AFS-11-110-E February 2, 2011 Exemption No. 10201 Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2011-0002

Mr. Robert Bernicchi Managing Director of Engineering

Alaska Airlines

19300 International Blvd Seattle, WA 98188

Dear Mr. Bernicchi:

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your request for exemption. It transmits our decision, explains its basis, and gives you the conditions and limitations of the exemption, including the date it ends.

The Basis for Our Decision

By letter dated December 23, 2010, Mr. Robert Bernicchi, Managing Director of Engineering, Alaska Airlines (Alaska), 19300 International Blvd., Seattle, WA 98188 petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on beha lf of Alaska for an exemption from § 121.344(f) and part 121, appendix M, footnote 18 of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). This exemption, if granted, would allow Alaska the continued operation of three B737 series aircraft for 18 months from the date of this letter without meeting the requirements of § 121.344(f) and part 121, appendix M, footnote 18.

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 Alaska.

The FAA has issued a grant of exemption in circumstances similar in all material respects to those presented in your petition. In Grant of Exemption No. 10200 (copy enclosed), the FAA granted relief from recording a parameter listed under § 121.344(f) and part 121, appendix M, footnote 18, because the petitioner minimized the imp act of the loss of the flight recorder data and showed the loss of this data did not affect the safety of aircraft.2

Having reviewed your reasons for requesting an exemption, I find that—

 they don’t differ materially from those presented by the petitioner in the enclosed grant of exemption;

 the reasons stated by the FAA for granting the enclosed exemption also apply to the situation you present; and

 a grant of exemption is in the public interest.

Flight data recorders are required by regulation because they are recognized as an essential tool for investigating accidents and incidents. Although a digital flight data recorder (DFDR) does not affect flight crew procedures, it is criti cal for later analysis of crew performance and the procedures used during an accident or incident.

The petitioner states that on December 17, 2010, during a review by Boeing of the Sagemgenerated qualification digital flight data acquisition unit (DFDAU) test reports, Boeing discovered some of the qualification tests were accomplished by Sagem out of sequence, requiring the testing be re-accomplished before the DFDAU software could be certified. Alaska notes that Boeing stated there were no tec hnical issues with any of the applicable test reports and there were no changes to the unit, despite the fact the test article was conformed after the qualification tests were perfor med. Since the new DFDAU was not properly certified, the DFDAU installed on the subject aircraft will use the previously certified version of the software, which does not meet the requirements of § 121.344(f).

Alaska expects Boeing to generate a service bulletin (SB) for the software modification needed to comply with the DFDR requirements in § 121.344(f). Alaska states that Boeing is continuing its work with Sagem to re-accomplish the necessary qualification tests, generate the test reports, review and approve the test reports, accomplish the ground and flight tests, and certify the DFDAU.

Alaska states that Boeing and Sagem indicate this effort could take as long as 12 months to complete based on the data available and previous certification experience. Alaska notes that replacement of the Sagem DFDAU software on the three B737-890 aircraft can be accomplished in an overnight maintenance visit once the Boeing SB has been issued.

Alaska states this exemption does not jeopardize individual airplane safety because the current equipment remains compliant with the DFDR recording requirements of § 121.344 that were in effect prior to December 6, 2010. Alaska states that preventing these airplanes from entering into service could have a significant negative effect on air transportation. Based on those factors, the FAA has determined that it is in the public interest to allow the introduction of the subject aircraft into service until they can be modified.3

The FAA’s Decision

In consideration of the foregoing, I find that a grant of exemption 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, Alaska Airlines is granted an exemption from § 121.344(f) to the extent necessary to allow Alaska to temporarily operate three newly delivered Boeing 737 NG aircraft, subject to the conditions and limitations listed below.

Conditions and Limitations

1. This exem ption only applies to the following aircraft.

Make Model Serial No. Line No. Registration No. Boeing 737-890 35201 3511 N533AS Boeing 737-890 35202 3523 N534AS Boeing 737-890 35200 3558 N535AS

2. This exemption allows this aircraft to operate with the DFDR sampling rate requirements that were in effect before December 6, 2010, as listed in part 121, appendix M, for parameters 12a, 13a, 14a, 15, 16, 17, and 88.

3. A copy of this exemption must be retained with the operator’s DFDR correlation documentation as specified in § 121.344(j) until the airplane identified in this exemption has incorporated the DFDAU system modification.

4. In the event of an accident or incident after which the DFDR data must be sent to the FAA or the National Transportation Safety Board, Alaska must provide a copy of this exemption.

5. Following receipt of the modification SB, Alaska must provide to its principal avionics inspector a schedule for the completion of the new installation.

This exemption terminates on the sooner of the installation of the DFDAU software update correcting the problem described in the petition, or 18 months after the date of this letter, unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

Sincerely,

/s/ John W. McGraw Acting Director, Flight Standards Service

Enclosure