Legal Interpretations
Smith 2011
Summary
The Question
May the FAA place a "Second in Command Required" limitation on a pilot certificate after a Cessna Citation II Model 550 type rating practical test?
Background
A pilot seeking a CE-500 type rating in a Citation II Model 550, whose type certificate data sheet requires a two-pilot crew, cited FAA Order 8900.2 guidance that such a certificate need not carry the limitation described in 14 CFR 61.43(b)(3).
The FAA’s Interpretation
Yes. Neither FAA Order 8900.2 nor 14 CFR 61.43(b)(3) expressly prohibits the limitation, and 49 U.S.C. 44703 lets the FAA specify the capacity in which a certificate holder may serve. Because the CE-500 type rating covers both two-pilot and single-pilot models, a certificate without the limitation would not stop the pilot from flying single-pilot models without being qualified. Passing a single-pilot test in another CE-500 model could remove it.
- Requester
- Smith
- Issued
- May 4, 2011
- Subject
- Pilot Certification & Privileges
Regulations Cited
Page 1
U.S. Department
of Tronspcrtotion
Federal Aviation
Administration
MAY - 4 tOfl
Mr. Richard Smith
I
Dear Mr. Smith:
Office of the Chief Counsel 800 Independence Ave., S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20591
This letter is in response to your request for interpretation of 14 C.F.R. §61.43 - Practical Tests: General Procedures, as it applies to practical tests for pilots in aircraft that can be flown by a single pilot or a two person crew.
Your inquiry specifically refers to the language in §6 ! .43(b)(3) which says, "Ifthe applicant performs the practical test with a copilot, the limitation of 'Second in Command Required' will be placed upon the applicant's pilot certificate." The same provjsion also says, "If the ... aircraft type certification data sheet allows the pilot flight crew complement t6 be either a single pilot, or a pilot and a copilot, then the applicant may demonstrate single pilot proficiency[.]" The type certification data sheet (A22CE) for the Citation II, Model 550, which you state in your letter is the type of aircraft for which you are seeking a type rating, states that the minimum crew, for all types of flight, is 2 persons, a pilot and a copilot. You correctly point to the language of FAA Order 8900.2, Chapter 7, section I 07(b) which says, "Since the Cessna 550 . .. type certification requires an SIC crewrnember, the applicant's pilot certificate and ... type rating need not contain the limitation "Second-in-Command Required." While 8900.2 says that the pilot's certificate "need not" contain the limitation, the placement of such a limitation is not expressly prohibited by either this. section of guidance nor 61.43(b)(3). Title 49 U.S.C. §44703 grants the Administrator authority to issue airman certificates. Subsection (b)(l)(D) of §44703 provides that an airman certificate shall "(D) specify the capacity in which the holder of the certificate may serve as an airman with respect to an aircraft." This provision allows the FAA to place appropriate limitations on an ainnan's certificate. According to the type rating table (see. http://registry.faa.gov/TypeRatirigs/ ), the CE-500 type rating designation is applicable t_o aircraft models that must be operated by two pilots, as weU as those that may be operated by only one pilot. If the 'Second in Command Required' limitation was not placed on your certificate, after taking the practical test described in your letter, your certificate would not expressly limit you from operating certain aircraft under the CE-500 type rating as a single pilot, for which you would not be qualified.
Page 2
It should be noted that if you take a practical test on another model of Citation that also would have a type rating designation as a CE-500 aircraft, and meet the requirements for earning a single pilot rating, then the limitation of "Second in Command Required" could be removed from your certificate.
We hope that this response has been helpful. If you need further information, or have additional questions, please do not hesitate to contact my staff at (202) 267-3073. This response was prepared by Neal O'Hara, an Attorney in the Regulations Division, Office of the Chief Counsel of the Federal Aviation Administration, and was coordinated with the Certification and General Aviation Operations Branch of the Flight Standards Service. ~ v Rebecca B. MacPherson
Assistant Chief Counsel for Regulations, AGC-200
Regulations Referenced
Snapshot retrieved August 6, 2026.