AFS-13-534-E

Exemption No. 10960

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

WASHINGTON, DC 20591

 

In the matter of the petition of 

 

BRIM EQUIPMENT LEASING. INC Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2013-0761

dba BRIM AVIATION 

 

for an exemption from § 133.45(e)(1) 

of Title 14, Code of 

Federal Regulations 

PARTIAL GRANT OF EXEMPTION

By letter dated August 23, 2013, and supplemental information dated 

October 31, 2013, Mr. Burl Brim Jr., President, Brim Equipment Leasing, Inc. dba Brim 

Aviation, (Brim Aviation), 455 Dead Indian Memorial Road, Ashland, Oregon 97520,

petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on behalf of Brim Aviation for an 

exemption from § 133.45(e)(1) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). The 

proposed exemption, if granted, would allow Brim Aviation to conduct Class D rotorcraftload combination operations for maritime pilot transfers and search and rescue with an 

MD900 (902 Configuration) helicopter certificated in the normal category under part 27.

The petitioner requests relief from the following regulation:

Section 133.45(e)(1) prescribes, in pertinent part, that the rotorcraft-load combination of Class 

D may be conducted only in a rotorcraft type certificated under transport Category A for the 

operating weight and provide hover capability with one engine inoperative at that operating 

weight and altitude.

The petitioner supports its request with the following information:

The petitioner states that § 133.45 was last amended in 1986, ten years before the FAA 

adopted Category A standards for normal category rotorcraft in part 27 Appendix C. An 

applicant is required to show compliance with numerous transport category airworthiness 

standards to obtain Category A certification under part 27. The petitioner claims that an 

exemption should not be necessary to conduct the proposed operations. The petitioner 

acknowledges that § 133.45(e)(1) requires a transport category aircraft for Class D operations

and that the FAA might conclude that an exemption is necessary. If an exemption is 
2

necessary, the petitioner states that a grant would serve the public interest by enhancing 

safety, protecting the environment, facilitating maritime commerce, and reducing or 

eliminating threat to human life.

The petitioner states the MD900 (902 Configuration) helicopter would be used to not only 

transport maritime pilots to and from ships located at United States (U.S.) ports, but also serve 

as an aerial hoist platform to perform rescues in remote wilderness and other locations that 

would be otherwise inaccessible in a timely manner. 

The petitioner states that by permitting helicopter transfers, as granted in Exemption No. 

10456, the safety of maritime pilots, environment, and maritime vessels is increased. In 

permitting rescue operations in the MD900 (902 Configuration), the petitioner states public 

interest would be met in permitting the availability of a hoist-equipped aircraft to emergency 

response agencies that would provide an invaluable, timely, and previously unavailable asset 

that can be utilized for rescue personnel and victims in remote areas or difficult terrain that 

may be otherwise inaccessible.

The petitioner asserts that the aircraft offers improved one-engine inoperative (OEI) 

performance and fully complies with Category A certification requirements in part 27, 

Appendix C, which requires compliance with numerous sections of part 29. The petitioner 

states that each flight plan would be initiated with a weight and balance determination to 

ensure the aircraft and hoisting operation are appropriate for the proposed flight in accordance 

with the Rotorcraft Flight Manual (RFM) and applicable limitations in the RFM appendices

regarding weight and balance and OEI performance. All hoisting operations would be 

conducted in accordance with the RFM supplement entitled “Rescue Hoist.”

The petitioner states that for nearly twenty years Brim Aviation has been providing aircraft, as 

well as trained rescue personnel, to the Jackson County Sheriff’s Office in support of search 

and rescue operations. As a result, the petitioner states that Brim Aviation’s aircraft are 

frequently called into service to perform rescues within Jackson County and throughout 

Oregon and neighboring states on a mutual aid basis. The petitioner described the vast 

mountainous wilderness regions that do not easily lend themselves to search and rescue 

operations and often challenge and hamper the abilities of even the most experienced and 

will-equipped rescue teams.

According to the petitioner, there are currently relatively few rescue hoist equipped 

helicopters in the western region of the United States that can meet the multi-engine and OEI 

performance requirements. The petitioner states that even fewer conduct civil aircraft 

operations. The petitioner states that the single engine performance and capabilities offered 

by the MD900 (902 Configuration) make it most beneficial to the rescue crews and members 

of the public that it would serve.

The petitioner states that availability of a helicopter equipped with a rescue hoist is a 

monumental benefit and vastly improves Brim Aviation’s abilities to rapidly rescue, 

medically treat, and evacuate victims who become injured or ill while in the treacherous 
3

expanses of the Oregon wilderness. Such operations can greatly reduce the time spent 

reaching and retrieving people who require emergency evacuation from remote locations that 

would otherwise be difficult or impossible to access by conventional ground-based rescue 

crews. The petitioner points out that the FAA has granted an exemption (No.7118) to support 

search and rescue operations in a part 27 aircraft.

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

Federal Register publication because the exemption, if granted, would not set a precedent, and 

any delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to Brim Aviation.

The FAA's analysis is as follows:

The FAA finds that an exemption would be necessary to conduct Class D rotorcraft-load 

combination operations in an aircraft type certificated under other than transport Category A. 

Without an exemption, a regulatory change would be necessary to conduct these operations in 

a normal category rotorcraft. Consideration for a regulatory change is outside the scope of the 

exemption process.

Accordingly, regarding the request to transfer maritime pilots to and from ships in U.S. ports 

with a normal category aircraft certified for Category A operations, the FAA issued grants of 

exemption in circumstances similar in all material respects to those presented in your petition.

In Grants of Exemption Nos. 6400 and 10456, the FAA determined that if specific conditions 

were implemented, the level of safety would be equivalent to that provided under the 

regulation and it would be in the public interest to improve safety of maritime pilot transfers.

The FAA concurs that the MD900 (902 Configuration) has been certificated under part 27,

Appendix C for Category A operations. 

Having reviewed reasons for requesting an exemption for maritime pilot transfers, the FAA 

finds that they are similar in all material respects to relief previously requested. The reasons 

stated by the FAA for granting Grants of Exemption Nos. 6400 and 10456 apply to the 

situation you present, and a grant of exemption to conduct maritime pilot transfers in the 

MD900 (902 Configuration) is in the public interest.

The FAA has also carefully reviewed the request and supporting documentation for 

conducting Class D rotorcraft-load combination rescue operations in the MD900 (902 

Configuration), which is available with two different types of engine with different 

performance data for each. The petitioner did not state the engine configuration on the Brim 

Aviation aircraft or whether the aircraft, generally equipped for high-altitude search and 

rescue operations, would be able to perform as needed and still provide one engine 

inoperative capability at the required elevations in excess of 5,000 feet as stated for the vast 

expanses of wilderness described in the petition. 

The FAA finds that a grant of exemption for rescue operations would not be in the public 

interest. The petitioner references previous Grant of Exemption No. 7118 to Intermountain 

Life Flight as precedent for allowing rescue operations in a normal category rotorcraft. The 
4

basis for public interest in Exemption No. 7118, was in part, the determination that there were 

no military or public aircraft operators conducting hoist rescue operations within a reasonable 

distance or response time to conduct life-saving rescue requests in Intermountain Life Flight’s 

area of operation. While the FAA agreed that the life-saving nature of the rescue operations 

were in the public interest, the FAA also verified, to the extent possible, the lack of other 

available public or civil aircraft operators capable of conducting similar rescue operations 

within Intermountain Life Flight’s operational range.

The petitioner’s public interest reason for allowing Class D rescue operations in the MD900 

(902 Configuration), as stated, is that the availability of a hoist-equipped aircraft to 

emergency response agencies would provide an invaluable, timely and previously unavailable 

asset that can be utilized to not only insert trained rescue and medical personnel into, but a 

victim removed from, remote areas or difficult terrain that may be otherwise inaccessible. 

The FAA has determined that hoist-equipped aircraft that can perform the operations 

described by the petitioner, are currently available. There are several military and public 

aircraft operators available to conduct hoist rescue operations within Brim Aviation’s area of 

operation and within reasonable distance. In June 2013, for example, Oregon Army National 

Guard helicopters conducted search and rescue hoist operations for a missing Mount Hood 

climber. A National Guard CH-47 Chinook helicopter was utilized to insert a rescue team at 

the 11,239-foot summit of Mount Hood to effectively and efficiently reduce the search time 

by as much as half, according to the local sheriff’s office. This and other helicopter hoist 

rescue resources can be coordinated through the respective local 911 dispatch center, 

according to interagency guidelines and information on emergency helicopter hoist extraction 

ordering for the Pacific Northwest encompassing the state of Oregon and Brim Aviation’s 

operational range.

With available helicopter hoist resources already in place and their capabilities recently 

proven for search and rescue operations in the remote wilderness described by the petitioner, 

the FAA does not consider this a reason to grant an exemption to Brim Aviation to conduct 

Class D rescue operations in a helicopter that is not certificated in the transport category as 

required by § 133.45(e)(1). 

The FAA’s Decision

In consideration of the foregoing, I find that a partial grant of exemption is in the 

public interest. Therefore, pursuant to the authority contained in 49 U.S.C. §§ 106(f), 40113,

and 44701, delegated to me by the Administrator, Brim Equipment Leasing, Inc. dba Brim 

Aviation is granted an exemption from 14 CFR § 133.45(e)(1) to the extent necessary to allow 

Brim Aviation to conduct Class D rotorcraft-load combination operations for maritime pilot 

transfers with an MDHI MD900 (902 Configuration) helicopter certificated in the normal 

category under part 27, subject to the conditions and limitations listed below.
5

Conditions and Limitations

1. In accordance with § 133.37, Brim Aviation must conduct training in accordance with 

its approved Class D rotorcraft-load combination training program prior to conducting 

Class D operations. The training program must include initial and recurrent training 

for pilots and other operations personnel, as appropriate.

2. The certificate-holding district office (CHDO) for Brim Aviation must approve the 

Class D training program.

3. Brim Aviation must maintain a current CHDO-approved rotorcraft-load combination 

flight manual, which meets the requirements of § 133.47.

4. Brim Aviation may utilize the provisions of this exemption only when operating the 

MDHI MD900 (902 Configuration) helicopter in the transport of maritime pilots to 

and from ships in United States ports.

5. This exemption does not relieve Brim Aviation from complying with the portion of 

§ 133.45(e)(1) which states, “...and provide hover capability with one engine

inoperative at that operating weight and altitude.”

6. Prior to each flight, the pilot in command must confirm that the weight and balance

and performance of the rotorcraft are within the MD900 (902 Configuration)

Rotorcraft Flight Manual (RFM) and RFM supplement limitations, as necessary to 

comply with Condition No. 5 of this exemption.

7. This exemption is not valid for operations outside the United States.

Exemption from § 133.45(e)(1) to conduct Class D rotorcraft-load combination rescue 

operations in remote wilderness and other locations with an MDHI MD900 (902 

Configuration) helicopter certificated in the normal category under part 27 is denied.

This exemption terminates on March 31, 2016, unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

Issued in Washington, DC, on March 19, 2014.

/s/

John Barbagallo

Acting Deputy Director, Flight Standards Service