Pilot, Flight Instructor, and Pilot School Certification

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Parts 61, 91, and 141

[Docket No. FAA-2006-26661; Amendment Nos. 61-124, 91-309, and 141-12]

RIN 2120-AI86

Pilot, Flight Instructor, and Pilot School Certification

AGENCY:

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

This final rule revises the training, qualification, certification, and operating requirements for pilots, flight instructors, ground instructors, and pilot schools. These changes are needed to clarify, update, and correct our existing regulations. These changes are intended to update and clarify the training and qualifications rules for pilots, flight instructors, ground instructors, and pilot schools to ensure a better understanding of these rules that relate to aircraft operations in the National Airspace System.

DATES:

This final rule is effective October 20, 2009.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

John D. Lynch, Certification and General Aviation Operations Branch, AFS-810, General Aviation and Commercial Division, Flight Standards Service, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) 267-3844; e-mail to

john.d.lynch@faa.gov

. For legal interpretative questions about this final rule, contact: Michael Chase, AGC-240, Office of Chief Counsel, Regulations Division, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) 267-3110; e-mail to

michael.chase@faa.gov.

Executive Summary

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is amending several regulations to further our safety mission, incorporate international flight standards, and respond to recent technological advances in aviation. The essence of these interlocking changes is pilot, flight instructor, and pilot school certification. The instruction and training taking place in pilot schools is for many their first exposure to recent aviation, technological, and industry changes. For the above reasons, the FAA has found it necessary to update, correct, and clarify our rules and requirements for pilots, flight instructor, and pilot school certification. Many of our changes reflect and incorporate comments and suggestions made by trade organizations, flight schools, manufacturers, individual pilots, and others.

On February 7, 2007, the FAA published the notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for airmen certification entitled “Pilots, flight instructors, ground instructors, and pilot schools; training, certification, and operating requirements” (Notice No. 06-20; 72 FR 5806-5854). The NPRM follows an earlier final rule amending the pilot and flight instructor certification, training, and experience rules of part 61 (

See

62 FR 16220; April 4, 1997). Since the 1997 final rule, we determined changes were needed to clarify and refine these regulations and address problems discovered post-publication. We also received a number of helpful comments and interpretation requests from the pilot, flight instructor, and training community. In order to make our rule revisions more comprehensive, the NPRM included changes to 14 CFR part 91 and part 141 appendices.

We made two significant proposals in the NPRM: The first one details pilot and flight instructor training and qualifications for night vision goggle (NVG) operations; and, the second one converts military flight instructor training experience to civilian teaching. We also made a number of other changes reflected in the following table and discussed in the rule preamble.

The FAA received considerable public response to the NPRM. We received 1,970 different comments from 231 commenters. These commenters represented a diverse “cross-section” of the aviation community including: Commenters who identified themselves as actively serving in the United States Armed Forces or Armed Forces Reserves; flight schools (commercial and educational), flight training facilities, or other organizations associated with flight training; aircraft manufacturers or aircraft manufacturer associations, pilot, aircraft, and helicopter owner associations; civil aviation associations; and law enforcement agencies or organizations associated with NVG operations. The substantive comments on both the overarching issues and specific rule changes are detailed in the “General Comments” and “Editorial Comments” sections of this preamble.

Authority for This Rulemaking

The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, § 106 describes the authority of the FAA Administrator, including the authority to issue, rescind, and revise regulations. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority.

This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Chapter 447—Safety Regulation. Under § 44701, the FAA is charged with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations necessary for safety. Under § 44703, the FAA issues an airman certificate to an individual when we find, after investigation, that the individual is qualified for, and physically able to perform the duties related to, the position authorized by the certificate. In this final rule, we are amending certain training, qualification, certification, and operating requirements for pilots, flight instructors, ground instructors, and pilot schools.

These revisions are intended to ensure that flight crewmembers have the training and qualifications to enable them to operate aircraft safely. For this reason, these revisions are within the scope of our authority and are a reasonable and necessary exercise of our statutory obligations.

Summary Table on the Revisions

The table below is a listing of the changes that are contained in this final rule in order of their Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) designations. The table is organized as follows: The first column, identified as “Revision No.,” refers to the paragraph number in the “Description of Revision” portion of this preamble where a detailed discussion of the revision appears. The second column gives the CFR designation of the regulation we are revising. The third column, identified as “Summary of the Revisions,” provides a brief summary of the revision.

This final rule revises and makes clarifications under part 61 that pertain to pilot, flight instructor, and ground instructor certification requirements. This final rule revises § 91.205(h) which is the rule that establishes the required instruments and equipment for use in NVG operations. This final rule also revises part 141 and its appendixes, which apply to part 141 approved pilot schools and provisional pilot schools.

Revision

No.

CFR designation

Summary of the revisions

1

§ 61.1(b)(12)

Adds a definition for the term “night vision goggles.”

2

§ 61.1(b)(13)

Adds a definition for the term “night vision goggle operations.”

3

§ 61.2

Establishes the requirements regarding “currency” and “validity” in a new § 61.2 as it relates to exercising the privileges of an airman certificate, rating, endorsement, or authorization.

4

§ 61.3(j)(1)

This proposal to delete the phrase “Except as provided in paragraph (j)(3) of this section” is being withdrawn as the “Part 121 Pilot Age Limit” direct final rule has incorporated this proposal and has also increased the age requirement to 65 years for pilots engaged in part 121 air carrier operations.

4

§ 61.3(j)(3)

We had proposed to delete this provision because the dates have passed. However, this proposal has been withdrawn as the “Part 121 Pilot Age Limit” direct final rule has overtaken the need for this proposed change.

5

§ 61.19(b)

Extends the duration period for student pilot certificates for persons under the age of 40 years.

6

§ 61.19(b)(3)

Extends the duration period for student pilot certificates for persons seeking the glider or balloon rating to 60 calendar months, regardless of the age of the person.

7

§ 61.19(d)

The NPRM proposed to issue flight instructor certificates without expiration dates. The FAA has decided to withdraw this proposal and will continue to issue flight instructor certificates with an expiration date.

8 & 81

§ 61.19(e)

Parallels the ground instructor certificate duration with the ground instructor currency requirements in revised § 61.217.

9

§ 61.23(a)(3)(iv)-(v)

Makes minor editorial changes to the medical certificate requirements.

9

§ 61.23(a)(3)(vii)

Permits Examiners to hold only a third class medical certificate as already provided for in FAA Order 8900.2.

10

§ 61.23(b)(3)

Clarifies that persons who are exercising the privileges of their pilot certificate when operating a balloon or a glider are not required to hold a medical certificate.

11

§ 61.23(b)(7)

Clarifies that Examiners who administer practical tests in a glider, balloon, flight simulator, or flight training device are not required to hold a medical certificate.

12

§ 61.23(b)(8)

Clarifies that no medical certificate is required when taking a practical test in a glider, balloon, flight simulator, or flight training device.

13

§ 61.23(b)(9)

Adds a provision that excuses U.S. military pilots from obtaining an FAA medical certification, if they hold an “up-to-date” medical clearance from the U.S. Armed Forces, and the flight only requires privileges of a third class medical certificate and is conducted within U.S. airspace.

14

§ 61.29(d)(3)

Deletes the requirement that a person furnish his/her Social Security Number.

15

§ 61.31(d)(1), (2), & (3)

Corrects a duplication of provisions between paragraphs (d)(2) and (3).

16

§ 61.31(k)

Establishes training for operating with night vision goggles in a new paragraph (k).

17

§ 61.35(a)(2)(iv)

Clarifies when a person must show his/her current residential address when making application for a knowledge test.

18

§ 61.39(b)(2)

Deletes the word “scheduled” in front of the phrase “U.S. military air transport operations.”

19

§ 61.39(c)(2)

Deletes the exception that an applicant does not have to receive an instructor endorsement for an additional aircraft class rating. Sections 61.39(a)(6) and 61.63(c) require an instructor endorsement.

20

§ 61.39(a)(6)(i), (d) and (e)

Changes the phrase “60 calendar days” to read “2 calendar months” for the training required prior to the practical test.

21

§ 61.43(a) and (b)

Clarifies when single pilot performance is required on the practical test versus permitting issuance of the “second in command” limitation.

22

§ 61.45(a)(2)(iii)

Defines a military aircraft for the purpose of using it for a practical test.

23

§ 61.45(c)

Excepts gliders that are unpowered from the requirement that aircraft used for a practical test must have engine power controls and flight controls that are easily reached and operable in a conventional manner by both pilots.

24

§ 61.51(b)(3)(iv)

Adds a provision for logging night vision goggle time.

27

§ 61.51(b)(1)(iv)

Revises the instructions for logbook entries to include aviation training device (ATD).

§ 61.51(b)(2)(v)

§ 61.51(b)(3)(iii)

25

§ 61.51(e)(1)

Corrects an omission and permits sport pilots and airline transport pilots (ATPs) to log pilot in command (PIC) flight time.

26

§ 61.51(e)(1)(iv)

Permits a pilot who is performing the duties of PIC while under the supervision of a qualified PIC to log PIC flight time.

27

§ 61.51(g)(4)

Requires that when using a flight simulator, flight training device, or an ATD for training, an instructor must be present and sign the person's logbook or training record.

28

§ 61.51(j)

Establishes that an aircraft must hold an airworthiness certificate, with some exceptions, for a pilot to log flight time to meet the certificate, rating, or recent flight experience requirements under part 61.

29

§ 61.51(k)

Adds the criteria and standards for logging night vision goggle time.

30

§ 61.57(c)(1)

In the NPRM, we had proposed to revise the instrument recent flight experience for maintaining instrument privileges in airplanes, powered-lifts, helicopters, and airships. The FAA has decided to maintain the existing instrument recency requirements and just make formatting and editorial revisions to the rule.

30

§ 61.57(c)(2)-(5)

Permits the use of flight simulators, flight training devices, or ATDs for performing instrument recent flight experience.

30

§ 61.57(c)(6)

Revises the instrument recent flight experience for maintaining instrument privileges in gliders.

31

§ 61.57(d)

Clarifies when an instrument proficiency check must be completed to serve as the PIC under IFR or in weather conditions less than the minimums prescribed for VFR.

32

§ 61.57(f)

Adds a night vision goggle recent operating experience requirement to remain PIC qualified for night vision goggle operations.

33

§ 61.57(g)

Adds a night vision goggle proficiency check requirement to remain PIC qualified for night vision goggle operations.

34

§ 61.59(a)-(b)

The FAA has decided to withdraw this proposal that would have paralleled this section with the language contained in § 67.403 of this chapter.

35

§ 61.63

Changes the section heading to read “Additional aircraft ratings (other than for ratings at the airline transport pilot certificate level).”

35

§ 61.63(c)(4)

Clarifies what is intended for those applicants who hold only a lighter than air (LTA)-Balloon rating and who seek a LTA-Airship rating.

35

§ 61.63(d)(5)

Adds a provision to account for aircraft not capable of instrument flight. Parallels revised § 61.157(b)(3).

35

§ 61.63(e)

Amends the requirement for permitting use of aircraft not capable of instrument flight for a rating. Parallels revised § 61.157(g).

35

§ 61.63(f)

Clarifies that an applicant for type rating in a multiengine, single seat airplane must meet the requirements in the multi-seat version of that type airplane, or the examiner must be in a position to observe the applicant during the practical test. Parallels revised § 61.157(h).

35

§ 61.63(g)

Clarifies that an applicant for type rating in a single engine, single seat airplane may meet the requirements in a multi-seat version of that type airplane, or the examiner must be in a position to observe the applicant during the practical test. Parallels revised § 61.157(i).

36

§ 61.64

Places the existing § 61.63(e), (f), and (g) and § 61.157(g), (h), and (i) that address the requirements for using flight simulators and flight training devices into revised § 61.64.

35

§ 61.63(h)

Clarifies that certain tasks may be waived if the FAA has approved the task to be waived to parallel § 61.157(m).

36

§ 61.64(a) and (b)

Moves § 61.63(e) and § 61.157(g) to revised § 61.64. Simplifies and amends the requirements and limitations for use of a flight simulator or flight training device for an airplane rating.

36

§ 61.64(a)(2)(i) & (ii)

Clarifies that to use a flight simulator for training and testing for the airplane category, class, or type rating, the type rating cannot contain the supervised operating experience limitation.

36

§ 61.64(c) and (d)

Moves § 61.63(f) and § 61.157(h) to revised § 61.64. Simplifies and amends the requirements and limitations for use of a flight simulator or flight training device for a helicopter rating.

36

§ 61.64(c)(2)(i) & (ii)

Clarifies that to use a flight simulator for training and testing for the helicopter class or type rating, the type rating cannot contain the supervised operating experience limitation.

36

§ 61.64(e) and (f)

Moves § 61.63(g) and § 61.157(i) to revised § 61.64. Simplifies and amends the requirements and limitations for use of a flight simulator or flight training device for a powered-lift rating.

36

§ 61.64(e)(2)(i) & (ii)

Clarifies that to use a flight simulator for training and testing for the powered-lift category or type rating, the type rating cannot contain the supervised operating experience limitation.

37

§ 61.65(d)

For an airplane, requires at least 10 hours of cross country time as PIC, appropriate to the instrument rating sought, so that it conforms to the ICAO requirements for instrument rating.

37

§ 61.65(e)

For a helicopter, requires at least 10 hours of cross country time as PIC, appropriate to the instrument rating sought, so that it conforms to the ICAO requirements for instrument rating.

37

§ 61.65(f)

For a powered-lift, requires at least 10 hours of cross country time as PIC, appropriate to the instrument rating sought, so that it conforms to the ICAO requirements for instrument rating.

37

§ 61.65(g)

Makes minor changes to address the usage of flight simulator and flight training devices for the instrument rating. Re-designate paragraph (e) as paragraph (g).

38

§ 61.65(h)

Permits the use of an ATD to be used for 10 hours of instrument time.

39

§ 61.69(a)(4)

Corrects a typographical error involving the word “or.”

40

§ 61.69(a)(6)

Increases the recent flight experience requirements for tow pilots from 12 months to 24 months.

41

§ 61.73(b)

Removes the requirement that military pilots and former military pilots be on active flying status within the past 12 months to qualify under these special rules. Deletes the requirement that military pilots and former military pilots have PIC status to qualify for pilot certification under these special rules. Also, makes minor editorial changes.

41

§ 61.73(c)

Allows military pilots of an Armed Force of a foreign contracting State to International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) to qualify for U.S. Commercial Pilot Certificates and ratings provided they are assigned in an operational U.S. military unit for other than flight training purposes.

41

§ 61.73(f)

Re-designates paragraph (g) as paragraph (f) and deletes the phrase “as pilot in command during the 12 calendar months before the month of application.”

42

§ 61.73(g)

§ 61.197(a)(2)(iv)

Allows issuance of flight instructor certificates and ratings to military instructor pilots and examiners who can show having been designated as a U.S. military instructor pilot or examiner. Provides an alternative method for U.S. military instructor pilots and examiners who hold an FAA flight instructor certificate to renew their flight instructor certificate and ratings.

43

§ 61.73(h)

Clarifies the documents required to qualify military pilots for a pilot certificate and ratings under the special rules of § 61.73 for military pilots.

44

§ 61.75(a)

Requires a holder of a foreign pilot license to have at least a foreign private pilot license in order to apply for a U.S. private pilot certificate under § 61.75.

44

§ 61.75(b)

Requires a holder of a foreign pilot license to have at least a foreign private pilot license in order to apply for a U.S. private pilot certificate under § 61.75.

45

§ 61.75(b)(3)

Adds “other than a U.S. student pilot certificate.”

46

§ 61.75(c)

Adds the qualifier “for private pilot privileges only” to clarify issuance of U.S. private pilot certificates based on foreign pilot licenses.

3

§ 61.75(d)

Adds the qualifier “valid.”

47

§ 61.75(e)

Corrects an error: Where the rule stated “U.S. private pilot certificate,” it has been corrected to read: “U.S. pilot certificate.”

47

§ 61.75(e)(1)

Corrects an error: Where the rule stated “private pilot privilege,” it has been corrected to read: “pilot privileges authorized by this part and the limitations placed on that U.S. pilot certificate.”

47

§ 61.75(e)(4)

Corrects an error: Where the rule stated “U.S. private pilot certificate,” it has been corrected to read: “U.S. pilot certificate.”

47

§ 61.75(f)

Corrects an error: Where the rule stated “U.S. private pilot certificate,” it has been corrected to read: “U.S. pilot certificate” in 2 places.

47

§ 61.75(g)

Corrects an error: Where the rule stated “U.S. private pilot certificate,” it has been corrected to read: “U.S. pilot certificate” in 2 places.

48

§ 61.77(a)(2)

Clarifies who can be issued a special purpose pilot authorization.

48

§ 61.77(b)(1)

Clarifies the requirements for issuance of a special purpose pilot authorization.

48

§ 61.77(b)(5)

Deletes a requirement that an applicant have documentation of meeting the recent flight experience requirements of part 61 be issued a special purpose pilot authorization.

49

§ 61.96(b)(9)

Requires an applicant for a recreational pilot certificate to hold either a student pilot certificate or sport pilot certificate.

50

§ 61.101(e)(1)(iii) and (j)

Excludes aircraft that are certificated as rotorcraft from the 180 horsepower powerplant limitation. Corrects a mistake in paragraph (j) that references “paragraph (h)” where the rule should reference “paragraph (i).”

51

§ 61.103(j)

Requires a private pilot certificate applicant to hold a student pilot certificate, recreational pilot certificate, or sport pilot certificate.

52

§ 61.109(a)(5)(ii)

Changes the distance on a cross country flight for private pilot certification—single engine airplane rating from “at least 50 nautical miles” to “more than 50 nautical miles.”

52

§ 61.109(b)(5)(ii)

Changes the distance on a cross country flight for private pilot certification—multiengine airplane rating from “at least 50 nautical miles” to “more than 50 nautical miles.”

53

§ 61.109(c)(4)(ii)

Changes the distance on the solo cross country flight for private pilot certification—helicopter rating to conform to ICAO requirements. Changes the distance on a cross country flight for private pilot certification—helicopter rating from “at least 25 nautical miles” to read “more than 25 nautical miles.”

54

§ 61.109(d)(4)(ii)

Changes the distance on the solo cross country flight for private pilot certification—gyroplane rating to conform to ICAO requirements. Changes the distance on a cross country flight for private pilot certification—gyroplane rating from “at least 25 nautical miles” to read “more than 25 nautical miles.”

52

§ 61.109(e)(5)(ii)

Changes the distance on a cross country flight for private pilot certification—powered-lift rating from “at least 50 nautical miles” to “more than 50 nautical miles.”

55

§ 61.127(b)(4)(vi)

Adds “ground reference maneuvers” as an area of operation for commercial pilot certification—gyroplane rating.

56

§ 61.127(b)(5)(vii)

Deletes “ground reference maneuvers” for commercial pilot certification powered lift rating.

57

§ 61.129(a)(3)(i)

Clarifies the instrument training tasks required for commercial pilot certification—airplane single engine rating by requiring training using a view-limiting device.

62

§ 61.129(a)(3)(iii)

Allows the daytime cross country flight for commercial pilot certification single engine airplane rating to be performed under visual flight rules (VFR) or instrument flight rules (IFR).

62

§ 61.129(a)(3)(iv)

Allows the cross country flight at nighttime for commercial pilot certification airplane single engine rating to be performed under VFR or IFR.

64

§ 61.129(a)(4)

Permits training to be performed solo or with an instructor onboard for commercial pilot certification—airplane single engine rating.

58

§ 61.129(b)(3)(i)

Requires instrument training tasks for commercial pilot certification airplane multiengine rating to include training using a view-limiting device.

62

§ 61.129(b)(3)(iii)

Allows the daytime cross country flight for commercial pilot certification multiengine airplane rating to be performed under VFR or IFR.

62

§ 61.129(b)(3)(iv)

Allows the cross country flight at nighttime for commercial pilot certification multiengine airplane rating to be performed under VFR or IFR.

59

§ 61.129(c)(3)(i)

Reduces the hour requirements on the control and maneuvering of a helicopter solely by reference to instruments from 10 hours to 5 hours for commercial pilot certification—helicopter rating and permits it to be performed in an aircraft, flight simulator, or flight training device. Clarifies the control and maneuvering of a helicopter solely by reference to instruments required for commercial pilot certification for the helicopter rating must include training using a view-limiting device.

62

§ 61.129(c)(3)(ii)

Permits the daytime cross country flight for commercial pilot certification helicopter rating to be performed under VFR or IFR.

62

§ 61.129(c)(3)(iii)

Permits the cross country flight at nighttime for commercial pilot certification helicopter rating to be performed under VFR or IFR.

64

§ 61.129(c)(4)

Permits training for commercial pilot certification helicopter rating to be performed solo or with an instructor onboard.

60

§ 61.129(d)(3)(i)

Reduces the instrument training for commercial pilot certification—gyroplane rating to 2.5 hours on the control and maneuvering of a gyroplane solely by reference to instrument and permits it to be conducted in an aircraft, flight simulator, or flight training device. Clarifies the control and maneuvering of a gyroplane solely by reference to instrument required for commercial pilot certification gyroplane rating must include training using a view-limiting device.

62

§ 61.129(d)(3)(ii)

Allows the daytime cross country flight for commercial pilot certification gyroplane rating to be performed under VFR or IFR.

63

§ 61.129(d)(3)(iii)

Deletes the requirement for a cross country flight at nighttime for commercial pilot certification gyroplane rating and establishes it as “At least two hours of flight training during nighttime conditions in a gyroplane at an airport, that includes 10 takeoffs and 10 landings to a full stop (with each landing involving a flight in the traffic pattern).”

64

§ 61.129(d)(4)

Permits training for commercial pilot certification gyroplane rating to be performed solo or with an instructor onboard.

61

§ 61.129(e)(3)(i)

Requires that instrument training tasks for commercial pilot certification powered-lift rating include training using a view-limiting device.

61

§ 61.129(e)(3)(ii)

Permits the cross country flight at nighttime for commercial pilot certification powered-lift rating to be performed under VFR or IFR.

62

§ 61.129(e)(3)(iii)

Permits the cross country flight at nighttime for commercial pilot certification powered-lift rating to be performed under VFR or IFR.

64

§ 61.129(e)(4)

Permits training for commercial pilot certification powered-lift rating to be performed solo or with an instructor onboard.

64

§ 61.129(g)(2)

Permits training for commercial pilot certification airship rating to be performed either solo or while performing the duties of PIC with an instructor onboard.

65

§ 61.129(g)(3)

Reformats paragraph (3) into subparagraphs (i) and (ii). Clarifies that the instrument training tasks for commercial pilot certification airship rating requires instrument training using a view-limiting device.

62

§ 61.129(g)(4)(ii) & (iii)

Permits the cross country training for commercial pilot certification airship rating to be performed under VFR or IFR.

66

§ 61.153(d)(3)(i), (ii)

Further clarifies the additional condition to qualify for a U.S. ATP certificate on the basis of a foreign pilot certificate.

67

§ 61.157

Reprints this section in its entirety due to numerous editorial, formatting, and technical revisions.

67

§ 61.157(b)

Adds the language “or a type rating that is completed concurrently with an airline transport pilot certificate” for clarification purposes. Reformats this section to establish a paragraph (g) that permits the use of an aircraft not capable of instrument flight for a type rating to be added to an existing ATP certificate. This revision parallels the changes in § 61.63(e).

67

§ 61.157(f)(1)(ii)

Clarifies the aeronautical knowledge areas of the competency check under § 135.293 for qualifying for an aircraft rating. The reason for this change is because Part 142 training centers and designated pilot examiners are only authorized to test an applicant on the aeronautical knowledge areas of § 135.293(a)(2) and (3) and not on the aeronautical knowledge areas of § 135.293(a)(1) and (4) through (8). Procedurally, the FAA only permits the part 135 operator's check airman and FAA Inspectors to test the applicant on the aeronautical knowledge areas of § 135.293(a)(1) and (4) through (8).

36 & 67

§ 61.157(g)

Clarifies the use of flight simulators and flight training devices and applicant qualifications for the airplane rating at the ATP certification level and moves it in to § 61.64 in paragraph (a) and (b).

36 & 67

§ 61.157(h)

Clarifies the use of flight simulators and flight training devices and applicant qualifications for the helicopter rating at the ATP certification level and moves it into § 61.64 in paragraph (c) and (d).

36 & 67

§ 61.157(i)

Clarifies the use of flight simulators and flight training devices and applicant qualifications for the powered-lift rating at the ATP certification level and moves it into § 61.64 as paragraph (e) and (f).

68

§ 61.157(g)

Re-designates paragraph (j) as paragraph (g). Amends the requirements for permitting use of aircraft not capable of instrument flight for a rating to permit the issuance of a “VFR Only” limitation for ATP certification. This revision parallels the changes in § 61.63(e).

68

§ 61.157(h)

Adds a provision to permit an applicant for type rating in a multiengine, single seat airplane to be performed in a multi-seat version of that type airplane, or the examiner must be in a position to observe the applicant during the practical test. This revision parallels the changes in § 61.63(f).

69

§ 61.157(i)

Adds a provision permitting an applicant for type rating in a single engine, single seat airplane to be performed in a multi-seat version of that type airplane, or the examiner must be in a position to observe the applicant during the practical test. This revision parallels the changes in § 61.63(g).

70

§ 61.159(c)(3)

Adds a provision to accommodate the crediting of flight engineer time for U.S. military flight engineers for qualifying for an ATP certificate that is similar to what is provided for crediting flight engineer time under part 121.

71

§ 61.159(d)

Clarifies when an applicant may be issued an ATP certificate with the ICAO endorsement.

71

§ 61.159(e)

Clarifies a holder of an ATP certificate with the ICAO endorsement may have the endorsement removed after meeting the aeronautical experience of revised § 61.159(d).

72

§ 61.187(b)(6)(vii)

Deletes the “go around maneuver” for flight instructor certification for the glider rating.

73

§ 61.195(c)(1) & (2)

Establishes the flight instructor qualifications for providing instrument training in flight to be a CFII in the appropriate category and class of aircraft.

74

§ 61.195(d)(3)

Deletes requirement that a flight instructor must sign a student's certificate for authorizing solo flight in Class B airspace.

75

§ 61.195(k)

Adds flight instructor qualifications for giving the PIC night vision goggle qualification and currency training.

7

§ 61.197(a)(2)

This proposal has been withdrawn, because the FAA has decided to continue to issue flight instructor certificates with an expiration date. The proposal would have established flight instructor renewal procedures without requiring re-issuance of the actual flight instructor certificate.

7

§ 61.199(a)

This proposal would have established flight instructor reinstatement procedures without requiring re-issuance of the actual flight instructor certificate. That proposal has been withdrawn, because the FAA has decided to continue to issue flight instructor certificates with an expiration date. The FAA is making a minor change to this rule to clarify the reinstatement requirements to allow the performance of a single CFI reinstatement practical test renews the other ratings held on that flight instructor certificate.

76

§ 61.215(b)

Deletes the privilege of advance ground instructors (AGIs) to provide training and endorsement for instrument training.

77

§ 61.217(a)-(d)

Establishes new currency requirements for ground instructors.

78

§ 91.205(h)

Establishes the required instruments & equipment for night vision goggle operations.

79

§ 141.5(a)-(e)

Clarifies that the “counters” for the pass rate must be 10 different people and that no one graduate can be counted more than once.

80

§ 141.9

Corrects the rule language for issuing examining authority.

81

§ 141.33(d)(2)

Reduces the number of student enrollments to qualify for a check instructor position to 10 students.

82

§ 141.39

Permits the use of foreign registered aircraft for those part 141 training facilities that are located outside of the United States and where the training is conducted outside of the United States.

83

§ 141.53(c)(1)

Deletes subparagraph (c)(1) to remove an obsolete date.

84

§ 141.55(e)(2)(ii)

Corrects the phrase “the practical or knowledge test, or any combination thereof” to read “the practical or knowledge test, as appropriate.”

85

§ 141.77(c)(1), (2), and (3)

Makes a technical correction to the language in the rules about the proficiency and knowledge test required for transfer students to a part 141 pilot school.

86

§ 141.85(a)(1) & (d)

Clarifies duties and responsibilities that chief instructor may delegate to an assistant chief instructor and recommending instructor.

87

Part 141, Appx. B. para. 2

Changes the eligibility requirement for enrollment into the flight portion of the private pilot certification course to only require a recreational, sport, or student pilot certificate prior to entry into the solo phase of the flight portion of the course.

88

Part 141, Appx. B. para. 4(b)(1)(i)

Corrects in the private pilot certification single engine airplane course requirement by changing the training required to read “on the control and maneuvering of a single engine airplane solely by reference to instruments” instead of calling it “instrument training.”

88

Part 141, Appx. B. para. 4(b)(2)(i)

Corrects the private pilot certification multiengine airplane course requirement by changing the training required to read “on the control and maneuvering of a multiengine airplane solely by reference to instruments.”

88

Part 141, Appx. B. para. 4(b)(5)(i)

Corrects the private pilot certification powered-lift course requirement by changing the training required to read “on the control and maneuvering of a powered-lift solely by reference to instruments.”

89

Part 141, Appx. B. para. 5(a)(1)

Changes the distance for the cross country flight in the private pilot certification—airplane single engine course from “at least 50 nautical miles” to read “more than 50 nautical miles.”

90

Part 141, Appx. B. para. 5(b)(1)

Changes the distance on a cross country flight in the private pilot certification—airplane multiengine course from “at least 50 nautical miles” to read “more than 50 nautical miles.”

91

Part 141, Appx. B. para. 5(c)(1)

Changes the distance on a cross country flight in the private pilot certification helicopter course to conform to ICAO requirements to be a cross country flight of at least 100 nautical miles. Changed the phrase “at least 25 nautical miles” to read “more than 25 nautical miles.”

92

Part 141, Appx. B. para. 5(d)(1)

Changes the distance on a cross country flight in the private pilot certification—gyroplane course from “at least 25 nautical miles” to read “more than 25 nautical miles.”

93

Part 141, Appx. B. para. 5(e)(1)

Changes the distance on a cross country flight in the private pilot certification—powered lift course from “at least 50 nautical miles” to read “more than 50 nautical miles.”

94

Part 141, Appx. C. para. 4(b)(5) & (6)

Allows approval of instrument rating courses that give credit for instrument training on an ATD.

100

Part 141, Appx. D. para. 4(b)(1)(i)

Requires that the instrument training tasks for the commercial pilot certification airplane single engine course include training using a view-limiting device.

99

Part 141, Appx. D. para. 4(b)(1)(ii)

Allows the complex airplane training in the commercial pilot certificate single engine airplane course to be performed in either in a single engine complex airplane or multiengine complex airplane.

96

Part 141, Appx. D. para. 4(b)(1)(iii)

Allows the daytime cross country flight for the commercial pilot certificate airplane course to be performed under VFR or IFR.

96

Part 141, Appx. D. para. 4(b)(1)(iv)

Allows the nighttime cross country flight for the commercial pilot certificate airplane course to be performed under VFR or IFR.

96

Part 141, Appx. D. para. 4(b)(2)(i)

Requires that the instrument training tasks for the commercial pilot certification airplane multiengine course include training using a view-limiting device.

96

Part 141, Appx. D. para. 4(b)(2)(iii)

Allows the daytime cross country flight for the commercial pilot certificate airplane course to be performed under VFR or IFR.

96

Part 141, Appx. D. para. 4(b)(2)(iv)

Allows the nighttime cross country flight for the commercial pilot certificate airplane course to be performed under VFR or IFR.

100

Part 141, Appx. D. para. 4(b)(3)(i)

Requires that the instrument training tasks for the commercial pilot certification helicopter course include using a view-limiting device.

96

Part 141, Appx. D. para. 4(b)(3)(ii)

Allows the daytime cross country flight in the commercial pilot certificate helicopter course to be performed under VFR or IFR.

96

Part 141, Appx. D. para. 4(b)(3)(iii)

Allows the nighttime cross country flight in the commercial pilot certificate helicopter course to be performed under VFR or IFR.

100

Part 141, Appx. D. para. 4(b)(4)(i)

Requires that the instrument training tasks for the commercial pilot certification gyroplane course include using a view-limiting device.

96

Part 141, Appx. D. para. 4(b)(4)(ii)

Allows the daytime cross country flight in the commercial pilot certificate gyroplane course to be performed under VFR or IFR.

97

Part 141, Appx. D. para. 4(b)(4)(iii)

Requires a nighttime cross country flight in the commercial pilot certificate gyroplane course to include at least two hours of flight training during nighttime conditions at an airport, that includes 10 takeoffs and 10 landings to a full stop (with each landing involving a flight in the traffic pattern).

100

Part 141, Appx. D. para. 4(b)(5)(i)

Requires that the instrument training tasks for the commercial pilot certification powered-lift course include using a view-limiting device.

96

Part 141, Appx. D. para. 4(b)(5)(ii)

Allows the daytime cross country flight in the commercial pilot certificate powered-lift course to be performed under VFR or IFR.

96

Part 141, Appx. D. para. 4(b)(5)(iii)

Allows the nighttime cross country flight in the commercial pilot certificate powered-lift course to be performed under VFR or IFR.

100

Part 141, Appx. D. para. 4(b)(7)(i)

Requires that the instrument training tasks for the commercial pilot certification airship course include using a view-limiting device.

96

Part 141, Appx. D. para. 4(b)(7)(ii)

Allows the daytime cross country flight in the commercial pilot certificate airship rating course to be performed under VFR or IFR.

96

Part 141, Appx. D. para. 4(b)(7)(iii)

Allows the nighttime cross country flight in the commercial pilot certificate airship rating course to be performed under VFR or IFR.

98

Part 141, Appx. D. para. 4(d)(4)(vi)

Adds “ground reference maneuvers” as an area of operation for the gyroplane rating in the commercial pilot certificate course.

95

Part 141, Appx. D. para. 5(a), (c ), (d), & (e)

Allows training to be performed solo or with an instructor onboard for the commercial pilot certificate courses.

101

Part 141, Appx. E. para. 2

Clarifies that a person prior to having completed the flight portion of the ATP course must have met the ATP aeronautical experience requirements of part 61, subpart G.

102

Part 141, Appx. I. para. 3 and 4

Clarifies the amount and content of ground and flight training for the add-on aircraft category and/or class rating courses in the recreational, private, commercial, and ATP certification courses.

Differences Between NPRM and Final Rule

The notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) generated considerable interest and commentary by the pilot, flight instructor, and flight school community as well as other stakeholders. While the FAA is appreciative of all comments, recommendations, and suggestions made during NPRM period, they are not always related to the instant final rule.

The FAA received general comments on aviation industry future trends. Comments on cockpit resource management (CRM) and general aviation (GA) trends, including very light jet (VLJ), will be addressed in other FAA rulemakings.

In response to several comments that rule changes would result in undue recordkeeping burdens for certificate holders and cause new problems such as identity theft, we have explained our requirements and rationale in the preamble of this final rule. We find the revisions will clarify and eliminate duplication of certain sections and, in fact, reduce paperwork. As detailed later in this document, revised § 61.29(d)(3) ends the requirement that a person requesting replacement of a lost or destroyed airman certificate, medical certificate, or knowledge test report must furnish their Social Security Number. The change improves privacy by one less place where a Social Security Number must be furnished and complies with Federal Law that forbids mandating a Social Security Number for identification purposes. The FAA has started a rulemaking process revising the pilot certificate requirements that when exercising the privilege of a pilot certificate, the person must carry photo identification acceptable to the Administrator. This exercise will also address security concerns regarding pilot identification. Details on this rulemaking will appear in the

Federal Register

in due course and comments will be solicited before a final rule is promulgated.

Responding to concerns that the FAA will deny or revoke privileges for inadvertent inaccuracies, based on re-review of § 61.59 we do not find this rule invalidates existing regulatory requirements for recording flight experience. It is not FAA's intention to deny or revoke privileges for inadvertent inaccuracies. In fact, many of the “e-initiatives” of FAA, Department of Transportation, and the Federal Government make applications, submission, and corrections easier. At present, a number of processes can be

completed online including the renewal of instructor flight certificates. The FAA has also made numerous editorial changes for clarity.

Editorial Comments

The FAA has made numerous editorial changes referenced by the previous Summary of Revision Table and detailed comments appear by Revision Number (Revision Number or Revision No.). One commenter noted FAA Order 8710.3D referenced in the NPRM, has been superseded by FAA Order 8900.2 and recommended the references be updated. The FAA agrees and the corrected reference “FAA Order 8900.2” appears throughout this document.

Discussion of the Final Rule

1. This revision of § 61.1(b)(13) defines the term “night vision goggles”

Revised § 61.1(b)(13) defines “night vision goggles” (NVG) to mean “an appliance worn by a pilot that enhances the pilot's ability to maintain visual surface reference at night.”

Two commenters supported the proposed definition for night vision goggles. One commenter, while supporting the general concept of defining and addressing night vision goggle operations, thought specific operational details should be left to NVG users.

The FAA is adopting the revision as proposed in the NPRM.

2. This revision of § 61.1(b)(14) defines the term “night vision goggle operation”

This final rule creates a new § 61.1(b)(14) by defining “night vision goggle operation” as “a flight at night where the pilot maintains visual surface reference utilizing NVGs in an aircraft that is approved for NVG operations.”

One commenter supported the general concept of defining and addressing night vision goggle (NVG) operations, while deferring to NVG users regarding specific details of the proposed provisions. Two commenters objected to the NVG definition on safety grounds. The commenters believed the proposed definition implies visual references to the surface may be maintained solely by NVG use and, in the event of a NVG malfunction, pilots could be left without any visual references.

The FAA does not believe that the definition of “night vision goggle operation” would in any way affect safety in the event of a NVG malfunction. Required pilot training should ensure a pilot has the skills and ability to revert to visual flight. Therefore, the FAA is adopting the revision as it was proposed in the NPRM.

3. This revision establishes a new § 61.2 that clarifies the requirements regarding “currency” and “validity” throughout part 61 as it relates to exercising the privileges of an airman certificate, rating, endorsement, or authorization issued under this part

The FAA had proposed to revise §§ 61.1(b)(2)(i) and (ii), (4), and (20); 61.3(a)(1), (c), (f)(2)(i) and (ii), and (g)(2)(i) and (ii); 61.39(c)(1), 61.69(a)(1); 61.75(b)(2) and (d); 61.77(b)(1); 61.103(j); 61.133(a)(1); 61.153(d)(1) and (3); 61.167(a) and (b)(3); the introductory language of 61.193; 61.197(a); and 61.215(a), (b), (c), and (d) to clarify that airman certificates, ratings, and authorizations had to be “current” and/or “valid,” or both, where and when appropriate. However, the FAA has now decided to remove the words “current” and “valid” entirely throughout part 61. This new § 61.2 establishes the requirements for “currency” and “validity” as it relates to exercising the privileges of an airman certificate, rating or authorization. As a result of adding this new § 61.2, we have removed the word “current” from §§ 61.1, 61.3, 61.19, 61.23, 61.25, 61.39, 61.51, 61.53, 61.55, 61.63, 61.65, 61.73, 61.75, 61.77, 61.89, 61.93, 61.101, 61.157, 61.185, 61.195, 61.197, 61.199, 61.213, 61.303, 61.403, 61.407, 61.429, and 61.431. Furthermore, by adding this new § 61.2, we have also removed the word “valid” from §§ 61.1, 61.3, 61.23, 61.53, 61.75, 61.77, 61.101, 61.303, 61.403, 61.429, and 61.431.

The words “current” and “valid” had not been defined until we proposed the definitions in the NPRM (

i.e.,

Notice No. 06-20; 72 FR 5806-5854; February 7, 2007). In the past, the words “current” and “valid” had been used in some sections of part 61, but not consistently or universally. Section 61.2 establishes the requirements for “currency” and “validity” as it relates to a person's certificate, rating, endorsement, or authorization in order to exercise the privileges of that certificate, rating, endorsement or authorization.

Five commenters expressed support for the various additions or replacements making clear that certificates, ratings, and other privileges must be current and valid for use. One commenter pointed out that the changes clarify that mere possession of a certificate is not necessarily sufficient to meet requirements.

Six commenters asserted that the proposed additions or revisions are unnecessary. Three commenters asserted that the requirement for certificates and ratings to be current and valid is implied, and it is not necessary to revise the regulations to reflect them. One commenter asserted that the regulatory requirements for exercising privileges are effective regardless of whether a regulation specifically requires that a privilege be current. Three commenters believed that the proposed changes to § 61.1 make adequately clear that pilots' certificates must be both valid and current, and that it is unnecessary to add the qualifier “current and valid” throughout part 61. Three commenters recommended that, instead of making changes throughout part 61, the FAA define valid and current in § 1.1 of the regulations. One commenter suggested a blanket statement to the effect that certificate holders are required to meet all standards required to exercise any particular privilege at the time of intended use. One commenter pointed out that many certificate types have no expiration, making currency a moot issue.

Six commenters pointed out that there is nothing on the face of pilot certificates that indicates currency or validity, and that reference to a logbook or training records is required. Three commenters asserted that compliance with the proposed rules would require a pilot to carry logbooks or flight training records to prove currency, and object to the proposal for that reason. These commenters asserted that requiring pilots to carry logbooks would expose them to loss or damage, and that pilots using computer-based flight records would be unable to comply. Two commenters urged that the proposed rules not be interpreted to require pilots to carry logbooks. One commenter recommended that the regulations require a pilot to make proof of currency available within a reasonable time upon inquiry.

Five commenters opposed the proposed additions and revisions because they believe that they will confuse matters rather than clarify them. Two commenters asserted that confusion will result from the fact that different currency requirements apply to different operations. One commenter asserted that there is no distinction between a current certificate and a valid one.

The changes made here do not establish additional requirements on pilots, flight instructors, and ground instructors, but merely clarify the meaning of the rules. The FAA acknowledges the comments received on this proposal, and therefore we decided to clarify the requirements for

“currency” and “validity” by establishing this new § 61.2.

4. This revision of § 61.3(j)(3) deletes an obsolete date

We had proposed to delete the existing § 61.3(j)(3) that references obsolete dates. Section 61.3(j)(3) states “Until December 20, 1999, a person may serve as a pilot in operations covered by this paragraph after that person has reached his or her 60th birthday if, on March 20, 1997, that person was employed as a pilot in operations covered by this paragraph.” However, § 61.3(j)(3) is being revised in the “Part 121 Pilot Age Limit” direct final rule, and so we have withdrawn the proposal to delete it in this rulemaking project. We also had proposed deleting the statement in “Except as provided in paragraph (j)(3) of this section” under § 61.3(j)(1). Again, we have withdrawn this proposal, because the “Part 121 Pilot Age Limit” direct final rule will conform the age at which pilots may serve in part 121 air carrier operation to the Fair Treatment for Experienced Pilots Act, Public Law 110-135.

Two commenters supported elimination of the exception to age limitations because the date has passed. Two commenters opposed application of age limitations on operating privileges. One commenter recommended relaxing the age limitations with respect to certain operations, noting that available data does not provide a logical basis. One other commenter argued that, irrespective of age, an individual should be permitted to exercise all privileges if he/she can pass the applicable medical examination.

The FAA acknowledges the comments received on this proposal. The FAA will amend § 61.3(j)(3) in the “Part 121 Pilot Age Limit” direct final rule.

5. This revision of § 61.19(b) amends the duration of the student pilot certificate

In the NPRM, we had proposed to revise § 61.19(b) to extend the duration period for the student pilot certificate to thirty-six calendar months for individuals under the age of 40 years. Since we proposed this revision, the FAA has issued the “Modification of Certain Medical Standards and Procedures and Duration of Certain Medical Certificates” final rule (73 FR 43064; July 24, 2008) incorporating a new § 61.23(d) that extended the duration of the third class medical certificate to the “60th month after the month of the date of examination shown on the medical certificate” for persons under the age of 40 years. Therefore, we are making a conforming change that further revises § 61.19(b) to parallel with the provisions set forth in the “Modification of Certain Medical Standards and Procedures and Duration of Certain Medical Certificates” final rule.

Twelve commenters supported the proposed revision. Five commenters supported the proposed correspondence to the duration of third class medical certificate, but recommended that the provision also take into account a proposed change in the duration of those certificates. One commenter supported the proposed provision, but recommended it be applicable to all student pilots, regardless of age. Three commenters expressed support for increasing duration of student pilot certificates for persons seeking a glider or balloon rating and one person recommended that the duration also be increased for those seeking an airship rating, because of the limited training assets available.

The FAA acknowledges the supportive comments received on this proposal, and has made the changes and conforming changes to § 61.19(b).

6. This revision of § 61.19(b)(3) extends the duration period to 36 calendar months for the student pilot certificate for persons seeking a balloon or glider rating

In the NPRM, we proposed to revise § 61.19(b)(3) to extend the duration period for the student pilot certificate for persons seeking a balloon or glider rating to thirty-six calendar months. Since we proposed this revision, the FAA has issued the “Modification of Certain Medical Standards and Procedures and Duration of Certain Medical Certificates” final rule (73 FR 43064; July 24, 2008) that incorporates a new § 61.23(d) that extended the duration of the third class medical certificate to the “60th month after the month of the date of examination shown on the medical certificate” for persons under the age of 40 years. Therefore, we are making a conforming change that further revises § 61.19(b)(3) to parallel the provisions set forth in the “Modification of Certain Medical Standards and Procedures and Duration of Certain Medical Certificates” final rule. In effect, this revision extends the duration period for the student pilot certificate for persons seeking a balloon or glider rating to 60 calendar months after the month of the date the student pilot certificate was issued, regardless of the age of the person. Under the rule, persons seeking a balloon or glider rating are not required to hold a medical certificate (

See

§ 61.23(b)(1)).

Three commenters supported the proposed increase in duration of student pilot certificates for persons seeking a glider or balloon rating. One commenter recommended the duration also be increased for persons seeking an airship rating due to the limited training assets available. The FAA has determined that the recommendation to expand this revision to include persons seeking an airship rating is beyond the scope of this final rule.

The FAA acknowledges the comments received on this proposal, and has made the change and conforming changes to § 61.19(b)(3).

7. This proposal would have amended §§ 61.19(d), 61.197(a), and 61.199 to allow for the issuance of a flight instructor certificate without an expiration date and clarifies the flight instructor certificate reinstatement requirements

The FAA proposed in the NPRM to revise §§ 61.19(d), 61.197(a), and 61.199 allowing issuance of flight instructor certificates without an expiration date. After further consideration and additional analysis and review of comments, we have determined revising our application procedures can achieve equivalent results. We plan to adopt a simplified application process where a flight instructor refresher course (FIRC) provider can submit applications directly to the FAA's Airman Certification Branch in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. When the flight instructor renewal applicant signs and completes an application, the FIRC provider mails the application directly to the FAA's Airman Certification Branch. At this point, the FAA will prepare and issue the renewed flight instructor certificate with a new expiration date.

We also decided to continue issuing flight instructor certificates with expiration dates, but through a simplified application process. This simplified application process allows for the flight instructor renewal applicant to complete and sign new “Flight Instructor Renewal Application,” FAA Form 8710-1 CFI. If the flight instructor renewal application is a result of completing FIRC training course of training, most FIRC providers have Airman Certification Representatives assigned to process their flight instructor renewal applications. The FAA's Airman Certification Branch, AFS-760, has a process in place where most FIRC providers are now permitted to submit their flight instructor renewal applications directly to the FAA's Airman Certification Branch.

Under this process, a FIRC provider's entire responsibility is to positively identify applicant, sign application, and send to the FAA Airman Certification Branch. The FAA's Airman Certification Branch will then process and issue the renewed flight instructor certificate. Although the Aircraft Owner and Pilots Association (AOPA) Safety Foundation petitioned the FAA to issue flight instructor certificates without an expiration date, we believe our simplified application process provides equivalent results. Furthermore, since the AOPA Safety Foundation petitioned for this change in 1999, the FAA believes its changes in the application and certification process have negated the need for the petitioned change.

8. This revision of § 61.19(e) standardizes the recent experience requirements for the ground instructor certificate

This final rule amends § 61.19(e) linking currency requirements for the ground instructor certificate with duration period requirements. Our intent is to further clarify currency requirements for ground instructors. Since issuance of § 61.19(e), there have been some questions about how a ground instructor remains current. By revising § 61.19(e) and linking this provision with the recent experience requirements under revised § 61.217 we provide clarity. Four commenters supported the proposed provisions bringing ground instructor certificate durations in line with currency requirements.

The Greater St. Louis Flight Instructor Association recommended ground instructors be required to complete a Flight Instructor Refresher Clinic to renew their privileges every 2 years. Such a renewal requirement would refresh instructors on core concepts and allow introduction of new material.

The FAA is adopting the revision as proposed in the NPRM.

9. This revision of § 61.23(a)(3)(vii) provides for Examiners to only be required to hold a third class medical certificate

Amended § 61.23(a)(3)(vii) requires Examiners to hold only a third class medical certificate. The FAA wants to parallel Examiners' medical certificate requirements in FAA Order 8900.2. FAA Order 8900.2 requires that an Examiner hold only a third class medical certificate when performing practical tests in an aircraft (with an exception for Examiners administering practical tests in a glider or balloon).

Four commenters supported the provision permitting examiners to hold only a third class medical certificate. The Greater St. Louis Flight Instructor Association asserted that examiners should not be required to hold a medical certificate at all, because, according to § 61.47, an Examiner is not the pilot in command (PIC). The association further asserted that Examiners reviewing sport pilot certificate applicants should not be required to hold a medical certificate.

The FAA acknowledges the comments received about our proposals. We are adopting the provision permitting Examiners only be required to hold third class medical certificates in § 61.23(a)(3)(vii).

10. This revision of § 61.23(b)(3) clarifies that persons exercising the privileges of a glider or balloon rating are not required to hold a medical certificate

This final rule amends § 61.23(b)(3) by clarifying that persons exercising the privileges of a glider or balloon rating are not required to hold a medical certificate. The FAA has received questions about § 61.23(b)(3). Some have asked whether the no medical certificate requirement for operating a balloon or a glider applies only when a person is taking a practical test for a glider or balloon rating or whether it applies when a person is exercising the privileges of a glider or balloon rating. The rule is intended to apply in both situations. Section 61.23(b)(3) now clarifies that persons exercising the privileges of their glider or balloon rating, as appropriate, are not required to hold a medical certificate. As specified in the revised § 61.23(b)(8), a person also is not required to hold a medical certificate when taking a practical test for a balloon or glider rating.

Two commenters supported the proposed clarification that no medical certificate is required to exercise private pilot privileges in a balloon or glider. The FAA is adopting this change because it further clarifies § 61.23(b)(3) that when pilots are exercising the privileges of their glider or balloon rating, they do not have to hold a medical certificate.

11. This revision of § 61.23(b)(7) adds situations where an Examiner need not hold a medical certificate

This final rule amends § 61.23(b)(7) to establish that when an Examiner or a Check Airman is administering a test or check for an airman certificate, rating, or authorization in a glider, balloon, flight simulator, or flight training device, he/she will not be required to hold a medical certificate. Existing § 61.23(b)(7) states that an Examiner or Check Airman is not required to hold a medical certificate when administering a test or check for a certificate, rating, or authorization in a flight simulator or flight training device. The words “glider” and “balloon” were inadvertently left out when the rule was last revised.

Two commenters supported the proposed clarification that no medical certificate is required to administer a practical test in a glider, balloon, flight simulator, or flight training device. The FAA is adopting the revision as proposed in the NPRM.

12. This revision of § 61.23(b)(8) adds situations where an applicant need not hold a medical certificate

This final rule amends § 61.23(b)(8) establishing when an applicant is receiving a test or check for a certificate, rating, or authorization in a glider, balloon, flight simulator, or flight training device, the applicant is not required to hold a medical certificate.

Existing § 61.23(b)(8) states that an applicant is not required to hold a medical certificate when receiving a test or check for a certificate, rating, or authorization in a flight simulator or flight training device. The words “glider” and “balloon” were inadvertently left out when the rule was last revised.

Two commenters supported the proposed clarification adding that a medical certificate is not required to undergo a practical test in a glider, balloon, flight simulator, or flight training device.

The FAA is adopting the revision as proposed in the NPRM.

13. This revision of § 61.23(b)(9) relieves military pilots of the U.S. Armed Forces from having to obtain an FAA medical certificate

This final rule adds a new § 61.23(b)(9) that, in some cases, relieves military pilots from the requirement to have an FAA medical certificate. Instead, military pilots must have an up-to-date medical examination conducted by the U.S. Armed Forces, which authorizes them to perform flight duty. This exception is for military pilots from the U.S. Air Force, U.S. Army, U.S. Marine Corps, U.S. Navy, U.S. Coast Guard, and National Guard and Reserve units.

The pilot's authorization for flight duty must be up to date on the date he or she relies on the military medical authorization to qualify for the § 61.23(b)(9) exception. We are using the general phrase “up to date” to modify a pertinent military medical authorization because the terminology

regarding flight duty/flight status varies between the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, Coast Guard, and National Guard and Reserve. The exception may be only used for flights requiring privileges of an FAA third-class medical certificate and when flying within U.S. airspace. We have limited this exception to operations within U.S. airspace because international standard (Annex 1 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation) requires pilots to hold an appropriate medical certificate from their civil aviation authority.

A conforming change has also been made to new § 61.3(c)(2)(xii) to exclude U.S. military pilots from having to carry an FAA medical certificate when exercising the privileges of their FAA pilot certificates. However, an up-to-date military medical examination is required for that person's active status as a military pilot. If requested by the FAA, the pilot will be required to show active status as a military pilot in lieu of the FAA medical certificate. To clarify, by “active status” we mean that the military pilot has an up-to-date medical examination and clearance issued by the U.S. Armed Forces authorizing pilot flight duty. Common military terminology for this authorization is an “up slip” or medical clearance to fly.

As implied in the existing § 61.39(a)(4), to be eligible for a practical test for a certificate or rating issued under part 61, one does not always need to hold an FAA-issued medical certificate. Under this § 61.23(b)(9) exception, a military pilot who is applying for a practical test is only required to have completed a U.S. military medical examination for military pilot status in lieu of holding an FAA third-class medical certificate. The FAA has determined that medical examinations provided by the U.S. Armed Forces provide a level of safety that more than satisfies the standards required for an FAA third-class medical certificate.

The FAA recognizes that each branch of the U.S. military has its own set of medical standards required for military pilot applicants. While there may be differences, the FAA finds that the military medical standards met by applicants—many who will conduct complex military exercises or combat operations—are, by nature and of necessity, more stringent and therefore exceed minimum 14 CFR part 67 standards. Military medical examinations also are more stringent. For example, military pilots endure more thorough vision screening—such as for refraction, depth perception, night vision, and intraocular tension. Military pilots are subjected to audiometry testing during the hearing portion of their examinations whereas civilian pilots are allowed to choose their method of hearing test which can be a speech discrimination test, a conversational voice test, or pure-tone audiometry. Laboratory testing (such as glucose, lipid, hemoglobin, serology, urinanalysis testing) and radiographic studies (such as chest x-ray) also are conducted.

The FAA recognizes that there may not be absolute parallels in military and civilian aviation with regard to certain procedural screening, such as for substance abuse. For example, the FAA verifies all medical certificate applications against information contained in the National Driver Registry to determine whether an applicant has failed to reveal an alcohol-related motor vehicle action. While this may not be done in the same manner during military pilot medical screening, military pilots are more subject to routine screening for substance abuse than are civilian pilots. Civilian private pilots must adhere to part 61 substance abuse standards, however they are not subject to routine drug testing. Unlike in the civilian realm where notice must be given, in the military realm routine screening typically is unannounced and is observed by collectors. In addition, within a military squadron, close observation and scrutiny of behavior is provided by colleagues within the squadron and also by squadron flight surgeons who work and fly with military pilots on a daily basis.

While medication usage authorized for military pilots may differ from usage authorized by the FAA for civilian pilots, the basic philosophy is the same—when contraindicated for flying, pilots must be grounded. Military pilots must be approved by a flight surgeon when taking any new medication. While military pilots are bound by standards similar to 14 CFR 61.53, prohibiting operations during a known medical deficiency, military pilots are more likely to be removed from flying duties before they have to make the decision to ground themselves. Because military oversight of pilots is branch specific, whereas FAA oversight is much more broad-based, the military is able to ground pilots more readily when necessary. Military pilots may not return to flight status unless approved by a flight surgeon.

Twelve commenters supported the proposed provision excusing military pilots who have an up-to-date military medical examination from holding an FAA medical certificate. Six commenters recommended that, in addition to military pilots, any military air crewmember holding an up-to-date military medical examination be allowed to meet FAA medical certificate requirements without actually holding an FAA-issued medical certificate. One commenter opined that the proposed provision appears to conflict with § 61.31(c)(1) requiring pilots to carry their medical certificates to operate as pilot in command (PIC). Two commenters recommended that FAA clarify what constitutes evidence of a military medical examination, and one person suggested the FAA define “current” for such examinations. He/she further recommended such examinations be current for twelve calendar months from examination date.

The Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA) and the National Association of Flight Instructors (NAFI) noted that §§ 91.146 and 91.147, prescribing requirements for passenger-carrying flights for the benefit of charitable, nonprofit, or community events, require the event sponsor to furnish the local Flight Standard District Office (FSDO) with a photocopy of the pilot's medical certificate. EAA and NAFI recommended amending the proposed rule to clarify that military pilots are eligible to conduct such flights based on their military examination.

In response to commenters who requested any military air crewmember holding a military medical examination (

e.g.

, aviation weapons officer, flight surgeon, navigator, flight crew chief, flight engineer,

etc.

) be excused from FAA medical certificate requirements, we have determined that this medical exception will only be afforded to U.S. military pilots. We determined there are too many differences in the stringency, standards, and durations of military medical examinations for the various other kinds of military crewmembers to permit crewmembers other than pilots to exercise the privileges of an FAA medical certificate without requiring them to hold one. Therefore, this medical exception provided in § 61.23(b)(9) will only be afforded to U.S. military pilots under the circumstances described above.

Procedurally, we envision this process to work as follows. A military pilot's satisfactory completion of a military medical examination from the U.S. Armed Forces, which authorizes the pilot flight duty, is routinely recorded on a military medical clearance or recommendation for flying form (

e.g.

, DA Form 4186, AF Form 1042, NAVMED 5410/2,

etc.

). The pilot will not need to show the actual

military medical examination record form. If the pilot is required to show the FAA that he or she has an up-to-date military medical clearance authorizing pilot flight duty on a given day, the pilot will only need to show the FAA a copy of the official U.S. military pilot flight documentation record, which indicates the pilot's flight status and his or her medical standing.

We do not find that the proposed exception conflicts with § 61.31(c)(1), requiring pilots to carry their medical certificates to operate as PIC. Since military pilots do not carry an actual document of their military medical examination, they are excused from having to carry a medical certificate when exercising the privileges of their FAA pilot certificates. We have provided a discussion and explanation of this matter in the preceding paragraphs.

Responding to the EAA and NAFI comment regarding §§ 91.146 and 91.147 requirements for passenger-carrying flights benefiting charitable, nonprofit, or community events, military pilots are not required to hold an FAA medical certificate under our new § 61.23(b)(9). This means that the military medical examination normally could not be used for flights engaged in the carriage of passengers or property for compensation or hire. However, under § 61.113(b) there are some limited exceptions for private pilots holding a third-class medical certificate, and the military pilots qualifying for our new § 61.23(b)(9) would qualify for the § 61.113(b) exceptions as well.

In response to the commenter requesting we define “current” (

i.e.

, proper duration) for the purposes of a U.S. military medical examination, the U.S. military duration standard for examinations for pilot flight status is typically one year, though some may be as short as six calendar months or as long as eighteen calendar months. However, the specific duration requirements for U.S. military medical examinations are governed by the U.S. Armed Forces, not the FAA. Also, the military has procedures in place similar to the civil requirements of § 61.53 prohibiting flight duty when they are unable to meet medical requirements.

14. This revision of § 61.29(d)(3) deletes the requirement for a person to furnish their Social Security Number

This final rule no longer requires that a person requesting replacement of a lost or destroyed airman certificate, medical certificate, or knowledge test report furnish his/her Social Security Number. The FAA by law cannot require a person to furnish his/her Social Security Number. However, a person may voluntarily provide his/her Social Security Number to establish his/her identity. In addition, we have added clarifying language in § 61.29(d)(4) explaining what information is required in the letter from a person who requests replacement of a lost or destroyed medical certificate.

Six commenters supported elimination of having to furnish a Social Security Number for a replacement certificate. One commenter objected to our proposal arguing that a Social Security Number should be furnished at all times. The FAA acknowledges the comments received about this proposal. Federal Law restricting release of Social Security Numbers is controlling over FAA regulations. Therefore, the FAA is adopting the revision as proposed in the NPRM.

15. This revision deletes the duplication in § 61.31(d)(2) by deleting the rule

This final rule deletes § 61.31(d)(2) that required a pilot in command (PIC) to receive “training for the purpose of obtaining an additional pilot certificate and rating that are appropriate to that aircraft, and be under the supervision of an authorized instructor.” The FAA has received inquiries about the difference between paragraphs (d)(2) and (d)(3) and found that they are conflicting. We also found that paragraph (d)(2) conflicts with § 61.51(e)(1)(i).

When the FAA initially revised § 61.31(d), we were considering a new phrase “supervised PIC flight” that would allow a PIC in training to act as an aircraft's PIC if properly supervised by their flight instructor. (

See

60 FR 41160, 41227; August 11, 1995). The “supervised PIC flight” concept was not adopted in the final rule, but paragraph (d)(2) erroneously remained in the final rule (

See

62 FR 16220; April 4, 1997). Paragraph (d)(3) of § 61.31 details FAA's PIC requirements and § 61.51(e)(1)(i) for logging PIC flight time.

Three commenters supported changes to § 61.31(d). One commenter noted that under proposed §§ 61.31(d)(2) and 61.51(e)(1), a pilot not rated for a category or class of aircraft could, without time limitation, log PIC flight time in that category or class of aircraft once he/she received a solo flight endorsement. The commenter suggested the FAA put a duration limitation on solo endorsements similar to the 90-day limitation on solo endorsements issued to student pilots.

The FAA acknowledges the comments received about this proposal. The 90-day limitation on solo endorsements is for student pilots, not rated pilots. Therefore, the FAA is deleting § 61.31(d)(2) as proposed in the NPRM.

16. This revision adds a new § 61.31(k) that provides training and qualification requirements for pilots who want to operate with night vision goggles

This final rule creates a new § 61.31(k) that will require ground and flight training and a one-time instructor endorsement for a pilot to act as PIC during night vision goggle (NVG) operations. This final rule “grandfathers” PICs previously qualified as PIC for NVG operations under § 61.31(k). Under new subparagraph (k)(3), a pilot will not need the “one-time” NVG training and endorsement provided the pilot can document having satisfactorily accomplished any of the following pilot checks for using NVGs in an aircraft:

• Completion of an official pilot proficiency check for using NVGs and that check was conducted by the U.S. Armed Forces; or

• Completion of a pilot proficiency check for using NVGs under part 135 of this chapter and that check was conducted by an Examiner or a Check Airman.

Three commenters generally supported the training requirements for NVG operations. The Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) supported the general concept of defining and addressing NVG operations, while urging deference to NVG users on specific operational details of proposed provisions. The General Aviation Manufacturers Association (GAMA) suggested the FAA consider recommendations from both the 2000 Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee (ARAC) with respect to NVG operations and the September 7, 2005 part 135/125 Aviation Rulemaking Committee (ARC).

American Eurocopter and the Helicopter Association International (HAI) objected to the requirement for training on the preparation and use of internal and external lighting systems for NVG operations. They asserted that external lighting systems of helicopters should require no preparation for NVG operations and if external lights are interfering with operations, they can be turned off. The commenters supported the proposed rule to the extent the requirement refers to training in the use of existing external lighting. Eurocopter and HAI also supported qualified law enforcement personnel NVG operations training and endorsement requirements.

Four comments were submitted by representatives of law enforcement agencies or entities involved in training law enforcement personnel in NVG

operations. These commenters noted NVG flight operations are conducted on a wide scale by law enforcement agencies and civilian public service operators. These four commenters proposed that pilots who have completed a formal NVG training course administered by an NVG manufacturer or authorized trainer or instructor and have logged twenty hours as PIC in NVG operations should be excused from the NVG operations training and endorsement requirements. An exemption from NVG operations training and endorsement should also be granted to U.S. Armed Forces pilots with NVG or part 135 experience. One commenter objected to NVG operations by the general flying public and stated use outside of law enforcement should be prohibited. The commenter asserted the risks of such use outweigh any potential benefit. The commenter also recommended use of NVG by law enforcement personnel should be addressed by a stand alone rulemaking.

The FAA appreciates the diverse comments received on our NVG training and qualification requirement proposal. The NVG ground and flight training in § 61.31(k) include recommendations from the 2000 ARAC and part 125 and 135 ARCs. We have further reviewed the ground and flight training in § 61.31(k) to ensure that the ground and flight training requirements conform to industry recommendations. The FAA agrees with the commenters and has further revised § 61.31(k) accordingly. The FAA has added a new paragraph (iii) to § 61.31(k)(3) to incorporate these recommendations.

In response to the recommendation about preparation of external lighting systems, we have revised the rule text to clarify the intent. We agree that a pilot does not have ability to prepare external lighting systems and thus we have revised the language in § 61.31(k)(2)(i). We have replaced the word “preparation” with “preflight” to clarify the intent for a pilot to preflight the internal and external aircraft lighting systems.

Finally, we do not agree that NVG operations should be restricted to law enforcement personnel. There are legitimate civilian uses for NVG, and our rule for training and qualifications will benefit law enforcement and other users of NVG. This final rule includes provisions to excuse law enforcement pilots who have completed a formal NVG training course administered by an NVG manufacturer or authorized trainer or instructor and have logged 20 hours as PIC in NVG operations from the training and endorsement requirements for NVG operations. This would be in addition to excusing pilots with NVG experience in the U.S. armed forces or in operations under part 135. For the above reasons, the FAA is adopting the ground and flight training requirements for NVG qualifications in § 61.31(k).

17. This revision adds a new § 61.35(a)(2)(iv) that requires proof of current residential address at the time of application for a knowledge test

New § 61.35(a)(2)(iv) clarifies when a person's permanent mailing address is a P.O. Box, the person must show proof of their current residential address at the time of application for a knowledge test. The purpose of this change is to conform the instructions in revised § 61.35(a)(2)(iv) with instructions in existing § 61.60.

Three commenters opposed the proposed provision requiring an applicant for a knowledge test to provide proof of a current residential address, asserting a knowledge test alone does not result in the issuance of a certificate or rating. Two other commenters noted that proof of residence is not required for an airman application, although airmen are required to notify the FAA of changes of address before exercising privileges. One commenter argued since proof of residential address is required for a practical examination, requiring it for a knowledge test is redundant and unnecessary.

The FAA acknowledges the comments received on this proposal. The essence of this change is merely to further clarify the intent of the existing rule and no substantive change is being made to the rule. The FAA is adopting the revision as proposed in the NPRM.

18. This revision of § 61.39(b)(2) deletes the word “scheduled” in front of the phrase “U.S. military air transport operations”

Revised § 61.39(b)(2) deletes the word “scheduled” in front of the phrase “U.S. military air transport operations” because there is no such thing as “scheduled” U.S. military transport operations. One commenter supported the proposed deletion. The FAA is adopting the revision as it was proposed in the NPRM.

19. This revision of § 61.39(c)(2) deletes the phrase “or a class rating with an associated type rating” in reference to the endorsement exception for applying for an additional aircraft class rating

Revised § 61.39(c)(2) deletes the phrase “or a class rating with an associated type rating” for persons who are applying for an additional aircraft class rating. In §§ 61.39(a)(6) and 61.63(c), the rules require an applicant for a practical test for an additional aircraft class rating to receive a logbook or training record endorsement from an authorized instructor. Existing § 61.39(c)(2) incorrectly suggests that an endorsement is not required for an applicant for an aircraft class rating. This final rule amends § 61.39(c)(2) by removing the phrase “or a class rating with an associated type rating” which clarifies that the rule does not exempt applicants for an aircraft type rating from having to receive an endorsement from an authorized instructor.

One commenter supported the deletion of the instructor endorsement exception for an additional class rating. The FAA acknowledges the comment received on this proposal. The purpose of this change is to correct a mistake in the former § 61.39(c)(2). No substantive changes have been made to § 61.39(c)(2), and we are adopting the revision as proposed in the NPRM.

20. This revision of § 61.39(d) and (e) clarifies the time frame for completing a practical test

This revision amends the phrase “60 calendar days” in § 61.39(d) and (e) to read “2 calendar months.” Our proposed change makes it simpler to calculate the time for when a segmented practical test must be completed. An applicant who accomplishes a segmented practical test will be required to complete the entire practical test within two calendar months after beginning the test. For example, an applicant who starts the oral portion of the practical test on July 2, 2008, will have to complete the remaining portions of the practical test (

i.e.

, simulator/training device check and aircraft flight check) before the end of September 2008. Additionally, we have further revised § 61.39(a)(6)(i) because we failed to propose a change of “60 days” to read “2 calendar months” in the rule. This was an inadvertent oversight and spotted by a commenter during NPRM review.

Ten commenters supported the proposed change in the time in which a practical test must be completed. One commenter asserted that if the time for completion of a practical test is changed to two calendar months, the validity period of the flight instructor endorsement must likewise be changed. LeTourneau University recommended the currency requirements of § 61.57(a)(1) and (b)(1) also be changed from ninety days to three calendar months. Another commenter generally supported bringing all time requirements in line by using a calendar month basis, but objected that the

proposed rule, as written, could give pilots up to 3 months to complete a practical test. The commenter's assessment is correct, and the new rule change will allow a pilot to have up to three months to complete a practical test.

The FAA also agrees with the recommendation to revise the validity period for flight instructor endorsement from “60 days” to read “2 calendar months” because of our inadvertent oversight in not proposing this change in § 61.39(a)(6)(i). Therefore, further revised § 61.39(a)(6)(i) now reads: “Has received and logged training time within 2 calendar months preceding the month of application in preparation for the practical test.”

21. This revision of § 61.43(b) will clarify when an applicant has the choice to perform the practical test as a single pilot or use a second in command

This final rule has revised § 61.43(b) to clarify when an applicant can perform the practical test as a single pilot or use a second in command. If a second in command pilot is used under new § 61.43(b)(3), the limitation “Second in Command Required” will be placed on the applicant's pilot certificate. This final rule revises § 61.43(a) by moving old § 61.43(a)(5) into revised § 61.43(b).

Under new § 61.43(b)(1), if the aircraft's FAA-approved aircraft flight manual requires the pilot flight crew complement be a single pilot, then the applicant will be required to demonstrate single pilot proficiency on the practical test. Under new § 61.43(b)(2), if the aircraft's type certification data sheet requires the pilot flight crew complement be a single pilot, then the applicant is required to demonstrate single pilot proficiency on the practical test. The Cessna 172, Cessna 310, Piper Malibu (PA-44), and Beech Baron (BE-58) are examples of aircraft whose flight manuals and/or type certification data sheets require the pilot flight crew complement be a single pilot.

Under new § 61.43(b)(3), if the FAA Flight Standardization Board report, FAA-approved aircraft flight manual, or aircraft type certification data sheet allows the pilot flight crew complement to be either a single pilot, or a pilot and a copilot, then the applicant may perform the practical test as a single pilot or with a copilot. If the applicant performs the practical test with a copilot, the limitation of “Second in Command Required” will be placed on the applicant's pilot certificate. Under new § 61.43(b)(3), the “Second in Command Required” limitation may be removed if and when the applicant passes the practical test by demonstrating single-pilot proficiency in the aircraft in which single-pilot privileges are sought.

Examples of aircraft for which an FAA Flight Standardization Board has approved the minimum pilot flight crew complement to be either a single pilot, or a pilot with a copilot, are certain models of the Beech 300, Beech 1900C, and Beech 1900D airplanes that received certification under SFAR 41; certain models of the Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica EMB 110 airplanes that received certification under SFAR 41; and certain models of the Fairchild Aircraft Corporation SA227-CC, SA227-DC, and other Fairchild commuter category airplanes on that same type certificate that received certification under SFAR 41 and that have a passenger seating configuration, excluding pilot seats, of nine seats or less and the airplane's type certificate authorizes single pilot operations.

The Cessna 501, Cessna 525, Cessna 551, Raytheon 390, and Beech 2000 are examples of aircraft whose flight manuals and/or type certification data sheets allow the minimum pilot flight crew complement to be either a single pilot, or a pilot with a copilot.

Two commenters supported the proposed clarifications of circumstances under which a pilot may complete a practical test with a copilot present. The FAA is adopting the revision as proposed in the NPRM.

22. This revision of § 61.45(a)(2)(iii) will define what is a military aircraft for the purpose of a practical test

Revised § 61.45(a)(2)(iii) will clarify the definition of a “military aircraft” when used in a practical test. Recently, there has been some confusion about whether it is permissible to use a surplus military aircraft with no civilian aircraft type designation for an airman certificate or rating practical test. Some applicants have requested to use a surplus military OH-58 Army helicopter for their practical test. As these surplus military helicopters are not Bell BH-206 helicopters, they do not have a civilian type designation. The FAA has determined it is not permissible to use these surplus former military aircraft for completing a practical test.

Revised § 61.45(a)(2)(iii) will now define a “military aircraft” as an aircraft under the direct operational control of the U.S. Armed Forces. Under this definition, surplus military aircraft are not military aircraft because they are not under the direct operational control of the U.S. military.

Three commenters, including HAI, objected to the proposed definition and exclusion from civilians using surplus military aircraft on a practical test. Two commenters asserted that any aircraft that satisfies equipment requirements and is deemed safe for operation should be eligible for a practical test. They further argued that the checking of pilots who use these aircraft exclusively would enhance safety. One commenter asserted that the operation of historical aircraft should be encouraged. All commenters opposing the proposed provision recommended the FAA issue special airworthiness certificates for such aircraft. The EAA and NAFI objected to the use of the term surplus military aircraft, and recommended the FAA use the industry-accepted term, “former military aircraft.”

The purpose of our rule change is to clarify the existing rule, and no substantive changes are being made. Regarding EAA and NAFI's recommendation that the FAA use industry-accepted term “former military aircraft,” the rule language in § 61.45(a)(2)(iii) does not use either term of “surplus military aircraft” or “former military aircraft.” The rule merely defines when military aircraft experience is applicable for a certificate or rating.

23. This revision of § 61.45(c) will except lighter-than-aircraft, and gliders without an engine, from the requirement that aircraft used for a practical test must have engine power controls and flight controls that are easily reached and operable in a conventional manner by both pilots

This final rule amends § 61.45(c) by excepting lighter-than-aircraft, and gliders without an engine, from requirement that aircraft used for a practical test must have engine power controls and flight controls easily reached and operable in a conventional manner by both pilots. Except for engine-powered gliders, most gliders do not have engine power controls.

Three commenters supported the proposed provision excepting gliders from the requirement that aircraft used for a practical exam have engine power controls and flight controls easily reached and operable by both pilots. One commenter opposed the proposed provision, asserting that motor gliders or self-launch gliders have power controls. The commenter argued that, even without the proposed provision, the Examiner has discretion to still permit gliders not meeting specifications be used for the practical test. One commenter supported the proposed provision. The commenter

acknowledged that some gliders may have engine controls not easily reached by both pilots, but that this should not preclude an Examiner's determination that a practical test can be safely conducted.

The FAA agrees with the comments that § 61.45(c) requires further clarification to differentiate between gliders that are unpowered and those that have an engine. Section 61.45(c) is further revised by adding phrase “without an engine” in reference to gliders.

24. This revision of § 61.51(b)(3)(iv) will provide for logging night vision goggle time

Revised § 61.51(b)(3)(iv) adds a provision that in order to log “night vision goggle time” compliance with the training time and aeronautical experience must be demonstrated when acting as pilot in command (PIC) for night vision goggle (NVG) operations. The logging of NVG time will be permitted when performed in an aircraft in flight, in a flight simulator, or in a flight training device.

The Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) supported the concepts of defining and addressing night vision goggle operations, while deferring to NVG users on the specific details of the proposed provisions. American Eurocopter and HAI argued pilots conducting NVG operations should be permitted to log both NVG time and night flight time. These commenters stated a pilot's peripheral vision is not affected and the same cockpit management skills are required for both NVG time and flight time. Two commenters asserted existing § 61.51(b) is adequate to address logging of NVG time and adding “while using night vision goggles” would suffice for clarity.

Regarding comment about whether NVG flight time may also be logged as night flight time, the revision to § 61.51(b)(3)(iv) does not prohibit the logging of NVG flight time and night flight time simultaneously. It is acceptable for a person to log both NVG flight time and night flight time if the conditions of flight occur during nighttime. The logging of nighttime for recency of experience must be “during the period beginning 1 hour after sunset and ending 1 hour before sunrise.” (

See

§ 61.57(b)(1)).

The FAA acknowledges the comments received about this proposal. We are not revising or withdrawing the proposal.

25. This revision of § 61.51(e)(1) will correct an omission of the words “airline transport pilot” regarding logging of pilot in command flight time

Because existing § 61.51(e)(1) does not include “airline transport pilots” it may appear airline transport pilot (ATP) certificate holders do not have the same pilot in command (PIC) logging privileges as sport pilots, recreational pilots, private pilots, and commercial pilots. This final rule adds “airline transport pilot” to § 61.51(e)(1) to avoid any further confusion. In addition, we have adopted a commenter's recommendation the FAA also add “sport pilot” to § 61.51(e)(1).

Five commenters supported the proposed provision permitting ATPs to log PIC flight time. Three commenters opposed the proposed rule's omission of sport pilots from the list of pilots permitted to log PIC flight time and recommended their inclusion. We agree with the recommendation that holders of a sport pilot certificate should be able to log PIC flight time. Therefore, we have revised § 61.51(e)(1) to include holders of sport pilot certificates as those who are allowed to log PIC flight time.

26. This revision of § 61.51(e)(1)(iv) will permit a pilot performing the duties of pilot in command while under the supervision of a qualified pilot in command to log pilot in command flight time

Revised § 61.51(e)(1)(iv) will allow a pilot performing the duties of a pilot in command (PIC) while under the supervision of a qualified PIC to log PIC flight time. The FAA is making this revision to provide another way for commercial pilot certificate or airline transport pilot certificate holders to log PIC flight time.

The pilot performing the duties of a PIC will be required to hold a commercial pilot certificate or airline transport pilot certificate with the aircraft rating appropriate to the category and class of aircraft being flown, if a class rating is appropriate. The pilot must be under the supervision of an appropriately qualified PIC. Additionally, the pilot who is performing PIC duties is required to undergo an approved PIC training program consisting of ground and flight training on the following areas of operation: pre-flight preparation, preflight procedures, takeoff and departure phase, in-flight maneuvers, instrument procedures, landings and approaches to landings, normal and abnormal procedures, emergency procedures, and post-flight procedures.

The supervising PIC will be required to hold either a commercial pilot certificate or ATP certificate, and flight instructor certificate. In addition, the supervising PIC must hold the appropriate aircraft rating (

i.e.,

category, class, and type of aircraft being flown, if a class or type rating is required). The supervising PIC must log the PIC training given in the pilot's logbook, certify having given the PIC training in the pilot's logbook, and attest to that certification with his/her signature, flight instructor certificate number, and expiration date, or ATP certificate number, as appropriate. This revision parallels and further clarifies the provisions in revised § 61.129 and existing §§ 61.31(d), 61.159(a)(4), 61.161(a)(3), and 61.163(a)(3) for PIC aeronautical experience.

AOPA supported the concept, but believed the proposed rule was unclear and would lead to confusion. AOPA recommended rewriting the proposed regulatory text to include a matrix text showing conditions under which a pilot may log time as PIC. Four commenters supported the proposed provisions clarifying logging of PIC flight time by pilots acting as PIC under supervision. One commenter questioned whether the proposed provisions are targeted toward pilots working toward advanced certificates, ratings, or authorizations after receiving their commercial pilot certificates.

Four commenters asserted the proposed provisions are unnecessary, as pilots acting as PIC under supervision are already permitted to log PIC flight time under other sections of the regulations. The Greater St. Louis Flight Instructor Association objected to the proposed provisions arguing there is a trend toward pilots having inadequate true solo experience; it believes the proposed rule would result in pilots building time without accruing real experience. One commenter opposed application of the proposed provision other than in operations or aircraft requiring a second in command (SIC) (

e.g.,

operation of light single engine airplanes under part 91). The commenter did not consider a required safety pilot to be an SIC. One commenter objected to requiring endorsement of the acting PIC's logbook by the supervising PIC. The commenter asserted that the training contemplated by the proposed rule is recorded in training records, not logbooks. One commenter recommended pilots logging PIC flight time under supervision also be required to log dual instruction time.

This rule is designed to allow operators to train new hires to eventually become PICs. The rule was

initially petitioned for by Saudi Aramco. Saudi Aramco wanted permission to allow new hires' training in their Bell 214 helicopter to eventually become PICs in the company and allow logging PIC flight time while under the supervision of more experienced and senior PICs. This rule does require pilots to hold at least a commercial pilot certificate and requires those performing supervising PIC duties must hold either a commercial pilot certificate or airline transport pilot certificate, and flight instructor certificate with the appropriate category and class of aircraft being flown, if a class rating is appropriate.

A pilot may log PIC flight time when performing the duties of the PIC while under the supervision of the § 1.1 PIC. The FAA believes the rule is abundantly clear that a person may log PIC flight time when performing the duties of the PIC while under the supervision of the PIC, provided both the person who is performing the duties of the PIC and the supervising PIC meet the requirements of the rule.

After consideration of all the comments received, the FAA is adopting the revision as proposed in the NPRM.

27. This revision of § 61.51(g)(4) conforms the rule for logging of instrument time in a flight simulator, flight training device, and aviation training device to existing policy

This final rule amends § 61.51(g)(4) to allow logging of instrument time in a flight simulator (FS), flight training device (FTD), or aviation training device (ATD) conforming to existing regulation or policy. An authorized instructor (

See

§ 61.1(b)(2)) must be present in the FS, FTD, or ATD when instrument training time is logged for training and aeronautical experience for meeting the requirements for a certificate, rating, or flight review (

See

§ 61.51(a)). The instructor must sign the person's logbook verifying training time and session content.

Examples of situations in which an authorized instructor will be considered present would be where an authorized instructor is seated at a center control panel in a flight simulation lab and is monitoring each student's performance from control panel display. Another example would be a situation where an instructor assigns a student several instrument tasks and then leaves the room. In such cases, if the flight training device has a monitoring and tracking system that allows the authorized instructor to review the entire training session, the instructor need not be physically present. Another example would be a situation where one authorized instructor monitors several students simultaneously in the same room at a flight simulation lab.

Six commenters supported the proposed provisions clarifying requirements for use of flight simulators, flight training devices and aviation training devices. Three commenters supported the proposed provisions regarding logging of training performed using an aviation training device. ALPA recommended a limitation be placed on the number of students an instructor may supervise, suggesting an instructor be permitted to oversee no more than three students simultaneously. For economic reasons, one commenter supported the specific provision that an instructor may oversee training of more than one pilot simultaneously.

Flight Safety International observed that flight schools and training centers often track training in records other than a logbook, and recommended proposed § 61.51(g)(4) be revised to require signing of a logbook or training record.

The FAA agrees that training permitted to also be logged in a training record. Section 61.51(g)(4) has been rewritten.

On whether to limit the number of students a single instructor may supervise, we did not propose such a restriction in the NPRM. Therefore, to require such a restriction would be beyond the scope of this final rule. The FAA is adopting the final rule as described above.

28. This revision of § 61.51(j) will establish the aircraft requirements for when a pilot may log “flight time”

Revised § 61.51(j) establishes the aircraft and aircraft airworthiness requirements for when a pilot may log flight time. To log flight time and meet the part 61 aeronautical experience requirements for a certificate, rating, or recent flight experience, the aircraft must have been issued either a standard or special airworthiness certificate (except for U.S. military aircraft flown by U.S. military pilots and under the direct operational control of the U.S. Armed Forces or public aircraft flown by pilots of a Federal, State, county, or municipal law enforcement agency). Special airworthiness certificates include primary, restricted, limited, light-sport, and provisional airworthiness certificates, as well as special flight permits and experimental airworthiness certificates (

See

§ 21.175(b)).

Section 61.51(j) has been further revised to correct an error in an earlier version of the rule that prevented the logging of flight time in aircraft issued special airworthiness certificates in the light-sport category, provisional airworthiness certificates, and special flight permits.

This revision will codify existing FAA policy under FAA Order 8900.1, Volume 5, Chapter 2, Section 5, page 3, paragraph 5-315 B., which states:

B.

Logging Time.

Unless the vehicle is type-certificated as an aircraft in a category listed in § 61.5(b)(1) or as an experimental aircraft, or otherwise holds an airworthiness certificate, flight time acquired in such a vehicle may not be used to meet requirements of part 61 for a certificate or rating or to meet recency of experience requirements.

The FAA has received several inquiries whether it is permissible to use surplus military aircraft that do not hold a civilian type designation as an aircraft or an airworthiness certificate for logging flight time to meet the part 61 requirements for a certificate, rating, or recent flight experience. The FAA's response has been that the aircraft must be of the category, class (if class is applicable), and type (if type is applicable) listed under § 61.5(b)(1) through (7), or the aircraft must hold an experimental airworthiness certificate.

American Eurocopter and HAI objected to the requirement that an aircraft be issued an airworthiness certificate for a pilot to log time in it, noting some aircraft have not been issued airworthiness certificates and may be legally operated without adversely affecting safety. The commenters asserted pilots exclusively operating aircraft without airworthiness certificates will be discouraged from training, which will negatively impact safety. The commenters recommended the FAA create a designation for surplus military aircraft meeting the intent of the rule to permit training and examination in such aircraft. One commenter interpreted proposed § 61.51(j) as prohibiting law enforcement pilots from logging time in surplus military aircraft, noting ability of military pilots to log time in identical aircraft and the ability of sport pilots to log time in uncertified aircraft.

One commenter implied that proposed § 61.51(j) would not permit a sport pilot to log time in aircraft other than light sport aircraft. The commenter questioned whether such a pilot should be able to log training received in such aircraft, and suggested that the proposed § 61.51(j)(2) be deleted, because § 61.51(e)(1) already prevents sport pilots from logging PIC time in other than light sport aircraft. One commenter questioned whether special operating light sport aircraft (SLSA) should be

included in the acceptable airworthiness certificate criteria in proposed § 61.51(j)(1). The commenter also recommended the section require that an acceptable airworthiness certificate be current and valid.

One commenter asserted proposed § 61.51(j) may conflict with § 61.52, permitting logging of time in ultralight aircraft toward a sport pilot certificate. The commenter also asserted that a prohibition on logging time in surplus military aircraft will discourage maintenance of national historic assets.

The purpose of the change is to parallel the rule with existing policy in FAA Order 8900.1, Volume 5, Chapter 2, Section 5, page 3, paragraph 5-315 B and the statutory requirements in Public Law 106-424.

The FAA disagrees the rule prohibits law enforcement pilots from being permitted to log flight time. Section 61.51(j)(4) allows logging of flight time if the pilot is engaged in official law enforcement duties in a public aircraft under the direct operational control of a Federal, State, county, or municipal law enforcement agency. Public Law 106-424 (November 1, 2000) provides, in pertinent part, that pilots of a Federal, State, county, or municipal law enforcement agency may log flight time for the purposes of meeting the aeronautical experience requirements for a certificate, rating or recent flight experience under part 61 in limited cases. The stipulation is that the law enforcement pilot must be operating a public aircraft, as defined under 49 U.S.C. 40102; the aircraft must be identified as a category and class of aircraft listed under § 61.5(b); and the aircraft is being used in law enforcement activities of a Federal, State, county, or municipal law enforcement agency.

The FAA does not find that rule language in § 61.51(j) conflicts with § 61.52. The FAA has always made a distinction between the term “aircraft” and “ultralight vehicle.” Section 61.51(j) applies to an aircraft that is identified as an aircraft under § 61.5(b). Section 61.52 applies to the use of aeronautical experience obtained in “ultralight vehicles.”

As previously stated, the FAA has further revised § 61.51(j)(1) to permit a sport pilot to log flight time in light-sport aircraft that hold either a standard or special airworthiness certificate. Under § 61.51(j)(1), the rule permits pilots (including a holder of a sport pilot certificate) to log flight time in an aircraft of U.S. registry with either a standard or special airworthiness certificate. Under § 61.51(j)(1), we have further revised the rule to permit the logging of flight time in an aircraft of U.S. registry with either a standard or special airworthiness certificate. Under § 21.175(b), a special airworthiness certificate includes aircraft that have been issued a primary, restricted, limited, light-sport, or a provisional airworthiness certificate, special flight permit, or experimental airworthiness certificate. Therefore, a special operating light sport aircraft (SLSA) is covered by § 61.51(j)(1) for the purpose of being allowed to log flight time.

29. This revision of § 61.51(k) will establish the criteria and standards for logging NVG time

Revised § 61.51(k) establishes criteria and standards for logging night vision goggle (NVG) time by revising the minimum information entered when logging time in a pilot's logbook. Under new § 61.51(k)(3), the required information for logging NVG time are the logbook entries under § 61.51(b).

Under the revision, a pilot may log NVG time using NVGs as the sole visual reference of the surface in an operation conducted in an aircraft at night (during the period beginning one hour after sunset and ending one hour before sunrise) in flight. Alternatively, a pilot may log NVG time in a flight simulator or in a flight training device provided the flight simulator or flight training device's lighting system has been adjusted to replicate the period beginning one hour after sunset and ending one hour before sunrise.

Under new § 61.51(k)(2), the rule will establish when an authorized instructor may log NVG time. The instructor must be conducting NVG training and must be using NVG as the sole visual reference of the surface. The time must be in an aircraft operated at night in flight, or in a flight simulator or flight training device with the lighting system adjusted to represent the period beginning one hour after sunset and ending one hour before sunrise.

As elsewhere in this final rule document, AOPA supported the general concept of defining and addressing NVG operations, while deferring to NVG users on specific details of the proposed provisions. Two commenters asserted existing § 61.51(b) and § 61.57(a)(3) are adequate and only require adding phrase “while using night vision goggles.” Two commenters asserted pilots conducting NVG operations should be permitted to log both NVG time and night flight time. These commenters believed a pilot's peripheral vision is no different under the two conditions and the same cockpit management skills are required for both NVG time and night flight time.

Two commenters recommended clarifying that NVG should not be used as the sole visual reference to the surface, stating NVG should only be used to enhance abilities during night VFR flight.

In regards to the comment about whether NVG flight time may also be logged as night flight time, the revision to § 61.51(b)(3)(iv) does not prohibit the logging of NVG flight time and night flight time simultaneously. It is perfectly acceptable for a person to log both NVG flight time and night flight time if the conditions of flight occur during nighttime. The logging of night flight time for currency purposes is the flight must occur “during the period beginning one hour after sunset and ending one hour before sunrise” (

See

§ 61.57(b)(1)). Night flight time, for other than the night currency purposes of § 61.57(b)(1), may be logged when the flight occurs during the nighttime conditions as defined in § 1.1 of this chapter (

i.e.,

“Night” means the time between the end of evening civil twilight and the beginning of morning civil twilight, as published in the American Air Almanac, converted to local time).

The essence of our changes is clarifying the rule's intent and no substantive changes are being made. Therefore, the FAA is adopting the revision to § 61.51(b)(3)(iv).

30. This revision of § 61.57(c) amends the instrument recent flight experience tasks and iterations and allows use of aviation training devices, flight simulators, and flight training devices for maintaining instrument recent flight experience

The FAA has decided to withdraw the referenced proposal to amend the instrument tasks for maintaining instrument currency because the proposed tasks were opposed by an overwhelming majority of the commenters. As a result of our decision to withdraw this proposal, the instrument tasks for maintaining instrument currency under § 61.57(c) will remain as:

• Six instrument approaches.

• Holding procedures and tasks.

• Intercepting and tracking courses through the use of navigational electronic systems.

This final rule amends § 61.57(c) to allow use of aviation training devices (ATD), flight simulators (FS), and flight training devices (FTD) for maintaining instrument recent flight experience. Revising § 61.57(c) will further clarify that a person who acts as pilot in command (PIC) under instrument flight rules (IFR) or weather conditions at less

than the minimums prescribed for visual flight rules (VFR) must look back 6 calendar months from the month of the flight to determine whether the instrument flight experience requirements were met.

In order to maintain instrument flight experience in airplanes, powered-lifts, helicopters, and airships, the revision requires the pilot perform and log the instrument flight experience in an airplane, powered-lift, helicopter, or airship appropriate to the category of aircraft for the instrument rating privileges the pilot desires to maintain. This instrument flight experience could be completed in either actual instrument meteorological conditions (IMC) or under simulated instrument conditions with use of a view-limiting device.

Subject to certain limitations, a pilot may choose completing his/her instrument experience requirements in an aircraft and/or through use of an FS, FTD, or ATD. The simulation devices must be representative of the category of aircraft suitable for the instrument rating privileges that the pilot desires to maintain.

Under new § 61.57(c)(2), a person may use a flight simulator or flight training device exclusively by performing and logging at least three hours of instrument recent flight experience within the six calendar months before the month of the flight.

Under new § 61.57(c)(3), a person may use an ATD exclusively by performing and logging at least three hours of instrument recent flight experience within the two calendar months before the month of the flight. We have deliberately established differences between the use of an ATD, FS, and flight training devices because use of an aviation training device to maintain instrument recent flight experience is a relatively new concept. The FAA wants to further evaluate its use before we allow use of ATDs equal to that of flight simulators and flight training devices.

Under new § 61.57(c)(4), a person could combine use of the aircraft and FS, FTD, and ATD to obtain instrument experience. When a pilot elects to combine use of an aircraft and simulation device, we will require, under new § 61.57(c)(4), completion of one hour of instrument flight time in the aircraft and three hours in the FS, FTD, or ATD within the preceding 6 calendar months.

Under new § 61.57(c)(5), a person may combine use of an FS or FTD flight training, and an ATD to obtain instrument recent flight experience. When a pilot elects this combination, we will require one hour in a flight simulator or flight training device, and three hours in a training device within the preceding six calendar months.

Under new § 61.57(c)(6), the final rule amends the instrument tasks and iterations for maintaining instrument flight experience in a glider. The person will be required to log instrument recent flight experience, tasks, and iterations in his/her logbook to show accomplishment of this instrument training. The person will be required to use a view-limiting device when performing this instrument recent flight experience or be in actual instrument meteorological conditions.

Three commenters recommended changing the terminology used to describe flight simulation devices. Three commenters asserted the use of basic aviation training devices (BATD) and advanced aviation training devices (AATD) is expected to increase and suggested the rule use this terminology.

Two commenters asserted the differing requirements for maintaining currency using aircraft or different simulation devices are complex and confusing. One commenter objected to a minimum time requirement for maintaining currency using a simulation device, asserting that the amount of time necessary to complete the prescribed tasks is sufficient.

Eight commenters objected to the fact that the requirements for maintaining currency using a simulation device are greater than the requirements for maintaining currency in an aircraft. Four commenters asserted training using a simulation device is at least as valuable as training in an aircraft. Two commenters objected to the proposed provisions permitting use of an ATD to maintain currency. One commenter asserted that no data has been presented showing that ATDs are effective in maintaining proficiency. One commenter recommended the rule require the tasks to be performed, but set no minimum training time requirement. ALPA argued that a pilot could maintain currency indefinitely by using an aviation training device for three hours every two months. ALPA recommended the proposed rule be supplemented with a requirement that instrument currency exercises be performed in an aircraft or using a FS or FTD within the previous eighteen months.

One commenter recommended a simpler set of requirements and an equivalency ratio, such as two approaches in a simulator being equivalent to one approach in an aircraft. Another commenter recommended the same requirements apply regardless of whether an aircraft or simulation device is used to maintain currency, but that the currency period cover the previous six months for aircraft and two months for simulation devices.

One commenter noted § 61.57(c)(4) and (5) allow pilots to use an ATD in conjunction with the aircraft, FS, or FTD for instrument currency, but eliminated the two month limitation as long as certain requirements are met in the aircraft, FS, or FTD. The commenter thought this could be more simply accomplished by adding to § 61.57(c)(3) “or six months if one hour of instrument time has been accomplished in an aircraft, flight simulator, or flight training device.”

One commenter asserted that the provisions are unlikely to be used because a proficiency check can be accomplished in less time and at less cost in an AATD. One commenter asserted the level of detail specified in the rule is more appropriate to practical test standards (PTS) and argued that instructors should have discretion over specific maneuvers to be performed.

One commenter argued there is no evidence that pilots satisfying instrument currency requirements in aircraft or simulation devices are proficient to operate in IMC. Two commenters generally objected to the proposed requirements for maintaining instrument currency using a flight simulator, flight training device, or aviation training device. One commenter asserted that the proposed requirements increase the burden on pilots without justification in the form of accident history or research.

Six commenters asserted steep turns should not be included in requirements for maintaining instrument currency in a flight simulation device, arguing that ATDs and flight training devices do not accurately simulate the flight characteristics and control feel for steep turns. The FAA acknowledges the comments received about this proposal. The FAA is allowing different means to maintain instrument currency. The pilot may use whatever method best suits his or her needs to maintain instrument currency by using the actual aircraft, flight simulator, flight training device, or aviation training device, or a combination of all.

One commenter objected to the unusual attitude recovery parameters prescribed by the proposed rule. The commenter noted that if the aircraft is at V

NE

and descending, it is still accelerating and will exceed V

NE

, thus triggering a failure. Similarly, if an aircraft is at stall speed and ascending, it is already stalling. The commenter suggested the language of the practical

test standards prescribing recovery from unusual attitudes (both nose-high and nose-low) is preferable. Another commenter noted V

NE

is not an appropriate specification for all aircraft. We believe that instrument currency tasks, involving unusual attitude recovery parameters are for maintaining instrument currency and can be achieved in aviation training devices. We are not revising the instrument currency tasks in aircraft, flight simulators, and flight training devices. The instrument currency tasks, involving unusual attitude recovery parameters are for maintaining instrument currency in aviation training devices, and the FAA believes this task is appropriate.

One commenter asserted that the requirements of proposed § 61.57(c)(4) include all of the requirements of § 61.57(c)(2) or (3), plus one hour of cross country time in the aircraft. In other words, a pilot completing the requirements of § 61.57(c)(4)(ii) will have already met the requirements of § 61.57(c)(2) or (3). The commenter argued that § 61.57(c)(4) is redundant and should be eliminated. The same commenter argued that proposed § 61.57(c)(5) is redundant to § 61.57(c)(3) and should be eliminated. Three commenters noted that the steep turns requirement has been removed from the instrument rating PTS. Fifteen commenters objected to the proposed provision requiring use of a view-limiting device when using a flight simulation device to maintain instrument currency, because such devices can be configured not to provide visual cues. The FAA acknowledges the comments received about this proposal. We are not revising the instrument currency tasks. The FAA is allowing different means to maintain instrument currency and the pilot may use the means best suited for his or her needs.

The FAA also acknowledges the comments received on recommending the rule use the terms “basic aviation training devices” (BATD) and “advanced aviation training devices” (AATD). The terms “basic aviation training device” (BATD) and “advanced aviation training device” (AATD) as being aviation training devices (ATD) are defined in AC 61-TD “FAA Approval of Basic Aviation Training Devices and Advanced Aviation Training Devices.”

The FAA is allowing different means to maintain instrument currency. The pilot may use whatever method best suits his or her needs to maintain instrument currency by using the actual aircraft, flight simulator, flight training device, aviation training device, or a combination of all. Furthermore, the use of flight simulators and flight training devices has always been allowed for pilots to maintain their instrument currency so we are not making new rules. ATDs are relatively new; yet the FAA has determined that the technological advancements of these devices make their use for maintaining instrument currency also possible.

Regarding the comment on unusual attitude recovery parameters prescribed by the proposed rule, we previously answered this question this way: “Reference § 61.51(g)(3)(ii) and § 61.57(c)(1); Provided the person is instrument current or is within the second 6-calendar month period” (

See

§ 61.57(d) for currency). A person would not need a flight instructor or ground instructor present when accomplishing the approaches, holding, and course intercepting/tracking tasks of § 61.57(c)(1)(i), (ii), and (iii) in an approved flight training device or flight simulator. Only when a person is required to submit to an instrument proficiency check must a flight instructor or ground instructor be present.

The rationale is that a person is not required to have a flight instructor or ground instructor present when performing the approaches, holding, and course intercepting/tracking tasks in an aircraft. If the person is using a view-limiting device (

i.e.,

hood device) when performing the approaches, holding, and course intercepting/tracking tasks in an aircraft, only a safety pilot is required to be present. If a person is performing approaches, holding, and course intercepting/tracking tasks in an aircraft in IMC, it is permissible to log the tasks without a flight instructor being present.

Therefore, a person who is instrument current or is within the second 6-calendar month period (

See

§ 61.57(d) for currency) need not have a flight instructor or ground instructor present when accomplishing the approaches, holding, and course intercepting/tracking tasks of § 61.57(c)(1)(i), (ii), and (iii) in an approved flight training device or flight simulator.

31. This revision of § 61.57(d) clarifies when a person must perform an instrument proficiency check to act as the PIC under IFR or in weather conditions less than the minima prescribed for VFR

This final rule amends § 61.57(d) to clarify when a person, who has not met the instrument recent flight experience of § 61.57(c), must perform an instrument proficiency check to act as the PIC under IFR or in weather conditions less than the minima prescribed for VFR. Revised § 61.57(d) requires a pilot who has not complied with the instrument recent experience requirement of § 61.57(c) within the twelve calendar months preceding the month of the flight to complete an instrument proficiency check to regain PIC instrument qualifications. The proficiency check will have to be performed in the aircraft category that is appropriate to the instrument privileges desired. The instrument proficiency check consists of operation areas and tasks listed for an instrument proficiency check in the practical test standards (PTS).

As noted in our earlier discussion of revised § 61.57(c), we will require a pilot to have performed and logged the instrument recent flight experience within the preceding six calendar months preceding the month of the flight in order to act as the PIC under IFR or in weather conditions less than the minima prescribed for VFR. Under revised § 61.57(d), if the pilot has not performed and logged the required instrument recent flight experience within the six calendar months preceding the month of the flight, the pilot is given an additional six calendar months to perform and log the required instrument recent flight experience. However, during this six-calendar month period, the pilot may not act as the PIC under IFR or in weather conditions less than the minima prescribed for VFR until the pilot has performed and logged the required instrument recent flight experience of revised § 61.57(c). If during this six-calendar month period, the pilot does not accomplish the required instrument recent flight experience, then he/she must perform an instrument proficiency check to regain his/her instrument currency.

Two commenters generally supported the proposed clarifications. One commenter supported the use of the instrument rating PTS as a guide for the proficiency check. One commenter questioned whether the preamble (

i.e.,

proposal No. 31) is meant to indicate proficiency checks may no longer be performed using a simulator or flight training device, but may now only be performed in an aircraft.

Two commenters were concerned that § 61.57(d) will be interpreted as requiring an entire instrument rating practical exam to satisfy the instrument proficiency check requirements. One commenter recommended the check consist of tasks required by the instrument practical test standards. One commenter objected to the language requiring that an instrument proficiency

check (IPC) requires an instrument rating practical test. The commenter argued that the requirement would limit instructors' discretion and that completion of an IPC in aircraft lacking certain equipment would be difficult. The revision to § 61.57(d) concerning the instrument proficiency check does not prohibit the use of a flight simulator or flight training device for performing an IPC check, nor did the proposal in the NPRM propose eliminating use of FS or FTDs for performing an IPC. An FS or FTD may be used for accomplishing an IPC if the training device is approved for performing an instrument proficiency check. The content of an instrument proficiency check is addressed on page 16 of the Instrument Rating Practical Test Standards.

32. This revision of § 61.57(f) establishes a recent flight experience requirement for acting as PIC in a night vision goggle operation

Revised § 61.57(f) establishes as a recent flight experience requirement to remain PIC qualified for night vision goggle (NVG) operations. To understand “NVG operations,” it is necessary to further clarify the term “flight.” “Flight” means a takeoff and landing, with each landing involving a flight in the traffic pattern. For example, a person who performs six takeoffs and landings, with each landing involving a flight in the traffic pattern, and uses NVGs to maintain visual reference may log six “NVG operations.”

For a pilot to act as PIC using NVGs with passengers on board, the pilot, within the preceding two calendar months, will have to perform and document the tasks under new § 61.57(f) as the sole manipulator of the controls during the time period beginning one hour after sunset and ending one hour before sunrise. If the pilot has not performed and logged the tasks under § 61.57(f), then the FAA will allow the pilot an additional two calendar months to perform and log the tasks under § 61.57(f). However, the pilot will not be allowed to carry passengers during this second two-month period. If the pilot still has not performed and logged the NVG tasks in revised § 61.57(f) during those additional two calendar months, then the pilot will be required to pass a NVG proficiency check to act as PIC using night vision goggles.

Two commenters asserted existing §§ 61.51(b) and 61.57(b) are adequate to address logging and recency of NVG time, and this rule only requires adding “while using night vision goggles.” The commenters further argued existing § 61.57(a)(3) is adequate to address use of a flight training device or flight simulator for NVG recency. Two commenters argued that the currency interval should be ninety days instead of two months to correspond with the existing night flight currency interval.

The FAA acknowledges the comments received about this proposal. We are adopting the above revisions for the final rule.

33. This revision of § 61.57(g) establishes a NVG proficiency check requirement to act as PIC of a night vision goggle operation

Revised § 61.57(g) establishes a proficiency check to be PIC qualified for NVG operations. This revision also establishes a proficiency check to regain PIC qualifications for NVG operations when the pilot's NVG privileges have lapsed.

Revised § 61.57(g) will require a pilot who has not complied with the NVG operating experience requirement of revised § 61.57(f) to complete a NVG proficiency check to regain PIC NVG qualifications. The proficiency check will have to be performed in the same aircraft category that is appropriate to the NVG operation desired. The proficiency check will consist of the tasks listed in revised § 61.31(k) and will be administered by an individual listed under § 61.31(k).

American Eurocopter and HAI each supported the proposed requirement to restore lapsed NVG currency. The commenters recommended that proficiency check requirements be set forth in the PTS, with an interim advisory circular (AC) issued because the standards for NVG and non-NVG maneuvers are the same. The commenters also recommended proficiency checks be administered by a qualified instructor, Examiner, or inspector, as applicable under parts 61, 141 or 142, to an air carrier employee in accordance with the carrier's approved training program, or to a military check pilot.

The FAA acknowledges the comments received on this proposal. The rule (§ 61.57(g)(1) through (6)) clearly establishes the qualifications of the person who can administer the NVG proficiency check; therefore, the rule does not need further clarification.

34. This proposed change to § 61.59 would have paralleled this section with the language contained in § 67.403

We had proposed to revise § 61.59 to parallel it with the existing § 67.403. However, we have reconsidered this proposal and the existing § 61.59 will remain without change.

Four commenters objected to the proposed changes, arguing the existing rule already prohibits submission of fraudulent or intentionally false data, and that the proposed rule will allow the FAA to deny or revoke privileges for an inadvertent inaccuracy. One commenter also noted the proposed rule does not parallel § 67.403 because that section includes a requirement that the FAA rely on incorrect data. One commenter also asserted that the proposed rule could effectively invalidate existing regulatory requirements for recording flight experience.

The FAA acknowledges the comments received on the proposal. We agree that trying to parallel the language of § 61.59 and § 67.403 raises additional concerns. The implications of incorrect information in the context of part 61 certification are different than those in the context of medical certification under part 67. Therefore, existing § 61.59 remains without change.

35. This revision of § 61.63 changes the format and re-structures rule

This final rule simplifies the format and structure of § 61.63, and moves paragraphs (e), (f), and (g) (addressing usage and limitations of the flight simulator and flight training device) to new § 61.64. This final rule also revises § 61.63(c)(3) to clarify applicability to those applicants holding only a lighter-than-air (LTA)-Balloon rating and who seek an LTA-Airship rating. Currently, the word “only” does not appear in § 61.63(c)(3).

This final rule has made minor revisions to § 61.63(d) to clarify the requirements for an additional type rating and a type rating sought concurrently with an additional aircraft category and class rating. We have also revised existing paragraph (h) in § 61.63 and re-designated it as paragraph (e). Furthermore, re-designated § 61.63(e) clarifies the pilot certification procedures for aircraft used on a practical test for a type rating. Such aircraft cannot be used for instrument maneuvers and procedures for the issuance of a type rating with a VFR limitation under these circumstances.

This final rule revises paragraph (i) in § 61.63 and re-designates it as § 61.63(f). This re-designated § 61.63(f) clarifies that an applicant for a type rating in a multiengine airplane with a single-pilot station must perform the practical test in the multi-pilot seat version of that multiengine airplane. Alternatively, the practical test may be performed in the single-seat version of that airplane if the Examiner can observe the applicant during the practical test when there is

no multi-seat version of the multiengine airplane. This revision parallels the same requirements in revised § 61.157(h) (existing § 61.157(k)) for a type rating in a multiengine airplane with single-pilot station.

This final rule revises existing paragraph (j) of § 61.63 and re-designates it as § 61.63(g). Re-designated § 61.63(g) clarifies that an applicant for a type rating, at other than airline transport pilot (ATP) certification level, for a single engine airplane with a single-pilot station must perform the practical test in the multi-pilot seat version of that single engine airplane. Alternatively, the practical test may be performed in the single-seat version of that airplane if the Examiner is in a position to observe the applicant during the practical test in the case where there is no multi-seat version of that single engine airplane. This revision parallels requirements under new § 61.157(i) (existing § 61.157(l)) for a type rating in a single engine airplane with single-pilot station at the ATP certification level.

Revised § 61.63(i) permits an Examiner who conducts a practical test for an additional aircraft rating under this section to waive any of the tasks for which the FAA has approved waiver authority. This revision parallels the revised requirements of § 61.157(j) (existing § 61.157(m)) at the ATP certification level.

Two commenters agreed the FAA should make changes to § 61.63, but asserted the proposed changes to § 61.63 and new § 61.64 offer no improvement. One commenter questioned whether safety would be enhanced by the proposed changes. Another commenter objected to the proposed changes to § 61.63 and the creation of § 61.64, asserting that the proposed rules eliminate ways for an applicant to qualify for all-simulator training. The commenter questioned the elimination of the provisions in question and requests justification in the form of safety data indicating a danger posed by pilots using the existing provisions.

One commenter requested clarification of the new phrase “training time and iteration requirements” in § 61.63(c)(3). The commenter stated this language does not clearly convey that candidates seeking an additional class rating are excused from certain requirements. One commenter asserted that the proposed changes to § 61.63 and new § 61.64 would have a significant and detrimental impact on the use of flight simulators and the flight training industry and the proposed changes in new § 61.64 go beyond merely moving and simplifying existing requirements and impose significant burdens and costs without any corresponding benefit. Another commenter recommended the proposed changes to § 61.63 and new § 61.64 be withdrawn.

Two commenters observed that under proposed § 61.63(d), an applicant for a type rating is not required to successfully complete an FAA approved or accepted training program but need only acquire an endorsement from an appropriately rated flight instructor. They recommended the FAA require the use of an FAA approved or accepted training program. Eclipse Aviation suggested an authorized instructor be defined as “a person or air agency approved by the Administrator to conduct type rating training in that make and model of aircraft.”

Training time and iteration requirements relate to the training time and iteration requirements listed in § 61.109 and § 61.129. For example, for the airplane single engine land rating at the private pilot certification level, it requires three hours of cross country flying in a single engine airplane (

See

§ 61.109(a)(1)) and one cross country flight of over 100 nautical miles in total distance (

See

§ 61.109(a)(2)(i)). Under § 61.63(c)(3), the applicant is not required to meet the training time and iterations requirements under this part that apply to the pilot certificate for the aircraft class rating sought Otherwise, the intent of § 61.63(c)(3) is for the flight instructor to make the decision on the amount “training time” and number of “iterations” required for the applicant to be adequately trained and be able to pass the practical test.

The FAA has reviewed the proposed changes to § 61.63 and § 61.64, and we have not found evidence that the changes will have a significant and detrimental impact on the use of flight simulators and the flight training industry. We intend only to further clarify the existing rule. In reviewing § 61.63(d), and old § 61.63(d), there is no requirement for an applicant to complete an FAA approved or accepted training program and there never has been such a requirement. As for defining an “authorized instructor,” it has already been done in § 61.1(b) and the privileges and limitations of a flight instructor are listed in existing § 61.193 and § 61.195.

The FAA has reviewed the changes to § 61.63 and § 61.64, and we have not found that the changes will eliminate ways for an applicant to qualify for all-simulator training. For the reasons stated, we are adopting the revision as proposed in the NPRM.

36. Establishes a new § 61.64 to address the use and limitations of flight simulators and flight training devices

This final rule adds a new § 61.64 to incorporate the use and limitations of flight simulators (FS) and flight training devices (FTD) into this one rule. These requirements were previously found in § 61.63(e), (f), and (g) (for other than ATP certification) and § 61.157(g), (h), and (i) (for ATP certification). The purpose of these changes is to clarify and simplify § 61.63 and § 61.157 and place all use and limitation requirements for simulation devices into new § 61.64.

New § 61.64(a) through (f) will clarify when an applicant may use an FS or FTD for all training, when an applicant may use a FS for all of the required practical test, when the supervising operating experience limitation on an applicant's pilot certificate is required, and when the supervised operating experience limitation may be removed.

New § 61.64(a) will allow an applicant to use a flight simulator for all training and the practical test for the airplane category, class, or type rating, provided the flight simulator and the applicant meet specific qualifications under new § 61.64(a)(1) through (3).

New § 61.64(b) allows an applicant for the airplane category, class, or type rating to use a flight training device for training only if the flight training device meets the specific qualifications under new § 61.64(b)(1) through (4). The rule further clarifies that a flight training device may not be used for any portion of the practical test.

New § 61.64(c) allows an applicant to use a flight simulator for all of the training and the practical test for the helicopter class or type rating, provided the flight simulator and the applicant meet the specific qualifications under new § 61.64(c)(1) and (2).

New § 61.64(d) allows an applicant for the helicopter class or type rating to use an FTD for training only if the device meets specific qualifications under new § 61.64(d)(1) through (4). The rule further clarifies that an FTD may not be used for any portion of the practical test.

New § 61.64 (e) states an applicant may use an FS for all training and the practical test for the powered-lift category or type rating, provided the applicant and FS meet specific qualifications under new § 61.64(e)(1) and (2).

New § 61.64(f) allows an applicant for the powered-lift category or type rating to use a flight training device for training only if the device meets specific qualifications under new § 61.64(f)(1)

through (4). The rule will further clarify that a flight training device may not be used for any portion of the practical test.

As a result of existing language in existing paragraphs (e), (f), and (g) of § 61.63 and paragraphs (g), (h), and (i) of § 61.157, there is confusion as to whether an applicant could complete all training and testing for a type rating in a simulator when there is a supervised operating experience limitation on the applicant's pilot certificate for that aircraft type rating. New § 61.64(a)(2)(i), (c)(2)(i), and (e)(2)(i) will specify that a type rating cannot contain the supervised operating experience limitation (

i.e.,

“This certificate is subject to pilot in command limitations for the additional rating”) for an applicant to use a flight simulator for all training and testing for a type rating. A flight simulator may be used for some of the required training and testing for a type rating, but not “all.” The training and testing permitted in a flight simulator depends on what the flight simulator is approved for and is in accordance with new § 61.64(a)(4)(i) and (b), (c)(3)(i) and (d), or (e)(3)(i) or (f), as appropriate for the category of aircraft and type rating sought.

New § 61.64(a)(1)(iii), (c)(1)(iii), and (e)(1)(iii) establishes that at minimum a Level C flight simulator is required if an applicant wishes to use a flight simulator on a practical test for an aircraft rating. New § 61.64(a)(1)(iv), (c)(1)(iv), and (e)(1)(iv) will establish that at minimum a Level A flight simulator is required for an applicant to use a flight simulator for training.

Two commenters argued proposed § 61.64 is unclear as to intent or purpose, and there is no indication how the proposed rules would improve safety. One commenter expressed uncertainty over the level of pilot certificate affected by the proposed section. One commenter asserted that the proposed changes to § 61.63 and new § 61.64 would have a significant and detrimental impact on the use of flight simulators and the flight training industry. A commenter recommended the proposed changes to § 61.63 and new § 61.64 be withdrawn, and the text of the existing rules be maintained.

One person asserted the minimum hour requirements for type rating applicants set forth in the proposed § 61.64(a)(2) are higher than necessary to ensure safety and will deter advancement of aviation careers. One commenter argued existing §§ 61.63 and 61.157 are clear that a flight simulator or flight training device can be used to complete all training and testing for the issuance of a rating without limitations and the proposed rule is not.

Two commenters noted that under existing § 61.63 and § 61.157, a rating applicant failing to meet requirements for an exception has an option of completing certain parts of the practical test in an aircraft (rather than a simulator or flight training device), or receiving a rating with supervised operating experience limitations. The commenters objected to the provisions of the proposed rule that would require both performance of certain tasks in an aircraft and issuance of a rating with supervised operating experience limitations. Two commenters objected to the proposed changes to § 61.63 and the creation of § 61.64, asserting that the proposed rules eliminate ways for an applicant to qualify for all-simulator training and testing.

Regarding the proposed requirement that a minimum of a Level C flight simulator or Level 5 flight training device be used for the practical test for a rating, a commenter asserted that the lowest level of flight simulator or flight training device qualified and approved for training in a particular task should be acceptable. If necessary, training or testing performed with lower level simulators could trigger additional experience requirements or requirements to perform certain maneuvers in the aircraft, or result in the issuance of a rating with limitations. Three commenters opposed the proposed requirement that a minimum of a Level C flight simulator be used for the practical test for a rating. Flight Safety International recommended a Level C simulator be required only if the entire practical test is performed in the simulator. One commenter asserted that requiring a Level C simulator for a practical test conflicts with guidance contained in FAA-S-8081-5E, Practical Test Standards. The commenter also questioned whether simulators not meeting at least Level C requirements may be used for evaluations similar to practical tests, such as proficiency checks or single pilot exemption evaluations that consist of Practical Test Standards (PTS) maneuvers. Two commenters asserted the inability to use simulators not meeting Level C requirements will require more pilots to take practical tests in aircraft. The commenters stated this will negatively impact safety by requiring low altitude maneuvering, and by eliminating the ability to simulate malfunctions such as engine fires and electrical malfunctions. One commenter noted that Level A simulators have been widely used in the past, and that if no longer permitted to be used costs will increase by 15%. Two commenters noted there are some aircraft for which there is no Level C or better simulator.

Flight Safety International recommended that if the practical test is given in a simulator or flight training device qualified and approved at less than Level C, the appropriate practical test standards be used to determine which events may be credited; any events not approved for the simulator or flight training device would need to be accomplished in the aircraft. One commenter objected to the requirement that a minimum of a Level 5 flight training device be used if a flight training device is used for the practical test. The commenter asserted that this requirement is unnecessarily restrictive and not supported by the PTS or other FAA rules or guidance.

One commenter objected to the proposed provisions requiring that one of a number of prerequisites be met if any portion of the practical test for a turbojet or turboprop airplane rating is to be performed in a simulator. The commenter asserted that the existing rules only require one of the prerequisites if all training and checking is to be done in a simulator. Flight Safety International said proposed § 61.64 calls for a logbook endorsement removing the supervised operating experience limitation. If so, a pilot must present his/her logbook containing the endorsement to show that the limitation is removed, the endorsement is unnecessary.

One commenter asserted the proposed changes to § 61.63 and § 61.157 and creation of § 61.64 conflicts with other existing guidance, such as appendices E and F to part 121, the appendices of the PTS, and the General Aviation Operations Inspector's Handbook.

One commenter asserted that pilots should be permitted to credit multiengine turbojet experience toward a single engine turbojet type rating for purposes of proposed § 61.64.

Five commenters were confused whether pilots must meet one or more than one of the criteria set forth in proposed § 61.64(a)(2) and recommended the section be revised to make clear that pilots must meet only one of the requirements. Flight Safety International recommended proposed § 61.64(a)(2)(ii) and (a)(3)(ii) use language currently found in § 61.63 and § 61.157 requiring pilots complete at least 1,000 hours of flight time in two or more different airplanes requiring type ratings.

Nine commenters noted that under existing § 61.63 and § 61.157, a rating applicant failing to meet requirements for an exception has an option of completing certain parts of the practical

test in an aircraft, rather than in a simulator or flight training device, or receiving a rating with supervised operating experience limitations. The commenters believed the economic impact of the proposed rule would be severe.

One commenter asserted that the FAA and training organizations lack sufficient manpower to administer the number of practical exams in the aircraft that the proposed rule would require. This commenter recommended that instead of requiring performance of maneuvers in an aircraft, the FAA increase supervised operating experience limitations or require line oriented flight testing (LOFT) scenarios in training.

Three commenters objected to the elimination of the possibility of a fifteen hour supervised operating experience limitation. Two additional commenters recommended that the endorsement removing a supervised operating experience limitation be by a person, designated by the Administrator, familiar with the airplane and the program under which the supervised operating experience was conducted. Eclipse Aviation suggested such a person could be the manufacturer or a training center conducting training in the airplane. Two commenters recommended the supervised operating experience (SOE) requirement be event based, covering a range of operating conditions and procedures that a pilot is likely to see in actual service. Two commenters recommended a PIC observing SOE be qualified and trained as an evaluator by the manufacturer or other facility, and hold a designation by the Administrator. Eclipse Aviation asserted that the proposed provisions are insufficient to ensure that SOE will be applicable and effective for all operators of its very light jet airplanes.

Two commenters noted that under the proposed rule, a pilot with a turbojet type rating for an airplane requiring a two-pilot crew may obtain a single pilot type rating without limitations with no single pilot turbojet PIC experience and virtually no turbojet PIC experience. The commenters recommended a pilot should be required to have 25 hours of turbojet PIC time to obtain a type rating without limitations.

One commenter opposed the proposed requirement of § 61.64(a)(1)(iv) that a minimum of a Level A flight simulator be used for training for a rating. The commenter recommended the PTS address credit for the use of simulators and flight training devices.

As stated in the NPRM and this preamble, § 61.64 consolidates the use of flight simulators and flight training devices for the airplane, helicopter, and powered-lift ratings for all the pilot certification levels (

i.e.,

private, commercial, and ATP certification levels). Prior to establishing this § 61.64, the use of flight simulators and flight training devices for the airplane, helicopter, and powered-lift ratings at the private and commercial pilot certification levels were located in old § 61.63. For the ATP certification level, it was in the old § 61.157. Now, the use of flight simulators and flight training devices for all the pilot certification levels are combined into new § 61.64.

We do not find any evidence that combining the use of flight simulators and flight training devices for the airplane, helicopter, and powered-lift ratings for all the pilot certification levels into § 61.64 will have a significant and detrimental impact on the use of flight simulators and the flight training industry. The FAA has not increased the minimum hour requirements for a type rating by having consolidated the use of flight simulators and flight training devices into § 61.64.

Section 61.64(a)(4), (c)(3), and (e)(3), is the area of the rule that addresses what tasks must be performed in the actual aircraft and the provisions that require it. The purpose of the change is to further clarify the intent of the rule and no substantive changes have been made. In reviewing the proposed changes to § 61.63 and § 61.157 and creation of § 61.64 we did not see a conflict with other existing guidance, such as Appendices E and F to part 121, the appendices of the PTS, and the General Aviation Operations Inspector's Handbook.

The endorsement requirement for removing the SOE limitation is to ensure accomplishment of the required supervised operating experience. We believe the endorsement requirement received from both the supervising PIC and an Examiner will insure that supervising operating experience was completed.

As for what portion of § 61.64 applies to an applicant, the answer depends on the specifics of the applicant's aeronautical experience and the rating being applied for. Section 61.64(a)(2) establishes the requirements for a type rating in a turbojet airplane and what the aeronautical experience requirements are for that applicant to be able to use a flight simulator. We have reviewed § 61.64 and find that this rule does not eliminate commonly used ways for an applicant to qualify for all-simulator training and testing. The establishment of this rule merely consolidates the use of flight simulators and flight training devices into § 61

This text is long and has been trimmed here. Open the source document for the complete record.