Exemption NO.I0051A

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDER"l- AVIA nON ADMINTSTRA nON

RENTON, WASHINGTON 98057-3356

In the matter of the petition of

Lufthansa Technik AG

for an exemption from § 26.47 of Title 14,

Code of Federal Regulations

Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2009-1241

GRANT OF EXEMPTION

By a submission to the Department of Transportation' s Federal Docket Management System

(FDMS) dated December 9, 2009, Mr. lochen Volkmar, of Lufthansa Technik AG (LHT),

Postfach 63-03-00, D-22313 Hamburg, petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)

for an exemption from the requirements of Tille 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)

26.4 7. Section 26.47 requirements are related to the development of damage-tolerance data for

alterations and repairs to alterations. This exemption i~ requested for the supplemental type

certificates (STC) installed on private-use aircraft listed in Table I, below.

Table 1: Airplanes affected by Ekemption No. I0051A.

,

STC# Description IsJue Date Limitation! A;rplane MO+

I

Exemption

ST02203NY Installation ofa VIP Cabin lntcrior lan! 12,2006 on STC 747-400 ,

ST02307NY UAE 747 Completion, EASA Upgrade Kit Oct. 27, 2006 on STC 747-400

STOI S37NY VIP Cabin Completion (EAGLE) Dee, 2, 2003 on STC 737-800

STOJ845NY VIP Cabin Completion (EVERGREEN) Dec. 18, 2003 on STC 737-700lGW

ST02000NY VIP Cabin Completion (MlDROC) Sept. 28, 2004 on STC 737-800

ST02096NY Installation ofa VIP Executive interior May 24, 2005 on STC 737-700IGW

ST02675NY VIP Cabin Completion Jan. 29, 2009 on STC 737-700lGW

STOO742SE Installation of VIP Cabin Interior Oct. 07, 1999 7029 737-700IGW

STOl276NY Installlltion ofa VIP Cabin Interior Feb_ 27.2001 7317 777-200

STOl341NY Saudi Oger VIP Cabin Installation I (8[31) Apr_ IS, 2001 7475 737-700IGW

ST0138INY Nellet VIP-Cabin Installation (BB1) Aug. 24, 2001 7572 737-700IGW

STOI460NY Saudi Oger VIP Cabin Installation (881) Feb. I I, 2002 6820 737-800
The petitioner requests relief from the following regulations:

§ 26.47, Holders of and applicants for a supplemental type certificate - Alterations and

repairs to alterations, which requires development of damage-tolerance data for alterations and

repairs to alterations.

The petitioner supports its request with the following information:

This information is quoted from Mr. Jochen Volkmar's petition letter dated December 9, 2009.

The complete petition may be found on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov, in docket no.

FAA-2009-1 24 I.

Reasons Why the Exemption Would Not Adversely Affect Public Safety

The listed STCs are restricted to private use only, as stated in the limitation section oftJ1C

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 result in consideration of 14 CFR part 26 requirements.

Reason the Exemption 'Vould Benefit the Public Interest

Granting the petition for exemption would be in the public interest because it would

significantly reduce workload on FAA side. Furthermore the generation of the DT data

for these aircraft would be very costly to LHT, with no perspective of compensation.

Federal Register publication

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for waiving the requirement for Federal Register

publication and public comment because the exemption, if granted, would not set a precedent, as

it is similar to previously granted exemptions on this subject.

The FAA's analysis

The FAA has developcd criteria to consider when deciding whether to grant or deny a design I

approval holder's (D~H) petitio? for e~e~ption from Ipart 26 requirements. These criteria were

meant as a general gUIde to makmg deCiSIOnsabout stich requests and were not developed for

any specific request. The FAA uses these criteria as a starting point for making its decision.

However, other factors may also be considered before a final decision is made on any particular

exemption request.

The criteria are described in the following tablc.

2
Table 2: Criteria for Considering Eligibility for Exemption from § 26.47.

If the airworthiness

authority for the And And And Then

state of design is

The FAA No airplanes are

,

No airplanes are being

,

No airplanes are The DAH may

operating under pan operating undtr part 129 operated by a foreign be eligible for

121 anditisunlikcly (N-registered}rand it is air carrier and it is an exemP"tlOi

that any will do so in unlikely that any will do unlikely that-any will

the furureJso in the futur~J do so in the future]

The FAA Airplanes are operating Airplanes are pperating Airplanes are being

,

111eDAH may

under part 121 but no under part 129 (N- operated by a foreign be eligible [(ir

airplanes will be registered) but no air carrier but no an exemption

operated under pan 121 airplanes will be airplanes will be

after the operational operated under part 129 operated by a foreib'll

rule compliance date' (N"registered): atter the air carrier after the

and it is unlikely that operational rule operational rule

any will return to such compliance dteland it compliance date! and it

service in the future] is unlikely th~t any will is unlikely that any will

return to such service in return to such service

the future' I

in the future]

Not the FAA No airplanes are No airplanes dre The DAH m~y

operating under part operating unctbr part 129 be eligible for

121 and it is unlikely (N-registered)1 and it is - an exemption

that any will do so in unlikely thm tiny WlUdo I

the future' so in the future] I

Not the FAA Airplanes arc operating Airplanes are Operatlng The DAH may

under part 121 but no under part 129 (N- bc eligible for

airplanes will be registered) bu: no an exemption

operated under part 121 airplanes will jbe

after the operational operated under part 129

rule compliance date1

(N-registered) after the -

and it is unlikely that operational rule

any will return to such cumpliance d~te 2 and it

service inthe future] is unlikely that any will

I

return to suchlserVice in

the futureJ

Ilbe design approval holder must demonstrate that these airplanes will rot be operating under part 121 or part 129, or operated

by a forcign air carrier, after the operational rule compliance date by obtaining documentarion of such from the current

owners/operators of the airplanes. I

2 The design approval holder mliSI demonstrate that these airplanes will nOI be operating undl'T part 121 or part 129 after the

operational rule compliance date by obtaining documeotation of such frJm the current owners/operators of lhe airplanes.

J Arguments for the likelihood of an airplane not entering into air carrieri service in the fUlure ~hould center on [he airplane's age

and/or current configuration.

The determination of whether an airplane is operatinglunder part 121 or part 129 is based on

whether that particular airplane is listed on an air carrier's Operations Speclfications.

The rationale behind the criteria contained in the table! above is this: The rule requires DAHs to

develop data for use by operators. If there are no operators for a particular aIrplane who are

required by the rules to use such data, it would be a pdor use of resources for the DAH to

develop it. Therefore, it would benefi.t both the DAH Andthe public as a whole to spend

resources on more important safety issues rather than bn developing data that will not be used. In

addition, granting such an exemption would not adverkely affect safety because there are no

3
airplanes that would be required to incorporate the data, nor is it likely that tbere will be any in

the future. I

The FAA is not the alJWorthiness authority for the state of design for Lufthansa Technik AG

STCs listed in Table I. The FAA has reviewed Lu-fthansa Technik AG's request, and has

detelmined that no affected airplanes are operating ul1<;'ler part 121 or part 129 (US registered).

Additional information

This exemption grants rchefto Lufthansa Technik AGi from having to meet the requirements of

§ 26.47 for the SICs identified in Table 1 for the development of damage-tolerance data for

alterations and repairs to alterations. This exemption does not grant relief from the related

operational requirements contained in § 121.1] 09 or § 129.109. Should a person choose to

operate an airplane with the STCs listed in Table 1 under part 121 or part 129 beyond the

operational compliance deadlines as stated in § 121.1109 or § 129.109, that person will be

required to comply with those operational requirements.

Note that Boemg Model 737-700IGW, 737-800, and 777-200 airplanes are certified to the

damage-tolerance requirements of § 25.571 (post Amendment 25-54), Damage- Tolerance and

Fatigue Evaluation of Structure, and § 25.1529, instructions for Continued Ainvorthil1ess, as

documented on Type Certificate Data Sheets A16WE bnd TOOOaSEl, respectively.

Supplemental-type-certificate holders and applicants are responsible for detailed design data

associated with STCs installed on these airplane mode's, including damage-tolerance data and I

instmctions for continued airworthiness (ICA) as required (for the baseline STC and repairs

developed by STC holders/applicants) to maintain the ,original certification basis.

The Grant of Exemption

In consideration of the foregoing, I find that a grant of exemption is in the public interest and

will not adversely affect safety. Therefore, pursuant talthe authority contained in 49 U.S.c.

§§ 40113 and 44701, delegated to me by the Administrator, Lufthansa Technik AG is hereby

granted an exemption from § 26.47 for those STCs listed in Table 1.

Issued in Renton, Washington on JUL 12 2010

Ali Bahrami

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate

Aircratt Certification Service

4