Rule2026-19843
Notice of Policy Change and Rescission of Single-Pilot Training Exemptions for Certain Cessna Aircraft
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
September 28, 2026
Effective
September 29, 2026
Issuing agencies
Transportation DepartmentFederal Aviation Administration
Abstract
Based on safety concerns and a review that revealed widespread non-compliance with the exemptions, the FAA is announcing its decision to cease issuing exemptions that allow certain Cessna aircraft that require two pilots to operate as a single-pilot operation, and notifying current exemption holders that their exemptions will be rescinded by separate action. This notice also serves to inform pilots who obtained single-pilot endorsements from training providers that held exemptions that they must cease single-pilot operations in aircraft that require two pilots under the regulations as they have no relief from the regulations.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 91 Issue 186 (Monday, September 28, 2026)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 186 (Monday, September 28, 2026)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 61135-61136]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2026-19843]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 91
[Docket No.: FAA-2026-12343]
Notice of Policy Change and Rescission of Single-Pilot Training
Exemptions for Certain Cessna Aircraft
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Policy statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Based on safety concerns and a review that revealed widespread
non-compliance with the exemptions, the FAA is announcing its decision
to cease issuing exemptions that allow certain Cessna aircraft that
require two pilots to operate as a single-pilot operation, and
notifying current exemption holders that their exemptions will be
rescinded by separate action. This notice also serves to inform pilots
who obtained single-pilot endorsements from training providers that
held exemptions that they must cease single-pilot operations in
aircraft that require two pilots under the regulations as they have no
relief from the regulations.
DATES: The policy described herein is effective September 29, 2026.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical questions concerning
this policy notice, contact AFS-810, Training and Certification Group,
800 Independence Ave. SW, Washington, DC 20591; email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#5b62761a1d0876636b6b76183429293e282b34353f3e35383e1b3d3a3a753c342d"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="231a0e6265700e1b13130e604c51514650534c4d47464d4046634542420d444c55">[email protected]</span></a>.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Under Sec. 91.9(a) of Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14
CFR), no person may operate an aircraft without complying with the
operating limitations specified for that aircraft. If the operating
limitations in an aircraft's type certificate data sheet (TCDS) require
that the aircraft be flown by a crew of two pilots, then a pilot in
command (PIC) and second in command (SIC) are required per Sec.
91.9.\1\ Further, under 14 CFR 91.531(a)(2), if an airplane is a
``large aircraft'' (as defined by FAA regulations at 14 CFR 1.1 as an
aircraft weighing over 12,500 pounds), then the aircraft cannot by
regulation be operated without a person designated as SIC.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Section 91.531(a)(1) similarly requires that no person may
operate any airplane that is type certificated for more than one
pilot or without a pilot designated as second in command (SIC).
\2\ Section 91.531(b) contains exceptions from the SIC
requirements in Sec. 91.531(a)(2) if the airplane is certificated
for operation with one pilot.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cessna Citation CE-500 series of airplanes are unique because
some variants of the CE-500 (CE-501 and CE-551) are certificated under
14 CFR part 23, while other variants (CE-500, CE-550 and CE-560) are
certificated under 14 CFR part 25. The Part 25 Cessna Citation CE-500
series of airplanes are type certificated for operation by two pilots.
Additionally, because these variants meet the definition of large
airplane, an SIC is required under Sec. 91.531(a)(2). The Part 23 CE-
500 variants are required by the type certificate to be flown with an
SIC unless the aircraft has additional equipment specified in the
limitation section of the FAA-approved Aircraft Flight Manual (AFM).
The FAA has been issuing exemptions to allow the single-pilot
operation of transport category CE-500 variants, which must be flown by
two pilots pursuant to regulation, for over forty years, subject to
certain conditions and limitations (C&Ls). The FAA issued the first CE-
500 single-pilot exemption to Cessna Aircraft Company in 1984.\3\ In
granting the original exemption, the FAA explained in response to
commenters' concerns about safety that there was no data that
specifically showed a degradation of safety between single-pilot
operations in Part 23 CE-500 aircraft and two-pilot operations in Part
25 CE-500 aircraft. The FAA also stated that a grant of exemption would
serve the public interest by providing operators with increased
operating flexibility and reduced economic burdens and would provide
the FAA with data that could be used to help assess the need for
general rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Exemption No. 4050, Docket No. 23771.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eventually, the FAA began granting exemptions to training providers
conducting training under 14 CFR parts 61, 141, and 142. These
exemptions permitted these training providers to provide training and
checking and issue a logbook endorsement to pilots that allows the
pilot to conduct single-pilot operations in CE-500 aircraft that would
otherwise require a second pilot. The FAA notes that these exemptions
are complicated by the fact that the regulatory relief provided from
Sec. Sec. 91.9 and 91.531 is required by the pilot
[[Page 61136]]
operating the aircraft, not the training provider who holds the
exemption.
The following table shows all variants of the CE-500 airplane
currently covered by the single-pilot exemptions.
Table--CE-500 Variants Covered by Single-Pilot Exemption
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of
Cessna model required
pilots
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transport Category (weighing more than 12,500 lbs)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Model 500--Citation and Citation I...................... 2
Model 550--Citation II.................................. 2
Model S550--Citation S/II............................... 2
Model 552, Navy T-47A................................... 2
Model 560--Citation V and Citation Ultra................ 2
Model 550--Bravo........................................ 2
Model 560--Encore....................................... 2
Model 560--Encore+...................................... 2
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 2024, the FAA began an in-depth review of compliance based on
information discovered that non-exemption holders were offering
training under another entity's exemption. The FAA found numerous
instances of non-compliance with the C&Ls by holders of these
exemptions. These acts of non-compliance include incomplete records,
conducting required flight training in an advanced aviation training
device contrary to the C&Ls, and improper checks by designated pilot
examiners (DPEs) that included falsified records.\4\ As a result, 13 of
the 14 Part 61 exemption holders were denied an extension or had their
exemption rescinded either for failing to respond to information
requests or for non-compliance with the C&Ls.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ In response to the exemption review, the FAA took concurrent
action against certain DPEs who administered checks for the non-
compliant training providers. In the instances involving
falsification of records, the FAA terminated the designee authority.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to the widespread non-compliance described above, a
review of CE-500 accidents over the last 18 years indicates that, even
with conservative assumptions about crew configuration, Part 25 CE-500
aircraft operated with a single pilot are involved in approximately
twice the rate \5\ of accidents as Part 23 CE-500, 510 and 525 aircraft
flown with a single pilot. This data undermines the threshold
requirement for issuance of an exemption, namely that the relief would
provide an equivalent level of safety or result in no adverse impact on
safety.\6\ The FAA also notes a fatal accident occurred on May 22, 2025
(NTSB WPR25FA161), that involved a CE-500 single-pilot operation that
killed six on board the aircraft and injured eight others on the
ground. The FAA determined that the pilot of the aircraft had received
an improper check six months before the accident by a DPE employed by a
Part 61 exemption holder. The accident is still under investigation,
and a probable cause has yet to be determined.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Rate is based on total number of aircraft.
\6\ See 49 U.S.C. 44701(f), 14 CFR 11.81(e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, another accident took place in Statesville, NC on
December 18, 2025 (NTSB WPR26MA063), in which the pilot of that
aircraft, a CE-500 variant that required two pilots under the
regulations, was operating without a qualified SIC on board. The
accident is still under investigation, and a probable cause has yet to
be determined.
In addition to these concerns, the FAA has determined that the
exemptions to training providers present safety oversight issues for
the agency. Unlike other exemptions that grant relief to the operator
of a flight on behalf of a pilot involved in the operation, the CE-500
exemption holders have no ongoing involvement with the pilots
exercising the relief to operate as a single pilot. The FAA
distinguishes the CE-500 exemption from exemptions granted to air
carriers on behalf of the air carrier and its pilots \7\ and exemptions
where the exemption holder is responsible for the operations for which
the pilot requires relief. In those circumstances, the exemption holder
maintains responsibility for the pilot, and a loss of exemption to the
operator prevents the pilot from continuing to exercise the relief
independently.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ In those instances, the regulation generally applies to both
the air carrier and the pilot (e.g., 14 CFR 121.383, which states
``[n]o certificate holder may use any person as an airman nor may
any person serve as an airman unless . . .'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Conversely, under the CE-500 exemptions, the relief granted to the
training provider is required only by the pilot operating the aircraft.
The training provider has no ongoing involvement with the operation for
which the relief is required; thus, the pilot exercising the relief is
likely unaware when the exemption expires or is terminated and may
continue to conduct operations for which no relief exists, resulting in
regulatory noncompliance.
Disposition
Due to the recent safety concerns, the widespread non-compliance
that has been identified, and the overarching problems associated with
granting relief to training providers on behalf of pilots for whom they
have no ongoing operational relationship, the FAA has determined that
cessation of the CE-500 single-pilot exemptions is warranted.
The FAA announces in this notice that it will cease issuing this
exemption to training providers who petition for relief on behalf of
pilots seeking to operate the CE-500 contrary to the aircraft's
operating limitations. The FAA finds that these exemptions do not
provide an equivalent level of safety to the regulations and are no
longer in the public interest. For those training providers who
currently hold a valid exemption, the FAA is issuing rescissions
following publication of this notice, effectively ending their current
exemptions. The FAA is also advising all pilots who hold logbook
endorsements authorizing them to operate a CE-500 aircraft as a single
pilot that with the termination of the exemption relief, their logbook
endorsement is no longer valid, and they must comply with the
requirements of Sec. Sec. 91.9 and 91.531. Accordingly, these pilots
must operate the aircraft in a two-pilot configuration consistent with
the operating limitations in the TCDS. The FAA notes that, if a pilot
received a Sec. 61.58 proficiency check during the course complying
with the C&Ls of the exemption, that pilot can still use that completed
proficiency check to satisfy the pilot-in-command requirements for a
two-pilot operation in a CE-500 model aircraft.
The FAA will apply the principles of the Compliance Program to
determine how to address flights performed by single pilots who
received a logbook endorsement from an exemption holder who was
rescinded or denied an extension prior to the issuance of this Notice.
Issued in Washington, DC, on September 24, 2026.
Hugh J. Thomas,
Executive Director, Flight Standards Service.
[FR Doc. 2026-19843 Filed 9-25-26; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on September 28, 2026.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.