ArgenTech Solutions, Inc.

16701 SE McGillivray Suite 210

Vancouver, WA 98683 9 July, 2015

Brenda Robeson Program Analyst, Airmen and Airspace Rules Division 800 Independence Ave. SW Washington, D.C. 20591

Dear Ms. Robeson

We are in receipt of your letter dated 26 June, 2015 notifying us of the FAA request for additional information required to process our request for e xemption from several provisions of Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R .). In your letter you indicated we needed to provide: “The reasons why grantin g the request would be in the public interest: That is, how it would benefit the public as a whol e.” The section below provides the requested information. Also attached is our original request with the paragraphs below inserted to provide a complete

document.

Reason why granting the request would be in the public interest

This exemption application is submitted to fulf ill Congress’ goal in passing Section 333(a) through (c) of the Reform Act. This law direct s the Secretary of Transportation to consider whether certain unmanned aircraft systems may ope rate safely in the NAS before completion of the rulemaking required under S ection 332 under the same act. By granting an exemption the FAA will fulfill Congress’ intent of allowing UAS to operate with significant safety precautions in low risk environments.” See Exempti on No. 11335, Regulatory Docket No. FAA–2014-1106, p.11

The use of small unmanned aircraft (sUAS) for infrastructure inspection can significantly reduce the risk to workers of falls while inspecting, su rveying, or monitoring numerous projects. sUAS can inspect, photograph, and collect real time data in hard to get to areas that as of now require worker inspection. Falls are the leading source of workplace fatality and injury on construction sites accounting for 36% of total deaths accordin g to OSHA statistics a nd a reduction of falls through the use sUAS for site imaging and insp ection could save workers’ lives, which is undoubtedly in the public interest. The petitioned aircraft is under the fifty-five pound threshold and carries no combustible material on board, as opposed to the much larger conventionally powered aircraft. Shifting to sUAS from other ma nned assets presents a marked safety increase for workers and the public. See similar approv ed Exemption No. 11335, Regulatory Docket No. FAA–2014-1106, p 11ArgenTech Solutions, Inc.

16701 SE McGillivray Suite 210

Vancouver, WA 98683 As stated “The FAA finds that a grant of exempti on is in the public interest. The enhanced safety achieved using a UA with the specifications described by the petiti oner and carrying no passengers or crew, rather than a manned aircra ft of significantly great er proportions, carrying crew in addition to flammable fuel, gives th e FAA good cause to find that the UAS operation enabled by this exemption is in the public interest.” See Exemption No. 11062, Regulatory Docket No. FAA–2014–0352, p. 22

Thank you for the notification and allowing us to provide the addi tional information. Should you have any further request for information, pl ease feel free to cont act me again.

Respectfully,

Marcel Piet

President

‐ UAS Services

603

‐ 836

‐ 0588 X122 | Cell: 207

‐ 651

‐ 3476

Email: mpiet@agts.usArgenTech Solutions, Inc.

16701 SE McGillivray Suite 210

Vancouver, WA 98683 Manager, Flight Standards Service

Unmanned Aircraft Systems Integration Office

Federal Aviation Administration 800 Independence A venue, SW Washington, DC 20591

U.S. Department of Transportation Docket Management System

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Washington, DC 20590

ArgenTech Solutions respectfully requests an exemption from several provisions of Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R .) to permit the use of small unmanned aerial systems (sUAS) to assist in the evaluation and inspection of Public Utilities, Infrastructure, Forest Fire monitoring and Emergency Public Res ponse. This request is motivated primarily by the desire to maximize safety during hazardous op erations, as well as assisting with public emergencies and to mitigate any safety concerns associated with such operations. While an exemption would not eliminate the current need fo r in-person visual insp ection and monitoring it would allow ArgenTech Solutions to evaluate asse ts and infrastructure with sUAS, resulting in a safer and more efficient valuation of public util ities, infrastructure, wild fire monitoring and emergency public response.

Company Profile

ArgenTech Solutions (AgTS) is a Veteran-Owned Small Business that was formed in March 2009 as a NH-based S-corporation. Our co mpany core competencies include providing Unmanned Aerial System (UAS) Field Service Representatives (FSRs) in support of DoD and civilian industry. AgTS is a professional avia tion organization with significant experience in UAV operation.

AgTS has supported 182 deployments with a combined total of 20,000 deployed days. As an aggregate, AgTS’ 50 highly trained Field Serv ice Representative’s (FSR) have accumulated over 40,000 hours of experience as Pilot in Co mmand (PIC) with over 13,000 UAS launches and recoveries for Group II and higher UAS. Our aver age FSR experience level is >950 hours PIC,

>650 launches and recoveries.

NOTE:

All information pertaining to this system can be found in Appendix A (OEM manual).ArgenTech Solutions, Inc.

16701 SE McGillivray Suite 210

Vancouver, WA 98683 ArgenTech Solutions hold's Unmanned Aircraft in surance with United States Aircraft Insurance Group (Policy Number SIHL1-142Y).

ArgenTech Solutions intends to use the 3DR obotics Aero-M (The OEM Manual of which is attached as Appendix A) in its sUAS operations.

ArgenTech intends to adopt

ASTM F2500-07 Standard Practice for Unma nned Aircraft System (UAS) Visual Range Flight Operations (Attached as Appendix B)

ASTM F2909-14 Standard Practice for Main tenance and Continued Airworthiness of small Unmanned Aircraft Systems (Attached as Appendix C).

Reason why granting the request would be in the public interest

This exemption application is submitted to fulf ill Congress’ goal in passing Section 333(a) through (c) of the Reform Act. This law direct s the Secretary of Transportation to consider whether certain unmanned aircraft systems may ope rate safely in the NAS before completion of the rulemaking required under S ection 332 under the same act. By granting an exemption the FAA will fulfill Congress’ intent of allowing UAS to operate with significant safety precautions in low risk environments.” See Exempti on No. 11335, Regulatory Docket No. FAA–2014-1106, p.11

The use of small unmanned aircraft (sUAS) for infrastructure inspection can significantly reduce the risk to workers of falls while inspecting, su rveying, or monitoring numerous projects. sUAS can inspect, photograph, and collect real time data in hard to get to areas that as of now require worker inspection. Falls are the leading source of workplace fatality and injury on construction sites accounting for 36% of total deaths accordin g to OSHA statistics a nd a reduction of falls through the use sUAS for site imaging and insp ection could save workers’ lives, which is undoubtedly in the public interest. The petitioned aircraft is under the fifty-five pound threshold and carries no combustible material on board, as opposed to the much larger conventionally powered aircraft. Shifting to sUAS from other ma nned assets presents a marked safety increase for workers and the public. See similar approv ed Exemption No. 11335, Regulatory Docket No. FAA–2014-1106, p 11

As stated “The FAA finds that a grant of exempti on is in the public interest. The enhanced safety achieved using a UA with the specifications described by the petiti oner and carrying no passengers or crew, rather than a manned aircra ft of significantly great er proportions, carrying crew in addition to flammable fuel, gives th e FAA good cause to find that the UAS operation enabled by this exemption is in the public interest.” See Exemption No. 11062, Regulatory Docket No. FAA–2014–0352, p. 22ArgenTech Solutions, Inc.

16701 SE McGillivray Suite 210

Vancouver, WA 98683 Regulatory Provisions from which Arge nTech Solutions seeks an Exemption

ArgenTech Solutions believes it may need an exemption from the following provisions to conduct the contemplated operations. In some inst ances, relief is needed because relief from another provision renders compliance w ith the regulation at hand infeasible.

14 C.F.R. §61.113(a) and (b) 14 C.F.R. §91.7(a) 14 C.F.R. §91.9(b)(2) 14 C.F.R. §91.109(a) 14 C.F.R. §91.119 14 C.F.R. §91.151 14 C.F.R. §91.203(a) and (b) 14 C.F.R. §91.405(a) 14 C.F.R. §91.407(a) 14 C.F.R. §91.409(a)

ArgenTech Solutions believes an exempti on is only needed from the above-listed regulatory provisions. To the exte nt that the FAA believes that additional relief is required for ArgenTech Solutions to conduct the operations de scribed here, we request an exemption from any such regulatory provisions as well.

The Extent of Requested Relief an d the Reasons Relief is Needed

14 C.F.R. §61.113(a) and (b)

§61.113 Private pilot privileges and limitations: Pilot in command. (a) Except as provided in paragraphs (b) through (h) of this section, no person who holds a private pilot certificate may act as pilot in command of an aircraft that is carrying passengers or property for compensation or hire; nor may that person, for compensation or hire, act as pilot in command of an aircraft. (b) A private pilot may, for compensation or hire, act as pilot in command of an aircraft in connection with any business or employment if: (1) The flight is only incidental to that business or employment; and (2) The aircraft does not carry passeng ers or property for compensation or

hire.ArgenTech Solutions, Inc.

16701 SE McGillivray Suite 210

Vancouver, WA 98683 ArgenTech Solutions specially trained employees will conduct the sUAS operations. While these individuals will have private pilot licenses, th ey will not hold commercial pilot licenses. The sUAS will not carry property for compensation or hire since they will be used solely to assist in evaluation and inspections of public utilities and infrastructure. W ithout an exemption, the pilot would be required to hold a commercial pilot certific ate under §61.133. However, the risk associated with the contemplated operations is less than the risk posed by a traditional aircraft. The sUAS will fly at altitudes well below the permissible limits for other civil aircraft, eliminating the risk to other aircraft, and within a geographical envelope under the sole control of ArgenTech Solutions. Accordingly, the risk w ould be limited to ArgenTech personnel, who will be appropriately outfitted in safety gear. Requiring a commercial pilot certificate would provide no appreciable safety benefit and would needlessly impose additional cost on ArgenTech. Because the contemplated operations would not comply with §61.113(b)(1) and none of the other exceptions to paragraph (a) apply, relief is needed from both paragraphs (a) and (b).

14 C.F.R. 91.7(a)

§91.7 Civil aircraft airworthiness

. (a) No person may operate a civil aircraft unless it is in an airworthy condition. (b) The pilot in command of a civil ai rcraft is responsible for determining

whether that aircraft is in condition for safe flight . The pilot in command shall discontinue the flight wh en un-airworthy mechanical, electrical, or structural

conditions occur.

There is no clear definition of “airworthy,” a nd the term has been defined in various ways depending on the circumstances. In all instances, it appears that the concept includes a requirement that the airplane 1) conforms to the ai rcraft’s type design or its type certificate, as modified by supplemental type certificates and ai rworthiness directives, and 2) be in condition for safe operations. The sUAS will not have a type design or type certificate, as the FAA has not developed standards applicable to sUAS. As di scussed later in this document, the types of operations contemplated by ArgenTech will not qualify the sUAS for an experimental

airworthiness certificate. Accordi ngly, relief from §91.7(a) is required. Should the FAA include airworthiness requirements as a condition of ex ercising the exemption, ArgenTech will assure

the continued airworthin ess of the sUAS. Regardless, ArgenTech believes that it can meet the requirements of §91.7(b) and is not requesting an exemption from that provision.

14 C.F.R. 91.9(b)(2)

§91.9 Civil aircraft flight manual, marking, and placard requirements.

*** (b) No person may operate a U.S.-registered civil aircraft --ArgenTech Solutions, Inc.

16701 SE McGillivray Suite 210

Vancouver, WA 98683 *** (2) For which an Airplane or Rotorcra ft Flight Manual is not required by §21.5 of this chapter unless there is available in the aircraft a current, approved manual material, markings, and placards, or any combination thereof.

*****

The sUAS comes with access to online manuals that provide instructions for the safe operation and maintenance of the aircraft. Compliance with this regulatory provision is not possible because this information has not been, and cannot be, approved by the FAA since there are no applicable standards established by the F AA against which to evaluate it. Additionally, the sUAS is too small to carry a printed manua l. Since, by definition, there will never be a person aboard the sUAS, ArgenTech submits that th ere is no need to require the manual to be placed on the sUAS and an exemption is appropri ate. Safety will be maintained by keeping the flight manual at the ground control point where the PIC will have immediate access to it. Since the sUAS cannot be operated without the Ground C ontrol Station containing the manuals, there

is minimal risk that the manuals will become separated from the sUAS, and ArgenTech will be able to immediately locate the manuals to effectuate any needed repairs on the sUAS detailed in the flight manual.

14 C.F.R. 91.109

§91.109 Flight instruction; simulated instrument flight and certain flight

tests.

(a) No person may operate a civil aircra ft (except a manned free balloon) that is being used for flight instruction unless that aircraft has fully functioning dual

controls....

Small UASs, by their design, do not have fully functional dual controls . Flight control is accomplished through the use of a Ground Control St ation that communicates with the aircraft via radio communications (C2 Link) . Aircraft being considered fo r use by ArgenTech allows the UAS Instructor to place the aircraft into ‘loite r’ mode (fixed altitude stationary hold). In the event of the student losing cont rol, the UAS Instructor can quic kly and via alternate equipment

(equipment not in the hands of th e student) place the aircraft into a mode that then allows the instructor to bring the aircraft back into cont rol and back to the pre-determined and/or safe landing location.

14 C.F.R. 91.119

§91.119 Minimum safe altitudes: General.ArgenTech Solutions, Inc.

16701 SE McGillivray Suite 210

Vancouver, WA 98683 Except when necessary for takeoff or land ing, no person may operate an aircraft below the following altitudes:

*** (c) Over other than congested areas. An altitude of 500 feet above the surface, except over open water or sparsely populat ed areas. In those cases, the aircraft may not be operated closer than 500 f eet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or

structure.

*****

ArgenTech submits that the only relief it re quires from §91.119 is from the minimum altitudes listed in paragraph (c). Relief is re quired from paragraph (c) for fixed wing operations

because asset evaluation conducted at 500 feet or higher is insufficiently distinct to be meaningful. Since operations at this altitude also pose a heightened risk of collision with another aircraft, safety can only be assured through the gr ant of an exemption. The anticipated aircraft operations should be adequately addressed by para graph (d) (1). Additionally, relief should not be needed from paragraph (a) because an emer gency landing of the aircraft due to a power failure will not create an undue hazard to persons or property on the surface. As noted in the explanation of why an exemption will not adversely affect safety,

ArgenTech will have exclusive use of the land over which the sUAS will be operated, and public access is restricted. C ontrolled access to public utility land, structures or emergency response areas assure that no individuals unassociat ed with the planned oper ations are within the affected area of operations. ArgenTech pers onnel are required to wear mandatory safety equipment, including hard hats, safety glasses when ever dispatched to a work site. As such, the risk of injury is minimal. ArgenTech does not contemplate conducting oper ations over congested areas, so relief is not requ ested from paragraph (b).

14 C.F.R. 91.151

§91.151 Fuel requirements for flight in VFR conditions.

(a) No person may begin a flight in an airplane under VF R conditions unless (considering wind and forecast weather c onditions) there is enough fuel to fly to the first point of intended landing and, assuming normal cruising speed – (1) During the day, to fly afte r that for at least 30 minutes.ArgenTech Solutions, Inc.

16701 SE McGillivray Suite 210

Vancouver, WA 98683 (b) No person may begin a flight in a rotorcraft under VFR conditions unless (considering wind and forecast weather c onditions) there is enough fuel to fly to the first point of intended landing and, assuming normal cruising speed, to fly

after that for at least 20 minutes.

Operating the sUAS in a pre-defined area with less than 30 minutes of reserve fuel does not raise the type of risk contemplated by §91.151, i. e., that an aircraft could run out of fuel in the event it has to be flown to an alternate airpor t or circle the planned airport in the event of unanticipated conditions. ArgenTech does not intend to use the s UAS for point-to-point flights and will not operate the sUAS beyond visual line of sight. Nor will the sUAS require an airport in order to land. Rather, ArgenTech will operate the sUAS using pre-planned flight paths (taking into account weather conditions) designed to allo w the sUAS to fly to the point of intended landing. As such, there is no need for a time-bas ed excess fuel requiremen t. Rather it should be sufficient to require only as much additional excess flight capacity as necessary to safely land the sUAS. We believe that a 20% energy reserve is more than sufficient to meet this objective.

14 C.F.R. 91.203(a) and (b)

§ 91.203 Civil Aircraft: Certifications required. (a) Except as provided in §91.715, no pers on may operate a civil aircraft unless it has within it the following: (1) An appropriate and current airworthiness certificate. *** (2) An effective U.S. registration ce rtificate issued to its owner or, for operations within the United Stat es, the second copy of the Aircraft Registration Application as provided for in §47.31(c), or a registration certification issued under the laws of a foreign country. (b) No person may operate a civil airc raft unless the airworthiness certificate required by paragraph (a) of this section or a special flight authorization issued under §91.715 is displayed at the cabin or cockpit entran ce so that it is legible to

passengers or crew. *****

The sUAS that ArgenTech intends to operate will not qualify for an airworthiness certificate

unless the FAA chooses to issue them a restricted category certificate. This is because the sUAS

do not meet the current conditions for either a standard airworthine ss certificate or an experimental airworthin ess certificate. Notably, under 14 C.F.R. §21.191, 8 experimental airworthiness certificates are only available for research and development, showing compliance with regulations, crew training, exhibitions, air racing, market su rveys, operating amateur-built aircraft, operating primary kit-built aircraft and operating light-sport aircraft. Until such time asArgenTech Solutions, Inc.

16701 SE McGillivray Suite 210

Vancouver, WA 98683 the FAA develops airworthiness standards a pplicable to sUAS for non-recreational and nonexperimental use, ArgenTech submits that the FAA should consider exemptions to the requirements of §91.203(a). The absence of such exemptions hinders the development of sUAS and applicable uniform standards since it is only through the devel opment of the aircraft that the FAA can reliably evaluate them and de termine appropriate design standards.

Section 333 of the Modernization Act authoriz es the FAA to exempt aircraft from the requirement for an airworthiness certificate base d on a consideration of the size, weight, speed, operational capability of the particular UAS, as we ll as its proximity to airports and populated areas. An analysis of these criteria demonstrates that the sUAS operated without an airworthiness

certificate in the areas and under the conditions c ontemplated by ArgenTech will be at least as safe, or safer, than a conventional aircraft (fixed wing or rotorcraft) operating with an

airworthiness certificate without the conditions proposed in th is request. The sUAS is less than 55 lbs. fully loaded, carries neither a pilot no r passenger, and operates exclusively within a secured area as set out in the UAS Operating Ma nual (Appendix B). Unlike other civil aircraft, operations under this exemption will be tightly controlled and monitored by the operator and observer. Operations will be conducted in complia nce with the FAA and with local public safety requirements to provide security for the area of operation. Lastly, app lication of these same criteria demonstrates that there is no credible threat to national security posed by the sUAS, due to its size, speed of operation, location of operati on, lack of explosive materials and inability to carry a substantial external load.

If the FAA waives the requirements of paragr aph (a) (1), then it is technically impossible to comply with paragraph (b), so an exemption is merited there as well.

14 C.F.R. 91.405(a), 91.407(a) (1) and 14 C.F.R. 91.409(a)

§91.405 Maintenance required. Each owner or operator of an aircraft – (a) Shall have that aircraft inspected as prescribed in subpart E of this part and shall between required inspections, except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, have discrepancies repaired as prescribed in part 43 of this chapter;

*****

§91.407 Operation after maintenance, p reventive maintenance, rebuilding, or

alteration. (a) No person may operate any aircra ft that has undergone maintenance, rebuilding, or alteration unless – (1) It has been approved for return to service by a pers on authorized under §43.7 of this chapter;

*****

§91.409 Inspections.ArgenTech Solutions, Inc.

16701 SE McGillivray Suite 210

Vancouver, WA 98683 (a) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, no pe rson may operate an aircraft unless, within the preced ing 12 calendar months, it has had __ (1) An annual inspection in accordan ce with part 43 of this chapter and has been approved for return to servi ce by a person authorized by §43.7 of this chapter; or (2) An inspection for the issuance of an airworthiness certificate in accordance with part 21 of this chapter.

*****

ArgenTech believes that an exemption from these three maintenance requirements is appropriate because the FAA has not developed maintenance standards that would allow an operator to meet the part 91 maintenance requir ements. In particular, there are no individuals authorized by the FAA to approve a sUAS for return to service under §91.407(a) or to conduct

the initial airworthiness and annual return to service in spections required by §91.409(a). ArgenTech will maintain the aircraft as in structed in the owner’s manual and ASTM F2909(Attached as Appendix C), where applicable, and will not operate the aircraft until it has reasonably determined that any needed repairs have been made. However, because of the technical impossibility of meeting the requirements of §§91.405(a), 407(a) and 409(a), we believe an exemption from these provisions is appropriate.

Please do not hesitate to contact me at the phone number or via the e-mail address provided above should you have any questions or concerns.

Respectfully,

Marcel Piet

President

‐ UAS Services

603

‐ 836

‐ 0588 X122 | Cell: 207

‐ 651

‐ 3476

Email: mpiet@agts.usArgenTech Solutions, Inc.

16701 SE McGillivray Suite 210

Vancouver, WA 98683 Summary for Federal Register Publication

Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. Part 11, the following su mmary is provided for publication in the Federal Register should the FAA determine that publication is needed.

Petitioner: ArgenTech Solutions

Sections of 14 C.F.R. Affected: 14 C.F.R. §61.113(a) and (b) 14 C.F.R. §91.7(a) 14 C.F.R. §91.9(b) (2) 14 C.F.R. §91.109(a) 14 C.F.R. §91.119 14 C.F.R. §91.151 14 C.F.R. §91.203(a) and (b) 14 C.F.R. §91.405(a) 14 C.F.R. §91.407(a) 14 C.F.R. §91.409(a)

Description of Relief Sought: Petitioner seeks relief from th e requirements of 14 C.F.R. §§45.29, 61.113(a) & (b), 91.7(a), 91.9(b)(2), 91.119, 91.121(a), 91.151, 91.203(a) &(b), 91.405(a), 91.407(a) and 91.409(a) to conduct sUAS opera tions over privet and publicly owned or controlled land, solely during day light hours, to assist in the sa fe evaluation and analysis of public utility's and infrastructure and operations. In general, sUAS operations are intended to be

conducted in areas remote from both congested areas and airports . The nature of operations anticipated by ArgenTech requires th at the sUAS be flown at relati vely low altitudes. ArgenTech expects that in most instances, the sUAS will be flown less than 75 feet from the highest structure along the path of the sUAS and in no in stances will be flown higher than 400 feet above the ground. Accordingly, the risk of interf erence with other airc raft is minimal.