AFS-11-021-E 

 Exemption No. 10214 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

WASHINGTON, DC 20591 

 

In the matter of the petition of 

 

RLB AVIATION, INC. D.B.A 

STARFIGHTERS, INC. Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2010-1086

 

for an exemption from § 91.319(a) 

of Title 14, Code of 

Federal Regulations 

 

DENIAL OF EXEMPTION 

 By letter dated October 1, 2010, Mr. Rick Svetkoff, President/Chief Pilot, RLB Aviation, 

Inc. d.b.a. Starfighters, Inc. (Starfighters), 1608 North Jasmine Avenue, Tarpon Springs, 

Florida 34689 petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on behalf of Starfighters 

for an exemption from § 91.319(a) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). The 

proposed exemption, if granted, would allow Starfighters to carry persons and property for 

compensation or hire in experimental aircraft. 

The petitioner requests relief from the following regulation:

Section 91.319(a) prescribes, in pertinent part, that no person may operate an 

experimental category civil aircraft for other than the purpose for which the certificate 

was issued, or for carrying persons or property for compensation or hire. 

The petitioner supports its request with the following information:

The petitioner states it is requesting an exemption in order to develop his business and 

continue the advancement of the commercial space industry within the United States 

(U.S.). 

Starfighters states that it has successfully carried payloads and persons aboard the 
2

F-104 as a “public use aircraft.” This was done in conjunction with the U.S. Air Force 

(USAF) and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). The 

petitioner contends that these flights help advance technology development for both 

NASA (camera, optics and sensors, one of which is aboard the International Space 

Station) and the FAA (commercial space airspace proving “Pathfinder”) projects. The 

petitioner states that it has been approached by Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, 

Florida State University, Boeing, Lockheed Martin, and Northrop Grumman to conduct 

similar flights. 

The petitioner states the F-104 is such a capable and highly requested test platform that 

Starfighters will be expanding its fleet from four to nine aircraft. The petitioner further 

states that Edwards Air Force Base Flight Center, the USAF Research laboratory, and 

Navy Test Pilot schools have all inquired into using Starfighters for various projects. 

Starfighters would like the same opportunities be available to education institutions and 

commercial industry partners to keep America at the forefront of aerospace technology 

now and in the future. 

 

The petitioner states that as the Space Shuttle program draws to a close, John F. 

Kennedy Space Center (KSC) will lose critical personnel. Starfighters states that a 

grant of exemption can ensure that these personnel remain at work. In addition, it will 

increase the petitioner’s workforce in a climate where almost 13,000 people face 

unemployment. 

Starfighters states that safety is paramount to its organization and the personnel based 

at the NASA Shuttle Landing Facility on KSC. The petitioner contends that all 

operations at this federal government installation are subject to oversight not only by 

the FAA but are inclusive of NASA and USAF. Starfighters states that its full time 

personnel attend all NASA aviation safety workshops, training, and planned exercises 

at KSC. Starfighters believes that by holding itself to a higher standard, its location 

and working airspace mitigates a vast majority of risk to the uninformed. 

The petitioner states it has operated without incident since 1996 across North America 

in support of commercial industry, U.S. Department of Defense and federal 

government contract work. 

The petitioner believes, for the reasons outlined above, that a grant of exemption would 

not adversely affect safety. Starfighters states that if granted an exemption, these safety 

mechanisms would remain in place and continue to be overseen by both NASA and the 

USAF. 

 A summary of the petition was published in the Federal Register on December 7, 2010 

(75 FR 76068). No comments were received. 
3

The FAA's analysis is as follows: 

The FAA has considered the petitioner’s request and supporting materials and finds that a 

grant of exemption would not be in the public interest and would not provide a level of safety 

equivalent to that provided by the current regulations. 

The FAA finds that Starfighters has failed to provide adequate details of their proposed 

operation. In addition, § 11.81(d)(e) requires that the petitioner provide the FAA with “[t]he 

reasons why granting your request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would 

benefit the public as a whole” and “[t]he reasons why granting the exemption would not 

adversely affect safety, or how the exemption would provide a level of safety at least equal to 

that provided by the rule from which you seek the exemption.” The petition does not 

adequately address why granting the request would be in the public interest since Starfighters 

wishes to advance the commercial space industry within the United States and the petitioners 

specifically states that the purpose of the exemption is “to enable me to develop my 

business...” Operations in support of the commercial space industry require that the operator 

receive prior approval from the FAA Office of Commercial Space. There is no indication that 

the Office of Commercial Space has granted any type of approval. In addition, several of the 

proposed operations are not suitable for an aircraft in the experimental exhibition category 

and would be more appropriately be conducted in accordance with an experimental research 

and development certification. 

The petitioner goes on to state that Starfighters conducts safe operations but does not provide 

any details on how Starfighters intends to provide the required equal level of safety. In order 

for the FAA to consider the petitioner’s proposed exemption, Starfighter’s would need to 

provide much more specific type(s) of operation and any safety mitigations that they would 

offer. The additional information would allow the FAA to determine if the petitioner’s 

mitigations were adequate or if the FAA would need to add conditions and limitations to 

ensure an equivalent level of safety. 

In its petition, Starfighters refers to Exemption No. 6540K, as amended, as using aircraft 

similar to Starfighters’. Exemption No. 6540K, as amended, and other similar exemptions are 

issued specifically for Living History Flight Experiences (LHFE). These exemptions permit 

very limited carriage of passengers for compensation only for the purpose of supporting the 

continued operation of these historic aircraft and are only issued to organizations that are 

Internal Revenue Service (IRS) tax exempt in accordance with 26 U.S.C. § 501(c)(3). The 

IRS regulations require that the organization must not be organized or operated for the benefit 

of private interests, and no part of a § 501(c)(3) organization's net earnings may inure to the 

benefit of any private shareholder or individual. Since Starfighters’ operations do not qualify 

under these guidelines, they are not eligible for a LHFE exemption. 

The FAA finds that the operation of these experimental aircraft raises significant safety issues 

that have not been addressed by Starfighters’ petition. 
4

The FAA’s Decision: 

 In consideration of the foregoing, I find that a grant of exemption would not be 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 petition of RLB Aviation, Inc. d.b.a. 

Starfighters, Inc., for an exemption from 14 CFR § 91.319(a) is hereby denied. 

Issued in Washington, D.C., on February 18, 2011. 

/s/ 

John w. McGraw 

Acting Director, Flight Standards 

 Service .