HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP 

### BEFORETHE FEDERALAVIATION ADMINISTRATION



### lnspecTools, LLC, Petitioner. Docket No. FAA-2015-

--

PETITION OF INSPECTOOLS, LLC FORAN EXEMPTION FROM CERTAIN FEDERALAVIATION REGULATIONS TO PERMIT UNMANNEDAIRCRAFT SYSTEMS (UAS) OPERATIONS

DATE: June3, 2015

IIDC

- 042005/000001 6411847v6 E. Tazewell Ellett Patrick 

### R. Rizzi Hogan Lovells US LLP 555 131hStreet, N.W. Washington, DC 20004 Phone: 202-637-8644 I-5659 Fax: 202-637-5910 tazewell.ellett@hoganlovells.com

patrick.rizzi@hoganlovells.com COUNSELFORINSPECTOOLS,LLCHOGAN LOVELLS US LLP TABLEOF CONTENTS Page 1. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: THE PETITIONER

...................................................................-1- 2. PROPOSED UAS OPERATIONS: THE EXEMPTION REQUEST

...............................................-1- 3. PROPOSED CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS

............................................................................-2- 3.1 Conditionsand limitations regardingthe proposed UAS

............................................-2- 3.2 Conditionsand limitations regardingthe proposed UAS operations

.........................-4- 3.3 Conditionsand limitations regardingthe Pilotin Command and other crewmemberqualificationsandtraining

.......................................................................-9- 3.4 Conditionsand limitations regarding lnspecTools manuals relatedto UAS operations

.................................................................................................................-11- 4. REQUEST FOR DETERMINATION UNDER SECTION 333 OF FMRA

........................................-13- 5. INFORMATION REQUIRED BY 14C.F.R. § 11.81 TO SUPPORTA PETITION FOR EXEMPTION

...........................................................................................................................- 14- 5.1 Contactinformation

.........................................................................................................- 14- 5.2 Thespecificsectionorsectionsofthe FARfromwhich lnspecTools seeksan exemption

.........................................................................................................- 14- 5.3 The extentofreliefsoughtandthe reason reliefissought

.........................................- 15 - 5.4 Reasonswhygrantingthe requestwould be inthe public interest.

...........................-29- 5.5 Reasonswhygrantingthe exemptionwould notadverselyaffect safety, orhowthe exemptionwould providea level ofsafetyat least equaltothatprovided bythe rulefromwhich exemption issought

..........................-32- 5.6 Summarythatcan be published in Federal Register, includingthe rule fromwhich exemption issought,and a briefdescriptionofthe nature oftheexemptionsought.

.................................................................................................-34 - 5.7 Additional informationthatsupports request
...............................................................-34- 5.8 Requesttoexercisethe privilegesoftheexemption outsidethe U.S

........................-34 - 5.9 Attachments

......................................................................................................................-34 - 6. CONCLUSION

.................................................................................................................................-35-

IIDC- 042005/000001 6411847 v6HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP

1. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: THE PETITIONER lnspecTools, LLC ("lnspecTools"), headquartered in Santa Cruz, California, designs and deploys systems, including aerial platforms, to acquire and provide useful data to meet the various needs of its customers. Such assignments include inspections ofwind turbines, the corresponding blades, and solar panels, asset risk mitigation, and/orwildlife/wilderness conservation.

2. PROPOSED UAS OPERATIONS: THE EXEMPTION REQUEST Pursuantto Section 333 ofthe FAA Modernization and Reform Act of2012 ("FMRA") and 14 C.F.R. ("FAR") §§ 11.61(b), 11.63(a), and 11.81, lnspecTools requests that the FAA grant lnspecTools an exemption from certain sections ofthe FAR (detailed below in Sections 5.2 and 5.3) so that lnspecTools may commercially operate one or more small UAS for aerial inspections and assessments ofthe condition of utility-scale wind and solarfarms and power distribution facilities on behalf of the owners and operators of such farms and facilities, as well as wilderness/wildlife conditions. These proposed operations involve aerial data collection, consistent with previously granted summary grant exemptions. As explained below, lnspecTools' proposed UAS operations, as conditioned and limited herein, will not adversely affect safety, but rather will provide an equivalent or greater level of safety than that provided by the current rules, large manned aircraft operations, and othercurrent inspection methods. See FAR§ 11.81. lnspecTools respectfully requests that the FAA grant the requested exemption. As detailed below, lnspecTools agrees to the conditions and limitations imposed in recent summary grant exemptionsfor its exemption.

\\DC- 042005/000001 6411847v6HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP

3. PROPOSED CONDITIONSAND LIMITATIONS The small UAS operations proposed in this Petition will be subjectto the following conditions and limitations. Each ofthese conditions and limitations is consistentwith conditions and limitations in previously granted small UAS Section 333 exemptions, including recent summary grant exemptions, and with FAA guidance.

**See,~.** Exemption No. 11277 (April1, 2015; Docket FAA2014-0873) ("AAIR Exemption"\ Exemption No. 11525 (May 11, 2015; Docket FAA-2015-0338) ("Pro Drones Canada Exemption"). To facilitate the FAA's review of this Petition, lnspecTools provides a chart atthe end ofthis Section 3cross-referencing the conditions and limitationsfrom the AAIR Exemption and the Pro Drones Canada Exemption with the corresponding conditions and limitations outlined below. Collectively, these conditions and limitations ensure that the proposed small UAS operations will not adversely affect safety and will provide at least an equivalent level of safety to that provided by the current rules, large manned aircraft operations, and other current inspection methods.



### 3.1 Conditions and limitations regardingthe proposed UAS lnspecTools intends to operate the small ITX8 UAS and 3DR Solo UAS underthe requested exemption. The ITX8 is a battery-powered, multi-rotor, conventional, proven design built from proven commercial components. It has a nylon framework with carbon fiber struts and reinforcements with carbonfiber blades. The flying unmanned aircraft part ofthe UAS ("the UA") will carry acombination ofelectro-optical and infra-red sensors, GPS receivers, and ultrasonic and laserdistance measuring devices. The 3DR Solo UAS is aquadcopter powered byfourbrushless motors and four propellers. The corresponding UAtypically carries afixed camera.

1AAIR stands forAdvanced Aerial Inspection Resources, LLC.

- 2- \\DC 042005/000001 6411847v6HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP Each UAS operated under the exemption will be subject to the following conditions and limitations: 3.1.1 Operations under the exemption will be limited to the ITX8 UAS and 3DR Solo UAS. The UA will have a gross weight of not more than 55 pounds, including energy sources, equipment, and payload. [AAIR Exemption Limitation No. 1; Pro Drones Canada Exemption Limitation No.1.] 3.1.2 The ITX8 UA has maximum dimensions of approximately 31 inches (I)
x 31 inches (w) x 16-17 inches (h). The 3DR Solo UA is approximately 10 inches in heightwith a motor-to-motordimension ofabout 18 inches. 3.1.3 The UAwill not be operated at airspeeds greaterthan the maximum UA operating speed recommended by the UA manufacturer, and in no eventwill it be operated at a speed exceeding 87 knots (100 miles per hour). [AAIR Exemption Limitation No. 3; Pro Drones Canada Exemption Limitation No. 3.] 3.1.4 The ITX8 UA will have a maximum total flight time ofapproximately 45 minutes. The 3DR Solo UA will have a maximum total flight time of about25 minutes. 3.1.5 The UA will be identified by its serial number and registered with the FAA in accordance with FAR Part 47. [AAIR Exemption Limitation No. 22; Pro Drones Canada Exemption Limitation No. 22.] 3.1.6 The UA will have identification markings in accordance with FAR Part 45, with the markings being as large as practicable. [AAIR Exemption Limitation No. 22; Pro Drones Canada Exemption Limitation No. 22.]



### -3

- \\DC 042005/000001 -6411847v6HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP 3.2 Conditions and limitations regarding the proposed UAS operations All UAS operations under the exemption will be subject to the following conditions and limitations: 3.2.1 All UAS operations will be covered by an Air Traffic Organization ("ATO")-issued Certificate ofWaiver orAuthorization ("GOA"). All UAS operations will be conducted in accordance with the airspace requirements in the ATO-issued GOA, including class of airspace, altitude level, and any potential transponder requirements. [AAIR Exemption Limitation No. 21; Pro Drones Canada Exemption Limitation No. 21.] Should lnspecToolswantto conduct operationsthatcannot be conducted under the terms of the blanket GOA accompanying this exemption, lnspecTools will applyfor a new or amended GOA. [AAIR Exemption Limitation No. 21; Pro Drones Canada Exemption Limitation No. 21.] 3.2.2 Operations for the purpose of closed-set motion picture and television filming are not permitted under this exemption. [AAIR Exemption Limitation No. 2; Pro Drones Canada Exemption Limitation No. 2.] 3.2.3 The UA will not operate within 5 nautical miles ofan airport's reference point ("ARP") as denoted in the current FAA Airport/Facility Directory,
orfor airports notdenoted with an ARP, the centerofthe airport symbol
as denoted on the current FAA-published aeronautical chart, unless a letter agreementwith that airport's management is obtained or such an operation is otherwise permitted by a GOA issued to lnspecTools. lnspecToolswill make the letter agreement available to the FAA or any lawenforcement official upon request. [AAIR Exemption Limitation No. 16; Pro Drones Canada Exemption Limitation No. 16.]



### -4

- \\DC 042005/000001 · 6411847v6HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP 3.2.4 The minimum crew for each UAS operation will consist of one Pilot in Command ("PIC") and one Visual Observer ("VO"). The PIC will be designated before the flight, and cannot transfer his or her designation for the duration of the flight. The PIC must ensure that the VO can perform the functions prescribed for the VO. [AAIR Exemption Limitation No. 6; Pro Drones Canada Exemption Limitation No. 6.] 3.2.5 The UA will be operated within visual line of sight ("VLOS") ofthe PIC at all times. The PIC will maintain VLOS with human vision unaided by any device otherthan corrective lenses as specified on the PIC's FAAissued airman medical certificate or driver's license. [AAIR Exemption Limitation No. 5; Pro Drones Canada Exemption Limitation No. 5.] The VO may be used to satisfy the VLOS requirement as long as the PIC always maintains VLOS capability. [AAIR Exemption Limitation No. 6; Pro Drones Canada Exemption Limitation No. 6.] 3.2.6 During each UAS operation, the PIC and the VO must be able to communicate verbally with each other at all times. Electronic messaging or texting by the PIC and the VO is not permitted during UAS flight operations. [AAIR Exemption Limitation No. 6; Pro Drones Canada Exemption Limitation No. 6.] 3.2.7 The PIC is prohibited from beginning a UAS flight unless (considering wind and forecast weather conditions) there is enough available power for the UA to conduct the intended operation and to operate after that for at least five minutes or, if greater, with the reserve power recommended by the UA manufacturer. [AAIR Exemption Limitation No. 20; Pro Drones Canada Exemption Limitation No. 20.] 3.2.8 Priorto each UA flight, the PIC will conduct a pre-flight inspection and determine that the UAS (including the Ground Control Station) is in a 

### - 5 - \\DC
- 042005/000001
- 6411847 v6HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP condition for safe flight. The pre-flight inspection will account for all potential discrepancies, e.g., non-functioning components, items or equipment. If the inspection reveals a condition that affects the safe operation of the UAS, the UA is prohibited from operating until the necessary maintenance has been performed and documented, and the UAS is found to be in a condition for safe flight. [AAIR Exemption Limitation No. 10; Pro Drones Canada Exemption Limitation No. 10.] The operator is responsible for maintaining and inspecting the UAS to ensure that it is in a condition for safe operation. [AAIR Exemption Limitation No. 9; Pro Drones Canada Exemption Limitation No. 9.] 3.2.9 Prior to each UAS operation, the PIC will review the weather, the UAS battery requirements, the UA takeoff and landing distances, and the UAS performance, and will account for all relevant site-specific conditions perthe Operating Documents (defined below). 3.2.10 During each UAS operation, the UA will remain at or below 400 feet above ground level ("AGL"). [AAIR Exemption Limitation No. 4; Pro Drones Canada Exemption Limitation No. 4.] 3.2.11 Altitude reports made to ATC or other persons must be reported in feet AGL. [AAIR Exemption Limitation No. 4; Pro Drones Canada Exemption Limitation No. 4.] 3.2.12 All UAS operations will be conducted over private or controlled-access property with permission from the property owner/controller or authorized representative. Permission from the property owner/controller or authorized representative will be obtained for each flight to be conducted. [AAIR Exemption Limitation No. 27; Pro Drones Canada Exemption Limitation No. 27.]

- 6- \\DC 042005/000001 6411847v6HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP 3.2.13 The UAwill operate at least 500 feetfrom all non-participating persons, vessels, vehicles, and structures unless: (a) Barriers or structures are presentthat sufficiently protect nonparticipating persons from the UA and/or debris in the event of an accident. lnspecTools must ensure that nonparticipating persons remain under such protection; and if a situation arises where non-participating persons leave such protection and are within 500 feet ofthe UA, flight operations must cease immediately in a manner ensuring the safety of non-participating persons; and/or (b) The owner/controller of any vessels, vehicles or structures has granted permission for operating closer to those objects and the PIC has made a safety assessment of the risk of operating closerto those objects and determined that it does not present an undue hazard. The PIC, VO, operator trainees, and essential persons are not considered non-participating persons underthis exemption. [AAIR Exemption Limitation No. 26; Pro Drones Canada Exemption Limitation No. 26.] 3.2.14 All UAS operations will take place during visual meteorological conditions (VMC) only. [AAIR Exemption Limitation No. 15; Pro Drones Canada Exemption Limitation No. 15.] 3.2.15 lnspecTools will not operate UAS flights under Special Visual Flight Rules (SVFR). [AAIR Exemption Limitation No. 15; Pro Drones Canada Exemption Limitation No. 15.] 3.2.16 All UAS operations will take place during daylight hours. UAS operations will not be conducted during night, as defined in 14 C.F.R. 

### § - 7 - \\DC
- 042005/000001 6411847v6HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP 1.1. [AAIR Exemption Limitation No. 15; Pro Drones Canada Exemption Limitation No. 15.] 3.2.17 During each UAS operation, the UA will avoid, remain clear of, and yield right-of-way to all manned aviation operations and activities at all times. [AAIR Exemption Limitation No. 24; Pro Drones Canada Exemption Limitation No. 24.] 3.2.18 The UAwill not be operated lessthan 500 feet below or lessthan 2,000 feet horizontally from a cloud, or when visibility is less than 3 statute miles from the PIC. [AAIR Exemption Limitation No. 17; Pro Drones Canada Exemption Limitation No. 17.] 3.2.19 The UAS will not be operated by the PIC from any moving device or vehicle. [AAIR Exemption Limitation No. 25; Pro Drones Canada Exemption Limitation No. 25.] 3.2.20 Any UAS that has undergone maintenance or alterationsthat affectthe UAS operation or UA flight characteristics (e.g., replacement ofaflight critical component) must undergo a functional test flight prior to conducting further operations under this exemption. Functional test flights will only be conducted by a PIC with a VO, and must remain at least 500 feet from other people. The functional test flight must be conducted in such a manner so as to not pose an undue hazard to persons and property. [AAIR Exemption Limitation No. 8; Pro Drones Canada Exemption Limitation No. 8.] 3.2.21 If the UAS loses communications or its GPS signal during any operation, the UA must return to a pre-determined location within the private or controlled-access property. [AAIR Exemption Limitation No. 18; Pro Drones Canada Exemption Limitation No. 18.]



### - 8 - \\DC
- 042005/000001 6411847v6HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP 3.2.22 The PIC will adhere to the written emergency procedures in the Manuals, and will abortthe UAS operation and UAflight in the event of unpredicted obstacles or emergencies. [AAIR Exemption Limitation No. 19; Pro Drones Canada Exemption Limitation No. 19.] 3.2.23 The documents used by the operatorto ensure the safe operation and flight ofthe UAS and any documents required under 14 C.F.R. 

### §§ 91.9 and 91.203 will be available to the PIC atthe Ground Control Station of the UAS at any time the UA is operating, and will be made available to the FAA orany lawenforcementofficial upon request. [AAIR Exemption Limitation No. 23; Pro Drones Canada Exemption Limitation No. 23.] 3.2.24 Any incident, accident orflight operation thattransgressesthe lateral or vertical boundaries ofthe operational area as defined by the applicable COA will be reported to the FAA's UAS Integration Office (AFS-80) within 24 hours. Accidents will be reported to the National Transportation Safety Board ("NTSB") per instructions contained on the NTSB website: www.ntsb.gov. [AAIR Exemption Limitation No. 28; Pro Drones Canada Exemption Limitation No. 28.]



### 3.3 Conditions and limitations regarding the Pilot in Command and other crewmemberqualifications and training The PIC and other crewmembers for each UAS operation under the requested exemption will be subjectto thefollowing conditions and limitations: 3.3.1 The PIC must hold (i) either an ATP, commercial, private, recreational or sport pilot certificate; and (ii) a current FAA airman medical certificate or a valid driver's license issued by a State, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, a U.S. territory/possession, or the Federal Government. The PIC must satisfythe flight review requirements of 14



### -9

- \\DC
- 042005/000001
-6411847v6HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP C.F.R. 

### §61.56 in an aircraftforwhich the PIC is rated on his or herpilot certificate. [AAIR Exemption Limitation No. 13; Pro Drones Canada Exemption Limitation No. 13.] 3.3.2 The operatorwill not permit any PIC to operatethe UAS unlessthe PIC demonstrates the ability to safely operate the UAS in a manner consistent with how the UAS will be operated under this exemption, including evasive and emergency maneuvers and maintaining appropriate distances from persons, vessels, vehicles, and structures. PIC qualification flight hours and currency must be logged in a manner consistent with 14 C.F.R. 

### § 61.51(b). Flights for the purposes of training lnspecTools' PICs and VOs (training, proficiency, and experience-building) and determining the PIC's ability to safely operate the UAS in a manner consistent with how the UAS will be operated under this exemption are permitted under the terms ofthis exemption. These training operations, however, may only be conducted during dedicated training sessions. [AAIR Exemption Limitation No. 14; Pro Drones Canada Exemption Limitation No. 14.] 3.3.3 During training, proficiency, and experience-building flights, all persons

\\DC- 042005/000001-6411847v6 not essential for flight operations are considered non-participants, and the PIC must operate the UA with appropriate distance from nonparticipants in accordance with 14 C.F.R. 

### § 91.119. [AAIR Exemption Limitation No. 14; Pro Drones Canada Exemption Limitation No. 14.]

- 10-HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP 3.4 Conditions and limitations regarding lnspecTools manuals related to UAS operations lnspecTools has manuals for the ITX8 UAS and the 3DR Solo UAS, as well as a training program (collectively, the "Manuals"). The Manuals will be subject to the following limitations and conditions: 3.4.1 The Operating Documents2 must be accessible during UAS operations and made available to the FAA upon request. If a discrepancy exists between the conditions and limitations in the exemption and the procedures outlined in the other Operating Documents, the conditions and limitations in the exemption take precedence and must be followed. Otherwise, lnspecTools must follow the procedures as outlined in the Operating Documents. [AAIR Exemption Limitation No. 7; Pro Drones Canada Exemption Limitation No. 7.] 3.4.2 lnspecTools may update or revise its Operating Documents, and it is lnspecTools' responsibility to track such revisions and present updated and revised documentsto the FAAorany lawenforcementofficial upon request. lnspecTools must also present updated and revised documents if it petitions for an extension or amendment of the exemption. If lnspecTools determines that any update or revision would affect the basis upon which the FAA granted the requested exemption, then lnspecTools must petition for an amendment to the exemption. lnspecTools will contact the FAA's UAS Integration Office (AFS-80) if questions arise regarding updates or revisions to the

2 This exemption, the Manuals, and all other documents needed by lnspecTools to operate the UAS and conduct its operations in accordance with the conditions and limitations stated in this grant of exemption are hereinafter referred to as the Operating Documents. [AAIR Exemption Limitation No. 7; Pro Drones Canada Exemption Limitation No. 7.]

- 11 - \\DC 042005/000001 •6411847v6HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP Operating Documents. [AAIR Exemption Limitation No. 7; Pro Drones Canada Exemption Limitation No. 7.] 3.4.3 Each UAS operated under the exemption will comply with all manufacturer safety bulletins. [AAIR Exemption Limitation No. 12; Pro Drones Canada Exemption Limitation No. 12.] 3.4.4 lnspecToolswill follow the UAS manufacturer's maintenance, overhaul, replacement, inspection, and life limit requirements for the UAS and UAS components. [AAIR Exemption Limitation No. 11; Pro Drones Canada Exemption Limitation No. 11.]

CROSS-REFERENCES AAIR Exemption Limitation No. Petition Limitation No. Pro Drones Canada Exemption Limitation No. 

### 1 3.1.1 2 3.2.2 3 3.1.3 

### 4 3.2.10, 3.2.11 5 3.2.5 6 3.2.4, 3.2.5, 3.2.6 

### 7 3.4.1, 3.4.2 8 3.2.20 9 

### 3.2.8 10 3.2.8 11 3.4.4 12 3.4.3

- 12- \\DC
- 042005/000001
- 6411847 v6HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP 13 3.3.1 14 3.3.2, 3.3.3 15 3.2.14, 3.2.15, 3.2.16 16 3.2.3 17 3.2.18 18 3.2.21 19 3.2.22 20 3.2.7 21 3.2.1 22 3.1.5, 3.1.6 23 3.2.23 24 3.2.17 25 3.2.19 26 3.2.13 27 3.2.12 28 3.2.24

4. REQUEST FOR DETERMINATION UNDERSECTION 333 OF FMRA In accordance with FMRA Sec. 333, lnspecTools requests that the Secretary of Transportation determine that lnspecTools' proposed small UAS operations (i) do not create a hazard to users of the National Airspace System or the public, and (ii) do not pose a threat to national security. lnspecTools further requests that, based on the Secretary's determination, the FAA determine - as it did in the AAIR Exemption and the Pro Drones Canada Exemption - that relief

- 13- \\DC-042005/000001 6411847v6HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP from FAR Part 21 and any associated noise certification and testing requirements of FAR Part 36 is not necessaryforthe UAS operations proposed in this Petition.3

5. INFORMATION REQUIRED BY 14 C.F.R. 

### § 11.81 TO SUPPORTA PETITION FOR EXEMPTION As required by FAR § 11.81, lnspecTools providesthe following information in support ofthis Petition:5.1 Contact information: Name: lnspecTools, LLC submitsthis Petition for Exemption, through counsel, E. Tazewell Ellettand Patrick R. Rizzi. Mailing address: E. Tazewell Ellett Patrick R. Rizzi Counselfor lnspecTools, LLC Hogan Lovells US LLP 555 131h Street, NW Washington, DC 20004 Telephone/Facsimile number: (T) 202-637-8644 (Ellett) I202-637-5659 (Rizzi) (F) 202-637-5910 E-mail addresses: tazewell.ellett@hoganlovells.com patrick.rizzi@hoganlovells.com
5.2 The specificsection orsections ofthe FARfrom which lnspecTools seeks an exemption: FAR§61.23(a) and (c)- Medical certificates: Requirementand Duration. FAR§61.101(e)(4) and (5)- Recreational pilot privileges and limitations. FAR§ 61.113(a) and (b)- Private pilot privileges and limitations: Pilot in command. FAR§61.315(a), (c)(2), and (c)(3)-Whatarethe privileges and limitationsofmy sport pilotcertificate? FAR§ 91.7(a)- Civil aircraftairworthiness. FAR§91.119(c)- Minimum safe altitudes: General. FAR§ 91.121 -Altimetersettings.

3 AAIR Exemption, at 6; Pro Drones Canada Exemption, at 2. Ifthe FAA concludes that the UAS operations proposed in this Petition require an exemption from FAR Parts 21 and/or 36, then lnspecTools requests thatthe FAA include that relief in the exemption.

- 14- \IDC 042005/000001

-6411847v6HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP FAR§ 91.151- Fuel requirements forflight in VFR conditions. FAR§ 91.405(a)- Maintenance required. FAR§ 91.407(a)(1)- Operation after maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, and inspections. FAR§91.409(a)(1) and (2) -Inspections. FAR§ 91.417(a) and (b)- Maintenance records.
5.3 The extentof reliefsoughtand the reason relief is sought: lnspecTools proposes to conduct commercial small UAS operations, as described herein, by operating one or more small UAS for aerial inspections and assessments ofthe condition of utilityscale wind turbines, solar farms, and power distribution facilities on behalf of the owners and operators ofsuch farms and facilities, aswell as wilderness/wildlife conditions. In orderto be ableto conduct these UAS operations, lnspecTools petitions the FAA, pursuant to FAR §§ 11.61(b), 11.63(a), and 11.81(b), foran exemptionfrom the following FAR forthe reasons noted: FAR§61.23(a)and (c)- Medical certificates: Requirementand Duration. FAR§61.101(e)(4) and (5)- Recreational pilot privileges and limitations.
The regulation states, in relevant part: (e) Except as provided in paragraphs (d) and (i) of this section, a recreational pilot may notactas pilot in command ofan aircraft-

... (4) Forcompensation or hire; (5) In furtherance ofa business;

.... FAR§61.113(a) and (b)- Private pilot privileges and limitations: Pilot in command. The regulation states, in relevant part:

\\DC 042005/000001 6411847v6 (a) Exceptas provided in paragraphs (b) through (h) ofthis section, no person who holdsa private pilot certificate mayactas pilot in command ofan aircraftthat is carrying passengers or propertyfor compensation or hire; nor maythat person, for compensation or hire, act as pilot in command ofan aircraft. (b) A private pilot may, for compensation orhire, act as pilot in command ofan aircraft in connection with any business or employment if: (1) Theflight is only incidental to that business or employment; and

- 15(c) . HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP (2) The aircraftdoes not carry passengers or propertyfor compensation or hire.
FAR§ 61.315(a) and (c)(2), (c)(3)- What are the privileges and limitations of my sport pilotcertificate? The regulation states, in relevant part: (a) If you hold a sport pilot certificate you may act as pilot in command ofa light-sportaircraft, exceptas specified in paragraph (c) ofthis section
.... (c) You may notactas pilot in command ofa light-sportaircraft:

... (2) Forcompensation or hire. (3) In furtherance ofabusiness
.... lnspecTools requests an exemption from these regulations to the extent necessaryto permit lnspecTools to conduct UAS operations using PICs who hold (i) an FAA private pilot, recreational pilot, or a sport pilot certificate, and (ii) an FAA airman medical certificate or a state driver's license. While lnspecTools recognizes that the FAA normally requires a PIC to hold a commercial pilot certificate where there is compensation eitherto the pilot orfor the operation, lnspecTools requests thatthe FAA exempt lnspecTools and its PICsfrom this requirement sincethe use ofat least a sport pilot as the PIC for the UAS operations under this exemption will be more safe than the use of a commercial pilotfor manned aircraft operations. Unlike conventional aircraft, the ITX8 UAS and the 3DR Solo UAS are lightweight, remotely controlled, and battery-powered (not fuel/gas), and they have no crew or passengers. The fulfillment ofthe additional requirements for a sport, recreational or private pilot to become qualified as a commercial pilot would not lead to any additional safety benefitswhen UAS operations are involved. The differences between the aeronautical knowledge and aeronautical experience requirements for sport pilots and for commercial pilots are significant in the traditional world of manned aircraft. However, no aspect of this incremental additional knowledge or aeronautical experience is significant for the daytime, VMC, low-altitude, visual-line-of-sight, small UAS

- 16- \\DC-042005/000001-6411847v6HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP operations over private or controlled access properties with property owner/controller permission as proposed in this Petition. Put anotherway, there are stark and fundamental differences between the type of experience and aeronautical knowledge that the PIC of a commercial manned aircraft with passengers and property should have, versus the type of experience and aeronautical knowledge that the PIC of a small UAS should have, in order to avoid imperiling passengers or property. In lnspecTools' case, the small amount of property carried aboard the UAwill be lnspecTools' property. While the PIC will be compensated, all risk ofdamage to the property (in fact to the UAS itself) will be borne by lnspecTools. There is no expectation or need for the PIC ofthe small UA to have the type of experience or aeronautical knowledge that a commercial pilot for a manned aircraft would have. Similarly, the differences between the flight proficiency requirements for sport pilots and commercial pilots are not substantively significant here where the operations will be conducted strictly during daylightVMC conditions, within VLOS, at altitudes no higherthan 400feetAGL. And, lnspecTools has atraining program to ensure thatthe experience, knowledge, and flight proficiency needed to operate the ITX8 UAS and the 3DR Solo UAS safely are achieved for its PICs. Accordingly, there is no reason to require the UAS PIC to have more aeronautical knowledge, experience, and flight proficiencythan that required for asport pilotcertificate. Given that lnspecTools plans to operate its ITX8 UAS and 3DR Solo UAS over private or controlled-access property and at low altitudes during daytime in VMC, the parallel nature of sport pilot aeronautical knowledge requirements to those of commercial requirements, the limited airmanship skills necessaryto operatethese small UAS, and the lack ofadditional safety benefitsfor the proposed UAS operations here resulting from commercial pilot experience, the PIC under this exemption should only be required to hold, at most, a sport pilot certificate. Such a condition would be consistent with the certificate requirements imposed on the PIC in the AAIR Exemption and the Pro Drones Canada Exemption. For these reasons, and consistent with recent summary grant exemptions, lnspecTools requests thatthe FAA grant an exemption to permit lnspecToolsto use as PIC of its proposed UAS operations pilots who hold at least a sport pilot certificate and either an FAA third-class airman



### - 17- IIDC-042005/000001-6411847v6HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP medical certificate or a state driver's license, so long as they satisfy the conditions and limitations proposed in this Petition, includingthe PIC qualification and training requirements. FAR§91.7(a)- Civil aircraftairworthiness. The regulation states in relevant part: (a) No person mayoperate a civil aircraft unless it is in an airworthy condition

.... lnspecTools requests an exemption from this provision to the extent necessary.4 Neitherthe ITX8 UAS nor the 3DR Solo UAS will require an airworthiness certificate under FAR Part 21, Subpart H, and thus relief is requested from this regulation. See Exemption No. 11110 (December 10, 2014; Docket FAA-2014-0367) ("Trimble Exemption"), at 16. An exemption is warranted because lnspecTools understands that, notwithstanding the lack ofan airworthiness certificate, the FAA will consider its "compliancewith [lnspecTools' Manuals]to be sufficient meansfordetermining
an airworthy condition" and that lnspecTools must still determine the UA's airworthiness prior to eachflight based on compliancewith such Manuals. Trimble Exemption, at 16. FAR§91.119(c)- Minimum safe altitudes: General. The regulation states: Exceptwhen necessaryfortakeoffor landing, no person mayoperate an aircraft belowthefollowing altitudes: (a) Anywhere. An altitude allowing, ifa power unitfails, an emergency landing without undue hazard to persons orpropertyon the surface. (b) Overcongestedareas. Overany congested area ofa city, town, orsettlement, oroverany open airassemblyofpersons, an altitude of 1,000feet abovethe highestobstaclewithin a horizontal radius of 2,000feet ofthe aircraft. (c) Overotherthan congestedareas. An altitude of500feet above the surface, exceptoveropen waterorsparsely populated areas. In

4 lnspecTools requests exemption from FAR 

### § 91.7(a) based on the relief granted in the Trimble Exemption, at 16, 21. However, lnspecTools notes thatthe FAA determined that no such exemption was needed in Exemption No. 11062 (September 25, 2014; Docket FAA-2014-0352) ("Astraeus Exemption") at19,22.

- 18- \\DC 042005/000001 6411847v6HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP those cases, the aircraft may not be operated closerthan 500feetto any person, vessel, vehicle, orstructure. (d) Helicopters, poweredparachutes, andweight-shift-controlaircraft. Ifthe operation is conducted without hazard to persons or propertyon the surface- (1) A helicopter may be operated at lessthan the minimums prescribed in paragraph (b) or(c) ofthis section, provided each person operating the helicoptercomplieswith any routes oraltitudesspecifically prescribedfor helicopters by the FAA; and (2) A powered parachute orweight-shift-control aircraft may be operated at lessthan the minimums prescribed in paragraph (c) ofthis section. lnspecTools requests an exemption from this regulation to the extent necessary to permit lnspecToolsto conduct its UAS operations at altitudes lowerthan those permitted by FAR§ 91.119, since such altitudes are one ofthe key benefits of using small UAS for these flights. Even at these low altitudes, lnspecTools' UAS operationswill be conducted ata level ofsafety at leastequal to that whichwould be achieved iflarger manned aircraftwere to be used atthe altitudes required by FAR§ 91.119.With respect to paragraph (a), lnspecTools intends to comply with this requirement to the
same extent as would a manned aircraft, meaning thatthe UA must operate at an altitude such that the loss of a single power unit aboard the UA or used by the UAS would still permit an emergency landing "without undue hazard to persons or property on the surface." lnspecTools agrees with the FAA's reasoning on this issue in the Astraeus Exemption, at20, and therefore does not believe that reliefis required from paragraph (a). With respectto paragraph (b), lnspecTools plans to operate these small UAS over private or controlled-access properties (with owner/controller permission) in areas that are not congested or densely populated. Accordingly, lnspecTools does not believe that an exemption is necessaryfrom this paragraph (b) covering "congested areas". With respect to paragraph (c), lnspecTools requests an exemption to allow UAS operations down to the surface, both in sparsely populated areas and in "other than congested" areas.

- 19- \\DC- 042005/000001-6411847v6HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP lnspecTools' UAS operations require lower-level flying, but have a number of self-imposed restrictionsto ensure at leastan equivalent level ofsafety. Forexample,
• All operationswill be conducted overprivate orcontrolled access property.
• Permission from the property owner/controllerwill be obtained prior to the beginning ofeach UAflight.
• The UA will operate at least 500 feet from all non-participating persons, vessels, vehicles, and structures unless:

o Barriers or structures are present that sufficiently protect non-participating persons from the UA and/or debris in the event of an accident. lnspecTools will ensure that non-participating persons remain under such protection; and if a situation arises where non-participating persons leave such protection and are within 500 feet ofthe UA, flight operations will cease immediately in a mannerensuring the safety ofthe non-participating persons; and/or
o The UA is operated near vessels, vehicles or structures where the property owner/controller has granted permission, and the PIC has made a safety assessment ofthe risk of operating closer to those objects and determined that itdoes not presentan undue hazard. Even with agrantofthis exemption, the UAS operationswill be at least as safe as operations by manned aircraftthat complywith this paragraph. Flying a manned aircraft, given its weight, size, speed, and fuel load, would pose a significant risk relative to the use of a small UA, with a much smaller size and lighter weight, operating at much slower speeds, with batteries rather than a significant fuel load, at all times within VLOS of the PIC on the ground who has a wide view. Accordingly, as the FAA determined in the Trimble Exemption, at 17-18, relief is warranted here provided that lnspecTools adheres to its Manuals and the additional conditions and limitations outlined above and in the exemption. For these reasons, lnspecTools requests relief from the entirety of paragraph (c), as was recently granted in the AAIR Exemption, at 6, and the Pro Drones Canada Exemption, at 2.

- 20- \\DC -042005/000001 -6411847v6HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP lnspecToolsdoes not request relieffrom paragraph (d), because it applies onlyto helicopters (and allows operation at lower altitudes only if on a prescribed helicopter route) and powered parachute-type aerial vehicles. FAR§91.121-Altimetersettings. The regulation states, in relevant part: (a) Each person operating an aircraftshall maintainthe cruising altitude orflight level ofthat aircraft, asthe case may be, by reference to an altimeterthat is set, when operating- (1) Below 18,000feet MSL, to- (i) The current reported altimetersetting ofastation along the route and within 100 nautical miles ofthe aircraft; (ii) Ifthere is no station within the area prescribed in paragraph (a)(1)(i) ofthis section, the current reported altimetersetting ofan appropriate available station; or (iii) In the case ofan aircraft notequippedwith a radio, the elevation ofthe departureairportoran appropriate altimetersetting available beforedeparture; or (2)Atorabove 18,000feet MSL, to 29.92" Hg. (b)** **. It is not clear to lnspecTools that an exemption from this section is required, because, although the regulation expresslyapplies onlyto aircraft maintaining a "cruising altitude" and dictates the altimetersetting that must be used while atthatcruising altitude, cruising altitudesforVFR flights do not begin - according to FAR 

### § 91.159 - until "more than 3,000 feet above the surface".5 Nonetheless, lnspecTools requests an exemption from FAR 

### § 91.121 to the extent necessary to permit lnspecTools to conductthe small UAS operations described in this Petition. See, !;UL, AAIR Exemption, at6; Pro Drones Canada Exemption, at2; Astraeus Exemption, at21-22. lnspecTools recognizes the critical importance of ensuring that any UAS operated by lnspecTools maintains altitude to an accurate reference such that other aircraft and the FAA may FAR§ 91.159; see also Aeronautical Information Manual, at Chpt. 3, Sec. 1, Tbl. 3-1-1, para. 3-1- 2. (July24, 2014).

- 21 - IIDC 042005/000001-6411847v6HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP rely on lnspecTools' UAS to be operating as proposed. The PIC will check the UA altitude reading priorto each takeoff, and will effectively zero the UA's altitude at the point oftakeoff, to ensure that measurements ofthe UA's altitude are as accurate as possible relative to the local elevation. To the extent that this methodology does not satisfy FAR§ 91.121 or any other regulation, lnspecTools requests an exemption to permit UAS operations usingthis methodology. FAR§91.151- Fuel requirements forflight in VFR conditions. The regulation states: (a) No person may begin aflight in an airplane underVFR conditions unless (considering wind and forecastweatherconditions)there is enoughfuel to flytothefirst pointofintended landing and, assuming normal cruising speed- (1) During the day, to fly afterthatforat least30 minutes; or (2) At night, to fly afterthatforat least45 minutes. (b) No person may begin aflight in a rotorcraft underVFR conditions unless (considering wind and forecastweather conditions)there is enough fuel to fly to thefirst pointofintended landing and, assuming normal cruising speed, to fly afterthatfor at least20 minutes. lnspecTools requests an exemption from FAR § 91.151 to permit lnspecTools to plan its UAS operations as described above. The proposed small UAS operations in this Petition will (i) involve operations in which one or more UAS is transported by means other than its own powerto the operational location, and (ii) begin and end at the operational site, with the takeoff, entire flight, and landing all taking place within the immediate proximity ofeach otherwhile remaining at all times within VLOS ofthe PIC. The goal of FAR § 91.151 is to ensurethat pilots plan for an extra 20 or30 minutes offuel at their first intended point of landing in order to account for unexpected possible delays en route and at thefirst planned destination. Many ofthese delays that plague manned aircraftare simply not an issue with the proposed small UAS operations over private or controlled access property, because there is virtually no "en route" portion of the flight, and any problems at the point of landing are

- 22- 1\DC · 042005/000001 -6411847 v6HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP extremely unlikely to cause delays, since a UA can always landjust afew feet away ifthe intended pointof landing becomes unusable. Given the relatively short operating time for the ITX8 UAS (45 minutes) and the 3DR Solo UAS (25 minutes), requiring a full 30 minutes of reserve "fuel" (battery power) could take up (i) nearly all ofthe available time for ITX8 UAS operations and (ii) all ofthe time availablefor 3DR Solo UAS operations. lnspecTools believesthat using asmaller reserve for UAS flight planning purposes will be at least as safe as using the reserves required by FAR 

### § 91.151 for manned aircraft. To that end, and consistent with AAIR Exemption Limitation No. 20 and Pro Drones Canada Exemption Limitation No. 20, the PIC underthe requested exemption will be prohibited from beginning a UAS flight unless (considering wind and forecast weather conditions) there is enough power available powerforthe UAto conductthe intended operation and to operate afterthatfor at leastfive minutes or, if greater, with the reserve power recommended by the UA manufacturer. See Proposed Limitation 3.2.7. Such a battery reserve is more than sufficient, particularly in light of the FAA's acceptance of a 5-minute reserve in the AAIR Exemption and the Pro Drones Canada Exemption. lnspecTools believes that these limitations will further ensure that the proposed reserve planning and operational requirements that lnspecTools is requesting to use underthis exemption will provide at leastan equivalent level ofsafety. Forthese reasons, lnspecTools requests an exemption from FAR 

### § 91.151(a) to permit it to plan and conduct UAS operations subject to the reserve power limitation explained above. FAR 

### § 91.151(b) covers only rotorcraft, and thus is not applicable to the small UAS operations lnspecTools is proposing.
FAR § 91.405(a)- Maintenance required. The regulation states, in relevant part:

1\DC
- 042005/000001
-6411847 v6 Each owneroroperatorofan aircraft- (a) Shall havethat aircraft inspected as prescribed in subpart Eofthis part and shall between required inspections, exceptas provided in paragraph (c) ofthis section, have discrepancies repaired as prescribed in part43 ofthis chapter;

- 23-HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP (b)  . lnspecTools requests an exemption from FAR § 91.405(a) to permit lnspecTools to conduct the UAS operations proposed in this Petition without having to perform the inspections and discrepancy repairs required by FAR § 91.405(a). In the Astraeus Exemption and the Trimble Exemption, the FAA determined that the proposed UAS operations required exemption from FAR§ 91.405(a), and that the achievement of an adequate level of safety required certain conditions and limitations. lnspecTools has proposed in Section 3 ofthis Petition several conditions and limitations related to maintenance and inspections which it believes provide a level ofsafety at leastequivalent to that provided by FAR § 91.405(a). For this reason, and consistent with the exemptions granted from this section in the AAIR Exemption and the Pro Drones Canada Exemption, lnspecTools requests an exemption from FAR § 91.405(a) to permit lnspecTools to conduct UAS operations as proposed in this Petition, subjectto the conditions and limitations proposed above, without having to performthe inspections and discrepancy repairs required by FAR§91.405(a). lnspecTools does not believe that an exemption from the remaining paragraphs of FAR § 91.405 is required, since lnspecTools will make appropriate logbook entries in aircraft maintenance records in accordance with paragraph (b), appropriately mark any inoperative instrument or item of equipmentforwhich maintenance has been properly deferred in compliance with paragraph (c), and appropriately placard listed discrepancies that include inoperative instruments or equipment in compliancewith paragraph (d).
FAR § 91.407(a)(1) - Operation after maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding
oralteration. The regulation states:

\\DC- 042005/000001 6411847v6 (a) No person may operate any aircraftthat has undergone maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, oralteration unless-

(1) It has been approved for return to service bya person authorized under§43.7 ofthis chapter; and



### -24HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP (2) The maintenance record entry required by §43.9or§43.11, as applicable, ofthis chapter has been made. (b)** **. (c) . lnspecTools requests an exemption from FAR § 91.407(a)(1) to permit lnspecTools to conduct UAS operations as proposed in this Petition without having to have the UAS approved for return to service by a person authorized under FAR § 43.7. In the Astraeus Exemption, the FAA determined thatthe proposed UAS operations required exemption from FAR § 91.407(a)(1), subject to certain conditions and limitations. lnspecTools has proposed in this Petition maintenance-related conditions and limitations which it believes provide a level of safety at least equivalent to that provided by FAR§ 91.407(a)(1). Forthis reason, and consistentwith the exemptions granted from this section in the AAIR Exemption and the Pro Drones Canada Exemption, lnspecTools requests an exemption from FAR § 91.407(a)(1) to permit lnspecTools to conduct UAS operations as proposed in this Petition, subject to the proposed conditions and limitations, without having to have the UAS approved for return to service by a person authorized under FAR§43.7. lnspecTools does not believe that an exemption from the remaining paragraphs of FAR § 91.407 is required, since lnspecTools will require that maintenance record entries are made as required, in compliance with paragraph (a)(2), and since no persons will be carried following maintenance performed on the UAS, making paragraphs (b) and (c) moot. FAR§91.409(a)(1) and (2) -Inspections. The regulation states, in relevant part:

\\DC 042005/000001
- 6411847v6 (a) Exceptas provided in paragraph (c) ofthis section, no person may operate an aircraft unless, within the preceding 12 calendar months, it has had-

(1) An annual inspection in accordancewith part43ofthis chapter and has been approvedfor return to service by a person authorized by §43.7 ofthis chapter; or (2) An inspectionforthe issuance ofan airworthiness certificate in accordancewith part21 ofthis chapter.

- 25-HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP No inspection performed under paragraph (b) ofthis section may be substituted for any inspection required bythis paragraph unless it is performed bya person authorizedto perform annual inspections and is entered as an "annual" inspection in the required maintenance records. (b) ** **. lnspecTools requests an exemption from FAR § 91.409(a)(1) and (2) to permit lnspecTools to conduct UAS operations as proposed in this Petition without having to obtain the annual inspection and airworthiness certificate inspection required by FAR § 91.409(a)(1) and (2). In the Astraeus Exemption, the FAA determined that the proposed UAS operations required exemption from FAR § 91.409(a)(1) and (2), and that achieving an adequate level of safety required certain conditions and limitations. lnspecTools has proposed in this Petition maintenance and inspectionrelated conditions and limitationswhich it believes provide a level ofsafety at least equivalentto that provided by FAR § 91.409(a)(1) and (2). For this reason, and consistent with the exemptions granted from this section in the AAIR Exemption and the Pro Drones Canada Exemption, lnspecTools requests an exemption from FAR § 91.409(a)(1) and (2) to permit lnspecTools to conduct UAS operations as proposed in this Petition, subject to the proposed conditions and limitations, without having to obtain the annual inspection and airworthiness certificate inspection required by FAR§91.409(a)(1) and (2). FAR§91.417(a) and (b)- Maintenance records. The regulation states, in relevant part:

\\DC 042005/000001
-6411847 v6 (a) Exceptforwork performed in accordancewith §§91.411 and 91.413, each registered owneroroperatorshall keepthe following recordsforthe periods specified in paragraph (b) ofthis section: (1) Records ofthe maintenance, preventive maintenance, and alteration and records ofthe 1 00-hour, annual, progressive, and other required orapproved inspections, as appropriate, foreach aircraft (includingthe airframe) and each engine, propeller, rotor, and appliance ofan aircraft. The records must include- (i) A description (or reference to data acceptableto the Administrator) ofthework performed; and

- 26-\\DC- 0420051000001 6411847v6 HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP (ii) The dateofcompletion ofthework performed; and (iii) The signature, and certificate numberofthe person approving the aircraftfor return to service. (2) Records containingthefollowing information: (i) Thetotaltime in service ofthe airframe, each engine, each propeller, and each rotor. (ii) The current status oflife-limited parts ofeach airframe, engine, propeller, rotor, and appliance. (iii) Thetime since lastoverhaul ofall items installed on the aircraftwhich are required to be overhauled on a specifiedtime basis. (iv) The current inspection status ofthe aircraft, including thetime sincethe last inspection required bythe inspection program underwhich the aircraftand its appliances are maintained. (v) Thecurrentstatus ofapplicable airworthiness directives (AD) and safetydirectives including, foreach, the method ofcompliance, theADorsafetydirective numberand revision date. IftheAD orsafetydirective involves recurring action, the time and datewhenthe next action is required. (vi) Copies oftheforms prescribed by §43.9(d) ofthis chapterforeach majoralteration to the airframeand currently installed engines, rotors, propellers, and appliances. (b) The owneroroperatorshall retain thefollowing recordsforthe periods prescribed:

(c)****. (1) The records specified in paragraph (a)(1) ofthis section shall be retained untilthework is repeated orsuperseded by otherworkorfor 1yearafterthework is performed. (2) The records specified in paragraph (a)(2) ofthis section shall be retained and transferredwith the aircraftatthetime the aircraft is sold. (3) A listofdefectsfurnished to a registered owneror operator under§43.11 ofthis chaptershall be retained until the defects are repaired and the aircraft is approvedfor return to service.



### -27-HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP lnspecTools requests an exemption from FAR§ 91.417(a) and (b) to permit lnspecTools to conduct UAS operations as proposed in this Petition without having to keepthe records described in FAR § 91.417(a) and (b). The FAA determined in the Astraeus Exemption that the proposed UAS operations required exemption from FAR § 91.417(a) and (b), and that an adequate level ofsafety required certain conditions and limitations. lnspecTools has proposed in this Petition maintenance, inspection, and records-related conditions and limitations which it believes provide a level ofsafety at leastequivalentto that provided by FAR§ 91.417(a) and (b). Forthis reason, and consistentwith the exemptions granted from this section in the AAIR Exemption and the Pro Drones Canada Exemption, lnspecTools requests an exemption from FAR § 91.417(a) and (b) to permit lnspecTools to conduct UAS operations as proposed in this Petition, subject to the proposed conditions and limitations, withouthaving to keepthe records described in FAR§91.417(a) and (b).

Additional FAR Provisions. The Petition does not seek exemption from certain regulations based on the reasoning and FAA precedent outlined below in the footnote.6 However, lnspecTools also requests that, to the

6 This Petition does not seekexemption from:

> FAR Part21 or36, based on the reasoning in the Astraeus Exemption, at 14.
> FAR§91.7(b), based on the reasoning in the Trimble Exemption, at 17.
> FAR §§ 91.9(b)(2) and 91.203(a) and (b), based on the reasoning in the FAA's August 8, 2014 Memorandum titled "Interpretation regarding whether certain required documents may be kept at an unmanned aircraft's control station" ("FAA's August 8, 2014 Memorandum"), the Astraeus Exemption, at 19-20, 22, and the Trimble Exemption, at 17, 20.

> FAR §§ 45.23(b) and 91.9(c), based on the reasoning in the Astraeus Exemption, at 14, and the Trimble Exemption, at 14, related to FAR§45.23(b), and assuming that the markings on the UA used to complywith FAR Part45, Subpart C requirements are as large as practicable.

> FAR§§ 47.3(b)(2) and 47.31(c), based on the reasoning in the FAA's August 8, 2014 Memorandum, and assuming that all UAare registered in accordancewith FAR Part47.
> FAR§91.103(b)(2), based on the FAA's reasoning in the Astraeus Exemption, at 20, which concluded that an exemption from the preflight action requirements is not necessarywhen the grantofan exemption for UAS operations includes conditions that satisfy preflight action requirements. lnspecTools proposes such conditions in this Petition.
28 \\DC 042005/000001
-6411847 v6HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP extent that the FAA concludes that an exemption from one or more other provisions of the FAR would be required to permit the UAS operations described in this Petition, the FAA grant an exemption from those FAR provisions as necessary to permit the UAS operations described in this Petition.7

5.4 Reasonswhy grantingthe requestwould be in the public interest: A grant ofthe requested exemption for small UAS commercial inspection and assessment operationswould be in the public interestfor several reasons. As discussed below, these operations would support cost-effective and safe renewable energy sources, and would enhance safety for the general public, lnspecTools' employees, its customers, and theiremployees. First, the ability to use a small UAS as described herein, subject to the conditions and limitations proposed in this Petition, would enable lnspecToolsto inspectand evaluatewind turbines and solar energy panels, thereby directly supporting the development, use, and safety ofrenewable energy. These UAS operations would support a critical element of President Obama's Advancing Clean Energy program. Second, these battery-powered UAS operations would have a net positive impact on the environment by replacing inspections conducted by larger, fuel-powered, and noisiermanned aircraft and by supporting clean energythat can displace othersources ofpowergenerationwhich createfar
more pollution. Third, lnspecTools' small UAS operations underthe requested exemption would reduce the operational costs of such renewable energy facilities (as compared to current inspection methods), thereby helping renewable energy be competitive in the market long term. In addition, the cost of

> FAR§ 91.109, based on the FAA's reasoning in the Astraeus Exemption, at 20, which concluded that an exemption from the requirement for dual flight controls forflight or simulatortraining orforflight testing is not necessary when there is no indication that dual flight controls will be used during any flight or simulatortraining orflighttesting. lnspecTools would be happy to provide follow-on documentation providing the rationale underlying any such additional exemptions.

- 29- IIDC 042005/000001-6411847v6HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP these inspections by the small, battery-powered ITX8 UAS and/or 3DR Solo UAS would be much lowerthan the cost ofsuch inspections performed with combustible fuel-consuming manned aircraft. By using the small UAS to conduct these inspections, the number of man-hours and the downtime necessaryfor inspectionswould also be significantly reduced. Fourth, the reduced cost ofinspection services resulting from the use ofthe small ITX8 UAS and/or3DR Solo UAS would likely result in more inspectionstaking place, which, in turn, would lead to the earlier identification offaults in wind turbine blades that could otherwise potentially result in a catastrophicfailure and apublic safetythreat. Fifth, the small ITX8 UAS, with electro-optical and infra-red sensors, as well as ultrasonic and laser-distance measuring devices, and the small 3DR Solo UAS with its camera would collect
more accurate data, therebyenabling the operators ofthe renewable energyfacilities to make better, more timely, and well-informed decisions about maintenance and repair issues. Additionally, the efficiencyofthe inspection process, through use ofUAS and the data delivery method, would enable decision-makers to address issues more quickly, which, in turn, would result in more production, whether it is replacing a broken or underperforming solar module or repairing a wind turbine blade and increasing its power performance. Sixth, the use ofthe small, extremely lightweight, battery-powered ITX8 UAS and 3DR Solo UAS to perform these aerial inspections of wind turbines and solar panels and related operations would be far less risky than undertaking those operations with much heavier, much faster, much larger, manned helicopters orotheraircraft loadedwith combustiblefuel and acrew. As the FAA acknowledged in the Total Safety Exemption, Exemption No. 11156 (January 29, 2015; Docket FAA-2014-0610) at 11-12: 'The [lnspecTools] pilot and crew will be remotely located from the aircraft. The limited weight and restricted sterile area significantly reduces the potential for harm to participating and nonparticipating individuals or property in the event ofan incident or accident. The risk to an onboard pilot and crew during an incident or accident is eliminated with the use of a UA for the inspection operation. In addition, utilizing UAS to conduct flare stack inspections will reduce the need for inspection personnel to performthis hazardous [inspection] activity. Manned aircraft are at risk of fuel spillage and fire in the event of an incident or accident. [The ITX8 UAS, as well as the 3DR Solo UAS,] carries no fuel [it is battery-

- 30- \\DC 042005/000001 -6411847v6HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP powered], and therefore the risk offire following an incident or accident due to fuel spillage is eliminated." Seventh, these small UAS operations would also be much less risky than having employees undertake the inspections directly by climbing the wind turbines. In addition, the use of the small UAS for these inspections would reduce the safety risks for workers who are currently in the field performing these inspections on-site, and theirexposureto environmental and otherhazards specific to the site and scope of work. To this point, the FAA has concluded - in the context of bridge inspections (which are "typically conducted by personnel who physically inspectthe bridge") -thatan appropriately tailored and limited exemption for commercial UAS operations would be in the public interest because "utilizing UAS to conduct bridge inspections will reduce the need for inspection personnel to perform this hazardous activity as well as traffic hazards related to blocking lanes on the roadway." Asymmetric Technologies Exemption,8 at 8-9. The FAA has reached similar conclusions in the contextoftower/structure inspectionsandflare stack inspections. 'Tower and structure inspections are hazardous and present unique difficulties for persons conducting inspections and maintenance of this infrastructure. The inspections are normally conducted utilizing personnel to physically inspectthe tower and structure. Manned helicopters may also be used to transport inspection personnel to the top of the tower so that a physical inspection may be conducted. The petitioner plans to utilize a UAS to provide high definition aerial photography to minimize the need for inspectors to personally climb such structures. Manned helicopters assisting in tower and structure inspections can weigh 6,000 pounds or more and are operated by an onboard pilot, in addition to other onboard crewmembers, as necessary.... [U]tilizing UAS to conduct tower inspections will reducethe needfor inspection personnelto perform this hazardous activity
...." LowCountryRC Exemption,9 at 2-3; see also Total Safety Exemption, at 11-12 ("utilizing UAS to conduct flare stack inspections will reduce the need for inspection personnel to perform this hazardous [inspection] activity").

8 Exemption No. 11171 (February 10, 2015; Docket FAA-2014-0816) ("Asymmetric Technologies Exemption"). 9 Exemption No. 11184 (February 23, 2015; Docket FAA-2014-0803) ("LowCountryRC Exemption").
31 - IIOC 042005/000001 -6411847v6HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP These distinctions, coupled with the safety-related features ofthe ITX8 UAS (as described in the next Section), such as Lost Link Procedures, backup redundant communications links, "return home" modes, and real-time telemetry, demonstrate that the ITX8 UAS inspection and assessment operations proposed in this Petition would be far less risky than if conducted with larger, faster, heavier, combustible fuel-powered manned aircraft or by personnel climbing wind turbines or inspecting solar panels. The 3DR Solo UAS also has safety features, including "Pause", "Return Home", and emergency motor shut-offfeatures. In addition, it has a substantial alert system for various types of
errors and an altitude limit mechanism. In sum, lnspecTools' proposed approach would allow renewable power generation equipment to be inspected and assessed in a safer, more reliable, more economical, and timely manner.5.5 Reasonswhy grantingthe exemptionwould notadverselyaffectsafety, or howtheexemption would providea level ofsafety at leastequaltothat provided bythe rule from which exemption is sought: Throughout this Petition, lnspecTools has explained many reasons why granting an exemption from each section ofthe FAR from which relief is soughtwould result in UAS operations that provide a level of safety equal to, or greater than, that provided by the rule from which exemption is sought. Moreover, the many conditions and limitations proposed in this Petition, coupled with the operational protocolsforthese small UAS, also would ensure at leastan equivalent level ofsafety, as the FAA concluded in the LowCountryRC Exemption, the Total Safety Exemption, the AAIR Exemption, the Pro Drones Canada Exemption, and theTrimble Exemption, among others. In general, the risks of any small UAS operation proposed in this Petition interfering with a manned aircraftwould be minimized by numerousfactors, including but not limited to: ? the lowaltitude atwhich the UAS would operate; ? the locations at which the UAS would operate (e.g., remote areas; private or controlled access property; awayfrom airports; and, with respectto wind turbinetowers, designated "no fly" zones);

- 32- \\DC
- 0420051000001 6411847v6HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP ";;- the small size, lightweight, and relatively slowspeed ofthe ITX8 UAS and the 3DR Solo UAS; 

## > the restriction on UAS operationsto VMC and daytime conditions; and ";;- the requirementforthe PICto maintainVLOS ofthe UA atall times. Importantly, the ITX8 UAS has several other safety-related protocols in case there is any lost link between the UA and the operator; the Lost Link Procedures are set out in the Manuals and can handle lost links alone or in combination. The ITX8 UAS also has backup communications links. The primary control interface is via Spread Spectrum Frequency Hopping technology for an extremely robust radio RF link; the backup system is via atelemetry linkto the Ground Station. The ITX8 UAS also has several return home modes - Return to Launch, Land at nearest specified landing zone, or land immediately. The "return home" mode is selected based on pre-programmed criteria.The 3DR Solo UAS also has several important safeguards. It has an altitude limit mechanism and battery power alerts. It has a "pause" feature whereby the 3DR Solo UAS can be stopped mid-air, as well as an emergency motorshut-off. And, likethe ITX8 UAS, the 3DR UAS has
a"return home" capability. The risks to persons or property on the ground would be substantially mitigated - if not eliminated - by these same factors, as well as the 500-foot set-offfrom non-participating persons, vehicles, and structures absent additional safeguards. Per the conditions and limitations proposed in this Petition, (i) the PIC will adhere to the written emergency procedures in the Manuals and suspend/abortthe UAS operation and UAflight in the eventofunpredicted obstacles oremergencies in accordance with the Manuals; and (ii) lnspecTools will coordinate extensively, as warranted, with the FAA, with local airports, and with property owners to ensure that all UAS operations under the exemption are at leastas safe as would be manned aircraftoperations used forsimilarpurposes. These conditions and limitations proposed in this Petition and the operational safetyfeatures of the ITX8 UAS and the 3DR Solo UAS provide substantial protection against interference with manned aircraft operations or with the safety of persons or property on the ground. For these

- 33- \\DC 042005/000001-6411847v6HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP reasons, granting an exemption from each section ofthe FAR from which relief is soughtwould not adversely affect safety, and would provide a level of safety at least equal to, or greater than, that provided bythe rulefrom which exemption is sought.

5.6 Summary that can be published in Federal Register, including the rule from which exemption is sought, and a brief description of the nature of the exemption sought: lnspecTools proposesthatthe FAA usethefollowing as the summary: Docket No.: FAA-2015-
__ _ Petitioner: lnspecTools, LLC Sections of14 CFR: 61.23(a) and (c), 61.101(e)(4) and (5), 61.113(a) and (b), 61.315(a), (c)(2), and (c)(3), 91.7(a), 91.119(c), 91.121, 91.151, 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) and (2), and 91.417(a) and (b). Description ofReliefSought: Petitionerseeks an exemptionto conductsmall UAS commercial operationsfor inspections ofwind turbines, the corresponding blades, and solarpanels, asset risk mitigation, and/orwildlife/wilderness conservation.
5.7 Additional informationthatsupports request: lnspecTools is prepared to provide additional information that the FAA mightfind helpful, or to answerquestions in responseto any FAA requests.

5.8 Requestto exercisethe privileges ofthe exemption outsidethe U.S.: lnspecTools does not requestto exercise the privileges ofthis exemption outside the United States. lnspecTools plans to undertake UAS inspection operations outside of the USA, but understands that the requested exemption applies only to the USA, where the FAA hasjurisdiction, and thatareas outsidethe USAwould be regulated by otherentities.

5.9 Attachments: There are no attachmentsaccompanyingthis Petition.

-34- \\DC·042005/000001 -6411847 v6HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP 6. CONCLUSION Forthe foregoing reasons, lnspecTools respectfully requests thatthe FAA grantthis Petition for Exemption.

- 35- \\DC
- 042005/000001 6411847 v6 Respectfully submitted,

E. Tazewell Ellett Patrick R. Rizzi Hogan Lovells US LLP COUNSELFORINSPECTOOLS