AFS
- 14
- 188
- E

March 28, 2014 Exemption No. 10965 Regulatory

Docket No. FAA
- 2014
- 0153
Mr. Gil L ipaz Tiger Squadron 1917 L ivonia Avenue Lo s Angeles, CA 90034 Dear Mr. L ipaz : This letter is to inform y ou that we have denied your p etition for exemption. I t transmits our decision and explains its basis. **The Basis for Our Decision** By letter dated March 6, 2014 , y ou petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on behalf of Tiger Squadron ( Tiger Squadron ) for an exemption from § 91
. 913 of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) to the extent necessary to allow Tiger Squadron to operate over densely

populated areas or in congested airway s with aircraft certificated in the experimental category
. Y ou petitioned for rel ief from § 91.913 however, relief from § 91.319 (c) is the relief that is required. W e will consider that yo ur intention was to seek relief from § 91.319 (c)
. The petitioner states the Tiger Squadron’s aircraft are all Nanchang CJ6/A military trainers ma intained to the highest level of care and the pilots are all commercially rated and experienced formation pilots who are certified for formation through the Red Star Pilots Association, a signatory

of FAST. Angels stadium sits in Orange County , CA in a largely industrial area and is adjacent to a large river bed that runs alongside the stadium, literally within 400 feet of the stadium and immediately alongside the parking area for the stadium, providing ample emergency landing contingencies. The f light ove r the stadium from a minimum height of 1,000 agl would amount to a time over the stadium of no more than a few seconds. Tiger Squadron, a professional formation team, has had an incident
- free record having flown a significant number of airshows each year and wishes to provide our services to the Angels organization and to its fans. The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition in the Federal Register because this is not a precedent
- setting petition , and any delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to the Tiger Squadron
.2

The FAA issued a denial of an exemption in circumstances similar in all material respects to those presented in y our petition. In Denial of Exemption No. 10853 (copy enclosed), the FAA has determined that the operating limitations for experimental category civil aircraft, as prescribed in § 91.319, have se rved to protect persons and property in connection with aircraft operations. Historically , the FAA's position on this issue ha s been that an aircraft with an experimental certificate may only be used for the special purpose for which it is certificated and not over densely

populated areas or on congested airway s. This position is due, in part, by the certification standards requ ired for an aircraft with a normal [standard] airworthiness certificate versus an aircraft with an experimental airworthiness certificate. Experimental aircraft do not necessarily meet any FAA certification standard. Inaddition, Tiger Squadron has not c learly shown that its petition is in the public interest. Tiger Squadron has not explained an acceptable means of providing for the safety of the uninformed, non
- participating public. As a comparison, Li ving History Flight Experience ( LHFE ) exemptions pe rmitting historic rides require that persons participating in the program be advised and acknowledge that the aircraft does not meet FAA certifica tion standards. Conversely , Tiger Squadron aircraft would be flown over non
- participating members of the gene ral public. The general public expects that aircraft operating over them meet the certification and safety

requirements. Since there is no practical way to advise the non
participating public of the hazards, the FAA has determined the petitioner has faile d to articulate a sufficiently

compelling public interest to justify flights over many

people. Having reviewed y our reasons for requesting an exemption, I find that

—  they do no t differ materially

from those presented by

the petition er in the enclosed Denial of E xemption No. 10853 ;  the reasons stated by

the FAA for denying the enclosed Denial of Exemption No. 10853 also apply

to the situation y ou present; and  a grant of ex emption would no t be in the public interest. **Our Decision** Under the authority

contained in 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 40113 and 44701, which the FAA Administrator has delegated to me, I hereby deny the petition of Tiger Squadron for an exemption from 14 CFR § 91.319(c)
. Sincerely , //s// John S. Duncan Director, Flight Standards Service Enclosure[s]