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

    AOPA recommended the FAA implement an online method to allow all
pilots and airmen to request and obtain a temporary document confirming
medical certification. This comment is also outside the scope of this
rulemaking. The FAA notes, however, that it is addressing AOPA's
comment in a separate action.\137\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \137\ Aerospace Medicine Safety Information System (AMSIS) will
permit user(s) to print a valid medical certificate. AMSIS is still
in development and is anticipated to become available in 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA is amending Sec. Sec.  121.383(c) and 135.95 as proposed.
Furthermore, as a result of the FAA's own continued review of the
proposal, the FAA has decided to also allow part 91, subpart K, program
managers to issue temporary verification documents to flightcrew
members who do not have their airman or medical certificates in their
personal possession for a particular flight. The FAA did not originally
consider providing relief to part 91, subpart K, program managers only
because there were no current exemptions granted to these program
managers. However, upon further review, the FAA finds that it is
appropriate to include part 91, subpart K, program managers because of
the similarity of part 91, subpart K, operations compared to part 121
and 135 operations. Many similarities exist between part 91, subpart K,
program managers and part 135 operators providing public air
transportation, such as: Time, duty, and rest requirements, destination
airport analysis programs, minimum equipment lists, recordkeeping,
pilot training and checking, proving tests, approved inspection
programs, and drug and alcohol misuse and prevention programs. In some
instances, a part 91, subpart K, program manager is also certificated
under part 119 to conduct part 135 operations.
    Specifically, part 91, subpart K, fractional ownership programs are
subject to FAA oversight similar to that provided to air carriers
(parts 135 and 121), with the exception of line checks and en-route
inspections. FAA aviation safety inspectors conduct scheduled and
unscheduled inspections, and surveillance of personnel, aircraft,
records, and other documents to ensure compliance with the regulations.
Given the similarities between parts 91, subpart K, 121 and 135, the
FAA finds it appropriate to also prevent cancelation of flights under
part 91, subpart K, in situations where a pilot certificate or medical
certificate is valid

but not physically available. Therefore, consistent with the amendments
to Sec. Sec.  121.383 and 135.95, the FAA is revising Sec.  91.1015 by
adding new paragraph (h), which will allow a program manager to obtain
approval to provide a temporary document verifying a flightcrew
member's airman certificate and medical certificate privileges under an
approved certificate verification plan set forth in the program
manager's management specifications. Consistent with the NPRM, the
temporary verification document will remain a short-term solution for a
period not to exceed 72 hours. The FAA is also revising Sec.
61.3(a)(1) by adding new paragraph (vi) to permit flightcrew members to
carry temporary documents provided by a program manager only on flights
conducted for the program manager under part 91, subpart K.\138\ This
is consistent with the NPRM, which proposed to add new Sec.
61.3(a)(1)(v) to allow flightcrew members to carry documents provided
by a certificate holder only on flights conducted for the part 119
certificate holder, including ferry flights to reposition aircraft. The
FAA notes that it is adopting Sec.  61.3(a)(1)(v) as proposed. The FAA
is also adopting the proposed revisions to current Sec.
61.3(a)(1)(iv).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \138\ The FAA proposed to redesignate current Sec.
61.3(a)(1)(v) as new Sec.  61.3(a)(1)(vi). Now that the FAA is
adding new Sec.  61.3(a)(1)(vi) to extend the relief to part 91,
subpart K operators, this final rule redesignates current Sec.
61.3(a)(1)(v) as new Sec.  61.3(a)(1)(vii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Furthermore, as a result of the FAA's continued review of the
proposal, the FAA is making several clarifying changes to allow for
smooth implementation of the final rule. Because the final rule allows
a person to use a temporary verification document as an airman
certificate or medical certificate, if certain conditions are met, the
inspection requirements of Sec. Sec.  61.3(l), 63.3(e), and 121.383(b)
would have applied to the temporary document. However, to avoid any
confusion, the FAA is revising Sec. Sec.  61.3(l), 63.3(e), and
121.383(b) to expressly include the temporary verification document in
the list of documents that must be presented for inspection upon
request from the Administrator.
    Additionally, the FAA is revising Sec.  121.383(a) to clarify that
an airman engaged in part 121 operations must have in his or her
possession any required appropriate current airman and medical
certificates or a temporary verification document issued in accordance
with an approved certificate verification plan under new Sec.
121.383(c).\139\ This change from what was proposed is consistent with
the FAA's proposal to add new Sec.  61.3(a)(1)(v) to allow a person
engaged in flight operations within the United States for a part 119
certificate holder authorized to conduct operations under part 121, to
hold a temporary verification document in place of an airman or medical
certificate. The FAA will be issuing a new Advisory Circular to provide
guidance to certificate holders/program managers on obtaining approval
of a certificate verification plan. The FAA will continue to provide
relief through exemptions until June 27, 2019 to allow sufficient time
for certificate holders to obtain authority under the regulation from
their Principal Operations Inspector.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \139\ In this final rule, the FAA is adding Sec.  121.383(c) to
allow a certificate holder to obtain approval to provide a temporary
document verifying a flightcrew memberr's airman certificate and
medical certificate privileges under an approved certificate
verification plan set forth in the certificate holder's operations
specifications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Military Competence for Flight Instructors

    In the NPRM, the FAA proposed several changes to Sec. Sec.  61.197
and 61.199 to accommodate renewal and reinstatement of flight
instructor certificates by military instructors and examiners.\140\ In
Sec.  61.197(a)(2)(iv), the FAA proposed to expand the 12-calendar-
month timeframe to 24 calendar months. The FAA also proposed to clarify
in Sec.  61.197(a)(2)(iv) that a flight instructor would be able to
renew his or her certificate by providing a record demonstrating that,
within the previous 24 calendar months, the instructor passed a
military instructor pilot proficiency check for a rating that the
instructor already holds or for a new rating.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \140\ Prior to this final rule, a person renewing his or her
flight instructor certificate under Sec.  61.197(a)(2)(iv) was
required to submit a record showing that, within the preceding 12
calendar months, the flight instructor passed an official U.S. Armed
Forces military instructor pilot proficiency check. Section 61.199
required the holder of an expired flight instructor certificate to
reinstate that certificate by passing a practical test.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In Sec.  61.199, the FAA proposed to revise paragraph (a) to permit
a military instructor pilot to reinstate his or her expired flight
instructor certificate by providing a record showing that, within the
previous six calendar months, the instructor pilot passed a U.S. Armed
Forces instructor pilot or pilot examiner proficiency check for an
additional military rating.\141\ Additionally, the FAA proposed to add
a new Sec.  61.199(c) as a temporary provision, which would have
allowed military instructor pilots who obtained their initial flight
instructor certificate under subpart H to reinstate that instructor
certificate based on military competence rather than by completing a
practical test.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \141\ As explained in the NPRM, the FAA has accepted a flight
instructor or examiner proficiency check conducted by the military
to be equivalent to an FAA practical test for the purposes of
issuing initial flight instructor certificates, adding ratings to
existing flight instructor certificates, and renewing flight
instructor certificates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA received six comments on these proposed amendments. Three
commenters supported the proposal. Two commenters recommended changes
to the proposed rule language. One commenter opposed the proposal.
    The Society of Aviation and Flight Educators (SAFE) and Aircraft
Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) concurred with the proposed
amendments to Sec.  61.199. AOPA also supported the proposed changes to
Sec.  61.197. One individual, identifying himself as a retired U.S. Air
Force instructor, supported having military credentials recognized by
the FAA and providing civilian equivalent instructor ratings.
    One individual, identifying as a military instructor with the
National Guard Bureau, agreed with changing the timeframe in Sec.
61.197(a)(2)(iv) from 12 calendar months to 24 calendar months.
However, the commenter suggested that the FAA revise the proposed rule
language to require a record showing that, within the preceding 24
months from the month of application, the flight instructor passed an
official U.S. Armed Forces military instructor pilot proficiency check
equivalent to renewal requirements as stated in the practical test
standards (PTS) for the rating sought. The commenter believed that this
would validate an equivalent level of flight proficiency. The commenter
explained that because some U.S. Armed Forces have instructors that
only train specific tasks such as formation flying or tactical
operations, this type of instruction is not an equivalent level of
flight proficiency as required for the renewal of a FAA flight
instructor certificate. The commenter also provided attachments
described as comparable military instructor pilot proficiency checks
accomplished on an annual basis in the U.S. Army. The commenter
asserted that these annual checks are equivalent to or better than what
would be necessary for the renewal of a flight instructor rating.
    As stated in the NPRM, the FAA proposed to clarify in Sec.
61.197(a)(2)(iv) that a flight instructor may renew his or her
certificate by providing a record demonstrating that, within the
previous

24 calendar months, the instructor passed a ``U.S. Armed Forces
military instructor pilot proficiency check'' for a rating that the
instructor already holds or for a new rating. As explained in the NPRM,
the FAA has accepted a flight instructor or examiner proficiency check
conducted by the military to be equivalent to an FAA practical test for
the purposes of issuing initial flight instructor certificates and
adding ratings to existing flight instructor certificates.\142\ Upon
further reflection, the FAA finds that the renewal requirements of
Sec.  61.197(a)(2)(iv) should be consistent with Sec.  61.73(g), which
allows a person to apply for and be issued an initial flight instructor
certificate based on official U.S. military documentation of being a
U.S. military instructor pilot or U.S. military pilot examiner.
Therefore, the FAA is revising proposed Sec.  61.197(a)(2)(iv) to allow
renewal based on either ``an official U.S. Armed Forces military
instructor pilot or pilot examiner proficiency check.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \142\ 81 FR at 29740.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    However, the FAA disagrees with referencing the PTS within Sec.
61.197(a)(2)(iv) because it would be too prescriptive. The military
typically does not perform all the tasks from the PTS or Airman
Certification Standards (ACS), as appropriate, required for civil pilot
certification during their military instructor pilot proficiency
checks. Rather, the military typically performs tasks or maneuvers that
are not outlined in the PTS and/or ACS. The FAA believes that requiring
a record showing that, within the preceding 24 months from the month of
application, the flight instructor passed an official U.S. Armed Forces
military instructor pilot proficiency check in an aircraft for which
the military instructor already holds a rating or in an aircraft for an
additional rating, is sufficient to validate a flight instructor's
equivalent level of competency. The FAA has long recognized and
accepted military credit without further review.
    The individual commenter further asserted that if a military
proficiency check meets the requirements for flight instructor renewal
or reinstatement as described in the PTS and/or ACS, the FAA should
modify Sec.  61.73(g)(3)(iv) to read: ``An official U.S. Armed Forces
record or order that shows the person passed a U.S. Armed Forces
instructor pilot or pilot examiner proficiency check in an aircraft as
a military instructor pilot or pilot examiner that is appropriate to
the flight instructor rating sought that meets equivalent requirements
of 14 CFR 61.185.''
    Section 61.73(g)(3)(i) already requires the applicant to present a
knowledge test report that shows the person passed a knowledge test on
the aeronautical knowledge areas listed under Sec.  61.185(a).
Therefore, the FAA finds it unnecessary to revise Sec.  61.73(g)(3)(iv)
to require the U.S. Armed Forces proficiency check to meet requirements
of Sec.  61.185.
    This commenter also recommended the FAA revise proposed Sec.
61.199(a)(3), which would have required a military instructor to show,
within the preceding 6 calendar months from the date of application for
reinstatement, the person passed a U.S. Armed Forces instructor pilot
or pilot examiner proficiency check for an additional military
instructor rating. The commenter noted that additional military ratings
are not acquired through a ``proficiency check.'' The commenter,
therefore, recommended the FAA revise paragraph (a)(3) to require a
record showing that, within the previous six calendar months, the
instructor passed a U.S. Armed Forces instructor pilot or pilot
examiner qualification program for an additional military rating that
results in an additional rating to be added to the airman certificate.
The individual also recommended the FAA add a new paragraph (a)(4) that
would allow for reinstatement of a flight instructor certificate if the
instructor can provide a record showing that, within the previous six
calendar months, the instructor passed a U.S. Armed Forces instructor
pilot or pilot examiner proficiency check equivalent to reinstatement
requirements as stated in the PTS and/or ACS for the rating sought. The
commenter explained this provision would facilitate reinstatement of an
expired flight instructor certificate through a U.S. Armed Forces
proficiency check that would be equivalent to the flight test described
in the PTS.
    As the commenter pointed out, additional military ratings are not
acquired through a proficiency check. Therefore, the FAA is revising
proposed Sec.  61.199(a)(3) to more accurately reflect the process by
which a military instructor pilot acquires an additional aircraft
rating qualification. The FAA is also dividing proposed Sec.
61.199(a)(3) into two subparagraphs to make the reinstatement
requirements for a military instructor pilot more consistent with the
reinstatement requirements for a civilian holder of an expired flight
instructor certificate, which are found in Sec.  61.199(a)(1) and (2).
    Accordingly, Sec.  61.199(a)(3)(i) now allows reinstatement of an
expired flight instructor certificate if the military instructor pilot
can provide a record showing that, within the preceding 6 calendar
months from the date of application for reinstatement, the pilot passed
a U.S. Armed Forces instructor pilot or pilot examiner proficiency
check. The FAA finds that a U.S. Armed Forces instructor pilot or pilot
examiner proficiency check is the military equivalent of a flight
instructor certification practical test. Therefore, this requirement is
consistent with Sec.  61.199(a)(1), which allows reinstatement of an
expired flight instructor certificate if the civilian pilot
satisfactorily completes a flight instructor practical test for one of
the ratings held on the expired flight instructor certificate.
    Additionally, Sec.  61.199(a)(3)(ii) now allows reinstatement of an
expired flight instructor certificate if the military instructor pilot
can provide a record showing that, within the preceding 6 calendar
months from the date of application for reinstatement, the pilot
completed a U.S. Armed Forces instructor pilot or pilot examiner
training course and received an additional aircraft rating
qualification as a military instructor pilot or pilot examiner that is
appropriate to the flight instructor rating sought. The FAA finds that
this requirement accurately reflects the process by which a military
instructor pilot acquires an additional aircraft rating. The FAA is not
using the terminology ``qualification program,'' as the commenter
recommended, because it is subject to interpretation. Instead, the FAA
is using language that is consistent with the terminology of Sec.
61.73(g)(3)(iii).\143\ The FAA notes that new Sec.  61.199(a)(3)(ii) is
consistent with Sec.  61.199(a)(2), which allows a civilian holder of
an expired flight instructor certificate to reinstate that flight
instructor certificate by satisfactorily completing a flight instructor
certification practical test for an additional rating.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \143\ To be issued a flight instructor certificate with the
appropriate ratings, Sec.  61.73(g) requires, in part, that the
person present an official U.S. Armed Forces record or order that
shows the person completed a U.S. Armed Forces' instructor pilot or
pilot examiner training course and received an aircraft rating
qualification as a military instructor pilot or pilot examiner that
is appropriate to the flight instructor rating sought. 14 CFR
61.73(g)(3)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    One individual asserted that military instructor pilots who allow
their FAA flight instructor rating to expire reflect a lack of
knowledge concerning 14 CFR part 61 that is pervasive in the military.
    The FAA disagrees. There are many possible scenarios other than ``a
lack of knowledge'' that may lead to someone letting his or her flight
instructor

certificate expire. In some instances, it may be intentional or an
individual may be subject to events beyond his or her control. As such,
the commenter's assertion is speculative. The FAA has determined that
this provision will provide an equitable method of renewal or
reinstatement for a FAA flight instructor certificate similar to the
allowances currently described in Sec.  61.199(a)(1) and (2).\144\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \144\ (1) A flight instructor certification practical test, as
prescribed by Sec.  61.183(h), for one of the ratings held on the
expired flight instructor certificate.
    (2) A flight instructor certification practical test for an
additional rating.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    One individual recommended the FAA revise Sec.  61.73 to add
military navigators and naval flight officers who hold a FAA flight
instructor certificate and who are military flight instructors to the
list of persons eligible for an instrument flight instructor
certificate. This commenter further asserted that there are numerous
other military aeronautical specialties beyond pilots, navigators, and
naval flight officers who have a skill set that may be valuable to the
civilian aviation community. The commenter recommended that any
military member that can produce documentation of service instructing
any aviation crew position be exempted from the fundamentals of
instruction written examination for a flight instructor certificate in
Sec.  61.183(e) or for a ground instructor certificate in Sec.
61.213(b).
    The FAA is not adopting these recommendations because they are
outside the scope of this rulemaking. Furthermore, the FAA disagrees
with providing flight instructor equivalency for non-pilot instructor
positions.
    The FAA is adding new Sec.  61.199(c) as proposed. As previously
stated, Sec.  61.199(c) will allow military instructor pilots who
obtained their initial flight instructor certificate under subpart H to
reinstate that flight instructor certificate based on military
competence rather than by completing a practical test. The FAA notes
that Sec.  61.199(c) is a temporary provision that will expire on
August 26, 2019. The FAA will revise FAA Order 8900.1 to provide
guidance to designees and inspectors on how to facilitate instructor
military competency approvals.

J. Use of Aircraft Certificated in the Restricted Category for Pilot
Flight Training and Checking

    Section 91.313(a) prohibits a person from operating a restricted
category aircraft for other than the special purpose for which it is
certificated or in any operation other than one necessary to accomplish
the work activity directly associated with the special purpose. Under
Sec.  91.313(b), operating a restricted category civil aircraft to
provide flight crewmember training in a special purpose operation for
which the aircraft is certificated is an operation for that special
purpose. The FAA recently clarified, however, that flight training and
testing for certification (e.g., for type ratings) in restricted
category aircraft is not a special purpose operation under Sec.
91.313.\145\ As such, these activities cannot be conducted in a
restricted category aircraft.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \145\ Several operators hold exemptions that permit them to
conduct pilot training for certification, practical tests (for type
rating designations) in aircraft certificated in the restricted
category.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Flights Necessary To Accomplish Work Activity Directly Associated
With the Special Purpose
    In the NPRM, the FAA proposed in Sec.  91.313(b) to list the
following operations in restricted category aircraft as flights
necessary to accomplish the work activity directly associated with a
special purpose operation:
     Flights conducted for flight crewmember training in a
special purpose operation for which the aircraft is certificated
provided the flight crewmember holds the appropriate category, class,
and type ratings and is employed by the operator to perform the
appropriate special purpose operation;
     Flights conducted to satisfy proficiency check and recent
flight experience requirements under part 61 of this chapter provided
the flight crewmember holds the appropriate category, class, and type
ratings and is employed by the operator to perform the appropriate
special purpose operation; and
     Flights conducted to relocate a restricted category
aircraft for maintenance.
    A number of commenters, including Queen Bee Air Specialties, Inc.,
GAMA, Air Tractor, and the National Agricultural Aviation Association
(NAAA), noted that the proposed regulation would prohibit third-party
training providers from conducting flight crewmember training in a
special purpose operation. The commenters indicated that such a
provision would eliminate agricultural aviation schools and decrease
safety. The commenters noted that training by experienced instructors
based on an approved curriculum in restricted category aircraft under
the oversight of FAA inspectors enhances safety. The NAAA and the
Colorado Agricultural Aviation Association (CAAA) commented that they
interpreted the proposal to allow agricultural aviation operator
``sponsored'' pilots to be able to attend third party training
facilities.
    GAMA, NAAA, AOPA, and CAAA suggested revisions to proposed Sec.
91.313(b) to ensure that training which is directly associated with the
special purpose operation is permitted without an employment
relationship existing between the trainee and the special purpose
operator.\146\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \146\ GAMA, Air Tractor, NAAA and Colorado Agricultural Aviation
Association all cited a recent survey conducted by the NAAA which
found that operators who conduct agricultural operations have an
average of 2.1 aircraft per operation, and that there was an average
of 2.0 pilots per operation. Texas State Technical College, GAMA,
NAAA, Farm Air, Curless Flying Service and Colorado Agricultural
Aviation Association all noted that many of these small operators do
not have capacity to dedicate an aircraft to training. NAAA, Farm
Air, Curless Flying Service, Colorado Agricultural Aviation
Association and Queen Bee Air Specialties specifically discussed the
difficulty of maintaining a turbine aircraft and commented that most
operators rely on third party training providers to provide
instruction in a dual cockpit aircraft.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Upon review of the extensive comments received, including a
conference call with Air Force representatives on December 13, 2016,
and a face-to-face meeting with representatives from the agricultural
aviation industry during the comment period, the FAA agrees that the
proposed rule language would have unnecessarily required all personnel
receiving flight crewmember training in a special purpose operation to
be employed by the operator providing the training.\147\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \147\ A record of conversation was placed in the docket for each
of these meetings.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Flight crewmember training in a special purpose operation has
historically been conducted by flight schools. Appendix K of part 141
for pilot schools contains allowances for special curriculum courses
for agricultural and external load operations. The FAA did not intend
to end the longstanding practice of pilot schools conducting flight
crewmember training in a special purpose operation. Flight crewmember
training in a special purpose operation for which the aircraft is
certificated is currently authorized in accordance with Sec.  91.313(b)
and was not intended to be affected by this provision. It was the FAA's
intent only to require pilot candidates to be an employee of the
operator when accomplishing training or practical tests specific to the
requisite type rating, a proficiency check, or recent flight experience
requirements specified under part 61. The FAA has revised the language
proposed in the NPRM to remove the employee requirement for

flight crewmember training in a special purpose operation.
    The FAA is retaining the provision proposed in Sec.  91.313(b) that
allows pilots employed by operators performing special purpose
operations to accomplish Sec.  61.58 proficiency checks and recent
flight experience requirements set forth in Sec.  61.57 in the course
of their employment provided the pilots hold the appropriate category,
class, and type ratings. When a pilot is employed to perform a special
purpose operation, satisfying recent flight experience and proficiency
check requirements is necessary to accomplish the work activity
directly associated with a special purpose operation. When a pilot is
not employed to perform a special purpose operation, these operations
are neither a special purpose operation nor an operation directly
associated with a special purpose operation and, therefore, are not
permitted under Sec.  91.313(a).
    The FAA is also retaining the provision from the NPRM that adds
relocation flights for maintenance to the list of operations considered
necessary to accomplish the work activity directly associated with the
special purpose operation.
    GAMA, Air Tractor, NAAA, Thrush Aircraft, Inc. and CAAA all noted
that the FAA's proposal to add this provision could suggest that other
essential types of flights necessary to accomplish work directly
associated with the special purpose, such as positioning flights,
flights to deliver aircraft, and flights to trade shows, are excluded
from expressly listed operations. GAMA stated that these flights are
clearly within the scope of flights necessary to accomplish work
directly associated with the special purpose, but that the industry
could benefit from explicit recognition that Sec.  91.313(b) does not
contain an exhaustive list of flights.
    The FAA has modified the final rule text to include flights to
relocate a restricted category aircraft for delivery, repositioning, or
maintenance to be considered as flights necessary to accomplish work
activity directly associated with a special purpose operation. This
change in the final rule permits many of the operations described by
the commenters, such as deliveries from an aircraft manufacturer,
change in ownership deliveries, relocation from one special purpose
operation to another, or repositioning for the special purpose
operation. The FAA notes that other types of flight events not
expressly allowed by the regulation may be permitted if they are
necessary to accomplish work activity directly associated with the
special purpose operation.\148\ Any operation that does not meet this
standard would require an exemption from the regulation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \148\ In the 1965 final rule, the FAA provided examples of
operations necessary to accomplish the work activity directly
associated with the special purpose operation which included
allowing a farmer to conduct a flight for the purpose of showing
which fields should be dusted or transportation of an insurance
agent, surveyor, or inspector to the site of a special purpose
operation. The FAA would also consider a flight conducted to
relocate an aircraft to an area of a special purpose operation to be
an operation necessary to accomplish the special purpose operation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. LODAs for Training and Testing for Certification
    In the NPRM, the FAA proposed in Sec.  91.313(h) to allow operators
of restricted category aircraft to apply for deviation authority for
the purpose of conducting the following operations in restricted
category aircraft:
     Flight training and the practical test for issuance of a
type rating provided the pilot being trained and tested holds at least
a commercial pilot certificate with the appropriate category and class
ratings for the aircraft type and is employed by the operator to
perform a special purpose operation; and
     Flights to designate an examiner or qualify an FAA
inspector in the aircraft type and flights necessary to provide
continuing oversight and evaluation of an examiner.
    The FAA emphasized that the proposed provision was intended to
ensure that operators do not establish training schools for the sole
purpose of issuing type ratings using restricted category aircraft. As
proposed, operators would only be granted deviation authority under
proposed Sec.  91.313(h) to conduct this training and testing for
pilots who are employed by the operator and only when a type rating is
required to complete the special purpose operation for which the
aircraft was certificated and the operator is actively engaged in
performing.
    A number of commenters opposed the proposed provision in Sec.
91.313(h) that limited the ability to obtain a LODA to an employer
providing flight training to its employees who perform a special
purpose operation for that employer. Texas State Technical College,
GAMA, L-3 Communications, and Queen Bee all suggested that such a
limitation would result in a reduction in safety.
    More specifically, Thrush Aircraft, Inc. noted that the implication
of the phrase ``is employed by the operator'' in proposed Sec.
91.313(h)(1)(i) is that an employer/employee relationship must exist
before any training may commence. The interpretation of this phrase
could create the effect of ``restricting'' the aircraft from being used
in agricultural aviation flight schools to conduct training of students
planning to become agricultural pilots, by instructors employed by
manufacturers and their dealers, or flight schools to perform pilot
checkouts and transitional training, such as transitions from piston
powered to turbine powered aircraft and by third party training for
firefighting or other restricted category operations. The U.S. Air
Force commented that proposed Sec.  91.313(h) would prohibit commercial
vendors from providing the required USAF flight crewmember training;
therefore, USAF flightcrew would not be able to receive training in
restricted category aircraft. The USAF also indicated that removing the
employment requirement would allow training in aircraft where it is not
practical to obtain a type rating in an aircraft with a standard
airworthiness certificate. Queen Bee stated that the proposal limits
ability for dealers to provide training that is crucial to customers
for their safety, success and comfort.
    As noted previously, the FAA has removed the proposed employment
requirement for flight crewmember training in a special purpose
operation. Third party training providers may continue to provide
training in special purpose operations (e.g. firefighting, agricultural
operations, and aerial advertising) absent an employment relationship
provided the operation is a special purpose operation for which the
aircraft is certificated.\149\ The LODA and employment requirements
described in Sec.  91.319(h)(1)(i) is specific to training and testing
to obtain a type rating and does not impede the special purpose flight
training identified by Thrush, the USAF, and Queen Bee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \149\ 14 CFR 21.25(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    GAMA, L-3 Communications, and AOPA all suggested that the FAA
revise the proposal to permit individuals or entities (instead of
operators) to apply for deviation authority and require that the
trainee is employed by ``an'' operator to perform a special purpose
operation instead of ``the'' operator applying to conduct the training
in proposed Sec.  91.313(h)(1). They noted that this would help to
ensure that the type rating training is required for the special
purpose operation in which the operator is actively engaged but allow
flexibility if the operator is unable to conduct the training itself.
GAMA noted, however, that this provision still would hinder training of
pilots trying to enter the

industry and not yet employed by a special purpose operator.
    L-3 Communications noted that modifying the proposal so that other
entities could obtain a LODA would allow training of initial cadres of
pilots by an aircraft manufacturer or by a properly certified training
school with an authorization to conduct restricted category training.
L-3 Communications noted that such a change would still achieve the
FAA's goal of limiting the training in restricted category aircraft for
certification to only those pilots who are employed to perform a
special purpose operation.
    GAMA, Air Tractor, Queen Bee, and one individual generally noted
that limiting the training and testing for the purpose of achieving a
type rating in a restricted category aircraft to a pilot's employer
will deny access to training for pilots that are not currently employed
in a special purpose operation. Additionally, Air Tractor noted the
possible burden on students, who must stay employed to finish flight
training. GAMA also noted that some insurance underwriters may require
pilots to obtain training that is only available through third party
training providers. Air Tractor, NAAA, CAAA, Queen Bee and one
individual all noted that these types of barriers to training will
affect the ability to replace an aging pilot community.
    As noted in the NPRM, the FAA has historically placed operating
limitations on the use of restricted category aircraft because the
airworthiness certification standards for these aircraft are not
designed to provide the same level of safety that is required for
aircraft certificated in the standard category. The operating
limitations set forth in Sec.  91.313 are designed to compensate for
the different standards and provide the necessary level of safety for
special purpose operations. In the final rule, the FAA has retained the
employment requirement to prevent flight training and testing for the
purpose of obtaining a type rating in restricted category aircraft
without an explicit employment connection to special purpose
operations. The operation of restricted category aircraft has always
been limited to special purpose operations and those operations
necessary to accomplish the work activity directly associated with a
special purpose operation. Providing flight training and testing for
certification to a pilot who does not perform a special purpose
operation is not training in a special purpose operation and the hope
of eventual employment in a special purpose operation is too attenuated
to be necessary to accomplish the work activity associated with a
special purpose operation.
3. Economic Burden
    L-3 Communications, Air Tractor, NAAA, CAAA, and Queen Bee
generally noted that the proposed rule would have a significant adverse
effect on businesses conducting operations with restricted category
aircraft since nearly all of these businesses are small businesses.
Texas State Technical College, L-3 Communications, Air Tractor, NAAA
and CAAA all noted that limiting the training and testing of pilots for
the purpose of achieving a type rating in a restricted category
aircraft to owners/operators will result in a major financial burden to
certain entities. GAMA, L-3 Communications, Air Tractor, Inc., and
Queen Bee Air Specialties generally noted that many agricultural
aviation operators lack the staff and aircraft to conduct training for
their employees. Texas State Technical College and GAMA both noted that
many of these small operators do not have in-house training staff.
Texas State specifically noted that the cost of providing its own
training would be a huge burden. Air Tractor commented that the FAA
should not place more burdens on these operators and reduce safety by
requiring training in restricted aircraft to be conducted by the
operator and requiring the student to be an employee of the operator.
    Most of the commenters concerned with the employment requirement
have described training operations in which restricted category
aircraft are being used for flightcrew member training in a special
purpose operation rather than flight training to obtain a type rating.
The FAA has removed the proposed employment requirement for special
purpose training in the final rule which may continue to be conducted
without obtaining a LODA and without an employment relationship. As
such, the economic burden associated with this provision would only
affect operators who must obtain a LODA to conduct flight training for
certification. These are very limited training operations, and they are
currently conducted by operators using the exemption process. The FAA
has issued several exemptions to facilitate this training.\150\ In all
cases, the FAA has required the training to be accomplished by the
employer as a condition of the exemption. If anything the provision
will be relieving in nature to both operators and the FAA by
eliminating the need for the exemption process. As discussed in the
NPRM, the provision is not intended to allow operators to establish
training schools utilizing restricted category aircraft for the purpose
of issuing type ratings.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \150\ Aero Contractors Ltd., Exemption No. 14396; Alaska Air
Fuel, Inc., Exemption No. 14205; Sky Aviation Corporation, Exemption
No. 12449; Columbia Helicopters, Exemption No. 11506; Airborne
Support, Inc., Exemption No. 11470; Withrotor Aviation, Inc.,
Exemption No. 11427; CHI Aviation, Exemption No. 11383; Aero-Flite,
Inc., Exemption No. 11276; Billings Flight Service, Exemption No.
11383.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Queen Bee specifically noted that this provision would limit its
ability to vet pilots for operators that do not have two-place, dual
control aircraft and/or the expertise in training. Queen Bee indicated
it currently provides this training, which would be prohibited under
the proposed requirements, for the U.S. company ARAMCO which responds
to oil spills in the Red Sea with U.S. citizens as pilots.
    L-3 Communications, Air Tractor, NAAA, Farm Air, Curless Flying
Service and CAAA noted the effect on manufacturers developing and
selling new restricted category type designs. L-3 Communications, Farm
Air and Curless Flying Service asserted that the proposed rule would
limit the ability of manufacturers to develop and sell new restricted
category type design aircraft. According to the commenters, prospective
buyers of new restricted category aircraft would not be able to receive
training for their pilot employees. A manufacturer would have no
incentive to produce a new design aircraft providing safety benefits
and improvements based on new design features and technology insertion
because pilot employees of a prospective buyer could not receive
training.
    Most restricted category aircraft do not require a type rating and
would be unaffected by this provision. Additionally, a manufacturer of
a new large or turbojet powered aircraft could seek approval as a
standard or transport category aircraft and, therefore, avoid any such
``type rating'' training limitations. The FAA notes that the level of
safety for restricted category aircraft may be lower than the level of
safety for standard category aircraft. However, the restricted category
level of certification does not eliminate any type certification
procedural requirements, such as the need to comply with continued
airworthiness requirements. To maintain an equivalent level of safety
for the public the FAA imposes certain operating restrictions for
restricted category aircraft. This provision is specific to facilitate
training in restricted category aircraft requiring a type rating
safely, not the promotion of restricted category aircraft production
for public use.

4. Operations for Compensation or Hire
    The FAA also proposed a change to Sec.  91.313(c) to ensure that
instructors providing flight training and designees conducting
practical tests under a LODA may accept compensation for these
operations. Likewise, the FAA proposed to revise Sec.  91.313(d) to
permit persons to be carried on restricted category aircraft if
necessary to accomplish a flight authorized by LODA under paragraph
(h).
    AOPA suggested revisions to Sec.  91.313(c) to eliminate confusion
by breaking each of the operations identified into three separate
subparagraphs and provided specific revised rule language. The FAA is
retaining the language in paragraph (c) as it was proposed in the NPRM.
The FAA merely proposed to add operations conducted under a LODA to the
existing list of operations involving the carriage of persons and
material that could be conducted without violating the general rule
prohibiting the carriage of persons or property on restricted category
aircraft for compensation or hire.
5. Exemptions
    GAMA raised concerns about the relationship between Sec.  61.31 and
proposed Sec.  91.313(h). GAMA noted that, if applicants requesting
exemption from Sec.  61.31 type rating requirements also must request
exemption from Sec.  91.313 type rating training through this LODA
process, they will be subject to an employment requirement. GAMA
suggested that the FAA clarify that aircraft operators who hold
exemptions from a type rating requirement do not need to also request
exemption from Sec.  91.313(h) per the proposed LODA process or revise
the LODA process to permit third party training as discussed
previously.
    GAMA also noted that while the LODA process seems to provide a path
for training in restricted category aircraft in pursuit of a type
rating, they believe that this process will be burdensome to obtain and
maintain. This process will be a barrier to a small business in that
manufacturers that plan on building larger restricted category
aircraft, that may not be exempted from the type rating requirement of
Sec.  61.31, will have a more difficult time getting training for
pilots. Air Tractor added that it and its competitor Thrush Aircraft,
Inc. manufacture airplanes that, by definition, are ``large'' (greater
than 12,500 lbs. gross weight). These airplanes are operated under
exemptions from Sec.  61.31. Air Tractor requested that the FAA
consider clarifying that large aircraft that are exempt from Sec.
61.31 are also exempt from the LODA process as proposed in the new
Sec.  91.313(h).
    Section 91.313 requires an operator to obtain a LODA to conduct
training and testing for the purpose of obtaining a type rating in a
restricted category aircraft. To the extent that some operators may
hold exemptions that enable pilots to operate certain aircraft as PIC
without a type rating, then Sec.  91.313 would be inapplicable. We
note, however, that the general provision limiting the operation of
restricted category aircraft to special purpose operations and flights
necessary to accomplish the work activity directly associated with a
special purpose operation remains applicable to all operations
conducted--even operations conducted under these exemptions. No
operator should utilize a restricted category aircraft outside the
permitted operations in Sec.  91.313.
6. FAA Interpretation of Sec.  91.313
    Finally, AOPA commented that, for the last 50 years, operators of
restricted category aircraft have been permitted to use such aircraft
for type rating training, type rating practical tests, and PIC
proficiency checks per Sec. Sec.  61.31 and 61.58. AOPA suggested that
the FAA reversed long-standing precedent in 2015 when it concluded that
this type rating training was not permissible under Sec.  91.313. AOPA
noted that new FAA guidance for conducting pilot training and/or
certification events in a restricted category aircraft was then
outlined in Notice N 8900.295 which stated that flights necessary for
PICs to obtain type rating designations in the restricted category
aircraft required under Sec.  61.31(a) are not permitted by the
operating limitations in Sec.  91.313.\151\ AOPA stated that none of
the FAA's documentation provides sufficient explanation as to the
reason for the recent change in interpretation of current Sec.
91.313(b). AOPA commented that the FAA is now proposing to codify this
new interpretation and implement a LODA process. AOPA added that
conducting type rating training and practical tests in restricted
category aircraft under certain circumstances and without a LODA has
been an accepted practice for at least several decades.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \151\ N 8900.295 Pilot Training and/or Certification Events
Conducted in Restricted Category Aircraft became effective 05/05/
2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    AOPA recommended that the FAA incorporate the operations from
proposed Sec.  91.313(h)(1) into proposed Sec.  91.313(b). This
approach would permit, without having to obtain a LODA, flight
operations in restricted category aircraft which are necessary for PICs
to obtain type rating designations in that aircraft, as required under
Sec.  61.31(a). AOPA did not believe that the LODA approach adds any
increased level of safety because the FAA has not articulated any
reason for the recent reinterpretation of current Sec.  91.313. AOPA
also believed that the FAA has not explained why the past accepted
practice should not be codified.
    The FAA Office of the Chief Counsel was asked by the Director of
the Flight Standards Service to provide a legal interpretation on the
scope of Sec.  91.313 and whether the regulation permitted operators to
conduct training and testing for certification in restricted category
aircraft. The Office of the Chief Counsel concluded that the rule as
written does not expressly permit this training and testing. As
previously noted, the FAA has historically placed limitations on the
use of restricted category aircraft because they do not meet the same
standard as a standard category aircraft. When restricted category
aircraft are used solely for the purpose of providing a type rating to
a pilot who is not engaged in a special purpose operation, the
operation cannot meet the express requirements of Sec.  91.313(a). The
previous history relative to this type of training does not change the
identified training limitation. Additionally, the FAA believes that
this type rating training and testing needs FAA oversight and approval
to ensure safe operations. Restricted category aircraft were never
intended or designed to be used for FAA pilot training and
certification. The FAA will retain the requirement for an operator to
obtain an LODA specific to training and testing in restricted category
aircraft that require a type rating when a standard category aircraft
is not readily available or does not exist and only when a pilot will
be performing a special purpose operation.
    AOPA noted that the FAA proposed to implement the changes to Sec.
91.313 within 180 days of the final rule. AOPA further noted that if
all of its recommendations are adopted, the implementation time frame
should be reduced to 30 days. AOPA suggested that the proposed changes
would be less complex to implement because the LODA process is
eliminated and less coordination within the FAA is required.
    The FAA is not eliminating the LODA process and will retain the
180-day effective date after publication. This will allow the FAA and
operators time to become familiar with the guidance and process
documents associated with the LODA requirements. The FAA has

retained the provision as proposed in the NPRM.

K. Single Pilot Operations of Former Military Airplanes and Other
Airplanes With Special Airworthiness Certificates

    In the NPRM, the FAA proposed to revise Sec.  91.531 to allow large
airplanes, including former military aircraft and some experimental
aircraft, to operate without an SIC if they were originally designed
for single pilot operations.\152\ The FAA also proposed to reorganize
Sec.  91.531 by placing all affirmative requirements in paragraph (a)
and all exceptions thereto in paragraph (b).\153\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \152\ Prior to this final rule, certain former military aircraft
and some experimental aircraft that were designed to be flown by one
pilot were required under Sec.  91.531(a) to have a SIC because they
qualified as a large airplane. These airplanes were not eligible to
obtain an LOA under Sec.  91.531(b) because they were not type
certificated. Under Sec.  91.531(b), the Administrator was allowed
only to issue LOAs for the operation of an airplane without an SIC
``if that airplane is designed for and type certificated with only
one pilot station.''
    \153\ As stated in the NPRM, the FAA also proposed to eliminate
inconsistencies, redundancies, and obsolete provisions in Sec.
91.531, including the language found in former paragraph (d). 81 FR
at 29744. The FAA notes that former Sec.  91.531(d), which applied
to part 91, subpart K aircraft, was redundant to Sec.  91.1049(d).
Section 91.1049(d) states, ``[u]nless otherwise authorized by the
Administrator, when any program aircraft is flown in program
operations with passengers onboard, the crew must consist of at
least two qualified pilots employed or contracted by the program
manager or the fractional owner.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) expressed concern
that, if read in isolation, proposed Sec.  91.531(b) could be
interpreted as providing an exhaustive list of airplanes that may be
operated without a SIC. AOPA stated that this would be a detrimental
unintended consequence because airplanes type certificated for one
required pilot are not listed in proposed Sec.  91.531(b). AOPA
recommended the FAA clarify that proposed Sec.  91.531(b) is not an
exhaustive list.
    Section 91.531(b) should not be read in isolation from the
remainder of Sec.  91.531. Section 91.531 prescribes SIC requirements
under subpart F of part 91. Subpart F of part 91 applies to large and
turbine-powered multiengine airplanes and fractional ownership program
aircraft. Section 91.531(b) should be read in context with paragraph
(a), which expressly states that exceptions are provided in paragraph
(b). The FAA finds that reading Sec.  91.531 in its entirety alleviates
AOPA's concern. The FAA is adopting Sec.  91.531(b) as proposed.
    AOPA also recommended revising proposed Sec.  91.531(b)(3) to state
``large airplane or turbojet-powered multiengine airplane,'' rather
than ``large or turbojet-powered multiengine airplane,'' to prevent any
confusion as to whether the paragraph applied to ``large airplanes'' or
``large multiengine airplanes.''
    The FAA agrees that proposed Sec.  91.531(b)(3) may have caused
confusion specific to large airplanes. The FAA is adopting AOPA's
recommendation.
    Additionally, the FAA recognizes that Sec.  91.531 has been amended
since the FAA published the NPRM on May 12, 2016.\154\ Effective August
30, 2017, the FAA amended its airworthiness standards for normal,
utility, acrobatic, and commuter category airplanes by replacing the
current prescriptive design requirements of part 23 with performance-
based airworthiness standards.\155\ As part of the part 23 final rule,
the FAA replaced the utility, acrobatic, and commuter categories in
part 23 with new airplane certification levels. As a result, the FAA
amended Sec.  91.531(a)(1) and (3) to incorporate the new airplane
certification levels to ensure airplanes certificated in the future
under new part 23 airworthiness standards would be addressed by Sec.
91.531. In this final rule, the FAA finds it unnecessary to expressly
incorporate the new airplane certification levels in the reorganized
rule language of Sec.  91.531(a) because levels 3 and 4 airplanes are
already covered by Sec.  91.531(a)(1), which requires a SIC for any
airplane that is type certificated for more than one required pilot.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \154\ Regulatory Relief: Aviation Training Devices; Pilot
Certification, Training, and Pilot Schools; and Other Provisions,
proposed rule, 81 FR 29720 (May 12, 2016).
    \155\ Revisions of Airworthiness Standards for Normal, Utility,
Acrobatic, and Commuter Category Airplanes, final rule, 81 FR 96572
(Dec. 30, 2016) (part 23 final rule).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Furthermore, the FAA is relocating the exception in proposed Sec.
91.531(a)(2), which excepts from the SIC requirement any large airplane
that is type certificated for single-pilot operation, to Sec.
91.531(b)(1). This change from what was proposed is consistent with the
NPRM, which intended to place all affirmative requirements in paragraph
(a) and all exceptions in paragraph (b). The FAA notes that, rather
than providing an exception for any large airplane certificated under
SFAR 41 if that airplane is certificated for operation with one pilot,
paragraph (b)(1) excepts any airplane that is certificated for
operation with one pilot. It is therefore unnecessary to expressly
reference the new airplane certification levels in paragraph (b)
because Sec.  91.531(b)(1) will except from the SIC requirement any
airplane that is certificated for single-pilot operation, including any
airplanes certificated under new part 23 and any large airplanes
certificated under SFAR 41. The FAA notes that the remaining
requirements of Sec.  91.531 remain unchanged from the proposal.

L. Technical Corrections and Nomenclature Change

    In the NPRM, the FAA proposed a technical correction in appendix I
to part 141, Additional Aircraft Category and/or Class Rating Course.
In paragraph 4.(k), course for an airplane additional multiengine class
rating, subparagraph (2) discussing the requirements for the commercial
pilot certificate, the FAA noted that two paragraphs were designated as
(k)(2)(iv). The FAA proposed to redesignate the second paragraph
(k)(2)(iv) as paragraph (k)(2)(v). The FAA received no comments on this
correction. The FAA is redesignating the second paragraph (k)(2)(iv) as
paragraph (k)(2)(v) as proposed.
    Additionally, to reflect the change in nomenclature regarding
flight simulators, the FAA proposed to remove the words ``flight
simulator'' wherever they appear in the sections the FAA determined
needed to be revised and replace them with the words ``full flight
simulator.'' The Society of Aviation and Flight Educators agreed with
the proposed changes of wording to ``full flight simulator.'' The FAA
is adopting the changes as proposed. The following sections are amended
to reflect this nomenclature change: Sec. Sec.  61.31, 61.51, 61.57,
61.109, 61.129, 61.159, 61.161, and section 4 of Appendix D to part
141.
    Finally, as discussed in section III.F.2. of this preamble, GAMA
recommended the FAA update its nomenclature to reflect the new Airmen
Certification Standards (ACS). The FAA began transitioning from the
practical test standards (PTS) to the airmen certification standards
(ACS) on June 15, 2016. The transition from the PTS to the ACS is an
ongoing process in which the FAA is enhancing the guidance it provides
to applicants, instructors, and evaluators to better prepare applicants
for knowledge and practical tests.\156\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \156\ The ACS offers a more comprehensive and integrated
presentation of standards for the knowledge and practical test for
an airman certificate or rating.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In light of GAMA's comment, the FAA recognized that the following
sections still referenced the practical test standards: Sec. Sec.
61.43, 61.57, 65.59, appendix A to part 65, and appendices A, B, C and
D to part 60. The FAA has

decided to revise these sections to reflect the transition to the ACS.
    In Sec.  61.57(d), the FAA is removing the reference to the PTS.
The FAA recognizes that it was inappropriate for Sec.  61.57(d) to
state that the areas of operation and instrument tasks were required in
the instrument rating PTS. The PTS and ACS do not contain regulatory
requirements. Therefore, rather than referencing the instrument rating
ACS in Sec.  61.57(d), the FAA is codifying in Sec.  61.57(d) the areas
of operation for an IPC. The FAA finds that this revision is not a
substantive change because the areas of operation and instrument tasks
required for an IPC remain unchanged. Thus, an IPC is still driven by
the standards for the instrument rating practical test.\157\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \157\ The areas of operation and instrument tasks are contained
in new Sec.  61.57(d)(1). The FAA notes that it is redesignating
former Sec.  61.57(d)(1) as new Sec.  61.57(d)(2), and former Sec.
61.57(d)(2) as new Sec.  61.57(d)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In Sec.  61.43(a)(1), the FAA is removing the reference to the PTS
as unnecessary. The FAA is also removing from Sec.  65.59 the reference
to the aircraft dispatcher PTS, to be consistent with editorial changes
made to other regulatory parts pertaining to certification of airmen.
In its place, the FAA is requiring an applicant to demonstrate skill in
applying the areas of knowledge and the topics outlined in appendix A
of part 65 to preflight and all phases of flight, which must include
abnormal and emergency procedures. The FAA emphasizes that this is not
a substantive change. The areas of operation in the aircraft dispatcher
PTS are currently based on an aircraft dispatcher's duties as they
relate to the various phases of flight, including preflight, en route,
and post-flight, and abnormal and emergency situations that could
occur. Therefore, the practical test will still be based on the
aircraft dispatcher PTS on the items outlined in appendix A of part 65.
Additionally, the aircraft dispatcher PTS will continue to provide
direction to examiners on how to administer a practical test.
    Additionally, the FAA is removing the references to the practical
test standards for FAA Publication FAA-S-8081 series (Practical Test
Standards for Airline Transport Pilot Certificate, Type Ratings,
Commercial Pilot, and Instrument Ratings) in appendices A, B, C, and D
to part 60. These references are replaced with ``FAA Airman Testing
Standards for the Airline Transport Pilot Certificate, Type Ratings,
Commercial Pilot Certificate, and Instrument Ratings.''

IV. Discussion of Effective Dates for Rule Provisions

    In the NPRM, the FAA proposed three different effective dates for
the various proposed amendments. The proposed amendments would have
been effective either 30, 60 or 180 days after the date of publication
of the final rule in the Federal Register, depending on the type and
scale of implementation needed for persons to begin complying with the
amended requirements.
    The FAA received no comments on the proposed effective dates. The
following discussion summarizes when the various amendments included in
this final rule will become effective.

Provisions Effective 30 Days After Date of Publication of Final Rule

    The following provisions will be effective 30 days after
publication of the final rule:

 The revised definition of ``flight simulation training
device'' in Sec.  1.1
 All definitions added to Sec.  61.1 and revisions to the
definition of ``pilot time'' in Sec.  61.1 regarding the reference to
FFSs rather than flight simulators and the allowance for training
received or given in an ATD
 Substantive and clarifying amendments to Sec.  61.51(g)(4) and
(5) regarding instructor requirement when using an FFS, FTD, or ATD to
complete instrument recency experience
 Amendment to Sec.  61.51(h) to include ATDs to accommodate the
logging of training time in an ATD
 Amendments to Sec.  135.245 regarding instrument experience
requirements
 Amendments to Sec.  61.195 regarding flight instructors with
instrument ratings only
 Amendment to Sec.  61.99 and addition of Sec.  61.109(l)
regarding credit for training obtained as a sport pilot
 Substantive amendment to Sec.  91.531 regarding single pilot
operations of former military airplanes and other airplanes with
special airworthiness certificates and clarifying amendments
 Typographical correction to appendix I to part 141
 Revisions related to the transition from the practical test
standards to the airman certification standards in Sec. Sec.  61.43,
61.57, 65.59, appendix A to part 65, and appendices A, B, C and D to
part 60

Provisions Effective 60 Days After Date of Publication of Final Rule

    The following provisions will be effective 60 days after
publication of the final rule:

 Substantive amendments to Sec.  61.129(a)(3)(ii) and (j) and
appendix D to part 141 regarding the completion of commercial pilot
training in technically advanced airplanes and clarifying amendments to
Sec.  61.129(b)(3)(ii)
 Amendments to Sec. Sec.  61.412, 61.415(h) and 91.109(c)
regarding sport pilot flight instructor training privilege
 Amendments to Sec. Sec.  61.197 and 61.199 regarding military
competence for Flight Instructors
 Amendments to Sec.  61.31 regarding the allowance of a Sec.
135.293 pilot-in-command competency check in a complex or high-
performance airplane to meet the training requirements for a complex or
high-performance airplane, respectively

Provisions Effective 150 Days After Date of Publication of Final Rule

    The following provisions will be effective 150 days after
publication of the final rule:

 Revisions to the definition of ``pilot time'' in Sec.  61.1
regarding the allowance of SIC time obtained under the SIC PDP in
accordance with Sec.  135.99(c)
 Amendments to Sec.  61.57(c) regarding instrument experience
requirements
 Amendments to Sec. Sec.  61.39, 61.51(e) and (f), 61.159(a),
(c), and (d)-(f), 61.161, and 135.99(c) and (d) regarding logging
flight time as a second in command in part 135 operations
 Amendment to Sec.  141.5(d) regarding pilot school use of
special curricula courses for renewal of certificate

Provisions Effective 180 Days After Date of Publication of Final Rule

    The following provisions will be effective 180 days after
publication of the final rule:

 Amendments to Sec. Sec.  61.3(a) and (l), 63.3, 63.16,
121.383(a) through (c), 91.1015 and 135.95 regarding temporary
validation of flightcrew members' certificates
 Amendments to Sec.  91.313 regarding use of aircraft
certificated in the restricted category for pilot flight training,
checking, and testing.

V. Advisory Circulars and Other Guidance Materials

    To further implement this final rule, the FAA is revising or
creating the following Advisory Circulars and FAA Orders.
    FAA Order 8900.1, Flight Standards Information Management System,
Vol. 11, Chapter 10, Basic and Advanced Aviation Training Device, Sec.
1, Approval and Authorized Use under 14

CFR parts 61 and 141 guidance concerning ATD's will be revised.
    FAA Order 8900.1, Flight Standards Information Management System,
Vol. 5 Airmen Certification, Chapter 1 Direction, Guidance, and
Procedures for Title 14 CFR parts 121/135 and General Aviation, Sec. 1,
General Information, will be revised adding a new paragraph to
facilitate application to the General Aviation and Commercial Division
for new technology TAA designation.
    The Commercial Pilot--Airplane ACS will be revised to no longer
require a complex or turbine powered airplane to be provided for part
of the practical test, and the Flight Instructor PTS for Airplane will
be revised to no longer require a complex airplane to be provided for
part of the practical test.
    AC 135-43: This document will be a new AC (Part 135 SIC
Professional Development Program) that will provide part 135 operators
guidance on receiving FAA approval for training and qualifying pilots
to act as an SIC and log that time for the ATP flight time
requirements.
    AC 61-65, Certification: Pilots and Flight and Ground Instructors
will be revised to include endorsements and guidance pertaining to the
sport pilot provisions. This will include the recommended endorsement
for qualifying a sport pilot only instructor to give basic instrument
flight instruction to sport pilot candidates only. Additional guidance
will be provided concerning reference to the General Aviation and
Commercial Division, to qualify aircraft as TAA that otherwise do not
meet the criteria defined in the rule definition.
    AC 141-1 Pilot School Certification will be revised to reflect the
allowance to use graduates from special curricula courses as a counter
for those pilot schools obtaining initial or renewal pilot school
certification.
    AC 00-70: This document will be a new AC (Flightcrew Member
Certificate Verification Plan) that will provide part 121 air carriers,
part 135 air carriers/operators, and part 91, subpart K, program
managers guidance on receiving FAA approval of a certificate
verification plan to provide a temporary document verifying a
flightcrew member's airman certificate and medical certificate
privileges.
    FAA Order 8900.1, Flight Standards Information Management System,
Vol. 5, Airman Certification, Chapter 1, Direction, Guidance and
Procedures for Parts 121/135 and General Aviation, Sec. 7, Amendments
to Certificates and Replacement of Lost Certificates will be revised to
provide guidance concerning temporary documents verifying a flightcrew
member's airman certificate and medical certificate privileges under an
approved certificate verification plan set forth in the certificate
holder's operations specifications/management specifications.
    FAA Order 8900.1, Flight Standards Information Management System,
Vol. 5, Airman Certification, Chapter 2, Title 14 CFR part 61
Certification of Pilots and Flight Instructors, Sec. 15, Issue a Title
14 CFR part 61 Pilot Certificate Based on Military Competence; and FAA
Order 8900.2, General Aviation Airman Designee Handbook, Chapter 7,
Designated Pilot Examiner Program, Sec. 19, Accomplish Designation/
Issue Certificates as an ACR Employed Solely by a FIRC Sponsor,
Paragraph 121, Flight Instructor Certificate and Ratings Issued on the
Basis of Military Competence by an MCE and MC/FPE, and Paragraph 122,
Certification of Graduates; and Sec. 20, Accomplish Designation/Conduct
Functions as an MCE, FPE, MC/FPE, GIE, and FIRE, Paragraphs 123-127,
Background, General Information for MCE, FPE, and MC/FPE Designations,
Issuance of a U.S. Private Pilot Certificate and Ratings Based on
Foreign Pilot Licenses, Pilot Certificates and Ratings Issued on the
Basis of Military Competence by an MCE and MC/FPE, and Compliance with
Other Provisions, respectively, guidance concerning flight instructor
certificate renewal via military competence will be revised regarding
the military flight instructor provisions included in this final rule.

VI. Section-By-Section Discussion of the Final Rule

    In part 1, definitions and abbreviations, in Sec.  1.1, the
definition of ``flight simulation training device'' is revised.
    In part 60, flight simulation training device initial and
continuing qualification and use, appendices A, B, C, and D are revised
to remove the references to the FAA Publication FAA-S-8081 series
(Practical Test Standards for Airline Transport Pilot Certificate, Type
Ratings, Commercial Pilot, and Instrument Ratings) to reflect the
transition to the airman certification standards. These references are
replaced with ``FAA Airman Testing Standards for the Airline Transport
Pilot Certificate, Type Ratings, Commercial Pilot Certificate, and
Instrument Ratings.''
    In part 61, certification: Pilots, flight instructors, and ground
instructors, in Sec.  61.1, the definition of ``pilot time'' is
revised. New definitions are added to Sec.  61.1(b) for ``aviation
training device'' and ``technically advanced airplane.''
    Section 61.3(a) is revised to permit a pilot flightcrew member to
carry a temporary document as a required pilot certificate for
operating a civil aircraft of the United States. This document must be
provided under an approved certificate verification plan by a part 119
certificate holder conducting operations under part 121 or 135 or a
fractional ownership program manager conducting operations under part
91, subpart K. Section 61.3(l) is revised to require the temporary
document to be presented for inspection upon request of certain
persons.
    Section 61.31 is revised to add an exception in Sec.  61.31(e) and
(f) to allow a Sec.  135.293 pilot-in-command competency check
completed in a complex or high performance airplane to meet the
training requirements for a complex or high performance airplane,
respectively.
    Section 61.39 is revised to add a provision that requires a pilot
who has logged flight time under the SIC professional development
program requirements of Sec.  61.159(c) 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.
    Section 61.43 is revised to remove the reference to the practical
test standards to reflect the transition to the airman certification
standards.
    Section 61.51(e) is revised to allow a commercial pilot or ATP
acting as PIC of a part 135 operation to log all of the flight time as
PIC flight time even when the SIC is the sole manipulator of the
controls under an approved SIC PDP. Section 61.51(e) is also revised to
prohibit an SIC from logging PIC time when the SIC is the sole
manipulator of the controls under an approved SIC PDP. Section 61.51(f)
is revised 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. Section 61.51(g) is revised to
allow a pilot to accomplish instrument experience when using a FFS,
FTD, or ATD without an instructor present. Section 61.51(h) is revised
to include ATDs to accommodate the logging of training time in an ATD.
    Section 61.57(c) is revised to allow pilots to accomplish
instrument experience in ATDs at the same 6-month interval allowed for
FFSs and FTDs. In addition, the section is revised to no longer require
pilots, who opt to use ATDs for accomplishing instrument experience, to
complete a specific number of additional instrument experience hours or
additional tasks. Finally, Sec.  61.57(d) is being revised to remove
the reference to the practical test

standards and codifying the areas of operation and instrument tasks
required for an IPC.
    Section 61.99 is revised to allow flight training received from a
flight instructor with a sport pilot rating who does not also hold a
flight instructor certificate issued under the requirements in subpart
H of part 61 to be credited toward the flight training and aeronautical
experience requirements for a recreational pilot certificate with
airplane or rotorcraft categories.
    Section 61.109 is revised by adding paragraph (l) to allow flight
training received from a flight instructor with a sport pilot rating
who does not also hold a flight instructor certificate issued under the
requirements in subpart H of part 61 to be credited toward the flight
training and aeronautical experience requirements for a private pilot
certificate with airplane, rotorcraft, or lighter-than-air categories.
    Section 61.129(a)(3)(ii) is revised to allow a pilot seeking an
initial commercial pilot certificate with an airplane single engine
rating to complete 10 hours of training, currently required in a
complex or turbine-powered airplane, to also be completed in a TAA or
any combination thereof. Section 61.129(a)(3)(ii) is also revised to
include a reference to the requirements of paragraph (j) because the
FAA is relocating the proposed requirements regarding what a TAA must
contain to Sec.  61.129(j). Coordinated revisions are made in Sec.
61.129(b)(3)(ii) for clarity and consistency purposes only.
    Section 61.159 is revised to permit flight time logged under an
approved SIC PDP to be used to meet certain flight time requirements
for an ATP certificate with an airplane category rating.
    Section 61.161 is revised to permit flight time logged under an
approved SIC PDP to be used to meet certain flight time requirements
for an ATP certificate with a rotorcraft category and helicopter class
rating.
    Section 61.195(b) and (c) are revised to permit a flight instructor
who holds only an instrument rating to provide instrument training
without being required to hold aircraft category and class ratings on
his or her flight instructor certificate if both the flight instructor
and the pilot receiving training hold a pilot certificate with the
appropriate category and class ratings. Flight instructors who wish to
provide instrument training in a multiengine airplane must still have
that additional category and class on their flight instructor
certificate.
    Section 61.197(a)(2)(iv) is revised to allow a military instructor
who has passed a U.S. Armed Forces military instructor pilot
proficiency check within the 24 calendar months preceding the month of
application to be eligible to renew his or her FAA flight instructor
certificate based on that proficiency check. The section is clarified
to indicate that a flight instructor is able to renew his or her
certificate by providing a record demonstrating that, within the
previous 24 calendar months, the instructor passed a military
instructor pilot proficiency check for a rating that the instructor
already holds or for a new rating.
    Section 61.199 is revised to permit a military instructor to
reinstate his or her flight instructor certificate by providing a
record showing that, within the previous six calendar months, the
instructor passed a U.S. Armed Forces instructor pilot or pilot
examiner proficiency check for an additional military rating or
completed a U.S. Armed Forces' instructor pilot or pilot examiner
training course and received an additional aircraft rating
qualification as a military instructor pilot or pilot examiner. Section
61.199(c) is added as a temporary provision to provide a reinstatement
method for military instructors and examiners who allowed their FAA
instructor certificates to expire before the regulations allowed them
to add a rating based on military instructor competence.
    Section 61.412 is added to 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.
    Section 61.415 is revised by adding new paragraph (h) to clarify
that a sport pilot 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 Sec.  61.412.
    In part 63, certification: Flight crewmembers other than pilots,
Sec.  63.3(a) is revised to permit a flight engineer flightcrew member
to carry a temporary verification document as an airman certificate or
medical certificate, as appropriate. This document must be provided
under an approved certificate verification plan by a part 119
certificate holder conducting operations under part 121. Section
63.3(e) is revised to require the temporary document to be presented
for inspection upon request of certain persons.
    Section 63.16 is revised to update the process for replacement of a
lost or destroyed airman certificate or medical certificate and to add
a process for replacement of a lost or destroyed knowledge test report.
    In part 65, certification: Airmen other than flight crewmembers,
Sec.  65.59 and appendix A are revised to update the terminology to
reflect the transition to the airman certification standards.
    In part 91, general operating and flight rules, Sec.  91.109(c) is
revised to permit a sport pilot instructor who has obtained the
endorsement 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.
    Section 91.313 is revised to permit operators of aircraft
certificated in the restricted category to operate those aircraft for
the purpose of providing pilot training and testing, to pilots employed
by the operator to perform the special purpose operation, that leads to
a type rating designation required by Sec.  61.31(a) (and an ATP
certificate obtained concurrently with a type rating). The section is
amended to allow flights to be conducted in restricted category
aircraft for the purpose of designating examiners and qualifying FAA
inspectors in the aircraft type and conducting oversight and
observation of designated examiners.
    Section 91.531 is revised to allow certain large airplanes that are
not type-certificated to be operated without a pilot who is designated
as SIC, provided that those airplanes: (1) Were originally designed
with only one pilot station; or (2) were originally designed with more
than one pilot station for purposes of flight training or for other
purposes, but were operated by a branch of the United States armed
forces or the armed forces of a foreign contracting State to the
Convention on International Civil Aviation with only one pilot. The
section is revised to eliminate redundancies and reorganized for
purposes of clarification by placing all affirmative requirements for a
SIC in paragraph (a) and all exceptions thereto in paragraph (b).
    Section 91.1015 is revised to permit a fractional ownership program
manager to obtain approval to provide a temporary document verifying a
flightcrew member's airman certificate and medical certificate
privileges under an approved certificate verification plan set forth in
the program manager's management specifications.
    In part 121, operating requirements: Domestic, flag, and
supplemental operations, Sec.  121.383(b) is revised to require the
temporary document to be

presented for inspection upon request of the Administrator. Section
121.383(c) is revised to permit a certificate holder to obtain approval
to provide a temporary document verifying a flightcrew member's airman
certificate and medical certificate privileges under an approved
certificate verification plan set forth in the certificate holder's
operations specifications.
    In part 135, operating requirements: Commuter and on demand
operations and rules governing persons on board such aircraft, Sec.
135.95 is revised to permit a certificate holder to obtain approval to
provide a temporary document verifying a flightcrew member's airman
certificate and medical certificate privileges under an approved
certificate verification plan set forth in the certificate holder's
operations specifications.
    Section 135.99 is revised to add paragraph (c) to permit a
certificate holder conducting part 135 operations to receive approval
of an SIC PDP via operations specifications (Ops Specs) in order to
allow their pilots to log time as SICs 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. The paragraph includes
requirements related to the certificate holder, aircraft, and pilots
involved. Section 135.99(d) states that certificate holders who have
been approved to deviate from the requirements in Sec.  135.21(a),
Sec.  135.341(a), or Sec.  119.69(a) are not permitted to obtain
approval to conduct an SIC PDP.
    Section 135.245 is revised to remove the reference to part 61 in
Sec.  135.245(a) and move the current instrument experience
requirements in Sec.  61.57(c) and (d) to new Sec.  135.245(c) and (d).
    In part 141, pilot schools, Sec.  141.5(d) is revised to add an
end-of-course test for a special curricula course approved under Sec.
141.57 to the list of activities a pilot school may use for the FAA to
issue or renew a pilot school certificate.
    Appendix D to part 141, commercial pilot certification course, is
revised to allow commercial pilot certification courses to reflect the
relief in Sec.  61.129(a)(3)(ii) that permits a pilot seeking a
commercial pilot certificate with an airplane single engine class
rating to complete the 10 hours of training in one, or a combination
of, a TAA, a complex airplane, or a turbine-powered airplane.
    Appendix I to part 141, additional aircraft category and/or class
rating course, section 4, paragraph (k)(2) is revised by redesignating
the second paragraph (k)(2)(iv) as paragraph (k)(2)(v).

VII. Regulatory Notices and Analyses

A. Regulatory Evaluation

    Changes to Federal regulations must undergo several economic
analyses. First, Executive Order 12866, and Executive Order 13563,
direct that each Federal agency shall propose or adopt a regulation
only upon a reasoned determination that the benefits of the intended
regulation justify its costs. Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act of
1980 (Pub. L. 96-354) requires agencies to analyze the economic impact
of regulatory changes on small entities. Third, the Trade Agreements
Act (Pub. L. 96-39) prohibits agencies from setting standards that
create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United
States. In developing U.S. standards, this Trade Act requires agencies
to consider international standards and, where appropriate, that they
be the basis of U.S. standards. Fourth, the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4) requires agencies to prepare a written
assessment of the costs, benefits, and other effects of proposed or
final rules that include a Federal mandate likely to result in the
expenditure by State, local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate,
or by the private sector, of $100 million or more annually (adjusted
for inflation with base year of 1995). This portion of the preamble
summarizes the FAA's analysis of the economic impacts of this rule. We
suggest readers seeking greater detail read the full regulatory
evaluation, a copy of which we have placed in the docket for this
rulemaking.
    In conducting these analyses, FAA has determined that this final
rule: (1) Has benefits that justify its costs, (2) is not an
economically ``significant regulatory action'' as defined in section
3(f) of Executive Order 12866, (3) is not ``significant'' as defined in
DOT's Regulatory Policies and Procedures; (4) will not result in a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities,
because this rule provides modest cost savings without imposing
significant costs; (5) will not create unnecessary obstacles to the
foreign commerce of the United States; and (6) will not impose an
unfunded mandate on state, local, or tribal governments, or on the
private sector by exceeding the threshold identified above. These
analyses are summarized below, and a full discussion of the benefits
and costs is provided in the regulatory evaluation included in the
docket for this rulemaking.
Who is potentially affected by this rule?
    This final rule will provide regulatory relief and benefits to
pilots, student pilots, flight instructors, military pilots seeking
civilian ratings, and pilot schools.
Assumptions
1. Analysis Time Period--5 Years
2. Discount Rates--3% and 7%
3. Analysis Base Dollar Year--2016
Summary of Cost Savings
    The amendments in this final rule reduce or relieve existing
burdens on the general aviation community and part 135 operators.
Several of these changes result from comments from the general aviation
community through petitions for rulemaking, industry/agency meetings,
and requests for legal interpretation. The changes include: reduction
in time and flexibilities in the use of ATDs, FTDs, and FFSs; expanded
opportunities for pilots in part 135 operations to log flight time;
allowed alternatives to the complex airplane requirement for commercial
pilot training; and, an allowance for pilots to credit some of their
sport pilot training toward a higher certificate. This final rule does
not result in additional costs.
    The present value total cost savings over the 5-year period of
analysis is about $93.1 million with an annualized cost savings of
about $22.7 million at a 7% discount rate. The following table
summarizes unquantified and monetized cost savings over the 5-year
period of analysis.

                                       Table 2--Summary of Rule Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   Total 5-year cost savings (millions of $2016
                                                                                dollars) *
               Provision/area of regulatory relief               -----------------------------------------------
                                                                       2016$         PV at 3%        PV at 7%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Allow a pilot to accomplish instrument recency experience in an            $12.5           $11.4           $10.3
 FFS, FTD, or ATD without an instructor present.................
Reduction in interval and time for pilots using ATDs............            83.1            76.1            68.2
Allowance to use less expensive basic airplanes for tests                    3.1             2.8             2.6
 instead of more expensive complex airplanes....................
Credit for training obtained as a sport pilot *.................            14.0            13.3            12.3
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    5-Year Total................................................           113.5           104.0            93.1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                Provisions With Unquantified Minimal Cost Savings
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Second in Command for part 135 operations.
Instrument recency experience for SICs serving in Part 135 operations.
Flight instructors with instrument ratings only.
Sport pilot flight instructor training privilege.
Include special curricula courses in renewal of pilot school certificate.
Temporary validation of flightcrew members' certificates.
Military competence for flight instructors.
Restricted category aircraft training and testing allowances.
Single pilot operations of former military airplanes and other airplanes with special airworthiness
 certificates.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Totals may not sum due to rounding.

    The following table summarizes annualized cost savings at a 7%
discount rate (annualized estaimtes at a 3% discount rate are almost
the same in this analysis). The reduction in interval and time for
pilots using ATDs comprises about 75% of the savings of this final
rule.

              Table 3--Summary of Annualized Cost Savings *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        Annualized cost
         Provision/area of regulatory relief             savings at 7%
                                                              ($M)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Allow a pilot to accomplish instrument recency                      $2.5
 experience in an FFS, FTD, or ATD without an
 instructor present..................................
Reduction in interval and time for pilots using ATDs.               16.6
Allowance to use TAAs for training and less expensive                 .6
 basic airplanes for tests instead of more expensive
 complex airplanes...................................
Credit for training obtained as a sport pilot........                3.0
                                                      ------------------
    Total............................................               22.7
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Estimates may total due to rounding.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Determination

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-354) (RFA)
establishes ``as a principle of regulatory issuance that agencies shall
endeavor, consistent with the objectives of the rule and of applicable
statutes, to fit regulatory and informational requirements to the scale
of the businesses, organizations, and governmental jurisdictions
subject to regulation. To achieve this principle, agencies are required
to solicit and consider flexible regulatory proposals and to explain
the rationale for their actions to assure that such proposals are given
serious consideration.'' The RFA covers a wide range of small entities,
including small businesses, not-for-profit organizations, and small
governmental jurisdictions.
    Agencies must perform a review to determine whether a rule will
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. If the agency determines that it will, the agency must
prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis as described in the RFA.
    However, if an agency determines that a rule is not expected to
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities, section 605(b) of the RFA provides that the head of the
agency may so certify and a regulatory flexibility analysis is not
required. The certification must include a statement providing the
factual basis for this determination, and the reasoning should be
clear.
    Most of the parties affected by this final rule will be small
businesses such as flight instructors, aviation schools, fixed base
operators, and small part 135 air carriers. There are over 1,000 part
135 air carriers alone. The general lack of publicly available
financial information from these small businesses precludes a financial
analysis of these small businesses.
    This final rule will affect a substantial number of small entities.
However, this final rule will not impose a significant impact on those
entities because this rule provides modest cost savings without
imposing significant costs.
    Therefore, as provided in section 605(b), the head of the FAA
certifies that this final rule will not result in a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, as it
imposes no new costs.

C. International Trade Impact Assessment

    The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (Pub. L. 96-39), as amended by the

Uruguay Round Agreements Act (Pub. L. 103-465), prohibits Federal
agencies from establishing standards or engaging in related activities
that create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United
States. Pursuant to these Acts, the establishment of standards is not
considered an unnecessary obstacle to the foreign commerce of the
United States, so long as the standard has a legitimate domestic
objective, such as the protection of safety, and does not operate in a
manner that excludes imports that meet this objective. The statute also
requires consideration of international standards and, where
appropriate, that they be the basis for U.S. standards.
    The FAA has assessed the potential effect of this final rule and
determined that it will have only a domestic impact and therefore would
not create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United
States.

D. Unfunded Mandates Assessment

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-
4) requires each Federal agency to prepare a written statement
assessing the effects of any Federal mandate in a proposed or final
agency rule that may result in an expenditure of $100 million or more
(in 1995 dollars) in any one year by State, local, and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector; such a mandate
is deemed to be a ``significant regulatory action.'' The FAA currently
uses an inflation-adjusted value of $155.0 million in lieu of $100
million.
    This final rule does not contain such a mandate. Therefore, the
requirements of Title II of the Act do not apply.

E. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)) requires
that the FAA consider the impact of paperwork and other information
collection burdens imposed on the public. According to the 1995
amendments to the Paperwork Reduction Act, (5 CFR 1320.8(b)(2)(vi)), an
agency may not collect or sponsor the collection of information, nor
may it impose an information collection requirement unless it displays
a currently valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number.
    In the proposed rule the FAA identified three provisions with PRA
implications that will require amended OMB supporting statements:
     Instrument recency experience requirements (information
collection 2120-0021),
     Second in command for part 135 operations (information
collection 2120-0021, 2120-0593, 2120-0039),
     Include special curricula courses in renewal of pilot
school certificate (information collection 2120-0009).
    The FAA did not receive any comments regarding its proposed
revision to any of the listed information collections. However, as the
FAA was developing this final rule, it recognized that it had not
provided an opportunity for meaningful comment regarding the proposed
revisions to information collections 2120-0021, 2120-0039 and 2120-
0009.\158\ While the FAA had described the changes in burden it did not
provide estimates of the total number of respondents affected by some
of the changes. To ensure transparency and a meaningful opportunity for
comment, the FAA published three notices seeking specific comment
regarding the revisions being made to each of these information
collections as part of this final rule.\159\ The revisions to these
information collections will follow the notice and comment requirements
of the Paperwork Reduction Act and will be submitted to OMB for review
and approval.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \158\ The FAA notes that for one information collection, 2120-
0593: Certification: Air Carriers and Commercial Operators, the FAA
provided estimates of the number of respondents and the total
burden. Therefore, the FAA provided adequate notice and an
opportunity for comment regarding the revisions to information
collection 2120-0593 in the NPRM. 81 FR 29749-52. The FAA further
notes that this information collection was submitted to OMB during
the comment period for the NPRM. OMB filed comment and continued the
information collection on January 2, 2017.
    \159\ Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for
Comments; Clearance of Renewed Approval of Information Collection:
Pilot Schools-FAR 141, 83 FR 27820 (Jun. 14, 2018); Agency
Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments; Clearance
of Renewed Approval of Information Collection: Certification:
Pilots, Flight Instructors, and Ground Instructors, 83 FR 27821
(Jun. 14, 2018); Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests
for Comments; Clearance of a Revision to an Approval of an Existing
Information Collection: Operating Requirements: Commuter and On-
Demand Operation, 83 FR 27822 (Jun. 14, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA notes that the effective dates of the provisions of this
final rule with information collection revisions have been adjusted
from the effective dates that were proposed to address the Paperwork
Reduction Act requirements for notice and OMB approval.

F. International Compatibility and Cooperation

    In keeping with U.S. obligations under the Convention on
International Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to conform to ICAO
Standards and Recommended Practices to the maximum extent practicable.
The FAA has reviewed the corresponding ICAO Standards and Recommended
Practices and has identified the following differences with these
proposed regulations.
    The FAA notes that, under Sec.  61.159(c), pilots are permitted to
log second in command flight time in part 135 operations when a second
pilot is not required. 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.
Accordingly, all pilots who log flight time under this provision and
apply for an ATP certificate would have a limitation on the certificate
indicating that the pilot does 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.
    Additionally, the FAA is allowing part 119 certificate holders
conducting operations under parts 121 and 135 and program managers
conducting operations under part 91 subpart K to issue temporary
verification documents to flightcrew members who do not have their
airman certificates or medical certificates in their personal
possession for a particular flight. A temporary verification document
may be used for a period not to exceed 72 hours. Article 29 of the
Convention on International Civil Aviation requires that every aircraft
engaged in international navigation shall carry ``the appropriate
licenses for each member of the crew.'' Accordingly, the FAA is
limiting the use of temporary verification documents to flights
conducted entirely within the United States.

G. Environmental Analysis

    FAA Order 1050.1F identifies FAA actions that are categorically
excluded from preparation of an environmental assessment or
environmental impact statement under the National Environmental Policy
Act in the absence of extraordinary circumstances. The FAA has
determined this rulemaking action qualifies for the categorical
exclusion identified in paragraph 5-6.6f and involves no extraordinary
circumstances.

VIII. Executive Order Determinations

A. Executive Order 13132, Federalism

    The FAA has analyzed this proposed rule under the principles and
criteria of Executive Order 13132, Federalism. The agency has
determined that this action would not have a substantial direct effect
on the States, or the relationship between the Federal Government and

the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among
the various levels of government, and, therefore, would not have
Federalism implications.

B. Executive Order 13211, Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use

    The FAA analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13211,
Actions Concerning Regulations that Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use (May 18, 2001). The agency has determined that it
would not be a ``significant energy action'' under the executive order
and would not be likely to have a significant adverse effect on the
supply, distribution, or use of energy.

C. Executive Order 13609, Promoting International Regulatory
Cooperation

    Executive Order 13609, Promoting International Regulatory
Cooperation, (77 FR 26413, May 4, 2012) promotes international
regulatory cooperation to meet shared challenges involving health,
safety, labor, security, environmental, and other issues and to reduce,
eliminate, or prevent unnecessary differences in regulatory
requirements. The FAA has analyzed this action under the policies and
agency responsibilities of Executive Order 13609, and has determined
that this action would have no effect on international regulatory
cooperation.

D. Executive Order 13771, Reducing Regulation and Controlling
Regulatory Costs

    This final rule is considered an E.O. 13771 deregulatory action.
Details on the estimated cost savings of this final rule can be found
in the rule's economic analysis.

IX. Additional Information

A. Availability of Rulemaking Documents

    An electronic copy of rulemaking documents may be obtained from the
internet by--
     Searching the Federal eRulemaking Portal (http://www.regulations.gov);
     Visiting the FAA's Regulations and Policies web page at
http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies or
     Accessing the Government Publishing Office's web page at
http://www.fdsys.gov.
    Copies may also be obtained by sending a request to the Federal
Aviation Administration, Office of Rulemaking, ARM-1, 800 Independence
Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Commenters must identify the docket or notice number of this
rulemaking.
    All documents the FAA considered in developing this proposed rule,
including economic analyses and technical reports, may be accessed from
the internet through the Federal eRulemaking Portal referenced above.

B. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act

    The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
(SBREFA) requires FAA to comply with small entity requests for
information or advice about compliance with statutes and regulations
within its jurisdiction. A small entity with questions regarding this
document may contact its local FAA official, or the person listed under
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT heading at the beginning of the
preamble. To find out more about SBREFA on the internet, visit http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/sbre_act/.

List of Subjects

14 CFR Part 1

    Air transportation.

14 CFR Part 60

    Airmen, Aviation safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

14 CFR Part 61

    Aircraft, Airmen, Aviation safety, Teachers.

14 CFR Part 63

    Aircraft, Airman, Aviation safety.

14 CFR Part 65

    Air traffic controllers, Aircraft, Airmen, Aviation safety,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

14 CFR Part 91

    Aircraft, Airmen, Aviation safety.

14 CFR Part 121

    Air carriers, Aircraft, Airmen, Aviation safety.

14 CFR Part 135

    Aircraft, Airmen, Aviation safety.

14 CFR Part 141

    Airmen, Educational facilities, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Schools.

The Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends chapter I of title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations as follows:

PART 1--DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS

0
1. The authority citation for part 1 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40113, 44701.

0
2. In Sec.  1.1, revise the definition of ``Flight simulation training
device'' to read as follows:

Sec.  1.1   General definitions.

* * * * *
    Flight simulation training device (FSTD) means a full flight
simulator or a flight training device.
* * * * *

PART 60--FLIGHT SIMULATION TRAINING DEVICE INITIAL AND CONTINUING
QUALIFICATION AND USE

0
3. The authority citation for part 60 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40113, and 44701; Pub. L.
111-216, 124 Stat. 2348 (49 U.S.C. 44701 note).

0
4. In appendix A, revise paragraph 1.d.(27) to read as follows:

Appendix A to Part 60--Qualification Performance Standards for Airplane
Full Flight Simulators

* * * * *
    1. * * *
    d. * * *
    (27) FAA Airman Testing Standards for the Airline Transport
Pilot Certificate, Type Ratings, Commercial Pilot Certificate, and
Instrument Ratings.
* * * * *

0
5. In appendix B, revise paragraph 1.d.(26) to read as follows:

Appendix B to Part 60--Qualification Performance Standards for Airplane
Flight Training Devices

* * * * *
    1. * * *
    d. * * *
    (26) FAA Airman Testing Standards for the Airline Transport
Pilot Certificate, Type Ratings, Commercial Pilot Certificate, and
Instrument Ratings.
* * * * *

0
6. In appendix C, revise paragraph 1.d.(25) to read as follows:

Appendix C to Part 60--Qualification Performance Standards for
Helicopter Full Flight Simulators

* * * * *
    1. * * *
    d. * * *
    (25) FAA Airman Testing Standards for the Airline Transport
Pilot Certificate, Type Ratings, Commercial Pilot Certificate, and
Instrument Ratings.
* * * * *

0
7. In appendix D, revise paragraph 1.d.(28) to read as follows:

Appendix D to Part 60--Qualification Performance Standards for
Helicopter Flight Training Devices

* * * * *
    1. * * *
    d. * * *
    (28) FAA Airman Testing Standards for the Airline Transport
Pilot Certificate, Type Ratings, Commercial Pilot Certificate, and
Instrument Ratings.
* * * * *

PART 61--CERTIFICATION: PILOTS, FLIGHT INSTRUCTORS, AND GROUND
INSTRUCTORS

0
8. The authority citation for part 61 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40113, 44701-44703, 44707,
44709-44711, 44729, 44903, 45102-45103, 45301-45302; Sec. 2307 Pub.
L. 114-190, 130 Stat. 615 (49 U.S.C. 44703 note).

0
9. Amend Sec.  61.1(b) as follows:
0
a. Add a definition of ``Aviation training device'' in alphabetical
order.
0
b. Revise the definition of ``Pilot time;'' and,
0
c. Add a definition of ``Technically advanced airplane'' in
alphabetical order.
    The revisions and additions read as follows:

Sec.  61.1   Applicability and definitions.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    Aviation training device means a training device, other than a full
flight simulator or flight training device, that has been evaluated,
qualified, and approved by the Administrator.
* * * * *
    Pilot time means that time in which a person--
    (i) Serves as a required pilot flight crewmember;
    (ii) Receives training from an authorized instructor in an
aircraft, full flight simulator, flight training device, or aviation
training device; or
    (iii) Gives training as an authorized instructor in an aircraft,
full flight simulator, flight training device, or aviation training
device.
* * * * *
    Technically advanced airplane (TAA) means an airplane equipped with
an electronically advanced avionics system.
* * * * *

0
10. Effective November 26, 2018, in Sec.  61.1(b), amend the definition
of ``Pilot time'' by removing the word ``or'' at the end of paragraph
(ii), revising paragraph (iii), and adding paragraph (iv) to read as
follows:

Sec.  61.1   Applicability and definitions.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    Pilot time * * *
    (iii) Gives training as an authorized instructor in an aircraft,
full flight simulator, flight training device, or aviation training
device; or
    (iv) Serves as second in command in operations conducted in
accordance with Sec.  135.99(c) of this chapter when a second pilot is
not required under the type certification of the aircraft or the
regulations under which the flight is being conducted, provided the
requirements in Sec.  61.159(c) are satisfied.
* * * * *

0
11. Effective December 24, 2018, in Sec.  61.3, revise paragraph
(a)(1)(iv), redesignate paragraph (a)(1)(v) as paragraph (a)(1)(vii),
add paragraphs (a)(1)(v) and (vi), and revise paragraph (l)
introductory text to read as follows:

Sec.  61.3   Requirement for certificates, ratings, and authorizations.

    (a) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (iv) A document conveying temporary authority to exercise
certificate privileges issued by the Airmen Certification Branch under
Sec.  61.29(e);
    (v) When engaged in a flight operation within the United States for
a part 119 certificate holder authorized to conduct operations under
part 121 or 135 of this chapter, a temporary document provided by that
certificate holder under an approved certificate verification plan;
    (vi) When engaged in a flight operation within the United States
for a fractional ownership program manager authorized to conduct
operations under part 91, subpart K, of this chapter, a temporary
document provided by that program manager under an approved certificate
verification plan; or
* * * * *
    (l) Inspection of certificate. Each person who holds an airman
certificate, temporary document in accordance with paragraph (a)(1)(v)
or (vi) of this section, medical certificate, documents establishing
alternative medical qualification under part 68 of this chapter,
authorization, or license required by this part must present it and
their photo identification as described in paragraph (a)(2) of this
section for inspection upon a request from:
* * * * *

0
12. Amend Sec.  61.31 as follows:
0
a. Effective July 27, 2018, in paragraphs (e)(1)(i), (f)(1)(i), (g)(2)
and (3), and (h)(1), remove the words ``flight simulator'' and add in
their place the words ``full flight simulator''; and
0
b. Effective August 27, 2018, revise paragraphs (e)(2) and (f)(2).
    The revisions read as follows:

Sec.  61.31   Type rating requirements, additional training, and
authorization requirements.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (2) The training and endorsement required by paragraph (e)(1) of
this section is not required if--
    (i) The person has logged flight time as pilot in command of a
complex airplane, or in a full flight simulator or flight training
device that is representative of a complex airplane prior to August 4,
1997; or
    (ii) The person has received ground and flight training under an
approved training program and has satisfactorily completed a competency
check under Sec.  135.293 of this chapter in a complex airplane, or in
a full flight simulator or flight training device that is
representative of a complex airplane which must be documented in the
pilot's logbook or training record.
    (f) * * *
    (2) The training and endorsement required by paragraph (f)(1) of
this section is not required if--
    (i) The person has logged flight time as pilot in command of a
high-performance airplane, or in a full flight simulator or flight
training device that is representative of a high-performance airplane
prior to August 4, 1997; or
    (ii) The person has received ground and flight training under an
approved training program and has satisfactorily completed a competency
check under Sec.  135.293 of this chapter in a high performance
airplane, or in a full flight simulator or flight training device that
is representative of a high performance airplane which must be
documented in the pilot's logbook or training record.
* * * * *

0
13. Effective November 26, 2018, in Sec.  61.39, revise paragraph
(a)(3) to read as follows:

Sec.  61.39   Prerequisites for practical tests.

    (a) * * *
    (3) Have satisfactorily accomplished the required training and
obtained the aeronautical experience prescribed by this part for the
certificate or rating sought, and if applying for the practical test
with flight time accomplished under Sec.  61.159(c), present a copy of
the records required by Sec.  135.63(a)(4)(vi) and (x) of this chapter;
* * * * *

0
14. In Sec.  61.43, revise paragraph (a)(1) to read as follows:

Sec.  61.43   Practical tests: General procedures.

    (a) * * *
    (1) Performing the tasks specified in the areas of operation for
the airman certificate or rating sought;
* * * * *

0
15. Amend Sec.  61.51 as follows:
0
a. Effective July 27, 2018, in paragraphs (b)(1)(iii) and (iv),
(b)(2)(v), (b)(3)(iii) and (iv), (k)(1)(ii), and (k)(2)(ii), remove the
words ``flight simulator'' and add in their place the words ``full
flight simulator'';
0
b. Effective November 26, 2018, revise paragraph (e)(1)(i);
0
c. Effective November 26, 2018, add paragraph (e)(5);
0
d. Effective November 26, 2018, revise paragraphs (f)(1) and (2);
0
e. Effective November 26, 2018, add paragraph (f)(3);
0
f. Effective July 27, 2018, revise paragraph (g)(4);
0
g. Effective July 27, 2018, add paragraph (g)(5); and
0
h. Effective July 27, 2018, revise paragraph (h)(1).
    The revisions and additions read as follows:

Sec.  61.51   Pilot logbooks.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (i) Except when logging flight time under Sec.  61.159(c), when the
pilot is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which
the pilot is rated, or has sport pilot privileges for that category and
class of aircraft, if the aircraft class rating is appropriate;
* * * * *
    (5) A commercial pilot or airline transport pilot may log all
flight time while acting as pilot in command of an operation in
accordance with Sec.  135.99(c) of this chapter if the flight is
conducted in accordance with an approved second-in-command professional
development program that meets the requirements of Sec.  135.99(c) of
this chapter.
    (f) * * *
    (1) Is qualified in accordance with the second-in-command
requirements of Sec.  61.55, and occupies a crewmember station in an
aircraft that requires more than one pilot by the aircraft's type
certificate;
    (2) Holds the appropriate category, class, and instrument rating
(if an instrument rating is required for the flight) for the aircraft
being flown, and more than one pilot is required under the type
certification of the aircraft or the regulations under which the flight
is being conducted; or
    (3) Serves as second in command in operations conducted in
accordance with Sec.  135.99(c) of this chapter when a second pilot is
not required under the type certification of the aircraft or the
regulations under which the flight is being conducted, provided the
requirements in Sec.  61.159(c) are satisfied.
    (g) * * *
    (4) A person may use time in a full flight simulator, flight
training device, or aviation training device for acquiring instrument
aeronautical experience for a pilot certificate or rating provided an
authorized instructor is present to observe that time and signs the
person's logbook or training record to verify the time and the content
of the training session.
    (5) A person may use time in a full flight simulator, flight
training device, or aviation training device for satisfying instrument
recency experience requirements provided a logbook or training record
is maintained to specify the training device, time, and the content.
    (h) Logging training time. (1) A person may log training time when
that person receives training from an authorized instructor in an
aircraft, full flight simulator, flight training device, or aviation
training device.
* * * * *

0
16. Amend Sec.  61.57 as follows:
0
a. Effective July 27, 2018, in paragraphs (a)(3), (b)(2), (d)(1)(ii),
(e)(4)(ii)(D), and (g) introductory text, remove the words ``flight
simulator'' and add in their place the words ``full flight simulator'';
0
b. Effective July 27, 2018, in paragraph (e)(4)(ii)(D), remove the
words ``flight simulator's'' and add in their place the words ``full
flight simulator's'';
0
c. Effective November 26, 2018, revise paragraph (c)(2), remove
paragraphs (c)(3) through (5), and redesignate paragraph (c)(6) as
paragraph (c)(3);
0
d. Effective July 27, 2018, redesignate paragraphs (d)(1) and (2) as
paragraphs (d)(2) and (3), redesignate the introductory text of
paragraph (d) as paragraph (d)(1), and revise newly redesignated
paragraph (d)(1).
    The revisions read as follows:

Sec.  61.57   Recent flight experience: Pilot in command.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (2) Use of a full flight simulator, flight training device, or
aviation training device for maintaining instrument experience. A pilot
may accomplish the requirements in paragraph (c)(1) of this section in
a full flight simulator, flight training device, or aviation training
device provided the device represents the category of aircraft for the
instrument rating privileges to be maintained and the pilot performs
the tasks and iterations in simulated instrument conditions. A person
may complete the instrument experience in any combination of an
aircraft, full flight simulator, flight training device, or aviation
training device.
* * * * *
    (d) Instrument proficiency check. (1) Except as provided in
paragraph (e) of this section, a person who has failed to meet the
instrument experience requirements of paragraph (c) of this section for
more than six calendar months may reestablish instrument currency only
by completing an instrument proficiency check. The instrument
proficiency check must consist of at least the following areas of
operation:
    (i) Air traffic control clearances and procedures;
    (ii) Flight by reference to instruments;
    (iii) Navigation systems;
    (iv) Instrument approach procedures;
    (v) Emergency operations; and
    (vi) Postflight procedures.
* * * * *

0
17. Revise Sec.  61.99 to read as follows:

Sec.  61.99   Aeronautical experience.

    (a) A person who applies for a recreational pilot certificate must
receive and log at least 30 hours of flight time that includes at
least--
    (1) 15 hours of flight training from an authorized instructor on
the areas of operation listed in Sec.  61.98 that consists of at least:
    (i) Except as provided in Sec.  61.100, 2 hours of flight training
en route to an airport that is located more than 25 nautical miles from
the airport where the applicant normally trains, which includes at
least three takeoffs and three landings at the airport located more
than 25 nautical miles from the airport where the applicant normally
trains; and
    (ii) Three hours of flight training with an authorized instructor
in the aircraft for the rating sought in preparation for the practical
test within the preceding 2 calendar months from the month of the test.
    (2) Three hours of solo flying in the aircraft for the rating
sought, on the areas of operation listed in Sec.  61.98 that apply to
the aircraft category and class rating sought.
    (b) The holder of a sport pilot certificate may credit flight
training received from a flight instructor with a sport pilot rating
toward the aeronautical experience requirements of this section if the
following conditions are met:
    (1) The flight training was accomplished in the same category and

class of aircraft for which the rating is sought;
    (2) The flight instructor with a sport pilot rating was authorized
to provide the flight training; and
    (3) The flight training included training on areas of operation
that are required for both a sport pilot certificate and a recreational
pilot certificate.

0
18. In Sec.  61.109, amend paragraph (k) by removing the words ``flight
simulator'' and adding in their place the words ``full flight
simulator'' and add paragraph (l) to read as follows:

Sec.  61.109   Aeronautical experience.

* * * * *
    (l) Permitted credit for flight training received from a flight
instructor with a sport pilot rating. The holder of a sport pilot
certificate may credit flight training received from a flight
instructor with a sport pilot rating toward the aeronautical experience
requirements of this section if the following conditions are met:
    (1) The flight training was accomplished in the same category and
class of aircraft for which the rating is sought;
    (2) The flight instructor with a sport pilot rating was authorized
to provide the flight training; and
    (3) The flight training included either--
    (i) Training on areas of operation that are required for both a
sport pilot certificate and a private pilot certificate; or
    (ii) For airplanes with a VH greater than 87 knots CAS,
training on the control and maneuvering of an airplane solely by
reference to the flight instruments, including straight and level
flight, turns, descents, climbs, use of radio aids, and ATC directives,
provided the training was received from a flight instructor with a
sport pilot rating who holds an endorsement required by Sec.
61.412(c).

0
19. In Sec.  61.129:
0
a. Effective August 27, 2018, revise paragraphs (a)(3)(ii) and
(b)(3)(ii);
0
b. Effective July 27, 2018, in paragraphs (c)(3)(i), (d) introductory
text, (d)(3)(i), and (i), remove the words ``flight simulator'' and add
in their place the words ``full flight simulator''; and
0
c. Effective August 27, 2018, add paragraph (j).
    The revisions and addition read as follows:

Sec.  61.129  Aeronautical experience.

    (a) * * *
    (3) * * *
    (ii) 10 hours of training in a complex airplane, a turbine-powered
airplane, or a technically advanced airplane (TAA) that meets the
requirements of paragraph (j) of this section, or any combination
thereof. The airplane must be appropriate to land or sea for the rating
sought;
* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (3) * * *
    (ii) 10 hours of training in a multiengine complex or turbine-
powered airplane; or for an applicant seeking a multiengine seaplane
rating, 10 hours of training in a multiengine seaplane that has flaps
and a controllable pitch propeller, including seaplanes equipped with
an engine control system consisting of a digital computer and
associated accessories for controlling the engine and propeller, such
as a full authority digital engine control;
* * * * *
    (j) Technically advanced airplane. Unless otherwise authorized by
the Administrator, a technically advanced airplane must be equipped
with an electronically advanced avionics system that includes the
following installed components:
    (1) An electronic Primary Flight Display (PFD) that includes, at a
minimum, an airspeed indicator, turn coordinator, attitude indicator,
heading indicator, altimeter, and vertical speed indicator;
    (2) An electronic Multifunction Display (MFD) that includes, at a
minimum, a moving map using Global Positioning System (GPS) navigation
with the aircraft position displayed;
    (3) A two axis autopilot integrated with the navigation and heading
guidance system; and
    (4) The display elements described in paragraphs (j)(1) and (2) of
this section must be continuously visible.

0
20. In Sec.  61.159:
0
a. Effective July 27, 2018, amend paragraph (a)(4) by removing the
words ``flight simulator'' and adding in their place the words ``full
flight simulator''; and
0
b. Effective November 26, 2018, revise the introductory text of
paragraphs (a) and (a)(5), revise paragraph (c), redesignate paragraphs
(d) and (e) as paragraphs (e) and (f), add new paragraph (d), and
revise newly redesignated paragraphs (e) and (f).
    The revisions and addition read as follows:

Sec.  61.159   Aeronautical experience: Airplane category rating.