[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 83 (Friday, May 1, 2009)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 20263-20270]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-10085]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 135

[Docket No. FAA-2009-0023; Notice No. 09-02]
RIN 2120-AJ32


Crew Resource Management Training for Crewmembers in Part 135 
Operations

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This proposed rule would require all certificate holders 
conducting operations under part 135 to include in their training 
programs crew resource management for crewmembers, including pilots and 
flight attendants. This proposal is needed to ensure that crewmembers 
in part 135 operations receive training and practice in the use of crew 
resource management principles, as appropriate for their operation. 
This proposed rule would respond to National Transportation Safety 
Board (NTSB) recommendations, address a recommendation from the Part 
125/135 Aviation Rulemaking Committee (ARC), and would codify current 
FAA guidance. The intended effect of this proposal is to reduce the 
frequency and severity of errors that are crew based, which will reduce 
the frequency of accidents and incidents within the scope of part 135 
operations.

DATES: Send your comments on or before July 30, 2009.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments identified by Docket Number FAA-2009-
0023 using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for sending your 
comments electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to the Docket Operations, M-30; U.S. 
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Room W12-
140, West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: Bring comments to the Docket 
Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 
New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., 
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax: Fax comments to the Docket Operations at 202-493-
2251.
    For more information on the rulemaking process, see the 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.
    Privacy: We will post all comments we receive, without change, to 
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you 
provide. Using the search function of our docket Web site, anyone can 
find and read the comments received into any of our dockets, including 
the name of the individual sending the comment (or signing the comment 
for an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's 
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on 
April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78) or you may visit http://DocketsInfo.dot.gov.
    Docket: To read background documents or comments received, go to

[[Page 20264]]

http://www.regulations.gov at any time and follow the online 
instructions for accessing the docket, or to the Docket Operations in 
Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey 
Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through 
Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical questions concerning 
this proposed rule, contact Nancy Lauck Claussen, Federal Aviation 
Administration, Flight Standards Service, Air Transportation Division 
(AFS-200), 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; 
Telephone: 202-267-8166; E-mail: [email protected]. For legal 
questions concerning this proposed rule, contact Anne Bechdolt, Federal 
Aviation Administration, Office of the Chief Counsel, 800 Independence 
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; Telephone: 202-267-3073; E-mail: 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Later in this preamble under the Additional 
Information section, we discuss how you can comment on this proposal 
and how we will handle your comments. Included in this discussion is 
related information about the docket, privacy, and the handling of 
proprietary or confidential business information. We also discuss how 
you can get a copy of related rulemaking documents.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety is found in 
Title 49 of the United States Code. This rulemaking is promulgated 
under the authority described in 49 U.S.C. 44701(a)(5), which requires 
the Administrator to promulgate regulations and minimum standards for 
other practices, methods, and procedures necessary for safety in air 
commerce and national security.

Background

    Crew Resource Management (CRM) training is the incorporation of 
team management concepts in flight operations. This training focuses on 
communication and interactions among pilots, flight attendants, 
operations personnel, maintenance personnel, air traffic controllers, 
flight service stations, and others. CRM also focuses on single pilot 
communications, decision making, and situational awareness. 
Consequently, CRM activities include team building, transfer of 
information, problem solving, decision making, maintaining situational 
awareness, and using automated systems. Training in these areas helps 
to prevent errors such as runway incursions, misinterpreting 
information from tower controllers, crewmembers' loss of situational 
awareness, and crewmembers failing to fully prepare for takeoff or 
landing.
    The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), National Transportation 
Safety Board (NTSB), and industry stakeholders have consistently 
recognized the problems associated with poor decision making, 
ineffective communication, inadequate leadership, and poor task or 
resource management as major contributors to accidents and incidents 
within the aviation industry. Effective CRM training for crewmembers is 
a critical element in reducing accidents and incidents resulting from 
these problems. This proposed rule would require all certificate 
holders conducting part 135 operations that are required to have a 
training program under 14 CFR 135.341 to implement CRM training for 
crewmembers in part 135 dual and single-pilot operations.

Previous Crew Resource Management Training Rulemaking

    On December 20, 1995, the FAA published Air Carrier and Commercial 
Operator Training Programs. See 60 FR 65940. This final rule required 
all certificate holders operating under part 121 to include CRM 
training for crewmembers in their training programs. This requirement 
also extended to certificate holders conducting operations under part 
135 that are required to comply with part 121 training and 
qualification requirements, such as those certificate holders that 
conduct commuter operations with airplanes for which two pilots are 
required by aircraft certification rules, and those that conduct 
commuter operations with airplanes having a passenger seating 
configuration of 10 seats or more. Today's proposed rule, which, if 
adopted, would require all certificate holders conducting operations 
under part 135 to include CRM training in their programs, continues the 
precedent set by the December 20, 1995 final rule.
    In considering this proposal to extend CRM training requirements to 
cover part 135 operators, the FAA conducted a review of all accidents 
involving airplanes and helicopters that occurred between March 20, 
1997 (the compliance date for training and qualifying under part 121 
for certain part 135 operators as set forth in the 1995 CRM final rule) 
and March 7, 2008. The FAA initially identified 268 accidents in part 
135 operations that may have been directly or indirectly related to 
ineffective CRM. Upon further review, the FAA found that 24 of these 
accidents were directly related to ineffective CRM. These 24 accidents 
were responsible for 83 fatalities and 12 serious injuries. The causal 
CRM factors in these accidents did not discriminate between dual and 
single pilot operations: 14 accidents involved single pilots and 10 
involved dual-pilot operations. The following accident histories, 
identified during this review, signify the critical need to require CRM 
training in both single and dual-pilot part 135 operations.
    On October 25, 2002, a Raytheon (Beechcraft) King Air A100, 
operating under the part 135 on-demand operation regulations, crashed 
while the dual-pilot flight crew was attempting to execute a very high 
frequency omnirange station (VOR) approach to runway 27 at Eveleth-
Virginia Municipal Airport, in Eveleth, Minnesota. In its final report 
on the accident, the NTSB noted that the evidence clearly indicated 
that neither flightcrew member was monitoring the airspeed indicator or 
course deviation indicator during the approach. The NTSB found that if 
the flightcrew had been adhering to the operator's approach procedures 
and effectively applying CRM techniques in the cockpit, at least one of 
the flightcrew members should have been monitoring the instruments 
during the approach. The two pilots and six passengers were killed in 
this accident. The airplane was also destroyed by impact forces and a 
post-crash fire. See NTSB Aircraft Accident Report AAR-03/03 (Nov. 18, 
2003).
    On September 25, 1999, a single pilot operating an on-demand aerial 
sightseeing tour crashed into the northeast slope of the Mauna Loa 
volcano near Volcano, Hawaii. The NTSB determined that the accident was 
caused by the pilot's decision to continue under visual flight rules 
(VFR) into instrument meteorological conditions (IMC) in an area of 
cloud-covered mountainous terrain. In addition, the NTSB found that the 
pilot's failure to properly navigate and his disregard for standard 
operating procedures, including flying into IMC while on a VFR flight 
plan and failure to obtain a current preflight weather briefing, also 
contributed to the accident. These issues are typically addressed in 
CRM training. The pilot and all nine passengers were killed, and the 
airplane was destroyed by impact forces and a post-impact fire. See 
NTSB Aircraft Accident Report AAB-01-02 (Sept. 26, 2001).
    On June 25, 1998, a single pilot operating an on-demand aerial 
sightseeing tour crashed into a mountainside in Mt. Waialeale, Hawaii. 
Three helicopters had departed on the

[[Page 20265]]

tour, with about 2 minutes between each departure. The company's most 
experienced pilot was leading the tour, followed by the company's 
second most-experienced pilot, and last, the accident pilot. The pilots 
had not received a weather briefing from an FAA-approved source, as 
required by the company's operations specifications. Throughout the 
flight, the three pilots were in radio contact with each other. During 
the flight, weather conditions worsened. The accident pilot became 
disoriented, misjudged his location, and while cruising toward what he 
believed was the prescribed crater entranceway, inadvertently entered 
IMC and collided into the mountainside. The NTSB determined that the 
probable cause of the accident was the failure of the lead pilot, who 
had first observed the deteriorating weather conditions, to notify the 
following pilots of the conditions and direct them to avoid the area. 
The pilot and all five passengers were killed. See NTSB Accident Report 
LAX98FA211 (May 17, 2001).
    These three accidents were all the result of poor decision making, 
a loss of situational awareness, a lack of communication between 
multiple pilots or between pilots and other key operational personnel, 
and inadequate leadership. Under this proposal, all of these issues 
would be addressed in CRM initial and recurrent training.

National Transportation Safety Board Recommendations

    In addition to addressing the issues identified in these accidents, 
this proposed rule would respond to the following NTSB recommendations: 
NTSB recommendation A-01-12 to require CRM training for all pilots 
conducting part 135 on-demand operations in aircraft that require two 
or more pilots; A-03-52, to require part 135 on-demand operators to 
provide CRM training to all pilots conducting dual-pilot operations; 
and A-95-124 to require certificate holders that conduct part 135 
operations to provide flightcrew members, during initial and recurrent 
training programs, with aeronautical decision-making and judgment 
training that is tailored to the company's flight operations and 
aviation environment. Further emphasizing the need for the FAA to 
address CRM training in part 135 operations, on May 14, 2008, the NTSB 
issued a letter to the FAA noting that recommendation A-03-52 remains 
on its most wanted list of Transportation Safety Improvements.
    This NPRM exceeds the requirements outlined in NTSB recommendation 
A-03-52, which only addressed CRM training for dual-pilot operations in 
part 135. These issues are not limited to dual-pilot operations, but 
rather, as indicated by the accident review, extend to all operations. 
Therefore, the FAA has decided it is necessary to require CRM training 
for crewmembers conducting either dual-or single-pilot operations under 
part 135.

Recommendations From the Part 135/125 Aviation Rulemaking Committee 
(ARC)

    This proposal is also based in part on recommendations submitted by 
the Part 135/125 ARC, which was established on April 8, 2003. The ARC 
recommended that all pilots in part 135 operations be proficient at 
mastering the resources available to them while managing many 
operational factors, such as communications with air traffic control, 
advanced cockpit technology, weather services, managing time, 
maintaining situational awareness, mitigating fatigue and stress, and 
other factors. The FAA recognizes the importance of training in these 
areas and has incorporated the ARC's suggestions in this regard.
    In addition to the curriculum components, the Part 135/125 ARC 
recommended CRM training for flight followers. The FAA, however, has 
decided not to require CRM training for these individuals in this 
proposal. Current regulations require flight locating in part 135 
operations, but there is no associated training requirement for the 
individuals that perform this function, typically referred to as 
``flight followers.'' Furthermore, there are no requirements for 
dispatchers in part 135 regulations. Therefore, while the FAA 
recognizes the value and encourages the training of all operational 
personnel regarding key CRM principles, this proposal does not include 
CRM training requirements for flight followers or dispatchers in part 
135 operations.

Current FAA Guidance

    The proposed amendments also codify certain elements of FAA 
guidance contained in Advisory Circular (AC) 120-51, Crew Resource 
Management Training, and AC 00-64, Air Medical Resource Management, as 
amended. These ACs present guidelines for developing, implementing, 
reinforcing, and assessing CRM training for crewmembers and other 
personnel essential to flight safety. The curriculum components and 
training methodologies contained in these ACs are designed to become an 
integral part of training and operations, and as such, have been 
included in the rule as the basic curriculum components for every CRM 
training program.
    AC 120-51 and AC 00-64, as amended, also contain information 
regarding recognition of fatigue and stress reduction. These ACs 
suggest that training may include a review of scientific evidence on 
fatigue and stress and their effects on performance in both normal 
operations and emergency situations. These topics are appropriately 
addressed in CRM training, which may also include training crewmembers 
on identifying various countermeasures for coping with stressors, 
recognition of cues that indicate lack or loss of situational 
awareness, and training in countermeasures to restore that awareness.

General Discussion of the Proposal

Components of CRM Training

    In the 1995 final rule, the FAA anticipated that for a CRM training 
program to be approved, it would include three distinct components: (1) 
Initial CRM training, during which CRM issues are defined and 
discussed; (2) a recurrent practice and feedback component during which 
trainees gain experience with CRM techniques; and (3) a continuing 
reinforcement component which ensures that CRM principles are addressed 
throughout the trainee's employment with the certificate holder. The 
FAA continues to expect these three components in today's proposal.
    Initial CRM training is a curriculum segment with a variety of 
instructional methods, which can include lectures, discussions, videos, 
and practice in an operational setting or a Line Oriented Flight 
Training (LOFT) scenario, with feedback from an instructor. Under the 
proposed rule, initial CRM training must be provided to crewmembers in 
part 135 operations. At a minimum, the training should address the 
authority of the pilot in command; communication processes; how to 
build and maintain a flight team, manage workload and time, and 
maintain situational awareness; recognizing and mitigating fatigue and 
stress; and particular aeronautical decision-making skills tailored to 
the certificate holder's operations. This training is in addition to 
current training requirements for crewmembers under part 135.
    Recurrent CRM training is best accomplished through the use of 
operational, performance-based scenarios that provide an opportunity 
for practice and feedback. Feedback should be directed by a facilitator 
who has had appropriate CRM training and

[[Page 20266]]

can identify the CRM markers in a performance-based scenario. Practice 
and feedback provide participants with opportunities to improve 
communication, decision-making, and leadership skills.

Program Hours and Approval of Training Programs

    Consistent with other part 135 training requirements, this proposal 
does not establish required program hours. In evaluating and approving 
part 135 CRM training programs, the FAA would consider instructional 
techniques, the number of students in a class, the use of performance-
based scenarios, new training technology, the use of student feedback, 
the measurement of training outcomes, as well as the number of hours of 
training time.

Compliance Date

    For initial CRM training, the FAA is proposing a compliance date 2 
years after the effective date of the final rule. After the compliance 
date, a certificate holder conducting part 135 operations would be 
prohibited from using a crewmember unless that person has completed 
approved initial CRM training. Since a large number of certificate 
holder employees are required to have this training, the delayed 
compliance date would allow sufficient time to train instructors who 
will conduct CRM training, and then, in turn, provide this training to 
all crewmembers. The delay in compliance is also necessary because most 
of these operators may be classified as small businesses and may need 
additional time to develop the training program.

Credit for Previous CRM Training

    As part of the proposal, the FAA may credit some CRM training 
received by crewmembers before the compliance date. Specifically, the 
FAA would consider training aids, devices, methods, and procedures, in 
accordance with AC 120-51 and AC 00-64, as amended, used by a 
certificate holder in a voluntary CRM program included in a training 
program required by 14 CFR 135.341, 135.345, or 135.349.
    In addition, the FAA recognizes that many crewmembers in part 135 
operations work for multiple part 135 operators throughout their 
careers. In light of the uniform CRM curriculum components proposed in 
this rule, the FAA has decided that it would be appropriate to credit 
initial CRM training that a crewmember completed while working for one 
part 135 operator toward the initial CRM training required by another 
part 135 operator if the crewmember is able to provide appropriate 
training records to his or her new employer.

Conclusion

    Effective Crew Resource Management (CRM) training for crewmembers 
is a critical element in the reduction of accidents and incidents. This 
proposed rule would require certificate holders conducting operations 
under part 135 to implement CRM training for crewmembers conducting 
both dual and single-pilot operations. The intended effect is to reduce 
accidents and incidents within the scope of part 135 operations. This 
rule is supported by the NTSB findings and recommendations, long-
standing FAA guidance, and the precedent set in 1995 with the 
promulgation of the final rule requiring a CRM training component for 
certificate holders conducting operations under part 121, as well as 
those part 135 operators that must operate under the rules of part 121.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    This proposal contains the following new information collection 
requirements. As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the 
FAA has submitted the information requirements associated with this 
proposal to the Office of Management and Budget for its review. See 44 
U.S.C. 3507(d).
    Title: Crew Resource Management Training for Crewmembers in Part 
135 Operations.
    Summary: This proposed rule would require CRM training for 
crewmembers, in 14 CFR part 135 operations. This proposal is needed to 
ensure that crewmembers in part 135 operations receive training and 
practice in the use of CRM principles, as appropriate for their 
operation. The intended effect of this proposal is to reduce the 
frequency and severity of errors that are crew based, which will reduce 
the frequency of accidents and incidents within the scope of part 135 
operations.
    Use of: This project is in direct support of the Department of 
Transportation's Strategic Plan--Strategic Goal--SAFETY; i.e., to 
promote the public health and safety by working toward the elimination 
of transportation-related deaths and injuries. This request for 
clearance reflects requirements necessary under Title 14 CFR part 135 
to ensure safety-of-flight by making certain that complete and adequate 
training is obtained and maintained by those who operate under this 
part of the regulation. The FAA will use the information it collects 
and reviews to ensure compliance and adherence to regulations and, 
where necessary, to take enforcement action on violators of the 
regulations.
    Respondents (including number of): The FAA estimates there are 
1,625 certificate holders who would be required to provide information 
in accordance with the proposed rule. The respondents to this proposed 
information requirement are certificate holders using the training 
requirements in 14 CFR part 135.
    Frequency: The FAA estimates certificate holders will have a one-
time information collection, and will then collect or report 
information occasionally thereafter.
    Annual Burden Estimate This proposal would result in a 10-year 
recordkeeping and reporting burden as follows:

                   Summary of Time and Costs (10-Year)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               Cost            Hours
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Development and submission of CRM            $302,260.00         8,636.0
 Training Program.......................
Crewmember Training Record Keeping......        65,540.5         1,872.5
                                         -------------------------------
    Total...............................      367,800.50        10,508.5
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The agency is soliciting comments to--
    (1) Evaluate whether the proposed information requirement is 
necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, 
including whether the information will have practical utility;

[[Page 20267]]

    (2) Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden;
    (3) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to 
be collected; and
    (4) Minimize the burden of collecting information on those who are 
to respond, including by using appropriate automated, electronic, 
mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms 
of information technology.
    Individuals and organizations may send comments on the information 
collection requirement by July 30, 2009, and should direct them to the 
address listed in the ADDRESSES section at the beginning of this 
preamble. Comments also should be submitted to the Office of Management 
and Budget, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attention: 
Desk Officer for FAA, New Executive Building, Room 10202, 725 17th 
Street, NW., Washington, DC 20053.
    According to the 1995 amendments to the Paperwork Reduction Act (5 
CFR 1320.8(b)(2)(vi)), an agency may not collect or sponsor the 
collection of information, nor may it impose an information collection 
requirement unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. 
The OMB control number for this information collection will be 
published in the Federal Register, after the Office of Management and 
Budget approves it.

International Compatibility

    In keeping with U.S. obligations under the Convention on 
International Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to comply with 
International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Standards and 
Recommended Practices to the maximum extent practicable. The FAA has 
determined that there are no ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices 
that correspond to these proposed regulations.

Economic Evaluation, Regulatory Flexibility Determination, 
International Trade Impact Assessment, and Unfunded Mandates Assessment

    Changes to Federal regulations must undergo several economic 
analyses. First, Executive Order 12866 directs that each Federal agency 
shall propose or adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned determination 
that the benefits of the intended regulation justify its costs. Second, 
the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-354) requires 
agencies to analyze the economic impact of regulatory changes on small 
entities. Third, the Trade Agreements Act (Pub. L. 96-39) prohibits 
agencies from setting standards that create unnecessary obstacles to 
the foreign commerce of the United States. In developing U.S. 
standards, this Trade Act requires agencies to consider international 
standards and, where appropriate, that they be the basis of U.S. 
standards. Fourth, the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 
104-4) requires agencies to prepare a written assessment of the costs, 
benefits, and other effects of proposed or final rules that include a 
Federal mandate likely to result in the expenditure by State, local, or 
Tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 
million or more annually (adjusted for inflation with base year of 
1995). This portion of the preamble summarizes the FAA's analysis of 
the economic impacts of this proposed rule. We suggest readers seeking 
greater detail read the full regulatory evaluation, a copy of which we 
have placed in the docket for this rulemaking.
    In conducting these analyses, the FAA has determined that this 
proposed rule: (1) Has benefits that justify its costs; (2) is not an 
economically ``significant regulatory action'' as defined in section 
3(f) of Executive Order 12866; (3) is not ``significant'' as defined in 
DOT's Regulatory Policies and Procedures; (4) would not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities; 
(5) would not create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of 
the United States; and (6) would not impose an unfunded mandate on 
state, local, or Tribal governments, or on the private sector by 
exceeding the threshold identified above. These analyses are summarized 
as follows.

Total Benefits and Costs of This Proposed Rule

    The estimated cost of this proposed rule is $11.2 million, or $8 
million in present value terms. An upper bound estimate of the 
potential benefits would be a 25 percent reduction in part 135 
accidents in which the lack of CRM training would be a causal factor, 
and is estimated at about $121 million. If one accident could be 
averted like the 2002 Beechcraft accident where the NTSB found 
effective CRM techniques should have been followed, then the benefits 
of this rule would easily exceed the costs.

Aviation Industry Affected

    The proposed rule would affect operators of airplanes and 
helicopters and crewmembers who fly under part 135. There would be 
1,625 part 135 operators that employ 25,033 crewmembers, of whom 24,447 
would be pilots and 586 would be flight attendants.

Period of Analysis

    We used a 10-year time period to calculate the CRM training costs 
and potential benefits from CRM training. A 10-year period of analysis 
is sufficient to determine costs and benefits.

Risk of an Accident Caused by the Absence of CRM Training

    We evaluated part 135 accidents from March 20, 1997, through March 
7, 2008. During this time period, there were 24 accidents (18 involving 
airplanes and 6 involving helicopters) with causal factors directly 
related to a lack of effective CRM. These accidents were responsible 
for 83 fatalities (66 involving airplanes and 17 involving helicopters) 
and 12 serious injuries (all involving airplanes).
    Further, of the 18 airplane accidents, 8 involved single pilot 
operations and 10 involved dual-pilot operations. All 6 of the 
helicopter accidents involved single pilot operations. The individual 
accident histories are provided in the Initial Regulatory Evaluation, 
which is in the docket.

Assumptions and Data Used To Estimate Benefits

    The value of a prevented fatality is $5.8 million, which is the 
Department of Transportation value of a statistical life.

Potential CRM Training Effectiveness and Benefits

    We reviewed all part 121 accidents contained in the NTSB database 
between 1988 through 2007 involving the same causal factors and divided 
them into accidents occurring from 1988 through 1997, and accidents 
occurring after 1997. As described earlier, the CRM rule for part 121 
and for some part 135 operations became effective in 1997. We then 
calculated the CRM training-related accident rates for these two groups 
and found that the accident rates decreased from 0.0000206 to 0.0000182 
(an 11.65 percent decline) and the accident rate for all fatal 
accidents decreased from 0.0000048 to 0.0000036 (a 25 percent decline). 
Although this accident rate reduction is not statistically significant 
due to the infrequency of these accidents, it is useful in establishing 
an upper bound for the potential CRM training effectiveness rate for 
part 135 operations.
    In order to illustrate the potential part 135 CRM training 
benefits, we applied the part 121 accident rate reductions of 25 
percent for fatal accidents and 11.65 percent for non-fatal accidents 
to the 24 CRM-related part 135 accidents. Had the proposed CRM training 
rule been in effect in 1997, it could have prevented

[[Page 20268]]

2.75 of these fatal airplane accidents involving 16.5 fatalities and 
2.25 serious injuries, as well as 1 fatal helicopter accident involving 
4.25 fatalities. It also could have prevented one non-fatal airplane 
and helicopter accident. On that basis, the proposed rule could have 
prevented 3.75 fatal accidents involving 20.75 fatalities and 2.25 
serious injuries. Thus, applying the DOT values to the accidents 
hypothetically prevented, an upper-bound quantified benefit of about 
$121 million would have resulted had the proposed rule been in effect 
since 1997.

Compliance Cost Assumptions

    Current industry practice is the baseline for the incremental 
compliance costs. CRM training is classroom training that would be 
incorporated into the annual training already required of each part 135 
operator.
    All 26 large part 135 operators with more than 100 crewmembers and 
10 percent of the 400 part 135 operators with 10-99 crewmembers (40 
operators) provide CRM training and would incur minimal compliance 
costs. The FAA estimates that 360 of the medium-sized operators and 
none of the 1,199 small operators with less than 10 crewmembers 
currently provide CRM training and all would incur compliance costs.
    We based training costs on the guidelines in the FAA Advisory 
Circular 120-51E and on the size of the firm.
    The average cost to develop a CRM training program would be $1,170 
for a medium-sized operator and $680 for a small operator.
    Current pilots and future new pilots in medium-sized operations 
would need 4 hours for initial CRM training while those in small 
operations would need 3 hours.
    Current flight attendants and future new flight attendants would 
need 2 hours for initial CRM training.
    Annual recurrent CRM training would take one-half of the time that 
initial CRM training would require.
    There would be an average of 10 pilots in an initial or recurrent 
CRM training session for a medium-sized operator and an average of 3.66 
for a small operator.
    There would be an average of 3.92 flight attendants in an initial 
or recurrent CRM training session for a medium-sized operator and an 
average of 1.1 flight attendants for a small operator.
    The average cost for an initial CRM pilot training session would be 
$1,293 for a medium-sized operator and $428 for a small operator.
    The average cost for an initial CRM flight attendant training 
session would be $207 for a medium-sized operator and $94 for a small 
operator.
    The average cost for recurrent CRM pilot training would be $647 for 
a medium-sized operator and $214 for a small operator.
    The average cost for recurrent CRM flight attendant training would 
be $104 for a medium-sized operator and $47 for a small operator.
    Initial CRM training for new entrants would be done on a one-to-one 
basis with the trainer. The average cost would be $208 per new pilot 
hire for medium-sized operators and $156 for small operators. The 
average cost would be $76 per new flight attendant hire for medium-
sized and small operators.
    A crewmember who has received initial CRM training from an operator 
would not need to repeat this initial CRM training if the crewmember 
changes part 135 employers.

Compliance Costs

    Based on those data and assumptions, as shown in Table 1, we 
estimated that the proposed rule from 2009 through 2018 would have a 
total cost of $11.2 million, which would have a present value of $8 
million using a 7 percent discount rate, and a present value of $9.6 
million using a 3 percent discount rate.

             Table 1--Summary of the Total CRM Training Costs by Source of Cost (2009 Through 2018)
                                    [Rounded to the nearest thousand dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                    Total costs
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
                         Source of cost                                            Present value   Present value
                                                                      Nominal          (7%)            (3%)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CURRENT OPERATOR CRM PLAN.......................................          $1,177          $1,101          $1,143
NEW OPERATOR CRM PLAN...........................................             345             234             290
CURRENT PILOT TRAINING..........................................           1,476           1,289           1,391
NEW PILOT TRAINING..............................................           1,437             964           1,203
PILOT RECURRENT TRAINING........................................           6,684           4,326           5,510
CURRENT FLIGHT ATTENDANT TRAINING...............................               6               5               6
NEW FLIGHT ATTENDANT TRAINING...................................              18              12              15
FLIGHT ATTENDANT RECURRENT TRAINING.............................              50              32              41
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    TOTAL.......................................................          11,193           7,963           9,599
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cost-Benefit Comparison

    As presented earlier, an upper-bound estimate of the quantified 
benefits of a $5.8 million value for a prevented fatality would be $121 
million, which would be larger than the undiscounted compliance cost of 
$11.2 million. As we do not predict the number of prevented accidents 
that would occur from this proposed rule, we do not provide present 
value benefits from preventing future accidents.
    An alternative way of looking at the cost-benefit analysis is that 
if the proposed rule were to prevent only 2 fatalities during this 10-
year period, the rule would be cost beneficial.
    Finally, 9 out of 9 operators we surveyed already provide CRM 
training. Thus, these operators have already made an implied internal 
cost-benefit analysis that the benefits from CRM training are worth its 
costs.
    For those reasons, we conclude that the proposed CRM training rule 
would be cost beneficial.

Regulatory Flexibility Assessment

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-354) (RFA) 
establishes ``as a principle of regulatory issuance that agencies shall 
endeavor, consistent with the objectives of the rule and of applicable 
statutes, to fit regulatory and informational requirements to the scale 
of the businesses, organizations, and governmental jurisdictions 
subject to regulation. To achieve this principle, agencies are required 
to solicit and consider flexible regulatory proposals and to explain 
the rationale for their

[[Page 20269]]

actions to assure that such proposals are given serious 
consideration.'' The RFA covers a wide range of small entities, 
including small businesses, not-for-profit organizations, and small 
governmental jurisdictions.
    Agencies must perform a review to determine whether a rule will 
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. If the agency determines that it will, the agency must 
prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis as described in the RFA.
    However, if an agency determines that a rule is not expected to 
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities, section 605(b) of the RFA provides that the head of the 
agency may so certify and a regulatory flexibility analysis is not 
required. The certification must include a statement providing the 
factual basis for this determination, and the reasoning should be 
clear.
    The FAA reviewed the North American Industrial Classification 
System codes to determine which entities affected by this rule would be 
considered small businesses. Applying NAICS codes 481211 (Non-Scheduled 
Chartered Air Services), 481212 (Non-Scheduled Chartered Freight 
Services), and 621910 (Ambulance Services), the FAA determined that 
1,559 entities employing 11,815 crewmembers would be affected by the 
proposed rule. The average number of crewmembers per entity would be 
7.6. The Small Business Administration (SBA) has established that all 
operators with fewer than 1,500 employees in NACIS codes 481211 and 
481212 are considered small businesses, and operators in NAICS code 
621910 who have annual receipts of less than $7,000,000 are also small 
businesses. Thus, all 1,559 operators in these NAICS codes that would 
be affected by the proposed rule would be considered small businesses 
under the applicable SBA size standard. See 13 CFR 121.201.
    Although the proposed rule would impact a substantial number of 
small businesses, the FAA has determined that the economic impact on 
these businesses would not be significant. The average initial cost per 
operator would be between $680 and $1,170. Further, the average annual 
cost per operator would be $450. Thus, even for the smallest of these 
operators that may have revenues of $250,000, the initial costs would 
range from 0.25 percent to 0.45 percent of revenues. Thus, in 
accordance with 5 U.S.C. 605(b), the FAA certifies that this proposed 
rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities. The FAA solicits comments regarding this 
determination.

International Trade Impact Analysis

    The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (Pub. L. 96-39), as amended by the 
Uruguay Round Agreements Act (Pub. L. 103-465), prohibits Federal 
agencies from establishing any standards or engaging in related 
activities that create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of 
the United States. Pursuant to these Acts, the establishment of 
standards is not considered an unnecessary obstacle to the foreign 
commerce of the United States, so long as the standards have a 
legitimate domestic objective, such as the protection of safety, and do 
not operate in a manner that excludes imports that meet this objective. 
The statute also requires consideration of international standards and, 
where appropriate, that they be the basis for U.S. standards. The FAA 
notes the purpose is to ensure the safety of the American public, and 
has assessed the effects of this proposed rule to ensure it does not 
exclude imports that meet this objective. As a result, this proposed 
rule is not considered as creating an unnecessary obstacle to foreign 
commerce and has determined that it would only have a domestic impact 
and therefore no effect on international trade.

Unfunded Mandates Assessment

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-
4) requires each Federal agency to prepare a written statement 
assessing the effects of any Federal mandate in a proposed or final 
agency rule that may result in an expenditure of $100 million or more 
(in 1995 dollars) in any one year by State, local, and Tribal 
governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector; such a mandate 
is deemed to be a ``significant regulatory action.'' The FAA currently 
uses an inflation-adjusted value of $136.1 million in lieu of $100 
million. This proposed rule does not contain such a mandate; therefore, 
the requirements of Title II of the Act do not apply.

Executive Order 13132, Federalism

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

Regulations Affecting Intrastate Aviation in Alaska

    Section 1205 of the FAA Reauthorization Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 
3213) requires the Administrator, when modifying regulations in title 
14 of the CFR in a manner affecting intrastate aviation in Alaska, to 
consider the extent to which Alaska is not served by transportation 
modes other than aviation, and to establish appropriate regulatory 
distinctions. Because this proposed rule would apply to part 135 
operations in Alaska, it could, if adopted, affect intrastate aviation 
in Alaska. We note that 7 of the 24 accidents previously referenced 
occurred in Alaskan operations. The FAA, therefore, specifically 
requests comments on whether there is justification for applying the 
proposed rule differently in intrastate operations in Alaska.

Environmental Analysis

    FAA Order 1050.1E identifies FAA actions that are categorically 
excluded from preparation of an environmental assessment or 
environmental impact statement under the National Environmental Policy 
Act in the absence of extraordinary circumstances. The FAA has 
determined this proposed rulemaking action qualifies for the 
categorical exclusion identified in paragraph 312f and involves no 
extraordinary circumstances.

Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or 
Use

    The FAA has analyzed this NPRM under Executive Order 13211, Actions 
Concerning Regulations that Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 
Distribution, or Use (May 18, 2001). We have determined that it is not 
a ``significant regulatory action'' under the executive order because 
it is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 
12866 and DOT's Regulatory Policies and Procedures, and it is not 
likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, 
distribution, or use of energy.

Additional Information

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites interested persons to participate in this 
rulemaking by submitting written comments, data, or views. We also 
invite comments relating to the economic, environmental, energy, or 
federalism impacts that might result from adopting the proposals in 
this document. The most helpful comments reference a specific portion 
of the proposal, explain the reason for any recommended change, and 
include

[[Page 20270]]

supporting data. To ensure the docket does not contain duplicate 
comments, please send only one copy of written comments, or if you are 
filing comments electronically, please submit your comments only one 
time.
    We will file in the docket all comments we receive, as well as a 
report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel 
concerning this proposed rulemaking. Before acting on this proposal, we 
will consider all comments we receive on or before the closing date for 
comments. We will consider comments filed after the comment period has 
closed if it is possible to do so without incurring expense or delay. 
We may change this proposal in light of the comments we receive.

Proprietary or Confidential Business Information

    Do not file in the docket information that you consider to be 
proprietary or confidential business information. Send or deliver this 
information directly to the person identified in the FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document. You must mark the 
information that you consider proprietary or confidential. If you send 
the information on a disk or CD ROM, mark the outside of the disk or CD 
ROM and also identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the 
specific information that is proprietary or confidential.
    Under 14 CFR 11.35(b), when we are aware of proprietary information 
filed with a comment, we do not place it in the docket. We hold it in a 
separate file to which the public does not have access, and we place a 
note in the docket that we have received it. If we receive a request to 
examine or copy this information, we treat it as any other request 
under the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552). We process such a 
request under the DOT procedures found in 49 CFR part 7.

Availability of Rulemaking Documents

    You can get an electronic copy of rulemaking documents using the 
Internet by--
    1. Searching the Federal eRulemaking Portal (http://www.regulations.gov);
    2. Visiting the FAA's Regulations and Policies Web page at http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies or
    3. Accessing the Government Printing Office's Web page at http://www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/index.html.
    You can also get a copy by sending a request to the Federal 
Aviation Administration, Office of Rulemaking, ARM-1, 800 Independence 
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by calling (202) 267-9680. Make 
sure to identify the docket number or notice number of this rulemaking.
    You may access all documents the FAA considered in developing this 
proposed rule, including economic analyses and technical reports, from 
the Internet through the Federal eRulemaking Portal referenced in 
paragraph 1.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 135

    Air carriers, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Safety, Transportation.

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 135--OPERATING REQUIREMENTS: COMMUTER AND ON DEMAND OPERATIONS 
AND RULES GOVERNING PERSONS ON BOARD SUCH AIRCRAFT

    1. The authority citation for part 135 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 41706, 40113, 44701-44702, 44705, 
44709, 44711-44713, 44715-44717, 44722, 45101-45105.

    2. In Sec.  135.329, add paragraph (a)(4) to read as follows:


Sec.  135.329  Crewmember training requirements.

    (a) * * *
    (4) Crew resource management training in Sec.  135.330.
* * * * *
    3. Add Sec.  135.330 to subpart H to read as follows:


Sec.  135.330  Crew resource management training.

    (a) Each certificate holder must have an approved crew resource 
management training program that includes initial and recurrent 
training. The training program must include at least the following:
    (1) Authority of the pilot in command;
    (2) Communication processes, decisions, and coordination, to 
include communication with Air Traffic Control, personnel performing 
flight locating and other operational functions, and passengers;
    (3) Building and maintenance of a flight team;
    (4) Workload and time management;
    (5) Situational awareness;
    (6) Effects of fatigue on performance, avoidance strategies and 
countermeasures;
    (7) Effects of stress and stress reduction strategies; and
    (8) Aeronautical decision-making and judgment training tailored to 
the operator's flight operations and aviation environment.
    (b) After [Two years after the effective date of the rule], no 
certificate holder may use a person as a flightcrew member or flight 
attendant unless that person has completed approved crew resource 
management initial training with that certificate holder or with 
another certificate holder.
    (c) For flightcrew members and flight attendants, the 
Administrator, at his or her discretion, may credit crew resource 
management training received before [Two years after the effective date 
of the rule] toward all or part of the initial CRM training required by 
this section.
    (d) In granting credit for initial CRM training, the Administrator 
considers training aids, devices, methods and procedures used by the 
certificate holder in a voluntary CRM program included in a training 
program required by Sec.  135.341, Sec.  135.345, or Sec.  135.349.
    4. In Sec.  135.351, revise paragraph (b)(2) to read as follows:


Sec.  135.351  Recurrent Training.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (2) Instruction as necessary in the subjects required for initial 
ground training by this subpart, as appropriate, including low-altitude 
windshear training and training on operating during ground icing 
conditions as prescribed in Sec.  135.341 and described in Sec.  
135.345, crew resource management training as prescribed in Sec.  
135.330, and emergency training as prescribed in Sec.  135.331.
* * * * *

    Issued in Washington, DC, on April 27, 2009.
John McGraw,
Acting Director, Flight Standards Service.
[FR Doc. E9-10085 Filed 4-30-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P