i

.

..... i .· ,,·...• July 23, 2014**.~ ,~**  i" ' '. • • =--- :-- (_;:-

.. [""""< • : :.:_; '-t

US DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Docket Operations West Building, Ground Floor, Room W12-140 1200 NewJersey Avenue S.E. WASHINGTON DC 20590 P.O. Box 1695 Trophy Club, Texas 76262-1695 Tele: 828.301.0504 email: jgeitz@earthlink.net



### ORI51NA 

# L 

# r:to(JjJ.

PETITION FOR LIMITED PARTIAL EXEMPTION from 

### 14 CFR SECTION 61.23{b){5)

Section ll.Sl(a) CONTACT INFORMATION
Name: John L. Geitz Address: P.O. Box 1695 Roanoke, Texas 76262-1695 Telephone: (828) 301-0504 eMail: jgeitz@earthlink.net Section ll.Sl(b)THE SPECIFIC SECTIONS FROM WHICH THE PETITIONER SEEKS EXEMPTION The petitionerseeks limited exemption from 14 CFR Section 

### 61.23(b)(5) (FAR) to permit the Petitionerto briefly serve as a required flight crewmemberforthe purpose of compliancewith Section 142.53(b)(1). Section 142.53(b)(1) provides for an annual currency requirement needed to permit the petitionerto continue acting as an instructor in Level C and Level D flight simulators.
In conjunction with the granting ofthis exemption, it shall followthat a second-incommand temporarily relinquishing his pilot station to the Petitionerwould be doing so in the context of FAR 91.1 05(a)(1). This section provides for a flight crewmember being temporarily absent from his normal dutystation for purposes related to the operation ofthe aircraft.

John L. Geitz Exemption Petition 61.23(b)(5) Page 1of 6.Section 11.81(c) THE EXTENT OF RELIEF BEING SOUGHT
The petitioner believes the exemptionwill effectively delete the restriction that prohibits the Petitionerfrom briefly serving as a flight crewmemberfor the purpose of complying with FAR 142.53(b)(1). The exemption will remove the restriction that results from the last eightwords of FAR 61.23(b) (5).
This exemption shall only apply in aircraft not equipped with an approved cockpit observerseat.
Section 11.81(d)THE REASONS THIS EXEMPTION IS IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST.
The public interest is served becausethe issuing ofthis exemptionwill provide a meansto enhance the skill, knowledge and currency of an active LEVEL C and LEVEL D simulator instructor providing pilot training in turbine powered business aircraft. Truly effective instructors are a very limited resource. The regulations anticipate instructors, forvarious reasons, may not be able to maintain a medical certificate at a reasonable cost. A special issuance medical requires significant time, money, and external resources including the availabilityof medical testing support and the use of FAA resources to reviewthe documentation in support of a special issue medical certification. In the case of a simulator instructor, consuming significant public and private industry resources forthe purpose ofa once a yeartwo hourflight requirement does not serve the public interest. To, none-the-less, provide for optimizing the professional development of a simulator instructor does serve the public interest. To accomplish these objectives in a cost effective mannerthat in noway compromises safety is very much in the public interest.
Section 11.81(e) REASONS WHY GRANTING THIS EXEMPTION WOULD NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT SAFETY and WOULD PROVIDE A LEVEL OF SAFETY AT LEAST EQUAL TO THAT PROVIDED

... The granting ofthe requested exemption does not adverselysafety. Indeed in several respects, operations underthe proposed exemptionwould be conductedwith a higher level ofsafetythan otheroperations permitted under other FARs. In specific:
1. The Petitioner, while exercising the provisions ofthe proposed exemption,will be required to hold a valid and unrestricted type rating on the Petitioner's Airline Transport Pilot Certificate{#1679965} in the type aircraft being utilized. That certificate is issued under Part 61 ofthe Federal Aviation Regulations.

John L. Geitz Exemption Petition 61.23(b)(5) Page 2 of 6.2. The petitionerwill be required to meetthe Pilot-In-Command proficiencycheck requirements of FAR Section 61.58(a) in the type aircraft being utilized. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 61.58(a) (2), that check must have been completed within the preceding 12 months.
3. When exercising the provisions ofthe proposed exemption, the aircraft shall not carry passengers. 4. When exercising the provisions ofthis exemption, the Petitionershall meet the requirements ofSection 61.23(c) (2). This alternative medicalstandard has been in effect for ten yearswith no evidence the standard compromises safety.
5. Section 61.55(b)(2) provides that a pilot accomplishing initial qualification as Second-in-Command in a turbojet aircraft requiring more than one flight crewmember may do so in the aircraft after becoming "familiar" with the aircraft documentation. Underthe provision ofthis exemption, a similar qualification is accomplished. Unlike the minimum standards of FAR 61.55(b)(2), the subject ofthe qualification has previously and currently demonstrated the skill of a Pilot-inCommand in the same aircraft. This is certainly a highersafetystandard than required underSection 61.55(b)(2).
6. If the aircraft in question were a turbojet business aircraft certified for single pilot operations, an exemption ofthis naturewould not be necessary. An unoccupied pilot station would otherwise be available to an individual needing to meet the requirements of FAR 142.53(b)(1). For the purpose in question, there would be no difference in the operational level of safety.
Section 11.81(f) SUMMARY WHICH MAY PUBLISHED IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER. The Petitioner requests limited partial exemption from Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations Section 61.23(b)(5) to the extent necessary to complywith 14 CFR Section 142.53(b)(1). Granting ofthe requested exemptionwould permit the petitionerto occupy a pilot station during flight time and function as second-in-command for a brief period for the purpose of meeting the annual currency requirements of 14 CFR 142.53(b)(1).

John L. Geitz Exemption Petition 61.23(b) (5) Page 3 of 6.Section 11.81(g) ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, VIEWS AND ARGUMENTS, TO SUPPORT THIS REQUEST. The petitioneris currently employed as a simulatorinstructor at a training center certificated under 14 CFR Part 142. The petitioner provides training in turbojet powered business aircraft utilizing Level C and Level D full flight simulators. Because ofthe physical size and associated complexity, these aircraft are not equippedwith an approved observerseat (jump seat) in the cockpit. Because ofthe lackofa cockpit observerseat, the option of using an approved line-observation program {142.53(b) (2)} under FAR Part 135 is not plausible. Again, because of a lack of an approved observerseat, use of an approved in-flight observation course {142.53(b) (3)} has proven to be of marginal value. The majority of the observation must be accomplished from a cabin passenger seat. Meaningful activities on such a flight are most difficult to observe from a passengerseat. When originally published in August 1, 1996, {Federal Register, Volume 61, Number 128, Pages 34541 and 34542} it was expressly intended that persons not holding a medical certificatewould qualify as a simulator instructor. Further, the original intention of FAR 142.53(b)(3) was to provide a means of currencyfor an instructorwho does not hold a medical certificate. The evidence suggested at the time, any instruction given in flight simulators would represent aircraft thatwere equippedwith an approved cockpit observer seat. Advances in technology and the aviation industry in the past eighteen years have shown the original assumption is notvalid. Althou·gh FAR 142.53(b)(3) provides an option to FAR 142.53(b)(1), it is neitherthe preferred option noris it the optimum for refining teaching insights in the simulator instructor. Recent accidents involving turbine powered aircraft indicate basic control ofthe aircraft has been an issue. Recent amendmentsto the FAA PracticalTest Standards (PTS) have placed greateremphasis on basic aircraft handling skills in pilot training, checking and testing. The well known limitations offull flight simulators {FAR 142.53(a) (4) (ii)} make those devices notthe optimum means fortraining basic airmanship skills. Enabling the Petitionerto gain more refined insight into the basic handling ofthe aircraft as an instructorwill betterenable the Petitioner provide more detailed insights. The public and industrywill benefit from continuous refinement in instructor skills.

John L. Geitz Exemption Petition 61.23(b) (5) Page 4 of 6.The question might be asked whythe Petitioner does not applyfor a special issuance medical certificate.The Petitioner has been subject to special issuance medical certification for the past 19 years. It has become increasingly impractical to go through the special issuance certification process. The cost of completing the current required testing takes about three days and costs more than $6000.00. Since the advent ofthe Affordable CareAct, this price has been increasing continuously and scheduling has become nearly impossible. Further thevarious medical reports need to beforwarded to the FAA Aeromedical Office in Oklahoma, Cityfor evaluation and issuance of a medical certificate. Since the Petitioner no longerengages in actual flight operations, all ofthis expense and effort is solely forthe opportunityto fly two hours a yearfor the purpose of meeting the currency requirement of Part 142.53(b) (1). That is not a cost effective use ofthe Petitioner's resources. It is not effective use of the limited resources ofthe medical industry and the FAA. By granting the exemption, the business aviation industrywill benefitfrom the best possible currency and insight from an instructor providing pilottraining. By granting the exemption, the Petitionerwill be ableto maintain the highest level of skill, knowledge, and technological currency in the aircraft in which he provides training to the business aircraft industry. In lieu of a copy ofthe Petitioner's medical certificate, a copy ofthe exemption shall be carried aboard the aircraftwhen the exemption is being exercised. A copyofthe exemption shall be kept in the Petitioner's Part 142 instructortraining file.
Section 11.81(h) EXERCISING THE PROVISIONS OF THE EXEMPTION OUTSIDE OF THE UNITED STATES. The provisions ofthis proposed exemption shall NOT be exercised outside ofthe United States.
Section 11.87The FAA should grant this exemptionwithout delayandwithout need for requesting comment in the Federal Register. The Petitioner is engaged full time as a simulator instructor at a pilot training center certificated under 14 CFR Part 142. The public and the Petitionerwill find benefit in the quickest approval ofthis exemption.
Section 11.87(a)The granting ofthis petition for exemption would not set a precedent.The petition is very limited in scope. Its applicability is very narrowand does not impact the general operation of aircraft exceptwithin the narrow confines ofthe petition.

John L. Geitz Exemption Petition 61.23(b)(5) Page 5 of 6.Section 11.87(b)The Petitioner knows of no other petitions for exemption that have been filed or grantedwithin the limited scope ofthis petition. Section 11.87(c) Delay ofthis petition is an on-going and evolving adversity. The changes in the PTS in response to recent accidents and incidents reflects this is an ongoing and developing concern. It is in the public interest that best efforts are being made to address these evolving concerns. Section 11.87(d)This petition has been filed in a timely manner.This is in response to a recently identified developing concern which will continue. As quickly as a means to address this concern was identified, this petition is being filed.

John L. Geitz Petitioner

John L. Geitz Exemption Petition 61.23(b) (5) Page 6 of 6.