[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 92 (Thursday, May 12, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 29719-29759]
[FR Doc No: 2016-10168]

Vol. 81

Thursday,

No. 92

May 12, 2016

Part IV

Department of Transportation

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

Federal Aviation Administration

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

14 CFR Parts 61, 63, 91, Et al.

Regulatory Relief: Aviation Training Devices; Pilot Certification,
Training, and Pilot Schools; and Other Provisions; Proposed Rule

Federal Register / Vol. 81 , No. 92 / Thursday, May 12, 2016 /
Proposed Rules

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Parts 61, 63, 91, 121, 135, 141

[Docket No.: FAA-2016-6142; Notice No. 16-02]
RIN 2120-AK28

Regulatory Relief: Aviation Training Devices; Pilot
Certification, Training, and Pilot Schools; and Other Provisions

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This rulemaking would relieve burdens on pilots seeking to
obtain aeronautical experience, training, and certification by
increasing the allowed use of aviation training devices. These training
devices have proven to be an effective, safe, and affordable means of
obtaining pilot experience. This rulemaking also would address changing
technologies by accommodating the use of technically advanced airplanes
as an alternative to the use of older complex single engine airplanes
for the commercial pilot training and testing requirements.
Additionally, this rulemaking would broaden the opportunities for
military instructors to obtain civilian ratings based on military
experience, would expand opportunities for logging pilot time, and
would remove a burden from sport pilot instructors by permitting them
to serve as safety pilots. Finally, this rulemaking would include
changes to some of the provisions established in an August 2009 final
rule. These actions are necessary to bring the regulations in line with
current needs and activities of the general aviation training community
and pilots.

DATES: Send comments on or before August 10, 2016.

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by docket number FAA-2016-6142
using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30; U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room
W12-140, West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket
Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Privacy: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments
from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts
these comments, without edit, including any personal information the
commenter provides, to http://www.regulations.gov, as described in the
system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
http://www.dot.gov/privacy.
    Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at
http://www.regulations.gov at any time. Follow the online instructions
for accessing the docket or go to the Docket Operations in Room W12-140
of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marcel Bernard, Airmen Certification
and Training Branch, Flight Standards Service, AFS-810, Federal
Aviation Administration, 55 M Street SE., 8th Floor, Washington, DC
20003-3522; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Contents

List of Abbreviations Frequently Used In This Document
I. Executive Summary
    Summary of Proposed Provisions
II. Authority for this Rulemaking
III. Discussion of the Proposed Rule
    A. Aviation Training Devices
    1. Instructor Requirement When Using a Full Flight Simulator,
Flight Training Device, or Aviation Training Device To Complete
Instrument Recency Experience
    2. Instrument Recency Experience Requirements
    3. Instrument Recency Experience for SICs Serving in Part 135
Operations
    B. Pilot Certification, Training, and Pilot Schools
    1. Second In Command Time In Part 135 Operations
    2. Completion of Commercial Pilot Training and Testing in
Technically Advanced Airplanes
    i. Definition of Technically Advanced Airplane
    ii. Amendment to Aeronautical Experience Requirement for
Commercial Pilots
    iii. Amendments to Commercial Pilot and Flight Instructor
Practical Test Standards
    C. Flight Instructors With Instrument Ratings Only
    D. Light-Sport Aircraft Pilots and Flight Instructors
    1. Sport Pilot Flight Instructor Training Privilege
    2. Credit for Training Obtained as a Sport Pilot
    E. Pilot School Use of Special Curricula Courses for Renewal of
Certificate
    F. Temporary Validation of Flightcrew Members' Certificates by
Part 119 Certificate Holders Conducting Operations Under Parts 121
or 135
    G. Military Competence for Flight Instructors
    H. Use of Aircraft Certificated in the Restricted Category for
Pilot Flight Training and Checking
    I. Single Pilot Operations of Former Military Airplanes and
Other Airplanes With Special Airworthiness Certificates
    J. Technical Correction and Nomenclature Change
IV. Discussion of Proposed Effective Dates for Rule Provisions
V. Advisory Circulars and other Guidance Materials
VI. Section-By-Section Discussion of the Proposed Rule
VII. Regulatory Notices and Analyses
    A. Regulatory Evaluation
    B. Regulatory Flexibility Determination
    C. International Trade Impact Assessment
    D. Unfunded Mandates Assessment
    E. Paperwork Reduction Act
    F. International Compatibility and Cooperation
    G. Environmental Analysis
VIII. Executive Order Determinations
    A. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
    B. Executive Order 13211, Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
    C. Executive Order 13609, Promoting International Regulatory
Cooperation
IX. Additional Information
    A. Comments Invited
    B. Availability of Rulemaking Documents

List of Abbreviations Frequently Used in This Document

AATD--Advanced aviation training device
AC--Advisory Circular
ATD--Aviation training device
ATP--Airline transport pilot
BATD--Basic aviation training device
FFS--Full flight simulator
FTD--Flight training device
FSTD--Flight simulation training device
ICAO--International Civil Aviation Organization
IFR--Instrument flight rules
LOA--Letter of authorization
LODA--Letter of deviation authority
MFD--Multi-function display
NPRM--Notice of proposed rulemaking
PFD--Primary flight display
PIC--Pilot in command
SIC--Second in command
TAA--Technically advanced airplane
VFR--Visual flight rules

I. Executive Summary

    On January 18, 2011, the President signed Executive Order 13563,
Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review. Among other things, Section
6 of that Executive Order directs agencies to conduct a retrospective
analysis of existing rules. Specifically, Executive

Order 13563 provides that ``[t]o facilitate the periodic review of
existing significant regulations, agencies shall consider how best to
promote retrospective analysis of rules that may be outmoded,
ineffective, insufficient, or excessively burdensome, and to modify,
streamline, expand, or repeal them in accordance with what has been
learned.''
    Consistent with Executive Order 13563, the FAA routinely evaluates
existing regulations and other requirements. The FAA works to identify
unnecessary, duplicative, or ineffective regulations and to mitigate
the impacts of those regulations, where possible, without compromising
safety.
    As part of the FAA's continuing obligation to review its
regulations, the agency has conducted an analysis of 14 CFR parts 61,
91, and 141 to identify provisions that are outmoded, ineffective, or
involve an unnecessary burden. This notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) is the result of the FAA's analysis of its regulations and
includes proposed amendments that are consistent with the retrospective
regulatory review requirements of Executive Order 13563. The proposed
amendments reduce or relieve existing burdens on the general aviation
community. Several of these proposed changes have resulted from
suggestions from the general aviation community through petitions for
rulemaking, industry/agency meetings, and requests for legal
interpretation. The proposed changes include increases in the use of
aviation training devices (ATDs), flight training devices (FTDs), and
full flight simulators (FFSs); expanding opportunities for pilots in
part 135 operations to log flight time, allowing an alternative to the
complex airplane requirement for commercial pilot training, and
permitting pilots to credit some of their sport pilot training toward a
higher certificate. Because this rulemaking includes proposals that
affect several disparate subject areas within the regulations, the FAA
has provided the necessary background information in the separate
sections of this document that discuss each proposed rule change.

Summary of Proposed Provisions

    Table 1 summarizes the provisions included in this rule, the
sections affected, and the total cost savings (benefits) for a 5-year
analysis period. All of the provisions proposed in this rule are either
relieving or voluntary. For those provisions that are relieving, no
person affected is anticipated to incur any costs associated with the
relieving nature of the provision. The FAA assumes that as these
provisions are relieving, all persons affected would use the provisions
as they would be beneficial. For those proposed provisions that are
voluntary, persons who wish to use the new provisions will do so only
if the benefit they would accrue from their use exceeds any cost they
might incur to comply with the new provision.

                             Table 1--Summary of Provisions in the Proposed Rule \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Total cost savings
              Provision                        Summary           Sec.  Sec.   Affected    (benefits) for  5-year
                                                                                analysis period
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Aviation Training Devices
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Instructor requirement when using an   Remove the requirement   61.51(g)(5)............  The cost savings
 FFS, FTD, or ATD to complete           to have an instructor                             benefits equal about
 instrument recency.                    present when                                      $12.1 million or $10.6
                                        accomplishing flight                              million in present
                                        experience                                        value at a 7 percent
                                        requirements for                                  discount rate.
                                        instrument recency in
                                        an FAA-approved FFS,
                                        FTD, or ATD.
Instrument recency experience          Reduce frequency of      61.57(c), 135.245......  The cost savings
 requirements.                          instrument recency                                benefits equal about
                                        flight experience                                 $79.4 million or $69.6
                                        accomplished                                      million in present
                                        exclusively in ATDs                               value at a 7 percent
                                        from every two months                             discount rate.
                                        to every six months.
                                       Reduce number of tasks
                                        and remove three-hour
                                        flight time
                                        requirement when
                                        accomplishing
                                        instrument recency
                                        flight experience in
                                        ATDs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                Pilot Certification, Training, and Pilot Schools
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Second in command for part 135         Allow a pilot to log     61.1, 61.39(a),          The FAA considers this
 operations.                            SIC flight time in a     61.51(e), (f),           to be a minimum cost
                                        multi-engine airplane    61.159(a), (c),          rule with positive,
                                        in a part 135            61.161, 135.99(c),       but difficult to
                                        operation that does      61.1,                    quantify, benefits.
                                        not require an SIC.      61.129(a)(3)(ii),
                                                                 appendix D to part 141.
Completion of commercial pilot         Allow TAA to be used to  .......................  The cost savings
 training and testing in technically    meet some or all of                               benefits equal about
 advanced airplanes (TAA).              the currently required                            $9.7 million or $8
                                        10 hours of training                              million in present
                                        that must be completed                            value at a 7 percent
                                        in a complex or                                   discount rate.
                                        turbine-powered
                                        airplane for the
                                        single engine
                                        commercial pilot
                                        certificate. TAA could
                                        be used in combination
                                        with, or instead of, a
                                        complex or turbine-
                                        powered airplane to
                                        meet the aeronautical
                                        experience requirement
                                        and could be used to
                                        complete the practical
                                        test.

Flight instructors with instrument     Remove the requirement   61.195(b), (c).........  The cost savings
 ratings only.                          that instrument only                              benefits equal about
                                        instructors have                                  $1.7 million or $1.5
                                        category and class                                million in present
                                        ratings on their                                  value at a 7 percent
                                        flight instructor                                 discount rate.
                                        certificates to
                                        provide instrument
                                        training.
Sport pilot flight instructor          Allow a sport pilot      61.412, 61.415(h),       Sport pilot flight
 training privilege.                    only instructor to       91.109(c).               instructors who choose
                                        provide training on                               to receive this
                                        control and                                       endorsement have
                                        maneuvering solely by                             determined that they
                                        reference to the                                  would be able to
                                        flight instruments                                recoup this cost by
                                        (for sport pilot                                  providing training to
                                        students only).                                   sport pilot students.
Credit for training obtained as a      Allow sport pilot        61.99, 61.109(l).......  If all 5,259 sport
 sport pilot.                           training to be                                    pilots choose to use
                                        credited for certain                              the lower cost option,
                                        aeronautical                                      the cost savings would
                                        experience                                        exceed $8.0 million.
                                        requirements for a                                We have used $8.0
                                        higher certificate or                             million as a one-time
                                        rating.                                           event in the benefit-
                                                                                cost analysis.
Include special curricula courses in   Allow part 141 pilot     141.5(d)...............  This proposed rule
 renewal of pilot school certificate.   schools to count FAA                              provision provides
                                        approved ``special                                potential unquantified
                                        curricula'' course                                benefits which exceed
                                        completions (graduates                            minimal compliance
                                        of these courses)                                 costs.
                                        toward certificate
                                        renewal requirements.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                Other Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Temporary validation of flightcrew     Allow a confirmation     61.3(a), 63.3(a),        This proposed rule
 members' certificates.                 document issued by a     63.16, 121.383(c),       would relieve both the
                                        part 119 certificate     135.95.                  FAA and stakeholders
                                        holder authorized to                              from the burden of the
                                        conduct operations                                exemption process,
                                        under part 121 or 135                             which must be
                                        to serve as a                                     completed every two
                                        temporary verification                            years. The cost
                                        of the airman                                     savings, while real,
                                        certificate and/or                                are small and believed
                                        medical certificate                               to be de minimis.
                                        during domestic
                                        operations for up to
                                        72 hours.
Military competence for Flight         Allow the addition of a  61.197, 61.199.........  The cost savings
 Instructors.                           flight instructor                                 benefits equal about
                                        rating based on                                   $1.4 million or $1.2
                                        military competency to                            million in present
                                        ``simultaneously                                  value at a 7 percent
                                        qualify'' for the                                 discount rate.
                                        reinstatement of that
                                        expired FAA flight
                                        instructor certificate.
Restricted Category Aircraft training  Allow an operator to     91.313.................  The benefits will
 and testing allowances.                request and obtain a                              exceed costs for those
                                        letter of deviation                               who choose to comply.
                                        authority to conduct
                                        training and testing
                                        and other directly
                                        related activities for
                                        employees to obtain a
                                        type rating in a
                                        restricted category
                                        aircraft.
Single Pilot Operations of Former      Allow pilots to operate  91.531.................  The benefits will
 Military Airplanes and Other           certain large and                                 exceed costs for those
 Airplanes with Special Airworthiness   turbojet-powered                                  who choose to comply.
 Certificates.                          airplanes
                                        (specifically former
                                        military and some
                                        airplanes not type
                                        certificated in the
                                        standard category)
                                        without a pilot who is
                                        designated as SIC.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    \1\ The agency recommends that commenters reference the title of
the provision to which they are commenting as it appears in the
first column of this table for ease of reference.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety is found in
Title 49 of the United States Code (49 U.S.C.). Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority.
    This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in 49
U.S.C. 106(f), which establishes the authority of the Administrator to
promulgate regulations and rules; 49 U.S.C. 44701(a)(5), which requires
the Administrator to promote safe flight of civil aircraft in air
commerce by prescribing regulations and setting minimum standards for
other practices, methods, and procedures necessary for safety in air
commerce and national security; and 49 U.S.C. 44703(a), which requires
the Administrator to prescribe 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. Consistent with
this authority and with the retrospective regulatory review
requirements of Executive Order 13563, this rulemaking includes certain
proposed amendments that would reduce or relieve existing burdens on
the general aviation community.

III. Discussion of the Proposed Rule

A. Aviation Training Devices

    Since the 1970s, the FAA has gradually expanded the use of flight
simulation for training--first permitting simulation to be used in air
carrier training programs and eventually permitting pilots to credit
time in devices toward the aeronautical experience requirements for
airman certification and recency. Currently, Title 14 of the Code of
Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 60 governs the qualification of
flight simulation training devices (FSTD) which include FFSs and FTDs
levels 4 through 7. The FAA has, however, approved other devices
including ATDs for use in pilot certification training, under the
authority provided in 14 CFR 61.4(c).\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Section 61.4(c) states that the ``Administrator may approve
a device other than a flight simulator or flight training device for
specific purposes.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For over 30 years, the FAA has issued letters of authorization
(LOAs) to manufacturers of ground trainers, personal computer-based
aviation training devices (PCATD), FTDs (levels 1 through 3), basic
aviation training devices (BATD), and advanced aviation training
devices (AATD). These LOAs were based on guidance provided in advisory
circulars that set forth the qualifications and capabilities for the
devices. Prior to 2008, most LOAs were issued under the guidance
provided in advisory circular AC 61-126, Qualification and Approval of
Personal Computer-Based Aviation Training Devices, and AC 120-45,
Airplane Flight Training Device Qualification. Since July 2008, the FAA
has been approving devices in accordance with Advisory Circular 61-136,
FAA Approval of Basic Aviation Training Devices (BATD) and Advanced
Aviation Training Devices (AATD).
    In 2009, the FAA issued a final rule that for the first time
introduced the term ``aviation training device'' into the regulations
and placed express limits on the amount of instrument time that could
be credited in an ATD toward the aeronautical experience requirements
for an instrument rating.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ In a 2007 NPRM, the FAA proposed to limit the time in a
personal computer-based aviation training device that could be
credited toward the instrument rating. Pilot, Flight Instructor, and
Pilot School Certification NPRM, 72 FR 5806 (February 7, 2007).
Three commenters recommended that the FAA use the terms ``basic
aviation training device'' (BATD) and ``advanced aviation training
device'' (AATD). Pilot, Flight Instructor, and Pilot School
Certification Final Rule, 74 FR 42500 (August 21, 2009) (``2009
Final Rule''). In response to the commenters, the FAA changed the
regulatory text in the final rule to ``aviation training device,''
noting BATDs and AATDs ``as being aviation training devices (ATD)
are defined'' in an advisory circular.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Since the 2009 final rule, the regulations permit ATDs to be used
for the purpose of satisfying instrument recency experience
requirements. As set forth in Sec.  61.57, pilots who complete
instrument recency experience exclusively in ATDs must complete more
tasks at more frequent intervals than those pilots who use aircraft,
FFSs, and FTDs.
    Despite the limitations on the use of ATDs that were set forth in
the 2009 final rule, the FAA had issued hundreds of LOAs to
manufacturers of devices that permitted ATDs (as well as ground
trainers, PCATDs, and FTDs (levels 1 through 3)) to be used to a
greater extent than were ultimately set forth in the regulations. Even
after publication of the 2009 final rule, the FAA continued to issue
LOAs in excess of the express limitations in the regulations. On
January 2, 2014, the FAA published a notice of policy to reissue LOAs
to reflect current regulatory requirements. 79 FR 20. The FAA concluded
that it could not use LOAs to exceed express limitations that had been
placed in the regulations through notice and comment rulemaking.
    As discussed further in the following two sections, the FAA is
proposing to amend the regulations governing the use of ATDs to
increase the use of these devices for instrument training and
instrument recency experience requirements above the levels established
in the 2009 final rule. In developing this proposed rule, the FAA notes
that ATD development has advanced to an impressive level of capability.
Many ATDs can simulate weather conditions with variable winds, variable
ceilings and visibility, icing, turbulence, high definition (HD)
visuals, hundreds of different equipment failure scenarios, navigation
specific to current charts and topography, specific navigation and
communication equipment use, variable ``aircraft specific''
performance, and more. The visual and motion component of some of these
devices permit maneuvers that require outside visual references in an
aircraft to be successfully taught in an AATD. Many of these simulation
capabilities were not possible in PCATDs and BATDs that the FAA
approved for 10 hours of instrument time.
    The FAA believes that permitting pilots to log increased time in
ATDs would encourage pilots to practice maneuvers until they are
performed to an acceptable level of proficiency. In an ATD, a pilot can
replay the training scenario, identify any improper action, and
determine corrective actions without undue hazard or risk to persons or
property. In this fashion, a pilot can continue to practice tasks and
maneuvers in a safe, effective, and cost efficient means of maintaining
proficiency.
    In a recent notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM),\4\ the FAA
proposed to increase the maximum time that may be credited in an ATD
toward the aeronautical experience requirements for an instrument
rating under Sec.  61.65(i). The NPRM proposed to permit a person to
credit a maximum of 20 hours of aeronautical experience acquired in an
approved ATD toward the requirements for an instrument rating. By LOA,
devices that qualify as AATDs were proposed to be authorized for up to
20 hours of experience to meet the instrument time requirements.
Devices that qualify as BATDs were proposed to be authorized, by LOA,
for a maximum of 10 hours of experience to meet the instrument time
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Aviation Training Device Credit for Pilot Certification, 80
FR 34338 (Jun. 16, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on the comments received to the NPRM, the final rule \5\
revised Sec.  61.65 to include a specified allowance of 10 hours for
BATDs and 20 hours for AATDs in part 61 (combined use not to exceed 20
hours) for the instrument rating.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 81 FR 21449 (Apr. 12, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The NPRM also addressed the use of ATDs in approved instrument
rating courses. The NPRM proposed to amend appendix C to part 141 to
increase the limit on the amount of training hours that may be
accomplished in an ATD in an approved course for an instrument rating.
The FAA proposed to allow ATDs to be used for no more than 40% of the
total flight training hour requirements in an approved instrument
rating course.
    Based on the comments received to the NPRM, the final rule revised
appendix C to part 141 to include a specified allowance of 25% of
creditable time in BATDs \6\ and 40% of creditable time for AATDs under
part 141 (not to exceed 40% total time) for the instrument rating.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ If a course of training is approved under the minimum
requirements as prescribed in part 141 Appendix C for the instrument
rating (35 hours of training required), 25% in a BATD would equate
to 8.75 hours and 40% in an AATD would equate to 14 hours.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA is now proposing to define ATD in Sec.  61.1 as a training
device, other than a full flight simulator or flight training device,
that has been evaluated, qualified, and approved by the Administrator.
The FAA is proposing to add a definition of aviation training device to
61.1 to differentiate ATDs from FFS and FTDs approved under

part 60 and to establish that an ATD must be approved by the
Administrator to be used to meet aeronautical experience requirements
under part 61. The FAA will continue to evaluate, qualify, and approve
these devices in accordance with the guidance set forth in AC 61-136,
which has been placed in the docket for this rulemaking.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The FAA will continue to issue LOAs that allow ATDs to be
used to meet other aeronautical experience requirements in parts 61
and 141, including aeronautical experience for pilot certificates
and ratings. Currently, the FAA issues LOAs that allow pilots to
credit the same amount of time in ATDs as is currently permitted by
regulation in FSTDs when the rule is silent on ATD allowances.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Instructor Requirement When Using a Full Flight Simulator, Flight
Training Device, or Aviation Training Device To Complete Instrument
Recency Experience
    Currently, pilots who perform instrument recency experience
requirements in an aircraft are not required to have an authorized
instructor present to observe the time. Rather, the pilot can perform
the required tasks in actual instrument conditions or in simulated
instrument conditions with a safety pilot on board the aircraft. A
pilot who accomplishes instrument recency experience in an FFS, FTD, or
ATD, however, must have an authorized instructor present to observe the
time and sign the pilot's logbook. 14 CFR 61.51(g)(4).
    In revising Sec.  61.57 in the 2009 final rule to include the
option of using ATDs for meeting instrument recency experience, the
preamble indicated that the FAA did not intend for an authorized
instructor to be present during instrument recency experience performed
in an FSTD or an ATD. It stated: ``[A] person who is instrument current
or is within the second 6-calendar month period * * * need not have a
flight instructor or ground instructor present when accomplishing the
approaches, holding, and course intercepting/tracking tasks of Sec.
61.57(c)(1)(i), (ii), and (iii) in an approved flight training device
or flight simulator.'' 74 FR 42500, 42518. In 2010, the FAA issued a
legal interpretation \8\ stating that, based on the express language in
Sec.  61.51(g)(4), an instructor must be present in order for a pilot
to accomplish instrument recency experience in an FSTD or ATD. That
interpretation acknowledged, however, that the FAA had indicated in the
2009 preamble some intention to change the requirement but that the
change was not reflected in the regulation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Legal Interpretation to Thomas Keller, August 6, 2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA is proposing to amend Sec.  61.51(g) by revising paragraph
(g)(4) and adding a new paragraph (g)(5) to allow a pilot to accomplish
instrument recency experience when using an FAA-approved FFS, FTD, or
ATD--just as he or she might do when completing instrument recency
experience in an aircraft--without an instructor present. Because
instrument recency experience is not training, the FAA no longer
believes it is necessary to have an instructor present when instrument
recency experience is accomplished in an FSTD or ATD. An instrument-
rated pilot has demonstrated proficiency during a practical test with
an examiner. It can be expensive to hire an instructor to observe a
pilot performing the instrument experience requirements solely to
verify that the instrument recency experience was performed.\9\ As
noted above, practice in an ATD has the distinct advantage of pause and
review of pilot performance not available in an aircraft.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The proposal would not change the existing requirement to
reestablish currency by completing an instrument proficiency check
under the requirements in Sec.  61.57(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As with instrument recency experience accomplished in an aircraft,
the pilot would continue to be required to verify and document this
time in his or her logbook. The FAA is retaining the requirement that
an authorized instructor must be present in an FSTD or ATD when a pilot
is logging time to meet the requirements of a certificate or rating,
for example, under Sec. Sec.  61.51(g)(4), 61.65 and 61.129.
2. Instrument Recency Experience Requirements
    Currently, under Sec.  61.57(c), to act as pilot in command (PIC)
of an aircraft under instrument flight rules (IFR) or in weather
conditions less than the minimums prescribed for visual flight rules
(VFR), an instrument-rated pilot must accomplish instrument experience
(often described as instrument practice, currency or recency) within a
certain period preceding the month of the flight.
    If a pilot accomplishes the instrument recency experience in an
aircraft, FFS, FTD, or a combination, then Sec.  61.57(c)(1)-(2)
requires that, within the preceding 6 months, the pilot must have
performed: (1) Six instrument approaches; (2) holding procedures and
tasks; and (3) intercepting and tracking courses through the use of
navigational electronic systems.\10\ If a pilot accomplishes instrument
experience exclusively in an ATD, then Sec.  61.57(c)(3) requires that,
within the preceding two months, the pilot must have performed the same
tasks and maneuvers listed previously plus ``two unusual attitude
recoveries while in descending Vne airspeed condition and
two unusual attitude recoveries while in an ascending stall speed
condition.'' 14 CFR 61.57(c)(3). Section 61.57(c)(3) also requires a
minimum of three hours of instrument recency experience when using an
ATD, whereas no minimum time requirement applies when using an
aircraft, FFS, or FTD to accomplish the instrument experience.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ A pilot whose instrument currency has been lapsed for less
than six months may not act as pilot in command in IFR or weather
conditions less than the minimums prescribed for VFR but may
reestablish instrument currency by performing the tasks and
maneuvers in Sec.  61.57(c). If a pilot has failed to maintain
instrument currency for more than six months (meaning it is more
than six months since the pilot was instrument current), the pilot
may reestablish instrument currency only by completing an instrument
proficiency check under the conditions set forth in Sec.  61.57(d).
See Pilot, Flight Instructor, and Pilot School Certification;
Technical Amendment, 76 FR 78141, 78142 (December 16, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If a pilot accomplishes the instrument recency experience using an
ATD in combination with using an FFS or FTD, then the pilot must--when
using an ATD--perform the additional tasks but the ``look back'' period
to act as PIC is six months rather than two months. 14 CFR 61.57(c)(5).
The FAA stated in 2009 that the more restrictive time limitations and
additional tasks were based on the fact that, at the time, ATDs
represented new technology.
    Since the ATD provisions were added to Sec.  61.57 in the 2009
final rule, the FAA has received numerous inquiries regarding the terms
used in the rule and what might be acceptable combinations when using
various aircraft or training devices to satisfy the currency
requirements.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ The FAA notes that it also received comments requesting
clarification of the recency requirements to the ``Aviation Training
Device Credit for Pilot Certification'' direct final rule (79 FR
71634, December 3, 2015) (Docket No. FAA-2014-0987, comments at FAA-
2014-0987-0004, FAA-2014-0987-0022) and the similarly-titled notice
of proposed rulemaking (80 FR 34338, June 16, 2015) (Docket No. FAA-
2015-1846, comments at FAA-2015-1846-0034, FAA-2015-1846-0038, FAA-
2015-1846-0055). http://www.regulations.gov.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA is proposing to amend Sec.  61.57(c) to allow pilots to
accomplish instrument experience in ATDs at the same 6-month interval
allowed for FFSs and FTDs. In addition, the FAA is proposing to no
longer require those pilots who opt to use ATDs exclusively to
accomplish instrument recency experience to complete a specific number
of additional hours of instrument experience or additional

tasks (in existing Sec.  61.57(c)(3)) to remain current. As discussed
previously, significant improvements in technology for these training
devices have made it possible to allow pilots to use ATDs for
instrument recency experience at the same frequency and task level as
FSTDs. The FAA believes that this proposal would encourage pilots to
maintain instrument currency, promote safety by expanding the options
to maintain currency, and be cost saving. As proposed, a pilot would be
permitted to complete instrument recency experience in any combination
of aircraft, FFS, FTD, or ATD.
3. Instrument Recency Experience for SICs Serving in Part 135
Operations
    Section 135.245(a) requires a person serving as SIC in a part 135
operation conducted under IFR to ``meet the recent instrument
experience requirements of part 61[.]'' The FAA is proposing to remove
the reference to part 61 in Sec.  135.245(a) and move the current
instrument experience requirements in Sec.  61.57(c)(1) and (2) to new
Sec.  135.245(c). The use of aviation training devices is not currently
permitted to satisfy requirements in part 135. As such, it is more
appropriate for the express requirement for instrument recency
experience to be listed in part 135 rather than by reference to another
rule part.

B. Pilot Certification, Training, and Pilot Schools

1. Second in Command Time in Part 135 Operations
Logging Second-in-Command Time
    Currently, a person may log second-in-command (SIC) flight time
\12\ only when more than one pilot is required under the type
certification of the aircraft or the regulations under which the flight
is being conducted. 14 CFR 61.51(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ ``Flight time'' is defined, in relevant part, as ``pilot
time that commences when an aircraft moves under its own power for
the purpose of flight and ends when the aircraft comes to rest after
landing.'' 14 CFR 1.1. ``Pilot time'' is currently defined as ``time
in which a person (i) serves as a required pilot flight crewmember;
(ii) receives training from an authorized instructor in an aircraft,
flight simulator, or flight training device; or (iii) gives training
as an authorized instructor in an aircraft, flight simulator, or
flight training device.'' 14 CFR 61.1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In some situations, an airplane may be type certificated for
operation either by two pilots or by a single pilot if the airplane has
additional equipment specified in the operating limitations section of
the FAA-approved airplane flight manual. For example, a Cessna 551
requires two pilots unless the airplane is equipped with an autopilot
with approach coupling, flight director, boom microphone or headset
mounted microphone, and a transponder ident switch on the pilot's
control wheel. Likewise, certain operations conducted under part 135
require an SIC even when the type certification for the aircraft would
not require a second pilot.\13\ For example, under Sec.  135.101 no
person may operate an aircraft carrying passengers under IFR unless
there is an SIC in the aircraft. Notwithstanding this requirement, the
regulations allow a certificate holder to conduct this operation
without an SIC provided the aircraft is equipped with an operative and
approved autopilot system and its use has been authorized by the FAA.
14 CFR 135.105.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ For instance, no certificate holder may operate an aircraft
without an SIC: (1) If the aircraft has a passenger seating
configuration, excluding any pilot seat, of ten seats or more; or
(2) the flight is conducted in a Category II operation. 14 CFR
135.99(b); 135.111. Part 135 has no exceptions to the SIC
requirement during these operations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Over the years, several individuals have requested clarification
from the FAA regarding whether a second pilot may log flight time when
an aircraft is equipped for operation by a single pilot. The FAA
responded that, because the aircraft--as equipped--requires a single
pilot under the type certificate or regulation under which the flight
is being conducted, then a second pilot is not a required flightcrew
member. Accordingly, a second pilot may not log flight time under Sec.
61.51(f) during those flights.\14\ See legal Interpretation to Scott
Nichols, April 2, 2009; Legal Interpretation to Jeff Karch, May 28,
1998; Legal Interpretation to Jeff Karch, March 9, 2000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ The FAA has indicated that an assigned SIC (though not
required) may log flight time as PIC under Sec.  61.51(e) as the
sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which the pilot
is rated. The assigned PIC (unless he or she holds an airline
transport pilot (ATP) certificate and is acting as PIC of an
operation requiring an ATP certificate) would not be able to log
flight time concurrently because, under Sec.  61.51(e)(1)(iii), the
PIC is not acting as PIC of an aircraft for which more than one
pilot is required by the type certification of the aircraft or the
regulation under which the flight is being conducted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Petitions for Exemption
    On December 18, 2007, Ameriflight, a part 119 certificate holder
authorized to conduct operations under part 135, petitioned the FAA for
an exemption from Sec.  61.51(f)(2) to allow Ameriflight's SICs to log
flight time during a flight that otherwise does not require an SIC.\15\
Ameriflight indicated that, if granted, the exemption would apply
``when an operator elects to assign a properly trained and checked SIC
to a flight so that special SIC operations could be conducted if the
need arose, flight time accumulated during such an assignment may be
`legally' logged by the SIC as SIC time, and meet the requirements of
Sec.  61.51(f)(2).''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ Exemption No. 9770; Docket No. FAA-2007-0383. http://www.regulations.gov.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In its petition, Ameriflight stated that granting this exemption
would actively improve the level of safety because a properly trained
and qualified SIC enhances safety in the cockpit by (1) providing a
second set of eyes, (2) allowing for better implementation of crew
resource management, (3) encouraging the use of standardized
procedures, and (4) helping distribute flying tasks during periods of
high workload. Ameriflight further stated that a grant of exemption
would be in the public interest because SICs assigned to these
operations would gain real-world line flying experience under
supervision of a qualified PIC which it claimed was an important
element in a smooth upgrade to PIC. Ameriflight also commented that
future airline pilots currently below the Sec.  135.243(c) threshold
for PIC \16\ would have an opportunity to gain experience far more
useful to their careers than other currently available avenues, such as
flight instruction, pipeline patrol, and traffic watch.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ Section 135.243(c) states that no person may serve as PIC
of an aircraft under IFR unless, among other things, that person has
``at least 1,200 hours of flight time as a pilot, including 500
hours of cross-country flight time, 100 hours of night flight time,
and 75 hours of actual or simulated instrument time at least 50
hours of which were in actual flight [.]''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA issued a partial grant of exemption to allow Ameriflight's
pilots to log SIC time in part 135 operations that did not otherwise
require an SIC for the purposes of upgrading from SIC to PIC in those
operations. The exemption, which has since been renewed,\17\ does not
permit the flight time to be used to gain an additional certificate or
rating under part 61 or to be logged as PIC flight time (even if the
pilot is the sole manipulator of the controls of the aircraft). All
pilots utilizing the exemption are required to complete the certificate
holder's approved SIC training program including 3 hours of crew
resource management training.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ The FAA granted the original petition for exemption on
October 3, 2008, and issued extensions on October 29, 2010 (9770A),
October 31, 2012 (9770B), September 30, 2014 (9770C), and October
29, 2014 (9770D).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The pilots are also required to meet other part 135 experience,
qualifications, and crew pairing requirements. Specifically, the SIC
must hold a commercial pilot certificate with appropriate category,
class, and

instrument rating, if applicable. The SIC must complete the same part
135 pilot training requirements required for two-pilot crews necessary
to conduct operations consistent with the certificate holder's
operations specifications (Ops Specs).\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ Ops Specs are paragraphs written and issued to the operator
to provide specific requirements for certain FAA approved
operations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, Ameriflight is required under the exemption to meet
certain recordkeeping requirements and outline all SIC ground and
flight duties in its general operations manual and flightcrew operating
manual.
    To the extent that Ameriflight had petitioned to permit its pilots
to log flight time to meet aeronautical experience requirements for
pilot certification, the FAA denied that relief stating that the denial
was based on a desire to maintain the integrity of the higher level
airmen certification and rating requirements. The FAA granted partial
relief because that relief was confined to operations conducted solely
within a part 135 certificate holder's operation, and such flight time
would only be used to gain experience that would allow an SIC to
upgrade to a PIC position within part 135 operations. The FAA found
that such experience has value in part 135 operations.
    On February 7, 2013, Ameriflight petitioned the FAA to expand the
relief provided in the original partial grant of exemption by again
asking for relief to permit SICs who were not required by aircraft
certification or the regulation under which the operation is conducted
to log flight time to meet aeronautical experience requirements for
pilot certification under part 61. Ameriflight restated its arguments
regarding the value of the flight time and the benefit of building
flight time under an experienced PIC. Ameriflight added that the relief
was appropriate in light of Public Law 111-216 (August 1, 2010), which
mandated FAA rulemaking to require SICs in part 121 operations to have
an airline transport pilot (ATP) certificate.\19\ Ameriflight stated
that granting the exemption would close the experience gap between
pilots with 300 flight hours and SICs who must meet the new 1,500 hour
experience requirement to qualify for an ATP certificate by providing
``richer and more varied flying'' than was otherwise available.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ On July 15, 2013, the FAA published the final rule on Pilot
Certification and Qualification Requirements for Air Carrier
operations implementing these statutory mandates (78 FR 42324)
(Pilot Certification rule). As a result of this action, an SIC in
part 121 domestic, flag, and supplemental operations must now hold
an ATP certificate and an airplane type rating for the aircraft to
be flown. With a few exceptions based on military and academic
experience, an ATP certificate requires that a pilot be 23 years of
age and have 1,500 hours total time as a pilot. Further, to receive
an ATP certificate with a multiengine class rating, a pilot must
have 50 hours of multiengine flight experience and must have
completed a new FAA-approved ATP Certification Training Program
(CTP). To upgrade from SIC to PIC for a part 121 air carrier, the
pilot must have logged at least 1,000 flight hours in air carrier
operations.
    \20\ The FAA notes that 250 hours of flight experience are
required for a commercial pilot certificate under Sec.  61.129(a)-
(b); the agency believes that Ameriflight referenced ``300 flight
hours'' because a pilot typically would have completed more than the
minimum 250 hours when hired by a certificate holder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA published a notice of the petition in the Federal Register.
78 FR 39824 (July 2, 2013). Thirty comments were submitted to the
docket.\21\ Most commenters supported Ameriflight's petition arguing
that a two-pilot crew is safer than a one-pilot operation and the
experience gained by the SIC is more valuable than experience gained
through other methods such as banner-towing, pipeline, or power-line
patrol. Other commenters noted other benefits such as mentoring by an
experienced PIC, a second pair of eyes for safety, help in reducing
single pilot workload, and the opportunity for hands-on experience that
is difficult to obtain otherwise.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ Docket No. FAA-2007-0383. http://www.regulations.gov.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Eight commenters raised concerns about Ameriflight's petition
including the possibility of part 135 operators exploiting and charging
low-time pilots a fee to gain this SIC experience. Other commenters
suggested that granting the relief was contrary to the new ATP
certificate requirements and National Transportation Safety Board
(NTSB) recommendations that are meant to increase the SIC
qualifications for air carrier operations. One commenter stated that
SIC flight time should not be allowed in aircraft type-certificated for
single pilot operations.
    The FAA denied Ameriflight's petition to expand the relief to
permit pilots to log flight time for certification. Although the FAA
believed that the petitioner and commenters raised valid points
regarding the benefit of a second pilot in part 135 operations,
Ameriflight did not need an exemption to place another pilot on board
for increased safety. Further, the FAA stated that Ameriflight failed
to demonstrate how it is unique to the general class of regulated
entities and therefore somehow eligible for regulatory relief. The FAA
has consistently denied petitions for exemption from certification
requirements including those pertaining to flight time requirements.
The FAA believes that any changes to the requirements for logging
flight time for the purpose of meeting certification requirements are
most appropriately achieved through notice and comment rulemaking.
Proposed Rule Change
    Under certain conditions, the FAA believes that it would be
appropriate to allow pilots in part 135 operations to log time in an
airplane or operation that does not otherwise require an SIC.
    The FAA is proposing to amend Sec.  135.99 by adding paragraph (c)
to permit a certificate holder to receive approval of an SIC
professional development program (SIC PDP) via Ops Specs in order to
allow the certificate holder's pilots to log time under this proposal.
The FAA believes that a comprehensive SIC PDP can provide opportunities
for beneficial flight experience that may not otherwise exist and also
provide increased safety in operations for those flights conducted in a
multicrew environment.
    To ensure that the SIC PDP achieves these goals, the FAA has set
forth in proposed Sec.  135.99(c) the requirements for certificate
holders, airplanes, and flightcrew members during operations conducted
under an approved SIC PDP. In addition to the following discussion of
the proposal, the FAA has placed a draft advisory circular (AC) in the
docket to this rulemaking that provides additional guidance for part
135 operators regarding development and approval (via Ops Specs) of a
SIC PDP. The FAA seeks comments on this proposed AC.
    As proposed, under an approved SIC PDP, a certificate holder would
have to be authorized to conduct operations under IFR in multiengine
airplanes with dual controls and flight instruments. Because the FAA
believes that it is important that the required flightcrew member
(i.e., the PIC) have immediate access to the flight controls at all
times, the dual controls would not be permitted to include a throwover
control wheel as proposed in Sec.  135.99(c)(2)(i). The airplane would
be required to have independent flight instrumentation for a second
pilot that includes the following instrumentation: (1) Airspeed
indicator; (2) sensitive altimeter adjustable for barometric pressure;
(3) gyroscopic bank and pitch indicator (artificial horizon); (4)
gyroscopic rate-of-turn indicator combined with an integral slip-skid
indicator; (5) gyroscopic direction indicator (directional gyro or
equivalent); (6) vertical speed indicator (rate-of-climb) for IFR
operations

carrying passengers; and (7) course guidance for en route navigation
and instrument approaches. In addition, the SIC would need to have
independent instrumentation required by the certificate holder's Ops
Specs. The FAA acknowledges that the proposed instrumentation is not
currently required for SICs who are required by regulation. The FAA
believes, however, that the proposed instrumentation is the minimum
necessary for an SIC assigned under an SIC PDP to be actively engaged
as a pilot flying and pilot monitoring in both VFR and IFR conditions
and would ensure that these SICs obtain the relevant type of
multipilot, multiengine experience envisioned by Public Law 111-216.
The FAA seeks specific comment on the impact of these proposed
instrumentation requirements on part 135 operators who would be
interested in obtaining approval of an SIC PDP.
    Consistent with existing obligations under part 135, certificate
holders would be required to have: (1) A manual containing standard
operating procedures (SOP) for conducting operations with a two pilot
flightcrew and setting forth the duties and responsibilities of an SIC;
(2) approved SIC training curriculums; \22\ (3) approved flight
instructor (aircraft) training curriculums; and (4) initial and
recurrent crew resource management (CRM) training for any pilot
assigned to an operation consisting of more than one pilot flightcrew
member.\23\ The assigned SIC would be expected to perform the functions
normally assigned to an SIC in an aircraft requiring two flightcrew
members, such as communications, navigation, flight management,
briefing, departure, arrival, and approach procedures, inspections and
checklists, and, at times, sole manipulator of the flight controls.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ The FAA would require certificate holders who exclusively
conduct operations that require only a PIC to obtain approval of an
SIC training program consistent with the requirements for SICs under
part 135.
    \23\ Because a certificate holder who elects to conduct
operations with an SIC would still have the option to conduct
operations with a single pilot, the FAA would require certificate
holders to provide training on both single pilot resource management
and crew resource management as part of the certificate holder's
training and checking program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As proposed in Sec.  135.99(d), certificate holders who are
authorized to operate as a basic operator, single PIC operator, or
single pilot operator would not be permitted to obtain approval to
conduct an SIC PDP. These certificate holders--either by regulation or
deviation--are not required to develop and maintain manuals that
describe the procedures and policies to be used by the flight, ground
and maintenance personnel. 14 CFR 135.21. In addition, these
certificate holders are not required to establish and maintain an
approved pilot training program under Sec.  135.341 or employ certain
management personnel (e.g., Director of Operations, Chief Pilot) under
Sec.  119.69. Because of the limited size and scope of these
certificate holders' operations, the FAA does not believe that they
would provide the environment necessary to foster an SIC PDP.
    The FAA is also proposing in Sec.  135.99(c)(1) to require a
certificate holder with an approved SIC PDP to maintain records for
each pilot consistent with the requirements in Sec.  135.63 and provide
training and testing records upon request to any pilot who the
certificate holder has assigned to serve as SIC under its program.
Additionally, the certificate holder would be required to establish and
maintain a data collection and analysis process that would permit the
certificate holder and FAA to determine whether the SIC PDP is
accomplishing its objectives. The proposed data collection and analysis
process could be based off a certificate holder's existing voluntary
safety management system or internal evaluation program. As proposed in
Sec.  135.99(c)(1)(iv), a certificate holder who obtains approval of an
SIC PDP would be required to conduct annual standardization meetings
for all flight instructors serving as PIC during operations conducted
under an SIC PDP. The FAA believes that standardization meetings would
provide an additional mechanism to assess the effectiveness of the SIC
PDP and review performance of participating SICs.
    Under proposed Sec.  135.99(c)(4), an assigned PIC in an operation
conducted under an SIC PDP must be an authorized part 135 flight
instructor for the certificate holder. To serve as an assigned SIC
under an SIC PDP, a pilot would be required to meet the same
certification, qualification, training, checking, and testing
requirements in part 135 as a required SIC.\24\ Accordingly, an
assigned SIC would be required to hold a commercial pilot certificate
with appropriate category and class ratings and an instrument rating.
14 CFR 135.245. Because pilots serving under an SIC PDP would be
exercising the privileges of a commercial pilot certificate, they would
be required to hold a second class medical certificate. 14 CFR 61.23. A
pilot logging time under this proposal would be required to complete
the requirements of an approved SIC training and checking program for
any airplane in which the pilot would serve. Because the pilot would be
serving in a multicrew environment, this training would include crew
resource management training required under Sec.  135.330. An assigned
SIC also would be required to complete any training required by the
certificate holder's Ops Specs for the operation being conducted, such
as operations in reduced vertical separation minimum airspace.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ Consistent with current regulations, if a certificate
holder is authorized under Sec.  135.3(c) to comply with the
applicable sections of subparts N and O of part 121 instead of the
comparable requirements in part 135, the assigned SIC would be
required to meet the certification, qualification, training and
checking requirements required by subparts N and O of part 121,
except for the airline transport pilot certification requirements in
Sec.  121.436. See 81 FR 1 (January 4, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA emphasizes that, under this proposal, an SIC assigned to
duty under an SIC PDP would be subject to part 135 requirements as
though the pilot were required by aircraft certification or regulation.
For example, under the proposal, the assigned SIC would be subject to
flight time and duty period limitations and rest requirements under
subpart F of part 135. Under part 135, these requirements can differ
based on the flightcrew complement. As such, a certificate holder would
be expected to treat duty and rest periods for a two-pilot crew
conducted under an SIC PDP no differently than those for pilots serving
in operations requiring two pilots by aircraft certification or
regulation. In addition, the FAA would consider a pilot assigned to
serve as SIC under an SIC PDP to be a covered employee performing a
safety sensitive function subject to drug and alcohol testing
requirements in part 120.
    The FAA emphasizes that the SIC PDP would be voluntary. This
proposal would impose no new requirements on certificate holders
conducting operations under part 135 if they choose not to seek
approval of an SIC PDP. However, only pilots employed by a certificate
holder that has an approved SIC PDP would be permitted to log SIC
flight time in part 135 operations when a second pilot is not required
by the aircraft certification or the regulation under which the flight
is being conducted. If a certificate holder does not have an approved
SIC PDP and assigns a second pilot to an operation that does not
require two pilots, that pilot may not log flight time under Sec.
61.51.
    If conducted in accordance with an approved SIC PDP, the flight
time accomplished by those pilots serving as SIC could be counted
toward the total flight time required for an ATP certificate under
Sec. Sec.  61.159(a), 61.160,

and 61.161.\25\ As proposed in Sec.  61.159(c)(1), pilots who log time
under this provision would not be permitted to use the time to meet the
more specific flight time requirements for ATP certification (e.g.,
cross-country flight time, night flight time) set forth in Sec.
61.159(a)(1) through (5).\26\ Rather, a pilot would be required to
satisfy these specific aeronautical experience requirements during his
or her time as a required pilot flightcrew member. This limitation on
applying time logged under this provision only toward the total time
requirement for an ATP certificate is consistent with the current
limitation for SICs and flight engineers in Sec.  61.159(c). The FAA
believes that by allowing this time to be used only toward total flight
time requirements for the ATP certificate, it would promote an
environment in which a pilot's career follows a progression within part
135 that includes the pilot serving as a PIC in part 135 operations
before transitioning to an SIC position in a part 121 operation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ The FAA is proposing to revise Sec.  61.161 to permit
flight time logged under an SIC PDP to be counted toward the 1,200
hours of total flight time required for an ATP certificate with a
rotorcraft category helicopter class rating.
    \26\ As currently provided in the Ameriflight exemption, pilots
logging time under this proposal would be permitted to use the
flight time for the purpose of upgrading from SIC to PIC in part 135
operations. Exemption No. 9770D.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In proposing this change to pilot time logging allowances, the FAA
is acknowledging the value of the pilot experience gained by airmen who
have been properly trained to serve as SIC in the air carrier
environment. In Public Law 111-216, Congress directed the FAA to ensure
that applicants for an ATP certificate have received flight training,
academic training, or operational experience that will prepare the
pilot to, among other things, function effectively in a multipilot
environment, adhere to the highest professional standards, and function
effectively in an air carrier operational environment. In addition, the
Public Law directed that all part 121 flightcrew members must have an
appropriate amount of multiengine flight experience, as determined by
the Administrator.
    The FAA believes, within an appropriate training and mentoring
environment, this proposal would support the Congressional directive
and provide an effective method to acquire experience for ATP
certification and prepare pilots for a career as a professional pilot.
The experience gained from working with and learning from a part 135
flight instructor in a crew configuration would create valuable
experience. This proposal would provide an additional option for
commercial pilots seeking to meet the minimum aeronautical experience
requirements for the ATP certificate while also providing a strong
foundational experience for a developing professional pilot.
    The FAA is proposing to revise Sec.  61.159(c)(1) to set forth the
requirements for logging SIC pilot time in an operation that does not
require an SIC by type certification of the aircraft or the regulations
under which the flight is being conducted. Current Sec.  61.159(c)
(former Sec.  61.145) was first added to the regulations in a 1969
final rule. 34 FR 17162 (October 23, 1969). Until that time, SICs were
permitted to log only 50 percent of their flight time toward a
certificate or rating. The 1969 final rule permitted SICs in part 121
operations to log 100 percent of their flight time in airplanes
required to have more than one pilot by their approved airplane flight
manual or airworthiness certificate.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ That final rule also added a provision that permitted
flight engineers to log a portion of their flight engineer time
toward the flight hour requirements for an ATP certificate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In 1973, the FAA revised Sec.  61.51 (former Sec.  61.39) to permit
all SICs--not just those in part 121 operations--to log 100 percent of
flight time as SIC in aircraft on which more than one pilot is required
by the type certification of the aircraft or the regulations under
which the flight is conducted. 38 FR 3156 (February 1, 1973). When the
FAA expanded Sec.  61.51 to include all SICs, it did not remove the
more limited provision that applied only to part 121 SICs in Sec.
61.159(c)(1). Because that paragraph provides the same allowance for
logging SIC flight time as is currently reflected in Sec.  61.51(f),
the FAA is proposing to revise Sec.  61.159(c)(1) to address the
logging requirements for SICs in part 135 operations who are not
required by type certification or the regulations under which the
flight is being conducted.
    The FAA is also proposing to revise the definition of pilot time in
Sec.  61.1 and the logging requirements in Sec.  61.51(f) to reflect
the allowance for SICs to log flight time in part 135 operations when
not serving as required flightcrew members under the type certificate
or regulations.\28\ The FAA notes that, because International Civil
Aviation Organization (ICAO) standards do not recognize the crediting
of flight time when a pilot is not required by the aircraft
certification or the operation under which the flight is being
conducted, pilots who rely on flight time logged under an SIC PDP to
meet the requirements for an ATP certificate must have a limitation on
their ATP certificates indicating that they do not meet the PIC
aeronautical experience requirements of ICAO. This limitation may be
removed when the pilot presents satisfactory evidence that he or she
has met the ICAO standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ The FAA also proposes to revise the definition of ``pilot
time'' in Sec.  61.1 to include training time from an authorized
instructor in aviation training devices within the definition. The
FAA likewise proposes to add aviation training devices to Sec.
61.51(h) to accommodate the logging of training time in an aviation
training device.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Because of the ICAO limitation, it is important that flight time
logged under this proposal is accurately recorded in the pilot's
logbook. For that reason, the FAA has proposed Sec.  61.159(c)(1)(ii)
which would require the PIC to certify in the SICs logbook that the
flight time was accomplished under the requirements in Sec.
61.159(c)(1). As currently happens, a designated pilot examiner,
aircrew program designee, or FAA inspector when validating the pilot's
flight time would be responsible for noting an ICAO limitation on a
temporary airman certificate (Form 8060-4). In addition, the FAA is
proposing to revise Form 8710-1 (Airman Certification and/or Rating
Application) to include this time in the record of pilot time
section.\29\ The FAA is proposing to add a provision to Sec.  61.39
that would require a pilot who has logged flight time under Sec.
61.159(c)(1) to present a copy of the records required by Sec.
135.63(a)(4)(vi) and (x) at the time of application for the practical
test.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ The FAA anticipates it would revise FAA form 8710-1 as
appropriate at the final rule stage to include a column or block
where the total number of hours accomplished under Sec.
61.159(c)(1) could be recorded along with the notice of the ICAO
limitation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As proposed in Sec.  61.159(c), an SIC logging time under this
provision would not be permitted to log this flight time as PIC time
even when he or she is the sole manipulator of the controls. The FAA is
proposing, however, to revise Sec.  61.51(e) to allow the part 135
flight instructor serving as PIC to log all of the flight time as PIC
flight time even when the PIC is not the sole manipulator of the
controls. Section 61.51(e)(1) permits a person who holds a sport,
recreational, private, commercial, or airline transport pilot
certificate to log PIC time when the pilot (1) is the sole manipulator
of the controls of an aircraft for which the pilot is rated; (2) is the
sole occupant of the aircraft, (3) is acting as PIC of an aircraft that
requires more than one pilot by type certificate or the regulations
under which the flight is being

conducted, or (4) is undergoing an approved pilot-in-command training
program and is performing the duties of pilot in command while under
the supervision of a pilot in command. In addition, the holder of an
ATP certificate who is rated to act as PIC may log all flight time
while acting as pilot in command of an operation requiring an ATP
certificate. 14 CFR 61.51(e)(2).\30\ Without the proposed change to
Sec.  61.51(e), the part 135 flight instructor would not be permitted
to log PIC flight time during those times when the SIC is the sole
manipulator of the controls because the PIC of these operations would
not be acting as PIC of an aircraft that requires more than one pilot.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ Currently, pilots are required to hold an ATP certificate
to act as PIC in part 121 air carrier operations. Additionally,
pilots must hold an ATP certificate to serve as PIC in operations
conducted under Sec. Sec.  135.243(a)(1) and 91.1053(a)(2)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Completion of Commercial Pilot Training and Testing in Technically
Advanced Airplanes
Introduction
    Under the current requirements, an applicant for a commercial pilot
certificate with airplane category single engine class rating must
accomplish 10 hours of flight training in a complex airplane \31\ or in
a turbine-powered airplane.\32\ 14 CFR 61.129(a)(3)(ii), appendix D to
part 141. In addition, the Commercial Pilot Practical Test Standards
for Airplane (as well as the Flight Instructor Practical Test Standards
for Airplane) require a pilot to use a complex airplane for takeoff and
landing maneuvers and appropriate emergency tasks for the initial
practical test for a commercial pilot certificate with an airplane
category.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ A complex airplane is defined as an aircraft with a
retractable landing gear, flaps, and a controllable pitch propeller,
including airplanes equipped with an engine control system
consisting of a digital computer and associated accessories for
controlling the engine and propeller. 14 CFR 61.1.
    \32\ This option was added to the regulations in 1997. Pilot,
Flight Instructor, Ground Instructor and Pilot School Certification
Rules final rule, 62 FR 16220, April 4, 1997. In the preamble to the
NPRM, the FAA explained that ``some commercial pilot applicants may
wish to complete their training in turbine-powered airplanes, and
some military pilots may not have demonstrated procedures pertaining
to the use of a controllable pitch propeller. Because a turbine-
powered airplane does not necessarily have a propeller, training and
demonstration of flight proficiency in such an airplane does not
satisfy existing requirements. However, a turbine-powered airplane
clearly meets the regulatory intent of requiring an applicant to
demonstrate proficiency in a relatively complex airplane.'' 60 FR
41160.
    \33\ The Commercial Practical Test Standards (FAA-S-8081-12C)
for Airplane states that the applicant must furnish a complex
airplane ``unless the applicant currently holds a commercial pilot
certificate with a single engine or multiengine class rating, as
appropriate.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Many pilots seeking a commercial pilot certificate in the airplane
category take the initial practical test in a single engine airplane.
Training providers have noted that there are far fewer single engine
complex airplanes available to meet the practical test standards
requirement, and the single engine complex airplanes that are available
are older aircraft that are expensive to maintain. The FAA recognizes
that accomplishing the required training in either a single engine
complex airplane or turbine-powered airplane has become cost
prohibitive for most flight schools.
    Because Sec.  61.45(b) requires a pilot to accomplish the practical
test in an aircraft that is the appropriate category, class, and type
(if applicable), pilots are not permitted to use a more readily
available multiengine complex airplane during the single engine
practical test at the commercial pilot level to accomplish the tasks
and maneuvers that require a complex airplane.\34\ Currently it is
permissible for an applicant to take his or her initial commercial
pilot practical test for the airplane category in the multiengine class
and then seek an additional rating in the airplane single engine class,
thereby avoiding the difficulty of furnishing a single engine complex
airplane. However, the FAA notes that many pilots often do not apply
for their initial commercial pilot certificate with a multiengine class
rating because of the higher cost associated with gaining the
aeronautical experience required by Sec.  61.129(b)(3) and (4) in a
multiengine airplane.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ See Legal Interpretation to Ian Robert Dean, February 15,
2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Related Rulemaking History
    On August 31, 2009, the FAA published a NPRM in the Federal
Register that proposed to replace the requirement for training in a
complex airplane for commercial pilot applicants (both single engine
and multiengine ratings) with a requirement for advanced instrument
training. Pilot in command proficiency Check and Other Changes to the
Pilot and Pilot School Certification Rules NPRM, 74 FR 44779. In
discussing the proposed change, the FAA noted the complaints by
training providers regarding the necessity to maintain older single
engine complex airplanes. The FAA also acknowledged in the NPRM that
general aviation aircraft manufacturers are no longer producing as many
single engine airplanes with retractable gear but are instead producing
aircraft with ``glass cockpits,'' \35\ which are also referred to as
technically advanced aircraft (TAA).\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ ``Glass Cockpits'' refer to an aircraft with a flight deck
LCD display system that incorporates a combined flight instrument
information that includes navigation information. An example is a
primary and multifunction flight display. (PFD and MFD systems).
This can include an integrated autopilot. Reference Instrument
Flying Handbook FAA-H-8083-15B Chp. 8 pg 18.
    \36\ The General Aviation Technically Advanced Aircraft FAA--
Industry Safety Study published August 22, 2003, defines TAA as
aircraft with a minimum of an IFR-certified GPS navigation system
with a moving map display, and an integrated autopilot. Most include
a primary flight display that integrates all of the following flight
instruments together: Airspeed indicator, turn coordinator, attitude
indicator, directional gyro, altimeter, and vertical speed
indicator. Some TAAs also have a multi-function display that shows
weather, traffic and terrain graphics. In general, TAAs are aircraft
in which the pilot interfaces with one or more computers in order to
aviate, navigate, or communicate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA received a variety of comments in response to the proposed
change. Although several commenters supported the change based on the
high cost of maintaining older single engine complex airplanes and the
perceived value of requiring additional instrument training, other
commenters opposed the change citing the potential for an increase in
gear-up landing incidents and the fact that training in a complex
airplane is essential for safety because most pilots will encounter a
complex airplane during their careers. The FAA withdrew the proposed
changes in the final rule citing the need to further analyze the
comments received on the proposed revision. 76 FR 54096 (August 31,
2011). The FAA noted that it would consider the matter further and
possibly publish an NPRM in the future.
Basis for Current Proposal
    Since the 2011 final rule, various pilot associations have made
public statements on behalf of their members, expressing disappointment
in the agency's decision to withdraw the proposal set forth in the 2009
NPRM. Various individuals and pilot organizations have reiterated
concern over the costs associated with the upkeep of aging complex
single engine airplanes that are unavailable (or are cost prohibitive)
due to the decrease or discontinuance of manufacture of these aircraft.
The FAA has also received multiple exemption requests that seek relief
from Sec.  61.45(b) and the requirement to use a single engine complex
airplane during the commercial and flight instructor practical tests.
While these requests have been denied because they have not met the
regulatory criteria for an exemption, they provide additional

examples of ongoing industry concern over the lack of flexibility
provided by the current requirement to furnish a complex single engine
airplane for use during training and testing for these certificates and
ratings.
    With the prominence of airplanes equipped with glass cockpits
(i.e., TAA) in today's general aviation aircraft fleet, the FAA
believes it is appropriate to permit the use of certain TAA to complete
the training required in Sec.  61.129(a)(3)(ii) and appendix D to part
141 as well as to meet the requirements of the commercial single engine
airplane pilot and flight instructor practical test standards.
i. Definition of Technically Advanced Airplane
    The FAA recognizes the emerging and continuing trend in general
aviation aircraft manufacturing to produce most new aircraft with
advanced avionics systems. The previously typical individual six-flight
instrument configuration (six-pack) is becoming unavailable in current
general aviation manufacturing. The NTSB safety study Introduction of
Glass Cockpit Avionics Into Light Aircraft published in 2010 indicated
that ``the transition to glass cockpits in Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA)-certified light aircraft'' began in 2003 when
Cirrus Design Corporation started delivering single-engine piston
airplanes with electronic primary flight displays (PFD). Other
manufacturers, including Cessna Aircraft Company, Piper Aircraft
Incorporated, Mooney, and Hawker Beechcraft soon followed suit. The
NTSB study further referenced General Aviation Manufacturers
Association data showing that ``by 2006, more than 90 percent of new
piston-powered, light airplanes were equipped with full glass cockpit
displays.'' \37\ Indeed, the Cessna Aircraft Corporation has produced
``glass cockpit only'' piston driven aircraft since 2006. According to
the General Aviation Manufacturers Association, these Cessna piston
aircraft totaled 3,696, as delivered through 2012. Piper Aircraft Inc.
also delivers almost exclusively glass cockpit configurations, except
for some limited requests from international flight school customers
for the previously traditional independent six-flight instrument
configuration.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ General Aviation Airplane Shipment Report, End-of-Year 2006
(Washington, DC: General Aviation Manufacturers Association, 2007)
indicates that 92 percent of the 2,540 piston airplanes delivered
during 2006 were equipped with glass cockpit electronic flight
displays.
    \38\ The six-flight instrument configuration includes a separate
airspeed indicator, attitude indicator, altimeter, turn coordinator,
heading indicator, and vertical speed indicator.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This trend toward exclusive production of airplanes with glass
cockpits (TAA) is due to an increase in demand for advanced avionics
cockpit platforms by general aviation consumers.\39\ At the same time,
there has been a significant decrease in the production of single
engine complex airplanes.\40\ The FAA understands the decrease in
single engine complex airplane manufacturing is due, at least in part,
to newer airframe and power plant technologies that allow for aircraft
to achieve higher performance (e.g., airspeed, reduced fuel
consumption, etc.) without the manufacturing and maintenance costs
associated with a retractable gear system that is characteristic of a
complex airplane. Cirrus Aircraft has delivered 5,326 aircraft with
this fixed gear configuration as of 2012.\41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ An Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association Air Safety
Foundation Special Report titled ``Technically Advanced Aircraft--
Safety and Training'' states ``virtually every newly designed
transportation airplane is a TAA, including Lancair, Cirrus,
Diamond, and the Adam 500 * * * Many owners are retrofitting their
classic aircraft to convert them to TAA with IFR-certified GPS
navigators and multifunction displays.''
    \40\ The General Aviation Manufacturers Association Web site
shows Cessna has not produced a piston engine retractable gear
airplane since 1985 and Piper has produced only 28 piston engine
airplanes with retractable gear since 2008 (16 being the Piper Arrow
model). Production for Beechcraft is also at an all-time low for
piston single engine airplanes with retractable gear.
    \41\ General Aviation Manufacturers Association published
statistics (http://www.gama.aero/).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To date, the FAA has primarily used the term ``glass cockpits''
when referring to airplanes equipped with these advanced avionics
components such as a primary flight display (PFD) and multi-function
display (MFD). For example, the Instrument Flying Handbook acknowledges
that PFDs and MFDs ``are changing not only what information is
available to a pilot but also how that information is displayed.''
Moreover, the executive summary to the NTSB's Introduction of Glass
Cockpit Avionics in Light Aircraft, provides that ``in a span of only a
few years, the cockpits of new light aircraft have undergone a
transition from conventional analog flight instruments to digital-based
electronic displays,'' which ``integrate aircraft control, autopilot,
communication, navigation, and aircraft system monitoring functions,
applying technology previously available only in transport-category
aircraft.'' \42\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \42\ NTSB Safety Study # SS-10/01.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In an FAA-Industry Safety Study published in 2003, the FAA defined
TAA as ``a General Aviation aircraft that contains the following design
features: Advanced automated cockpit such as MFD or PFD or other
variations of a Glass Cockpit, or a traditional cockpit with GPS
navigation capability, moving map display and autopilot.'' \43\ The FAA
is proposing to require a certain level of complexity for TAA by
proposing to define TAA in the regulations and, thereby, mandating
certain functionalities when used for commercial pilot training and the
practical test.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \43\ General Aviation Technically Advanced Aircraft, FAA-
Industry Safety Study: Final Report of TAA Safety Study Team, http://www.faa.gov/training_testing/training/fits/research/media/TAAFinalReport.pdf (Washington, DC: Federal Aviation Administration,
2003).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Notwithstanding the previous use of terms such as glass cockpit and
electronic flight instrument displays, the FAA is proposing to adopt an
updated definition of ``technically advanced airplane'' in Sec.  61.1
based on the common and essential components of advanced avionics
systems equipped on the airplane, including a PFD, MFD and an
integrated two axis autopilot. These components would be required in
order to ensure the TAA used to meet the aeronautical experience
requirements for commercial pilots in Sec.  61.129(a)(3)(ii) and
appendix D to part 141, as well as the related practical test
standards, as amended, have the necessary level of complexity
comparable to the traditional single engine complex airplane.
    TAA would be required to include a PFD that is an electronic
display integrating all of the following flight instruments together:
An airspeed indicator, turn coordinator, attitude indicator, heading
indicator, altimeter, and vertical speed indicator. Additionally, an
independent MFD must be installed that provides a GPS with moving map
navigation system and an integrated two axis autopilot.\44\ In general,
the pilot interfaces with one or more computers in order to operate,
navigate, or communicate. The proposed definition of TAA would apply to
permanently-installed equipment and would not apply to any portable
electronic device. The FAA recognizes the continuing advancements in
aircraft avionics and the need for a pilot to be proficient with modern
cockpit equipment and automation. As proposed, the FAA would define the
term TAA as an airplane with an electronic PFD and an MFD that
includes, at a minimum, a GPS moving

map navigation and integrated two-axis autopilot.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \44\ The MFD may also include additional capabilities such as
depicting weather, traffic, terrain, navigation aids and airport
information, but these capabilities are not necessary to meet the
proposed definition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to adding a definition of TAA to Sec.  61.1, the FAA is
proposing to amend the existing training requirements to permit the use
of a TAA instead of a complex or turbine-powered airplane by commercial
pilot applicants seeking an airplane category single engine class
rating. In addition to the regulatory changes, the FAA would revise the
practical test standards for commercial pilot applicants and flight
instructors seeking an airplane category single engine class rating.
ii. Amendment to Aeronautical Experience Requirement for Commercial
Pilots
    The FAA proposes to amend the current requirement found in Sec.
61.129(a)(3)(ii) and appendix D to part 141 to complete 10 hours of
training in a complex or turbine-powered airplane. As proposed, the FAA
would permit a pilot seeking a commercial pilot certificate with an
airplane category single engine class rating to complete the 10 hours
of training in a TAA. With this amendment, a pilot seeking a commercial
pilot certificate with a single engine class rating could complete all
10 hours in a complex airplane, a turbine-powered airplane, or a TAA,
or could complete the 10 hours of training in any combination of these
three airplanes. The FAA believes that demonstration of proficiency in
an airplane that is electronically complex (i.e., those that would meet
the proposed definition of a TAA) will be comparable to the
demonstration of proficiency in an airplane that is mechanically
complex (i.e., those that meet the current definition of a complex
airplane).
    Providing the TAA alternative to the training requirements for a
commercial pilot certificate with an airplane category single engine
class rating is appropriate because advanced avionics in TAA create a
level of complexity that would be equal to or greater than the
mechanical complexity found in traditional complex airplanes. The FAA
contends that, as avionics continue to advance, the need for training
and checking in other categories of aircraft equipped with advanced
avionics systems will continue to grow. Further, the FAA emphasizes the
importance of pilot and flight instructor proficiency in the advanced
aircraft systems that are essential to the FAA's NextGen
initiatives.\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \45\ FAA publication ``NextGen Implementation Plan March 2012''
or latest version. NextGen involves development of aviation-specific
applications for existing, widely-used technologies, such as the
Global Positioning System (GPS) and technological innovation in
areas such as weather forecasting, data networking and digital
communications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Complex airplanes, turbine-powered airplanes, and TAA all require
the commercial pilot applicant to have an understanding of aircraft
systems that are more complicated than the aircraft systems found in
more basic airplanes that most private pilots learn to fly. Operation
of a complex airplane requires the pilot to perform advanced plans of
action with the gear, flaps, and propeller control in certain phases of
flight (such as takeoff, landing, and emergency procedures). Failure to
perform the correct action in a complex airplane could result in a
degradation of the safety of flight, such as a gear up landing or
achieving maximum aircraft performance during climb after takeoff.
Similarly, a TAA demands the pilot perform functions with the advanced
avionics such as programing, entering flight plans and autopilot
management. If not accomplished in an efficient, proper, and timely
manner, there is the potential for a loss of safety during the flight.
    As another example, the failure of the pilot to recognize and
respond properly to a failure of either the PFD or the MFD at a
critical phase of flight (especially during marginal VFR conditions or
instrument meteorological conditions (IMC)) could result in the pilot
losing situational awareness and possibly leading to loss of control
jeopardizing the successful completion of the flight. The FAA believes
that demonstrating proficiency when operating a TAA provides at least
an equivalent level of complexity compared to a complex airplane.
Indeed, newly hired operations aviation safety inspectors are required
to complete three weeks of glass cockpit training (in TAA). This
commitment to TAA training reflects the FAA's acknowledgment of the
importance of developing skills, understanding the complexity, and
demonstrating knowledge required to safely operate these airplanes.
    The proposed amendments to Sec.  61.129(a)(3)(ii) and appendix D to
part 141 for single engine airplane ratings do not impose any new
regulatory requirements on pilots or part 141 pilot schools.\46\ The
FAA believes that applicants for the commercial pilot practical test or
flight instructor practical test for a multiengine rating need to
continue to demonstrate skill and proficiency in a complex airplane as
defined in the practical test standards. For that reason, the FAA is
not proposing to make any related substantive revisions to the
requirement to use a complex or turbine-powered airplane to complete
the training required for multiengine airplanes in Sec.
61.129(b)(3)(ii) and appendix D to part 141, other than clarifying
amendments to eliminate redundancies in the current regulatory text. As
noted, the vast majority of multiengine airplanes are complex, and
there should be no significant burden on these applicants to provide a
multiengine complex airplane for the multiengine practical test.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \46\ Although commercial pilots who hold airplane category
single engine class ratings may not have been trained or tested in a
complex airplane, they would be required to obtain training and an
endorsement under Sec.  61.31 in order to act as PIC of a complex
airplane.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

iii. Amendments to Commercial Pilot and Flight Instructor Practical
Test Standards
    The FAA notes that the proposed amendments to Sec.
61.129(a)(3)(ii) and appendix D to part 141 necessitate coordinated
revisions to the practical test standards for commercial pilots and
flight instructors. The Commercial Pilot Practical Test Standards for
Airplane require a pilot to use a complex airplane for takeoff and
landing maneuvers and appropriate emergency tasks for the initial
practical test for a commercial pilot certificate with an airplane
category. Similarly, the Flight Instructor Practical Test Standards for
Airplane require an instructor candidate to use a complex airplane for
the performance of takeoff and landing maneuvers as well as appropriate
emergency procedures.
    Because an applicant for a commercial pilot certificate with an
airplane category single engine class rating would no longer be
required to complete training in a complex airplane, the FAA would
revise the practical test standards to permit the use of a TAA in place
of a complex or turbine-powered airplane during the single engine
airplane practical test. The FAA would also revise the flight
instructor single engine airplane practical test standards to permit
the flight instructor applicant to use a TAA during the practical test.
The FAA acknowledges that no longer requiring flight instructors
seeking an airplane category single engine class rating to take the
practical test in a complex airplane could result in a flight
instructor not being evaluated specifically on complex airplane tasks
and maneuvers.
    Although under the proposed rule an instructor would not
necessarily be evaluated during the practical test in a complex
airplane, the FAA believes that the current training and endorsement
required to act as PIC of a complex

airplane set forth in Sec.  61.31, in conjunction with the flight
instructor's demonstrated knowledge of the fundamentals of instruction,
is sufficient to ensure that type of training is provided effectively.
The FAA notes that this ability to provide training without having been
evaluated on a practical test is consistent with other Sec.  61.31
endorsements including high performance aircraft, tailwheel aircraft,
or high altitude operations.

C. Flight Instructors With Instrument Ratings Only

    Section 61.195 sets forth the limitations and qualifications for
flight instructors. Under Sec.  61.195(b), an instructor may not
conduct flight training \47\ in any aircraft for which the instructor
does not hold a pilot certificate and flight instructor certificate
with the applicable category and class ratings for the aircraft in
which the training is being provided.\48\ In addition to this
requirement, Sec.  61.195(c) requires that a flight instructor who
provides instrument training for the issuance of an instrument rating,
a type rating not limited to VFR, or the instrument training required
for commercial pilot and ATP certificates must hold an instrument
rating on his or her pilot certificate and flight instructor
certificate that is appropriate to the category and class of aircraft
used for the training.\49\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \47\ ``Flight training'' is defined as ``training, other than
ground training, received from an authorized instructor in flight in
an aircraft.'' 14 CFR 61.1.
    \48\ To be eligible for a flight instructor certificate, a
person must hold either: (1) A commercial pilot certificate with an
aircraft category and class rating for the flight instructor rating
sought and an instrument rating, or (2) an airline transport pilot
certificate with an aircraft category and class rating appropriate
to the flight instructor rating sought and instrument privileges
appropriate to the flight instructor rating that is sought. As such,
it is not possible for a person to hold a flight instructor
certificate with a rating that the person does not first hold on his
or her pilot certificate. If providing instruction in an aircraft
that is type certificated, the instructor must hold the appropriate
type rating on his or her pilot certificate. 14 CFR 61.195(b)(2).
    \49\ The FAA has distinguished instrument training for an
instrument rating under Sec.  61.65 and instrument training at the
commercial pilot certificate level under Sec.  61.129 from the
training requirements for private pilots on ``basic instrument
maneuvers'' under Sec.  61.107 and ``control and maneuvering of an
airplane solely by reference to the instruments'' under Sec.
61.109. See Legal Interpretation to Taylor Grayson, July 6, 2010. A
flight instructor does not need to hold an instrument rating to
provide the training under Sec. Sec.  61.107 and 61.109.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the 2009 final rule, the FAA modified Sec.  61.195(c) to clarify
that, in order to provide instrument training required for commercial
pilot or ATP certification, an instructor must have an instrument
rating on his or her flight instructor certificate. 74 FR 42500, 42561.
In disposing of comments to the NPRM, the FAA made the following
statement: ``. . . a flight instructor who does not hold the
appropriate airplane multiengine rating on his/her flight instructor
certificate and the appropriate airplane category multiengine class
rating on his/her pilot certificate may not conduct instrument training
in a multiengine airplane unless that flight instructor holds the
appropriate airplane category multiengine class rating on his/her pilot
certificate and flight instructor certificate.'' 74 FR 42500, 42536.
    Shortly after the final rule published, the FAA received a request
for legal interpretation seeking clarification of whether a flight
instructor who holds only an instrument-airplane rating on his or her
flight instructor certificate may conduct instrument training in a
single or multiengine airplane if he or she holds those ratings only on
his or her commercial pilot certificate but not on his or her flight
instructor certificate. See Legal Interpretation to Taylor Grayson,
January 4, 2010. The FAA responded that, under Sec.  61.195(b), a
flight instructor may not conduct instrument flight training without
holding on his or her flight instructor certificate the appropriate
category and class ratings for the aircraft in which the instrument
flight training is provided.\50\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \50\ See Legal Interpretation to Taylor Grayson, January 4,
2010, which states ``a flight instructor must have an instrument
rating on his flight instructor certificate that is applicable to
the aircraft category for which the instrument training is
provided.'' Additionally, Grayson states ``under part 61.195 a
flight instructor may not conduct instrument training in a
multiengine airplane unless that flight instructor holds the
appropriate airplane category multiengine class rating on his or her
pilot certificate and flight instructor certificate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Despite this conclusion, FAA regulations permit a pilot to receive
an initial flight instructor certificate with an instrument-airplane or
instrument-helicopter rating without a corresponding category (airplane
or rotorcraft) and class rating (single engine, multiengine,
helicopter) on the flight instructor certificate.\51\ In addition, the
FAA has indicated in guidance \52\ that a flight instructor may provide
instrument training in any class of airplane with only an instrument-
airplane rating on the flight instructor certificate so long as the
person receiving instruction holds category and class ratings for the
aircraft in which the instruction is being given. In such instances
where guidance is inconsistent with a regulation, the regulation
controls.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \51\ The powered lift category does not contain any
corresponding class ratings, on either a pilot certificate or flight
instructor certificate, and thus would not be affected by this
rulemaking proposal.
    \52\ In Grayson, the FAA noted that FAA guidance was
inconsistent with the current regulation. FAA Order 8900.1, Vol. 5,
Chpt 2, Sec. 11, stated:
    B. Class Ratings. Flight instructors who hold flight instructor
certificates issued under part 61, which allow only instrument
instructor privileges in airplanes, may give instrument flight
instruction in any class airplane that is listed without restriction
on their pilot certificate. Instructors holding only a helicopter
instrument rating on their flight instructor certificate are limited
to conducting instrument flight instruction in helicopters.
    C. Ratings Limited to Instrument. Instructors with ratings
limited to instrument may not give instrument flight instruction to
students who do not hold category and class ratings in the aircraft
used. This would be instruction for the addition of a rating that
conveys other than instrument privileges. These instructors may not
certify logbooks or recommend applicants for any aircraft category
or class rating.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    However, due to the confusion between the regulation and guidance
regarding the qualifications of a flight instructor who is providing
instrument training, the FAA is proposing to revise Sec.  61.195.
Specifically, the FAA is proposing to revise Sec.  61.195(b) and (c) to
permit a flight instructor who holds only an instrument-airplane rating
or instrument-helicopter rating on his or her flight instructor
certificate to provide instrument training in an aircraft, flight
simulation training device (which includes full flight simulators and
flight training devices), or in an aviation training device. As
proposed, the authorized instructor and the pilot receiving instrument
training would need to possess category and class ratings on their
pilot certificates that are applicable to the aircraft in which the
instrument training is accomplished. The flight instructor would need
to hold the category and class rating on his or her pilot certificate
appropriate to aircraft in which instrument training is given at the
commercial pilot or ATP certificate level.
    For example, a pilot who holds an airplane category single engine-
land class rating on his or her private pilot certificate would be able
to receive instrument training in a single engine-land airplane from a
flight instructor who holds a single engine-land class rating on his or
her commercial pilot (or ATP) certificate and an instrument-airplane
rating on his or her flight instructor certificate. If the private
pilot does not also hold a multiengine-land class rating, then in order
to provide instrument training to that private pilot in a multiengine-
land airplane, the flight instructor would be required to hold: (1) An
instrument-airplane rating on his or her flight instructor certificate,
and (2) an airplane category

multiengine-land class rating on his or her flight instructor
certificate.\53\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \53\ Likewise, if the pilot receiving instrument training held a
multiengine-land class rating on his or her private pilot
certificate but the flight instructor did not hold a multiengine-
land class rating at the commercial pilot or ATP certificate level,
the instructor--despite holding an instrument-airplane rating on his
or her flight instructor certificate--would not be able to provide
instrument training to that private pilot in a multiengine-land
airplane.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Allowing a flight instructor with only an instrument rating on his
or her flight instructor certificate to provide instrument training
when the flight instructor and the pilot receiving instrument training
hold the appropriate category and class ratings on their pilot
certificates provides adequate assurance that instrument training can
be conducted competently and safely because the pilot and the
instructor would have each previously demonstrated proficiency during a
practical test with an examiner in the category and class of aircraft
in which the instrument training is conducted.\54\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \54\ The FAA notes that, as is currently required, either the
instructor or the pilot receiving instrument training must be able
to act as pilot in command of the aircraft in which the training is
provided, meaning that one of them must meet the recent experience
requirements, have satisfied the necessary flight review and
proficiency check, and hold any required endorsements (e.g., complex
airplane) for the aircraft.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA believes the fundamentals of instrument training (and the
procedures) are a universal skill within a category of aircraft. The
IFR procedures are fundamentally consistent within a particular
category of aircraft and the same skills and rules apply to operate
under IFR in the national airspace system. Obtaining a clearance,
maintaining an attitude, altitude, speed, assigned course, following
instructions from air traffic control (ATC), and other instrument
skills are universal tasks for instrument flight in an aircraft. The
ability of an instructor to teach instrument procedures in an aircraft
for which he or she possesses an instrument rating on the flight
instructor certificate would not be affected by the absence of aircraft
category and class ratings on the flight instructor certificate.\55\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \55\ The FAA notes that a flight instructor who holds only an
instrument rating on his or her flight instructor certificate is not
authorized to provide training to meet requirements for category and
class ratings. For example, a flight instructor with only an
instrument rating who is providing instrument training required
under Sec.  61.129(a)(3)(i) for a commercial pilot certificate with
an airplane category single engine class rating is not authorized to
provide training to meet requirements that are specific to the
category and class of airplane. As such, an applicant for a
commercial pilot certificate who receives instrument training from
an instrument only instructor would need to obtain training on the
areas of operation listed in Sec.  61.127 from an instructor who
holds the appropriate category and class for the rating sought.
Additionally, the instrument only instructor may not endorse an
applicant for a commercial pilot certificate to take the practical
test.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, a flight instructor with an instrument rating on his
or her flight instructor certificate has demonstrated the required
knowledge on the fundamentals of instruction (e.g., the learning
process, elements of effective teaching, student evaluation and
testing, course development, lesson planning and classroom training
techniques). See 14 CFR 61.185(a)(1). Therefore, an instructor who
holds only an instrument rating on his or her flight instructor
certificate meets the same foundational criteria as a person who holds
a flight instructor certificate with a category and class rating. This
instructional knowledge is in addition to the knowledge and skills
specific to the instrument rating and training tasks as provided in the
Flight Instructor Instrument Practical Test Standards.\56\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \56\ FLIGHT INSTRUCTOR INSTRUMENT Practical Test Standards for
AIRPLANE and HELICOPTER, FAA-S-8081-9D U.S. Department [sic] with
Change 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Light-Sport Aircraft Pilots and Flight Instructors

1. Sport Pilot Flight Instructor Training Privilege
    To be eligible for a pilot certificate, a person must receive
training from an authorized instructor on certain areas of operation.
For instance, an applicant for a private pilot certificate with an
airplane category single engine class rating must receive flight
training on ``basic instrument maneuvers'' and ``control and
maneuvering an aircraft solely by reference to the instruments.'' 14
CFR 61.107(b)(1)(ix); 61.109(a)(3). For that reason, a flight
instructor authorized to provide flight training to a private pilot
applicant (part 61, subpart H instructor) is evaluated during the
flight instructor practical test on his or her instructional knowledge
related to tasks and maneuvers performed solely by reference to the
instruments.\57\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \57\ Flight Instructor Practical Test Standards for Airplane,
FAA-S-8081-6D; http://www.faa.gov/training_testing/testing/test_standards/media/FAA-S-8081-6D.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Conversely, basic instrument maneuvers are not an area of operation
for which sport pilot applicants must receive flight training. 14 CFR
61.311. As such, a sport pilot instructor (part 61, subpart K
instructor) is not evaluated during the practical test on his or her
instructional knowledge related to basic instrument maneuvers.\58\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \58\ Sport Pilot Practical Test Standards for Airplane,
Gyroplane, Glider, and Flight Instructor, FAA-S-8081-29; http://www.faa.gov/training_testing/testing/test_standards/media/faa-s-8081-29.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Notwithstanding this fact, there is a single circumstance under
which a sport pilot must receive flight training on control and
maneuvering solely by reference to the instruments. As with other
student pilots, a sport pilot applicant must complete solo cross-
country flight time to be eligible for the practical test for a sport
pilot certificate. 14 CFR 61.313. Prior to accomplishing this solo
cross-country flight time, sport pilot applicants must receive flight
training from an authorized instructor on various maneuvers and
procedures.\59\ 14 CFR 61.93. For applicants for a single engine
airplane rating, the maneuvers and procedures for a cross-country solo
endorsement include flight training on control and maneuvering the
airplane solely by reference to the instruments. 14 CFR 61.93(e)(12).
Sport pilot applicants are not required to receive this specific
training unless the airplane they are using to accomplish solo cross-
country flight has a Vh (maximum speed in level flight with
maximum continuous power) greater than 87 knots calibrated air speed
(CAS). The FAA believes that sport pilot flight schools currently use
flight instructors certificated under subpart H to provide training in
these airplanes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \59\ To accomplish solo cross-country flight time, a sport pilot
must obtain a student pilot certificate, receive flight training,
and obtain an endorsement from an authorized instructor. 14 CFR
61.93.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA is proposing to authorize sport pilot instructors to
provide training on control and maneuvering solely by reference to the
instruments to sport pilot applicants receiving flight training for the
purpose of solo cross-country requirements in an airplane that has a
Vh greater than 87 knots CAS. Because a sport pilot
instructor is not evaluated on this instructional knowledge, the FAA is
proposing to require a sport pilot flight instructor to receive
training and an endorsement from a flight instructor certificated under
subpart H that affirms the sport pilot flight instructor has been found
competent and is qualified to provide flight training on tasks and
maneuvers performed solely by reference to the flight instruments. A
subpart H instructor is necessary to provide the training and
endorsement to a sport pilot flight instructor because the subpart H
flight instructor is instrument rated and would be knowledgeable on the
appropriate techniques for safely accomplishing flight by reference to
the flight instruments. The FAA is not requiring a sport pilot flight
instructor to receive this endorsement. The

endorsement would only be required if the sport pilot flight instructor
seeks the privilege of providing training to sport pilot applicants on
maneuvering solely by reference to the flight instruments.
    The proposed endorsement would require the sport pilot flight
instructor to receive a minimum of 1 hour of ground training and 3
hours of flight training.\60\ The hour of ground training should
emphasize a flight instructor's role, risk, and responsibilities in
providing this type of training, evaluation and authorization. This
basic instrument flight training should involve flight training for the
purpose of giving instruction on control and maneuvering solely by
reference to the instruments including straight and level flight,
turns, descents, climbs, use of radio aids, and air traffic control
directives. 14 CFR 61.93(e)(12). The FAA believes that the sport pilot
flight instructor already has demonstrated proficiency in the
fundamentals of instruction and course development. The endorsement
would ensure that the sport pilot instructor has received appropriate
training and assessment from an authorized Subpart H instructor to
enable the sport pilot flight instructor to provide this training
effectively and safely.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \60\ Private pilot applicants have a similar requirement under
Sec.  61.109(a)(3) that requires 3 hours of flight training in a
single-engine airplane on the control and maneuvering of an airplane
solely by reference to instruments, including straight and level
flight, constant airspeed climbs and descents, turns to a heading,
recovery from unusual flight attitudes, radio communications, and
the use of navigation systems/facilities and radar services
appropriate to instrument flight.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA is proposing to add new Sec.  61.412 that would establish
training and endorsement requirements for those sport pilot flight
instructors who want to provide training for sport-pilot applicants on
control and maneuvering solely by reference to the flight instruments.
This training is not required. Rather, the proposed change would allow
a flight instructor with only sport pilot rating to provide all the
training requirements for the sport pilot certificate. The FAA is
proposing to revise Sec.  61.415 by adding a new paragraph (h) to
clarify that a sport pilot flight instructor may not conduct flight
training on control and maneuvering an aircraft solely by reference to
the instruments in an airplane that has a Vh greater than 87
knots CAS without meeting the requirements in proposed Sec.  61.412.
Because a sport pilot flight instructor is not currently authorized to
provide this training, the FAA is not placing any new limitation on
sport pilot flight instructors.
    The FAA is proposing to make a corresponding change to Sec.
91.109(c). Under that section, no person may operate a civil aircraft
in simulated instrument flight unless the other control seat is
occupied by a safety pilot who possesses at least a private pilot
certificate with category and class ratings appropriate to the aircraft
being flown. As such, a flight instructor with a sport pilot rating
only (who holds no other pilot certificates) cannot currently act as
safety pilot in simulated instrument flight. As proposed, the FAA would
revise Sec.  91.109(c) to permit a sport pilot instructor who has
obtained the endorsement proposed in Sec.  61.412 to serve as a safety
pilot only for the purpose of providing flight training on control and
maneuvering solely by reference to the instruments to a sport pilot
applicant seeking a solo endorsement in an airplane with a
Vh greater than 87 knots CAS. This serves the purpose of
qualifying the sport pilot student for solo cross-country endorsement.
2. Credit for Training Obtained as a Sport Pilot
    In the NPRM that proposed to establish the certification and
qualification requirements for sport pilots, the FAA indicated that a
pilot would be able to credit ``training time and aeronautical
experience logged as a sport pilot'' toward the requirements for higher
certificates in accordance with the logging requirements in Sec.
61.51. 67 FR 5368, 5411 (February 2, 2002). Under Sec.  61.51(h), a
person may log training time when that person receives training from an
authorized instructor in an aircraft, full flight simulator, or flight
training device.\61\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \61\ An authorized instructor for purposes of a sport pilot
certificate includes a flight instructor certificated under subpart
H of part 61 and a sport pilot instructor certificated under subpart
K of part 61 provided the instructor holds the appropriate ratings
for the aircraft in which the training is being provided.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A sport pilot instructor is authorized, within the limits of his or
her certificate, to provide training and endorsements required for: (1)