AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

SUMMARY: The FAA is proposing requirements for the certification, operation, maintenance, and manufacture of light-sport aircraft. Light-sport aircraft are often heavier and faster than ultralights and include airplanes, gliders, balloons, powered parachutes, weight-shift-control aircraft, and gyroplanes. This action is necessary to address advances in sport and recreational aviation technology, gaps in the existing regulations, and several petitions for rulemaking and for exemptions from existing regulations. The intended effect of this action is to provide for the manufacture of safe and economical aircraft and to allow operation of these aircraft by the public in a safe manner.

DATES: Send your comments on or before [INSERT DATE 90 DAYS AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER]May 6, 2002.

ADDRESSES: Address your comments to the Docket Management System, U.S. Department of Transportation, Room Plaza 401, 400 Seventh St., SW., Washington, DC 20590-0001. You must identify the docket number at the beginning of your comments, and you should submit two copies of your comments.

You may also submit comments through the Internet to http://dms/dot.gov. You may review the public docket containing comments to these proposed regulations in person in the Dockets Office between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Dockets Office is on the plaza level at the Department of Transportation building at the address above. Also, you may review public dockets on the Internet at http://dms.dot.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan Gardner at 202/267-5008 for questions regarding airman certification and operational issues (14 CFR parts 1, 43, 45, 61, 65, and 91). For questions regarding aircraft certification (14 CFR part 21), call Steve Flanagan at 202/267-5008. Due to the large volume of questions we expect from this proposal, please leave a message and we will answer your questions within 3 days. Please use this phone number for questions only. If you wish to submit a public comment, please review the procedures below to ensure that your comments are included in the docket.

I. Public Comment Procedures

2. Overview of the Proposal
3. Effects of the Proposal on the Public and Industry
4. Background

1. Current rules
2. The FAA’s reasons for this propsal

2. The Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee (ARAC)
3. Section-by-Section Analysis of the Proposal

1. What are the proposed changes to 14 CFR part 1?
2. What are the proposed changes to 14 CFR part 21?
3. What are the proposed changes to 14 CFR part 43?
4. What are the proposed changes to 14 CFR part 45?
5. What are the proposed changes to 14 CFR part 61?
6. What are the proposed changes to 14 CFR part 65?
7. What are the proposed changes to 14 CFR part 91?

2. Paperwork Reduction Act
3. International Compatibility
4. Regulatory Evaluation Summary–Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures

1. Economic evaluation
2. Initial regulatory flexibility determination
3. International trade impact statement
4. Initial unfunded mandates assessment

2. Executive Order 13132, Federalism

XI. Environmental Analysis

XII. Energy Impact

The FAA invites you to participate in this rulemaking action by submitting written data, views, or arguments. We also invite comments relating to the environmental, energy, federalism, or economic impact that might result from adopting the proposals in this document. Substantive comments should contain cost estimates. In your comments, identify the regulatory docket or notice number you are commenting on. Submit them in duplicate to the DOT Rules Docket address specified above.

We will file in the docket all comments received, as well as a report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel concerning this proposed rulemaking. The docket is available for public inspection before and after the comment closing date.

We will consider all comments received on or before the closing date before taking action on this proposed rulemaking. We will consider comments filed late as far as possible without incurring expense or delay. We may change the proposals in this document in response to comments.

If you want FAA to acknowledge receipt of your comments include a pre-addressed, stamped postcard. In the message area, identify the document you are commenting on by notice or docket number. We will date stamp the postcard and mail it to you.

We also anticipate holding an electronic public meeting during the comment period. You will be able respond on-line via the Internet to questions that we will ask you regarding this proposal. We will publish a notice in the Federal Register shortly announcing more details about this virtual public meeting.

You can get an electronic copy of this document from the Internet by taking the following steps:

(1) Go to the search function of the Department of Transportation’s electronic Docket Management System (DMS) web page (http://dms.dot.gov/search).

(2) On the search page, type in the last four digits of the docket number shown at the beginning of this document. Click on "search."

(3) On the next page, which contains the docket summary information, click on the item you want to see.

You can also get an electronic copy using the Internet through the FAA’s web page at http://www.faa.gov/avr/arm/nprm/nprm.htm or the Federal Register’s web page at http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/aces/aces140.html.

You can also get a copy by submitting a request to the Federal Aviation Administration, Office of Rulemaking, ARM-1, 800 Independence Ave., SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by calling (202) 267-9680. Make sure to identify the docket number or notice number of this rulemaking.

This proposal addresses three major issues:

• Certification of light-sport aircraft;

• Certification of pilots and flight instructors to operate light-sport aircraft; and

• Certification of repairmen to maintain light-sport aircraft.

We discuss these issues in more detail below.

Light-sport aircraft are small, simple-to-operate, low-performance aircraft. The FAA is proposing to limit these aircraft to a maximum of 2 occupants, a 1,232-lb. (560 kg.) takeoff weight, a 39-knot stall speed, a 115-knot maximum operating speed, a single engine, and fixed landing gear. Refer to the definition of light-sport aircraft in the proposed rule for a complete list of limits for those aircraft. Helicopters and powered lift would not be light-sport aircraft due to their complexity.

The FAA currently issues two major types of airworthiness certificates—standard and special. The special airworthiness certificate includes six categories—primary, restricted, limited, provisional, special flight permits, and experimental. We propose to add a seventh category of special airworthiness certificate—light-sport. You could use aircraft issued a special light-sport airworthiness certificate for sport and recreation, flight training, or rental. The special airworthiness certificate would ensure that aircraft used for these purposes are designed and manufactured to an identified standard. The FAA would exclude gyroplanes for this certificate.

The FAA currently issues special experimental certificates for eight purposes. We propose to add a new purpose—to operate light-sport aircraft—for issuing an experimental certificate. There would be three ways to get an experimental certificate for the purpose of operating light-sport aircraft. First, if you operate a light-sport aircraft that does not meet the existing definition of ultralight vehicle in 14 CFR 103.1, you would have to apply for an experimental airworthiness certificate for your aircraft under this provision. You would have to apply to register your aircraft not later than 24 months after the effective date of the final rule. You would then have your aircraft inspected and an airworthiness certificate issued not later than 36 months after the effective date of the final rule. You could use aircraft with an airworthiness certificate issued for this experimental purpose for sport and recreation, and flight training. For a period of 3 years after the effective date if the final rule, you could operate these aircraft for compensation or hire, while conducting flight training.

Second, you could get an experimental airworthiness certificate for an aircraft you assembled from an eligible kit. You could use these aircraft only for sport and recreation, and flight training.

And finally, you could get an experimental airworthiness certificate to operate a light-sport aircraft if it previously had been issued a special, light-sport aircraft airworthiness certificate and you do not want to comply with the operating limitations associated with a special light-sport certificate. For example, you could do this if you wanted to alter the aircraft without the manufacturer’s authorization, or you choose not to comply with the mandatory safety-of-flight actions. You could use these aircraft only for sport and recreation, and flight training.

Table 1 Proposed new or expanded airworthiness certificate categories and purposes.

* New airworthiness certificate categories and/or purposes

The FAA is also proposing two new pilot certificates and two new aircraft category ratings to allow operations of light-sport aircraft. Currently, we issue student, recreational, private, commercial, and airline transport pilot certificates. This proposal would add a student pilot certificate for operating light-sport aircraft and a sport pilot certificate. We would issue the sport pilot certificate and flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating without any category and class ratings. However, the applicable aircraft category, class, and make and model privileges would be established through logbook endorsements.

The FAA currently issues airplane, helicopter, gyroplane, glider, balloon, airship, and powered-lift aircraft category ratings. We propose to add powered parachute and weight-shift-control aircraft category ratings for the private pilot certificate. The weight-shift-control aircraft category rating would include land and sea class ratings.

Table 2 Proposed new or expanded pilot/flight instructor categories and class ratings.

A student pilot operating light sport aircraft, a sport pilot, and a flight instructor with a sport pilot rating could operate or provide training only in a light sport aircraft that meets the definition under 14 CFR part 1. These light sport aircraft could be issued any one of the standard or special airworthiness certificates shown in Table 1.

The FAA proposes to revise recreational pilot certificate privileges to align them with the proposed privileges for sport pilots, primarily to permit operation in Class B, C, and D airspace. To operate in that airspace, you would have to get appropriate training and logbook endorsements. We also propose to revise the training requirements for the private pilot certificate to permit private pilots to operate powered parachutes and weight-shift-control aircraft.

This proposal also addresses flight instructor certification and ground instructor privileges. The FAA would add a new rating for flight instructors–the sport pilot rating–and would revise privileges for ground instructors to train sport pilots and flight instructors with a sport pilot rating.

We also would add a new repairman certificate, which we would issue with a maintenance or inspection rating. If we issue you an inspection rating, you could perform the annual condition inspection on your own aircraft that has an experimental, light-sport airworthiness certificate. If we issue you a maintenance rating, you could perform all of the inspections required for an aircraft with an experimental, light-sport airworthiness certificate, and the inspections and other maintenance required on an aircraft with a special, light-sport airworthiness certificate. A maintenance rating would allow you to work on category–specific aircraft that you may not own.

This section of the preamble describes in general terms how the proposal would affect certain categories of people. A reader who is interested in a quick overview of the proposal may find this part useful. In preparing this overview, we condensed the material and focused on the major concepts of this proposed rule. If you are looking for a detailed description, you should read the section-by-section analysis portion of the preamble.

If you own or plan to purchase an ultralight that meets the definition of ultralight vehicle in part 103 of our regulations (14 CFR part 103), this proposal doesn’t affect you.

If your aircraft or the aircraft you plan to purchase doesn’t meet the definition of ultralight vehicle in 14 CFR part 103, you would have to apply to register your aircraft with the FAA not later than 24 months after the effective date of the final rule. You would then have your aircraft inspected by the FAA (or representative of the FAA) and an experimental, light-sport airworthiness certificate must be issued not later than 36 months after the effective date of the final rule.

If you currently operate an ultralight vehicle under a training exemption and you also have applied to the FAA for aircraft registration, you would be allowed to continue to operate under the training exemption until you are issued an experimental, light-sport airworthiness certificate. If your aircraft does not meet 14 CFR part 103 and you are not authorized to operate under a training exemption, you would not be allowed to operate under 14 CFR part 91 until you register your aircraft with the FAA and receive an airworthiness certificate for your aircraft.

If you buy a U.S.-manufactured, ready-to-fly light-sport aircraft after the effective date of the final rule and intend to use it for training or rental, you could apply for a special airworthiness certificate in the light-sport category. To get the certificate, you would have to present the following information to the FAA:

• The manufacturer’s statement of compliance;
• The applicable maintenance and inspection procedures;
• The pilot flight training manual;
• The pilot operating handbook; and
• Statements concerning any prior or future alterations.

You’d also have to get the aircraft registered and inspected by the FAA.

If you buy an imported light-sport aircraft, you would have to provide the same information as required for a U.S.-manufactured aircraft, and you would also have to provide the additional information under 14 CFR 21.186(d).

If you buy a light-sport aircraft kit after the effective date of the final rule, you would have to assemble the kit according to the manufacturer’s instructions and could apply for an experimental airworthiness certificate for the purpose of operating light-sport aircraft. To get the certificate you would provide evidence that the kit is an eligible kit. You would also have to present the following information to the FAA:

• The kit manufacturer’s statement of compliance;
• The applicable maintenance and inspection procedures;
• The pilot flight training manual; and
• The pilot operating handbook.

In addition, you’d have to get the aircraft registered and inspected by the FAA.

For most types of light-sport aircraft, including powered parachutes and weight-shift-control aircraft, you would have to obtain at least a sport pilot certificate. First, you would have to get a student pilot certificate for operating light-sport aircraft (called a "student certificate" in this preamble).

To get a student certificate, you would have to—

• Meet certain eligibility requirements related to language and age (at least 16 years old, or 14 years old to operate a glider or balloon);
• Have a U.S. driver’s license or an FAAairman medical certificate;

• Receive and log ground and flight training in specific aeronautical areas; and

• Meet specific requirements for solo and solo cross-country.

As a student certificate holder, you’d be subject to most of the existing limits on student certificate holders. You also couldn’t fly when visibility is less than 3 miles, at night, above certain altitudes and speeds, in certain airspace, contrary to any operating limitation for the aircraft or the pilot, and outside the United States.

To get a sport pilot certificate, you would have to—

• Obtain a student certificate for operating light-sport aircraft;
• Meet certain eligibility requirements related to language and age (at least 17 years old, or 16 years old to operate a glider or balloon);

• Have a U.S. driver’s license or FAA an airman medical certificate;

• Receive and log ground and flight training in specific aeronautical areas;
• Meet aeronautical experience requirements; and
• Pass a knowledge test and a practical test.

The FAA would issue you a sport pilot certificate and your logbook would be endorsed authorizing you privileges in that specific category, class, and make and model of aircraft.

As a sport pilot certificate holder, you couldn’t fly—

• When visibility is less than 3 miles;
• At night;
• Above certain altitudes and speeds;
• In certain airspace;
• For other than sport and recreational purposes;
• Contrary to any operating limitation for the aircraft or the pilot;
• While towing an object;
• While carrying a passenger for compensation or hire; or
• Outside the United States without authorization.

You also couldn’t demonstrate an aircraft in flight if you’re an aircraft salesperson. You could share operating expenses with another pilot.

To fly an additional make and model of light-sport aircraft, you’d have to receive and log aircraft-specific ground and flight training for the additional make and model from an authorized instructor.

To fly another category or class of light-sport aircraft, you’d have to receive and log ground and flight training in certain operational areas from an authorized instructor, and successfully complete a proficiency check from a different authorized instructor. The authorized instructor who certifies your proficiency for the additional make and model or category and class privileges would endorse your logbook establishing those specific privileges.

If you don’t hold a flight instructor certificate issued under 14 CFR part 61, you would have to obtain a flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating. To get it, you would have to—

• Meet certain eligibility requirements related to language and age (at least 18 years old);

• Have a sport pilot certificate or a private pilot certificate;

• Receive and log ground training in the fundamentals of instruction;

• Receive and log ground and flight training in specific aeronautical areas;

• Meet aeronautical experience requirements; and

• Pass a knowledge test and a practical test.

The FAA would issue you a flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating and your logbook would be endorsed authorizing you privileges to provide training in that specific category, class, and make and model of aircraft.

If you already hold a current and valid flight instructor certificate issued under 14 CFR part 61, you could provide flight training toward a sport pilot certificate without further showing of proficiency. You would be subject to certain limitations.

To provide training in an additional make and model of light-sport aircraft, you’d have to receive and log aircraft-specific ground and flight training for the additional make and model from an authorized instructor.

To provide flight training in another category or class of light-sport aircraft, you’d have to receive and log ground and flight training in certain operational areas from an authorized instructor, and successfully complete a proficiency check from a different authorized instructor.

The authorized instructor who certifies your proficiency authorizing you to provide training for the additional make and model or category and class privileges would endorse your logbook establishing those specific privileges.

The training programs of FAA-recognized ultralight organizations already cover many of the proposed requirements. This proposal would establish how you would credit your experience toward the aeronautical experience requirements for a sport pilot certificate and a flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating.

If you already have at least a private pilot certificate, you would have to—

• Receive and log specific training for any make and model of light-sport aircraft for which you hold a category and class rating and that you haven’t piloted; and

• Get a logbook endorsement from the authorized instructor who trained you certifying your proficiency.

If you want to add category and class privileges for which you do not have an aircraft category or class rating on your private pilot certificate, you would have to meet the requirements for the addition of those privileges established in this proposal.

The following persons could perform maintenance and preventive maintenance on an aircraft with a special light-sport airworthiness certificate: (1) an appropriately rated mechanic, (2) an appropriately rated repair station, and (3) a repairman (light-sport aircraft) with a maintenance rating. Certificated pilots could also perform preventive maintenance.

The following persons could perform inspections on an aircraft with an experimental, light-sport airworthiness certificate: (1) an appropriately rated mechanic, (2) an appropriately rated repair station, and (3) a repairman (light-sport aircraft) with a maintenance rating. Additionally, if you want to perform inspections on your own experimental aircraft, you would have to obtain a repairman certificate (light-sport aircraft) with an inspection rating.

To get a repairman certificate (light-sport aircraft), you would have to—

• Meet certain eligibility requirements relating to age, language, and citizenship or residency;
• Demonstrate the requisite skill to determine whether a light-sport aircraft is in a condition for safe operation; and
• Meet the requirements for one of the following ratings:

• Complete a 16-hour training course on the inspection requirements of the particular make and model of light-sport aircraft.

• Complete an 80-hour training course on the maintenance requirements of the particular category of light-sport aircraft.

If you manufacture aircraft intended for certification as a special, light-sport aircraft, you would have to—

• Manufacture those aircraft in accordance with airworthiness standards developed by a consensus of industry and FAA (consensus standards);
• Attest on a Statement of Compliance for each aircraft that it conforms to the consensus standards;
• Test each aircraft in accordance with a production acceptance test specifications described in the consensus standard;
• Develop and identify the system you would use for monitoring and correcting safety-of-flight issues in accordance with the consensus standards;
• Develop and make available a Pilot Operating Handbook for safe operation applicable to the aircraft;
• Develop and make available a manufacturer’s pilot flight training manual for the aircraft; and
• State that you will provide FAA unrestricted access to your facilities.

If you manufacture aircraft kits, intended to be assembled by the purchaser into aircraft eligible for certification as an experimental aircraft for the purpose of operating light-sport aircraft, you would have to—

• Manufacture at least one ready-to-fly aircraft. For the purposes of this certificate, an aircraft make and model is eligible for a kit if the aircraft make and model has been issued a special, light-sport airworthiness certificate;
• Manufacture the aircraft kit in accordance with standards developed by a consensus of industry and the FAA (consensus standard);
• Attest on a statement of compliance that the kit conforms to the consensus standard.
• Provide complete assembly instructions; and
• Develop and make available the applicable supporting documentation.

Yes, industry would have to work with the FAA to develop consensus standards governing the following:

• Design and performance criteria;
• Quality assurance system requirements;
• Completed aircraft production acceptance or "pass-through" test specifications; and
• A system for continued operational safety monitoring.

Although aircraft issued special airworthiness certificates in the light-sport category would not need a type certificate or have to be produced under a production certificate, the FAA proposes that these aircraft meet consensus standards. By consensus standards, we mean standards developed by the industry through a consensus process with FAA participation. Industry would present those standards to the FAA for review and publication in the Federal Register for public comment. After the FAA accepts the consensus standards, we would publish them in the Federal Register.

There would be separate standards for each aircraft class to which FAA could issue a certificate in the light-sport aircraft category. We have determined it is appropriate to use consensus standards, consistent with Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-119, "Federal Participation in the Development and Use of Voluntary Consensus Standards and in Conformity Assessment Activities," February 10, 1998.

4. Background

Several FAA regulatory initiatives have addressed sport and recreational general aviation needs:

• We issued regulations regarding ultralight vehicles under 14 CFR part 103 (47 FR 38776; September 2, 1982),

• We created the recreational pilot certificate under 14 CFR part 61 (54 FR 13028; March 29, 1989), and

• We established a new category of aircraft, primary category, under 14 CFR part 21 (57 FR 41367; September 9, 1992).

We discuss these regulatory initiatives below.

Ultralight vehicle regulations

The FAA adopted part 103 in 1982 (47 FR 38776; September 2, 1982) in response to existing and rapidly growing hang glider activity. This activity made our earlier guidance inadequate.

Part 103 defines an ultralight as either an unpowered or powered vehicle with certain weight, speed, and other limitations. An ultralight can carry only one occupant and be used for sport and recreational purposes. It does not have a U.S. or foreign airworthiness certificate. Ultralight vehicle operators must comply with certain operating restrictions. Generally, you can operate these vehicles only between sunrise and sunset; you must yield the right-of-way to all aircraft; you may not operate over congested areas or over any open air assembly of people, and you may not operate for compensation or hire. See part 103 for more information on limits on ultralight vehicles.

Ultralight vehicles are not subject to the aircraft certification requirements of 14 CFR part 21, the maintenance requirements of 14 CFR part 43, the identification and marking requirements of 14 CFR part 45, or the registration requirements of 14 CFR part 47. In addition, to operate one of these vehicles, you do not need to comply with the airman certification requirements in 14 CFR part 61, medical certification requirements in 14 CFR part 67, or the operating rules in 14 CFR part 91.

The FAA established the recreational pilot certificate under part 61 in 1989 (54 FR 13028; March 29, 1989). We intended this certificate to be a lower cost alternative to the private pilot certificate. We believed this new certificate would be attractive for persons interested in flying basic, experimental, or homebuilt aircraft.

As a recreational pilot, you may operate a single-engine airplane or rotorcraft certificated for no more than four occupants with a powerplant of no more than 180 horsepower (hp). You are not only subject to the limits of a private pilot, but also have additional limits. These additional limits include not being permitted to carry more than one passenger; tow an object; fly between sunset and sunrise; fly above 10,000 feet MSL or 2,000 feet AGL, whichever is higher; fly without visual reference to the surface; or operate in airspace in which you need to communicate with air traffic control (ATC). See part 61 for information on other limits placed on recreational pilots.

However, in this current rulemaking we are proposing to allow a recreational pilot to operate in airspace in which communication with ATC is required, as long as the pilot receives training on that operation and a logbook endorsement authorizing it. This would parallel a similar privilege we are proposing for sport pilots.

Primary category aircraft regulations

In 1992, the FAA established a new category of aircraft, primary category aircraft, under §§ 21.24 and 21.184 (57 FR 41367, September 9, 1992), because of concerns that the decline in general aviation in the United States was in part due to higher certification costs for aircraft. The new category had simplified procedures for type, production, and airworthiness certification.

Primary category aircraft must be unpowered or have only a single, naturally aspirated engine. They are also subject to speed, weight, and load limits. They may not be used to carry persons or property for hire, although under certain conditions they may be rented or used for flight instruction. See part 21 at the sections listed above for more information about the limits placed on this category of aircraft.

Despite the efforts discussed above to address sport and recreation general aviation needs, those rules, for various reasons, have not achieved the regulatory goals we set out to achieve. Since we issued the regulations, the state of the art in ultralight vehicles has advanced considerably and our rules are out-of-date. New advancements in technology have improved safety, including light-engine technology and reliability, more effective application of low-speed aerodynamic principles, and new materials. Although part 103 covers ultralight activities, an increasing number of ultralight vehicles are operating outside the current regulations. This is because the vehicles either exceed the part 103 ultralight weight limit (254 pounds) or they have two seats. For many operators, installing any new equipment or using new materials (some of which increase the level of safety) causes the vehicle to exceed the weight requirements of part 103.

Seeing the need for training to reduce accidents, manufacturers have built two-place training vehicles and organizations have established programs to qualify ultralight flight instructors. However, these vehicles do not meet the current definition of ultralight vehicle, and are not manufactured, certificated, or maintained to a standard. So, while the FAA currently does not require certification for ultralight vehicle operators, flight instructors, or vehicles, we issued exemptions to allow these larger ultralights to be used for training, but not for other sport or recreational flight. You can find a detailed discussion of exemptions for two-place ultralight training vehicles in the following documents: Aero Sports Connection (ASC) Exemption No. 6080, docket No. 27953; Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA) Exemption No. 3784, docket No. 23477; United States Hang Glider Association (USHGA) Exemption No. 4721, docket No. 23492; and United States Ultralight Association (USUA) Exemption No. 4274, docket No. 24427.

Neither the recreational pilot certificate nor the primary category airworthiness certificate regulations have accommodated the sport and recreational flying community. Only about half of the recreational pilot certificates we have issued are active. Specifically, as of January 10, 2001, the FAA has issued 638 recreational pilot certificates, but only 336 of those were active. Most initial pilot applicants have chosen to pursue a private pilot certificate, rather than a recreational pilot certificate, because the former provides more benefits for little extra cost. Since the primary category aircraft certification option covers only single-engine airplanes and rotorcraft, it excludes increasingly popular aircraft such as powered parachutes and weight-shift-control aircraft. And, although we intended the certification process for these aircraft to be abbreviated and economical compared to standard category certification, we have not achieved that goal. As of March 14, 2001, we have certificated only two aircraft in the primary category.

Finally, we have received numerous requests for exemptions from part 103, a petition for rulemaking from the United States Ultralight Association (docket No. 25591), and two petitions for exemption relating to powered parachutes, one from North American Powered Parachute Federation (NAPPF) and one from Aero Sports Connection (ASC) (docket No. 29674). The last petition also dealt with weight-shift-control aircraft.

The FAA currently does not have aircraft category ratings or training and certification requirements for powered parachutes and weight-shift-control aircraft in part 61. Before you fly one of these aircraft, you don't have to receive any training specific to them, but you must get a pilot certificate with a rating in another aircraft category and class. This requires pilots to get training in aircraft that do not have the same operating characteristics as the aircraft they will be flying. Although current regulations do not require any additional training in the powered parachute or weight-shift-control aircraft, many pilots exercise reasonable judgement and get that additional training. This significantly increases the cost of getting a pilot certificate to operate powered parachutes and weight-shift-control aircraft without any added benefit to the pilot or to public safety.

The FAA is proposing this rule to increase safety in the light-sport aircraft community by closing the gaps in existing regulations and accommodating new advances in technology. Although we issued exemptions to temporarily resolve the training issues, to extend them on a long-term basis would be an inappropriate use of the exemption process. The FAA believes that a permanent and appropriate level of regulation is necessary.

The FAA analyzed the existing accident data of ultralights that do not meet part 103 to determine deficiencies in safety. Accident data from the NTSB and part 103 exemption holders show that 36 accidents occurred between 1995-2001 involving aircraft that would meet the proposed definition of light-sport aircraft. Those accidents resulted in 51 fatalities. (The organizations that hold part 103 training exemptions are required to report to the FAA accidents involving two-place training vehicles.) The data indicate that some of these accidents also involve vehicles that are not covered under part 103 and were not used for training under an exemption. Because light-sport flying is becoming more and more popular, there is concern that more accidents could occur without regulatory intervention.

We believe that many of these accidents could have been avoided with this proposed rule. There are many safety benefits of certificating sport pilots, light-sport aircraft, and repairmen who would maintain these aircraft. The FAA has identified a number of factors related to training and certification that contribute to the prevention of accidents. For example, certificated sport pilots would—

1. meet minimum requirements to be eligible to operate aircraft,
2. be trained and tested to a standard,
3. routinely receive notices of FAA safety programs and are eligible to participate in that supplemental training (current operators of ultralight vehicles do not received these notices),
4. be required to be aware of safety- and security-related information contained in Notices to Airmen (NOTAMs), which could impact a flight and potentially reduce accidents (current operators of ultralight vehicles are not required to receive these NOTAMs),
5. be required to receive weather briefings and therefore are better prepared to avoid bad weather (current operators of ultralight vehicles are not required to receive weather briefings),
6. have access to DUAT (direct user access terminal) automated weather service, and
7. be required to complete recurrent training, which would maintain pilot skills.

Under this proposal, certificated sport pilots could credit ultralight flight time toward higher-level certificates, which would increase the experience level and qualification of sport pilots. In addition, sport pilots would receive make and model training, which is not required for any other pilot certificate.

Certificated light-sport aircraft would—

1. be designed, manufactured, tested, and supported according to the latest standard,
2. be manufactured under a quality assurance system that meets a standard,
3. receive safety-of-flight bulletins, similar to airworthiness directives and service bulletins (there are no safety-of-flight bulletins currently being issued to operators of ultralight vehicles),
4. be required to have make- and model-specific training and maintenance instructions,
5. have a make- and model-specific pilot operating handbook for safe operation of the aircraft,
6. have a make- and model-specific maintenance and inspection procedures manual, and
7. be eligible to use airports, which provide more access to maintenance facilities and emergency services. Vehicles without airworthiness certificates normally typically are not allowed to use airports.

Certificated repairmen (light-sport aircraft) would—

1. meet minimum training and testing requirements, which would ensure that repairmen have the necessary skills to inspect (or maintain) light-sport aircraft and certify that they are safe to fly (currently no certificated repairman or mechanic receives any safety and training information targeted to light-sport aircraft),
2. meet minimum requirements ensuring that the persons working on the aircraft are mature individuals who can read and understand maintenance manuals and instructions. These proposed requirements are similar to requirements for part 145 repair stations and repairmen for amateur-built aircraft,
3. receive FAA’s aircraft-specific safety and training information targeted to repairmen needs,

(4) be trained on how to report faults or failures to the FAA and light-sport aircraft manufacturers. This would greatly improve how light-sport aircraft manufacturers correct faults and make a safer product.

Also, certificating sport pilots, light-sport aircraft, and repairmen would allow the FAA to identify and take certificate action against them. The threat of certificate action could improve compliance with the regulations, and therefore, improve safety.

Certificated sport pilots and operators of light-sport aircraft would have better access to insurance. They would be more widely recognized by existing industry and trade organizations because the pilots and aircraft would meet the same operating rules as all other pilots and aircraft. These organizations would likely publish more safety-related material addressing sport flying.

Finally, the NTSB would investigate any accidents or incidents involving certificated sport pilots or light-sport aircraft, which could help identify ways to improve safety and reduce future accidents. (The NTSB generally does not investigate accidents involving ultralight vehicles.) The FAA bases many of its policy and rule changes on NTSB recommendations following accidents and incidents. Industry also uses NTSB data to develop safety initiatives and new training materials.

The ultralight aircraft industry has urged us to initiate rulemaking to address light-sport aircraft and has received strong support among its members. According to most of these supporters, regulating this industry would significantly increase the popularity of sport flying and would consequently have a positive impact on their businesses. Thriving businesses typically have more resources to improve their products, and, in this case, could produce safer aircraft. We agree with these statements and also believe that regulating this industry would offer other safety enhancements.

Although there would be some costs involved with this proposal, we believe it to be the least costly of the viable alternatives. (Refer to section IX "Regulatory Evaluation Summary" for more details on the costs and benefits of the proposal.) Industry leaders have indicated that regulations ultimately would lower the cost to participate in light-sport aircraft activities, while ensuring appropriate public safety. In a letter sent to the Director of the Office of Management and Budget on August 10, 2001, EAA stated that they see this proposal as an opportunity to decrease the cost of aircraft ownership and operation. The General Aviation Coalition indicated its support of sport pilot and light-sport aircraft regulations to the Administrator at its July 18, 2001, meeting with the FAA Administrator. According to one manufacturer of sport aircraft kits, rules covering these aircraft would benefit public safety in several ways, including: (1) providing appropriate rules for students to learn to fly light-sport aircraft, (2) improving flight instructor training on light-sport aircraft, and (3) providing rules for the continued airworthiness of the aircraft. Another manufacturer states that new regulations would improve pilot skills to fly these aircraft, encourage new flying skills, and would ensure that the aircraft are safe and high quality. Finally, one manufacturer of kit planes believes that regulating the light-sport aircraft certification process would increase safety by eliminating aircraft that do not meet a certain standard.

Several letters were received while the Department of Transportation and the Office of Management and Budget were reviewing this proposal. Buckeye Industries, Inc., Flightstar Sportplanes, and EAA all expressed their support of this proposal and requested expedited review of this proposal. You may find copies of all of the above letters in the docket.

The FAA is especially interested in receiving specific comments regarding the various costs of the proposal and the extent to which the affected public is willing to bear these costs as an acceptable part of business or recreation. These costs can be broken down into the following three components: aircraft certification; annual condition inspection and repairman certification; and sport pilot certificate and flight instructor certification (with a sport pilot rating). Each of these costs is discussed further in section IX "Regulatory Evaluation Summary". The FAA seeks information and data regarding each of these cost areas and if these costs are considered reasonable.

In summary, the FAA believes that these proposed regulations would improve safety and would:

• Provide an economical means for manufacturers to obtain FAA certification for light-sport aircraft;

• Provide an economical means for pilots to obtain a certificate to fly those aircraft;

• Provide a reasonable and appropriate means to overcome the limits of the ultralight regulations, the recreational pilot certificate, and the primary category airworthiness certificate;
• Eliminate the need for exemptions from part 103 to conduct flight training in aircraft that do not meet the requirements of that part;

• Provide the public safe access to general aviation without creating a significant financial barrier; and
• Create more eligible pilots to meet the needs of future airline and military demand.

The FAA established the Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee (ARAC) in 1991 to help us by providing input from outside the Federal government on major regulatory issues affecting aviation safety. The ARAC includes representatives of air carriers, manufacturers, general aviation, labor groups, universities, associations, airline passenger groups, and the general public. In 1993, we formed an ARAC working group to review part 103 and recommend whether we needed new or revised standards for sport aircraft (58 FR 47172, September 7, 1993). In 1995, we revised our charge to ARAC (60 FR 33247, June 27, 1995).

The ARAC considered a variety of alternatives to deal with light-sport aircraft issues. In their final recommendation, they focused on three areas. You can read ARAC’s entire report in the docket for this proposed rule.

The ARAC recommended FAA include detailed privileges and limits in part 61, tailored to diverse aircraft types, and appropriate to the low weight and speed of those aircraft. They wanted to enhance safety by providing a pilot certificate for those who wish to exercise pilot privileges that exceed the current limits of part 103. They wanted to achieve this goal without making the certificate requirements so stringent they were economically impractical.

In addition, ARAC recommended FAA allow the training and flight time used to obtain a sport pilot certificate to be applicable to higher-level airmen certificates. They believed this would encourage individuals to obtain a higher-level airman certificate.

ARAC’s airman medical certification recommendations

The ARAC recommended a self-evaluation medical requirement that would allow sport pilot applicants to certify at the time of application that they have no known medical defect. They considered but did not recommend requiring that an applicant hold a current and valid U.S. driver’s license; requiring a letter from an aviation medical examiner (AME) or a personal physician addressing that physician’s knowledge of the applicant’s health; and allowing a Flight Standards Review Board (FSRB) to define medical requirements unique to each specific type of aircraft. They rejected these options because, in their opinion, a driver’s license requirement would involve unnecessary paperwork and recordkeeping, a letter from an AME or other physician would create yet another class of airman medical certificate, and involving a medical examiner through the FSRB would be unnecessary because the activities allowed under the proposed sport pilot certificate would be of a limited nature and the medical requirements for each rating would always be the same.

Under this recommendation, a person interested in a sport pilot class or "type" rating not previously established by FAA could request that we establish an appropriate class or "type" rating using an FSRB. The requester would suggest to FAA requirements and limits for the specific category, class, and "type" rating. Typically, an aircraft manufacturer or a national organization whose members are interested in the sport pilot class would make these requests. If you wanted to be certificated for these aircraft, you would apply under the appropriate generic requirements of the proposed sport pilot certificate and the specific requirements for your aircraft as established by the FSRB.

The ARAC working group submitted its recommendations to FAA for review in July, 1998. Much of FAA’s proposal is based on ARAC’s sport pilot certification recommendation, but it also addresses many issues not considered by the ARAC. We decided we needed to cover aircraft and airman certification as well as operational and maintenance issues. Therefore, we have expanded on ARAC’s recommendation and are proposing a complete regulatory solution that would address these issues. Our proposal expands pilot certification and training requirements; addresses the airworthiness certification of light-sport aircraft, to include powered parachutes and weight-shift-control aircraft; establishes a new repairman certificate to ensure continuing airworthiness requirements are met; and revises operational requirements to address these aircraft.

There are several specific points on which FAA does not agree with ARAC. We do not agree we should allow sport pilots to tow objects. We believe pilots who tow objects should have a higher level of experience and training than the sport pilot certificate will allow. Existing regulations allow private pilots to do this. We did not agree with permitting an aircraft salesperson to demonstrate an eligible aircraft in flight to a potential buyer. We believe sales demonstration flights are not consistent with the nature of sport and recreational flying.

While the FAA agrees a sport pilot certificate would not warrant a separate class of FAA airman medical certification, we do not agree that a U.S. driver’s license requirement is unreasonable or a paperwork burden. The FAA would amend Form 8710-1, "Application for an Airman Certificate and/or Rating," to add an item for applicants to verify at the time of application that they hold a current and valid U.S. driver’s license or a current and valid airman medical certificate. The FAA’s proposal does not include ARAC’s recommendation for an FSRB because of the potential administrative burden a board could create. We discuss specific ARAC recommendations more fully in the section-by-section analysis of this notice.

Proposed § 1.1 would be revised to add the terms "light-sport aircraft," "consensus standard," "powered parachute," and "weight-shift-control aircraft" to the list of definitions.

This proposal would establish a new category of aircraft—light-sport aircraft that would include airplanes, gliders, gyroplanes, powered parachutes, lighter-than-air, and weight-shift-control aircraft. These aircraft fall between "small aircraft" as defined in current § 1.1 and "ultralight vehicles" as defined in current § 103.1. Helicopters and powered-lift aircraft would be excluded from the definition of light-sport aircraft due to their complex operation, maintenance, design, and manufacture.

A light-sport aircraft would have a maximum takeoff weight of 1,232 lbs (560 kilograms), or a maximum gross weight of 660 lbs (300 kilograms) for lighter-than-air aircraft. These weight limits should accommodate a significant number of aircraft that are simple, low performance, and have no more than two occupants. These aircraft may be manufactured in the United States or another country.

A light-sport aircraft would have a maximum speed in level flight with maximum continuous power (V_H) of 115 knots. This limits the commanded kinetic energy of an aircraft flown by a pilot holding a sport pilot certificate. The FAA chose to use V_H as the limiting speed for powered, light-sport aircraft as it is simple to verify during testing. The FAA believes that aircraft with a V_H greater that 115 knots would be inappropriate for operation by persons with the minimum training and experience of a sport pilot, which prepares them for flying simple, low performance aircraft for sport and recreation. This value is consistent with light-sport aircraft airworthiness design standards adopted by other airworthiness authorities.

An unpowered light-sport aircraft (e.g. glider) would have a maximum never-exceed speed (V_NE) of 115 knots, as V_H is not applicable. This speed limitation also limits the commanded kinetic energy of an aircraft flown by a pilot holding a sport pilot certificate. For a V_NE equal to 80% of the aircraft’s structural design limit speed, a 115-knot V_NE limit for aircraft would mean that structural design limits would preclude gliders with a speed capability in excess of 144 knots from being approved as light-sport aircraft (144 X .80=115).

A light-sport aircraft would have a maximum stall speed in the landing configuration (V_S0) of 39 knots. This value for a maximum stall speed is a characteristic of low-performance aircraft and would assist in ensuring that light-sport aircraft possess handling characteristics commensurate with the training and experience of sport pilots. It is also consistent with foreign airworthiness standards for similar performance aircraft.

A light-sport aircraft would have a maximum stall speed in the landing configuration without the use of lift-enhancement devices (V_S1) of 44 knots. The FAA selected this value to allow for the use of simple lift-enhancing systems that can result in a 5-knot stall speed decrease. With this limit, if more effective lift-enhancement systems are used on the aircraft, the resulting V_S0 would be lowered further . The FAA recognizes that this limitation, combined with the V_S0 limit, also would limit the maximum speed of the aircraft.

A light-sport aircraft would carry no more than two occupants, including the pilot. This limitation is consistent with the size of the aircraft and the limitations of a sport pilot certificate.

A light-sport aircraft would be limited to a single, non-turbine engine, if powered. The FAA believes that the requirement for no more than one engine keeps the aircraft simple and limits speed. The requirement for a non-turbine engine is intended to limit the engine to a simple-to-operate design, such as a conventional reciprocating engine (including a rotary or diesel engine) and would also permit simple alternatives, such as electric engines.

A light sport aircraft, if powered, would be limited to a fixed or ground-adjustable propeller. The FAA determined that a propeller that could not be adjusted in pitch in flight was necessary to limit the operational complexity of the aircraft and would be consistent with the skills necessary to hold a sport pilot certificate.

The cabin of a light-sport aircraft would be unpressurized. Cabin pressurization systems and the associated pressure vessel are complex to design and manufacture and the systems can be difficult to operate. The FAA determined that the requirement for an unpressurized cabin is consistent with the skills necessary to hold a sport pilot certificate and with the philosophy of light-sport aircraft design and manufacture.

A light-sport aircraft would have fixed landing gear, except that for seaplanes, repositionable landing gear that would allow the wheels to be rotated for amphibious operations would be acceptable. Retractable gear systems are complex to design, manufacture, and maintain, and may be complex to operate in flight. The FAA determined that the requirement for fixed landing gear is consistent with the philosophy of keeping light-sport aircraft design, manufacture, and operation simple. Repositionable gear on a seaplane is of simple design and operation. Accordingly, the FAA has determined that repositionable gear would be consistent with the skills necessary to hold a sport pilot certificate as it is analogous to a ground adjustable pitch propeller.

The FAA is proposing that the light-sport aircraft industry develop and reach a consensus on an airworthiness standard that would govern light-sport aircraft—(1) design and performance, (2) quality assurance system requirements, (3) production acceptance test specifications, and (4) continued operational safety monitoring system characteristics. This standard would be used by the manufacturer of an aircraft intended to be issued a special light-sport airworthiness certificate or of a kit intended for certification as a light-sport aircraft. Consensus standard means, for the purpose of certificating light-sport aircraft, an industry-developed consensus airworthiness standard that addresses these four topics, as described below.

(1) Design and performance. The consensus standard would govern light-sport aircraft design and performance. A suitable standard would identify minimum aircraft flight and ground performance standards, in addition to design practices to prohibit, that would ensure a safe aircraft for the operator. It would also establish flight proficiency training requirements that would be applicable to the particular class of light-sport aircraft. Design and performance standards maintained or recognized by other civil aviation authorities (CAA’s) could be selected or otherwise form the basis for a light-sport aircraft airworthiness standard. Examples of commonly used design and performance standards for conventional fixed-wing airplanes are BCAR section S (Britain), TP10141 (Canada), and JAR-VLA (JAA). The light-sport aircraft industry also may choose to utilize other nationally recognized airworthiness design standards for the consensus standards.

(2) Quality assurance. The consensus standard would govern the necessary quality assurance system requirements used in the manufacture of light-sport aircraft. The standard would establish reference quality assurance procedures so a manufacturer could attest that individual aircraft produced all meet the same minimum safety standards and are built as intended.

(3) Production acceptance. The consensus standard would govern the necessary characteristics of the production acceptance test specifications used in the manufacture of light-sport aircraft. A suitable standard would identify the needed required final product acceptance test procedures that ensure a completed product is safe and performs as intended.

(4) Safety monitoring. The consensus standard would govern the characteristics of the manufacturer’s continued operational safety monitoring system. The consensus standard would establish reference system requirements for monitoring and correcting safety-of-flight issues. A suitable standard would include a process by which aircraft owners and operators would be notified of occurrences that are hazards to safety of flight and the appropriate corrective action. A suitable standard would also ensure that the manufacturer reviews the operational experience of the fleet and corrects any deficiencies. In addition, Iit would also iidentify processes that would ensure manufacturers learn about problems experienced on aircraft in service. Safety monitoring also would include processes by which manufacturers evaluate the reported problems for their safety tof flight. It would also define the processes by which manufacturers develop repairs and communicate them to operators for problems that are determined to be hazards to flight safety.

A suitable consensus standard would also establish the procedures by which the industry reviews and updates the consensus standards. It would establish procedures to periodically review the standard every two years, and to update the standard when if necessary. Industry may chose to initiate a shorter review period.

This proposal would establish two new kinds of light-sport aircraft–powered parachutes and weight-shift-control aircraft. The aircraft would be controlled by a pilot within a suspended fuselage. The inclusion of a fuselage permits the designer of the aircraft to standardize a design based on structural geometry and engineering principles of flight rather than the individual characteristics of the pilot. The definitions describe the characteristics of powered parachutes and weight-shift-control aircraft as they exist today. While the proposed definitions are not intended to hinder future developments of these aircraft designs, they specifically intend to exclude configurations in which the engine and/or wing is mounted on the person operating the aircraft.

A powered parachute would be defined as powered aircraft that derive their lift from a non-rigid wing that inflates into a lifting surface when exposed to a wind. A powered parachute consists of a non-rigid wing, a suspended fuselage, and an engine that is an integral part of the aircraft.

Weight-shift-control aircraft would be defined as powered aircraft with a framed pivoting wing and a fuselage. The aircraft is controllable only in pitch and roll by the pilot’s ability to change the aircraft’s center of gravity. For these two-axis-control aircraft, the line of action of the thrust and the suspended mass of the fuselage would ensure that a laterally applied control force would result in motion about the roll axis. An aircraft with these characteristics, but with three-axis control (i.e. also controllable about the yaw axis) would not meet the definition of a weight-shift control aircraft.

Proposed § 21.175 would add light-sport aircraft to the list of special airworthiness certificates in current § 21.175(b).

Proposed § 21.181 would be revised to indicate that a light-sport aircraft airworthiness certificate is effective as long as the aircraft is maintained in accordance with its operating limitations and the aircraft is registered in the United States. The FAA notes that the proposal would not require the maintenance requirements of part 43 to apply to these aircraft.

This section also would be revised to indicate that certificates for experimental and primary category kit-built aircraft would be of unlimited duration, unless the FAA finds good cause to establish a specific period.

Proposed § 21.182 would be revised to require all aircraft issued experimental certificates for the purpose of operating light-sport aircraft to be identified under § 45.11.

Proposed § 21.186 would establish the eligibility requirements for the issuance of a special airworthiness certificate in the light-sport category ["special light-sport aircraft"] and the purposes for which the FAA would issue such a certificate. It would set forth the required contents of a manufacturer’s Statement of Compliance for a light-sport aircraft. It also would set forth requirements for importing light-sport aircraft. Special light-sport aircraft are designed and manufactured without an FAA type or production certificate and are accordingly limited to operating for sport and recreation, flight training, or rental.

Only complete, "ready-to-fly" aircraft would be eligible for special light-sport airworthiness certificates. If there is a change to the consensus standard, all newly manufactured aircraft would have to comply with the changed standard. This would ensure that a new aircraft always meets the latest standard. Changes to a consensus standard would not apply retroactively to previously manufactured aircraft, unless required by the changed standard. Industry may agree to apply a change to the consensus standards retroactively. If a change addresses an unsafe condition, it would need to be handled as a mandatory safety-of-flight action.

Aircraft that would be eligible for this certificate would not need a type or production certificate. However, the proposal would require the aircraft manufacturer to attest that the aircraft design and manufacture complies with a consensus standard. The manufacturer would indicate this on a Statement of Compliance, which would be provided to the original purchaser of the aircraft. The person who will be the registered owner of the aircraft will identify and register these aircraft in accordance with 14 CFR parts 45 and 47.

To maintain eligibility for the special light-sport aircraft airworthiness certificate, the operator would be required to comply with operating limitations under the proposed § 91.327 as part of the aircraft’s airworthiness certificate. The operating limitations would also address the maintenance and inspection requirements, preventive maintenance, as well as flight test programs, operations in various airspace classes, and pilot qualification. This is because these aircraft would not have a type certificate and, therefore, would not be required to be maintained in accordance with 14 CFR part 43. Maintenance and inspection procedures required by the operating limitations would meet the scope and detail of Appendix A to 14 CFR part 43. Similar to part 43, a certificated pilot could perform preventive maintenance.

The operating limitations would also require the operator to accomplish any safety-of-flight actions (maintenance or alterations) that the manufacturer deems necessary for continued operational safety. This is proposed because the aircraft would not be manufactured in accordance with a type design and hence the FAA would not issue Airworthiness Directives. If an operator chooses not to perform this maintenance, the special airworthiness certificate in the light-sport category would no longer be valid; however, the operator may still apply for an experimental certificate for the aircraft. These restrictions on the special light-sport aircraft would provide the higher level of safety required for an aircraft to be used for flight training or rental.

The special airworthiness certification option would be in addition to existing methods of obtaining airworthiness certification. No existing airworthiness certification option would be eliminated or restricted for aircraft that meet the definition of light-sport aircraft. An aircraft that meets the proposed definition of light-sport aircraft is not required to have a special light-sport certificate and may be eligible to hold other airworthiness certificates, provided that it meets the applicable requirements of subpart H of part 21.

Aircraft that otherwise meet the light-sport aircraft criteria that are shown via test to have a higher V_H would not be issued a special airworthiness certificate under the terms of this rule. Such higher performance aircraft currently could be type-certificated in other categories such as normal, primary, or special class (e.g., JAR-VLA); and could be operated by the holder of at least a recreational pilot certificate.

An aircraft would no longer be eligible for the special light-sport certificate if it is altered such that it no longer meets the definition of light-sport aircraft. For example, an alteration to a powered aircraft that results in a V_H greater than 115 kts (e.g., installation of a cruise propeller on an aircraft initially certificated with a climb propeller) would render the aircraft ineligible.

The definition of light-sport aircraft includes gyroplanes; however, gyroplanes would not be issued special airworthiness certificates in the light-sport category under proposed § 21.186. The FAA would issue an experimental, operating light-sport aircraft airworthiness certificate under § 21.191(i)(1) to existing gyroplanes that do not meet part 103 but meet the proposed definition of light-sport aircraft. Because gyroplanes could not be certificated under § 21.186, they would not be eligible for airworthiness certificates under § 21.191(i)(2) and (3). The FAA recognizes that this may limit the number and types of gyroplanes that a sport pilot may fly; however, the FAA notes that a sport pilot may fly a gyroplane that has a standard or special category airworthiness certificate provided the aircraft meets the definition of light-sport aircraft.

The FAA may issue special, light-sport aircraft airworthiness certificates to aircraft manufactured before the effective date of the rule. These aircraft would be required to meet the consensus standard in effect at the time of manufacture. To get the certificate you would have to make application for registration not later than 24 months after the effective date of the rule. You would also have to present the required information (as above) to the FAA and make the statements concerning any prior or future modifications. This would require the manufacturer of your aircraft to be in a position to issue a retroactive Statement of Compliance for your specific aircraft serial number. If it is an imported aircraft, you would also have to provide the additional import information on a retroactive basis.

Because of these requirements, not all aircraft models will be eligible for a special airworthiness certificate. While the FAA does not expect many manufacturers would retroactively issue Statements of Compliance for aircraft manufactured before the effective date of the rule, the FAA does not want to rule out this possibility.

Proposed § 21.186(b) would define the requirements for getting a special light-sport aircraft airworthiness certificate.

Proposed § 21.186(b)(1) describes the items that the registered owner would be required to present to be eligible for a special airworthiness certificate in the light-sport category. The registered owner would submit a copy of the manufacturer-issued Pilot Operating Handbook for the aircraft and the manufacturer-issued maintenance and inspection procedures. These items would be required to provide the registered owner with access to the information on how to operate aircraft safely and the technical data to inspect and properly maintain the aircraft. The registered owner would also present a manufacturer’s Statement of Compliance to ensure that the aircraft presented is in a condition for safe operation.

Proposed § 21.186(b)(2) would exclude aircraft that have been previously issued an airworthiness certificate in the standard or primary category from being eligible for a special light-sport certificate. The intent of this proposal is to enable aircraft that can meet a consensus standard to obtain an airworthiness certificate without demonstrating to the FAA that the aircraft complies with the standards for the issuance of a standard or primary category airworthiness certificate. The FAA believes that to allow aircraft with existing certificates in the standard or primary category to attain a special light-sport certificate would be an unnecessary burden on the manufacturers, the operators, and the FAA. This is because the proposal would require the manufacturers of light-sport aircraft to implement a system specific to their aircraft models to monitor the continued airworthiness. Additionally, the FAA believes there would be little interest in ‘downgrading’ from a standard or primary category certificate to a special light-sport, as the airworthiness certificate would have more restrictive operating limitations.

Proposed § 21.186(b)(3) would require that the aircraft be inspected by the FAA (or an FAA-designated representative) and be in a condition for safe operation. The person conducting the inspection would rely upon Manufacturer’s Statement of Compliance to assist in determining that the aircraft complies with consensus standards unless FAA experience with the manufacturer dictates otherwise.

Proposed § 21.186(b)(4) would address authorized modifications to light-sport aircraft. The registered owner would provide a statement indicating that either the aircraft has not been altered after the date of manufacture, or that the aircraft was altered with the authorization of the manufacturer. Absent a responsible manufacturer, other persons acceptable to the FAA who have established a program to review the alterations to the manufacturer’s aircraft may also authorize an alteration. That person would review the alteration for compliance with the applicable standard. In order to authorize an alteration the person must accept continued airworthiness responsibility for the altered aircraft. This requirement would assist in ensuring that the aircraft meets the applicable consensus standard throughout its useful life.

Proposed § 21.186(b)(5) would address authorized modification to the aircraft. The registered owner would provide a statement indicating that any future alterations to the aircraft will be performed with the authorization of the manufacturer. Other persons acceptable to the FAA who have established a program to review the alterations to the manufacturer’s aircraft may also authorize an alteration. That person would review the alteration for compliance with the applicable standard. In order to authorize an alteration the person must accept continued airworthiness responsibility for the altered aircraft. This requirement would assist in ensuring that the aircraft meets the applicable consensus standard throughout its useful life.

Proposed § 21.186(c) would require manufacturers of aircraft intended for certification as a special, light-sport aircraft, or of kits intended for certification as experimental aircraft for the purpose of operating light-sport aircraft (under proposed § 21.191(i)(2)), to produce those aircraft or aircraft kits in accordance with consensus standards. The FAA believes that light-sport aircraft can be designed and manufactured with less FAA oversight than that required for an aircraft with a type or production certificate. Accordingly, light-sport aircraft would conform to an industry-developed consensus airworthiness standard, which the FAA would define as a "consensus standard."

The manufacturer would have to perform specific tasks and attest to their satisfactory completion on a manufacturer’s Statement of Compliance. A Statement of Compliance would be required for each specific aircraft to be issued a special, light-sport aircraft airworthiness certificate; or for each kit issued an experimental certificate for the purpose of operating light-sport aircraft.

Furthermore, proposed § 21.186(c) would define the items that must be contained in the manufacturer’s Statement of Compliance. The manufacturer’s quality assurance system would identify a company official who would be authorized to make the certifications on the Statement of Compliance. The official who makes the certifications would need to have control and direct supervisory participation in the activities that the statement addresses.

Proposed § 21.186(c)(1) would require the Statement of Compliance to contain the aircraft make and model designation, aircraft serial number, class of light-sport aircraft, and date of manufacture for each aircraft or kit intended for certification under proposed § 21.186 or 21.191(i)(2). This provision is intended to specify the minimum basic identification on the Statement of Compliance for each aircraft (or kit, when applicable) produced. A manufacturer could include in its Statement of Compliance additional information to help describe or otherwise identify the aircraft.

Proposed § 21.186(c)(2) would require the Statement of Compliance to fully identify the consensus standard used to manufacture the aircraft. The identification would include the effective date of the consensus standard. This requirement would provide a permanent record of compliance by aircraft and by serial number with a particular consensus standard.

Although aircraft issued special airworthiness certificates in the light-sport category would not have a type certificate or be produced under a production certificate, the FAA proposes that these aircraft would meet consensus standards, which would mean an industry-developed consensus airworthiness standard. The light-sport aircraft industry, with FAA participation, would develop an acceptable minimum airworthiness standard for each aircraft class that could be issued a special airworthiness certificate in the light-sport category. The airworthiness standards would govern light-sport aircraft design and performance, quality assurance system requirements, production acceptance test specifications, and continued operational safety monitoring system characteristics. These standards would provide a level of safety that is higher than that provided by the standards permitted for an experimental certificate issued for the purpose of operating amateur-built aircraft under current § 21.191(g).

For aircraft that would be eligible for the special, light-sport aircraft airworthiness certificate, the FAA believes that the use of consensus standards is appropriate. The FAA has made this determination in accordance with Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-119, "Federal Participation in the Development and Use of Voluntary Consensus Standards and in Conformity Assessment Activities," dated February 10, 1998. Specifically, the FAA believes that this determination is consistent with a primary goal of the government in using voluntary consensus standards—reduced regulatory development costs to the government and reduced regulatory compliance costs to the industry.

Proposed § 21.186(c)(3) would require the Statement of Compliance to include a statement that the aircraft complies with the current consensus standard identified in proposed § 21.186(c)(2). This would attest to the satisfactory completion of all analyses, tests, and inspections necessary to demonstrate that the aircraft complies with that standard.

Proposed § 21.186(c)(4) would require the Statement of Compliance to include a statement that the manufacturer has found that the specific aircraft conforms to the manufacturer’s design data. This determination would be made using a quality system that conforms to the consensus standard. This determination would apply to the aircraft (or kit, when applicable) and its components, including purchased components. Thus, this statement would attest to the existence of a quality assurance system that complies with the consensus standard.

Proposed § 21.186(c)(5) would require the Statement of Compliance to include full identification of the following:

1. The Pilot Operating Handbook describing the proper methods and procedures for safely operating the aircraft.
2. The manufacturer’s inspection and maintenance program for the continued airworthiness of the aircraft. This would require the manufacturer to establish and make available the technical information necessary to inspect and maintain the aircraft.
3. The pilot flight training providing information on the model-specific features and characteristics of the aircraft, because the sport pilot certificate would require specific training by make and model. (Without such a manual, a sport pilot would not be able to receive a make and model logbook endorsement and thus could not operate the aircraft.)

Under the proposal, this paragraph would also require the Statement of Compliance to include a statement that the manufacturer would make this information available to any interested party.

Proposed § 21.186(c)(6) would require the Statement of Compliance to fully identify the document describing the system the manufacturer agrees to use for monitoring and correcting safety-of-flight issues. The FAA believes this is an important requirement because light-sport aircraft would not have a type certificate, and therefore, the manufacturer may not have the service difficulty reporting and correcting responsibilities required of a type certificate holder. The intent of this requirement is to require a system to monitor and correct safety-of-flight issues for these aircraft. By making this statement, the manufacturer would also attest that the manufacturer’s continued operational safety monitoring system complies with the consensus standard.

This proposal would establish a requirement for manufacturers to have a system to monitor and correct safety-of-flight issues, because aircraft holding a special, light-sport aircraft airworthiness certificate would not have a type certificate. The manufacturer would be responsible for monitoring and notifying operators to correct unsafe conditions in aircraft that have been issued special airworthiness certificates in the light-sport category for as long as these aircraft are U.S.-registered. The manufacturer also would be responsible for issuing corrective actions in accordance with its program to monitor and correct safety-of-flight issues and would notify the owner of the affected aircraft of the corrective action to resolve problems. The FAA does not normally issue airworthiness directives (AD’s) against products without a type certificate. Therefore, to ensure the success of this proposal, the FAA expects manufacturers to implement a vigorous system to monitor and correct safety-of-flight issues. The FAA specifically requests comments on the manner in which the continued airworthiness of light-sport aircraft should be addressed.

To ensure continued airworthiness of the aircraft, the FAA proposes that when an aircraft is certificated, the FAA would assign appropriate operating limitations requiring certain inspections. The operating limitations associated with the airworthiness certificate would specify that the manufacturer’s safety-of-flight actions must be complied with. This proposal also addresses how the continued airworthiness would be handled for these aircraft and who would perform the maintenance and inspections to ensure continued airworthiness.

Under this proposal, the owner would ensure that the corrective action is addressed in accordance with the operating limitations proposed for the special, light-sport aircraft airworthiness certificate. Failure to comply with mandatory safety-of-flight actions from the manufacturer would mean that the aircraft is no longer in compliance with the conditions of its airworthiness certificate. However, an operator who chooses not to comply with the manufacturer’s program may seek an experimental certificate for the aircraft.

If public safety requires issuance of an AD, the FAA has the ability to issue one; however, the FAA expects that such action would be needed only as a consequence of a serious breakdown in the manufacturer’s fulfillment of its responsibilities for maintaining continued airworthiness.

If a manufacturer ceases to exist (or ceases to provide continued airworthiness support), the lack of a responsible party for the continued airworthiness support of in-service aircraft would be a potential safety hazard for the aircraft operator and the public. Thus, the proposal would permit the manufacturer to transfer responsibility for monitoring and correcting safety-of-flight issues to a suitable third party capable of supporting the fleet. The consensus standard would include procedures to ensure that a person acceptable to the FAA can be identified to assume the continuing airworthiness responsibilities of the manufacturers of light-sport aircraft. If an airworthiness issue arises and there is no known responsible person, the FAA could take certificate action against the individual aircraft.

Proposed § 21.186(c)(7) would require the Statement of Compliance to include a statement that the manufacturer would provide the FAA unrestricted access to its facilities, upon request. Access to facilities would include access to design, manufacturing, and quality system data. Because the light-sport aircraft manufacturer would not be required to hold an FAA design or production approval, this requirement would be needed to facilitate the FAA’s ability to make any inspections and tests necessary to determine compliance with the provisions of this section. The FAA may also need to preserve this access under its bilateral obligations.

Proposed § 21.186(c)(8) would require a manufacturer’s statement that completed (non-kit) aircraft were tested in accordance with a production acceptance test procedure that meets the consensus standard. Furthermore, the manufacturer would be required to make a determination that a completed aircraft is in a condition for safe operation before the FAA could issue an airworthiness certificate. This statement would also attest that the manufacturer has determined that the aircraft’s performance is acceptable and that the aircraft is in a condition for safe operation.

Proposed § 21.186(d) would specify the additional requirements that the registered owner must meet to obtain a special airworthiness certificate in the light-sport category when importing a light-sport aircraft. These requirements are in addition to those in proposed § 21.186(b).

Proposed § 21.186(d)(1) would require the applicant for the special airworthiness certificate to provide evidence that that an imported light-sport aircraft was manufactured in a country with which the United States has an agreement for the import/export of that product. This is because the FAA would rely on the CAA’s of other countries to assess the airworthiness of these aircraft. The agreement must address aircraft with special airworthiness certificates and the appropriate class of light-sport aircraft for these aircraft to be imported or exported. Typically, these agreements are in the form of Bilateral Airworthiness Agreements or Bilateral Aviation Safety Agreements with Implementation Procedures for Airworthiness, but other types of agreements would be suitable. The FAA would consider agreements that address "all aeronautical products" as being applicable to all classes of light-sport aircraft, including those new classes such as powered parachutes and weight-shift-control aircraft.

Proposed § 21.186(d)(2) would require the applicant for the special airworthiness certificate to provide evidence that the make and model of the aircraft to be imported is eligible for an airworthiness certificate or flight authority in the country of manufacture. This would constitute evidence that the civil aviation authority (CAA) of the country of manufacture has established a proper level of oversight for this type of product and would perform its export bilateral obligations with regard to the continued airworthiness of the product.

Proposed § 21.186(d)(3) would require the applicant for the special airworthiness certificate to provide evidence that the CAA of the country of export has found that the aircraft is in a condition for safe operation. This requirement would be the same for used or new aircraft. However, if a used aircraft is imported from a country that is not the country of manufacture, additional inspection and documentation may be required to demonstrate the airworthiness of the aircraft.

Proposed § 21.191(i) would establish a new purpose for which the FAA may issue an experimental airworthiness certificate for the purpose of operating light-sport aircraft. Under the proposal, there would be three methods for obtaining an experimental airworthiness certificate for this purpose. Experimental certificates could be issued for: (1) existing aircraft that exceed the weight, occupant, or performance limitations of the current part 103; (2) kit-built light-sport aircraft; and (3) aircraft previously certificated under the proposed § 21.186.

The FAA created this new purpose for the experimental certificate in lieu of combining this purpose with the current purpose of operating amateur-built aircraft. The FAA did not want to have aircraft that could not demonstrate compliance with § 21.191(g) (the 51-percent rule) to be certificated under that paragraph.

The experimental airworthiness certification option set forth in this proposal would be in addition to existing methods of obtaining airworthiness certification. No existing airworthiness certification option would be eliminated or restricted for aircraft that meet the definition of light-sport aircraft. Additionally, this proposal wouldn’t affect vehicles eligible to operate under part 103.

Aircraft that otherwise meet the light-sport aircraft definition that are shown via test to have a higher V_H would not be issued an airworthiness certificate under the terms of this rule. An aircraft would no longer be eligible for the experimental light-sport certificate if it is altered such that it no longer meets the definition of light-sport aircraft. For example, an alteration to a powered aircraft that results in a V_H greater than 115 kts (e.g., installation of a cruise propeller on an aircraft initially certificated with a climb propeller) would render the aircraft ineligible.

An aircraft issued an experimental, operating light-sport aircraft airworthiness certificate under proposed § 21.191(i) would be issued operating limitations under current § 91.319(b) as part of the certificate. The limitations would address maintenance, flight test programs, operations in various airspace classes, and pilot qualification. Operating limitations would prohibit the operation of experimental light-sport aircraft for compensation or hire, except when operated while conducting flight training in aircraft certificated under proposed § 21.191(i)(1), and also would prohibit rental of these aircraft.

Operating limitations also would address the different purposes for which an experimental certificate would be issued. Operating limitations for existing aircraft that exceed the weight, occupant, or performance limitations of part 103 would be similar to those that currently exist for vehicles operating under part 103, although flight training, under certain circumstances described previously, would be an allowable use. Operating limitations for new aircraft, either assembled from an eligible kit or previously issued a special certificate under § 21.186, would be similar to those for aircraft issued experimental, operating amateur-built aircraft.

When an experimental, operating light-sport aircraft airworthiness certificate is issued for an aircraft that has not previously completed flight testing, operating limitations would require the owner to complete phase I flight testing to demonstrate that the aircraft is safe for flight. Operating limitations issued for these aircraft would be similar to those currently issued for experimental, amateur-built aircraft. Upon completion of phase I flight test, the pilot should record in the aircraft records that the aircraft meets § 91.319(b). The aircraft would be considered to have completed phase I flight testing if the aircraft has met the phase I flight test requirement at the time of application, and the owner can attest that the aircraft meets the requirements for safe flight and has made the appropriate entry in the aircraft’s maintenance record.

The continued airworthiness of light-sport aircraft issued experimental certificates would follow the experience and precedent that has been established for the continued airworthiness of experimental amateur-built aircraft. The aircraft owner would be responsible for ensuring the continued airworthiness of the aircraft. The FAA has not generally issued AD’s for aircraft with experimental certificates in the past and expects this policy to continue. Similar to aircraft with special, light-sport aircraft airworthiness certificates, the FAA would issue an AD if public safety requires; however, the FAA expects that such action would be required only as a consequence of a serious breakdown in the manufacturer’s fulfillment of its responsibilities for maintaining continued airworthiness.

Under the proposal, there would be three ways a person could obtain an experimental airworthiness certificate for the operation of light-sport aircraft ["experimental light-sport"].

Proposed 21.191(i)(1) would establish the eligibility requirements and time frame for the first method of issuing an experimental airworthiness certificate for the operation of light-sport aircraft ["experimental light-sport"].

This method would allow a person to obtain an experimental certificate for the operation of light-sport aircraft if that person applies to register the aircraft not later than 24 months after the effective date of the rule. The FAA would have to issue an experimental airworthiness certificate for the aircraft not later than 36 months after the effective date of the rule. This provision would not apply to aircraft that meet the definition of ultralight vehicle in § 103.1. Light-sport aircraft could be used only for sport and recreation and flight training. However, for 36 months after the effective date of the rule, a person could operate these aircraft for compensation or hire while conducting initial flight training.

The owner of an aircraft that does not meet the current definition of ultralight vehicle in § 103.1 would be able to obtain an experimental certificate for their aircraft. To get the certificate, the owner would have to apply to the FAA to register the aircraft not later than 24 months after the effective date of the rule. Then, the registered owner would be required to have the aircraft inspected and an airworthiness certificate issued by a qualified representative of the FAA not later than 36 months after the effective date of the rule. The FAA wouldn’t issue experimental, operating light-sport aircraft airworthiness certificates under § 21.191(i)(1) after 36 months after the effective date of the final rule.

Once the FAA has inspected the aircraft and determined it is safe to operate, the FAA would issue an experimental, operating light-sport aircraft airworthiness certificate with the appropriate operating limitations. Identification of the aircraft with a data plate per current § 45.11 would be required.

The process for getting an experimental, operating light-sport aircraft airworthiness certificate would be the same for an imported aircraft as for an aircraft manufactured in the United States.

Aircraft certified under this method could be used only for sport and recreation and flight training; however, until 36 months after the effective date of the rule, flight training would be permitted in existing light-sport aircraft that do not meet part 103 (those certificated under proposed § 21.191(i)(1)) and are operated for compensation or hire. Permitting these aircraft to be used for flight training while the aircraft is being used for compensation or hire for a 36-month period would ensure that flight training currently permitted under exemptions could continue while light-sport aircraft manufacturers begin production of aircraft that could be certificated under proposed § 21.186. This 36-month period also would provide industry with time to develop and reach a consensus on the airworthiness standards appropriate for light-sport aircraft. The owner of an aircraft certificated under proposed § 21.191(i) would be authorized to receive flight training in the aircraft regardless of this 36-month provision.

Persons who currently operate vehicles under a training exemption and who have applied for an aircraft registration would be allowed to continue to operate under the training exemption until the FAA issues an experimental, operating light-sport aircraft airworthiness certificate. Persons operating aircraft under a training exemption would still have to apply for registration and for an airworthiness certificate, as proposed. Persons with vehicles that exceed the weight/occupant limitations of part 103 and who do not hold a training exemption would not be permitted to operate under part 91 until the aircraft is registered and is issued an experimental, operating light-sport aircraft airworthiness certificate. The FAA intends for the experimental, operating light-sport aircraft airworthiness certificate to be for aircraft meeting the criteria for light-sport aircraft that do not currently hold a valid airworthiness certificate and that cannot be operated under the provisions of part 103.

Proposed 21.191(i)(2) would establish the eligibility requirements and time frame for the second method of issuing an experimental airworthiness certificate for the operation of light-sport aircraft ["experimental light-sport"]. A person could obtain an experimental certificate for the operation of light-sport aircraft, if the aircraft was assembled from an eligible kit without the supervision and quality system of the manufacturer. The aircraft could be used only for the purpose of sport and recreation and for receiving flight training.

An aircraft assembled from a kit could alternatively be eligible for an experimental amateur-built certificate, provided the assembler can meet the requirements of § 21.191(g).

A gyroplane kit could not be an eligible kit, because a gyroplane would not be issued an airworthiness certificate in the light-sport category under proposed § 21.186

Experimental, kit-built aircraft may also benefit from manufacturer support provided to aircraft with special, light-sport aircraft airworthiness certificates.

Proposed 21.191(i)(3) would establish the eligibility requirements and time frame for the third method of issuing an experimental airworthiness certificate for the operation of light-sport aircraft ["experimental light-sport"]. In this method a person could obtain an experimental certificate for the operation of light-sport aircraft if the aircraft previously was issued a special airworthiness certificate in the light-sport category under § 21.186. These aircraft also could be used only for sport and recreation and flight training, even if they were previously operated for compensation or hire while conducting flight training or used as rental aircraft.

This method is intended to permit aircraft previously issued a special, light-sport aircraft airworthiness certificate under proposed § 21.186 that no longer meet the operating limitations of proposed § 91.327 to be certificated for this purpose. The operating limitations would then be to those of current § 91.319(b).

An aircraft that did not comply with a manufacturer’s mandatory safety of flight bulletin or had unauthorized alterations would be eligible for the experimental certificate using this method.

Proposed § 21.193(e) would include general requirements for registered owners who seek to obtain an experimental certificate for a light-sport aircraft under proposed § 21.191(i)(2) assembled from a kit. This section has similar requirements to those of § 21.186(b) for aircraft eligible for special light-sport airworthiness certificates.

Proposed § 21.193(e)(1) would define the requirements that an eligible kit must meet. A kit would be considered eligible if the aircraft make and model previously has been issued a special airworthiness certificate in the light-sport category and that aircraft was manufactured and assembled by the aircraft kit manufacturer. This requires that the manufacturer has completed the process of designing, manufacturing, assembling, and testing the same make and model aircraft.

Under the proposal, the owner would have to provide evidence that the aircraft was assembled per the kit manufacturer’s instructions, and would have the aircraft inspected by the FAA. The applicant also would need to provide the Statement of Compliance issued by the manufacturer. Once the aircraft has been inspected and determined to be safe to operate, the FAA would issue an experimental, operating light-sport airworthiness certificate with the appropriate operating limitations. Aircraft assembled from a kit and imported complete into the United States would not be eligible for an experimental certificate under proposed § 21.191(i)(2). This person could obtain only an experimental airworthiness certificate if the aircraft is eligible under § 21.191(g).

Proposed § 21.193(e)(2) would require registered owner to have a copy of the Pilot Operating Handbook. This would provide the registered owner access to information on how to safely operate the aircraft.

Proposed § 21.193(e)(3) would require the registered owner to have a copy of the maintenance and inspection procedures for the aircraft. This would provide the registered owner access to information on how to safely maintain the aircraft.

Proposed § 21.193(e)(4) would require the registered owner to provide a Statement of Compliance for the design and manufacture of the kit aircraft. This Statement would include all the items required on a Statement of Compliance for a special light-sport aircraft, except for a statement that it has been tested in accordance with a production acceptance procedure. This statement would not be required because the Statement of Compliance for a kit would address only the work performed by or under the control of the kit manufacturer. In lieu of a statement that the aircraft has been tested in accordance with a production acceptance procedure, this proposal would require the kit manufacturer to provide assembly instructions for the aircraft kit. The instructions should provide enough detail so that if the kit were assembled by a qualified person, the completed aircraft would perform acceptably and be in a condition for safe operation.

Proposed § 21.193(e)(5) would require the registered owner to present the completed assembly instructions used to assemble the aircraft to the FAA.

Proposed § 21.193(e)(6) would require that an imported kit be manufactured in a country that has an agreement with the United States for the import and export of the aircraft to be made from the kit. This would preclude the manufacture of kits in countries that the United States has not assessed with respect to the manufacture of these kits.

Proposed § 43.1 would be revised to reflect that part 43 would not apply to an aircraft for which a special airworthiness certificate in the light-sport category was issued. The FAA has made this determination because these aircraft would not be issued a type certificate.

The FAA is proposing revisions to part 45 to require aircraft registration markings for powered parachutes and weight-shift-control aircraft. The revisions would set forth requirements for the size of these registration marks and how they should be displayed.

Proposed § 45.27 would require each operator of a powered parachute or weight-shift-control aircraft to display registration marks. The marks would be required to be displayed horizontally and in two diametrically opposite positions on any structural member or airfoil.

Proposed § 45.29 would permit an aircraft issued an experimental certificate for the purpose of operating a light-sport aircraft to display marks at least 3 inches high when the maximum cruising speed of the aircraft does not exceed 180 kts CAS. This proposal is identical to that contained in § 45.29(b)(iii) for exhibition aircraft and amateur-built aircraft. The proposal also would require marks displayed on all powered parachutes and weight-shift-control aircraft. This proposal is similar to the current requirement for airships, balloons, and non-spherical balloons.

The FAA is proposing a new sport pilot certificate and flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating. The proposal would establish two new aircraft category and class ratings, weight-shift-control (with land and sea class ratings), and powered parachute, in addition to new training and certification requirements for these new aircraft ratings at the sport pilot and private pilot levels.

The FAA would establish a Special Federal Aviation Regulation (SFAR) under part 61 that would apply to the issuance of a student pilot certificate to operate light-sport aircraft, a sport pilot certificate, a flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating, and ground instructor privileges for these certificates. The FAA’s decision to propose many of these rule changes in the format of an SFAR was based on a number of factors. First, the proposed SFAR would consolidate all requirements for sport pilot certification, flight instructor certification with a sport pilot rating, student pilot certification to operate a light-sport aircraft, and ground instructor privileges applicable to certificates issued under the SFAR in one location. The FAA believes that this approach would make it easier for you to use the certification rules that apply to you. Additionally, because this proposal would be a significant amendment to part 61, we see this as an opportunity to revise our regulations using plain language writing techniques, which would make the regulations clearer to you. Finally, it provides us with greater flexibility to further refine the new regulations after evaluating their impact over a period of time. We will evaluate the impact of the SFAR after we have had operational experience with the regulations. At that point, we will determine the most appropriate location for the provisions of the SFAR and we expect to integrate them into the permanent portion of 14 CFR part 61. The proposed certification of sport pilots is a new concept that may require revisions once it is put into place. Although the question-and-answer format in the rule text is a departure from what you may be used to, it is easier to understand and apply. The FAA specifically requests that you comment on the language of the NPRM and on the proposal to incorporate these rules initially as an SFAR, rather than in the body of part 61.

Proposed § 89section. 1 would set forth the scope of the SFAR 89. It would state that the SFAR would establish the requirements to apply for a student pilot certificate to operate a light-sport aircraft, a sport pilot certificate, and a flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating. It would also establish requirements for ground instructors who would provide training for a sport pilot certificate or a flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating.

Proposed § 89.section 3 of SFAR 89 would list the eligibility requirements for student pilot, sport pilot, and flight instructor certificates.

If you are an applicant for a student pilot certificate, you would have to be at least 16 years old to operate a light-sport aircraft other than a glider or a balloon. You would have be at least 14 years old to apply for a certificate to operate a light-sport glider or balloon.

If you are an applicant for a sport pilot certificate, you would have to be at least 17 years old to operate light-sport aircraft other than a glider or balloon. You would have to be at least 16 years old to apply for a certificate to operate a light-sport glider or balloon. These age limitations are consistent with the current age requirements for recreational and private pilot certificates.

If you are an applicant for a flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating, you would have to be at least 18 years old. This age requirement is consistent with age requirements for all other flight instructor certificates.

The FAA is not considering changes to the existing age requirements, because there has not been any indication of a decrease in the level of safety due to the age of a pilot or flight instructor.

Student pilots, sport pilots, and flight instructors would have to be able to read, speak, write, and understand the English language, which currently is required of all student pilots, private pilots, and flight instructors. The FAA may place operating limitations on you, as necessary, for the safe operation of light-sport aircraft. This procedure would be identical to that used for current student pilot, private pilot, and flight instructor applicants.

Proposed § 89.section 5 would indicate that the SFAR would remain effective until superceded or rescinded. The FAA expects to incorporate the provisions of SFAR 89 into the permanent portions of 14 CFR part 61 after evaluating the operational needs of the SFAR.

Proposed § 89.section 7 of SFAR 89 would establish that a sport pilot certificate issued under this SFAR would not expire.

Proposed § 89.section 9 of SFAR 89 would indicate that the term "light-sport aircraft," as used in the SFAR, would be defined in § 1.1. This definition would provide the criteria for a light-sport aircraft and which aircraft you would be authorized to fly. A light-sport aircraft may hold either a standard or special airworthiness certificate.

Proposed § 89.section 11 of SFAR 89 would indicate that the term "authorized instructor," as used in this SFAR, would be defined under § 61.1. The definition of authorized instructor would be amended to include a flight instructor with a sport pilot rating.

Proposed § 89.section 13 of SFAR 89 would require that as a sport pilot, you would have to comply with parts 61 and 91 and any other applicable regulations under 14 CFR.

Proposed § 89.section 15 of SFAR 89 would require you, while exercising the privileges of a student pilot operating light-sport aircraft or a sport pilot (other than a glider or balloon), to hold and possess either a current and valid U.S. driver’s license or a current and valid airman medical certificate issued under part 67. The FAA would consider a U.S. driver’s license to be any license to operate a motor vehicle issued by a state, the District of Colombia, Puerto Rico, a territory, a possession, or the Federal government. Consistent with all other pilot certificates, if you are a student pilot or a sport pilot operating a light-sport balloon or glider, you would not be required to hold a current and valid U.S. driver’s license or a current and valid airman medical certificate.

If you do not possess a current and valid airman medical certificate and your driver’s license is revoked or rescinded for any offense, you couldn’t exercise the privileges of your sport pilot certificate until your license is reinstated. If you choose to use your driver’s license to satisfy the medical requirements for your sport pilot certificate (or a student pilot operating light-sport aircraft), your driver’s license must be in your personal possession at all times when you conduct operations under your sport pilot certificate. Similarly, if you choose to use a third-classcurrent and valid airman medical certificate to meet the medical requirements for your sport pilot certificate, you would be required to carry your that medical certificate at all times when you conduct operations under your certificate.

It should be noted that any restrictions on a U.S. driver’s license (e.g., vision restrictions) also would apply when exercising the privileges of a student pilot certificate operating light-sport aircraft or a sport pilot certificate.

The FAA proposes to require a pilot to hold and possess an U.S. driver’s license because it provides generally accepted evidence of basic health. Further, the FAA believes the medical standards that permit an individual to drive an automobile in close proximity to other automobiles at high speeds provides an adequate level of safety to operate a light-sport aircraft.

Although the process for applying for a driver’s license varies throughout the United States, U.S. issuing authorities typically require applicants to verify some basic level of health on their various driver’s license applications. Each State requires an applicant to meet minimum vision standards. Additionally, many authorities require applicants to provide a summary of any medical condition(s) that might preclude them from obtaining a U.S. driver’s license in that jurisdiction. In the District of Columbia, for example, applicants for a driver’s license are asked to indicate whether they have ever been treated for any of the following: stroke or paralysis; loss of function in an extremity; alcoholism or drug abuse; a mental disorder; a brain disorder; diabetes; glaucoma; cataracts or other eye diseases; any heart disorder; seizure disorder or fainting spells; poor muscle control, or dizzy spells. If a driver’s license applicant affirms having received treatment for any of these conditions, a licensed physician must further evaluate whether that person should be allowed to drive a motor vehicle. The FAA believes that the level of health evidenced by a U.S. driver’s license is a necessary prerequisite to safely operate a light-sport aircraft.

If the U.S. driver’s license of a pilot who does no