Mr. J. Mark Hansen 

Lead Counsel 

Federal Express Corporation 

362 Hacks Cross Road, Building B, 3rd Floor 

Memphis, Tennessee 38125 

Date: January 7, 2010 

To: Correction to Grant of Exemption No. 9984 

Subject: Correction to 14 CFR citation 

Action: 

X 

Per Your Request Discuss With Me Take Appropriate Action 

For Your 

Information 

For Your Approval Please Answer 

Per Our 

Conversation 

For Your Signature Prepare Reply For: 

Note and Return Comment 

Remarks: 

The FAA has corrected the typo on page 1 of this exemption. Please file this with 

the original signed Grant of Exemption. 

We are sorry for the error and hope it has not inconvenienced you. If you have any 

questions, please call. 

Tyneka L. Thomas 

Transportation Industry Analyst 

ARM–105, Office of Rulemaking 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Phone: 202–267–7626 Facsimile: 202–267–5075 

Attachment Rev 1 
2 

CORRECTED COPY 

This letter corrects the December 24, 2009, letter we sent granting your petition. 

The FAA corrected a typo on the first page. It should read “In the matter of the 

petition of FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION for an exemption from 

§ 121.651(b)(2) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulation.” We have made the 

correction in our records as of January 7, 2010. 

 Exemption No. 9984 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

WASHINGTON, DC 20591 

 

In the matter of the petition of 

 

FEDERAL EXPRESS 

CORPORATION Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2008-0370

 

for an exemption from § 121.651(b)(2) 

of Title 14, Code of 

Federal Regulations 

 

GRANT OF EXEMPTION 

 By letter dated March 21, 2008, and supplemental information dated June 25, 

2008, Mr. J. Mark Hansen, Lead Counsel, Federal Express Corporation (FedEx), 

362 Hacks Cross Road, Building B, 3rd Floor, Memphis, Tennessee 38125, 

petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on behalf of FedEx for an 

exemption from § 121.651(b)(2) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). 

The proposed exemption, if granted, would allow FedEx aircraft properly equipped 

with an Enhanced Flight Vision System (EFVS) to continue an approach beyond the 

final approach fix, or to begin the final approach segment of an instrument approach 

procedure, even if the latest weather report for that airport reports the visibility to be 

less than the visibility minimums prescribed for that procedure. 
3 

The petitioner requests relief from the following regulation:

Section 121.651(b)(2) states that no pilot may continue an approach past the 

final approach fix, or where a final approach fix is not used, begin the final 

approach segment of an instrument approach procedure at airports within the 

United States and its territories or at U.S. military airports, unless the latest 

weather report for that airport issued by the U.S. National Weather Service, 

a source approved by that Service, or a source approved by the 

Administrator, reports the visibility to be equal to or more than the visibility 

minimums prescribed for that procedure. For the purpose of this section, the 

term “U.S. military airports” means airports in foreign countries where flight 

operations are under the control of U.S. military authority. 

The petitioner supports its request with the following information:

FedEx states that the EFVS technology on its aircraft is the first such 

equipment application by an air carrier. This equipment consists of an 

infrared sensor which provides real-time video imagery for display on the 

Heads-Up Display (HUD) to the pilot. The EFVS generates an image that is 

conformal and aligned with the external view on a HUD. This enables a 

pilot to acquire a view of the runway environment while still in instrument 

meteorological conditions (IMC), thus achieving an enhanced situational 

awareness of aircraft and runway positioning. FedEx contends that this 

technology can be a safety benefit by improving the pilot’s situational 

awareness in low visibility conditions, improving airport capacity in those 

same conditions, and reducing delays and diversions due to weather. 

The petitioner states that EFVS is designed to detect and image the visual 

references required by § 91.175(l). These requirements permit a pilot 

conducting a straight-in instrument approach, other than a Category (CAT) 

II or III approach, to continue descending below the published decision 

altitude/minimum descent altitude (DA/MDA) based solely on the sensor 

image provided by the EFVS. Upon reaching 100 feet above the touchdown 

zone elevation of the runway of intended landing, the pilot would not 

continue to descend unless the visual references required by 

§ 91.175(l) were distinctly visible and identifiable using natural vision. 

During certain reduced visibility conditions, EFVS imagery would 

significantly improve the pilot’s ability to detect objects, such as approach 

lights and visual references of the runway environment, that may not be 

visible during day or night IMC operations. Specifically, for straight-in 

approach operations below the DA/MDA down to 100 feet above the 

runway, EFVS imagery displayed on a HUD becomes the approved 

enhanced flight visibility at the distance not less than the visibility 

prescribed by the instrument approach procedure being used. This is a 
4 

marked improvement for the pilot in terms of safety and situational 

awareness. 

The petitioner further states that the approach ban rule relating to required 

visibility was written many years ago and does not reflect current 

technological developments. Specific to meteorological circumstances, the 

existing rule cancels the potential for increased safety and situational 

awareness that would be gained through the use of EFVS equipment. 

FedEx also states that EFVS equipment to be installed on its aircraft goes 

beyond the equivalent level of safety by improving aircraft situational 

awareness, providing visual cues to maintain a stabilized approach, and 

minimizing missed approaches in reduced visibility conditions. 

Additionally, the EFVS may allow the pilot to observe an obstruction on the 

runway, such as an aircraft or vehicle, earlier in the approach and observe 

potential runway incursions during ground operations in reduced visibility 

conditions. Even in situations where the pilot observes the required flight 

visibility at the DA/MDA, EFVS usage will provide added situational 

awareness that may be impossible without it, particularly in marginal visual 

meteorological conditions. 

 A summary of the petition was published in the Federal Register on August 20, 

2008 (73 FR 49233). One comment was received from the Air Line Pilots 

Association (ALPA). 

ALPA supports the development of new technologies, including EFVS. 

However, with an increase in technology, ALPA believes there is an 

increase in complexity and workload within the flight deck, particularly 

during its initial stages of introduction. ALPA recommended several 

restrictions or limitations to the exemption. 

The FAA's analysis is as follows: 

The FAA has considered the petitioner’s request and supporting materials 

and finds that a grant of exemption would be in the public interest and 

maintain a level of safety equivalent to that provided by the current 

regulations. The FAA also considered ALPA’s comment and has 

incorporated many of its recommendations into this grant of exemption. 

Currently, part 121 operators benefit very little from equipping with EFVS 

because they are restricted from continuing an approach past the final 

approach fix, or where a final approach fix is not used, from beginning the 

final approach segment of an instrument approach procedure, when the 

reported visibility, based on natural vision not on enhanced vision, is less 

than the visibility minimums prescribed for that procedure. This restriction 
5 

is generally known as the “approach ban.” The purpose of the approach ban 

is to significantly decrease the probability that a missed approach will be 

conducted at DA/decision height (DH) or the MDA and increase the 

probability that the approach will be successfully completed. 

This restriction greatly reduces the opportunity for EFVS to be used for 

approach operations under §§ 91.175(l) and 121.651 when, at the minimum 

runway visual range (RVR) prescribed by an approach procedure, it is likely 

that the required visual references would be acquired by natural vision prior 

to DA/DH or MDA. While these regulations provide an added safety 

margin to approach operations conducted with natural vision, they do not 

make provision for technological advancements such as EFVS where a realtime image of the external scene is provided by means of a sensor image. 

EFVSs enable a pilot to see in much lower visibility conditions than he or 

she would be able to using natural vision alone. These systems provide a 

means of safely permitting a flightcrew to arrive at a point where they can 

operate in the visual segment of an instrument approach procedure. The 

FAA believes that the use of EFVS, subject to the conditions and limitations 

set forth in this exemption, will provide a level of safety equivalent to the 

provisions of § 121.651(b)(2). 

Section 91.175(l) requires that the enhanced flight visibility provided by an 

EFVS be not less than the visibility prescribed in the instrument approach 

procedure. Additionally, § 91.175(l)(4) requires that: 

At 100 feet above the touchdown zone elevation of the 

runway of intended landing and below that altitude, the 

flight visibility must be sufficient for the following to be 

distinctly visible and identifiable to the pilot without 

reliance on the enhanced flight vision system to continue to 

a landing: 

(i) The lights or markings of the threshold; or 

(ii) The lights or markings of the touchdown 

zone. 

These regulatory requirements ensure that sufficient visibility exists to make 

a safe approach and landing. In fact, the regulatory requirements for the use 

of EFVS in § 91.175(l) are analogous to those in § 91.175(c) for operations 

using natural vision, except that the visual reference requirements for EFVS 

are more stringent. 

Section 91.175(l) permits EFVS to be used for straight-in approaches, which 

includes precision, lateral performance with vertical guidance, and 

nonprecision approaches. A straight-in approach may be aligned with the 

landing runway or may be offset by up to plus or minus 30 degrees of the 

inbound course for the landing runway for nonprecision approaches. 
6 

The FAA has also conducted an analysis of the types of approaches to be 

flown, approach geometry, and the capabilities/limitation of the EFVS 

equipment that FedEx will install on its fleet of aircraft. As that portion of 

the approach conducted at 100 feet above the touchdown zone elevation 

(TDZE) of the runway and below that altitude must be accomplished using 

natural vision only, the FAA believes that an RVR of at least 1,000 feet (or 

visibility not less than 1⁄4 statute mile when RVR is not available) is 

necessary to ensure that the required natural visibility will be available to 

ensure that a successful, stabilized landing can be completed. A limitation to 

specifically address this issue and also to provide for the safety of ground 

operations in low visibility conditions has been included in this exemption. 

Approaches to lower minimums require more precise course alignment as a 

mitigation of the risk of operations in IMC near the ground. Historically, 

whenever the FAA has allowed approaches to lower minimums, the 

mitigation was to require more robust and redundant ground and airborne 

navigation components. Enhanced vision or EFVS technology has the 

potential to both increase operational capability into airports during low 

visibility conditions and improve safety by enhancing pilot situational 

awareness during those operations. 

Application of EFVS technology is a gain to both pilots and to the public. 

Further, airborne image sensor technology is already in its second generation 

and will only continue to improve over time. The FAA is aware of the 

specific limitations of current EFVS technology, but with mitigations such 

as a robust program to ensure pilot training and checking are effective and 

restrictions on airborne use, EFVS application will benefit the public while 

maintaining a level of safety equivalent to that established by 

§ 121.651(b)(2). 

The FAA’s Decision 

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

interest. Therefore, pursuant to the authority contained in 49 U.S.C. §§ 40113 

and 44701, delegated to me by the Administrator, Federal Express Corporation is 

granted an exemption from 14 CFR § 121.651(b)(2) to the extent necessary to allow 

FedEx aircraft properly equipped with EFVS to continue an approach beyond the 

final approach fix, or to begin the final approach segment of an instrument approach 

procedure, if the latest weather report for that airport reports the visibility to be less 

than the visibility minimums prescribed for that procedure, subject to the conditions 

and limitations listed below. 

Conditions and Limitations 
7 

1. This exemption is applicable to FedEx airplanes equipped with an FAAcertified EFVS. 

2. This exemption applies only to approaches (except CAT II and CAT III 

approaches) conducted using line selectable approaches from the 

aircraft’s flight management system database that provide vertical and 

lateral guidance. 

3. Prior to conducting an approach beyond the final approach fix or 

beginning the final approach segment of an instrument approach 

procedure, the latest weather reports for the airport must indicate that 

the RVR for the runway to which the approach will be conducted is at 

least 1,000 feet (or 1,600 feet if the tower at that airport is closed). If 

RVR information is not available, the visibility must be at least 1⁄4 sm. 

4. The inbound final approach course cannot differ by more than 10 

degrees from the actual magnetic alignment of the runway of intended 

landing. 

5. The maximum crosswind component for the landing runway is less than 

the airplane flight manual’s crosswind limitation, or 15 knots or less, 

whichever is more restrictive. 

6. Prior to continuing an approach procedure beyond the final approach fix 

or beginning the final approach segment of an instrument approach 

procedure using the visibility minimums set forth in this exemption, the 

pilot in command of the aircraft must: 

a. have a minimum of 10 hours of actual operational line 

experience using EFVS; and 

b. have logged four EFVS approaches in actual instrument 

meteorological conditions. 

After acquiring this initial qualification, the pilot in command must log 

at least three EFVS approaches in either a simulator or aircraft within the 

6 months preceding the conduct of any approach under the provisions of 

this exemption. 

7. FedEx must develop and maintain an approved EFVS training program. 

This training program must include comprehensive instruction to aid 

pilots in determining visibilities using EFVS and natural vision at or 

near the landing (100 feet) “break out” phase of the approach. Specific 

emphasis must be placed on: EFVS theory, the effects of various 

weather phenomena on determining measured visibility, and the 

operational aspects and limitations of HUDs and imaging sensors. The 
8 

training program must also include 4 hours of full flight simulator 

training to include specialized training in low altitude missed 

approaches, special departure procedures, and specifically tailored crew 

briefs on obstacle clearances inside the missed approach point and 

below DA/DH or MDA. Specific training must also be provided in 

determining required flight visibility (without EFVS) and enhanced 

visibility (with EFVS). Ground training may be provided by video, 

DVD, or equivalent instructional media. FedEx must also have 

procedures in place to check that those pilots who have received this 

training are properly qualified to conduct operations under the 

provisions of this exemption. 

8. FedEx must develop a special section in each aircraft’s approved flight 

manual that will include specific crew callouts while operating under 

the provisions of this exemption. These callouts should assist the second 

in command with situational awareness by mirroring what the pilot in 

command sees or does not see. All pilots conducting approaches under 

this exemption must receive training on the use of these callouts. 

 

9. For operations conducted at foreign airports, both the conditions and 

limitations of this exemption and the requirements of the local civil 

aviation authority apply. 

10. FedEx must develop an approved monitoring/feedback program that 

will permit FedEx and the FAA to monitor the conduct of operations 

conducted under this exemption. At a minimum, the 

monitoring/feedback program must report the number of approaches 

flown using this exemption, the reported visibility, and the number of 

missed approaches executed due to the required visual references not 

being seen at 100 feet above TDZE. The monitoring/feedback program will 

have the appropriate program tracking reporting subsystem codes so that 

data points can be developed and monitored. 

 

This exemption terminates on January 31, 2012, unless sooner superseded or 

rescinded. 

Issued in Washington, D.C., on December 24, 2009. 
9 

/s/ 

John M. Allen 

Director, Flight Standards 

 Service .