[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 69 (Monday, April 11, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-8482]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: April 11, 1994]


_______________________________________________________________________

Part III





Department of Transportation





_______________________________________________________________________



Federal Aviation Administration



_______________________________________________________________________



14 CFR Part 61




Recent Flight Experience: Pilot in Command; Proposed Rule
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 61

[Docket No. 27682; Notice No. 94-9]
RIN 2120-AF32

 
Recent Flight Experience: Pilot in Command

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This document proposes to revise the Federal Aviation 
Regulations (FAR) governing the recent flight experience requirements 
for pilots in command (PICs). This proposal would provide relief from 
essentially redundant recency requirements for PICs serving in part 121 
and part 135 air carrier operations. This proposal was undertaken in 
response to the Air Transport Association (ATA) petition for exemption 
or other regulatory relief. By adopting this proposal, the air carrier 
industry, which already complies with recency requirements found in 
parts 121 and 135, would be relieved of unnecessary duplication of 
recordkeeping while maintaining an equivalent level of safety.

DATES: Comments must be received by June 10, 1994.

ADDRESSES: Comments on this amendment may be mailed in triplicate or 
delivered to: Federal Aviation Administration, Office of Chief Counsel, 
Attention: Rules Docket (AGC-10), Docket No. 27682, 800 Independence 
Avenue, Washington, DC 20591.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Alberta Brown, Project Development 
Branch, AFS-240, Air Transportation Division, Office of Flight 
Standards, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, 
SW., Washington, DC 20591, Telephone (202) 267-8096.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    Interested persons are invited to participate in the making of the 
proposed rule by submitting such written data, views, or arguments as 
they may desire. Comments relating to the environmental, energy, 
federalism, or economic impact that might result from adopting the 
proposal in this notice are also invited. Substantive comments should 
be accompanied by cost estimates. Comments should identify the 
regulatory docket or notice number and should be submitted in 
triplicate to the Rules Docket address specified above. All comments 
received on or before the closing date for comments specified will be 
considered by the Administrator before taking action on this proposed 
rulemaking. The proposal contained in this notice may be changed in 
light of comments received. All comments received will be available, 
both before and after the closing date for comment, in the Rules Docket 
for examination by interested persons. A report summarizing each 
substantive public contact with Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) 
personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the docket. 
Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments 
submitted in response to this notice must include a preaddressed, 
stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments 
to Docket No. 27682'' The postcard will be date stamped and mailed to 
the commenter.

Availability of NPRMs

    Any person may obtain a copy of this NPRM by submitting a request 
to the Federal Aviation Administration, Office of Public Affairs, 
Attention: Public Inquiry Center, APA-430, 800 Independence Avenue, 
SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by calling (202) 267-3484. Communications 
must identify the notice number of this NPRM.
    Persons interested in being placed on the mailing list for future 
NPRMs should request from the above office a copy of Advisory Circular 
No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking Distribution System, which 
describes the application procedure.

Background

    This proposal would amend Sec. 61.57 by providing relief from 
essentially redundant recency requirements and from the recordkeeping 
burden for parts 121 and 135 certificate holders and their PIC's. It is 
based on a petition for exemption or other regulatory relief from ATA. 
ATA requested relief from essentially duplicative recordkeeping 
requirements related to the recency of experience for part 121 PICs. 
This ``duplication'' arises because certificate holders are currently 
required to maintain records under Sec. 121.683 showing compliance with 
both Sec. 61.57 and currency requirements of part 121. The FAA agrees 
that part 121 air carriers already have training and checking 
requirements in place that are equivalent to Sec. 61.57 recency 
requirements and that maintaining records of compliance with both of 
these requirements is essentially redundant.
    The FAA has decided that the appropriate response to the ATA 
petition is to propose a change to the existing regulations. In 
addition, the FAA has determined that it is appropriate to propose the 
same relief to part 135 certificate holders as they also have training 
and checking requirements already in place that are equivalent to the 
recency requirements of Sec. 61.57.

Discussion of the Proposal

    ATA petitioned on behalf of its affected member airlines and other 
similarly situated airlines for exemption, or other appropriate 
regulatory relief, from the requirements of Secs. 61.57(e) and 
121.683(a)(1). A summary of the ATA petition was published in the 
Federal Register on March 9, 1993, (58 FR 16576), and one comment was 
received from the Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA). ALPA generally 
agreed with the intent of the petition but was concerned that pilots 
who had been absent from flying for long periods of time and pilots 
trained annually, instead of semiannually, under ``single visit 
exemptions,'' discussed below, would not be current. The FAA has 
considered all facts and circumstances presented by the petitioner and 
comments made by ALPA.
    Under Sec. 61.57, Recent flight experience, paragraphs (a)-(b) are 
reserved, paragraph (c) concerns general experience, paragraph (d) 
concerns night experience, and paragraph (e) concerns instrument 
experience. Currently, under Sec. 61.57, PICs serving in part 121 and 
part 135 operations are excluded from compliance with paragraph (c). 
PICs serving in part 121 (and some part 135) operations are excluded 
from compliance with paragraph (d). All parts 121 and 135 PICs, 
however, must comply with paragraph (e).
    The FAA agrees with the premise of the ATA petition. It is not the 
intent of the FAA to require duplicative recency requirements for PICs 
serving in part 121 or part 135 air carrier operations. The FAA does 
intend, however, that each PIC serving in these air carrier operations 
receive adequate recency experience.
    Currently, part 121 and part 135 certificate holders record all 
flight time. It is common industry practice for air carriers to file 
instrument flight rules (IFR) flight plans and perform navigation 
solely by reference to instruments regardless of meteorological 
conditions. As a result, almost all flight time logged by PICs in parts 
121 and 135 air carrier operations is in IFR but is not broken down 
into instrument meteorological conditions (IMC) or visual 
meteorological conditions (VMC). Therefore, in order for PICs in parts 
121 and 135 air carrier operations to comply with Sec. 61.57(e) they 
must log separately their flight time in and out of IMC. Under 
Secs. 121.683 and 135.63, parts 121 and 135 certificate holders must 
also keep additional records of their PICs' IFR flight time in and out 
of IMC to show that their PIC comply with Sec. 61.57. The FAA finds 
that having both pilots and certificate holders separately log flight 
hours in and out of IMC meteorological conditions is redundant. This 
duplicative logging of flight time is an unnecessary burden on both the 
PICs and the air carriers and adds no safety benefits.
    The FAA has determined that both part 121 and part 135 certificate 
holders have recency requirements in place, in addition to their normal 
day to day operations, that are at least equivalent to the recency 
requirements of Sec. 61.57. Therefore, the specific requirements to 
obtain recent flight experience under Sec. 61.57 are unnecessary for 
part 121 and part 135 air carrier operations.
    The FAA has considered ALPA's comment to ATA's petition concerning 
the single visit exemption. The single visit approach to checking, 
which allows air carriers to certify competency of pilots through a 12-
month visit instead of at 6-month intervals as required by 
Sec. 121.441(a)(1), is a part of the Advanced Qualification Program 
(AQP) concept. The FAA has reviewed the single visit exemptions to 
determine if training and checking under a single visit exemption or a 
future AQP would be equivalent to the requirements of Sec. 61.57. SFAR 
58, which authorizes AQP's, provides for approval of an alternate 
method of compliance for qualifying, training, certifying, and 
otherwise ensuring competency of crewmembers who are trained and 
qualified to serve in operations under parts 121 and 135. The FAA has 
granted exemptions to several part 121 operators to use the single 
visit concept, with certain conditions and limitations, while these 
carriers are awaiting AQP approval. Experience under these exemptions 
has shown that a level of IFR competency equivalent to that required by 
parts 61, 121, and 135 can be maintained.
    This proposed amendment would avoid unnecessary recordkeeping for 
the air carrier pilots during the time they are performing part 121 or 
135 flights. Additionally, this proposal relieves parts 121 and 135 
certificate holders from the need to keep a record of their pilots' 
compliance with Sec. 61.57. Pilots are still personally responsible for 
showing currency when they are flying in an operation conducted under 
part 91.
    The FAA has decided not to extend this proposed amendment to part 
125 operators. Most part 125 training and checking rules are not 
equivalent to those in parts 121 and 135, nor do they need to be. 
Although some part 125 operators have approached training programs 
which exceed part 125 requirements, these programs have been submitted 
by choice, not to meet a FAA requirement.
    The FAA concludes that the proposed amendment would provide an 
equivalent level of safety. Part 121 and part 135 pilots are required 
and are expected to be trained to the highest level of qualification. 
Current air carrier operations and the availability of simulators 
ensure part 121 and part 135 air carrier pilots maintain currency far 
beyond the minimum requirements of Sec. 61.57.

International Civil Aviation Organization and Joint Aviation 
Regulations

    The FAA has determined that a review of the Convention on 
International Civil Aviation Standards and Recommended Practices is not 
warranted because this proposal eliminates duplicative recordkeeping 
for U.S. carriers and has no effect on actual currency.

Regulatory Analysis

    The FAA has determined that this proposed rule is not a significant 
rulemaking action as defined by Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory 
Planning and Review). The anticipated costs and benefits associated 
with this proposed rule are summarized below.
    The estimated benefit of the proposed rule is the relief from 
recordkeeping for parts 121 and 135 certificate holders and pilots. 
There are about 18,000 captains working for parts 121 and 135 
certificate holders. It is estimated that each of them would meet the 
relevant requirement for Sec. 61.57 after flying about five days every 
6 months and spending 5 minutes per day logging their flying. After 
that, the regulation would require no additional recordkeeping. The FAA 
estimates that about 14,900 hours would be used for recordkeeping 
purposes. Given that the median monthly earnings for a captain (for 
majors, nationals, and regionals) in 1992 dollars is about $11,100 or 
about $135 per hour, then the industry could realize a potential annual 
cost savings of about $2.01 million annually. However, if the 
recordkeeping duties were performed by the first officer or flight 
engineer, then the potential savings would not be as great.
    There would be no incremental costs associated with this proposed 
rule since there would be an equivalent level of recent flight 
experience requirements for parts 121 and 135 PICs; in essence only the 
recordkeeping requirements would be relaxed. The FAA has concluded that 
there would be no degradation of safety. Therefore, the FAA has 
concluded that the proposed rule is cost beneficial.

Regulatory Flexibility Determination

    Congress enacted the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) of 1980 (Pub. 
L. 96-354) to ensure that small entities are not unnecessarily and 
disproportionately burdened by Government regulations. The RFA requires 
agencies to review proposed rues that may have a significant impact on 
a substantial number of small entities.
    The Regulatory Flexibility Criteria and Guidance, FAA Order 
2100.14A, sets guidelines for determining whether small entities are 
significantly affected by regulations. The fleet size for an operator 
of aircraft for hire to be considered a small entity is nine or fewer 
aircraft. The threshold annualized cost levels for operators of 
aircraft for hire in 1992 dollars was $4,575 for unscheduled operators. 
Because the cost threshold for scheduled operators would be higher, the 
FAA presents the cost data for the unscheduled operator as a worst case 
scenario.
    The proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact, 
positive or negative on small entities. The entities that would be 
affected are national and regional air carriers. The median salary of 
captains for national and regional air carriers, but not major 
carriers, in 1992 dollars was between $3,000 and $5,800 per month or 
between $30 and $58 per hour. Assuming it would take an additional 50 
minutes a year for the captains of these small entities (9 or fewer 
aircraft) to separately record their flight time in and out of IMC, at 
$58 per hour, approximately 95 captains would have to be employed by 
one of these small entities before they would reach their threshold 
annualized cost level of $4,575. There are no small entities employing 
95 captains. Therefore, a substantial number of small entities would 
not suffer a significant economic impact as a result of this proposed 
rule.

International Trade Impact Assessment

    The Office of Management and Budget directs agencies to assess the 
effects of regulatory changes on international trade. This rule will 
have no economic impact on U.S. operators international operations 
since the rule only affects parts 121 and 135 certificate holders and 
is not a requirement for foreign operators nor is it required for U.S. 
air carriers to operate in foreign operations. Based on this 
information, the FAA concludes that the proposed rule change would have 
no impact on international trade.

Federalism Implications

    The regulations proposed herein would not have substantial direct 
effects on the states, or on the relationship between the national 
government and the states, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, in 
accordance with Executive Order 12612, it is determined that this 
proposal would not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant 
the preparation of a Federalism Assessment.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-
511), the FAA has considered the information collection impact 
associated with this proposed rule and finds that the proposal, if 
adopted, would result in some reduction in required recordkeeping. The 
FAA requests comments on this issue and will address its findings in 
the final rule.

Conclusion

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, and based on the 
findings in the Regulatory Flexibility Determination and the 
International Trade Impact Analysis, the FAA has determined that this 
proposed regulation is not a significant regulatory action under 
Executive Order 12866. The FAA certifies that this proposal, if 
adopted, will not have a significant economic impact, positive or 
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria 
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. In addition, this proposal is not 
considered significant under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 
FR 11034; February 26, 1979).

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 61

    Airmen, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

The Amendment

    The Federal Aviation Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 
61 of the Federal Aviation Regulations as follows:

PART 61--CERTIFICATION: PILOTS AND FLIGHT INSTRUCTORS

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

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. App. 1354(a), 1355, 1421, 1422, and 1427; 
49 U.S.C. 106(g).

    2. Section 61.57 is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 61.57  Recent flight experience: Pilot in command.

    (a)-(b) [Reserved]
    (c) General experience. No person may act as pilot in command of an 
aircraft carrying passengers, nor of an aircraft certificated for more 
than one required pilot flight crewmember, unless, within the preceding 
90 days, that person has made three takeoffs and three landings as the 
sole manipulator of the flight controls in an aircraft of the same 
category and class and, if a type rating is required, of the same type. 
If the aircraft is a tailwheel airplane, the landings must have been 
made to a full stop in a tailwheel airplane. For the purpose of meeting 
the requirements of the paragraph, a person may act as pilot in command 
of a flight under day VFR or day IFR if no persons or property other 
than as necessary for compliance thereunder, are carried.
    (d) Night experience. No person may act as pilot in command of an 
aircraft carrying passengers during the period beginning 1 hour after 
sunset and ending 1 hour before sunrise (as published in the American 
Air Almanac) unless, within the preceding 90 days, that person has made 
at least three takeoffs and three landings to a full stop during that 
period in the category and class of aircraft to be used.
    (e) Instrument Experience.
    (1) Recent IFR experience. No pilot may act as pilot in command 
under IFR, nor in weather conditions less than the minimums prescribed 
for VFR, unless that pilot has, within the past 6 calendar months--
    (i) In the case of an aircraft other than a glider, logged at least 
6 hours of instrument time under actual or simulated IFR conditions, at 
least 3 of which were in flight in the category of aircraft involved, 
including at least 6 instrument approaches, or passed an instrument 
competency check in the category of aircraft involved.
    (ii) In the case of a glider, logged at least 3 hours of instrument 
time, at least half of which were in a glider or an airplane. If a 
passenger is carried in the glider, at least 3 hours of instrument 
flight time must have been in gliders.
    (2) Instrument Competency Check. A pilot who does not meet the 
recent instrument experience requirements of paragraph (e)(1) of this 
section during the prescribed time or 6 calender months thereafter may 
not serve as pilot in command under IFR, nor in weather conditions less 
than the minimums prescribed for VFR, until that pilot passes an 
instrument competency check in the category of aircraft involved, given 
by an FAA inspector, a member of an armed force of the United States 
authorized to conduct flight tests, an FAA-approved check pilot, or a 
certificated instrument flight instructor. The Administrator may 
authorize the conduct of part or all of this check in a pilot ground 
trainer equipped for instruments or an aircraft simulator.
    (f) This section does not apply to operations conducted under parts 
121 or 135 of this chapter.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on March 31, 1994.
Thomas C. Accardi,
Director, Flight Standards Service.
[FR Doc. 94-8482 Filed 4-8-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M