that represents an airplane, 
provided the aeronautical experience was accomplished as part of an 
approved training course in parts 121, 135, 141, or 142 of this 
chapter.
* * * * *

0
14. Add Sec.  61.160 to read as follows:


Sec.  61.160  Aeronautical experience--airplane category restricted 
privileges.

    (a) Except for a person who has been removed from flying status for 
lack of proficiency or because of a disciplinary action involving 
aircraft operations, a U.S. military pilot or former U.S. military 
pilot may apply for an airline transport pilot certificate with an 
airplane category multiengine class rating or an airline transport 
pilot certificate concurrently with an airplane type rating with a 
minimum of 750 hours of total time as a pilot if the pilot presents:
    (1) An official Form DD-214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge 
from Active Duty) indicating that the person was honorably discharged 
from the U.S. Armed Forces or an official U.S. Armed Forces record that 
shows the pilot is currently serving in the U.S. Armed Forces; and
    (2) An official U.S. Armed Forces record that shows the person 
graduated from a U.S. Armed Forces undergraduate pilot training school 
and received a rating qualification as a military pilot.
    (b) A person may apply for an airline transport pilot certificate 
with an airplane category multiengine class rating or an airline 
transport pilot certificate concurrently with an airplane type rating 
with a minimum of 1,000 hours of total time as a pilot if the person:
    (1) Holds a Bachelor's degree with an aviation major from an 
institution of higher education, as defined in Sec.  61.1, that has 
been issued a letter of authorization by the Administrator under Sec.  
61.169;
    (2) Completes 60 semester credit hours of aviation and aviation-
related coursework that has been recognized by the Administrator as 
coursework designed to improve and enhance the knowledge and skills of 
a person seeking a career as a professional pilot;
    (3) Holds a commercial pilot certificate with an airplane category 
and instrument rating if:

[[Page 42376]]

    (i) The required ground training was completed as part of an 
approved part 141 curriculum at the institution of higher education; 
and
    (ii) The required flight training was completed as part of an 
approved part 141 curriculum at the institution of higher education or 
at a part 141 pilot school that has a training agreement under Sec.  
141.26 of this chapter with the institution of higher education; and
    (4) Presents official transcripts or other documentation acceptable 
to the Administrator from the institution of higher education 
certifying that the graduate has satisfied the requirements in 
paragraphs (b)(1) through (3) of this section.
    (c) A person may apply for an airline transport pilot certificate 
with an airplane category multiengine class rating or an airline 
transport pilot certificate concurrently with an airplane type rating 
with a minimum of 1,250 hours of total time as a pilot if the person:
    (1) Holds an Associate's degree with an aviation major from an 
institution of higher education, as defined in Sec.  61.1, that has 
been issued a letter of authorization by the Administrator under Sec.  
61.169;
    (2) Completes at least 30 semester credit hours of aviation and 
aviation-related coursework that has been recognized by the 
Administrator as coursework designed to improve and enhance the 
knowledge and skills of a person seeking a career as a professional 
pilot;
    (3) Holds a commercial pilot certificate with an airplane category 
and instrument rating if:
    (i) The required ground training was completed as part of an 
approved part 141 curriculum at the institution of higher education; 
and
    (ii) The required flight training was completed as part of an 
approved part 141 curriculum at the institution of higher education or 
at a part 141 pilot school that has a written training agreement under 
Sec.  141.26 of this chapter with the institution of higher education; 
and
    (4) Presents official transcripts or other documentation acceptable 
to the Administrator from the institution of higher education 
certifying that the graduate has satisfied the requirements in 
paragraphs (c)(1) through (3) of this section.
    (d) A graduate of an institution of higher education who completes 
fewer than 60 semester credit hours but at least 30 credit hours and 
otherwise satisfies the requirements of paragraph (b) may apply for 
airline transport pilot certificate with an airplane category 
multiengine class rating or an airline transport pilot certificate 
concurrently with an airplane type rating with a minimum of 1,250 hours 
of total time as a pilot.
    (e) A person who applies for an airline transport pilot certificate 
under the total flight times listed in paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) of 
this section must otherwise meet the aeronautical experience 
requirements of Sec.  61.159, except that the person may apply for an 
airline transport pilot certificate with 200 hours of cross-country 
flight time.
    (f) A person who has 1,500 hours total time as a pilot, 200 hours 
of cross-country flight time, and otherwise meets the aeronautical 
experience requirements of Sec.  61.159 may apply for an airline 
transport pilot certificate under this section.
    (g) An airline transport pilot certificate obtained under this 
section is subject to the pilot in command limitations set forth in 
Sec.  61.167(b) and must contain the following limitation, ``Restricted 
in accordance with 14 CFR 61.167.'' The pilot is entitled to an airline 
transport pilot certificate without the limitation specified in this 
paragraph when the applicant presents satisfactory evidence of having 
met the aeronautical experience requirements of Sec.  61.159 and the 
age requirement of Sec.  61.153(a)(1).
    (h) An applicant who meets the aeronautical experience requirements 
of paragraphs (a), (b), (c), and (d) of this section is issued an 
airline transport pilot certificate with the limitation, ``Holder does 
not meet the pilot in command aeronautical experience requirements of 
ICAO,'' as prescribed under Article 39 of the Convention on 
International Civil Aviation if the applicant does not meet the ICAO 
requirements contained in Annex 1 ``Personnel Licensing'' to the 
Convention on International Civil Aviation. An applicant is entitled to 
an airline transport pilot certificate without the ICAO limitation 
specified under this paragraph when the applicant presents satisfactory 
evidence of having met the ICAO requirements and otherwise meets the 
aeronautical experience requirements of Sec.  61.159.

0
15. Amend Sec.  61.165 as follows:
0
A. Redesignate paragraphs (c)(2) through (c)(5) as paragraphs (c)(3) 
through (c)(6);
0
C. Add new paragraph (c)(2);
0
D. Revise newly redesignated paragraphs (c)(3) and (c)(5);
0
E. Revise paragraph (e) introductory text and paragraph (e)(1);
0
F. Redesignate paragraph (f) as paragraph (g);
0
G. Add new paragraph (f);
0
H. Remove the phrase ``paragraphs (a) through (e)'' from newly 
redesignated paragraph (g) introductory text and add the phrase 
``paragraphs (a) through (f)'' in its place; and
0
I. Remove the phrase ``paragraph (f)(1)'' from newly redesignated 
paragraph (g)(3) and add the phrase ``paragraph (g)(1)'' in its place.
    The revisions and additions read as follows:


Sec.  61.165  Additional aircraft class category and ratings.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (2) After July 31, 2014, successfully complete the airline 
transport pilot certification training program specified in Sec.  
61.156;
    (3) Pass a knowledge test for an airplane category multiengine 
class rating or type rating on the aeronautical knowledge areas of 
Sec.  61.155(c);
* * * * *
    (5) Meet the aeronautical experience requirements of Sec.  61.159 
or Sec.  61.160; and
* * * * *
    (e) Additional class rating within the same aircraft category. 
Except as provided in paragraph (f) of this section, a person applying 
for an airline transport pilot certificate with an additional class 
rating who holds an airline transport certificate in the same aircraft 
category must--
    (1) Meet the eligibility requirements of Sec.  61.153, except 
paragraph (g) of that section;
* * * * *
    (f) Adding a multiengine class rating or airplane type rating to an 
airline transport pilot certificate with a single engine class rating. 
A person applying to add a multiengine class rating or airplane type 
rating to an airline transport pilot certificate with an airplane 
category single engine class rating must--
    (1) Meet the eligibility requirements of Sec.  61.153;
    (2) Pass a required knowledge test on the aeronautical knowledge 
areas of Sec.  61.155(c), as applicable to multiengine airplanes;
    (3) Comply with the requirements in Sec.  61.157(b), if applicable;
    (4) Meet the applicable aeronautical experience requirements of 
Sec.  61.159; and
    (5) Pass a practical test on the areas of operation of Sec.  
61.157(e)(2).
* * * * *

0
16. Revise Sec.  61.167 to read as follows:

[[Page 42377]]

Sec.  61.167  Airline transport pilot privileges and limitations.

    (a) Privileges. (1) A person who holds an airline transport pilot 
certificate is entitled to the same privileges as a person who holds a 
commercial pilot certificate with an instrument rating.
    (2) A person who holds an airline transport pilot certificate and 
has met the aeronautical experience requirements of Sec.  61.159 and 
the age requirements of Sec.  61.153(a)(1) of this part may instruct--
    (i) Other pilots in air transportation service in aircraft of the 
category, class, and type, as applicable, for which the airline 
transport pilot is rated and endorse the logbook or other training 
record of the person to whom training has been given;
    (ii) In flight simulators, and flight training devices representing 
the aircraft referenced in paragraph (b)(1) of this section, when 
instructing under the provisions of this section and endorse the 
logbook or other training record of the person to whom training has 
been given;
    (iii) Only as provided in this section, except that an airline 
transport pilot who also holds a flight instructor certificate can 
exercise the instructor privileges under subpart H of this part for 
which he or she is rated; and
    (iv) In an aircraft, only if the aircraft has functioning dual 
controls, when instructing under the provisions of this section.
    (3) Excluding briefings and debriefings, an airline transport pilot 
may not instruct in aircraft, flight simulators, and flight training 
devices under this section--
    (i) For more than 8 hours in any 24-consecutive-hour period; or
    (ii) For more than 36 hours in any 7-consecutive-day period.
    (4) An airline transport pilot may not instruct in Category II or 
Category III operations unless he or she has been trained and 
successfully tested under Category II or Category III operations, as 
applicable.
    (b) Limitations. A person who holds an airline transport pilot 
certificate and has not satisfied the age requirement of Sec.  
61.153(a)(1) and the aeronautical experience requirements of Sec.  
61.159 may not:
    (1) Act as pilot in command in operations conducted under part 121, 
Sec.  91.1053(a)(2)(i), or Sec.  135.243(a)(1) of this chapter, or
    (2) Serve as second in command in flag or supplemental operations 
in part 121 of this chapter requiring three or more pilots.

0
17. Add Sec.  61.169 to read as follows:


Sec.  61.169  Letters of authorization for institutions of higher 
education.

    (a) An institution of higher education that is accredited, as 
defined in Sec.  61.1, may apply for a letter of authorization for the 
purpose of certifying its graduates for an airline transport pilot 
certificate under the academic and aeronautical experience requirements 
in Sec.  61.160. The application must be in a form and manner 
acceptable to the Administrator.
    (b) An institution of higher education must comply with the 
provisions of the letter of authorization and may not certify a 
graduate unless it determines that the graduate has satisfied the 
requirements of Sec.  61.160, as appropriate.
    (c) The Administrator may rescind or amend a letter of 
authorization if the Administrator determines that the institution of 
higher education is not complying or is unable to comply with the 
provisions of the letter of authorization.

PART 121--OPERATING REQUIREMENTS: DOMESTIC, FLAG, AND SUPPLEMENTAL 
OPERATIONS

0
18. The authority citation for part 121 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40113, 40119, 41706, 
44101, 44701-44702, 44705, 44709-44711, 44713, 44716-44717, 44722, 
46105.2.


0
19. Amend Sec.  121.409 by revising paragraph (b) introductory text to 
read as follows:


Sec.  121.409  Training courses using airplane simulators and other 
training devices.

* * * * *
    (b) Except for the airline transport pilot certification training 
program approved to satisfy the requirements of Sec.  61.156 of this 
chapter, a course of training in an airplane simulator may be included 
for use as provided in Sec.  121.441 if that course--
* * * * *

0
20. Add Sec.  121.410 to read as follows:


Sec.  121.410  Airline transport pilot certification training program.

    (a) A certificate holder may obtain approval to establish and 
implement a training program to satisfy the requirements of Sec.  
61.156 of this chapter. The training program must be separate from the 
air carrier training program required by this part.
    (b) No certificate holder may use a person nor may any person serve 
as an instructor in a training program approved to meet the 
requirements of Sec.  61.156 of this chapter unless the instructor:
    (1) Holds an airline transport pilot certificate with an airplane 
category multiengine class rating;
    (2) Has at least 2 years of experience as a pilot in command in 
operations conducted under Sec.  91.1053(a)(2)(i) or Sec.  
135.243(a)(1) of this chapter, or as a pilot in command or second in 
command in any operation conducted under this part;
    (3) Except for the holder of a flight instructor certificate, 
receives initial training on the following topics:
    (i) The fundamental principles of the learning process;
    (ii) Elements of effective teaching, instruction methods, and 
techniques;
    (iii) Instructor duties, privileges, responsibilities, and 
limitations;
    (iv) Training policies and procedures; and
    (v) Evaluation.
    (4) If providing training in a flight simulation training device, 
hold an aircraft type rating for the aircraft represented by the flight 
simulation training device utilized in the training program and have 
received training within the preceding 12 months from the certificate 
holder on:
    (i) Proper operation of flight simulator and flight training device 
controls and systems;
    (ii) Proper operation of environmental and fault panels;
    (iii) Data and motion limitations of simulation;
    (iv) Minimum equipment requirements for each curriculum; and
    (v) The maneuvers that will be demonstrated in the flight 
simulation training device.
    (c) A certificate holder may not issue a graduation certificate to 
a student unless that student has completed all the curriculum 
requirements of the course.
    (d) A certificate holder must conduct evaluations to ensure that 
training techniques, procedures, and standards are acceptable to the 
Administrator.

0
21. Revise Sec.  121.419 to read as follows:


Sec.  121.419  Pilots and flight engineers: Initial, transition, and 
upgrade ground training.

    (a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, initial, 
transition, and upgrade ground training for pilots and flight engineers 
must include instruction in at least the following as applicable to 
their assigned duties:
    (1) General subjects--
    (i) The certificate holder's dispatch or flight release procedures;
    (ii) Principles and methods for determining weight and balance, and 
runway limitations for takeoff and landing;

[[Page 42378]]

    (iii) Enough meteorology to insure a practical knowledge of weather 
phenomena, including the principles of frontal systems, icing, fog, 
thunderstorms, and high altitude weather situations;
    (iv) Air traffic control systems, procedures, and phraseology;
    (v) Navigation and the use of navigation aids, including instrument 
approach procedures;
    (vi) Normal and emergency communication procedures;
    (vii) Visual cues prior to and during descent below DA/DH or MDA;
    (viii) Approved crew resource management initial training; and
    (ix) Other instructions as necessary to ensure competence.
    (2) For each airplane type--
    (i) A general description;
    (ii) Performance characteristics;
    (iii) Engines and propellers;
    (iv) Major components;
    (v) Major airplane systems (e.g., flight controls, electrical, 
hydraulic); other systems as appropriate; principles of normal, 
abnormal, and emergency operations; appropriate procedures and 
limitations;
    (vi) Procedures for--
    (A) Recognizing and avoiding severe weather situations;
    (B) Escaping from severe weather situations, in case of inadvertent 
encounters, including low-altitude windshear, and
    (C) Operating in or near thunderstorms (including best penetrating 
altitudes), turbulent air (including clear air turbulence), icing, 
hail, and other potentially hazardous meteorological conditions;
    (vii) Operating limitations;
    (viii) Fuel consumption and cruise control;
    (ix) Flight planning;
    (x) Each normal and emergency procedure; and
    (xi) The approved Airplane Flight Manual.
    (b) Initial ground training for pilots who have completed the 
airline transport pilot certification training program in Sec.  61.156 
must include instruction in at least the following as applicable to 
their assigned duties:
    (1) Ground training specific to the certificate holder's--
    (i) Dispatch or flight release procedures;
    (ii) Method for determining weight and balance and runway 
limitations for takeoff and landing;
    (iii) Meteorology hazards applicable to the certificate holder's 
areas of operation;
    (iv) Approved departure, arrival, and approach procedures;
    (v) Normal and emergency communication procedures; and
    (vi) Approved crew resource management training.
    (2) The training required by paragraph (a)(2) of this section for 
the airplane type.
    (c) Initial ground training for pilots and flight engineers must 
consist of at least the following programmed hours of instruction in 
the required subjects specified in paragraph (a) of this section and in 
Sec.  121.415(a) unless reduced under Sec.  121.405:
    (1) Group I airplanes--
    (i) Reciprocating powered, 64 hours; and
    (ii) Turbopropeller powered, 80 hours.
    (2) Group II airplanes, 120 hours.
    (d) Initial ground training for pilots who have completed the 
airline transport pilot certification training program in Sec.  61.156 
must consist of at least the following programmed hours of instruction 
in the required subjects specified in paragraph (b) of this section and 
in Sec.  121.415(a) unless reduced under Sec.  121.405:
    (1) Group I airplanes--
    (i) Reciprocating powered, 54 hours; and
    (ii) Turbopropeller powered, 70 hours.
    (2) Group II airplanes, 110 hours.

0
22. Add Sec.  121.435 to read as follows:


Sec.  121.435  Pilot qualification: Certificate and experience 
requirements.

    (a) No pilot may act as pilot in command of an aircraft (or as 
second in command of an aircraft in a flag or supplemental operation 
that requires three or more pilots) unless he holds an airline 
transport pilot certificate and an appropriate type rating for that 
aircraft.
    (b) No certificate holder may use nor may any pilot act as a pilot 
in a capacity other than those specified in paragraph (a) of this 
section unless the pilot holds at least a commercial pilot certificate 
with appropriate category and class ratings for the aircraft concerned, 
and an instrument rating. Notwithstanding the requirements of Sec.  
61.63(b) and (c) of this chapter, a pilot who is currently employed by 
a certificate holder and meets applicable training requirements of 
subpart N of this part, and the proficiency check requirements of Sec.  
121.441, may be issued the appropriate category and class ratings by 
presenting proof of compliance with those requirements to a Flight 
Standards District Office.
    (c) The requirements of this section will expire on July 31, 2013. 
After that date, the requirements of Sec.  121.436 apply.

0
23. Add Sec.  121.436 to read as follows:


Sec.  121.436  Pilot Qualification: Certificates and experience 
requirements.

    (a) No certificate holder may use nor may any pilot act as pilot in 
command of an aircraft (or as second in command of an aircraft in a 
flag or supplemental operation that requires three or more pilots) 
unless the pilot:
    (1) Holds an airline transport pilot certificate not subject to the 
limitations in Sec.  61.167 of this chapter;
    (2) Holds an appropriate aircraft type rating for the aircraft 
being flown; and
    (3) If serving as pilot in command, has 1,000 hours as second in 
command in operations under this part, pilot in command in operations 
under Sec.  91.1053(a)(2)(i) of this chapter, pilot in command in 
operations under Sec.  135.243(a)(1) of this chapter, or any 
combination thereof. For those pilots who are employed as pilot in 
command in part 121 operations on July 31, 2013, compliance with the 
requirements of this paragraph (a)(3) is not required.
    (b) No certificate holder may use nor may any pilot act as second 
in command unless the pilot holds an airline transport pilot 
certificate and an appropriate aircraft type rating for the aircraft 
being flown. A second-in-command type rating obtained under Sec.  61.55 
does not satisfy the requirements of this section.
    (c) For the purpose of satisfying the flight hour requirement in 
paragraph (a)(3) of this section, a pilot may credit 500 hours of 
military flight time obtained as pilot in command of a multiengine 
turbine-powered, fixed-wing airplane in an operation requiring more 
than one pilot.
    (d) Compliance with the requirements of this section is required by 
August 1, 2013. However, for those pilots who are employed as second in 
command in part 121 operations on July 31, 2013, compliance with the 
type rating requirement in paragraph (b) of this section is not 
required until January 1, 2016.


Sec.  121.437  [Removed]

0
24. Remove Sec.  121.437.
0
25. Amend Sec.  121.543(b)(3)(i) to read as follows:


Sec.  121.543  Flight crewmembers at controls.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (3) * * *
    (i) In the case of the assigned pilot in command during the en 
route cruise portion of the flight, by a pilot who holds an airline 
transport pilot certificate not subject to the limitations in Sec.  
61.167 of this chapter and an

[[Page 42379]]

appropriate type rating, is currently qualified as pilot in command or 
second in command, and is qualified as pilot in command of that 
aircraft during the en route cruise portion of the flight. A second in 
command qualified to act as a pilot in command en route need not have 
completed the following pilot in command requirements: The 6-month 
recurrent flight training required by Sec.  121.433(c)(1)(iii); the 
operating experience required by Sec.  121.434; the takeoffs and 
landings required by Sec.  121.439; the line check required by Sec.  
121.440; and the 6-month proficiency check or simulator training 
required by Sec.  121.441(a)(1); and
* * * * *


Appendix H to Part 121   [Amended]

0
26. Amend Appendix H to Part 121 by removing the reference ``Sec.  
61.153(g)'' from the last paragraph of the appendix and adding the 
reference ``Sec.  61.153(h)'' in its place.

PART 135--OPERATING REQUIREMENTS: COMMUTER AND ON DEMAND OPERATIONS 
AND RULES GOVERNING PERSON ONBOARD SUCH AIRCRAFT

0
27. The authority citation for part 135 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 41706, 40113, 44701-44702, 
44705, 44709, 44711-44713, 44715-44717, 44722, 45101-45105.


0
28. Add Sec.  135.336 to read as follows:


Sec.  135.336  Airline transport pilot certification training program.

    (a) A certificate holder may obtain approval to establish and 
implement a training program to satisfy the requirements of Sec.  
61.156 of this chapter. The training program must be separate from the 
air carrier training program required by this part.
    (b) No certificate holder may use a person nor may any person serve 
as an instructor in a training program approved to meet the 
requirements of Sec.  61.156 of this chapter unless the instructor:
    (1) Holds an airline transport pilot certificate with an airplane 
category multiengine class rating;
    (2) Has at least 2 years of experience as a pilot in command in 
operations conducted under Sec.  91.1053(a)(2)(i) of this chapter, 
Sec.  135.243(a)(1) of this part, or as a pilot in command or second in 
command in any operation conducted under part 121 of this chapter;
    (3) Except for the holder of a flight instructor certificate, 
receives initial training on the following topics:
    (i) The fundamental principles of the learning process;
    (ii) Elements of effective teaching, instruction methods, and 
techniques;
    (iii) Instructor duties, privileges, responsibilities, and 
limitations;
    (iv) Training policies and procedures; and
    (v) Evaluation.
    (4) If providing training in a flight simulation training device, 
holds an aircraft type rating for the aircraft represented by the 
flight simulation training device utilized in the training program and 
have received training and evaluation within the preceding 12 months 
from the certificate holder on:
    (i) Proper operation of flight simulator and flight training device 
controls and systems;
    (ii) Proper operation of environmental and fault panels;
    (iii) Data and motion limitations of simulation;
    (iv) Minimum equipment requirements for each curriculum; and
    (v) The maneuvers that will be demonstrated in the flight 
simulation training device.
    (c) A certificate holder may not issue a graduation certificate to 
a student unless that student has completed all the curriculum 
requirements of the course.
    (d) A certificate holder must conduct evaluations to ensure that 
training techniques, procedures, and standards are acceptable to the 
Administrator.

0
29. Amend Sec.  135.341 by adding a sentence to the end of paragraph 
(a) to read as follows:


Sec.  135.341  Pilot and flight attendant crewmember training programs.

    (a) * * * This deviation authority does not extend to the training 
provided under paragraph (c) of this section.
* * * * *

PART 141--PILOT SCHOOLS

0
30. The authority citation for part 141 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40113, 44701-44703, 44707, 
44709, 44711, 45102-45103, 45301-45302.


0
31. Amend Sec.  141.11 by adding paragraph (b)(2)(viii) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  141.11  Pilot school ratings.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (viii) Airline transport pilot certification training program.
* * * * *

0
32. Revise Sec.  141.26 to read as follows:


Sec.  141.26  Training agreements.

    (a) A training center certificated under part 142 of this chapter 
may provide the training, testing, and checking for pilot schools 
certificated under this part and is considered to meet the requirements 
of this part, provided--
    (1) There is a training agreement between the certificated training 
center and the pilot school;
    (2) The training, testing, and checking provided by the 
certificated training center is approved and conducted under part 142;
    (3) The pilot school certificated under this part obtains the 
Administrator's approval for a training course outline that includes 
the training, testing, and checking to be conducted under this part and 
the training, testing, and checking to be conducted under part 142; and
    (4) Upon completion of the training, testing, and checking 
conducted under part 142, a copy of each student's training record is 
forwarded to the part 141 school and becomes part of the student's 
permanent training record.
    (b) A pilot school that provides flight training for an institution 
of higher education that holds a letter of authorization under Sec.  
61.169 of this chapter must have a training agreement with that 
institution of higher education.


0
33. Amend Sec.  141.33 by adding paragraph (a)(4) to read as follows:


Sec.  141.33  Personnel.

    (a) * * *
    (4) In addition to meeting the requirements of paragraph (a)(3) of 
this section, each instructor used for the airline transport pilot 
certification training program in Sec.  61.156 of this chapter must:
    (i) Hold an airline transport pilot certificate with an airplane 
category multiengine class rating;
    (ii) Have at least 2 years of experience as a pilot in command in 
operations conducted under Sec.  91.1053(a)(2)(i) or Sec.  
135.243(a)(1) of this chapter, or as a pilot in command or second in 
command in any operation conducted under part 121 of this chapter; and
    (iii) If providing training in a flight simulation training device, 
have received training and evaluation within the preceding 12 months 
from the certificate holder on--
    (A) Proper operation of flight simulator and flight training device 
controls and systems;
    (B) Proper operation of environmental and fault panels,
    (C) Data and motion limitations of simulation;
    (D) Minimum equipment requirements for each curriculum; and

[[Page 42380]]

    (E) The maneuvers that will be demonstrated in the flight 
simulation training device.
* * * * *

0
34. Amend Appendix K to Part 141 as follows:
0
A. Revise paragraph 4.(b) and 4.(c).
0
B. Add paragraph 13.

Appendix K to Part 141--Special Preparation Courses

* * * * *
    4. * * *
    (b) Except for the airline transport pilot certification program 
in paragraph 13 of this appendix, training in a flight simulator 
that meets the requirements of Sec.  141.41(a) of this part, may be 
credited for a maximum of 10 percent of the total flight training 
hour requirements of the approved course, or of this section, 
whichever is less.
    (c) Except for the airline transport pilot certification program 
in paragraph 13 of this appendix, training in a flight training 
device that meets the requirements of Sec.  141.41(b) of this part, 
may be credited for a maximum of 5 percent of the total flight 
training hour requirements of the approved course, or of this 
section, whichever is less.
* * * * *
    13. Airline transport pilot certification training program. An 
approved airline transport pilot certification training program must 
include the academic and FSTD training set forth in Sec.  61.156 of 
this chapter. The FAA will not approve a course with fewer hours 
than those prescribed in Sec.  61.156 of this chapter.

PART 142--TRAINING CENTERS

0
35. The authority citation for part 142 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40113, 40119, 44101, 44701-
44703, 44705, 44707, 44709-44711, 45102-45103, 45301-45302.


0
36. Amend Sec.  142.1 by revising paragraphs (a) and (b)(2) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  142.1  Applicability.

    (a) This subpart prescribes the requirements governing the 
certification and operation of training centers. Except as provided in 
paragraph (b) of this section, this part provides an alternative means 
to accomplish training required by parts 61, 63, 65, 91, 121, 125, 135, 
or 137 of this chapter.
    (b) * * *
    (2) Approved under subpart Y of part 121 of this chapter, Advanced 
Qualification Programs, for the authorization holder's own employees;
* * * * *

0
37. Amend Sec.  142.3 by revising paragraph (3) of the definition of 
Course and the definition of Flight training equipment to read as 
follows:


Sec.  142.3  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Course means--
* * * * *
    (3) A curriculum, or curriculum segment, as defined in subpart Y of 
part 121 of this chapter.
* * * * *
    Flight training equipment means full flight simulators, as defined 
in Sec.  1.1 of this chapter, flight training devices, as defined in 
Sec.  1.1 of this chapter, and aircraft.
* * * * *

0
38. Amend Sec.  142.49 by revising paragraph (c)(3)(iv) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  142.49  Training center instructor and evaluator privileges and 
limitations.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (3) * * *
    (iv) If instructing or evaluating in an aircraft in flight while 
serving as a required crewmember, holds at least a valid second class 
medical certificate; and
* * * * *

0
39. Add Sec.  142.54 to read as follows:


Sec.  142.54  Airline transport pilot certification training program.

    No certificate holder may use a person nor may any person serve as 
an instructor in a training program approved to meet the requirements 
of Sec.  61.156 of this chapter unless the instructor:
    (a) Holds an airline transport pilot certificate with an airplane 
category multiengine class rating;
    (b) Has at least 2 years of experience as a pilot in command in 
operations conducted under Sec.  91.1053(a)(2)(i) or Sec.  
135.243(a)(1) of this chapter, or as a pilot in command or second in 
command in any operation conducted under part 121 of this chapter;
    (c) Except for the holder of a flight instructor certificate, 
receives initial training on the following topics:
    (1) The fundamental principles of the learning process;
    (2) Elements of effective teaching, instruction methods, and 
techniques;
    (3) Instructor duties, privileges, responsibilities, and 
limitations;
    (4) Training policies and procedures; and
    (5) Evaluation.
    (d) If providing training in a flight simulation training device--
    (1) Holds an aircraft type rating for the aircraft represented by 
the flight simulation training device utilized in the training program 
and have received training and evaluation within the preceding 12 
months from the certificate holder on the maneuvers that will be 
demonstrated in the flight simulation training device; and
    (2) Satisfies the requirements of Sec.  142.53(a)(4).
    (e) A certificate holder may not issue a graduation certificate to 
a student unless that student has completed all the curriculum 
requirements of the course.
    (f) A certificate holder must conduct evaluations to ensure that 
training techniques, procedures, and standards are acceptable to the 
Administrator.


Sec.  142.55  [Amended]

0
40. Amend Sec.  142.55 as follows:
0
A. In paragraph (a)(2), remove the phrase ``part 187'' and add in its 
place the phrase ``part 183''; and
0
B. In paragraph (d), remove the phrase ``SFAR 58'' and add in its place 
the phrase ``subpart Y of part 121 of this chapter''.

    Issued in Washington, DC, under the authority provided by 49 
U.S.C. 106(f), 44701(a), and Secs. 216-217, Public Law 111-216, 124 
Stat. 2348 on July 10, 2013.
Michael P. Huerta,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2013-16849 Filed 7-10-13; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P