AFS-10-028-E September 12, 2014

Exemption No. 11053 Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2009-0966

Mr. James Bowman Director of Operation FedEx Express

3131 Democrat Road Building C, Suite C112 Memphis, TN 38118

Mr. Jeff Kilmer Executive Chairman, Pilot Assistance Committee Air Line Pilots Association, International 1625 Massachusetts Avenue, NW. Washington, DC 20036

Dear Messrs. Bowman and Kilmer:

This letter is to inform you that we have denied your petition for exemption. It transmits our decision and explains its basis.

The Basis for Our Decision

By letter dated October 13, 2009, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on behalf of FedEx Express (FedEx) and Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA) for an exemption from § 121.333(c)(3) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) to the extent necessary to allow FedEx and ALPA to have one pilot to leave his or her station at the controls of the airplane when operating at f light altitudes above flight level (FL) 250, while the remaining pilot at the controls could remove their oxygen mask from the stowage unit and have it in his or her lap until the other pilot has returned to his or her duty station.

Initially, the FAA interpreted your ‘request to suspend the regulations’ as a request for rulemaking. However, it was determined subsequently that this request was the equivalent of2

a petition for exemption since it was asking only for a suspension of the regulations and not a change in the regulations.

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 FedEx and ALPA.

The FAA issued a denial of exemption to a separate December 17, 2009 petition from FedEx Express in circumstances similar in all material respects to those presented in this petition. In Denial of Exemption No. 10136 (copy enclosed), the FAA found that a grant of exemption would not provide a level of safety equivalent to that provided under the current regulation. If an emergency were to occur when one pilot has left the flight deck, the remaining pilot would have to immediately initiate and accomplish multiple tasks that would otherwise be accomplished by two pilots working in coordination with one another. Therefore, it is critical that a lone pilot have his or her oxygen in use. Further, the FAA found that the operational safety risk of rapid decompression to the flying public by a single pilot not wearing the oxygen mask outweighs the risk of a single pilot catching a life-threatening communicable

disease.

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

 they do not differ materially from those presented by the petitioner in the enclosed Denial of Exemption No. 10136;

 the reasons stated by the FAA for denying the enclosed Denial of Exemption No. 10136 also apply to the situation you present; and

 a grant of exemption would not 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, FedEx Express and Air Line Pilots Association is denied an exemption from 14 CFR 121.333(c)(3). If you continue to believe that the regulation should be changed, you may submit a petition for rulemaking.

Sincerely,

/s/

John S. Duncan Director, Flight Standards Service

Enclosure