Exemption No. 10481

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION WASHINGTON, DC 20591

In the matter of the petition of

PENNSYLVANIA STATE Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2011-0125

POLICE

for an exemption from § 43.3 of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations

GRANT OF EXEMPTION

By letters dated February 9 and May 31, 2011, Sgt. Matt Tarczynski, Supervisor, Aviation Maintenance Section, Pennsylvania State Polic e (PSP), Aviation Patrol Unit 3, 575 Airport Drive, New Cum berland, Pennsylvania 17070, petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on behalf of PSP for an ex emption from § 43.3(a) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). The proposed exemption, if granted, would allow properly trained PSP pilots to remove and reinstall the Gyrocam camera on its PSP Cessna 206H airplane (N193P), ensure the appropriate aircraft weight and balance data is documented in the document folder, and perform operational check of the system, in the absence of a FAA

licensed technician.

The petitioner requests relief from the following regulation:

Section 43.3 prescribes in pertinent part, that except as provided in this section and § 43.17, no person other than the holder of a mechanic or repair station certificate may maintain, rebuild, alter, or perform preventive maintenance on an aircraft, airframe, aircraft engine, propeller, appliance, or component part to which this part applies. Those items, the performance of which is a major alteration, a major repair, or preventive maintenance, are listed in Appendix A.

AFS-11-173-E2

The petitioner supports its request with the following information:

The petitioner states Aero Avionics, Inc., Sanford, NC, installed the Gyrocam camera under supplemental type certificate ST03677AT. The petitioner states the installation design includes features to facilitate removal of the Gyrocam camera without the need of tools or requiring any complex operation and is a simple operation for a trained person to accomplish.

In its petition, the petitioner illustrated how the Gyrocam camera is secured to a fixed dovetail mount attached to the airframe and held in place using two thumb screws with a fail-safe interlocking safety pin. Associ ated electrical connections are provided by a cable assembly and two cannon plugs. Aircraft weight and balance data is available for both camera installed and camera removed configurations.

The petitioner stated that without the relief sought, the removal or reinstallation of the Gyrocam camera requires coordination with local certificated aircraft mechanics prior to its missions. The petitioner stated the response to critical and impromptu missions is therefor dependent on the availability of certificated maintenance personnel. The petitioner further states that allowing PSP pilots to remove or install the camera absent of a FAA licensed mechanic reduces incident response time by eliminating the time required to contact off-duty maintenance personnel and their respective travel time to the airport. The petitioner believes that prompt aerial support becomes a force multiplier for ground units by adding an additional level of safety to both state police ground units and to the public.

The petitioner states the pilots performing the removal and reinstallation shall be trained using only the methods prescribed by the manufacturer Gyrocam, to assure correct completion of the work. The pilots will document this action with a logbook entry. They will also perform operational checks and will predetermine and record weight and balance data for either configuration.

The petitioner states that it supports law enforcement, public safety and homeland security missions.

The petitioner believes that if the FAA grants the request, the public will benefit from more timely and efficient availability of PSP aviation service.

A summary of the petition was published in the Federal Register on August 17, 2011 (76 FR 51119). No comments were received.

The FAA’s analysis is as follows:

The FAA, in the past, has granted partial exemptions to 14 CFR § 43.3 where an equivelent level of safety to that provided by the regulation will exist. It has been demonstrated that the public does benefit from permitting a trained pilot to perform the relatively simple3

maintenance task of removing or installing the Gyrocam camera and associated electrical connections on aircraft similarly modified. Th e FAA finds that, subject to the conditions and limitations set forth in this exemption are followed, a grant of exemption, limited to the pilots of the PSP, may now be granted.

The FAA’s Decision:

In consideration of the foregoing, I find that a grant of exem ption is in the public interest. Therefore, pursuant to the authority contained in 49 U.S.C. §§ 40113 and 44701, delegated to me by the Administrator, the Pennsylvania State Police are granted an exemption from 14 CFR § 43.3(a) to the extent necessary to allow PSP pilots to remove and reinstall the Gyrocam camera in the absence of a FAA licensed mechanic, subject to the conditions and

limitations listed below.

Conditions and Limitations:

1. PSP will m aintain a roster of pilots qualified to remove and reinstall the Gyrocam.

2. PSP will provide initial and annual recurrent training in this task by a properly certificated airframe mechanic, to qualified pilots and maintain appropriate

records.

3. A copy of the associated training program will be provided to the local Flight Standards District Office for review and acceptance.

4. Each pilot removing or installing the Gyrocam shall record that work in accordance with § 43.9 and ensure the appropriate weight and balance is utilized.

This exemption terminates on March 31, 2014, unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

Issued in Washington, DC, on March 16, 2012.

/s/ Raymond Towles Acting Director, Flight Standards

Service