June 24, 1998
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 61
[Docket No. ; Notice No. 98- ]
RIN:
Sport Pilot Certification Requirements
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
__________________________________________________________
SUMMARY: This notice proposes to establish a new kind of airman certificate called a sport pilot certificate and new eligibility requirements appropriate to the proposed new certificate. This proposed new airman certificate would be intended for persons who wish to fly aircraft of simple design intended exclusively for recreational and sport flying. The sport pilot certificate is necessary to provide a reasonable and appropriate means of certification for pilots that wish to operate certificated lightweight, uncomplicated, slow speed, and very diverse types of aircraft. These aircraft would be two-place or less, have a maximum certificated takeoff weight of 1,200 pounds or less and a maximum stall speed of 39 knots (airplanes only). All of the proposals in this notice have been extensively researched for the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) by the Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee (ARAC), Part 103 Working Group, and all proposals made in this notice are based on ARAC recommendations.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before [XX days after date of publication in the Federal Register.]
ADDRESSES: Comments on this proposed rulemaking should be mailed or delivered, in duplicate, to: U.S. Department of Transportation Dockets, Docket No. FAA-1998-nnnn, 400 Seventh Street, SW, Room Plaza 401, Washington, DC 20590. Comments may also be sent electronically to the following internet address: 9-NPRM-CMTS@faa.dot..gov. Comments may be filed and/or examined in Room Plaza 401 between 10 a.m. and 5 p.m. weekdays except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William Cook, Regulations Branch, General Aviation and Commercial Division, AFS-820, Flight Standards Service, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) 267-3840.
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 desire. Comments relating to the environmental, energy, federalism, or economic impact that might result from adopting the proposals in this notice are also invited. Substantive comments should be accompanied by cost estimates. Comments must identify the regulatory docket or notice number and be submitted in duplicate to the Rules Docket address specified above.
All comments received, as well as a report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel on this rulemaking, will be filed in the docket. The docket is available for public inspection before and after the comment closing date.
All comments received on or before the closing date will be considered by the Administrator before taking action on this proposed rulemaking. Late-filed comments will be considered to the extent practicable. The proposals contained in this notice may be changed in light of the comments received.
Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments submitted in response to this notice must include a pre-addressed, stamped postcard with those comments on which the following statement is made: Comments to Docket No. XXXXX. The postcard will be date stamped and mailed to the commenter.
Availability of NPRMs
An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded using a modem and suitable communications software from the FAA regulations section of the Federal electronic bulletin board service (telephone: 703-321-3339), the Federal Register's electronic bulletin board service (telephone: 202-512-1661), or the FAA's Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee Bulletin Board service (telephone: 800-FAA-ARAC).
Internet users may reach the FAA's web page at http://www.faa.gov or the Federal Register's web page at http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs for access to recently published rulemaking documents.
Any person may obtain a copy of this NPRM by submitting 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. Communications must identify the notice number or docket number of this NPRM.
Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future NPRM's should request from the above office a copy of Advisory Circular No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking Distribution System, that describes the application procedure.
Background
The state of the art at the light end of the aviation spectrum has advanced considerably since the early 1980's. These advances include refinement of light engine technology, more effective application of principles of low-speed aerodynamics, and the use of a wide range of new materials. Concurrent with these developments has been a collapse of the light end of the general aviation market and a corresponding growth of the kit market. All of these factors have contributed to the evolution of new aircraft.
The FAA took a number of initiatives in response to some of the changes at the light end of the aviation spectrum. One was creation of the ultralight vehicle addressed in part 103. A second was creation of a recreational pilot certificate. A third was to establish a new primary category aircraft.
The Ultralight Vehicle
The FAA adopted 14 CFR Part 103 in 1982 (47 FR 38776, September 2, 1982) as a regulatory response to existing and rapidly growing hang glider activity. The basic performance needs of "low and slow" recreational flying, coupled with widely available modern materials, made possible the development of new and diverse varieties of hang gliders, both powered and unpowered.
Earlier guidelines provided by Advisory Circular 60-10, Recommended Safety Parameters for Operation of Hang Gliders, (May 16, 1974) were no longer adequate to cover the operations of the more advanced hang gliders. The FAA determined that certain hang gliders, even those with a power plant, should be classified as ultralight vehicles. The primary reasons for considering these hang gliders (powered or unpowered) to be ultralight vehicles were the low weights and slow speeds at which they were operated, and the intended sport and recreational purposes of flight. The FAA determined that these ultralight vehicles were not subject to the aircraft certification requirements of 14 CFR part 21, the identification and marking requirements of part 45, or the registration requirements of part 47. In addition, the persons operating these vehicles were not subject to the airman certification requirements in 14 CFR part 61 or the operating rules for aircraft in 14 CFR part 91. However, the FAA also determined that there was a need for some operating restrictions for these ultralight vehicles to avoid conflicts with other air traffic and to protect persons and property on the ground.
Part 103 defines ultralights as unpowered and powered vehicles with certain weight and other limitations that carry one occupant that are used for sport and recreation and that do not have a U.S. or foreign airworthiness certificate. Except for ultralights operating under exemptions (discussed later), currently only ultralights that meet the following limitations are allowed to operate under part 103:
(1) If unpowered, weigh less than 155 pounds;
(2) If powered, weigh less than 254 pounds empty weight, excluding floats and safety devices which are intended for deployment in potentially catastrophic situation;
(3) If powered, have a fuel capacity of less than 5 gallons, a full-power airspeed capability of no more than 55 knots, and a power-off stall speed of no more than 24 knots.
Ultralights operating under part 103 are required to comply with operating restrictions. These include operating for sport and recreation only, during daylight only, yielding the right-of-way to all aircraft, not operating over congested areas, not operating in a manner that creates a hazard to other persons and property, operating only with authorization in restricted areas or in certain airspace, and not operating for compensation or hire.
Under 103.7, ultralights are not required to meet airworthiness certification standards, to be registered, or to bear markings of any type. Ultralight operators are not required to meet airman certification requirements or to have medical certificates. A detailed discussion of the history and background of ultralight vehicles can be found in the preamble to the 1982 final rule (47 FR 38770, September 2, 1982),
The ultralight community currently administers voluntary registration and airman training programs for ultralight owners and operators seeking these options, as well as voluntary manufacturer-developed programs for ultralight airworthiness. It has been this activity that created the reliable, two-seat ultralight vehicle trainer that has made possible the present, structured system of dual-instruction for new part 103 pilots. Unfortunately, as a result of weight, performance, or seating capacity, these vehicles may fall outside of the present ultralight definitions, despite the fact that, in operational terms, they are primarily suited to precisely the same type of recreational/sport flying as those machines that can be operated under part 103.
Under the grants of exemption from the present regulations a part 103 pilot receives training and becomes proficient in the operation of these two-seat vehicles. However, under the present exemptions these two-seat vehicles can only be used for training purposes and not for recreational flight. A detailed discussion and background of exemptions permitting individuals to give instruction in two-place ultralight vehicles can be found in the text of the exemptions. [See: ASC #6080, Docket 27953; EAA #3784, Docket 23477; USHGA #4721, Docket 23492; and USUA #4274, Docket 24427.]
The Recreational Pilot Certificate
The FAA established the recreational pilot certificate in 1989. The recreational pilot certificate was intended to provide a lower cost alternative to the private pilot certificate by requiring less training than is required for private pilot certification. The FAA believed that the recreational pilot certificate would be particularly attractive for persons interested in flying basic, experimental, or homebuilt aircraft that are for the most part operated in close proximity to a home airport in airspace in which communication with air traffic control facilities is not required. The decrease in required skills and number of required hours was intended to lower the burden when compared to the burden of obtaining a private pilot certificate which had become more complex over time. A recreational pilot may operate a certificated non-complex aircraft with up to four seats and one engine up to 180 horsepower. Increased pilot limitations were imposed in exchange for the decreased requirements to obtain a recreational pilot certificate. For instance, a recreational pilot may not act as pilot in command of an aircraft that is classified as a multiengine airplane, powered-lift, glider, airship, or balloon. Nor may a recreational pilot act as pilot in command of an aircraft between sunset and sunrise or in airspace in which communication with air traffic control is required.
Recreational student pilots receive flight training from an FAA certificated flight instructor in a certificated aircraft. Flight instruction may be received from an instructor in an experimental category aircraft if the aircraft is owned by the student.
The recreational pilot certificate has not proven to be as attractive an alternative to the private pilot certificate as the FAA had anticipated. A detailed discussion of the history and background of the recreational pilot certificate can be found in the preambles to the 1985 NPRM (50 FR 26286, June 25, 1985) and the 1989 final rule (54 FR 13028, March 29, 1989).
Primary Category Aircraft
In 1992, the FAA established the primary category aircraft in response to general aviation groups who cited the decline in the general aviation industry in the United States. The intent was to establish standards and procedures that would encourage the production of affordable aircraft suitable for general aviation use.
The new primary category of aircraft and new simplified procedures for type, production, and airworthiness certification, and associated maintenance procedures were developed for aircraft of simple design that are intended exclusively for pleasure and personal use. Specifically, primary category aircraft must be unpowered or an airplane powered by a single, naturally aspirated engine, with a 61-knot or less stall speed limitation ; or rotorcraft with a 6 pound per square foot main rotor disc loading limitation. In addition, primary category aircraft cannot exceed a 2,700 pound certificated weight, a seating capacity of four, and must have unpressurized cabins. Primary category aircraft cannot be used for the carriage of persons or property for hire although under certain conditions they can be available for rental as well as for flight instruction.
FAA may issue a primary category type and production certificate to a manufacturer through a simplified administrative process in which the applicant shows compliance with applicable airworthiness requirements.
A full discussion of the history and background of primary category aircraft can be found in the preambles to the 1989 notice of proposed rulemaking (54 FR 9738, March 7, 1989) and the 1992 final rule (57 FR 41360, September 9, 1992).
Developments Since 1982
Since the adoption of part 103 individual citizens and business entrepreneurs have sought to serve the developing community of sport aviators by creating a wide variety of ultralight vehicles under part 103 that have low forward inertia and are still relatively simple to operate. Recognition of the need for training led to development of two-place ultralight training vehicles, qualification of flight instructors, and to FAA exemptions to allow these two-place training vehicles to be operated under part 103. In response to an enthusiastic and growing recreational flying community, the marketplace generated many very active ultralight vehicle manufacturing, sales, training, and service enterprises.
Over the years a desire for increased safety, coupled with public misconception of the actual scope of part 103 has led some well-intentioned people to begin operating in a way that may be technically outside of that scope. Operations of fat and two-place ultralights raise complex issues that are not well served by existing regulations. Fat ultralights are usually those powered ultralights that may be slightly over the 254 pound weight limit, often because of additional equipment installed after purchase by the owner whose goal is to enhance safety. Typically, these modifications are to add features such as brakes, instruments, larger wheels or a larger, more reliable engine.
Ultralight owners who choose not to operate under part 103 may in some cases obtain FAA aircraft registration by complying with 14 CFR part 47 and airworthiness certification by complying with the airworthiness certification requirements of 14 CFR part 21 including the experimental certificate requirements of 21.191 through 21.195 and primary category aircraft requirements of 21.24. Aircraft with experimental certificates must be operated under the operating limitations of 91.319. To operate certificated aircraft under 14 CFR part 91, pilots have to comply with pilot and medical certification requirements in 14 CFR part 61.
The FAA and the ultralight community recognize that the present limitations of part 103 have advantages and disadvantages. Ultralight vehicles that are operated within the strict limitations (weight, fuel, etc., as well as the operating limitations) provide a satisfactory and safe level of aviation related sport to many individuals. In fact, many persons who currently operate within the legal confines of part 103 are concerned that any effort to expand part 103 to accommodate larger ultralights could threaten the present legitimate part 103 ultralight vehicles because of the likelihood that the vehicle/aircraft distinction would disappear.
The recreational pilot certificate became available to aspiring pilots in 1989, seven years after the adoption of part 103. Many kit and certificated aircraft have been available for the recreational pilot to fly yet most recreational pilot candidates instead choose, or are recommended by their instructors to pursue a private pilot certificate. No new significant privilege was afforded the recreational pilot nor were there any breakthrough aircraft designs aimed toward this certificate.
Creation of the primary category aircraft in 1992 offered the option of manufacturing and selling ready to fly aircraft of simple design which may be more affordable than aircraft certificated under standard category airworthiness requirements. The primary category also created the opportunity to operate and own an aircraft for which pilot-owner maintenance could be performed. As of now, it is not clear how many manufacturers will take advantage of this new certification route.
Formation of ARAC Working Group
An Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee (ARAC) was established in 1991 to assist the FAA in the rulemaking process by providing input from outside the Federal Government on major regulatory issues affecting aviation safety. The ARAC includes representations of air carriers, manufacturers, general aviation, labor groups, universities, associations, airline passenger groups, and the general public.
In order to address the issues previously discussed, the FAA asked the ARAC to accept a task to review part 103 and to make a recommendation to the ARAC concerning whether new or revised standards are appropriate. On August 30, 1993, the FAA announced the formation of an ARAC Part 103 (Ultralight Vehicles) Working Group (58 FR 47172, September 7, 1993). As part of its task the working group was asked to consider a petition to amend part 103 (Docket No. 25591) that had previously been submitted by the United States Ultralight Association. After its formation in August of 1993 the Ultralight Vehicles Working Group explored numerous options for addressing the ultralight issue. Initially, the options considered involved expanding part 103 to include within the ultralight vehicle definition heavier vehicles and two-place vehicles and amending the recreational pilot certificate requirements to relax those requirements for persons interested in flying aircraft at the light end of the aviation spectrum. After numerous discussions at the working group level and after consultation with the FAA, the Working Group reported to the ARAC and the ARAC recommended to the FAA the following:
1. The current privileges and limitations under part 103 should remain intact and the related exemptions should be continued.
2. The primary category requirements of 21.24 adopted in 1992 (57 FR 41367, September 9, 1992) are sufficiently flexible and efficient to allow the certification of many aircraft under consideration by this group. An aircraft manufacturer can also choose to -- (a) Certificate as an aircraft under the primary category a vehicle of a size that would currently be eligible to operate under part 103; (b) Sell aircraft as kit aircraft, leaving certification to the builder; or (c) Build non-certificated vehicles under part 103. It must be recognized that an extremely low number of vehicles are produced or imported each year for some segments of aviation activity beyond part 103 and for some two-place operations conducted under part 103 exemptions. Primary category certification is not economically feasible presently nor in the foreseeable future for these operations. Continued use of exemptions and potential future regulatory action will be required for these operations.
3. The current recreational pilot certification rules in part 61 are unnecessarily restrictive and do not accommodate the scope of operations for persons who are interested in flying a wide variety of small, slow, single and two-place aircraft.
4. Therefore, the FAA should establish a new sport pilot certificate that would be modeled on the primary category aircraft concept. That is, the rules would allow for the creation of different sport pilot certificate ratings that would be appropriate for the unique training and operational requirements of the types of small, slow, single and two-place aircraft that are or would be certificated under the primary category or that could be home built.
As a result of this recommendation, the FAA revised the task previously assigned to the ARAC to broaden its scope from just reviewing part 103 to recommend whether new or revised standards for part 103 are appropriate to reviewing part 103 and recommending whether new or revised standards, under part 103 or other regulations that may be affected, are appropriate. (Emphasis added).
The Federal Register announcement of the revised task stated that the ARAC has accepted the revised task and has chosen to assign it to the existing Part 103 (Ultralight Vehicles) Working Group.
While the ARAC working group continued to be known as the Ultralight working group, after the task was revised, and consistent with the first ARAC recommendation that led to the revision, the focus of the working group's discussion was no longer part 103. Instead, as earlier recommended by the working group and approved by the ARAC, the working group focused on developing a new sport pilot certificate that would be modeled on the primary category aircraft concept.
This proposal is the result of the revised task. The proposal is in the public interest because it would improve safety by providing more instructors in type who would be validated through recognized procedures. It would enhance the use of certified vehicles in additional classes and types and would expand annual condition inspections that would improve safety.
The proposal would also expand the number of certified pilots thus increasing the benefits and uses of the national air space system. This would promote increased training thereby enhancing safety.
This proposal would provide reasonable and required training, airman certification, and promote compliance with general operating rules, while affording relief from burdensome and expensive medical requirements for persons operating light, slow, unique aircraft.
In a survey of ASC clubs, it was found that an estimated 34% of the pilots came to ultralight flying from general aviation, 30% had already additionally attained general aviation licenses in addition to continuing to fly ultralights, and 25% would get a Sport Pilot's rating if it were available as outlined. An assessment of community size shows that there are about 35,000 to 40,000 ultralight type vehicles in the overall community. It is further noted that a Sport Pilot rating will save an estimated $2,500 to $3,500 over obtaining a private pilot certificate, given the American average of 82 hours to attain the rating. The resulting savings to the community is estimated at $25 million to $35 million. (Based on 25% of 40,000 pilots each saving $3,500.)
This proposal has received support from many different and highly varied aviation disciplines represented on the ARAC and on the Part 103 Working Group. However, The United States Ultralight Association (USUA) submitted a separate opinion which is stated below:
Statement of the United States Ultralight Association
The United States Ultralight Association (USUA) has participated for over four years in the development of this proposal which is in response to the FAA's assignment to review our 1988 petition to FAA regarding operation of two-place ultralight training vehicles (allowed by FAA exemptions) and other craft which modestly exceed the limitations of the ultralight rule (FAR Part 103).
In the interest of continuing a united effort to reach some modification to the regulations which may be of benefit to some individuals, USUA will not dissent or object to the current Sport Pilot proposal. However, USUA must continue to state that the current Sport Pilot proposal disregards the fundamental simplicities embodied in Part 103. It has gone so far beyond the original USUA request that it will not resolve the original issues which USUA has presented.
Statement of the Capella Aircraft Corporation (concurred in by ASC and NAPPF)
In reference to the Statement of the United States Ultralight Association , we appreciate that this organization has agreed not to dissent or object to the current Sport Pilot proposal . We do not believe that the operations currently conducted under the guise of FAR Part 103 that modestly exceed the limitations of the ultralight rule , only distantly relate to the privileges now requested in this proposal. It is our belief that the potential exists for operations of ultralight styled aircraft to far exceed the scope of the ultralight rule (FAR Part 103). We believe that the proposed Sport Pilot certificate is an appropriate solution for certificating airmen that wish to operate single and two seat light sport aircraft as defined herein. We also believe the proposed umbrella concept that provides for various category ratings specific to these diverse types of aircraft, coupled with the concept of a basic airmen's certificate that would allow removal of basic limitations by obtaining additional training and instructor issued logbook endorsements, may eliminate the need to revisit these issues in the future.
Discussion of the Proposals
The Sport Pilot Concept
This proposal would establish a new subpart under 14 CFR part 61 that creates a new sport pilot certificate correlated to meet the knowledge and skill requirements needed to operate a diverse category of small, lightweight, aircraft that have emerged since the early 1980's.
The proposed new sport pilot certificate would introduce a new concept into the airman certification rules. As previously stated, this new concept is based on the primary category aircraft regulations in 21.17(f) and 21.24 that were issued in 1992 to facilitate the type certification of aircraft of a simple design that are intended exclusively for recreational and sport flying. For most aircraft the FAA has adopted detailed design requirements set out in 14 CFR parts 23, 25, 27, and 29 that apply to airplanes or helicopters depending on the category of aircraft (e.g., normal, utility, commuter, transport) for which a type certificate is sought. However, for primary category aircraft the FAA has not issued separate, detailed design requirements. Rather, under 21.17(f) and 21.24, an applicant can propose applicable requirements in parts 23, 27, 31, 33, and 35 or other appropriate airworthiness criteria. If, after an opportunity for public comment, the Administrator finds that the proposed airworthiness criteria are appropriate and applicable to the specific design and intended use and will provide an acceptable level of safety, the Administrator may approve the criteria as a basis for primary aircraft type certification.
The proposed sport pilot certification process would operate in a similar manner as the primary category process. The proposed process is described in more detail in the following sections of this preamble.
The ARAC carefully considered amending the recreational pilot certification rules in order to support this area of aviation but does not recommend this approach at this time partly because the recreational pilot certificate authorizes flight in more sophisticated conventional aircraft (e.g., four-place) and requires a medical certificate. The ARAC considers medical self-evaluation to be an essential part of this proposal. Also, the sport pilot umbrella approach provides several key capabilities not available under recreational pilot. The ARAC views the proposed sport pilot certificate as an entry level to certificated flight designed to address the operation of very different, unique, and diverse types of recreational aircraft. The airmen training and certification of such diverse categories, classes, and types of aircraft is not addressed in the recreational pilot certificate issued under present part 61.
The diversity of aircraft envisioned to be operated under this category include such types as Powered Parachutes, Powered Flex Wing Trikes (Powered Hang Gliders), Powered Fixed Wing Aircraft, Ultralight Sailplane, Ultralight Sailplane Tug, Gyroplane and powered Rotorcraft, and many other unique and unconventional flying machines. The potential also exists for the addition of future types that have yet to be conceived but that may fit this category of operations in the future. In addition, many of the listed types may be further sub-grouped to address such dissimilar features as pusher and tractor engine locations - single and double surface wings - weight shift and single, double, or three axis controls systems - conventional tail, canard, and tail-less aircraft - amphibious configurations of many of the above - and tricycle or conventional landing gear configurations.
The sport pilot umbrella approach addresses:
(1) Detail privileges and limitations which would be included in a new proposed subpart J of part 61 and which would be tailored to the very diverse and unique aircraft types and that would be commensurate with the low weight and speed of aircraft of low relative energy.
(2) Specific type related training programs which could be designed and developed to accommodate the very unique and specific characteristics of a broad spectrum of types of aircraft not currently covered.
(3) Certification of sport pilot instructors, trained to meet the specific and diverse needs of the sport pilot, to the full flight instructor rules of proposed part 61, subpart J, appropriate to the rating sought as determined by the flight standards review board.
Subpart J--Sport Pilot Certificates
The FAA proposes to adopt a new subpart J in part 61 to contain requirements for a sport pilot certificate. As previously stated, the overall proposed procedures for determining the appropriate requirements for a sport pilot certificate or for an individual rating on a sport pilot certificate are similar to the procedure used for determining the applicable airworthiness requirements for a primary category aircraft under 14 CFR 21.17(f) and 21.24. However, the proposed rule language in this notice would contain more detailed general requirements for a sport pilot certificate than are set out for primary category aircraft type certification. In addition to meeting these general requirements, a person interested in a sport pilot class or type rating not previously established, could request that the Administrator establish an appropriate class or type rating. Under this proposal, the requester would suggest to the FAA specific requirements and limitations for the specific category, class, and type rating to be established. A typical requester could be an aircraft manufacturer, or a national organization that represents interested persons. For example, exemptions from part 103 that have helped to identify the need for this rulemaking have been issued to United States Ultralight Association (USUA), Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA), United States Hang Gliding Association (USHGA), and Aero Sports Connection (ASC).
An overall goal of this proposal is to enhance safety by providing a pilot certificate for persons who have outgrown the limitations of present part 103 without making the requirements for that certificate so stringent as to be economically impractical, at least for the larger market segments. This goal would be achieved by tailoring sport pilot rating requirements to the specific category and class aircraft to be flown. Thus, this proposed rulemaking recognizes and accommodates the growth in aircraft operations that have emerged since the early 1980's.
Additionally, the sport pilot certificate would encourage and motivate individuals to enter certificated flight because the training and flight time would be applicable to higher certificates if the individual so chooses. In this way the sport pilot certificate, like the recreational pilot certificate, would be an entry level certification that could serve as a continuum through the ATP certificate if the airman chooses. In addition to providing a continuum, the sport pilot certificate would cover a breadth of diversity in types of aircraft not covered under recreational pilot.
Flight Standards Review Board
Upon receiving a request for a new sport pilot certificate class or rating, the FAA would review the application to determine if there is sufficient information to organize a Flight Standards Review Board (FSRB) and, if so, the FAA would appoint an FSRB, as appropriate. The appointed FSRB would be made up of appropriate FAA personnel to review the proposed requirements and limitations and could include appropriate industry representatives at the request of the FSRB. After the FSRB has reviewed the application, it would approve, disapprove, or approve with changes the applicant's proposal for a new sport pilot certificate class or rating. One of the more controversial issues addressed by the ARAC Ultralight Working Group is the potential for the development of single seat, high performance aircraft within the proposed limitations. This is an issue that would be considered and dealt with by the FSRB in partnership with any appointed industry representatives.
For proposed new requirements approved by the FSRB, a notice would be published in the Federal Register to inform the public of the availability of the new proposed rating and give the public an opportunity to comment on the new rating. Any public comments would be reviewed by the FSRB and acted on as deemed necessary by the FSRB. After the completion of this review, the availability of the new rating and its standards would be announced in the Federal Register. The detailed instructions for applicants regarding this process would be provided in Advisory Circular AC61-XX titled Application and Approval of Sport Pilot Class or Rating.
Once a new class or rating for a sport pilot certificate is established following this procedure, individuals would apply under the appropriate generic requirements of proposed subpart J and the specific requirements as established by the FSRB.
Exception to Medical Certification
In place of the requirement to hold a medical certificate, each student sport pilot and each sport pilot would be required to certify at the time of applying for a certificate or rating that they have no known medical defect that makes them unable to pilot an eligible aircraft. This proposed approach of relying on the judgment of an individual pilot regarding his or her fitness in lieu of a medical certificate has for many years been FAA policy for glider pilots, balloon pilots, and the pilots of high performance motor gliders that exceed the performance of those aircraft envisioned to be operated under this proposal. Thus, a medically related safety problem does not appear to exist for basic aircraft used for limited recreational purposes.
The primary justification for proposing this exception for sport pilots is that both the pilots and the aircraft that would be affected by this proposal are very close to the persons and vehicles (powered and unpowered) that have operated under part 103 for over 15 years with no evidence that the absence of any medical requirement in part 103 creates a safety hazard. In fact, accident summary data from 1986 through 1992 indicates that the percentage of accidents involving medical causal factors is lower for those recreational type activities that do not require medical certificates than those activities that do require medical certification. During those seven years, there were 761 accidents in lighter-than-air aircraft and gliders. These operations do not require FAA medical certification. Only one of these 761 accidents showed a medical cause, slightly more than 1/10 of one per cent of total accidents. Of general aviation operations requiring medical certification, there were 46,976 total accidents, 99 of which (slightly more than 1/5 of one percent) showed a medical cause. Thus, a medically related safety problem does not appear to exist for basic aircraft used for limited recreational purposes.
Further justification is that the proposed sport pilot certificate would be subject to many limitations that do not apply to a private pilot. A sport pilot would not be allowed to fly within Classes A, B, C, or D airspace unless that sport pilot has prior authorization from the ATC facility having jurisdiction over that airspace. A sport pilot would be limited to exercising the privileges of his or her certificate in a two-seat aircraft with not more than 1,200 pound maximum certificated takeoff weight and not more than 39 kcas maximum stall speed for an airplane or equivalent limitation the Administrator deems appropriate for the class of aircraft. These pilots would not be allowed to fly passengers or property for compensation or hire or to fly outside the United States. They would be prohibited from flying between sunset and sunrise except under certain conditions in Alaska or during the twilight periods 30 minutes after official sunset and 30 minutes before official sunrise.
On the other hand, private and recreational pilots who have the necessary training endorsements may fly aircraft with more than two seats, with certificated gross takeoff weights up to 12,500 pounds, and a stalling speed of 61 kcas. Private pilots may fly at night, in the clouds, and outside the Untied States. Private pilots may carry more than one passenger. Private pilots may, for compensation or hire, fly in connection with any business or employment if the flight is only incidental to that business or employment, and the aircraft does not carry any passengers or property for compensation or hire. In addition, private pilots may fly aircraft for compensation or hire that are used in a passenger-carrying airlift sponsored by a charitable organization, or used in search and location operations.
An important relationship factor between airmen certificate privileges and limitations is the magnitude of the total aircraft energy such an airman might command. Lower energy means low risk and reduced demands on the pilot in terms of flight training. The aircraft energy a typical sport pilot could command is less than one-quarter that of a recreational pilot and one-fifteenth that of a typical private pilot. The most extreme projected aircraft energy allowed under sport pilot would be less than one-third the energy of an aircraft that could be flown by a recreational pilot.
As a household relationship to energy, the most extreme energy a sport pilot could command would only be enough total energy to raise a typical bathtub of water 6 degrees F. This is less than the energy commanded by any driver on a typical two-
lane back road. (See chart.)
[Insert Chart]
Reduced energy necessarily implies reduced risk, reduced aircraft handling difficulties, and reduced landing and takeoff room requirements. Clearly there would be a significant reduction in privileges in terms of speed, weight and energy for the proposed sport pilot certificate and this reduction is commensurate with the associated medical and training requirements.
As the previous paragraphs describe, the diversity and simplicity of aircraft envisioned to be operated under the proposed sport pilot certificate are simply not addressed by either the recreational or private pilot certificate. These conventional airmen certificates are intended to address the operation of only conventional general aviation aircraft designed for use in transportation. These aircraft are of a comparatively higher level of complexity and performance than that envisioned for sport pilot. The training of airmen for certification to the private or recreational pilot certificates is delegated to conventional certificated flight instructors, many of which do not have the interest in, or the experience with, the diversity of aircraft being addressed by the sport pilot proposal. The private and recreational pilot certificates are either incompatible with the diversity, or inappropriate to the simplicity, of the aircraft and their operation in not for transportation use for sport and recreation envisioned for the proposed sport pilot certificate. Of particular relevance is the following statement submitted by the Ultralight Pilots Association of Canada:
Ultralight Safety Documentation -
Experienced ultralight pilots have for years professed the inherent safety of ultralight flight, though it has not been possible to substantiate that intuitive conclusion through acceptable documentation, because of the unregulated and unlicensed nature of FAR Part 103 ultralight operations. However, Canada has been collecting information on comparable light aircraft activity for more than ten years.
Canada has established categories of comparable certificated ultralight aircraft that range in launch weight from 363.8 lb. for a single place, to 1212.6 lb. for a two-place seaplane. Launch weight is the ready-for-flight weight of the aircraft, including all equipment, instruments, and maximum fuel and oil. Minimum entry level training requirements include 10 hours of instruction, of which not less than 5 hours is to be dual and 2 hours is to be solo, and no fewer than 30 takeoffs and landings, -- roughly comparable to the U.S. ultralight training programs.
Transport Canada does not have a data collection process in place that provides an accident-per-hour flown rate. However, Transport Canada does provide registration totals and accident totals. This enables a valid rate comparison between registered general aviation and ultralight aircraft, and some additional interesting observations.
Comparing the records from 1987 to 1996 shows that general aviation registrations have decreased from 22,270 to 21,089, while ultralight aircraft registrations have increased from 2,949 to 4,070 - a trend that is also occurring in the US. GA accident rates have averaged one per every 51 registered aircraft (a rate of 0.0196) over the time period, while ultralight rates have averaged 1 per every 95 registered aircraft (a rate of 0.0105). Perhaps the most interesting information comes from additional analysis of ultralight accidents. General aviation pilots flying ultralight aircraft are responsible for 53% of the ultralight accidents, while ultralight pilots are responsible for 29.7%, and unlicensed pilots make up the remaining 17.3%. This information certainly seems to support the training-in-type approach which is integral to the Sport Pilot proposal.
Conclusion: The available data demonstrates that ultralight activity is as safe or safer than general aviation. The data does not support the perception that there is more risk involved in flying ultralight aeroplanes than in flying general aviation aircraft. The data shows an accident rate that is as low or lower than for general aviation. Given that this ultralight activity includes flight training as well as pleasure flying, it shows that ultralight instructors are responsible and that the pilots are well trained. Since we know that there are some pilots who illegally carry passengers in ultralight aeroplanes, the data shows a de facto safety record for passenger carrying in ultralight aeroplanes. The accident rates also demonstrate a safety record for the ultralight aeroplane maintained by the ultralight pilot and instructor.
On the other hand, there is an identified problem with general aviation pilots causing ultralight accidents. Requiring general aviation pilots to have training in ultralight aeroplanes would result in fewer ultralight accidents.
The above data does not show a clear risk, and does not define a problem in the operation of ultralight aeroplanes by ultralight pilots. Since the risk of accidents is lower in ultralights flown by ultralight pilots, the risk of injury to a passenger in an ultralight aeroplane piloted by the holder of a PP-UL is also lower. Creating a larger regulatory burden for ultralight pilots cannot be justified by the data. Requiring the pilot to have general aviation training will not result in fewer accidents. (The Canadian proposals for passenger carrying in ultralight aeroplanes by ultralight pilots include the requirement for knowledge, experience, and skill similar to that required for the Canadian Pilot Permit-Recreational Aeroplane.) The rationale is that more knowledge and training will result in increased safety to the passenger. According to the data, this rationale is not valid. If Transport Canada personnel follow their regulatory policy, there is no justification to require increased regulations for ultralight pilots to carry passengers in ultralight aeroplanes.
The ARAC believes that the pilot community generally exercises reasonable judgment with respect to their medical condition. Each glider, balloon, and higher-rated pilot (i.e., those who must be medically evaluated and certified by an aviation medical examiner) currently must evaluate his or her fitness each time that pilot operates an aircraft (see 61.53). Data available to the FAA does not indicate any accident or incident as a result of inadequate preflight self-evaluation by pilots who hold medical certificates. In addition, accident and incident data associated with medical incapacitation for glider pilots, who are not required to hold medical certificates even when operating a powered glider, provide no statistics that demonstrate that the absence of a medical certificate decreases safety.
The proposed self-evaluation medical requirements are based on the ARAC recommendation which the ARAC reached after considering a number of alternatives such as: (1) requiring that the applicant hold a valid drivers license; (2) requiring a letter from an AME or a personal physician addressing that physician's knowledge as to the applicant's health; or (3) allowing the FSRB to define medical requirements unique to each specific aircraft type as developed under the umbrella (sport pilot) proposal.
The ARAC concluded that a drivers license requirement would provide purposeless paperwork and recordkeeping.
A letter from an AME or other physician would create yet another class of medical which ARAC concluded is not necessary for the very slow and light aircraft envisioned to be flown by the holder of the proposed sport pilot certificate.
ARAC believes that all of the activities allowed under the proposed certificate are of such a limited nature, in regard to exposing the general public and property to a risk of injury and/or damage, that individual evaluation of each rating would not be necessary. Further requiring the FSRB to make medical decisions would require the addition of a medical expert to the board, only to make decisions that ARAC has concluded will always result in the same decision regardless of the rating sought.
The overall thrust of the ARAC discussion was to avoid medical examinations that could not be justified from a safety perspective. The ARAC based its recommendation on its belief that the proposed sport pilot operations are closely akin to the operations that have been conducted safely for over 15 years under part 103, and the belief that the proposed sport pilot operations are of significantly less performance and impact than those operations conducted by private pilots of high performance motorgliders, the operation for which contain no medical requirements.
The ARAC concluded that a self-evaluated medical would be entirely appropriate for these very slow, light aircraft and considers a self-evaluated medical to be of primary importance and vital to public acceptance and participation in the proposed sport pilot program.
Grandfathering of Part 103 Pilots
With the adoption of part 103, the FAA chose not to promulgate Federal regulations regarding pilot certification, vehicle certification, and vehicle registration, preferring that the ultralight community assume the initiative for development of these important safety programs. Subsequently, the FAA granted exemptions to part 103 to permit flight training programs to be conducted by the ultralight industry. ASC, EAA, USHGA, and USUA are currently conducting such flight training programs under the exemptions granted by the FAA. The ARAC asserts that there can be no doubt that the flight training conducted by the ultralight industry under the exemptions has provided the cornerstone of an ever improving safety record of ultralight vehicle operations. The FAA recognizes that the success of these flight training programs exemplifies the capability of the aviation industry to take responsibility for the safety of its flight operations. The proposed rule provides for grandfathering in 61.303(h), which allows the Administrator to accept experience, including experience as an ultralight vehicle pilot who has successfully completed a training program under an FAA recognized part 103 training program, to meet part or all of the required flight proficiency and aeronautical experience as applicable to the category, class and type rating sought.
Grandfathering of Part 103 Instructors
The ARAC found that within the existing FAA certificated flight instructors there are (a) virtually no instructors with experience in flying and teaching in the new lightweight, uncomplicated, slow speed, and diverse (such as powered parachutes) aircraft to be operated primarily by those seeking the sport pilot certificate; and (b) virtually no instructors with an interest in becoming qualified to teach in those aircraft. From the very beginning, there must be qualified FAA certificated instructors to teach those seeking the sport pilot certificate. The instructor base will come from those instructors currently teaching under the exemptions held by ASC, EAA, USHGA, and USUA. It is imperative, therefore, that the FAA include a grandfather clause for those individuals currently authorized to teach in ultralight vehicles. These persons would be eligible for an FAA flight instructor certificate limited to the category, class and type of aircraft in which the instructor is fully qualified.
Quality and safety of the flight instructing programs administered by ASC, EAA, USHGA, and USUA under the exemptions is exemplified by both Buckeye and Six Chuter powered parachute manufacturers reports that in the last three years, sales of powered parachute vehicles have grown dramatically, yet sales for replacement parts have been reduced significantly from what would otherwise have been expected. Specifically, Buckeye reports an increase in sales of 300% of vehicles with a reduction of replacement parts per vehicle sold (including per existing population support) of 20%. The ARAC working group believes that this demonstrates that because of training under the exemptions, the safety record has progressively improved.
The proposed rule provides for grandfathering in proposed 61.184. Proposed 61.184(a) would allow the Administrator to count experience, including experience as an ultralight pilot or flight instructor, gained under an FAA recognized part 103 training program, to meet part or all of the required flight proficiency and aeronautical experience as applicable to the class and type rating sought.
In addition, under proposed 61.184(b), the FAA would allow a person who is authorized by an appropriate exemption holder under part 103 to give instruction in two-place ultralight vehicles, and who is recommended by the exemption holder as being currently qualified for a particular class and type of aircraft to be issued a flight instructor certificate limited to the category, class, and type of aircraft in which he or she is qualified. This would provide for a cadre of experienced flight instructors when the rule goes into effect.
Section-by-Section
Conforming amendments
A number of amendments would be needed in other subparts of part 61 in order to reference the new sport pilot certificate. Specifically changes are proposed for 61.3 and 61.23 to add the sport pilot certificate to the list of pilots for whom a medical certificate is not required. Section 61.5 would be amended to add the sport pilot certificate and ratings to the list of certificates and ratings issued under part 61. Section 61.56 would be amended to allow a sport pilot to accomplish the flight review requirements of that section by logging a minimum of 50 hours PIC within the previous 12 calendar months with at least three takeoffs and landings within the previous 90 days. Sections 61.83 and 61.87 would be amended to add references to sport pilots in the regulations governing student pilots.
Subpart J - Sport Pilots
Applicability
Proposed 61.301 states that the proposed new subpart prescribes the requirements for obtaining sport pilot certificates and ratings, the conditions under which those certificates and ratings are necessary, and the general operating rules for persons who hold these certificates and ratings.
Sport Pilots: Eligibility
Proposed 61.303 parallels 61.96 except that the minimum age would be 16 years and the applicant for a sport pilot certificate would not be required to hold a medical certificate, but would be required to certify that they have no known medical defect that makes them unable to pilot an eligible aircraft. Requirements as to aeronautical experience and other provisions of this part would be established by the FAA Administrator as appropriate for the sport pilot rating sought. The proposed ages of 14 for student pilot and 16 for pilot are appropriate for slower, less sophisticated aircraft and are in keeping with the FAA's recognition of that fact as evidenced by the same age requirements for piloting balloons and sail planes.
In addition, proposed 61.303(h) would provide a partial grandfathering for certain current ultralight pilots. Persons who have successfully completed an FAA recognized and appropriate ultralight pilot training program and who can provide written documentation of that training and of proficiency and aeronautical experience in the specific type aircraft for the rating sought could show compliance with all or part of the oral and flight test and aeronautical experience requirements of proposed 61.303(e) and (f).
Sport Pilots: Aeronautical Knowledge
Proposed 61.305 contains minimum aeronautical knowledge requirements that are partly based on existing criteria for part 103 training programs that have been recognized by the FAA and partly based on existing criteria contained in part 61 for recreational pilot certificates. In addition, safety would be enhanced by the specific aeronautical knowledge requirements developed by the FSRB related to specific class and type.
The umbrella concept was designed to accommodate pilot skills for any type of aircraft. Requirements for safe piloting of these aircraft will be specific to each class and type of aircraft.
While requirements for some of these aircraft could be determined by existing regulations, other classes and types require different regulations, specific to the flight characteristics of those aircraft. An example would be piloting a hot air balloon as compared to a powered parawing.
Sport Pilots: Flight Proficiency
Proposed 61.307 contains minimum flight proficiency requirements, but is written so that the Administrator determines any additional specific proficiency requirements based on the class and type rating sought. Since an unlimited number of class and type ratings may be approved, the proposed rule does not attempt to outline every possible rating as is done with the other certificates in part 61. A list of the required minimum sport pilot operations is included in the proposed rule as a basis for the development and approval of a class and type rating.
Sport Pilots: Aeronautical Experience
Proposed 61.309 allows the Administrator through the FSRB to establish minimum aeronautical experience requirements for each individual class and type rating. The aeronautical experience requirements in each case would be the requirements that the FSRB determines are necessary for the class and type rating proposed by an applicant. Since an unlimited number of class and type ratings may be approved under this proposal, the rule does not attempt to outline every possible rating as is done with the other certificates in part 61. However, the proposed rule allows the Administrator to count experience, including experience as a flight instructor, gained under an FAA recognized part 103 training program to meet part or all of the required aeronautical experience as applicable to the rating sought.
Sport Pilots: Privileges and Limitations
Proposed 61.311 contains sport pilot certificate privileges and limitations and in addition provides that the Administrator could establish additional privileges and limitations as appropriate for a specific rating under a sport pilot certificate. Specifically, proposed 61.311 limits a person operating an aircraft under a sport pilot certificate to the following:
1. The aircraft capacity could not exceed two persons.
2. The aircraft maximum certificated takeoff weight could not exceed 1,200 lbs. and the stall speed for airplanes, could not exceed 39 knots calibrated air speed (KCAS) or an equivalent limitation established by the Administrator for other types of aircraft.
3. The sport pilot would be allowed to do the following:
( Share operating expenses of a flight with a passenger.
( For the purpose of obtaining an additional rating fly as the sole occupant of an aircraft provided certain criteria are met.
( Operate an aircraft to tow a glider or unpowered ultralight if certain criteria are met (as established by a FSRB).
4. The sport pilot would be prohibited from operating an aircraft to do any of the following:
( To carry passengers or property for compensation or hire.
( For flight outside the United States.
( For flight between sunset and sunrise except under certain limited conditions. Specifically, the times of 30 minutes before sunrise and 30 minutes after sunset are the crucial times for flight and instruction for wind sensitive light aircraft similar to hot air balloons. If this privilege were not granted, it would severely impact training time. This time is needed to enhance safety through training.
( For flight within classes A, B, C and D airspace without prior ATC authorization. Operations with prior ATC authorization have been conducted since 1982 under part 103 and its exemptions without known incidents according to the exemption holders.
( For flight beyond visual reference with the surface.
( To fly an aircraft for which more than one pilot is required.
A sport pilot who is an aircraft salesman would be allowed to demonstrate an eligible aircraft in flight to a potential buyer if the pilot has the appropriate rating and at least 100 hours in the type of aircraft to be demonstrated.
A sport pilot certificate would carry a notation stating that the holder does not meet ICAO requirements.
The proposed general privileges and limitations described above would apply to any class and type rating proposed under the sport pilot certificate. Additional specific privileges and limitations would be established by the FSRB. The proposed limitations are intended to limit the activity of sport pilots to non-commercial recreational activities and training, thereby minimizing any safety hazard for the general public. The limitations are not intended to prevent the development of new forms of aviation recreational activities or aircraft. The potential for possible damage to people and property on the ground in the event of an accident would be limited because the proposed maximum weights and speed would limit the potential impact energy.
This proposal would include the towing of gliders or unpowered ultralights as a sports pilot privilege. The privilege to tow non-powered ultralights and gliders can safely assist one of the few aspects of aviation that is presently growing in the United States. The aerotowing of ultralight gliders and hang gliders has been well developed over the past decade, domestically and internationally, and the growth of these activities is breathing new life into many small airports and airparks. This activity requires specialized tugs which fly very slow, slower than even most powered ultralight vehicles, and are generally very easy to pilot. Because of this particular similarity with ultralights, data and experience obtained with those ultralights is relevant to understanding potential issues with this privilege of the Sport Pilot.
The U.S. Hang Gliding Association has extensive experience in this arena completing well over 100,000 aerotows over the past 13 years under exemption with powered ultralights and with a few experimental certificated aircraft. The safety record of these operations has been extremely good, only 2 accidents yielding fatalities during those 13 years and this record was achieved generally with unlicensed pilots operating powered ultralights while following industry practices. To preserve this safety record, the activity does require operational guidelines similar to those implemented by the USHGA, and provision is made for the FSRB to establish those. Furthermore, the expected skill levels of pilots certificated under Sport Pilot, coupled with likely FSRB criteria would establish tug pilot skill and proficiency levels that match or exceed those of current ultralight tug pilots. Related data from ultralights indicates safety could be preserved with Sport Pilots towing gliders and unpowered aircraft. Furthermore, the FSRB could easily adjust the criteria as necessary through administrative action to correct any unforeseen problems to preserve safety.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This proposal contains information collections which are subject to review by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13). This title, description, and respondent description of the annual burden are shown below.
Title: Sport Pilot Certification Requirements
Description: [Insert part from summary that explains what NPRM is about.]
Description of Respondents: [Describe who will be commenting and paperwork/recordkeeping burden.]
Individuals and organizations may submit comments on the information collection requirement by [insert date xx days after publication in the Federal Register], and should direct them to the address listed in the ADDRESSES section of this document. Comments also should be submitted to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB, New Executive Office Building, Room 10202, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20503, Attn: Desk Officer for FAA.
Persons are not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The burden associated with this proposal has been submitted to OMB for review. The FAA will publish a notice in the Federal Register notifying the public of the approval numbers and expiration date.
International Compatibility
The FAA has reviewed corresponding International Civil Aviation Organization international standards and recommended practices and Joint Aviation Authorities regulations, where they exist, and has discussed similarities and differences in these proposed amendments and foreign regulations.
Regulatory Evaluation Summary
[TBD by APO]
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 requires agencies to analyze the economic effect of regulatory changes on small entities. Third, the Office of Management and Budget directs agencies to assess the effect of regulatory changes on international trade. In conducting these analyses, the FAA has determined that this proposed rule [is/is not] a significant regulatory action as defined in the Executive Order and the Department of Transportation Regulatory Policies and Procedures. This proposed rule [would/would not] have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities and would not constitute a barrier to international trade. The FAA invites the public to provide comments, and supporting data, on the assumptions made in this evaluation. All comments received will be considered in the final regulatory evaluation.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Determination
[TBD by APO]
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) of 1980 was enacted by Congress to ensure that small entities are not unnecessarily or disproportionately burdened by Government regulations. The RFA requires a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis if a proposed rule has a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small business entities. FAA Order 2100.14A, Regulatory Flexibility Criteria and Guidance, establishes threshold costs and small entity size standards for complying with RFA requirements.
International Trade Impact Analysis
[TBD by APO]
The provisions of this proposed rule [would have little or no] impact on trade for both U.S. firms doing business in foreign countries and foreign firms doing business in the United States.
Federalism Implications
The regulations proposed herein [will/will not] have substantial direct effects 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. Therefore, in accordance with Executive Order 13083, it is determined that this proposal [would/would not] have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Assessment
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (the Act), enacted as Pub. L. 104-4 on March 22, 1995, requires each Federal agency, to the extent permitted by law, to prepare a written assessment of the effects of any Federal mandate in a proposed or final agency rule that may result in the expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more (adjusted annually for inflation) in any one year. Section 204(a) of the Act, 2 U.S.C. 1534(a), requires the Federal agency to develop an effective process to permit timely input by elected officers (or their designees) of State, local, and tribal governments on a proposed significant intergovernmental mandate. A significant intergovernmental mandate under the Act is any provision in a Federal agency regulation that would impose an enforceable duty upon State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, of $100 million (adjusted annually for inflation) in any one year. Section 203 of the Act, 2 U.S.C. 1533, which supplements section 204(a), provides that before establishing any regulatory requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect small governments, the agency shall have developed a plan that, among other things, provides for notice to potentially affected small governments, if any, and for a meaningful and timely opportunity to provide input in the development of regulatory proposals.
The rule [does/does not] contain a Federal intergovernmental or private sector mandate that exceeds $100 million a year.
List of Subjects
14 CFR 61
Aircraft, Airmen, Recreation and recreation areas, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
The Proposed Amendment
In consideration of the foregoing, and under the authority of 49 U.S.C. 44702, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 61 as follows:
PART 61--CERTIFICATION: PILOTS AND FLIGHT INSTRUCTORS
1. The authority citation for part 61 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g); 40113, 44701-44703, 44707, 44709-44711, 45102-45103, 45301-45302.
2. Section 61.3 is amended by revising paragraph (c)(2)(i), by redesignating paragraphs (c)(2)(iv) through (c)(2)(vii) as (c)(2)(v) through (c)(2)(viii), by adding a new paragraph (c)(2)(iv), and by revising newly redesignated (c)(2)(v) to read as follows:
61.3 Requirements for certificates, ratings, and authorizations.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(2) * * *
(i) Is exercising the privileges of a student pilot certificate while seeking a sport pilot certificate or a pilot certificate with a glider category rating or balloon class rating;
* * * * *
(iv) Is holding a sport pilot certificate or a sport pilot flight instructor certificate, and is piloting or providing training in an eligible aircraft, as appropriate;
(v) Except as provided in paragraphs (c)(2)(iii) and (c)(2)(iv) of this section, is exercising the privileges of a flight instructor certificate, provided the person is not acting as pilot in command or as a required crewmember;
* * * * *
3. Section 61.5 is amended by redesignating paragraphs (a)(1)(ii) through (a)(1)(v) as paragraphs (a)(1)(iii) through (a)(1)(vi) and by adding new paragraphs (a)(1)(ii), (b)(7), and (c)5) to read as follows:
61.5 Certificates and ratings issued under this part.
(a) * * *
(1) * * *
(ii) Sport pilot.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(7) Sport pilot ratings as established by the Administrator.
(c) * * *
(5) Sport pilot ratings as established by the Administrator.
* * * * *
4. Section 61.23(b) is amended by redesignating paragraphs (b)(3) through (b)(8) as paragraphs (b)(4) through (b)(9), by adding a new paragraph (b)(3), and by revising newly redesignated paragraphs (b)(4) and (b)(5) to read as follows:
61.23 Medical certificates: Requirement and duration.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(3) When exercising the privileges of a sport pilot certificate;
(4) When exercising the privileges of a student pilot certificate while seeking a sport pilot certificate or a pilot certificate with a glider category rating or balloon class rating;
(5) When exercising the privileges of a flight instructor certificate with a glider category rating or a sport pilot flight instructor certificate;
* * * * *
5. Section 61.56 is amended by adding a new paragraph (i) to read as follows:
61.56 Flight review.
* * * * *
(i) A sport pilot may accomplish the requirements of this section in combination with the requirements of 61.57 by logging a minimum of 50 hours PIC within the previous 12 calendar months with at least three takeoffs and landings within the previous 90 days.
* * * * *
6. Section 61.83(a) and (b) are revised to read as follows:
61.83 Eligibility requirements for student pilots.
To be eligible for a student pilot certificate, an applicant must--
(a) Be at least 16 years of age for other than the operation of a glider, free balloon, or aircraft authorized by the Administrator for student sport pilots.
(b) Be at least 14 years of age for the operation of a glider, free balloon, or aircraft authorized by the Administrator for student sport pilots.
* * * * *
61.87 [Amended]
7. The first sentence of 61.87(a) is amended to read as follows: (a) General. A student pilot may not operate an aircraft in solo flight unless that student meets the requirements of this section or, the requirements of 61.311(g) and (h) as appropriate to the certificate sought.
8. Section 61.183 is amended by revising the introductory text of paragraph (c) and by revising paragraph (c)(2) to read as follows:
61.183 Eligibility requirements.
* * * * *
(c) Hold either a commercial pilot certificate or airline transport pilot certificate or, for a flight instructor rating limited to sport pilot, hold the appropriate sport pilot rating, with:
* * * * *
(2) Except for a sport pilot flight instructor, an instrument rating, if the person holds a commercial pilot certificate that is appropriate to the flight instructor rating sought, if applying for --
* * * * *
9. A new 61.184 is added to read as follows:
61.184 Sport pilot flight instructors: Grandfathering.
(a) Successful completion of, or service as a flight instructor in, an FAA recognized ultralight pilot training program applicable to the class and type rating sought may serve to meet all or part of paragraphs (d), (e), (f), and (g) of 61.183 of this chapter. The applicant must provide written documentation from the training provider that shows that the applicant has training, proficiency, and aeronautical experience in the specific class and type aircraft for the rating sought.
(b) A person who is authorized by an appropriate exemption holder under part 103 to give instruction in two-place ultralight training vehicles and who holds a current recreational or higher pilot certificate and is recommended by the exemption holder as being currently qualified for a particular class and type aircraft may be granted a sport pilot flight instructor certificate without further showing.
10. Subpart J is added to read as follows:
Subpart J--Sport Pilots
61.301 Applicability.
This subpart prescribes the requirements for issuing sport pilot certificates and ratings, the conditions under which those certificates and ratings are necessary, and the general operating rules for persons who hold these certificates and ratings.
61.303 Sport pilots: Eligibility.
To be eligible for a sport pilot certificate, a person must meet the following requirements:
(a) Be at least 16 years of age.
(b) Be able to read, speak, write and understand the English language. If the applicant is unable to meet one of these requirements due to medical reasons, then the Administrator may place such operating limitations on that applicant's pilot certificate as are necessary for the safe operation of the aircraft.
(c) Affix to the application a signed and dated statement certifying that he or she has no known medical defect that makes the applicant unable to safely pilot an eligible aircraft.
(d) Pass a written test on the subject areas on which instruction or home study is required by 61.305.
(e) Except as provided in paragraph (h) of this section, pass an oral and flight test on maneuvers and procedures selected by an FAA designated examiner to determine the applicant's competency in the appropriate flight operations listed in 61.307.
(f) Except as provided in paragraph (h) of this section, meet the aeronautical experience requirements established by the Administrator for the class and type rating sought.
(g) Comply with the sections of this part determined by the Administrator to apply to the class and type rating sought.
(h) Successful completion of an FAA recognized ultralight pilot training program applicable to the type rating sought may serve to meet all or part of paragraphs (e) and (f) of this section. The applicant must provide written documentation from the training provider that shows that the applicant has training, proficiency, and aeronautical experience in the specific type aircraft for the rating sought.
61.305 Sport pilots: Aeronautical knowledge.
An applicant for a sport pilot certificate must have logged ground instruction from an authorized instructor, or must present evidence showing satisfactory completion of a course of instruction or home study, in at least the areas of aeronautical knowledge determined by the Administrator appropriate to the class and type rating sought, including at least the following:
(a) Applicable Federal Aviation Regulations for sport pilot privileges, limitations, and flight operations that apply to the class and type rating sought;
(b) Accident reporting requirements of the National Transportation Safety Board;
(c) Use of the applicable portions of the "Airman's Information Manual" and FAA advisory circulars;
(d) If applicable, the use of aeronautical charts;
(e) Recognition of critical weather situations from the ground and in flight, windshear avoidance, and the applicable procurement and use of aeronautical weather reports and forecasts;
(f) The safe and efficient operation of aircraft, including collision avoidance, and recognition and avoidance of wake turbulence;
(g) The effects of density altitude on takeoff and climb performance;
(h) Weight and balance computations;
(i) Principles of applicable aerodynamics, powerplants, and aircraft systems;
(j) Aeronautical decision making and judgment;
(k) Preflight action as applicable to the rating sought; and
(l) Additional aeronautical knowledge requirements as established by the Administrator that apply to the class and type rating sought.
61.307 Sport pilots: Flight proficiency.
(a) The applicant for a sport pilot certificate must have logged instruction from an authorized flight instructor in those pilot operations listed in paragraph (b) of this section and any additional pilot operations determined by the Administrator to apply to the class and type rating sought. In addition, the applicant's logbook must contain an endorsement by an authorized flight instructor who has found the applicant competent to perform each of those operations safely as a sport pilot.
(b) The Administrator determines for each sport pilot rating the pilot operations in which an applicant must have instruction to include at least the following:
(1) Preflight preparation and procedures;
(2) Airport operations;
(3) Takeoffs, landings, and, if applicable, go-arounds;
(4) Performance maneuvers;
(5) Ground reference maneuvers;
(6) Navigation as applicable;
(7) Emergency operations;
(8) Postflight procedures.
61.309 Sport pilots: Aeronautical experience.
An applicant for a sport pilot certificate must accomplish and log flight training time as established by the Administrator for the class and type rating sought.
61.311 Sport pilots: Privileges and limitations.
(a) A person who holds a sport pilot certificate may operate an aircraft only in accordance with the privileges and limitations in this section and any additional privileges and limitations established by the Administrator for the appropriate class and type rating.
(b) A sport pilot certificate may be approved by the Administrator to allow a person to operate an aircraft as follows:
(1) With no more than:
(i) Capacity for two occupants;
(ii) 1,200 lbs. maximum certificated takeoff weight; and
(iii) 39 kcas maximum stalling speed for airplanes or equivalent limitation the Administrator deems appropriate for other categories of aircraft.
(2) Sharing the operating expenses of the flight with a passenger.
(c) Notwithstanding 61.69, a sport pilot may tow a glider or unpowered ultralight vehicle provided that the sport pilot meets the following requirements:
(1) The sport pilot has an endorsement in his or her pilot logbook certifying that he or she has received ground and flight training from an appropriately rated certificated flight instructor who authorized the sport pilot and is familiar with the techniques and procedures essential to the safe towing of gliders, including airspeed limitations, emergency procedures, signals used, and maximum angles of bank.
(2) The sport pilot has made and entered in his or her pilot logbook at least three flights as sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft towing a glider or unpowered ultralight vehicle while accompanied by a pilot who has met the requirements of this section and made and logged at least 10 flights as pilot-in-command of an aircraft towing a glider or unpowered ultralight vehicle.
(3) A person who, before (effective date of final rule) who has evidence of 10 or more flights as pilot in command of an aircraft towing a glider or unpowered ultralight vehicle need not comply with paragraphs (1) and (2) of this section.
(d) A sport pilot may not operate an aircraft--
(1) As pilot in command in an aircraft carrying passengers or property for compensation or hire;
(2) On a flight outside the United States;
(3) Between sunset and sunrise except that a sport pilot may operate an aircraft during the twilight periods 30 minutes before official sunrise and 30 minutes after official sunset or, in Alaska, during the period of civil twilight as defined in the Air Almanac, if:
(i) The aircraft is equipped with an operating anticollision light visible for at least 3 statute miles; and
(ii) All operations are conducted in uncontrolled airspace.
(4) Within Class A, Class B, Class C, or Class D airspace unless that sport pilot has prior authorization from the ATC facility having jurisdiction over that airspace.
(5) Except by visual reference with the surface.
(e) A sport pilot may not act as a required pilot flight crewmember on any aircraft for which more than one pilot is required by the type certificate of the aircraft or the regulations under which the flight is conducted, except when receiving flight instruction from an authorized flight instructor.
(f) The sport pilot certificate issued under this part carries the notation, "Holder does not meet ICAO requirements."
(g) For the purpose of obtaining additional ratings, while under the supervision of an authorized flight instructor who has given flight instruction in the appropriate subjects and has specifically authorized the sport pilot, a sport pilot may fly as sole occupant of an aircraft--
(1) For which the pilot does not hold an appropriate rating;
(2) Within airspace that requires communication with air traffic control; or
(3) Between sunset and sunrise, provided the flight or surface visibility is at least 5 statute miles.
(h) In order to fly solo as provided in paragraph (g) of this section, the sport pilot must meet the appropriate aeronautical knowledge and flight training requirements of 61.87, 61.305, 61.307, and 61.309 for that aircraft. When operating an aircraft under the conditions specified in paragraph (g) of this section, the sport pilot shall carry the logbook that has been endorsed for each flight by an authorized pilot instructor who--
(1) Has given the sport pilot instruction in the make and model of aircraft in which the solo flight is to be made;
(2) Has found that the sport pilot has met the applicable requirements of 61.87, 61.305, 61.307, and 61.309; and
(3) Has found that the sport pilot is competent to make solo flights in accordance with the logbook endorsement.
(i) A sport pilot who is an aircraft salesman and who has the appropriate rating with at least 100 hours of logged flight time in the type of aircraft to be demonstrated, may demonstrate that aircraft in flight to a potential buyer.