### October 7, 2013

CERTIFIED MAIL- Return Receipt

Docket Management Facility US Department ofTransportation 1200Jersey Avenue, SE West Building Ground Floor Room W12-140 Washington, D.C. 20590

Dear Sir or Madam, 

# VERTS

Please find enclosed an original and three copies ofa petitionfor a deviation for Everts Air Cargo relating to relief sought from certain previsions of 14 CFR part 91. Information supporting this relief is also provided.
The petition concerns the impact of noise compliance not ordinarily required for operation within the State ofAlaska, impactingthe air carrier's intentto provide the essential services to outlying communities while atthe same time accomplishing the mandate to ensure operations at the highest standard ofsafety.
As the colder months approach and contaminated runways become the norm ratherthan the exception,
we respectfully ask thatthis request is processed and the deviation granted as a matterof urgency.

Enclosure

cc: Robert Christensen

6111 Lockheed Avenue Anchorage, AK 99502-1 078 (907) 243-0009 Main (907) 243-7333 Fax 5525 Airport Industrial Road Fairbanks, AK 99709-4470 (907) 450-2345 Main (907) 450-2320 FaxOctober7, 2013

Docket Management Facility US Department ofTransportation 1200Jersey Avenue, SE West Building Ground Floor Room W12-140 Washington, D.C. 20590

Re: Request for Deviation
Petitioner:
TatondukOutfitters, Ltd., d/b/a Everts Air Cargo by its Director ofOperations, Mr. Zachary M. Adams

Petitioner's Contact Information: Everts Air Cargo 5525 Airport Industrial Road Fairbanks, Alaska 99709 (907) 450-2345 zadams@evertsair.com
Background: TatondukOutfitters, Ltd, doing business as Everts Air Cargo, the petitioner, holdsAir Carrier Certificate Number FXGA030A and has operations specifications authorizing itto conduct supplemental operations in common carriage pursuant toTitle 14Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 119.21(a)(3)

. Everts Air Cargo primarily provides intrastate transportation ofcargo, mail and commodities essential to
commerce and the sustainability ofoutlying communities and villages, as well as serving the Department of Defense within the State ofAlaska. Everts Air Cargo's fleet ofgroup II aircraft consists of McDonnell Douglas DC-9-30 Series Cargo Airplanes. These aircraft are currently operated conformingto 14 CFR part 36 stage 3 noise requirements. Everts Air Cargo seeks relief in orderto permit, consistent with the appropriate provision of 14CFR part 91.857, operations duringwhich the landing not conforming stage 3 would occur.

Relief Sought From Regulatory Sections 14CFR Subpart I section 91.801 as applicable to civil subsonic (turbojet) aircraft operated in the United States, and 14 CFR part 36 and relevant noise levels under appendix Cofthat part are clearly exempted during operations in Alaska. Relief is sought from the implicit requirementto restrict the airplanes if operated as stage 2, to only stage 2 operations when these airplanes may be operated conformingto stage 3 is available when trailing edge flaps or maximum landing weight limits are imposed.Page 2 Request for Deviation October

### 7, 2013

Nature and Extent ofthe Requested Relief The petitioner, FXGA, comes before the Administrator seeking a deviation to the Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) ST165CH and the associated AFM Supplement, in the interest ofachieving a higher standard ofsafety. In support ofthis petition,the following is submitted:
The above captioned STC and the associated Flight Manual Supplement FMS-KSl000-093 establish the basis for operatingthe McDonnell Douglas DC-9-31, -32, 32F, -33F, -34, and -34F Series aircraft, equipped with Pratt and WhitneyJT8D-7, 

### -9, -11, -15, and -17 series engines equipped with the ABS Partnership Stage 3 Hushkit installed, conforming to 14 CFR part 36.
The petitioneroperates the aircraft ofthis series and engines ofthis series in common carriage operations, authorized under 14 CFR part 121, principally within the State ofAlaska. The services provided by the petitionerare in many instances essential tothe well being ofisolated communities providing necessities for sustenance and survival. The ability to provide these services with safety and reliability at a sustainable economic level establishes the basis forthis petition.
The deviation sought is characterized as follows:

1. Maximum TakeoffWeight as authorized by this STC unchanged. 2. Maximum Landing Weight of 102,000 lbs., flaps

### 40, as authorized in accordance with Appendix B ofthe referenced STC. 3. Maximum Landing Weight of 102,000 lbs., flaps 50 landing configuration, as authorized by the AFM document DAC-67033, and consistent with §91.801(c) Applicability: Relation to part 36; §91.853 Final Compliance: Civil Sub Sonic Airplanes; §91.857 Stage 2 operations outside ofthe 48 contiguous United States and §91.858 Special flight authorizationsfor non revenue Stage 2 operations. 4. This deviation is sought for landing operations conducted within the State ofAlaska. Analysis
The petitioner can find no regulation or policy barring landing weight restrictions predicated upon flap settings. This was commonplace in the B727, with separate AFM landing weight limits established for flaps 30 and flaps 40 landing configurations.
The petitionerseeks to retain the Maximum Landing Weight of 102,000 lbs., in orderto carry the maximum payloads to provide the best services to the outlying communities and villages. A reduction in landing weight which approaches 10% ofthe available payload, when it is not appropriate for operational safety substantially penalizes the end consumer as a result ofincreased cost ofgoods transported, which are frequently necessities forthe survival and well being ofthe remote communities and villages.Page 3 Request for Deviation October7, 2013

The weight restriction imposed by Appendix Gofthe referenced STC forflaps SO landing is relative only tothe documented noise levels (EPNdB) determined during proving flights forthis STC, as required for compliance with §36 for operations withinthe contiguous United States. There is no indication ofa decrementtothe performance that would pose a compromise in safety in the case ofa balked landing
or landing climb event. In further support ofthe request forthe deviation from the referenced STC is the resultant reduction in Vrefspeed by five to seven knots indicated airspeed for any given landing weight, materially reducing the landing rollout distance on a contaminated (water, snow, slush, ice) runway.
The petitioner recognizes thatthe provision exists within 14CFR 91.8S7 and 14CFR 91.8S8 to electto conduct operations notconforming to stage 3 outside ofthe 48 contiguous United States while preserving the rightto operate non revenue flights under special authorization into the contiguous United States and District ofColumbia. The petitionerasserts thatthere is no safety attribute which would be compromised byvirtue ofa deviation allowing the operation ofthese airplanes as stage 3 airplanes during all operations exceptfor landing, withoutthe imposition of restrictions not ordinarily required withinthe State ofAlaska.

Equivalent Level ofSafety It is imperativethat all parties understand the Everts Air Cargo is not requesting any relieffrom any performance requirement of part 121, but rather is requesting the Administrator recognize the enhanced level ofsafety that would be attained by granting the petitionerthe deviation sought. All elements ofthe deviation are consistent with parameters tested and demonstrated in approval, with the exception ofthe noise level duringthe approach phase offlight. Everts Air Cargo assertsthatthe abilityto select the original factory maximum landingflap configuration, ratherthan a compromised configuration adopted to reduce noise where this is required, ensures that a greater level ofsafety would exist.

Benefit of Public Interest If Everts Air Cargo is denied the deviation allowing operationsto be conducted using landingflaps SO and the structural maximum landing weight (unless reduced for performance considerations), it is forced to conduct operations at a lesser standard ofsafety. Even when the actual landing weight is to be less than the structural or performance limited weight, and runway analysis data supports a landing using flaps 40 on a short or contaminated runway, the resulting higher touchdown speed is in and of itselfacompromise tothe highest standard ofsafety. The abilityto carry fuel in addition tothat required underthe regulations is often significantwith the rapidly changing weather in the State of Alaska. The reduction in landing weight required to meetthe stage 3 limitation imposed inhibits safety by reducing the landing weight in the equivalent ofapproximately 30 minutes ofadditional contingency fuel.Page 4 Request for Deviation October7, 2013

A secondary impactto the public will result when operating weights are restricted by nearly 10%, resulting in higher costs to industry, end users and consumers. This is estimated at 5.4 million dollars per year; not an insignificant cost in the lease populous regions ofthe nation. While such a cost impact may be tolerable when safety is a concern, it is nottolerable when it is due to noise constraints, excepted in the State ofAlaska.
Summary for Publication in the Federal Register Tatonduk Outfitters, Ltd, doing business as Everts Air Cargo, the petitioner holds Air Carrier Certificate Number FXGA030A and has operations specifications authorizing itto conduct supplemental operations in common carriage pursuant toTitle 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 119.21(a)(3). Everts Air Cargo primarily provides intrastate transportation ofcargo, mail and commodities essential to
commerce and the sustainability ofoutlying communities and villages, as well as serving the Department of Defense within the state ofAlaska. Everts Air Cargo fleet ofgroup II aircraft consists of McDonnell Douglas DC-9-30 Series Cargo Airplanes.

Everts Air Cargo seeks relief in orderto be authorized to operate atthe highest standard, while providingthe necessary services tothe outlying communities in the State ofAlaska, while sparing these communitiesthe costs associated with payload limits necessitated for noise standards exempted in the public interestforthisvery reason. The absence ofthe reliefsought in this petition from the requirements of 14 CFR 91.801, during operations in the State ofAlaska will result in a disproportionate economic burden forthe communities served while at the same time preventthe carrierfrom operating the DC-9 airplane in accordance with its original Type Certificate and the highest standard ofsafety inherent in this certification.

Most respectfully,