Exemption No. 10197

UNITED 'STATES , OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT ATION

FEDERAL AVIA nON ADMINISTRA nON

RENTON, WASIDNGTON 98055-4056

In the matter of the petition of

Sierra Nevada Corporation

tor au exemption from §§ 25.562 and 25.785(b)

of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations

Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2010-0989

GRANT OF EXEMPTION

By letter dated September 22,2010, Mr. Bill Eckler, Aircraft Certification Manager, Sierra

Nevada Corp., 11211 E. Arapahoe Road, Centennial, CO 80112, petitioned for an exemption

fTom §§ 25.562 and 25.785(a) ofTille 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). The proposed

exemption, if granted, would permit certification of medical-litter systems for transport of

persons whose medical condition dictates such accommodation. The exemption is for the

installation of medical-litter systems on Dornier Model 328-100 airplanes.

The petitioner requests relief from the following regulations:

Section 25.562 at Amendment 25-64: specifies dynamic test conditions for qualification

of occupant-injury criteria as well as structural-retention criteria. I

Section 25.785(a) at Amendment 25-64: requires that "Each seat, berth, safety belt,

harness, and adjacent part of the airplane at each station designated as occupiable during

takeoff and landing must be designed so that a person making proper use of those

facilities will not suffer serious injury in an emergency landing as a result of inertia forces

specified in §§ 25.561 and 25.562."

The petitioner supports its request with the following information:

[Sierra Nevada Corporation (SNC)] hereby petitions for an exemption from 14 CFR

25.562 and part of25.785(a) to the extent necessary to permit certification of medical
litters, for transport of persons whose medical condition dictates such accommodations,

on Domier 328-100 airplanes.

The purpose ofthe medical litter is to transport non-ambulatory individuals who cannot

travel, for medical reasons, in a normal passenger seat. In most cases, these individuals

will be transported for the purpose of receiving needed medical attention.

Aircraft mayor may not be configured with a litter system installed. When installed it

will be limited to one or two installations per aircraft (maximum of four patients) and will

not be used in every flight. When the litter is occupied, it will not reduce safety or limit

the level of protection provided to other occupants of the aircraft. The non-ambulatory

occupant of the litter will be oriented head forward in the litter. SNC recommends that

this intent be covered by (1) a limitation in the Flight Manual Supplement and (2) a

conspicuously located placard on the litter that states "Occupancy is limited to nonambulatory persons."

The basic premise for the implementation of FAR 25.562 was to provide an overall

increased level of passenger safety by reducing serious injuries which would affect the

passenger's ability to evacuate the aircraft in a survivable accident. The FAA has

evaluated the manufacturing and operational costs associated with installing dynamically

tested seats and has determined that the benefits of the increased level of safety is

significantly greater than these costs. While this conclusion may be valid for passenger

seats which can number up to 379 per aircraft, it is not necessarily valid for a litter

installation.

SNC notes that the estimated cost of demonstrating compliance of stretcher installations

with dynamic test requirements is quite high considering the limited number of units for

which the cost could be amortized. Since none have been shown to comply with the

dynamic test criteria, stretchers cannot currently be used on airplanes whose type

certificate bases include the dynan'lic requirements. Full compliance with the ,

requirements of § 25.561 will be demonstrated for the litter system.

SNC feels that granting the petition would he in the public interest for the following

reasons:

1. The level of safety that would be provided is an acceptable level of safety given

the limited usage and exposure of the litter.

2. Compliance with the dynamic test requirements would be difficult at best, and

very expensive, while returning a marginal safety benefit. in addition, § 25.562 is

WTittenspecifically for seats and would not be easily applied to a litter.

2
SNC notes that this petition is consistent with LifePort, Inc., Exemptions No. 6625, 6920,

and 7318, which were granted for LifePort litter installations in Cessna 750 (Citation X),

Falcon 2000, and Cessna Citation 560XL, respectively.

Federal Register publication

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

publication because a grant of exemption would not set a precedent, and a delay in acting on this

petition would delay installation and use of the potentially life-saving medical-litter systems.

The FAA's analysis

The FAA has considered the cost implications and the overall benefits resulting from use of

medical-litter systems. Where a medical-litter system is not available on a commercial carrier, a

person may need to charter an airplane, the cost of which may be prohibitive. In such a costprohibitive scenario, a person may need to forego medical care altogether.

The FAA has also considered that the use of the medical-litter system is limited. Because the use

ofa medical-litter system during takeoff and landing is limited to persons whose medical

condition requires that they travel on a stretcher, liner, or related horizontal device, the FAA does

not consider this a precedent-setting issue. The FAA acknowledges that stretchers and related

litter systems for medical use were not considered in the context of the dynamic-test

requirements of § 25.562 when the regulation was developed. Occupancy of other berths during

takeoff and landing, for non-ambulatory persons, was not considered feasible under the

conditions of § 25.562, and for the purposes of compliance, stretchers and litters are considered

"berths."

The FAA agrees that demonstrating medical-titter-system compliance with the requirements of

§ 25.562 would be very difficult, and application of the existing pass/fail criteria to these

installations is questionable.

With respect to the overall level of safety, the FAA notes that full compliance with the

requirements of § 25.561 is required for medical-litter systems as indicated by the petitioner. This

is consistent with the standards for all seats before the adoption of § 25.562. An alternative to

this exemption would require a non-ambulatory person to seek transportation on an airplane that

does not require dynamic testing of seats as part of its certification basis (i.e., an airplane with an

earlier certification basis). While this alternative meets the rule, the FAA does not consider that

this is a reasonable approach or solution. While differences in certification bases are not

sufficient to justify an exemption, the FAA does not consider that safety necessarily would be

served by using an airplane with an earlier certification basis.

Regarding the safety of other occupants on a flight, litters are installed such that they preclude

inadvertent injury of seated occupants.

3
The FAA's decision

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

Therefore, pursuantto the authority cont1ined in 49 US.c. 40113 and 44701, delegated to me by

the Administrator, Sierra Nevada Corp. ik granted an exemption fyom the requirements of I·

14 CFR 25.562 and 25.785(b) to the ext~nt necessary to allow Sierra Nevada Corp. to install

medical-litter systems on a Domier Mod~1328-100 airplane, with the following limitation:

1. The following operating limitation must be added to the limitations section of the

airplane flight manual supplement as stated on a conspicuously located placard:

Occupancy for takeoff and landing is limited to non-ambulatory persons.

I

2. The litter system must be installed such that any failure under the loading

conditions prescribed by § 25.562 will preclude the inadvertent injury of the

seated occupants in the cabin.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on JAN

;JI(j/L/

Ali Bahrami

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate

Aircraft Certification Service

4