Exemption No. 10105

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRAl'fSPORTA nON

FEDERAL AVIATION AD~1TNISTRATION

RENTON, WASHINGTON 98057-3356

In the matter of the petition of

Regulato y Docket No. FAA-2010-0649

Supertanker Services, Inc.

for an exemption from § 25.1415(b) of

Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations

GRANT OF EXEMPTION

By letter dated June 11, 2010, Mr. Neil Stevens, DirecJor of Maintenance, Supertanker Services,

Inc., 3850 Three Mile Lane, McMinnville, Oregon, 97128, petitioned for a temporary exemptidn

fyom the requirements of Title 14, Code of Federal Re~ulations (14 CFR) 25.1415(b), as it relates

to the limitations in Teclmical Standard Order (TSO) G70a, \','l1ichlimits Type n liferafts to nOi~-

transport category airplanes. Supertanker Services, Incl, has one airplane with these liferafts

installed.

The petitioner requests relief from the following regulations:

Section 25.1415(b) requires that each liferaft fL a transport-category airplane be

approved.

Section 25.1301 (a)(3) requlres that each item of installed equipment be installed

according to limitations specified for that equiJment.

The petitioner snpports its request with the fOlloWit information:

This text is quoted from the petitioner's request.

Supertanker Systems, Inc. (SSI), petitions for a temporary exemption from the ProVisiorS

of Section 25.1415(b) for the airplane listed in fable 1 below. Section 25.1415(b)

requires that each life raft for a transport categ9ry airplane be approved. 5SI requests

relief from these provisions of pan 25 as it relates to the scope definition in Tec1m~cal
Standard Order (TSO) C70A that states Type Life rafts are for use in Non~Transport

Category Airplanes.

Section ofthe FAR affected:

Section 25.1415(b) requires that each life raft f0f a transport category airplane be

S81 has been compelled to petItIOn for an exemptIOn to Section 25.14l5(b) for the S5I

B747~100 Supertanker as listed in Table 1.for a brief period of approxlTuately 100 days.'

Within this request, SSI will show that by gran~ing this petition, an equivalent level of I

safety is maintained. Failure to grant the exernWion represents an economic hardship tOi

55l that was not avoidable through actions on SST's part.

approved.

Table 1 - Affected Aircraft

Tail Number VRBLNumber Line Number Selial Number

N479EV RA633 941 19898

Supportive information is as foUows:

..

Background:

Recently, 551 was contacted by its Certificate Management Office (CMO) and was

provided a copy of the FAA Notice N8900.1161for review and action. 55I has reviewed

the FAA Notice N8900.116. 5SI understands the issue the letter is raising, but differs in,

the assessment of the approval status of its currbnt life rafts (Eastern Aero Marine (EAM)

Model 19, PIN R0103A121), hereinafterreferrbd to as a T9life raft.

SSl agrees that FAR 25.1415 is valid and reguiL the use of approved life rafts on its 747

Supertanker. However, SSI's position is that ndither of these regulations require a specific

TSO life raft, but simply state that the life raftsl~ust be approved. There are many

examples in the FARs where specific 150s arelr~~lledout for various items of required

equipment. Life rafts are not one of these cases, Life rafts used on transport-category

aircraft could be covered by TSO el2, C69, or C70, or by any other specification

approved by the FAA.

SSI also agrees that TSO C70a, Appendix 1, Sqope, states:

"TYPE I - For use in any category aircraft.

TYPE IT- For use in non-transport category aircraft."

However, SSI's secondary position is that this ltaternent in ISO C70a is not the only

factor to be considered. Specific intended use Just also be considered. There are

numerous cases on a 747 freighter where speci 11consideration is given to the fact that

2
only cre\Nmembers and "supernumeraries" are earried. While FAR Part 25 does not

specifically mention "supernumeraries", there ik long history of the FAA considering

these unique personnel during rulemaking and 6ertification approvals. The history of

specific FAA approval of the use of the T9 life raft is evidence of tliis consideration.

The SSI Supertanker aircraft listed in Table 1 above was previously operated by SSI's

sister company, Evergreen International Airlinds (EIA) in freighter service. ElA has usetl

the T9 life raft for almost 20 years with full FAlA. knowledge and approval. In the I

Airworthiness Directive (AD) 92-14-02, the FAA acknowledged the common usage of

the T9 life raft. The FAA did not deem the use pf this life raft a safety concern, but

simply required a lanyard no different than for TSO C70a Type I life rafts. This AD

required compliance with EAM SB T9-25-1 onllife rafts used on the 747 upper deck, with

which ErA has complied. Had the use of the T1life raft been deemed a safety or I

compliance concern during this FAA rulemaking process, the AD would have prohibiteo

T9 use on 747 freighters. I

The STC SA2121 CE-D was used to convert Eu\'s retired tTansport category aircraft

N477EV and N478EV from passenger to fTcigHter by Boeing. This STC installed life

rafts per the Boeing drawing 65B58005, -509 cpnfiguration on these aircraft. Please notf

that the life raft is listed as "EAMT9~ 121". This is the model number for our Life raft PiN

ROt 03A121. The "EAM" refers to Eastern Aerb Marine; the "T9" is the basic life raft ,

model; and the "121" identifies the FAR part 121 kit included in the life raft. SIC

SA2125CE-D and Boeing drawing 016U5920, [II configuration are essentially tlie same,

but are effective to auuaft N485EV.

In both cases, these SICs were reviewed and approved by the FAA for use of the T9 Iifir

r~fts on 747 freighters. These life rafts are .incl~ded in the certification data of these _

aircraft and are therefore approved as requued fuy FAR 25.1415 as part of the type deSign.

STC STOOI85SE is an ErA STC allowing tlie clrriage of grooms on the main deck of al

properly equipped 747 freighter aircrafL As parl of this STC, a palletized groom station'l

was constructed and approved as part of the required equipment. This palletized groom

station is defined by the ErA drawing 25-4-0026-92 Rev I. This drawing calls out the use

of life raft PIN ROI 03-105 or ROI 03A 105. Thebe are the same as life raft PIN

ROt 03A121, except they do not have lanyard ~odification described in AD 92-14-02.

This is because these life rafts are intended to b;e used from the main deck (door 5L or

SR) and therefore the lanyard length is not the safety concern it would be if used on the

upper deck.

This groom station STC package was given ex~emely close scrutiny by the FAA Seattle

ACO at the time of submittal because it was the first 747 STC to specifically allow the

carriage of grooms in the main deck cargo compartment. Life raft information was

submitted with the data package and the appro~al was granted. Therefore, as was the ca$e

in the other STCs discussed, the T9 life raft was included in the certification data of this

3
STC. This meets the FAR 25.1415 requirement: for the life raft to be approved as part of

the type design.

The above discussion provides four completely separate occasions where FAA ACOs

have specifically approved the use of the T9life rafts for use on 747 freighters. These

approvals constitute part of the type design for these aircraft. Ifthe FAA deems the use of

these life rafts to be a safety concern, SSI would expect the FAA to issue new rulemakiAg

and invite public connnent, as is the long-standing normal process used by the FAA in I

safety-related matters.

Further, the four cases discussed above clearly demonstrate that the historical, or defact6,

,

policy of the FAA regarding the T9life raft is that it is approved for use on 747

freighters. Three separate STC projects, involving two ACOs, and an AD rulemaking

process reviewed and specifically approved theluse ofT91ife rafts on 747 freighters. Tne

Transport Directorate in Seattle defines transpor aircraft certification policy and their I

demonstrated policy, for at least the last 20 years, has been to approve the T9 life raft for

use on 747 freighters. This demo~strated ~AA roli.cy a~approval o~the T9life raft .is I

cantrary to the new supposed natJOnal pohcy descnbed IIIFAA Notlce N8900.116, Issued

by the Flight Standards Service. I

A review of the FAA website far the Flight Standards Service shows their mission to be:

"The Flight Standards Service promotes sofe Ltransportation by selling the standaJs

for certification and oversight of airmen, air oAerators, air agencies, and designees. We

also promote safety offlight of civil aircraft anU air commerce by: I

• Accomplishing certification, inspection, sunJeillance, investigation, and

enforcement

• Setting regulations and standards

• Managing the system Jar registration 01civil aircraft and all airmen records"

In contrast, a review of the FAA websIte for Air'craft CertIficatIOn Service shows their

mission to be:

'The Aircra}t Certification Service of the }<~A is the office re.'Jponsiblefor:

• Adminislering safely slandards gOVerniJ,gthe design, production, and

airworthiness of civil aeronautical products;

• Overseeing design, production, and ailorthiness certifieOlion programs to

ensure compliance with prescribed sqfe~y standards;

4
•

•

Providing a safety performance management system to ensure continued

operational safety of aircraft; and,

Working with aviation authorities, manufacturers, and other stakeholders to helf

them successfully improve the safeZy a/the international air transportation

system. "

The FAA Notice N8900.116 appears to skirt the nonnal rulemaking process used by the

FAA and does not appear to be in compliance Jrith the mission statement for the Flight I

Standards Service.

SS! strongly objects to being compelled to remove the T9life rafts from OUT 747

Supertanker at the present time for the following reasons:

1. There has been no unsafe condition ideAtified for T9life raft usage on the 747

freighterlS upertanker;

2. There has been no out-of-compliance condition identified for T9 life raft usage on

the 747 freighter/Supertanker; I

3. There has been no certification rulemakmg prohibiting T9 life raft usage on the

747 freighter/Supertanker per Part 39;

4. There has been no opportunity for public comment that the aforementioned

rulemaking process would nonnally prtide;

5. Replacement of the T9 life rafts in our 147 freighter fleet would be a significant I

economic burden to SSI, yet the FAA has not perfonned an economic cost-benefit

evaluation that would be part of the notal rulemaking process;

SSI is committed to aircraft safety. SSI has never had any reported in-service, or shop,

,

issues reported that would suggest this life raft is unsafe or incapable ofperfonning its

intended function.

Not withstanding all of the above discussion, SSI has been compelled by FAA Flight

Standards, through its CMO, to petition for excbption from Section 25.l415(b).

Safety:

SSI believes that the level of safety will not be compromised ifSSI is allowed to operate

the listed aircraft with TSO C70A Type II life r~fts in lieu ofthe Type I life rafts for thel

period requested.

5
55! believes that EAM PIN ROl 03A12l life rafts, with incorporation of the modification

described in Ainvorthiness Directive 92-14-02,lwhen installed in the 747 Supertanker, I

will perform their intended function. S5I therefpre does not believe that the installation of

the EAM PIN ROI03A121 life rafts on Model 147 series airplanes, operated as

Supertankers, certificated in any category constitutes a safety Issue.

This is supported by the fact that the FAA has 1t published a finding of an unsafe

condition associated with the use ofthe T9 life raft.

Projected usage during the requested exemption period of 100 days represents very

limited exposure on a fleet with an exceptional !safety record. Usage shall be limited to

the aircraft listed in Table 1.

Economic Hardship:

A cessation of extended ovcrwater operation due to a Type II life raft restriction on the

listed aircraft would have an immediate impaction both SSI and its customers. Flights

may have to be cancelled, fe-routed (~t great expense and inconvenience to our

customers) or operated with more expensive equipment (if available). SSJ respectfully

requests that an exemption be granted until Octbber 1,2010 by which time the new life

rafts will be installed. SSI further requests that tbis exemption be approved on an

expedited basis to minimize impact on currentl~ planned flights.

Public Comment:

SSI requests that the FAA not post a Summary Notice of Petition Received on the Federal

Register for public comment in the normal fashion as the request is virtually identical td

Exemptions 9856, 9874. and 9976 granted for dther airlines; and due to the fact that the!

, ,

normal corrunent period would have adverse effects on SSI should it be fOfced to cancel

currently planned flights. I

Use Outside of the United States:

ssr requests the petition for exemption be approved for use outside of the United States!

(US) as a portion of its flight activity may take place beyond US borders.

Federal Register publication

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

publication because this exemption, if granted, would Jot set a precedent, and recent, similar

petitions have received no public COlllil1ents.

6
The FAA's analysis

The FAA notes that the petitioner has several reasons for requesting this temporary exemption'

l Underlying each of the argllments, however, is the relatively low risk associated with a temporary

grant of exemption. While the FAA agrees that the oco~pants of a freighter airplane are more I

likely to be familiar with the airplane and its equipme~~, this is not relevant to the capability of'l

the Iiferaft itself. The liferafts presently installed are TSO C70a approved, Type II liferafts.

,

However, the TSO has a limitation such that the Type II liferafts are for use on non-transportcategory airplanes only. The TSO states that Type I liftrafts are for transport-category airplanes.

Section 25.1301 (a)(3) requires that each item of instanbd equipment be installed according to

limitations specified for that equipment.

Type 1 Jiferafts are designed to be more robust and sear0rthythan Type II liferafts, and are better

suited to the extended overwater operation typical oftr:ansport-category airplanes. Under such I

conditions, the raft may need to be occupied for 10nge~periods of time than would be necessary

for airplanes equipped with Type 11rafts. For these reasons, the FAA requires Iiferafts meeting!

the standards of the Type I raft (principally, multiple- idflation chambers and redundant inflatiori·

systems) on this type of airplane. Nonetheless, given U1erelatively short time period of the . ,

requested exemption and small number of airplanes affected, the FAA considers that an

exemption would would not materially affect the leve11ofsafety provided by the regulations_ !

Since both Type r and Type II rafts are readily available for the airplane industry to purchase, the

FAA typically allows only a very short time to exchan~e the rafts. In this case, Supertanker

Services, Inc., has made arrangements to purchase repl~cement Type lliferafts and is \vaiting f?r

the liferafts to be manufactured and delivered. The FAA considers that additional time is I

warranted to allow for procurement and installation of~he new liferafts on the subject airplanes, a

timeframc which will not measurably degrade safety. q-ranting the exemption will enable the I

petitioner to fulfill its contractual obligations and avoid unnecessary disruptions of air commerce,

which would be in the public interest.

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

not affect the level of safety provided by the regulation1s. Therefore, pursuant to the authority

contained in 49 U.S.c. 40113 and 44701, delegated to ~e by the Administrator, Supertanker

Services, Inc., is hereby granted an exemption from 141~FR 25.1415(b). The petition is granted

to the extent required to permit operation of the Boeing Model 747 airplane, listed in Table 1,

with TSO C70a Type II liferafts. This exemption expirbs on October 1,2010.

~~enton, Washington, on JUL 272010

Ali Bahrami

Manager, Transp0l1 Airplane Directorate

Aircraft Certification Service

7