AFS-10-222-E April 21, 2010 Exemption No. 8292C Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2004-17283

Mr. Ronald J. Zasadzinski 305 W. Magnolia Street, #154 Fort Collins, CO 80521

Dear Mr. Zasadzinki:

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your petition to extend Exemption No. 8292, as amended. It explains the basis for our decision, describes its effect, and lists the conditions
and limitations.

The Basis for Our Decision

By letter dated April 7, 2010, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for an extension of Exemption No. 8292, as amended. That exemption from § 91.109(a) and (b) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) allows you to conduct certain flight training and to provide simulated instrument fli ght experience in certain Beech airplanes that are equipped with a functioning throwover control wheel.

In your petition, you indicate that there has been no change in the conditions and reasons relative to public interest and safety that were the basis for granting the original exemption.

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition
in the Federal Register because the requested extension of the exemption would not set a precedent, and any delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to you.

Our Decision

The FAA has determined that the justification for the issuance of Exemption No. 8292, as amended, remains valid with respect to this exemption and is in the public interest. Therefore, under the authority provided by 49 U.S.C. 40113 and 44701, which the FAA2

Administrator has delegated to me, I grant your petition, subject to the following conditions
and limitations.
Conditions and Limitations

1. Operations under this exemption are limited to flights for completion of the flight review required by § 61.56 and for accomplishing recency of experience as required by § 61.57.

2. Operations under this exemption are limited to Beechcraft airplanes equipped with a functioning throwover control wheel and operable rudder pedals, in lieu of functioning dual controls.

3. The pilot manipulating the controls under the terms of this exemption must be qualified in every respect to serve as pilot in command (PIC) of the airplane during the entire flight. While operating under this exemption, the pilot seated in the left seat must at all times serve as and remain PIC as defined in 14 CFR § 1.1. The PIC must agree to the provisions of this exemption.

4. While serving as flight instructor under the terms of this exemption,
Mr. Zasadzinski must:

a. Notwithstanding Condition No. 5 below, be otherwise fully qualified to serve as PIC and flight instructor in the airplane involved, as required by 14 CFR § 61.195 (b) and (f); and

b. Have given at least 25 hours of dual instruction in the airplane involved.

5. Mr. Zasadzinski, when serving as the flight instructor under the conditions of this exemption, and the PIC must agree that the proposed flight, under the conditions in evidence at the time of proposed flight, can be conducted safely.

The Effect of Our Decision

Our decision extends the termination date of Exemption No. 8292, as amended, to April 30, 2013, unless sooner superseded or rescinded.3

All conditions and limitations of Exemption No. 8292, as amended, remain the same. This letter must be attached to, and is a part of, Exemption No. 8292.

Sincerely,

/s/
John W. McGraw Acting Director, Flight Standards
Service