U S Oeportrnen t 

o f lronsponotcn 

Federal Avloti·on 

Administrotiol"' 

December 18, 2012 

Mr. William J. Ertle II 

STC ODA Administrator 

PATS Aircraft, LLC 

21652 Nanticoke A venue 

Georgetown, DE 19947 

Dear Mr. Ertle: 

Exemption No. 10674 

Transport Airplane Directorate 

1601 LindAvenue,S.W. 

Renton, Washington 98057-3356 

Regulatory Docket No. F AA-20 12-0841 

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your request for exemption. It transmits our 

decision, explains its basis, and describes the conditions and limitations of the exemption. 

The Basis for Our Decision 

By letter dated August 8, 20 12, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), 

on behalf of PATS Aircraft, LLC, for exemption from §§ 25.785(h)(2), 25.785 (j), 25.813(e), 

and 25.853(d) ofTitle 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). This exemption permits 

PATS Aircraft, LLC, relief from certain requirements relating to flight-attendant seating, firm 

handholds along aisles, interior doors between passenger compartments, and heat-release 

rates of certain cabin interior materials on a Boeing Model 737-900 airplane, serial no. 

37632, designated as a business jet. 

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for waiving the requirement for Federal 

Register publication for public comment because the request is identical in all material 

respects to previously granted exemptions, and the exemption, if granted, would not set a 

precedent. 

The FAA has issued grants of exemption in circumstances similar in all material respects to 

those presented in your petition. In Exemption No. 9794 (copy enclosed), the FAA found that 

granting this exemption is in the public interest for the reasons stated by the petitioner, and 

because the FAA is directed to take into account the type of airplane operation when 

establishing standards under Title 49 of the United States Code (49 U.S.C. 44701 (d)). Having 

reviewed your reasons for requesting an exemption, I find that-
• they don't differ materially from those presented by the petitioner in the enclosed 

grant of exemption, and; 

• the reasons stated by the FAA for granting the enclosed exemption also apply to the 

situation you present 

Therefore, a grant of exemption is in the public interest. 

Our Decision 

In consideration of the foregoing, I find that a grant of exemption is in the public interest. 

Therefore, pursuant to the authority contained in 49 U .S.C. 40113 and 44 70 I , delegated to 

me by the Administrator, I grant the petition of PATS Aircraft, LLC, for an exemption from 

14 CFR 25.785(h)(2), 25.7850), 25.813(e), and 25.853(d) to the extent necessary to allow 

installation of an executive interior on a "private, not-for-hire" Boeing Model 737-900 

airplane, serial number 3 7632. 

Specifically, the exemption allows relief from the req uirements for flight-attendant direct 

view, firm handholds in the passenger compartment, interior doors between passenger 

compartments, and maximum heat-release flammability requirements for large interior 

panels. This exemption is subject to the conditions specified in the enclosed exemption. 

Sincerely, 

!~~c\6- Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate 

Aircraft Certification Service 

2 
Exemption No. 9794 

UNITE D STATES OF AMERICA 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

FEDERAL A YIATION ADMI NISTRATION 

RENTON. WASHINGTON 98057-3356 

In the matter of the petition of 

Gore Design Completions, Ltd. 

for an l!Xemption from ~§ 25. 785{h)(2). 

25. 785(j), 25.8 13(c), and 25.853(d) of 

Titl e 14, Code of Federal Regulations 

Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2008-1 004 

PARTIAL GRANT OF EXEMPTION 

By letter dated September I I, 2008, Mr. Andrew G frcrcr, Certi lication Manager, Gore Design 

Completion, Ltd .. 607 . Frank Luke Drive, San Antonio. Texas, 78226. petitioned the Federal 

Aviation Administration (FAA) for an exemption from the following sections ofTitle 14, Code 

of Federal Regulations ( 14 CFR): 25. 785(h)(2). 25.785U), 25.813(c), and 25.853(cl). The 

proposed exemption, if granted, wou ld permit reli ef from the requirements for night attendant 

direct view. finn handholds in the passenger compartment. interior doors between passenger 

compartments. and maximum heat release nammability requirements for large interior panels. 

The proposed exemption is spcci fically for the install ation of an executive interior on one Boeing 

Model 737-800 airplane, serial number 35792. designated as "private, not-for-hire." 

T he petitioner requests reli ef from the foll owing regula tions: 

Section 25. 785(h)(2), Amendment 25-72 - Flight attendant scats must be located to 

provide direct view of the cabin area. 

Section 25. 785U), Amendment 25-72 - Requir(!S a .. firm handhold .. along each aisle 

Section 25.813(e), Amendment 25-76 - No door may be installed in any partition 

between passenger compartments. 

Section 25.853(d), Amendment 25-1 16- Limits maximum heat release rates for large 

panel cabi n interior materials. 
The petitioner supports its r·cqucst with the following information. This infonnation is 

quoted from the petition. 

BACKGROUND: 

Gore Design Completion. Ltd. has been contracted for the completion of an 

executi\·c business interior on a Boeing Model 73 7-800 airplane. The r: AA has 

accepted our one-time only STC application and assigned Project umber 

ST8945SC-T for this project. 

The certi fi cation basis for the Boeing 737-800 is [p]art 25, Amendment 25- 1 

thTough 25-77, with some regulations voluntarily complied with up to 

[A ]mendment 25-9 1. There arc good techni cal arguments to suppot1 special 

consideration for pri vate usc airplanes: the airplanes are not for public hire and 

they are configured to carry a fraction of the passengers carried in airline servi ce. 

For these reasons, Gore Design Completion, Ltd. has prepared a petition for 

exemption [from] the following regulations: 

14 CFR 25. 785(1t){2). Amendment 25-72- Fl ight attendant seats must be located 

to provide direct view of the cabin area. 

I-I CFR ]5.8/J(e). Amendment 25-76 -No door may be installed in any partition 

bet,vcen passenger compartments. 

14 CFR 25.785(j). Amendment 25-72- Requires a "firm handhold'' along each 

aisle. 

14 CFR 25.853(d). Amendment 25- 11 6- Limits max imum heat release rates for 

large panel cabin interior materials. 

DISCUSSION: 

14 CFR [part) 25 governs design ccrtili cation of transport category airplanes. The 

primary intent of these regulations, as written, are to be certain that airplane 

manufacturers provide the appropriate design features to meet the standards 

necessary to protect the traveling public. Clearl y. there is a requirement ''in the 

public interest" and in the interest of safe ty LO provide regulatory guidelines for 

ccr1i fication. However. it is also very clear these regulations arc intended to 

r~ ul ate the ccrtili cation of"commcrcial' ' uirplancs. which are ·'f\)r hire" to the 

general public. 

While the greatest majori ty of these regulations represent a common sense 

inclusion for any aircrali regardless or it's intended use. a few arc obviously 
intended to regu late situations that an: spcci fie to an airline, or for hire operation. 

When a transport category airplane is operated under 14 CFR [p]art 91 or [p)art 

125, some of the [p lart 25 rules have acceptance criteria that arc inappropriate, or 

arc not compatible with the type or operation and the intended use of this airplane. 

The FAA clearly recognizes these differences as evidenced by the issuance of 

Exemption numbers 6820A, 6822. 7489 and numerous others which eliminate 

many of the more onerous regulations when applied to ··private use. not-for-hire .. 

operations under 14 Cf-R [p)art 125. 

BASIS FOR EXEMPT ION: 

The ai rp lane thai is the subject of this petition is a Boeing Model 737-800. It is 

privately owned and will be operated under [p)art 125 regulations or other 

equivalent non-US foreign national operational standard. 

The interior configuration being installed in this airplane will pro\'idc seating for 

twenty seven (27) passengers. The maximum certified passenger count for this 

airplane is 189 scats. The passenger count of the subject airplane represents just 

14% of the capacity allowed for this aiq)l anc. 

Regulation 14 CFR 15. 785(11)(1) 

Customers arc buying these large airplanes as an extension of the office and are 

requiring privacy areas \\"ithin the airplane sometimes spanning the ,,·hole cabin. 

such as board rooms, bedrooms. la\'atorics. and lounges rather than traditional 

airline type seating. An exemption to the Oight attendant direct view requirement 

is there fore needed to allow the full use of the airplane capabi lities. ln addition. 

this requirement was incorporated into the r AA rules through (A)mendmcnt 25-

5 1. Out of the comments submitted to the FAA during the NPRM comments 

period, two said that, if galley doors were used as emergency exits, the placement 

of an allendam scat ncar the exit prccludc[sJ compliance with the requirement that 

the allcndant he provided \\"ith direct view of the cabin area. To cover this 

situation. it was suggested that the requiremem be conditioned to apply in so far as 

practicable and without compromising the proximity to required noor IC\'CI exits. 

The FAA concurred and further stated in the preamble to the final rules that 

.. location t)l. the flight attendant scats ncar the lloor level ex its in this case is more 

important than the requirement to have a direct view of the cabin:· The final rule 

was revised from the NPRM proposal to address this relative importance. 

3 
Regulation 14 CFR 25.813(e) 

There will be two mechanical "pocket .. type doors (located at corridor I Playi ng 

Area and Dining Area/Theater Area) that are located between passenger 

compartments. There is also a mechanical ··pocket" door (located between the 

Theater Area/ Master Suite), and a swing door (located between Master Suite and 

Master Lavatory), however, these doors are not between passenger compartments 

and these doors do not apply to this exemption request. 

Each door between passenger compartments will have the following design 

features: dual latches (each of which arc able to withstand the forces defined by 

14 CFR 25.561) to secure them in the open position, cockpit annunciation ofthe 

door position for taxi, take-off and landing, and the doors will be frangible in the 

event that they should become stuck in the closed position. In addition, since the 

a ft emergency exits arc deactivated, the door between the Theater Area/Master 

Suite will be in the closed position for taxi, take-off, and landing. 

Regulation 14 CFR 25. 785(tf) 

Customers are buying airplanes because they wish to create a spacious and 

impressive atmosphere they are used to. The wide body of the 8 737-800 satisfies 

these requirements. On the other hand, the requirement for fim1 hand hold along 

the aisles cannot be met for certain areas in the passenger cabin due to the wide 

open spaces. On a typical "commercial" flight this requiren1ent is met by the 

individual seat backs which typically provide an adequate hand hold for a 

passenger to stabilize themselves in the aisle duri ng turbulence. In fact due to the 

spaciousness of the interior there is no readily identifiable "aisle'' in the Playing 

areas. Any construction hanging from the ceiling would ruin the appearance of 

the high quality interior, is not acceptable to the customer, and may add additio nal 

safety concerns. 

It has been acknowledged by the FAA that the passengers on this type of airplane 

arc typica ll y the same people on most of the trips. Familiarity with the airplane 

layo ut and operation provides an addition benefit towards the level of safety. 

Regulation 14 CFR 25.853(d) 

With the sudden growth in the VIP or executive transport airplane market together 

with the simultaneous introduction of more stringent interior material 

nammabi lity standards, aircraft interior modifiers have been faced with a seri ous 

dil emma in resolvi ng the styling requirements of the private aircraft 

owner/ operator of these executive aircraft and the nammability requiremenrs 

imposed by§ 25.853. For the most part, modifiers have been able to 

simultaneously satisfy both the styling and interior material flammabiliry 

4 
n.:quiremcnLs of§~ 25.853(a) and (c) with great cllort and diligence; ho\ovcver, 

many olthe materi als required in these aircralt interiors simply cannot pass the 

65/65 heat rcl cas~.: n:quirement of§ 25. 53( a-I) no matter how diligent the 

designer is. It is not \\'ithin the grasp or current technology to make certain natural 

materials confom1 to these standards and the owners of these airplanes define, in 

fact demand, the usc ofthese materials. It should be understood that these aircraft 

must be outfitted in a style not unlike fine executive board rooms or luxurious 

residences to satisfy their private users. 

OCCUPANT SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS: 

14 CFR 25.785(/t){2) 

Considering the sma ll er number of occupants in the business, private airplane. in 

this case 14% or that of a traditional commercial configuration, and the familiarity 

of the flight and cabin crews with the specific airplane, its passengers and its 

interior arrangement, and the wording of the existing rule that places the emphasis 

lor safety on the proximity of the exit to the attendant over the abi lity of the 

attendant to view the cabin area, there should be no degradation in the passenger 

safety as a result of this requested ex~.: mpti n. 

l.J CFR 25.8/J(e) 

The risk for occupants due to the usc of doors between passenger compartments 

should be considered acceptable for the following reasons: 

• All doors between passenger compartments will be frangible. 

• There will be n signal to the fli ght crew when the pocket doors arc closed 

for Taxi, Takco fl and Landing. The AFMS f Airplane Flight Manual] wi ll 

provide procedures and limitations to ensure that the doors arc in the 

proper position for takeoff and landing. 

• The doors between passenger compartments will have dual means to retain 

them in the open position for takc-olfand landing, each of which will be 

capable of withstanding the inertia loads specified in 14 CFR 25.56 1, 

• The airplane" ill be operated under 1-+ CFR [p)art 125 and" ill be not be 

operated for hire or offered for common carriage. 

l.J CFR 25. 785(j) 

The risk for occupants due to the non availability of direct hand holds in certain 

areas of the airplane should be considered acceptable for the following reasons: 

5 
• All furniture in the passenger cabin has rounded comers and edges to 

avoid serious injury in case ofturbul cncc. 

• The installed scat and divans arc heavily upholstered and will not cause 

injuries when contacted, 

• In the Playing Area. Dining Area and Theater Area occupants can use 

divan arms[and] scat back to steady themselves in case of turbulence 

fli ght. 

• In the Executi ve Area. scat backs and tables are readily within reach with 

one or two steps, 

• There will be a recommendation to passengers to remain seated with their 

seat belts fastened in case of turbulence during flight, 

• Occupants arc intimately famil iar with the interior arrangement. 

• The ai rpl ane will be operated under 14 CFR [p]art 125 and will not be 

operated for hire or offered for common carriage. 

14 CFR 25.853(tl) 

The vast majority of the rule was driven by the post-crash fire experiences in 

airline operations. The 65/65 heat release regulation was specifically developed to 

reduce the like! ihood of the flash-over phenomenon which was proven by tests to 

be a prime contributor to the rapid propagation of post-crash cabin interior fires 

and the generation of blinding smoke. Rapid fire propagation combined with the 

relatively slow rate of passenger evacuation from densely packed air carri er 

airplanes has proven to be a deadly combination during actual airline accidents. 

Since it is clear that materi al selection is being controlled by aestheti cs in this 

application, we cannot exercise any real control over the actual heat release but 

the exposure time to this heat release is still within the designer's control. 

Therefore. it is proposed as a first step in mitigating the fire hazard that an 

evacuation ana lysis be performed to show that all souls on board can be safely 

evacuated in less than 45 seconds. This would be possible because of excess 

emergency exi ts for the airplane passenger capacity. flight attendants. smooth 

evacuation routes, anJ the smal l number of scats in the Executi ve Seating, 

Playing. Dining. and Theater areas. (27) scats total. 

PUBLIC INTEREST : 

As in the cases of numerous already established Exemptions, granting this petition 

for exemption would be clearly in the public interest for the following reasons: 
• It allows cfli cient and safe carriage or I lead of State and executives in the 

sought for environment that would otherwise not be possible, 

• There is no degradation of safety itwoJ,·ed with this request and therefore 

no detrirnl!ntal impact to the public a1 large. 

• lncreaseJ sa ~s of these executive configured transport airplanes will 

ultimately result in some portion of those airplanes being completed at US 

owned or operated aircraft completion facilities, providing improved 

financial performance and work force stability for those organi:tations as 

well, 

• Improved financial performance or US O\\'ncd or operated corporations, 

and incrcaseJ work force stability translates into continued and improved 

tax revenue for all go\·emmental organization involved. 

• Improved linancial performance allows US corporations to continue to 

invest in new R & D research wh ich wi ll allow the US to maintain or 

improvl: it "s competitive position in the world economy. 

• A large number of these types of sales can be predicted to be to ··offshore·· 

clients. improving the US balance of trade deficit. 

Federal Register publication 

A summary of this petition was not publisheJ in the Federal Regis1er. This 

exemption does not set a precedent and any delay in acting on this petit ion would 

be detrimental to Gore Design Completions. Ltd. 

The FAA's a na lysis 

The FA/\ considers that granting this petition is in the public interest for the reasons stated by the 

petitioner and because the FAA is directed to take into account the type of operation when 

establishing standards under Title 49 of the United States Code (49 U.S.C. 4470 1(d)). 

As morl: transport category airplanes have be~n configured (or re-configured) for private use. the 

FA/\ has given consiJerable attention to the issue or appropriate regulation or such airplanes. 

Some of the current regulations goveming design certification of transport categoty airplanes arc 

not compati ble with private usc of such airplanes. Because of this. we have rccci,·cd a number of 

petitions for exemption from certain regulations. We have granted such exemptions when we 

lind that to do so is in the public interest and docs not adversely affect the level of safety 

provided by the regulations. We published a noti ce or proposed rulcmaking. otice o. 07-13. 

Sj;ecial Relfllirementsfor Primte Use Transport CategOIJ' Airplanes (72 FR 38732. July 13, 

2007). which. if promulgated. would obviate the nect.l for case-by-case review of individual 

petitions for exemption for pri\'ate use airplanes. 

7 
We arc giving considerable allention to the issue of transport category airplanes operated for 

private usc. There arc several regulatory requirements, including some identified by the 

petitioner. that lend themselves to exemption when considering the differences between 

commercial and private usc operations. We intend to summari ze our views on these regulations 

anJ propose revisions to the requirements. where appropriate. The regulations that arc the 

subj ect of this petition may be included in the proposed revisions. 

Our analysis of this petition considered each of the fol lowing design features proposed by the 

pet i 1 ioncr: 

I. Firm llandholds 

We have considered the requirement for firm handholds in the context of private usc airplanes 

and have determined that it would be impractical for this 1)1JC of operation and interior 

configuration. 

2. Interior Doors 

The placement of interior doors is clearly quite significant to the owner/operator of the airplane. 

The llexibility to panition the airplane into individual rooms, such as pri,·ate meeting rooms or 

bedrooms. is paramount to an acceptable interior. The availability of private meeting rooms and 

bedrooms is essential. The FAA acknowledges the desirability of these features from the 

operator's point or view. 

When the..: rc..:gulations pc..:rtaining to interior doors were adopted. they did not consider ··rooms ... 

They consiJercd two possible types of interior doors in a passenger compartment. The first type 

is an interior door between passenger cornpartments. The second type is an interior door between 

the exit and the passenger compartment. 

Until recent!). only the fi rst type of door was prohibited by§ 25.813(e). However, part 25, as 

amended by Amendment 25-1 I 6. prohibits interior doors between the exit and the passenger 

compartment. In addition, Amendment 12 1-306 prohibits these doors in airplanes manufactured 

after November 27, 2006, operated under 14 CFR part 121. Amendments 25-I 16 and 12 I -306, 

titled Miscellaneous Cahill S(ifery Changes. were published in the Federal Regisfer on 

October 27, 2004. 

When" e reviewed the petition for exemption concerning the interior doors we dctcrn1incd that 

we needed to add a li fih category of doors to address the door between the Theater Area and 

Bedroom /\rca. We consider the Bedroom Area a passenger compartment that is only occupied 

in-night and should require this door to meet th e frangible req uirement to address the door 

becoming jammed in-night with people in the compartment. Also. we determined for evacuation 

reasons the door should be closed for taxi. take-off. and landing since there arc no ex its aft or the 

door. 

8 
In terms ofairplan~s conligured for ··pri nlle. not-for-hire·· use. there arc five different categories 

of doors in the passenger cabins. 

Category I. A tk10r in a room am1 the room is less than the full width o f the <tirp lanc. 

There wi II be an aisle on the outside of the room. This type of room may be occupied 

during l<tkc-off and landing, and only the occupants of the room must use the door to 

reach an exit. 

Category 2. A door in a room and is the same as CategOJy 1 except there is a single 

emergency ex it or pair of emergency exi ts wi thin the room. 

Category 3. !\ door or doors in a compartment and the compartment is the full width o f 

the airplane. There are passengers seated on both sides of the do01·(s) and the ma in aisle 

leads out of or passes through the compartment. The compartment docs not have any 

emergency exits. This type of compartment may be occupied du ring take-off and landing. 

Category 4. J\ door in a room and the room is the fu ll width of the airplane. Passengers 

are seated on both sides of the door, and there is a pair of emergency exits at one end. 

This type of room may be occupied during takeoff and landing. 

Category 5. A door in a room that may be the full width of the airplane. This type of 

room is not occupied during take-o tT and l<tnding. This room is only occupied du ri ng 

night. Passengers arc not seated on both sides of the door during taxi, takc-o ff, and 

landing. Passengers seated in taxi, take-off. and landing seats must not need to pass 

through this door to get to any emergency exits. 

Because not all interior doors between passenger companments arc equivalent. the FAA has 

detem1ined that the following requirements will produce an adequate level of safety: 

I. In order to max imize the level or safety, doors in Category 2, 3, or 4 install ed across 

the main cabin aisle must open and close in a trnnsverse direction. That is. the direction 

of motion of the door must be at a right angle to the longitudi nal axis of the airplane. A 

··pocket door·· i · one example or such a de ·ign. This wi ll tend to minimize the chance 

that the inertia forces of an acc ident could Ioree the door closed. 

2. Redundant means are necessary to latch doors open for take-off and landing. Each 

latching means must have the capability of retaining the door in the take-off and landi ng 

position under the inertia forces of§ 25.56 1. 

3. Each interior door must be frangib le, in the event that it is jammed in the closed 

position in flight or during taxi, take-of!. or landing. Frangibi lity is intended to ensure 

that ira door is jammed closed occupants can escape in either direct ion and emergency 

equipment can be moved. Frangibility may be demonstrated in either of the following 

ways: 

<) 
• A 5111 percenti lc female can break through the door, creating a large enough 

opening that a 95111 

percentile (or larger) male can pass through. (See 

Advisory Circular 25-I 7. Transpor1 Airplane Cabin fllleriors 

Crashii'Orlhiness /land/wok. paragraph 43b(2)). 

• A 5'11 

percentile female can break a hinge on the door or a hinge on a smnllcr 

door within the door such that the door can swing, so as to allow a 95'11 (or 

larger) percentile male to pass through the opening with the door swung open. 

This evaluation must be made with any cabin furnishi ng or equipment 

installed that could limit the swing arc of the door and placed in the most 

adverse posi tion. In using this approach. one must consider the possibility that 

the door is physicall y jammed in the closed position by distortion of the 

fuselage or fumishings. This possibil ity must be considered even i f thc door 

normally translates into the open and closed positions. 

4. Doors ':vhich 1~111 into Category I must be in the open position during taxi. take-off. 

and landing on ly when the room is occupied. 

5. Doors which fa ll into Categori es 2, 3, or 4 must be in the open position during taxi. 

take-off. and landing, regardless of occupancy. 

6. Doors which fall into Category 5 must be in the closed position during taxi. take-off 

and landing. 

With respect to the possibility that a door will remain closeo when it should not be, the FAA has 

determined that a higher level of awareness is required to address this issue. Due to the relative 

complexity of the cabin interior. the FAA has dctem1ined that inspection by night attendants 

prior to take-off and landing is not su fficient to verify that interior doors arc in the proper 

position. Consequentl y, some type of remote indication is considered necessary. The 

petitioner's proposal to provide remote indication to the fli ghtcrew is considered adequate. 

3. Interior Materials 

With respect to the nammability of interior materials. the petitioner has accurately summari;.ed 

the requiremems. The petitioner correctly notes that the requirements are related to prolonging 

the time available for evacuation. 

When the standards for heat release and smoke emission of interior materials were developed. the 

FAA incorporated a discriminant, based on passenger capacity. This approach was intended to 

address small er airplanes where the ratio of exits to passengers is typically quite good and the 

evacuation times arc expected to be quite low. Under these conditions, the benefits of improved 

materials were expected to be negligible. The airplane type oiscussed in the petition was not 

envisioned by the rulemaking, insofar as the large size with low passenger count is concerned. 

The FAA has considered the issue of the evacuation capability of the airplane relative to the 

namrnability ofrhe materials. and finos that there may be omc rdiefpossiblc. However, the 

10 
issue of nammability is not lin1ited to post-c rash scenarios, and the in-night fire threat must also 

be addressed. The FAA notes that the petitioner has not proposed an alternati,·e heat release or 

smoke emission criteria, but rather an exemption from the requirement to assess the heat release 

and smoke emissions of certain materials allogether. 

Since the main benefit of improved interior materials is to lengthen the time available for 

evacuation, an anangcmcnt that effecti vely provides the same <.;vacuation capability would satisfy 

many of the concerns addressed by the requirement, albeit indirectly. The FAA has reviewed the 

full-scale fire test data used to develop the heat release requirements. and considered accident 

data relevant to this issue. This re\·icw is not complete. but it docs suggest that a quanti fiablc 

improvement in evacuation capability could wan-ant a relaxation of the heat release requirements. 

It is also the pet iti er·~ comcntion that the particular cabin configuration(s) and mode of 

operation of the 737-800 make it likely that the evacuation capability under actual accident 

conditions will more closely model the evacuation capability shown for certification 

demonstrations. The petitioner has proposed that an evacuation analysis be perfonned to show 

that al l occupants includ ing crew can be safety evacuated in less than 45 seconds. The FAA has 

determined that a 45 second evacuation time would provide for a higher level of safety than is 

provided on some earlier certificated airplanes, where compli<mce with the heat release and 

smoke emissions requirements is not required. There arc precedents for this decision involving 

other private use airplanes. 

The remaining issue of the in-night fire scenario needs to be addressed as well. The major issue 

with respect to in-flight fires is timely recognition. On some airplanes the interior includes 

isolated areas that do not lend themselves to timely detection of a fire. For the purposes of this 

exemption an isolated passenger compartment is defined as a room that docs not contain an 

egress path (e.g., main cabin aisle, cross aisle or passageway), or is isolated by a door. In order to 

address the in-night case. the FAA believes that installing a smoke detector in such areas would 

compensate for the potential for an increased in-night fire threat. Therefore, each isolated 

passenger compartment must incorporate a fire detection system that meets the requirements of 

§ 25.858. While this section is written for cargo compartment fire detection systems, the criteria 

contained therein arc considered appropriate to this application. 

4. Direct View 

The petitioner has idcntifi~.:d the requirement for flight allendant scats to be located to provide a 

direct view or the passenger cabin as not practical for compliance with the executive type interior 

to be used on the 737-800. The complexity of the interior ammgcmcnt, coupled with the need to 

retain proximity to emergency exits is cited as the primary reason that compliance is impracti c<.~l. 

The FAA has considered the req uirement for direct view in the context of private use aiq)lanes, 

and agrees that much of the justification for the requirement is based on air carrier type 

operations. The practicality of locating flight attendant seats ncar emergency exits so that there is 

a direct \'icw of occupants inside ofrooms is questionable. at best. Tn this regard, the FAA docs 

believe that some relief may be appropriate for airplanes intended tor private usc. Howc\'cr. the 

II 
rAA notes that the justification for the n.:quircment for direct view is not limited to obs~.: va ion 

of passengers that arc not familiar with the interior. Flight attendant scats should be located so 

that there is a direct ,·iew provided for thc cabin area that is practical. For example, flight 

attendant scats should not face away from the cabin. In those areas of the airpl;mc where 

traditional seating arrangements arc used. the FAA believes that direct view should be provided. 

In considering the need for direct Yicw. the F;\ A agrees that the restricted nature of the operation 

of a private use airplane mitigates much ofthc need. That is. the operator has control of and can 

restrict the population of passengers, unlike an air catTier. The risk of passengers engaging in 

haLardous or malicious acti\ uy is essential!) diminatcd. and the need for direct \'iC\\' is limited 

to those cases where u passenger might nccd assistance. We consider that this objccti \·e is met by 

requiring that a majority of night attendants scats face the cabin. 

We disagree \\'ith the applicant 's statement that "The passenger count of the subject airplane 

represents just 1-t% of the capacity allow~d ftw this airplane ... The applicant is comparing the 

proposed passenger seating capacity or its pri vate use Model 737-800 airplane. which will have 

one pair of Type lll exit doors and the aft pair of noor level exits deacti vated. with a Model 737-

800 aiqJiane that has all of the emergency ex its functional. As ex its arc deactivated the nllowable 

passenger seating capacity dGcreases. The applicant should compare its proposed passenger 

seating capacity with the maximum allowable seating capacity of a Model 737-800 with the same 

deactivated exits. In this scenario the maximum passenger seating capacity allowed on a Model 

737-800 would be 80. not 189; thercrore. the seating capacity of the pri\'atc usc airplane is 33. % 

of that allowed on a comparable Model 73 7- 00 airplane, not 14%. 

The FAA' decision 

In consideratiOn of the for~go ing. I find that a partial grant of exemption is in the public interest. 

Therefore, pursuant to the authority contained in 49 U.S.C. -tO I I 3 and 4-t70 I. delegated to me by 

the Administrator. I grant the petition of Gore Design Completion, Ltd. for ~.:xcmpt on from 

14 CFR 25.785(11)(2). 25.7R5(j). 25.813(G). and 25.853(cl) to the extent necessary to allow 

installation of an executivr interior on a "pri\'atc. not-for-hire" Bo~ in g Mod~! 737-800 airplane, 

serial number 35792. Specifically. the exemption allows relief from the requirements for Oight 

attendant direct view. firm handholds in the passenger compartment, interior doors between 

passenger compartments, and maximum heat release Oammability requirements for large interior 

panels. This exemption is subj ect to the fo llowing conditions and limitation numbers 4, 5 and 6 

must be documented in the !.imitations. cction of the AiqJiane Flight Manual: 

I. The airplane must not be opGratcd for hire or offered for common carriage. This 

provision does not preclude the operator from receiving remuneration to th~ extull 

consistent with 14 CrR parts 125 and 91 . subpan F, as applicable. 

2. A majori ty ol' flight attendant scats must be oriented to face the passenger cabin. 

3. Each door between passenger compartments must be frangible. 

12 
4. Doors that fall into Category I must be in the open position during taxi, take-off. and 

landing " h~:n the room is occupied or when passengers must pass through the room to 

reach an emergency exit. 

5. Doors that fall into Categories 2, 3, or 4 must be in the open position during taxi. takeon~ and landing, regardless of occupancy of the room. 

6. Doors which fall into Category 5 must be in the closed position during taxi. take-off, 

and landing. 

7. Appropriate procedures must be established to signal the Oightcrew that a door 

between passenger compartments is closed and to prohibit take-off or landing when a 

door between passenger compartments is not in the proper position. 

8. Doors between passenger compartments must have dual means to retain them in the 

open position, each means must be capable of withstanding the inertia loads specified in 

§ 25.56 1. 

9. When materials arc installed that do not comply with the requirements of appendix r. 

parts IV and V. it must be shown that the passengers and crewmembers can be e\'acuat cd 

in 45 seconds or less, under the condi tions described in part 25, appendix J. 

I 0. There must be means to signal the Oightcrcw in the event of a fire in any isolated 

passenger compartment that meet the requirements of§ 25.858(a) through (d). 

Issued in Renton Washington, on NOV 2 6 ZOOB 

Ali Bahrami 

Manager, Transport J\iqJlanc Directorate 

Aircraft Certiti cation Service 

13