[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 135 (Monday, July 15, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42323-42380]
[FR Doc No: 2013-16849]

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

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

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<PHONE_NUMBER>; facsimile (202) 267-
5299, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    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<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
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

    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)
------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

          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

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)).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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.

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

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.''

    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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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