March 26, 2010 

U.S Department of Transportation 

Docket Operations, M-30 

West Building Ground Floor 

Room W12-140 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

Washington, D.C 20590 

PETITION FOR RENEWAL OF EXEMPTION 

Docket number FAA-2008-0824 

THE RULE FROM WHICH EXEMPTION IS SOUGHT 

(PURSUANT TO 14 CFRl 1.61(b)) 

John F. Seubert, holder of Airline Transport Pilot and Flight Instructor certificate Number 

1723642, hereby petitions the federal Aviation Administration for a rules exemption as 

provided by Section 11.61(b) of the Federal Aviation regulations. Specifically: 

Exemption is requested from Section 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 type aircraft when those 

aircraft are equipped with a functioning throw over control wheel. This exemption 

is requested to the extent necessary to permit training for the purpose of meeting 

the Flight Review and/or Recency of Experience requirements of Sections 61.56 

and 61.57 of the Federal Aviation Regulations. 

The above exemption is requested subject to the following: 

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 Section 1.1 of the federal Aviation 

Regulations. The pilot in command must agree to the provisions of this 

exemption. 

2. The petitioner, when providing instruction under this exemption, must be 

Otherwise qualified to serve as flight instructor in a Bonanza/Debonair under 

Section 61.195(b) of the Federal Aviation Regulations as appropriate. 
3. The Petitioner and Pilot in Command (pilot receiving training) must 

continually agree the proposed training, under conditions in evidence at the 

time, can be conducted in a safe manner. 

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.. 

THE INTERESTS OF THE PUBLIC IN THE ACTION REQUESTED 

(FAR 11.81(d)) 

The membership of the American Bonanza Society (ABS) is approximately 10,000 

persons who own and operate, or have an interest in Beechcraft Bonanza/Debonair, 

Baron, and 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 in 1983. In 1986, the program was expanded to include Barons and Travel Airs. 

The Petitioner has been an active flight instructor as well as an owner of a Beech 

Bonanza, training a number of Bonanza pilots on a one-to-one basis. 

The Bonanza Pilot Proficiency Program is a recurrent training program that has served 

over 6,000 pilots. Research has shown that the accident rate experienced by regular 

participants in the BPPP is less than 1% of the rate of the general pilot population. 

The largest majority of Beechcraft Bonanzas, Debonairs, Barons, and Travel Airs built 

were equipped with a single throw over control wheel. Consequently, the majority of 

owners of these aircraft are confronted with either 1) a very expensive conversion of their 

flight control system or 2) obtaining recurrent training in a rental aircraft, or 3) forgoing 

recurrent training altogether. None of these three alternatives are in the best public 

interest. 

The Petitioner believes it is the best interest of the affected owners, as well as in the best 

interest of the public, that the availability of recurrent training be maximized. To this end, 

obstructions to training availability must be eliminated consistent with acceptable safety 

practices. 

On April 10, 1993, the BPPP, on behalf of its staff instructors, petitioned the Federal 

Aviation Administration for an exempfion from Sections 91.109(a) and 91.109(b)(3) of 

the federal Aviation Regulations (Regulatory Docket No. 27251). The federal Aviation 

Administration granted the exemption request on August 30, 1993(Exemption No. 5733). 

Although the BPPP training program is available at approximately twelve locations 

across the United States each year, the BPPP program is still only capable of 
accommodating 600-700 pilots a year. The Petitioner believes that at best, the BPPP can 

serve no more than 5% of the affected pilot population. 

In that the Petitioner is fit, willing, and able to provide additional training to Beechcraft 

Bonanza/Debonair owners in addition to the BPPP, the Petitioner believes it is in the best 

public interest that he be permitted to do so. Granting the petitioners request will increase 

the availability of recurrent training in aircraft equipped with throw over control wheels. 

Granting this exemption also provides a means of compliance with the regulatory 

requirements of Part 61 not withstanding the regulatory obstruction to training posed by 

the throw over wheels. 

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT OF THIS EXEMPTION REQUEST 

(FAR 11.81(e)) 

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 

fiight instructor to properly discharge responsibility for the safe operation of the training 

session. Under the proposed exemption, the Petitioner proposes to conduct only recurrent 

training of otherwise qualified airmen in a controlled environment. The training will be 

accomplished by the Petitioner, a flight instructor with more than 16000 flight hours in 

experience, with over 4400 hours of dual flight instruction given. 

The Petitioners exemption does NOT result in operations at a level of safety without 

precedence. Since 1973, Section 61.45(c) of the Federal Aviation regulations has 

permitted FAA personnel and Designated Pilot Examiners 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 greater than the minimal permitted by FAR 

61.45(c). 

Further relating to the Petitioner: 

In the twenty four years of the BPPP program, it is estimated that nearly one-half of all 

Bonanza participants have served in aircraft with throw over control wheels. Since the 

granting of Exemption 5733, approximately one half of the Baron participants in the 

BPPP were equipped with the throw over wheel. The training has been accomplished 

entirely successfiilly and without incident in any way attributable to the use of a throw 

over control wheel configured aircraft. The Petitioner is confident he will parallel this 

level of performance. 

This specific level of control available to a flight instructor in a Beechcraft equipped with 

a 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 instructor's access to 

all engine controls of the aircraft is unaffected by the type of control wheel installed. 

Full elevator control is continuously available to the instructor in either configuration. 

The center control column of the airplane is easily accessible to the instructor in a throw 

over configuration. Manipulation of the center control column affords the flight instructor 
full elevator control. Additionally, the instructor is afforded a mechanical advantage in 

elevator manipulation over what is available through a normal single control wheel; the 

elevator control column is offset and unobstructed. Aileron control is within reach of the 

instructor (although in front of the PIC) sufficient to alter any additional control inputs 

necessary during recurrent training or training in simulated IFR flight. 

On August 31, 1993, the Federal Aviation Administration amended Section 61.56 of the 

Federal Aviation Regulations. Prior to that date, flight reviews did not specifically require 

flight instruction be administered as part of the flight review. The flight review was 

regarded as either a satisfactorily completed or not recorded. After August 31, 1993, 

Section 61.56(a) and (c) specifically REQUIRES that flight instruction be provided as a 

function of the flight review. Because of the limitations of Section 91.109, the August 31, 

1993, amendment to the flight review requirements effectively precludes the operators of 

approximately 15,000 Bonanzas/Debonairs, barons, and Travel Airs equipped with throw 

over control wheels from compliance with Section 61.56 in the aircraft they own/or 

operate. The Petitioner believes that this new 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 will return the availability of the flight review to 

owners of throw over wheel Bonanzas. 

SUMMARY WHICH MAY BE PUBLISHED IN THE FEDERAL 

REGISTER (FAR 11.81(f)) 

John F. Seubert, holder of Airline Transport Pilot and Flight Instructor Certificate 

Number 1723642, petitions for exemption from Section 91.109(a) of the federal 

Aviation Regulations to the extent necessary to permit him to provide recurrent flight 

training in Beechcraft Bonanza/Debonair aircraft when those aircraft are equipped 

with a functioning throw over control wheel. This exemption is requested to the 

extent necessary to permit training for the purpose of meeting the requirements of 

Sections 61.56 and 61.57 of the Federal Aviation Regulations. 

CONTACT FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 

The Petitioner is: 

John F. Seubert 

200 East Cherry Circle Tel: 901-683-8391 

Memphis, TN 38117-3517 Email: jseubert@bellsouth.net 
PETITIONER'S SUMMARY 

From 1969 through present, John F. Seubert, the Petitioner, has been a Flight and 

Advanced Ground Instructor He has served as an APD TCE, Line Check Airmen and 

Proficiency Check Airmen for 15 years. The granting of this exemption will permit the 

Petitioner to individually provide recurrent training to Bonanza/Debonair owners and 

operators. 

Due to Section 91.109(a) of the federal Aviation Regulations, an unintended consequence 

of the August 31, 1993 Amendment to Section 61.56 of the Federal Aviation Regulations 

restricts, indeed precludes, compliance with Section 61.56 in aircraft equipped with a 

throw over control wheel. The petitioner's requested exemption will again make recurrent 

training available to owners of Beechcraft Bonanza/Debonair aircraft equipped with a 

throw over wheel in a manner similar to that in effect prior to August 31, 1993. 

The Petitioner's proposal exceeds the minimal level of safety set forth in current 

regulatory standards. Having recurrent training available in Bonanzas will continue to 

have a positive effect on the accident rate among affected owners. 

The granting of this exemption is in the public interest. 

J(Win F. Seubert 

1723642 CFI 

Petitioner