[```clancey``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````c````l````a````n````c````e````y``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````(`````````````````````````````]{.underline}

March 12^th^, 2008

Petition for Exemption

U.S. Department of Transportation

Docket Management System

400 7^th^ Street S.W., Room PL 401

Washington, D.C. 20591-0001

**[PETITION FOR EXEMPTION]{.underline}**

**[THE RULE FROM WHICH EXEMPTION IS SOUGHT]{.underline}**

**[(PURSUANT TO 14 CFR
]{.underline}[§]{.underline}[11.61(b))]{.underline}**

[Linda Sue Maloney, holder of Airline Transport Pilot certificate number
2831813 and Flight Instructor certificate number 2831813CFI
(Petitioner), hereby petitions the Federal Aviation Administration for a
rules exemption as provided by §11.61(b) of the Federal Aviation
Regulations. Specifically:]{.underline}

[Exemption is requested from §91.109(a) of the Federal Aviation
Regulations to the extent necessary to permit the Petitioner to provide
recurrent flight training in Beechcraft Bonanza/Debonair, Baron, and
Travel Air type aircraft when those aircraft are equipped with a
functioning single-yoke, throw-over control wheel. This exemption is
requested to the extent necessary to permit training for the purpose of
meeting flight review and/or recency of experience requirements of §§
61.56 and 61.57 of the Federal Aviation Regulations, and may include
mountain-flying training as part of the flight review.]{.underline}

[The above exemption is requested subject to the following:]{.underline}

1.  [The pilot receiving the training must be qualified in every respect
    to serve as pilot in command of the aircraft during the entire
    training period. During the training period, the pilot receiving the
    training shall at all times serve as, and remain as, pilot in
    command as defined in §1.1 of the Federal Aviation Regulations. The
    pilot in command must agree to the provisions of this
    exemption.]{.underline}

2.  [The Petitioner, when providing instruction under this exemption,
    must be otherwise qualified to serve as flight instructor in a
    Bonanza/Debonair, Baron, or Travel Air under §61.195(b) of the
    Federal Aviation Regulations as appropriate.]{.underline}

3.  [The Petitioner and pilot in command (pilot receiving training) must
    continually agree that the proposed training, under conditions in
    evidence at the time, can be conducted in a safe
    manner.]{.underline}

4.  [This exemption (with provision for extension and/or renewal) is
    requested to be valid for 24 calendar months from the date the
    exemption is granted or until the effective date of the amendment to
    §91.109 of the Federal Aviation Regulations. See Docket Number
    28202.]{.underline}

**[THE INTERESTS OF THE PUBLIC IN THE ACTION REQUESTED (FAR
]{.underline}[§]{.underline}[11.81(d))]{.underline}**

[Membership of the American Bonanza Society (ABS) is approximately
10,000 persons who own and/or operate or who have an interest in
Beechcraft Bonanza/Debonair, Baron, or Travel Air type aircraft. In
response to what was perceived as an unacceptable accident rate among
Bonanza pilots, the ABS developed the Bonanza Pilot Proficiency Program
(BPPP) in 1983. In 1986, BPPP expended to include Barons and Travel Airs
and became the Beechcraft Pilot Proficiency Program. The BPPP is an
initial and recurrent training program that has served over 6,000
pilots. Research shows that the accident rate experienced by regular
participants in the BPPP is ]{.underline}***[less than
1%]{.underline}***[ of the rate of the general pilot
population.]{.underline}

[The majority of Beechcraft Bonanzas, Debonairs, Barons, and Travel Airs
manufactured was equipped with single-yoke, throw-over control wheels.
Consequently, to receive dual flight instruction legally for flight
reviews or recurrency training, the majority of owners of these aircraft
are faced with either (1) an expensive conversion of their flight
control system to dual yokes, (2) obtaining recurrency training in
rental aircraft, or (3) forgoing recurrency training altogether. None of
these alternatives is in the best public interest.]{.underline}

[The Petitioner believes it is in the best interest of the affected
owners, as well as in the best interest of the public, that the
availability of recurrency training be maximized. To this end,
impediments to training availability need to be eliminated in a manner
consistent with acceptable safety practices.]{.underline}

[On April 10, 1993, the BPPP, on behalf of its contract staff
instructors, petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration for an
exemption from §§91.109(a) and 91.109(b)(3) of the Federal Aviation
Regulations (Regulatory Docket No. 27251). The Federal Aviation
Administration granted the exemption on August 30, 1993 (Exemption No.
5733. Although the BPPP training program is available at approximately
10 locations across the United States each year, the BPPP still is
capable of accommodating only 600 to 700 pilots a year. The Petitioner
believes that, at best, the BPPP can serve no more than 5% of the
affected pilot population.]{.underline}

[The Petitioner has been an active flight instructor as well as an owner
of a Beechcraft Baron, training a number of Bonanza pilots on a
one-to-one basis as well as in the BPPP regular and mountain-flying
clinics for nearly 12 years. In that the Petitioner is fit, willing and
able to provide additional training to Beechcraft Bonanza/Debonair,
Baron and Travel Air owners in addition to the BPPP, the Petitioner
believes it is in the best public interest that she be permitted to do
so. Granting the Petitioner's request will increase the availability of
recurrent training in aircraft equipped with single-yoke, throw-over
control wheels. Granting this exemption also provides a means of
compliance with the regulatory requirements of FAR Pt. 61,
notwithstanding the regulatory impediments to training posed by the
single-yoke, throw-over control wheels.]{.underline}

**[ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT OF THIS EXEMPTION REQUEST (FAR
]{.underline}[§]{.underline}[11.81(e))]{.underline}**

[The Petitioner believes the intent of FAR §91.109 was to prevent the
training of unqualified pilots in an environment in which it is
difficult for a minimally qualified flight instructor to discharge
properly the responsibility for the safe operation of the aircraft
during the training session. ]{.underline}

[On August 31]{.underline}^[st]{.underline}^[, 1993, the Federal
Aviation Administration amended §]{.underline}

[61.56 of the FARs. Prior to that date, flight reviews did not
specifically require flight instruction to be administered as part of
the flight review. The flight review was regarded as either
satisfactorily completed or not recorded. After August
31]{.underline}^[st]{.underline}^[, 1993, §61.56(a) and (c) specifically
require that flight instruction be provided as part of the flight
review. Because of the limitations of §91.109, the August
31]{.underline}^[st]{.underline}^[, 1993 amendment to the flight review
requirements effectively precluded operators of approximately 15,000
Bonanzas/Debonairs, Barons, and Travel Airs equipped with single-yoke,
throw-over control wheels from complying with §61.56 in their own owned
or operated aircraft. The Petitioner believes that this restriction on
the operators of these aircraft was an unintended consequence of the
effort to improve the quality of the flight review. Granting this
exemption returns the availability of the flight review to
owners/operators of single-yoke, throw-over control wheel
Bonanzas/Debonairs, Barons, and Travel Airs.]{.underline}

[Under the proposed exemption, the Petitioner proposes to conduct only
flight reviews and recurrency training of otherwise qualified airmen in
controlled environments. The training will be accomplished by the
Petitioner, a flight instructor with nearly 4,000 hours total flight
time (700 hours total time in Bonanzas/Debonairs and Barons) and nearly
1,900 hours of dual flight instruction given.]{.underline}

[The Petitioner's exemption does not result in operations at a level of
safety without precedence. Since 1973, FAR §61.45(c) has permitted FAA
personal and Designated Pilot Examiners (DPEs) to conduct pilot
certification flight tests in aircraft not equipped with dual controls.
Under the proposed exemption, the Petitioner will operate at a level of
safety at least as great as the minimum required by FAR
§61.45(c).]{.underline}

[Further relating to the BPPP exemption and the Petitioner:]{.underline}

[In the 24 years of the BPPP exemption, it is estimated that nearly half
of Bonanza participants have flown aircraft with single-yoke, throw-over
control wheels. Since the granting of Exemption No. 5733, approximately
half of the Baron participants in the BPPP were equipped with the
single-yoke, throw-over control wheel. The training has been
accomplished entirely successfully and without incident in any way
attributable to the use of the single-yoke, throw-over control wheel.
The Petitioner is confident she will parallel this level of
performance.]{.underline}

[The specific level of control available to a flight instructor in a
Beechcraft airplane equipped with a single-yoke, throw-over control
wheel is far beyond minimal. The control configuration is such that the
instructor always has full use of rudder control in flight. The flight
instructor's access to all aircraft engine controls is unaffected by the
type of control wheel installed. Full elevator control is continuously
available to the flight instructor in either configuration because the
center control column of the airplane is easily accessible to the
instructor in a single-yoke, throw-over control wheel configuration.
Additionally, the flight instructor is afforded a mechanical advantage
in elevator manipulation over what is available through a normal
single-yoke, throw-over control wheel -- the elevator control column is
offset and unobstructed. Aileron control is within reach of the flight
instructor using the pilot's yoke (although in front of the pilot in
command) sufficient to alter any additional control inputs necessary
during recurrent training or training in simulated instrument flight
rules flight. BPPP instructor standardization/evaluation training
requires the candidate flight instructor to demonstrate aircraft control
with the single-yoke, throw-over control wheel in the pilot-in-command
position forward of the left seat, both normal maneuvers and simulated
instrument approaches.]{.underline}

**[SUMMARY WHICH MAY BE PUBLISHED IN THE
FE]{.underline}[D]{.underline}[ERAL REGISTER (FAR
]{.underline}[§]{.underline}[11.18(f))]{.underline}**

[Linda Sue Maloney, holder of Airline Transport Pilot certificate
2831813 and Certificated Flight Instructor certificate 2831813CFI,
petitions for exemption from §91.109(a) of the Federal Aviation
Regulations to the extent necessary to permit her to provide flight
review and recurrent flight training in Beechcraft Bonanza/Debonair,
Baron and Travel Air type aircraft when those aircraft are equipped with
a functioning single-yoke, throw-over control wheel. This exemption is
requested to the extent necessary to permit training for the purpose of
meeting the requirements of §§61.56 and 61.57 of the Federal Aviation
Regulations.]{.underline}

[CONTACT FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:]{.underline}

[The Petitioner is:]{.underline}

[Linda Sue Maloney]{.underline}

[432-B Santa Fe County Road 84 \[87506\]]{.underline}

[Post Office Box 3827]{.underline}

[Santa Fe, New Mexico 87501]{.underline}

[Telephone: 505-455-0381 (home)]{.underline}

[ 719-661-3647 (cell)]{.underline}

[Fax: 505-455-0382]{.underline}

[E-mail: ]{.underline}

**[PETITIONER]{.underline}[']{.underline}[S SUMMARY]{.underline}**

[From July 1988 through the present, Linda S(ue) Maloney, the
Petitioner, has been a flight and ground instructor. Ms. Maloney was
awarded her Gold Seal Instructor designation in 1992, in recognition of
her excellent initial pass rate for her students, based on her first 10
students. Most of her own flight training was performed in Colorado
Springs and Denver, Colorado, with an initial mountain flight training
and endorsement in September 1981. She has flown numerous USDA Forest
Service fire patrol and air attack missions and ASCS aerial survey, as
well as charter flight operations, primarily in the mountainous terrain
of Colorado, and participated in 10 BPPP mountain flying clinics, as
well as regular BPPP clinics for the past 3 years.]{.underline}

[Because of §91.109(a) of the Federal Aviation Regulations, an
unintended consequence of the August 31]{.underline}^[st]{.underline}^[,
1993, amendment to FAR §61.56 restricts, indeed precludes, compliance
with §61.56 in aircraft equipped with a single-yoke, throw-over control
wheel. The Petitioner's requested exemption will make flight review and
recurrent training available to owners of Beechcraft Bonanza/Debonair,
Baron, and Travel Air aircraft equipped with a single-yoke, throw-over
control wheel in a manner similar to that in effect prior to August
31]{.underline}^[st]{.underline}^[, 1993.]{.underline}

[The Petitioner's proposal exceeds the minimal level of safety set forth
in current regulatory standards. Having recurrent training available in
Bonanzas/Debonairs, Barons, and Travel Airs will continue to have a
positive effect on the accident rate among affected owners.]{.underline}

[The granting of this exemption is in the public interest.]{.underline}

[Sincerely,]{.underline}

[Linda S(ue) Maloney, Petitioner]{.underline}

[ATP 2831813]{.underline}

[2831813CFI]{.underline}