Exemption No.1 0051

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT ATION FEDERAL AVIATION ADMlNISTRATION RENTON, WASHINGTON 98057-3356

Inthe matter ofthepetition of Lufthansa Technik AG foran exemption from §26.47 ofTitle 14, Code ofFederaJ Regulations Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2009-1241

PARTIAL GRANT OF EXEMPTION By asubmission tothe Depm1ment ofTransportation's Federal Docket Mm1agement System (FOMS) dated December 9,2009, Mr. Jochen Volkmar ofLufthansa Technik AG (LHT), Postfach 63-03-00, D~22313, Hamburg, petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for anexemption fromthe reqllirements ofTitle 14, Code ofFederal Regulations (14 CFR) 26.47. Section 26.47 requirements rclate tothe development ofdamage tolerance data for alterations and repairs to alterations. Lufthansa requests this exemption for supplemental type certificate (STC)-approved design changes installed onpnvate use (not forhire, not forcommon carriage) airplanes. The affected STCs are listed inTable 1. Table 1 

### Supplemental Type Certificates for which Lufthansa Technik AG Seeks

Exemptiou from 14 CFR 26.47

STC# Oeseriptio" Issue Date Limitation; ACI Model Exem lion ST0220JNY Installation ofa VIP Cabin Interior 12.01.2006 on STC 747-400 ~~)7NY UAE 747 Com lelion, EASA U ade Kit 27.10.2006 on STC 747-400 STOl837NY VIP Cabin Com letion (EAGLE) 02.12.2003 on STC 737-800 STOl845NY VIP Cabin Com lelion EVERGREEN) 18.12.2003 on STC 737-700JGW it02000NY VIP Cabin Com !clion (MIDROC) 28.09.2004 on STC 737.800 ST02096NY Installation ofa VIP Foxecutive interior.,. 24,05,2005 on STC 737-IOOlC,W ST02675NY VIP Cabin Com letioll 29,01.2009 on STC 737-70{)IGW ST00742SE installation arVIP Cabin Interior

... 07.10.1999 7029 737700lGW STOl276NY Installation or a VIP Cabi" Interior 27.02.2001 7317 777-200 STOl341NY Saudi Oger VIP Cabin Installation I (13B1) 18,04.2001 7475 737-70010\V 5T01381 NY NetJe! VIP-Cabin Installation (0131) 24.08.2001 7572 737-7001GW STOl460NY Saudi 0 er VI!' Cabill InstallaLion (BElJ) 11.02.2002 6820 737-800The petitioner requests reHeffrom the following regulation:

§26.47 Holders ofand applicants for a supplemental type certificate ~ Alterations and repairs to alterations, which requires development ofdamage tolerance data for alterations and repairs to alterations. The petitioner supports its request with the following information: This section quotes the relevant infom1ation from thepetitioner's request. The complete petition isaVaJlableatFDMS, on the internet athttp://www.regualtions.gov, inDocket No. FAA-2009- 1241.
Reasons Why the Exemption Would Not Adversely Affect Public Safety The listed STCs arerestricted to private use only, as stated inthe limitation section ofthe STCs or related exemptions. Aircraft operation is neither performed under § 121 or § 129,nor will the operator adopt maintenance requirements specified in § 121.1109. A change from private to commercial operation would require an amendment to any of these operationally limited STCs. This process would be followed by the FAA and would consequently resull inconsideration of 14CFR part 26 requirements. Reason the Exemption Would Benefit the Public Interest Granting thepetition for exemption would be inthe public interest because it would significantly reduce workload onFAA side. FUl1hennore the generalion ofthe DT data forthese aircraft would be very costly to LHT, with no perspective ofcompensation. Federal Register publication The FAA has detennined that good cause exists forwaiving the requirement forFederal Register publication because the exemption, ifgranted, would not set aprecedent, and is similar to previously granted exemptions on this subject. The FAA's analysis The FAA has developed criteria toconsider when deciding whether to grant ordellYadesign approval holder's (DAH) petition for exemption frompart 26 requirements. These critelia are meant as ageneral guide tomaking decisions about such requests and were not developed for any specific request. The FAA uses these criteria as astarting point formaking its decision. However, other factors may also be considered before afinal decision ismade on anyparticular exemption request. The criteria are annotated inTable 2.

2TabieZ 

### Criteria for Considering Eligibility for Exemption

from §26.47

Ifthe And And And Then ainvorthiness authority for the state ofdesign is 1 The FAA No airplanes are No airplanes are operating No airplanes are being The DAH operating under part 121 under part 129 (N~ operated by a foreign air may be and it is unlikely that any registered) and it is unlikely carrier and it isunlikely eligible for will do so inthe future3 that any will do so inthe that any will do so inthe an future3 future" exemption

2 The FAA Airplanes are operating Airplanes are operating Airplanes are being The DAH under part 121 but no under part 129 (N- operated by a foreign air may be airplanes will be registered) but no airplanes carrier but no airplanes eligible for operated under part 121 will be operated under part will be operated by a on after the operational rule 129 (N·registered) after the foreign air carrier after the exemption compliance date I and itis operational rule compliance operational rule unlikely that any will date 1 and itis unlikely that compliance date 1and itis return to such service in any will retwn to such unlikely that any will the future} service inthe future 3 return to such service in the future3 3 Not the FAA No airplanes are No airplanes are operating The DAH operating under part 121 under part 129 (N~ may be and itis unlikely that any registered) and itisunlikely eligible for will do so inthe future} that any will do so inthe eo furure" exemption

4 Not the FAA Airplanes are operating Airplanes are operating TheDAH under part 121 but no under part 129 (N- may be airplanes will be registered) but no airplanes eligible for operated under part 121 will be operated under part eo after the operational rule 129 (N-registered) after the exemption compliance date2 and itis operational rule comp!.iance unlikely that any will date 2and itis unlikely that return to such service in any will return to such the future3 service inthe future3 I The design approval holder must demonstrate that these airplanes will not be operating under part 121 orpart 129, oroperated by a foreign air carrier, after the operational rule compliance date by obtaining documentation of such from the current owners/operators ofthe airplanes.
2 The design approval holder must demonstrate that these airplanes will not be operating under part 121 orpart 129 after the operational rule compliance date byobtaining documentation of such from the current owners/operators ofthe airplanes.
3 Arguments for the likelihood ofan airplane not entering into air carrier service inthe future should center onthe airplane's age and/or current contio-uration.

3The determination ofwhether an airplane is operated under 14CFR part 121 or 14CFR part 129

is based on whether that particular airplane is listed on an aircarrier's operations specifications. The rationale behind the criteria contained in Table 2is that the rule requires DABs to develop data foruse by operators. Ifthere are no operators for aparticular airplane, required by the rules touse such data, itwould be apoor use ofresources forthe DAH to develop it. Therefore, it would benefit both the DAH andthe public as awhole to spend resources on more important safety issues rather than on developing data that will not beused. In addition, granting such an exemption would not adversely affect safety because there are no airplanes that would be required to incorporate the data, nor is itlikely that there will be any inthe future. Incases where the FAA isthe authority forthe design and affected airplanes are operated by foreign air carriers (or likely to do so in the future), the FAA does not grant exemptions from this rule, as doing somay negatively impact an operator's ability to comply with an equivalent rule under another airworthiness authority. The FAA isthe aifVolorthinessauthority forLufthansa Technik AG's STC-approved design changes (listed in Table I). The FAA has reviewed Lufthansa Technik AG's request, and has determined that no affected airplanes are operating under part 121 orpart 129 (US-registered); however the FAA has determined that some ofthe airplanes affected by this request are not limited to private use operations. For those STC-approved design changes on airplanes that are not limited to private use operations (orthe FAA was not able to confirm that airplane usage is limited to private use), granting this exemption may have an adverse effect onpublic safety. Therefore granting this exemption for STC-approved design changes installed on airplanes used forhire orfor common carriage would not be inthe public interest. The FAA was able to confirm that the STC-approved design changes listed inTable 3 are installed on airplanes limited to private use (not for hire, not for common carriage). Therefore granting this exemption forthese airplanes would be inthe public interest. The Partial Grant ofExemption In consideration ofthe foregoing, T find that apartial grant ofexemption is in the public interest. Therefore, pursuant to the authority contained in49 U.S.c. §§40113 and 44701, delegated tome bythe Administrator, Lufthansa Technik AG, ishereby granted an exemption from § 26.47 for only those STC-approved design changes listed inTable 3, forthe development ofdamage tolerance data for alterations and repairs to alterations. This exemption does not grant relief from therelated operational requirements contained in § 121.1109 or § 129.109. Should aperson choose to operate an airplane with STCwapproved design changes (listed inTable 3) under part 121 orpart 129beyond the operational compliance deadlines as stated in § 121.1109 or 

### § 129.109, that person will berequired to comply with those operational requirements.

4IfLufthansa Technik AG submits apetition for amendment to this exemption, with additional

data showing that theremaining airplanes with STC-approved design changes (listed inTable 1) are currently operated exclusively inprivate use operation, and are unlikely to be operated by a foreign air carrier inthe futme, the FAA will consider Lufthansa Technik AG's request.


### Table3 

### Supplemental Type Certificates for which the FAA Grants Exemption to

Lufthansa Technik AG from 14CFR 26.47

STC# Descri lion Issue Dale ACIMooel ST02307NY UAE 747 Com letion, EASA U rade Kit 27,10,2006 747400 ST01837NY VIP Cabin Com letion (EAGLE) 02.122003 737·800 ST0134INY Saudi 0 er VIP Cabin Installation I (BBJ) 18.04.2001 737-7001GW STOl460NY Saudi 0 er VIP Cabin Installation (BBn 11.02.2002 737-800 Issued inRenton, Washington on 

## APR16 2010 

# ;f¥;Jb

Ali Bahrami Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate Aircraft Certification Service



### 5