Exemption No. 10197

UNITED 'STATES OF AMERICA

, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT ATION FEDERAL AVIAnON ADMINISTRA nON RENTON, WASIDNGTON 98055-4056

Inthe matter ofthe petition of Sierra Nevada Corporation tor au exemption from §§ 25.562 and 25.785(b) ofTitle 14,Code ofFederal 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 ofFederal Regulations (14 CFR). The proposed exemption, ifgranted, would permit certification ofmedical-litter systems for transport of persons whose medical condition dictates such accommodation. The exemption is for the installation ofmedical-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 ofoccupant-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 ofthe airplane ateach station designated as occupiable during takeoff and landing must be designed so that aperson making proper use ofthose facilities will not suffer serious injury in an emergency landing as aresult ofinertia 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 14CFR 25.562 and part of25.785(a) to the extent necessary to permit certification ofmedicallitters, fortransport ofpersons whose medical condition dictates such accommodations,

on Domier 328-100 airplanes. The purpose ofthe medical litter isto transport non-ambulatory individuals who cannot travel, for medical reasons, in anormal passenger seat. Inmost cases, these individuals will be transported for the purpose ofreceiving needed medical attention. Aircraft mayor may not be configured with alitter system installed. When installed it will be limited to one ortwo installations per aircraft (maximum offour patients) and will not be used in every flight. When the litter is occupied, itwill not reduce safety or limit the level ofprotection provided to other occupants ofthe aircraft. The non-ambulatory occupant ofthe litter will be oriented head forward inthe litter. SNC recommends that this intent be covered by (1) alimitation inthe Flight Manual Supplement and (2) a conspicuously located placard on the litter that states "Occupancy is limited tononambulatory persons." The basic premise for the implementation ofFAR 25.562 was to provide an overall increased level ofpassenger safety byreducing serious injuries which would affect the passenger's ability to evacuate the aircraft in asurvivable accident. The FAA has evaluated the manufacturing and operational costs associated with installing dynamically tested seats and has determined that the benefits ofthe increased level ofsafety is significantly greater than these costs. While this conclusion may be valid for passenger seats which can number upto 379 per aircraft, itis not necessarily valid foralitter installation. SNC notes that the estimated cost ofdemonstrating compliance ofstretcher installations with dynamic test requirements isquite high considering the limited number ofunits 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 forthe litter system. SNC feels that granting the petition would he in the public interest for the following reasons: 1. The level ofsafety that would be provided is an acceptable level ofsafety given the limited usage and exposure ofthe litter. 2. Compliance with the dynamic test requirements would be difficult atbest, and very expensive, while returning amarginal safety benefit. in addition, §25.562 is WTittenspecifically for seats and would not be easily applied to alitter.

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

and 7318, which were granted for LifePort litter installations inCessna 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 forFederal Register publication because agrant ofexemption would not set aprecedent, and a delay in acting on this petition would delay installation and use ofthe 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 amedical-litter system is not available on acommercial carrier, a person may need to charter an airplane, the cost ofwhich may be prohibitive. In such a costprohibitive scenario, aperson may need to forego medical care altogether. The FAA has also considered that the use ofthe 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 astretcher, liner, orrelated horizontal device, the FAA does not consider this aprecedent-setting issue. The FAA acknowledges that stretchers and related litter systems for medical use were not considered inthe context ofthe dynamic-test requirements of §25.562 when the regulation was developed. Occupancy ofother berths during takeoff and landing, fornon-ambulatory persons, was not considered feasible under the conditions of §25.562, and forthe purposes ofcompliance, 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 ofthe existing pass/fail criteria to these installations is questionable. With respect tothe overall level of safety, the FAA notes that full compliance with the requirements of § 25.561 is required for medical-litter systems as indicated bythe petitioner. This isconsistent with the standards forall seats before the adoption of § 25.562. An alternative to this exemption would require anon-ambulatory person to seek transportation on an airplane that does not require dynamic testing of seats as part ofits 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 areasonable approach or solution. While differences incertification bases are not sufficient tojustify 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 ofother occupants on a flight, litters are installed such that they preclude inadvertent injury ofseated occupants.

3The FAA's decision

In consideration ofthe foregoing, Ifind that agrant ofexemption isin the public interest. Therefore, pursuantto the authority cont1ined in 49 US.c. 40113 and 44701, delegated to me by the Administrator, Sierra Nevada Corp. ikgranted an exemption fyomthe requirements of I· 14CFR 25.562 and 25.785(b) tothe ext~nt necessary to allow Sierra Nevada Corp. to install medical-litter systems on aDomier Mod~1328-100 airplane, with the following limitation:

1. The following operating limitation must be added tothe limitations section ofthe airplane flight manual supplement as stated on aconspicuously located placard: Occupancy for takeoff and landing is limited tonon-ambulatory persons. I 2. The litter system must beinstalled such that any failure under the loading conditions prescribed by § 25.562 will preclude the inadvertent injury ofthe seated occupants inthe cabin. Issued inRenton, Washington, on

### JAN 

# ;JI(j/L/

Ali Bahrami Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate Aircraft Certification Service

4