certificate requirement for part 121 SICs would significantly affect
air carriers' ability to hire new pilots, particularly regional air
carriers.
    Only a handful of commenters provided specific information to
support the assertion that part 121 pilot supply will diminish. Among
these commenters was the UAA. Their comments included data that
suggests there is a diminishing supply of pilots in general at a time
when forecasts suggest a consistent and growing global demand for
pilots. UAA stated in their comments:
     Overall, U.S. airline domestic revenue passenger
enplanements are expected to grow an average of 2.2 percent per year
from 2011 to 2032 and international revenue passenger enplanements by
U.S. carriers are expected to grow 4.2 percent per year from 2011 to
2032.
     Currently, Boeing forecasts a global need for 460,000
pilots through the year 2030, with 97,350 of those needed for North
America. This demand is based upon projected fleet growth and pilot
retirements.
     Pilots who turned 60 in the years 2007 to 2012 will be
forced to retire beginning in 2012. UAA estimated that, beginning in
2018 or 2019, as many as 2,000 part 121 pilots will be forced to retire
each year due to the Age 65 rule.
     FAA statistics demonstrate the number of new student pilot
certificates issued has declined from 2007 to 2010 by more than 12,000.
The number of new commercial pilot certificates issued also declined
significantly from 2007 through 2010.
     A study conducted by the University of North Dakota
indicates

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

IV. Regulatory Notices and Analyses

A. Regulatory Evaluation

    Changes to Federal regulations must undergo several economic
analyses. First, Executive Order 12866 and Executive Order 13563 direct
that each Federal agency shall propose or adopt a regulation only upon
a reasoned determination that the benefits of the intended regulation
justify its costs. Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub.
L. 96-354) requires agencies to analyze the economic impact of
regulatory changes on small entities. Third, the Trade Agreements Act
(Pub. L. 96-39) prohibits agencies from setting standards that create
unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United States. In
developing U.S. standards, this Trade Act requires agencies to consider
international standards and, where appropriate, that they be the basis
of U.S. standards. Fourth, the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(Pub. L. 104-4) requires agencies to prepare a written assessment of
the costs, benefits, and other effects of proposed or final rules that
include a Federal mandate likely to result in the expenditure by State,
local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private
sector, of $100 million or more annually (adjusted for inflation with
base year of 1995). This portion of the preamble summarizes the FAA's
analysis of the economic impacts of this final rule. We suggest readers
seeking greater detail read the full regulatory evaluation, a copy of
which we have placed in the docket for this rulemaking.
    In conducting these analyses, FAA has determined this final rule
has benefits that justify its costs, satisfies a Congressional
requirement to improve aviation safety, and is a ``significant
regulatory action'' as defined in section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866
because it raises novel policy issues contemplated under that executive
order. The rule is also ``significant'' as defined in DOT's Regulatory
Policies and Procedures. The final rule, if adopted, will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities,
will not create unnecessary obstacles to international trade, and will
not impose an unfunded mandate on state, local, or tribal governments,
or on the private sector.
Total Benefits and Costs of This Rule
    In the Act, Congress mandated that all part 121 pilots serving as
second in command (SICs) have an airline transport pilot (ATP)
certificate with at least 1,500 flight hours. This statutory
requirement is self-executing, it will take effect whether or not the
FAA issues a regulation. We estimate the costs of the ATP certificate
requirement to be $6.4 billion ($2.2 billion in present value), almost
all of which stems from the 1,500-hour flight time requirement. The
statute allows the FAA Administrator to specify academic training as an
offset to the 1,500-hour flight time requirement provided the training
enhances safety. This rule provides cost savings benefits from its
provision of such academic training credits toward the 1,500-hour
requirement (by means of the R-ATP certificate) and also by its
provision allowing pilots with a minimum age of 21 to be eligible for
the R-ATP certificate. Our estimate of these cost savings are $2.3
billion with a present value savings of $0.8 billion.
    The final rule requires that all SICs serving in part 121
operations hold a type rating in the airplane flown and requires that
an ATP CTP be completed by all applicants for an ATP certificate with
an airplane category multiengine class rating (or an ATP certificate
obtained concurrently with an airplane type rating). The costs of the
final rule training and aircraft type rating requirements total $312.7
million ($138.7 million in present value). The expected benefits from
the new training requirements are $576.8 million with a present value
of $251.7 million.
    For part 121 operators the final rule is cost-beneficial as present
value benefits, at $127.5 million, exceed present value costs, at
$124.6 million. For part 135 operators present value benefits, at
$124.2 million, exceed present value costs, at $9.8 million. Although
the FAA does not have a quantitative estimate of benefits for part 91,
subpart K, operators, we believe that the ATP CTP will sufficiently
enhance safety for part 91, subpart K, operators to make the rule cost-
beneficial for these operators as well. Because of the similarity of
their operations, we believe that part 91 subpart K operators are
subject to similar risks as part 135 operators. The lack of
identifiable rule-related accidents reflects the significantly smaller
scope of part 91 subpart K operations compared to part 135 operations
and a possible under-recording of part 91 subpart K accidents.
Additional discussion can be found in the full regulatory evaluation.
Statute and Rule Costs and Benefits

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

B. Regulatory Flexibility Determination

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

flexibility analysis as described in the RFA.
    However, if an agency determines that a rule is not expected to
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities, section 605(b) of the RFA provides that the head of the
agency may so certify and a regulatory flexibility analysis is not
required. The certification must include a statement providing the
factual basis for this determination, and the reasoning should be
clear.
    As required by Section 603(a) of the RFA, we prepared and published
an initial regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA) as part of the NPRM
for this rule (77 FR 12374, February 29, 2012). As a result of that
analysis we determined this rule would not have a significant impact on
a substantial number of small entities for the following reason: The
annualized cost \27\ of the rule is less than 2% of operating revenues
for all small firms that would be affected by the rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

C. International Trade Impact Assessment

    The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (Pub. L. 96-39), as amended by the
Uruguay Round Agreements Act (Pub. L. 103-465), prohibits Federal
agencies from establishing standards or engaging in related activities
that create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United
States. Pursuant to these Acts, the establishment of standards is not
considered an unnecessary obstacle to the foreign commerce of the
United States, so long as the standard has a legitimate domestic
objective, such the protection of safety, and does not operate in a
manner that excludes imports that meet this objective. The statute also
requires consideration of international standards and, where
appropriate, that they be the basis for U.S. standards. The FAA has
assessed the potential effect of this final rule and determined that it
would have only a domestic impact and therefore would not create
unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United States.

D. Unfunded Mandates Assessment

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-
4) requires each Federal agency to prepare a written statement
assessing the effects of any Federal mandate in a proposed or final
agency rule that may result in an expenditure of $100 million or more
(adjusted annually for inflation with the base year 1995) in any one
year by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by
the private sector; such a mandate is deemed to be a ``significant
regulatory action.'' The FAA currently uses an inflation-adjusted value
of $143.1 million. Excluding the Congressionally driven costs, the
compliance costs of this rule never exceed $100 million in any one
year. This final rule does not contain such an unfunded mandate;
therefore, the requirements of Title II of the Act do not apply.

E. Paperwork Reduction Act

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

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

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

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

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

F. International Compatibility

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

G. Environmental Analysis

    FAA Order 1050.1E identifies FAA actions that are categorically
excluded from preparation of an environmental assessment or
environmental impact statement under the National Environmental Policy
Act in the absence of extraordinary circumstances. The FAA has
determined this rulemaking action qualifies for the categorical
exclusion identified in paragraph 308(c) and involves no extraordinary
circumstances.

V. Executive Order Determinations

A. Executive Order 13132, Federalism

    The FAA has analyzed this final rule under the principles and
criteria of Executive Order 13132, Federalism. The agency determined
that this action will not have a substantial direct effect on the
States, or the relationship between the Federal Government and the
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government, and, therefore, does not have Federalism
implications.

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

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

VI. How To Obtain Additional Information

A. Rulemaking Documents

    An electronic copy of a rulemaking document may be obtained by
using the Internet--
    1. Search the Federal eRulemaking Portal (http://www.regulations.gov);
    2. Visit the FAA's Regulations and Policies Web page at http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/ or
    3. Access the Government Printing Office's Web page at http://www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/index.html.
    Copies may also be obtained by sending a request (identified by
notice, amendment, or docket number of this rulemaking) to the Federal
Aviation Administration, Office of Rulemaking, ARM-1, 800 Independence
Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>.

B. Comments Submitted to the Docket

    Comments received may be viewed by going to http://www.regulations.gov and following the online instructions to search the
docket number for this action. Anyone is able to search the electronic
form of all comments received into any of the FAA's dockets by the name
of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).

C. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act

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

List of Subjects

14 CFR Part 61

    Aircraft, Airmen, Aviation safety.

14 CFR Part 121

    Air carriers, Aircraft, Airmen, Aviation safety.

14 CFR Part 135

    Air taxis, Aircraft, Airmen, Aviation safety.

14 CFR Part 141

    Airmen, Educational facilities.

14 CFR Part 142

    Airmen, Educational facilities.

The Amendment

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

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

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

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

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

Sec.  61.1  Applicability and definitions.

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

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

Sec.  61.23  Medical certificates: Requirement and duration.

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

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

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

                                                  * * * * * * *
(2) A second-class medical          (i) Any age..........  an airline transport pilot  12th month after the
 certificate.                                               certificate for second-in-  month of the date of
                                                            command privileges (other   examination shown on the
                                                            than the operations         medical certificate.
                                                            specified in paragraph
                                                            (d)(1) of this section),
                                                            a commercial pilot
                                                            certificate, or an air
                                                            traffic control tower
                                                            operator certificate.

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Sec.  61.35  Knowledge test: Prerequisites and passing grades.

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

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

Sec.  61.39  Prerequisites for practical tests.

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

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

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

Sec.  61.55  Second-in-command qualifications.

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

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

Sec.  61.57  Recent flight experience: Pilot in command.

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

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

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

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

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

Sec.  61.153  Eligibility requirements: General.

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

0
10. Amend Sec.  61.155 as follows:
0
A. Remove the word ``and'' after the semicolon in paragraph (c)(12);
0