sd-655014 

Writer’s Direct Contact 

+1 (858) 720.7932 

WOConnor@mofo.com 

12531 HIGH BLUFF DRIVE 

SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 

92130-2040 

TELEPHONE: 858.720.5100 

FACSIMILE: 858.720.5125 

WWW.MOFO.COM 

MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP

BEIJING , BERLIN , BRUSSELS , DENVER , 

HONG KONG , LONDON , LOS ANGELES , 

NEW YORK , NORTHERN VIRGINIA , 

PALO ALTO , SACRAMENTO , SAN DIEGO , 

SAN FRANCISCO , SHANGHAI , SINGAPORE ,

TOKYO , WASHINGTON , D . C . 

February 9, 2015 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Docket Operations, M-30 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE 

Room W12-140, West Building Ground Floor 

Washington, DC 20590-0001 

Re: Petition of Pro Drones Canada Inc. for an Exemption Pursuant to Section 333 of 

the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 to Operate an Unmanned Aircraft 

System

Dear Sir or Madam: 

Pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (the Reform 

Act) and 14 C.F.R. Part 11, Pro Drones Canada Inc. (Pro Drones),1

 the North American 

manufacturer and operator of the DT-18, hereby applies for an exemption from the Federal 

Aviation Regulations identified below. 

The requested exemption would permit Pro Drones’ commercial operation of the DT-18, 

which is a lightweight, electric powered aircraft. The DT-18 was the first UAV to obtain a 

S4 Permit from the French Aviation Authority (DGAC), allowing for flight beyond line of 

sight. However, Pro Drones agrees to limit its operations of the DT-18 in the United States 

to within visual line of sight of the pilot in command (PIC). The DT-18 can be used for a 

variety of purposes, including oil and gas pipeline inspections, solar installation inspections, 

power line/cable inspections, cooling tower inspections, forestry, critical infrastructure 

inspections, wind turbine inspections, safety and security monitoring, radiation measurement, 

surveying, and mapping. 

As discussed below, Pro Drones is willing to abide by conditions the FAA has required 

in issuing recent Section 333 exemptions, specifically Exemptions 11109 (Clayco, Inc.) 

and 11110 (Trimble Navigation Ltd.). This agreement and the strong similarity of its 

operations to those approved in Exemptions 11109 and 11110 should give the FAA a basis 

for expedited consideration and processing of Pro Drones’ request. 

 

1

 Pro Drones Canada Inc. dba Avyon, www.Avyon.com, and dba Flyterra, www.Flyterra.com.
U.S. Department of Transportation 

February 9, 2015 

Page Two 

sd-655014 

Use of the DT-18 for survey and inspection activities reduces the need to operate 

conventional aircraft for the same purposes and provides extremely high quality imagery and 

modeling at a fraction of the price and time for the same activities done by conventional 

aircraft. Use of the DT-18 therefore results in enhanced efficiency, environmental benefits, 

and increased safety. 

Operation under the requested exemption will be subject to strict operating parameters, set 

forth more fully herein. These parameters will ensure at least an equivalent level of safety to 

currently authorized operation using manned aircraft.2

I. REGULATIONS FOR WHICH EXEMPTION IS REQUESTED 

Pro Drones requests exemption from the following regulations: 

 14 C.F.R Part 21, Subpart H; 

 14 C.F.R Part 27; 

 14 C.F.R § 45.23(b); 

 14 C.F.R. § 45.27(a); 

 14 C.F.R § 61.113; 

 14 C.F.R § 91.7(a); 

 14 C.F.R § 91.9(b)(2); 

 14 C.F.R § 91.9(c); 

 14 C.F.R § 91.103; 

 14 C.F.R § 91.109(a); 

 14 C.F.R § 91.119; 

 14 C.F.R § 91.121; 

 14 C.F.R § 91.151(a) & (b) 

 14 C.F.R § 91.203 (a) & (b); 

 14 C.F.R § 91.405(a); 

 14 C.F.R § 91.407(a)(l); 

 14 C.F.R § 91.409(a)(2); 

 14 C.F.R § 91.417 (a) & (b). 

This petition incorporates the material contained in the Pro Drones DT-18 Operations, 

Inspection, and Maintenance Manual, the Pro Drones DT-18 Training/Experience Manual, 

and the DT-18 Operator Manual, (together, the “Manuals” at Attachments 1-3). The Manuals 

are submitted herewith as confidential under 14 C.F.R. § 11.35(b), because they contain 

 

2

 While Pro Drones is filing this petition for exemption on its own behalf, it anticipates that future customers 

may file exemptions to allow them to operate the DT-18 at their own facilities, which will be substantially 

similar to this petition. 
U.S. Department of Transportation 

February 9, 2015 

Page Three 

sd-655014 

commercial and proprietary information that Pro Drones has not and will not share with 

others, is not available to the public, and is protected from release under the Freedom of 

Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552 et seq. 

II. STATUTORY AUTHORITY FOR REQUESTED EXEMPTIONS 

This petition for exemption is submitted in accordance with Section 333 of the Reform Act. 

Congress has directed the FAA “to safely accelerate the integration of civil unmanned 

aircraft systems into the national airspace system.” Pursuant to Section 333 of the Reform 

Act, the FAA Administrator is to permit operation of an unmanned aircraft system where it 

does not create a hazard to users of the national airspace system (NAS) or the public or pose 

a threat to national security based on the following considerations: 

 The size, weight, speed and operational capability; 

 Operation in proximity to airports and populated areas; and 

 Operation within visual line of sight of the operator. 

Furthermore, the Federal Aviation Act grants the FAA Administrator general authority to 

grant exemptions from the agency’s safety regulations and minimum standards when the 

Administrator decides a requested exemption is in the public interest. See 49 U.S.C. §§ 

106(f), 44701-44716, et seq. A party requesting an exemption must explain the reasons why 

the exemption: (1) would benefit the public as a whole, and (2) would not adversely affect 

safety or how it would provide a level of safety at least equal to the existing rules. 14 C.F.R. 

§ 11.81. 

III. DESCRIPTION OF PRO DRONES AND ITS SERVICES 

Pro Drones provides professional Unmanned Aircraft System solutions, delivering 

customized services with its UAS products including surveying and mapping solutions. 

Pro Drones is based in New York (USA) and Alma (Canada). In 2014, Pro Drones acquired 

the exclusive rights to manufacture, distribute and develop custom solutions for Microdrones 

products in North America. Pro Drones also sells Delair-Tech products, including the DT-18. 

Pro Drones provides UAS solutions for utilities, allowing for safer and high precision 

inspections of sites including power lines, pipelines, railways, and wind farms. Pro Drones’ 

services also support security and safety operations, such as monitoring or searching hard to 

access areas. Pro Drones’ products also allow unprecedented access to geospatial data to 

support civil engineering projects. The UAS products can also provide detailed and timely 

crop information from scouting land and conducting multispectral imagery collection. 
U.S. Department of Transportation 

February 9, 2015 

Page Four 

sd-655014 

The contact information for Pro Drones is as follows: 

 

Vivien Hériard Dubreuil 

Pro Drones Higher Solutions 

President 

www.Pro Drones.com

Tel (418) 800-0403 

vivien@Pro Drones.com

C/O William V. O’Connor

William D. Janicki 

Joanna L. Simon 

Morrison & Foerster LLP 

12531 High Bluff Drive 

San Diego, CA 92130 

Tel (858) 720-5100 

WOConnor@mofo.com WJanicki@mofo.com

JoannaSimon@mofo.com

IV. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED OPERATIONS 

A. The DT-18 

The DT-18 was conceived and manufactured by Delair-Tech. Over ten DT-18 have been sold 

to date. Globally, the DT-18 has completed 521 flights for a total of 231 flight hours and 

12,600 km covered. 

The DT-18 is hand launched and lands on its belly. It typically lands with a 5m precision. 

Every aspect of the landing is automatic. It is the first and only UAS certified by the 

Direction Generale de l’Aviation Civile (DGAC) for flight beyond line of sight (BLOS) up to 

15km from the base station in the French civilian airspace (Scenario S4). However, flights 

pursuant to the requested exemption will be operated within visual line of sight (VLOS) of 

the pilot in command (PIC).3

The DT-18 is equipped with six control surfaces. It has one aileron on each wing, one flap 

on each wing, and two ruddervators located on the empennage. The flaps are only used on 

landing. They are also automatically deployed in case of an overspeed to act as speed 

brakes. 

 

3

 Given the DT-18’s proven record for operations BLOS and the Direction Generale de l’Aviation Civile 

certification, Pro Drones intends to seek permission to operate BLOS in the United States in the future. 
U.S. Department of Transportation 

February 9, 2015 

Page Five 

sd-655014 

Figure 1: The DT-18 System 

Figure 2: DT-18 Specifications 

Type of Motors Brushless, outrunner

Cruise Speed 31 mph (50 km/h)

Max speed 49.7 mph (80 km/h)

Power 4S 8900mAh Li-Po, 270W Max Power

Weight 4.4 lbs (2kg)

Maximum Endurance 120 minutes

Wingspan 5.9 ft/1.8m

Fuselage length 3.9 ft/1.2 m

Takeoff/landing Hand or catapult/belly or net

Wind resistance 31 mph (50 km/h)

C2 range 25 mi/40 km (857 MHz)

Data link range 9.3mi/15 km (5.8 Ghz)
U.S. Department of Transportation 

February 9, 2015 

Page Six 

sd-655014 

B. The DT-18 Flight Control System 

The DT-18 Ground Control Station (GCS) serves as the operator interface, coordinating the 

mission and communication functions including mission planning, near real-time mission 

progress, video display, and function monitoring. 

The GCS consists of a laptop and mission planning/execution software (SolApp), a case with 

a built-in joystick and slider, a back-up controller, a steerable command and control link 

antenna, and a steerable data link antenna. 

The SolApp program conducts mission planning for the DT-18, with complete route 

planning to include waypoints, identify No-Fly zones, and take into consideration the terrain 

height. All of the takeoff and landing is planned in SolApp. The mission planning 

information is up-loaded to the DT-18 prior to flight. SolApp also has the ability to change 

and upload all mission planning during flight via the Command and Control link. 

As part of the mission execution, SolApp has a check-list that confirms the following: 

 DT-18 assembly 

 Internal sensor (magnetometer, GPS, etc) calibration 

 Payload functionality 

 Weather inputs 

 Carrying case controller (joystick and slider) calibration 

 Antennae placement and calibration 

 Uploading of mission information to DT-18 

During flight, SolApp provides complete management of the DT-18 mission. The following 

is provided during flight to the operator: 

 Moving map showing the location of the DT-18 

 Speed 

 Heading 

 Altitude 

 Climb rate 

 Link status 

 Battery status 

 All safety systems and alarms 
U.S. Department of Transportation 

February 9, 2015 

Page Seven 

sd-655014 

Figure 3: SolApp Mission Planning Software 

The DT-18 system operates under autopilot during missions, or can be controlled by the 

joystick and slider built into the GCS. The joystick and slider operate through the command 

control link of the GCS. The DT-18 system also includes a back-up controller, which 

operates on a separate link from the GCS. The operator can bypass the DT-18 autopilot with 

the back-up controller. 

Figure 4: GCS Joystick and Slider 
U.S. Department of Transportation 

February 9, 2015 

Page Eight 

sd-655014 

Figure 5: Back-up Controller 

The command and control and data link antennae are part of the GCS. The two antennae are 

mounted on a motorized steerable mount that will automatically track the location of the DT18. The main command and control link between the DT-18 and the GCS operates at a 

frequency of 915 MHz (ISM Band). This link provides all the DT-18 flight information back 

to the GCS and provides any updates to the mission from the GCS to the DT-18. The DT-18 

uses the XBee-Pro 900HP Modem, which has FCC regulatory approval. See Figure 7, 

XBee-Pro 900 Specifications. The data link on the DT-18 allows for the payload 

information to be transmitted in near real-time between the DT-18 and the GCS. The data 

link operates at a frequency of 5.8 GHz. 

Figure 6: Steerable Antenna (Command & Control Link Antenna) and Data Antenna 
U.S. Department of Transportation 

February 9, 2015 

Page Nine 

sd-655014 

Figure 7: Specifications for XBee-Pro 900 
U.S. Department of Transportation 

February 9, 2015 

Page Ten 

sd-655014 

Notable features include: 

 Lost Link Mission Procedures: If at any time during the mission the command and 

control link is lost between the GCS and DT-18 for more than 30 seconds, the GCS 

and PIC are notified and the DT-18 will terminate the assigned mission. The DT-18 

will return to the pre-determined holding pattern location and will attempt to 

reestablish the link. If the link cannot be reestablished, the PIC can initiate the DT-18 

to recover using the back-up controller (safety-like). If both links cannot establish 

communication, the DT-18 will continue in the holding pattern. Once the battery 

reaches 12.5 B, the DT-18 will go into auto landing mode and will calculate a landing 

zone based upon the axis of flight when the fault occurred. 

 Alarm monitoring: SolApp has an integrated annunciator panel, giving the pilot the 

alarm level at a glance. SolApp monitors various parameters such as the 

communication status, accelerator status, GPS status and so forth. The autopilot goes 

into the different levels of alarm depending on how long an abnormality persists. The 

autopilot will take certain actions to ensure the safety of those on the ground 

depending on the alarm monitor, such as flying to a predefined location to land 

automatically, defining a landing path using the current heading, or powering the 

motor off and circling over the current location while losing altitude until touchdown. 

The pilot can, at all times, gain full control over the aircraft if any of these autopilot 

decisions would be concerning in regard to security of those on the ground. 

 Independent flight termination system: The DT-18 is equipped with an 

independent flight termination system, designed to stop the aircraft from flying by 

creating an important amount of drag to cause the DT-18 to fall to the ground with a 

limited amount of energy. The calculated impact force is less than 51 foot pounds 

(69J). The system itself includes a 1S low capacity Li-Po battery, a nylon bolt, a 

heating element and an electronic control board. If it is activated, the heating element 

melts the nylon bolt, which breaks. This nylon bolt holds the V-Tail to the fuselage, 

causing the V-Tail to pivot on a pin and become perpendicular to the airflow. This 

system will activate under three circumstances: 

o Total power loss (main electrical and avionics buses unpowered) 

o Critical autopilot failure (physical damage to the autopilot) 

o Manual activation from the ground station (to prevent the UAV from colliding 

with another aircraft or any other obstacles, only as a last resort) 
U.S. Department of Transportation 

February 9, 2015 

Page Eleven 

sd-655014 

Figure 8: DT-18 GCS Alarm Panel on SolApp GCS Software 

Figure 9: DT-18 Failsafe System 
U.S. Department of Transportation 

February 9, 2015 

Page Twelve 

sd-655014 

C. Pro Drones’ Proposed Operations Demonstrate an Equivalent 

Level of Safety 

1. General Description of Proposed Flight Operations 

Pro Drones proposes to operate the DT-18 only on privately-owned, remote locations and 

within the limitations and performance specifications listed in the Manuals, which are 

summarized below. 

The DT-18 will be used for a variety of purposes including line inspections of utilities with 

real time mosaicking of pictures and live visual and thermal video feed, security and safety 

monitoring with streaming visual and infra-red video, geospatial analysis for civil 

engineering projects, and data collection for agricultural lands. 

The proposed operations do not create any hazard to users of the national airspace system or 

pose a threat to national security. The aircraft is battery operated and weighs approximately 

4.4 pounds. The vehicle’s ground speed has a maximum of 49.7 mph but it will be operated 

below 25 miles per hour, and it will operate at or below 400 feet AGL. The DT-18 has an 

alarm monitoring system and a fail-safe independent flight termination system. 

Manned aircraft are at risk of fuel spillage and fire in the event of an incident or accident. 

The DT-18 carries no fuel, and therefore the risk of fire following an incident or accident due 

to fuel spillage is eliminated. Compared to manned aircraft, the unmanned aircraft reduces 

the risk to participating persons in close proximity to the aircraft due to the limited size, 

weight, operating conditions, and design safety features of the DT-18. 

Pro Drones’ operations will be over remote areas and over land that is secured by either Pro 

Drones or its customers. 

The FAA has determined that the risk of not having an electronic means to monitor and 

communicate with other aircraft, such as transponders or sense and avoid technology, is 

mitigated by placing limits on altitude, requiring stand-off distance from clouds, permitting 

daytime operations only, and requiring that the aircraft be operated within visual line of sight 

and yield right of way to all other manned operations. Additionally, the operator will request 

a NOTAM prior to operations to alert other users of the NAS. See Exemption No. 11062, 

Docket No. FAA 2014-0352, at p. 13, attached hereto as Attachment 4. 

The petitioner’s aircraft has the capability to operate safely after experiencing certain inflight failures, as specified above in the description of the Flight Control System in IV.B. 

The aircraft is also able to respond to a lost-link event with a pre-coordinated, predictable, 

automated flight maneuver returning to a pre-determined holding pattern location. 
U.S. Department of Transportation 

February 9, 2015 

Page Thirteen 

sd-655014 

2. Specific Limitations on Proposed Flight Operations 

Given the small size involved, the restricted environment within which they will operate, the 

procedures listed below, and pilot certification requirements, Pro Drones’ proposed 

operations using the DT-18 would “not create a hazard to users of the national airspace 

system or the public or pose a threat to national security.” Reform Act Section 333(b)(1). 

1. The aircraft is approximately 4.4 pounds. 

2. The aircraft will be identified by serial number, registered with the FAA, and 

will have identification (N-Number) markings as large as practicable. 

3. Flights will be operated within visual line of sight of the pilot in command 

(PIC). 

4. Prior to each flight, a zero altitude initiation point will be established and 

confirmed for accuracy by PIC. 

5. Maximum flight time for each operational flight will be 120 minutes. 

6. The aircraft will be safely landed with no less than the greater of (a) 20% 

battery life remaining or (b) fifteen minutes of flight time remaining. 

7. The aircraft will be operated during daylight and in VFR conditions. 

8. Flights will not exceed 400 feet AGL. 

9. Flights will be operated at a lateral distance of at least 500 feet from any 

persons or property not associated with the operation who have not given 

prior permission. 

10. Flights will be limited to a groundspeed of 25 mph. 

11. Minimum crew for each flight will consist of a PIC and a Visual Observer. 

12. The PIC will possess at least a private pilot certificate and a third class 

medical certificate. 

13. Prior to the flight, a Mission Plan will be created setting forth the limitations 

for the flight as well as contact information for the PIC. 

14. The flight operations will yield the right of way to other manned aircraft 

operations. 
U.S. Department of Transportation 

February 9, 2015 

Page Fourteen 

sd-655014 

15. All persons who are not involved with Pro Drones’ operations will be required 

to be at least 500 feet from flight operations. 

16. The aircraft will only operate over sites with the consent of the owner. 

17. Pro Drones will provide NOTAM details to the FAA 24 hours prior to each 

flight. 

18. All required permissions and permits will be obtained from territory, state, 

county or city jurisdictions prior to flight. 

19. Prior to commencing operations, Pro Drones will obtain a Certificate of 

Waiver or Authorization (COA) from the FAA. 

20. If the aircraft loses communications, it will have the capability to return to a 

pre-determined location within the operational area and land. 

21. If the aircraft loses its GPS signal it will have the capability of being flown 

manually to a predetermined location within the operational area and land. 

22. The flight will be aborted in case of unpredicted obstacles or emergencies. 

23. Each flight will be recorded in an Aircraft Logbook and by the PIC in the 

Pilot Logbook. 

24. Maintenance on the aircraft will be recorded in an Aircraft Logbook.

3. Flight Recovery, Lost Communications, and Lost GPS 

Procedures 

The flight recovery, lost communications, and lost GPS procedures are documented above, 

and are more fully documented in the attached DT-18 Operator Manual. See Attachment 3. 

V. PRIOR OPERATIONAL APPROVALS 

The DT-18 has received prior operational approvals in the U.S., Canada, and France, further 

verifying it is safe for use. 

 The DT-18 was granted a COA by the FAA for the “Operation of the Delair-Tech 

DT-18 Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) in Class G airspace at or below 400 feet 

Above Ground Level (AGL) at Musgrave Research Farm, in the vicinity of Aurora, 

NY, under the jurisdiction of Elmira TRACON.” See Attachment 5. 
U.S. Department of Transportation 

February 9, 2015 

Page Fifteen 

sd-655014 

 The DT-18 was granted two Special Flight Operations Certificates (SFOCs) by 

Transport Canada. See Attachments 6 - 7. 

The FAA COA noted that “[t]he Griffiss International Airport has made its own determination 

that the Delair-Tech DT-18 unmanned aircraft is airworthy.” (Attachment 5 p. 3) Transport 

Canada made a similar finding, stating that Pro Drones dba Flyterra “is adequately equipped and 

able to conduct a safe operation” using the DT-18. (Attachment 6 p. 1)

VI. SPECIFIC FAR EXEMPTIONS REQUESTED 

Pro Drones seeks an exemption from several interrelated provisions of 14 C.F.R. Parts 21, 

45, 61, and 91 for purposes of conducting the requested operations using the DT-18. Listed 

below are (1) the specific FAR sections for which exemption is sought, and (2) the operating 

procedures and safeguards that Pro Drones has established which will ensure a level of safety 

better than or equal to the rules from which exemption is sought. See 14 C.F.R. § 11.81 (e). 

A. 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H – Airworthiness Certificates and 14 

C.F.R. § 91.203(a)(1) 

The FAA has stated that no exemption is needed from this section if a finding is made under 

the Reform Act that the UAS selected provides an equivalent level of safety when compared 

to aircraft normally used for the same application. These criteria are met, and therefore no 

exemption is needed. See Attachment 1, Grant of Exemption to Astraeus Aerial, Docket No. 

FAA 2014-0352 at 13-14, 22. If, however, the FAA determines that there are some 

characteristics of the DT-18 that fail to meet the requirements of the Reform Act, an 

exemption is requested. 

Equivalent Level of Safety: The DT-18 is safe when taking into account its size, weight, 

speed, and operational capability. The DT-18 weighs approximately 4.4 pounds and will be 

flown at speeds less than 25 miles per hour, in visual line of sight of the operator, and in 

remote and unpopulated airspace over land only with the consent of the owner. The DT-18 

does not carry pilots, passengers, explosive materials, or flammable liquid fuels. The DT-18 

will be operated within the parameters of the Manuals.

Pro Drones will also provide the FAA with advance notice of all operations via NOTAM and 

coordination with the local FSDO. The proposed operations will be at least as safe as, or 

safer than, conventional aircraft and/or rotorcraft operating with an airworthiness certificate 

without the restrictions and conditions proposed here. The proposed operations will also be 

as safe, or safer than traditional surveying or inspection activities. 
U.S. Department of Transportation 

February 9, 2015 

Page Sixteen 

sd-655014 

B. 14 C.F.R. §§ 45.23(b), 45.27(a) and 91.9(c): Aircraft Marking and 

Identification Requirements 

14 C.F.R. §45.23(b), Markings of the Aircraft states: 

When marks include only the Roman capital letter “N” and the registration number is 

displayed on limited, restricted or light-sport category aircraft or experimental or 

provisionally certificated aircraft, the operator must also display on that aircraft near 

each entrance to the cabin, cockpit, or pilot station, in letters not less than 2 inches 

nor more than 6 inches high, the words “limited,” “restricted,” “light-sport, 

“experimental,” or “provisional,” as applicable. 

14 C.F.R. § 91.9(c) states: 

No person may operate a U.S.-registered civil aircraft unless that aircraft is identified 

in accordance with part 45 of this chapter. 

In a previous Grant of Exemption, the FAA determined that exemption from these 

requirements was warranted provided that the aircraft “have identification (N-Number) 

markings in accordance with 14 CFR part 45, Subpart C if the markings are “as large as 

practicable.” See Exemption No. 11062, Docket No. FAA 2014-0352, at p. 14. 

Equivalent Level of Safety: Pro Drones will mark all DT-18s with their N-Number in a 

prominent spot on the fuselage with markings that are as large as practicable. 

C. 14 C.F.R. § 61.113: Private Pilot Privileges and Limitations 

Pro Drones seeks exemption from 14 CFR § 61.113, which restricts private pilots from flying 

aircraft for compensation or hire and would also require a second class medical certificate. 

The purpose of Part 61 is to ensure that the skill and competency of any PIC matches the 

airspace in which the PIC will be operating, as well as requiring certifications if the pilot is 

carrying passengers or cargo for hire. 

While the DT-18 will be operated as part of a commercial operation, it carries neither 

passengers nor cargo. In the Grant of Exemption in FAA Docket No. FAA-2014-0352, the 

FAA determined that the unique characteristics of UAS operation outside of controlled 

airspace did not warrant the additional cost and restrictions attendant with requiring the PIC 

to have a commercial pilot certificate and a class II medical certificate. The FAA has also 

determined that the required knowledge for a commercial pilot covers the same fundamental 

principles as a private pilot. 
U.S. Department of Transportation 

February 9, 2015 

Page Seventeen 

sd-655014 

The PIC will possess at least a private pilot certificate, a third class medical certificate, and 

will have completed the Delair-Tech training course for the DT-18. See the Pro Drones DT18 Training/Experience Manual for more information. (Attachment 2.) 

The FAA stated in its grant of an exception to Astraeus Aerial the “the FAA considers the 

overriding safety factor for the limited operations proposed by the petitioner to be the 

airmanship skills acquired through UAS-specific flight cycles, flight time, and specific make 

and model experience, culminating in verification through testing.” See Exemption No. 

11062, Docket No. FAA 2014-0352, at p. 18. The proposed operations can achieve an 

equivalent level of safety by requiring the knowledge and experience in DT-18 operations 

described above. 

Furthermore, the security screening conducted by the Transportation Security Administration 

of certificated airmen satisfies the statutory requirement of Section 333 for operations to not 

pose a threat to national security. 

The restrictions Pro Drones has placed on its DT-18 operations meet or exceed the 

restrictions similarly imposed on Astraeus Aerial in FAA Docket No. FAA-2014-0352. Pro 

Drones will operate in unpopulated areas with the consent of the land owner away from 

persons and property not involved in the operation. The aircraft will be flown based on 

VLOS at or below 400 feet AGL. A NOTAM will be issued at least 24 hours before the 

flight is to occur, and the flight will be coordinated with the applicable FSDO. 

D. 14 C.F.R. § 91.7(a): Civil Aircraft Airworthiness 

Pro Drones seeks an exemption from 14 C.F.R. § 91.7(a), which requires that a civil aircraft 

be in airworthy condition to be operated. The FAA has stated that no exemption is required 

to the extent that the requirements of Part 21 are waived or found inapplicable. Accordingly, 

Pro Drones requests that the requirements for Section 91.7 be treated in accordance with 

FAR Part 21 Subpart H. See Grant of Exemption No. 11062, p. 19. 

E. 14 C.F.R. § 91.9(b)(2): Civil Aircraft Flight Manual in the 

Aircraft; 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.203(a) and (b): Carrying Civil Aircraft 

Certification and Registration 

Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. § 91.9(b)(2): 

(b) No person may operate a U.S.-registered civil aircraft - 

 ... 

(2) For which an Airplane or Rotorcraft Flight Manual is required by § 

21.5 of this chapter, unless there is available in the aircraft a current 
U.S. Department of Transportation 

February 9, 2015 

Page Eighteen 

sd-655014 

approved Airplane or Rotorcraft Flight Manual, approved manual 

material, markings, and placards, or any combination thereof. 

Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. § 91.203(a) and (b): 

(a) Except as provided in § 91.715, no person may operate a civil aircraft unless it 

has within it the following: 

(1) An appropriate and current airworthiness certificate... 

(b) No person may operate a civil aircraft 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 entrance so that it is 

legible to passengers or crew. 

Pro Drones does not request an exemption from this section but instead notifies the FAA 

that, in accordance with FAA Office of Chief Counsel’s Opinion dated August 8, 2014, the 

UAS flight manual, registration certificate and other documentation will be kept at the 

control station with the PIC during flight. The Chief Counsel’s Office has held that for all 

UAS operations, this alternate method constitutes full compliance with the regulations. See 

also Grant of Exemption No. 11062, pp. 19-20, and Grant of Exemption No. 8607. 

F. 14 C.F.R. § 91.103: Preflight Action 

Pro Drones seeks an exemption from 14 C.F.R. § 91.103, which requires a PIC to become 

familiar with specific information before each flight, including information contained in the 

FAA-approved Flight Manual on board the aircraft. The aircraft will not have a Flight 

Manual on board. The PIC will take all actions including reviewing weather, flight battery 

requirements, landing and takeoff distances and aircraft performance data before initiation of 

flight. Under these circumstances, the FAA has stated that no exemption is required. See 

Grant of Exemption No. 11062, p. 20. An exemption is requested to the extent that an FAAapproved Flight Manual is required. 

Equivalent Level of Safety: An equivalent level of safety will be provided by following the 

Manuals. The PIC will take all required preflight actions - including performing all required 

checklists and reviewing weather, flight requirements, battery charge, landing and takeoff 

distance, aircraft performance data, and contingency landing areas - before initiation of 

flight. The Manuals will be kept at the ground station with the operator at all times. 
U.S. Department of Transportation 

February 9, 2015 

Page Nineteen 

sd-655014 

G. 14 C.F.R. § 91.109(a): Flight Instruction

Pro Drones seeks an exemption from 14 C.F.R. § 91.109(a), which provides that “[n]o 

person may operate a civil aircraft (except a manned free balloon) that is being used for flight 

instruction unless that aircraft has fully functioning dual controls.” UASs and remotely 

piloted aircraft, by their design, do not have functional dual controls. Instead, flight control is 

accomplished through the use of the Ground Control System consisting of the antenna with 

the command and control link and the data link, a case with a built-in joystick, and a back-up 

controller that communicates with the aircraft via radio modem communications. 

Equivalent Level of Safety: When flight instruction is performed, no pilots will be on the 

aircraft and the GCS will be a safe distance from the aircraft and the public, causing no 

safety hazard. Given the size and speed of the DT-18, an equivalent level of safe training can 

still be performed without dual controls because no pilot or passengers are aboard the 

aircraft, and all persons will be a safe distance away in the event that the aircraft experiences 

any difficulties during flight instruction. In addition, Pro Drones will conduct flight training 

at a remote facility away from population centers. These training flights will comply with the 

provisions in the Manuals. Accordingly, Pro Drones’ proposed method of operation provides 

superior levels of safety. 

H. 14 C.F.R. § 91.119(c): Minimum Safe Altitudes in Uncongested 

Areas

Pro Drones requests an exemption from the minimum safe altitude requirements of 14 C.F.R. 

§ 91.119(c). Section 91.119(c) prescribes that an aircraft may not be operated closer than 500 

feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure. The Manuals provide for operations away 

from congested population areas, but in close proximity to potential inspection sites and 

structures. The FAA has already determined that relief from Section 91.119(c) is warranted 

for UAS operations in uncongested areas with similar flight restrictions as those imposed by 

Pro Drones. See Grant of Exemption No. 11062, p. 20-21. 

Equivalent Level of Safety: Compared to flight operations with rotorcraft/aircraft weighing 

far more than the maximum weights proposed herein, and given the lack of flammable fuel, 

any risk associated with these operations is far less than those that presently existing with 

conventional aircraft. An equivalent level of safety will be achieved given the size, weight, 

and speed of the DT-18, as well as the locations where it is operated. In order to avoid any 

risk to aircraft, flight operations will be restricted to 400 feet AGL or below. This is airspace 

where other aircraft do not normally operate. As set forth in the Manuals and herein, the DT18 will be operated over land with the consent of the owner, away from persons or structures 

not involved in the operation. All persons who are not involved with Pro Drones’ operations 

will be required to be at least 500 feet from flight operations. 
U.S. Department of Transportation 

February 9, 2015 

Page Twenty 

sd-655014 

I. 14 C.F.R. § 91.121: Altimeter Settings

This petition seeks an exemption from 14 C.F.R. § 91.121, which requires a person operating 

an aircraft to maintain cruising altitude or flight level by reference to an altimeter that is set 

to the elevation of the departure airport. 

Equivalent Level of Safety: The FAA has stated that an equivalent level of safety can be 

achieved if the aircraft will be operated at or below 400 feet AGL and within visual line-ofsight in addition to GPS based altitude information relayed in real time to the operator. See 

Grant of Exemption No. 11062, p. 20-21. As the attached Manuals indicate, the DT-18 will 

be operated at or below 400 feet AGL and otherwise comply with the limitations in the Grant 

of Exemption No. 11062. 

J. 14 C.F.R. § 91.151(a): Fuel Requirements for Flight in VFR

Conditions

Pro Drones requests an exemption from 14 C.F.R. § 91.151(a)’s fuel requirements for flight 

in VFR conditions. Section 91.151 states: 

(a) No person may begin a flight in an airplane under VFR conditions unless 

(considering wind and forecast weather conditions) there is enough fuel to fly 

to the first point of intended landing and, assuming normal cruising speed - 

(1) During the day, to fly after that for at least 30 minutes; or 

(2) At night, to fly after that for at least 45 minutes. 

The aircraft is battery powered with a maximum flight time of 120 minutes. The aircraft will 

be safely landed with no less than the greater of (a) 20% battery life remaining or (b) fifteen 

minutes of flight time remaining. 

Equivalent Level of Safety: The FAA has stated that an equivalent level of safety is provided 

if the UAS flight is conducted under daytime VFR flight conditions using VLOS, and 

terminated with at least 25% reserve battery power still available. See Grant of Exemption 

No. 11062, p. 21-22. The Manuals providing an equivalent level of safety by safely landing 

with no less than the greater of (a) 20% battery life remaining or (b) fifteen minutes of flight 

time remaining and otherwise complying with the flight restrictions above. 
U.S. Department of Transportation 

February 9, 2015 

Page Twenty-One 

sd-655014 

K. 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(l), 91.409(a)(2); 91.417(a) and 

(b): Maintenance Inspections

Pro Drones seeks an exemption from the maintenance inspection requirements contained in 

14 C.F.R. § 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(l), 91.409(a)(2); 91.417(a) and (b). These regulations 

specify maintenance and inspection standards in reference to 14 C.F.R. Part 43. See, e.g., 14 

C.F.R. § 91.405(a) (stating that each owner or operator of an aircraft “[s]hall have the aircraft 

inspected as prescribed in subpart E of this part and shall between required inspections ... 

have discrepancies repaired as prescribed in part 43 of this chapter”). An exemption from 

these regulations is needed because Part 43 and these sections only apply to aircraft with an 

airworthiness certificate, which the DT-18 will not have. 

Equivalent Level of Safety: An equivalent level of safety will be achieved because 

maintenance and inspections will be performed in accordance with the Manuals. This 

includes maintenance, overhaul, replacement, and inspection requirements for the aircraft 

and procedures to document and maintain maintenance records for the aircraft. This also 

includes preflight inspection procedures. See Exemption No. 11062, Docket No. FAA 2014-

0352, at p. 14-15. 

As provided in the Manuals, flights will not be conducted unless a flight operations checklist 

is performed that includes all of the aircraft’s components. The Manuals also set 

requirements for maintenance log books and record keeping as well as routine and post-flight 

maintenance. The Manuals set requirements for both annual maintenance and preventative 

maintenance. 

VII. PUBLIC INTEREST 

Granting Pro Drones’ petition for exemption furthers the public interest. National policy set 

by Congress favors early integration of UAS into the NAS in controlled, safe, working 

environments. By granting this petition, the FAA will fulfill Congress’s intent of allowing 

UAS to operate safely in the NAS before completion of the rulemaking required under 

Section 332 of the Reform Act. 

Pro Drones’ DT-18 allows for safer and more thorough surveys and inspections of buildings, 

construction sites, pipelines, railways, etc. Such inspections and surveys traditionally 

required either manned aircraft or people surveying on foot. 

The DT-18 is a safer option than traditional manned aircraft. The DT-18 is approximately 

4.4 pounds, carries no passengers or crew and has no flammable fuel, as opposed to larger 

and more powerful helicopters and small airplanes. The public has an interest in reducing 

the hazards to human health and safety and property associated with such traditional manned 

aircraft for inspection operations. Moreover, an additional benefit is the reduced emissions 
U.S. Department of Transportation 

February 9, 2015 

Page Twenty-Two 

sd-655014 

associated with the proposed UAS use, which addresses both environmental and human 

health imperatives. 

The DT-18 also allows for safer agricultural surveying compared to manned aircraft and or 

higher precision surveying compared to satellite. Satellite imagery has much lower precision 

and is not “on demand.” The DT-18 will allow for high precision imagery and surveying of 

agricultural fields. Here too, the benefits to human health and safety and property obtain. 

But in addition to the environmental benefits of reduced emissions from traditional aircraft, 

the use of UAS can support more targeted applications of irrigation, herbicides, and 

fertilizers to agricultural lands, which also benefit the environment. 

VIII. PRIVACY 

All flights will occur over unpopulated areas, with the consent of the landowner. All flights 

will be conducted in accordance with any federal, state or local laws regarding privacy. 

IX. SUMMARY FOR FEDERAL REGISTER 

Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. Part 11, the following summary is provided for publication in the 

Federal Register, should it be determined that publication is needed: 

Pro Drones seeks an exemption from the following rules for the commercial operation of a 

small unmanned aerial system: 14 C.F.R Part 21, Subpart H; 14 C.F.R Part 27; 14 C.F.R § 

45.23(b); 14 C.F.R. § 45.27(a); 14 C.F.R § 61.113; 14 C.F.R § 91.7(a); 14 C.F.R § 

91.9(b)(2); 14 C.F.R § 91.9(c); 14 C.F.R § 91.103; 14 C.F.R § 91.109(a); 14 C.F.R § 91.119; 

14 C.F.R § 91.121; 14 C.F.R § 91.151(a) & (b) 14 C.F.R § 91.203 (a) & (b); 14 C.F.R § 

91.405(a); 14 C.F.R § 91.407(a)(l); 14 C.F.R § 91.409(a)(2); 14 C.F.R § 91.417 (a) & (b). 

The exemption will enhance safety by reducing risk to the operator, the general public and 

property owners from the substantial hazards associated with performing equivalent work 

using conventional aircraft and rotorcraft. 
U.S. Department of Transportation 

February 9, 2015 

Page Twenty-Three 

sd-655014 

X. ATTACHMENTS 

Attachment 1: Pro Drones DT-18 Operations, Inspection, and Maintenance Manual 

Attachment 2: Pro Drones DT-18 Training/Experience Manual 

Attachment 3: DT-18 Operator Manual 

Attachment 4: Grant of Exemption to Astraeus Aerial, Docket No. FAA 2014-0352. 

Attachment 5: FAA Form 7711-UAS COA Attachment, 2014-ESA-102 –Certificate 

of Waiver of Authorization for Griffiss International Airport Test Site 

Attachment 6: Special Flight Operations Certificate (SFOC) for DT-18 issued by 

Transport Canada on September 12, 2014 for operations at unspecified 

locations in the Province of Ontario. 

Attachment 7: Special Flight Operations Certificate (SFOC) for DT-18 issued by 

Transport Canada on September 19, 2014 for operations in the 

provinces of Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba and the Yukon, 

Northwest and Nunavut Territories 

Attachments 1-3 are confidential documents submitted under 14 C.F.R. § 11.35(b) and are 

exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552 et seq., and 

any other requirements established by the FAA pursuant to Section 333 of the Reform Act). 

If you have any questions or require any additional information, please do not hesitate to 

contact the undersigned attorneys for Pro Drones. 

XI. CONCLUSION 

Satisfaction of the criteria provided in Section 333 of the Reform Act - size, weight, speed, 

operating capabilities, proximity to airports and populated areas, operation within visual line 

of sight, and national security considerations - provides more than adequate justification for 

the grant of the requested exemptions to permit Pro Drones to operate the DT-18 for 

commercial purposes. 

Granting the requested exemption will benefit the public interest as a whole in many ways, 

including (1) significantly improving safety and reducing risk by alleviating human exposure 
U.S. Department of Transportation 

February 9, 2015 

Page Twenty-Four 

sd-655014 

to danger; (2) improving the quality of services Pro Drones can provide to its customers; (3) 

decreasing operating costs related to survey and inspection activities; (4) reducing 

environmental impacts aerial surveys and inspections; and (5) supporting agricultural 

applications and treatments that reduce environmental impacts. 

Sincerely, 

William V. O’Connor 

William D. Janicki 

Joanna L. Simon 

Morrison & Foerster LLP 

12531 High Bluff Drive, Suite 100 

San Diego, CA 92130-2040 

Telephone: (858) 720-5100 

Facsimile: (858) 720-5125 

woconnor@mofo.com 

wjanicki@mofo.com 

joannasimon@mofo.com 
Attachment 1 
Submitted confidentially under 14 C.F.R § 11.35(b). 

Exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C § 552 et 

seq.
Attachment 2 
Submitted confidentially under 14 C.F.R § 11.35(b). 

Exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C § 552 et 

seq.
Attachment 3 
Submitted confidentially under 14 C.F.R § 11.35(b). 

Exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C § 552 et 

seq.
Attachment 4 
AFS-14-320-E

Exemption No. 11062

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

WASHINGTON, DC 20591

In the matter of the petition of 

ASTRAEUS AERIAL Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2014-0352

for an exemption from part 21; 

§§ 45.23(b); 61.113(a) and (b); 91.7(a);

91.9(b)(2); 91.103; 91.109; 91.119;

91.121; 91.151(a); 91.203(a) and (b);

91.405(a); 91.407(a)(1); 

91.409(a)(2); and 91.417(a) and (b) 

of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations 

GRANT OF EXEMPTION

By letter dated May 27, 2014, Jonathan B. Hill, Cooley LLC, Counsel for Astraeus Aerial, 

and John McGraw, Aerospace Consulting, LLC, Agent for Astraeus Aerial, 1299 

Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Suite 700, Washington, DC 20004 petitioned the Federal 

Aviation Administration (FAA) on behalf of Astraeus Aerial (Astraeus) for an exemption 

from part 21, §§ 45.23(b), 61.113(a) and (b), 91.7(a), 91.9(b)(2), 91.103, 91.109, 91.119,

91.121, 91.151(a), 91.203(a) and (b), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(2), and 91.417(a) and

(b) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). The proposed exemption, if granted, 

would allow operation of unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) for the purpose of scripted,

closed-set filming for the motion picture and television industry.

The petitioner requests relief from the following regulations:

Part 21 prescribes, in pertinent part, the procedural requirements for issuing and 

changing design approvals, production approvals, airworthiness certificates, and 

airworthiness approvals.

Section 45.23(b) prescribes, in pertinent part, that when marks include only the Roman 

capital letter “N” and the registration number is displayed on limited, restricted or lightsport category aircraft or experimental or provisionally certificated aircraft, the operator 
2

must also display on that aircraft near each entrance to the cabin, cockpit, or pilot 

station, in letters not less than 2 inches nor more than 6 inches high, the words 

“limited,” “restricted,” “light-sport,” “experimental,” or “provisional,” as applicable.

Section 61.113(a) and (b) prescribes that—

(a) no person who holds a private pilot certificate may act as a 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 passengers or property for compensation 

or hire. 

Section 91.7(a) prescribes, in pertinent part, that no person may operate a civil aircraft 

unless it is in an airworthy condition.

Section 91.9(b)(2) prohibits operation of U.S.-registered civil aircraft unless there is 

available in the aircraft a current approved Airplane or Rotorcraft Flight Manual, 

approved manual material, markings, and placards, or any combination thereof.

Section 91.103 prescribes, in pertinent part, that each pilot in command shall, before 

beginning a flight, become familiar with all available information concerning that 

flight, to include—

(a) For a flight under IFR or a flight not in the vicinity of an airport, weather 

reports and forecasts, fuel requirements, alternatives available if the 

planned flight cannot be completed, and any known traffic delays of which 

the pilot in command has been advised by ATC;

(b) For any flight, runway lengths at airports of intended use, and the following 

takeoff and landing distance information:

(1) For civil aircraft for which an approved Airplane or Rotorcraft 

Flight Manual containing takeoff and landing distance data is 

required, the takeoff and landing distance data contained therein; 

and
3

(2) For civil aircraft other than those specified in paragraph (b)(1) of 

this section, other reliable information appropriate to the aircraft, 

relating to aircraft performance under expected values of airport 

elevation and runway slope, aircraft gross weight, and wind and 

temperature.

Section 91.109 prescribes, in pertinent part, that no person may operate a civil aircraft 

(except a manned free balloon) that is being used for flight instruction unless that 

aircraft has fully functioning dual controls.

Section 91.119 prescribes that, except when necessary for takeoff or landing, no person 

may operate an aircraft below the following altitudes:

(a) Anywhere. An altitude allowing, if a power unit fails, an emergency 

landing without undue hazard to persons or property on the surface.

(b) Over congested areas. Over any congested area of a city, town, or 

settlement, or over any open air assembly of persons, an altitude of 1,000 

feet above the highest obstacle within a horizontal radius of 2,000 feet of 

the aircraft. 

(c) Over other than congested areas. An altitude of 500 feet above the surface, 

except over open water or sparsely populated areas. In those cases, the 

aircraft may not be operated closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, 

vehicle, or structure. 

(d) Helicopters, powered parachutes, and weight-shift-control aircraft. If the 

operation is conducted without hazard to persons or property on the 

surface—

(1) A helicopter may be operated at less than the minimums prescribed 

in paragraph (b) or (c) of this section, provided each person 

operating the helicopter complies with any routes or altitudes 

specifically prescribed for helicopters by the FAA; and

(2) A powered parachute or weight-shift-control aircraft may be 

operated at less than the minimums prescribed in paragraph (c) of 

this section.

Section 91.121 requires, in pertinent part, each person operating an aircraft to maintain 

cruising altitude by reference to an altimeter that is set “to the elevation of the departure 

airport or an appropriate altimeter setting available before departure.”
4

Section 91.151(a) prescribes that no person may begin a flight in an airplane under

VFR conditions unless (considering wind and forecast weather conditions) there is 

enough fuel to fly to the first point of intended landing and, assuming normal

cruising speed, (1) during the day, to fly after that for at least 30 minutes; or (2) At 

night, to fly after that for at least 45 minutes. [emphasis added]

Section 91.203(a) prohibits, in pertinent part, any person from operating a civil aircraft 

unless it has within it (1) an appropriate and current airworthiness certificate; and (2) an

effective U.S. registration certificate issued to its owner or, for operation within the 

United States, the second copy of the Aircraft Registration Application as provided for 

in § 47.31(c). Section 91.203(b) prescribes, in pertinent part, that no person may 

operate a civil aircraft unless the airworthiness certificate or a special flight 

authorization issued under § 91.715 is displayed at the cabin or cockpit entrance so that 

it is legible to passengers or crew.

Section 91.405(a) requires, in pertinent part, that an aircraft operator or owner shall 

have that aircraft inspected as prescribed in subpart E of the same part and shall,

between required inspections, except as provided in paragraph (c) of the same section, 

have discrepancies repaired as prescribed in part 43 of the chapter.

Section 91.407(a)(1) prohibits, in pertinent part, any person from operating an aircraft 

that has undergone maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, or alteration 

unless it has been approved for return to service by a person authorized under § 43.7 of 

the same chapter.

Section 91.409(a)(2) prescribes, in pertinent part, that no person may operate an aircraft 

unless, within the preceding 12 calendar months, it has had an inspection for the 

issuance of an airworthiness certificate in accordance with part 21 of this chapter.

Section 91.417(a) and (b) prescribes, in pertinent part, that—

(a) Each registered owner or operator shall keep the following records for the 

periods specified in paragraph (b) of this section:

(1) Records of the maintenance, preventive maintenance, and alteration 

and records of the 100-hour, annual, progressive, and other required 

or approved inspections, as appropriate, for each aircraft (including 

the airframe) and each engine, propeller, rotor, and appliance of an 

aircraft. The records must include—

(i) A description (or reference to data acceptable to the 

Administrator) of the work performed; and 

(ii) The date of completion of the work performed; and 
5

(iii) The signature, and certificate number of the person approving 

the aircraft for return to service. 

(2) Records containing the following information: 

(i) The total time in service of the airframe, each engine, each 

propeller, and each rotor. 

(ii) The current status of life-limited parts of each airframe, engine, 

propeller, rotor, and appliance. 

(iii) The time since last overhaul of all items installed on the 

aircraft which are required to be overhauled on a specified 

time basis. 

(iv) The current inspection status of the aircraft, including the time 

since the last inspection required by the inspection program 

under which the aircraft and its appliances are maintained. 

(v) The current status of applicable airworthiness directives (AD) 

and safety directives including, for each, the method of 

compliance, the AD or safety directive number and revision 

date. If the AD or safety directive involves recurring action, the 

time and date when the next action is required.

(vi) Copies of the forms prescribed by § 43.9(d) of this chapter for 

each major alteration to the airframe and currently installed 

engines, rotors, propellers, and appliances.

(b) The owner or operator shall retain the following records for the periods 

prescribed:

(1) The records specified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section shall be 

retained until the work is repeated or superseded by other work or 

for 1 year after the work is performed.

(2) The records specified in paragraph (a)(2) of this section shall be 

retained and transferred with the aircraft at the time the aircraft is 

sold.

(3) A list of defects furnished to a registered owner or operator under 

§ 43.11 of this chapter shall be retained until the defects are 

repaired and the aircraft is approved for return to service.
6

The petitioner supports its request with the following information:

The petitioner has provided the following information – contained in its petition and 

supplemental proprietary Flight Operations and Procedures Manual (hereafter FOPM) and 

Motion Picture and Television Operations Manual (hereafter MPTOM) – in support of its

exemption request. The petitioner submitted additional information in response to the FAA’s 

August 7, 2014 request which is posted to the docket. The FAA has organized the petitioner’s 

information into three sections: 1) the unmanned aircraft system, 2) the UAS Pilot In 

Command (PIC), and 3) the UAS operating parameters.

Unmanned Aircraft System

The UAS proposed by the petitioner is a proprietary design, conceived and constructed by 

Astraeus Aerial, and referred to as the Astraeus Aerial Cinema System V.3CS UAS aircraft 

variant, serial #001 onward (hereafter referred to as V.3). This aircraft has eight rotors and 

eight motors in a quadcopter configuration (X8). The petitioner states that given the size,

weight, speed, and limited operating area associated with the aircraft to be utilized by the 

applicant, an exemption from 14 CFR part 21, Subpart H (Airworthiness Certificates), subject 

to certain conditions and limitations, is warranted and meets the requirements for an 

equivalent level of safety under 14 CFR part 11 and Section 333 of the FAA Modernization 

and Reform Act of 2012 (PL 112-95). The petitioner further states that UAS operated without 

an airworthiness certificate in the restricted environment and under the conditions and 

limitations proposed by the petitioner will be at least as safe, or safer, than a conventional 

aircraft (fixed wing or rotorcraft) operating with an airworthiness certificate issued under 14 

CFR part 21, Subpart H and not subject to the proposed conditions and limitations.

The petitioner states that the unmanned aircraft (UA) to be operated under this request is less 

than 55 lbs. fully loaded, flies at a speed of no more than 50 knots, carries neither a pilot nor 

passenger, carries no explosive materials or flammable liquid fuels, and operates exclusively 

within a secured area as set out in the MPTOM. In addition, the petitioner has integrated 

safety features into the design of the UAS, as described in the petitioner’s FOPM, to ensure 

the safety of persons and property within and surrounding the limited operating area. The 

petitioner further describes that, in the event the UAS loses communications or its GPS signal, 

the UA will have the capability to return to a pre-determined location within the Security 

Perimeter and land. It will also have the capability to abort a flight in the event of unpredicted 

obstacles or emergencies. 

The petitioner states that even though its UAS will have no airworthiness certificate, an 

exemption may be needed from 14 CFR § 45.23 as the UA will have no entrance to the cabin, 

cockpit, or pilot station on which the word “experimental” can be placed. Given the size of the 

UA, the petitioner notes that the two-inch lettering will be impossible. The petitioner asserts 

that an equivalent level of safety will be provided by having the UA marked with the word 

“experimental” on the fuselage in compliance with 14 CFR § 45.29(f), in a location where the 

pilot, observer, and others working with the UA will see the identification.
7

The petitioner states that the maintenance requirements in the pertinent sections of 14 CFR 

part 91 are only applicable to aircraft with an airworthiness certificate in accordance with part 

43. The petitioner states that its V.3 UAS does not have specific maintenance instructions;

therefore the petitioner has developed and documented in its MPTOM and FOPM an “oncondition” maintenance process for the V.3 UAS affected by this exemption. The petitioner 

has also stated that it intends to follow any manufacturers’ recommended instructions and 

procedures when those procedures exist for certain components of its V.3 UAS.

UAS Pilot In Command (PIC)

The petitioner asserts that since the UA will not carry a pilot or passengers on board, the 

proposed operations will not adversely affect safety by requiring the PIC operating the aircraft 

to have a private pilot’s license rather than a commercial pilot’s license. In support of its 

position, the petitioner argues that, since there are no standards for either private or 

commercial UAS pilot certificates, knowledge of airspace regulations and dexterity in the 

control and operation of the UAS acquired from actual operation of the aircraft will be the 

most important factors in establishing an equivalent level of safety. Furthermore, the 

petitioner explains that, given the restricted and controlled airspace within which operations 

will take place, the key factors needed by the PIC are knowledge of the airspace within which 

the “closed-set filming” operation will take place and how that airspace fits into the National 

Airspace System (NAS). The petitioner also states that it cannot be assumed that a 

commercial pilot, approved to operate a helicopter or fixed wing aircraft, has the skill or 

ability to safely operate an unmanned aerial vehicle, operating at 400 feet AGL or lower, 

within strictly controlled pre-approved airspace. The petitioner asserts that there are relatively 

few certificated pilots who are also qualified to fly the type of UAS utilized in motion picture 

industry image-capture operations. Astraeus further asserts that there are even fewer 

commercially certificated pilots that can fly these UAS, to the point that to do both is 

considered rare.

Additionally, the petitioner states that the aircraft will be operated within a secure 

environment, which no one will be allowed to enter unless they are part of the production, 

have been fully briefed of the risks prior to operation of the UAS, and have consented to the 

risks associated with being in the operating area. Should there be a mishap, the UA being 

flown pose significantly less of a threat than the helicopters and fixed wing aircraft now being 

employed because they are a fraction of the size, carry no flammable fuel, and do not carry 

crew or passengers. This is in stark contrast to conventional aircraft that are flown to the site, 

carry flammable fuel, carry passengers and crew, and operate in a much larger area.

UAS Operating Parameters

The petitioner states that all flights will be operated within visual line of sight (VLOS) of a 

pilot and/or observer, and that the UA flights will be limited to a maximum altitude of 400

feet AGL. The petitioner further states that an operator will ensure that only consenting 

production personnel will be allowed within 100 feet of the UA operation, but this radius may 

be reduced to 30 feet based upon an equivalent level of safety determination, as stated in their 

MPTOM, with the advance permission of the local Flight Standards District Office (FSDO).

The petitioner asserts that an equivalent level of safety can be achieved given the size, weight, 
8

and speed of the UAS, as well as the location where it is operated. The petitioner states that 

the UAS will be operated within a safe operating perimeter, the boundaries of which will be 

determined by production personnel and the UAS PIC based on the site-specific filming 

activities and speed of the UAS required for the operation, and coordinated with the 

jurisdictional FAA FSDO and local government officials as applicable, as outlined in the 

MPTOM and FOPM. The petitioner states that only participating and consenting production 

personnel will be allowed within this perimeter; the petitioner also states their intention to 

comply with the guidelines outlined in Order 8900.1 V3, C8, S1 with regard to 

nonparticipating personnel outside the safety perimeter. The petitioner argues that, compared 

to flight operations with aircraft or rotorcraft weighing far more than its maximum 55 lb. UA,

and the lack of flammable fuel, any risk associated with its UAS operations is far less than 

those with conventional aircraft operating at or below 500 feet AGL in the movie industry. 

With respect to preflight actions, the petitioner notes it may need an exemption from 14 CFR 

§ 91.103, because it will not have approved rotorcraft flight manuals. The petitioner asserts 

that an equivalent level of safety will be achieved by the PIC taking all preflight actions as set 

forth in their MPTOM and FOPM, including reviewing weather, flight battery requirements, 

landing and takeoff distances, and aircraft performance data before initiation of flight.

Additionally, the petitioner states that a briefing will be conducted prior to each day’s filming 

regarding planned UAS operations, and all personnel who will be performing duties within 

the boundaries of the safety perimeter will be required to attend.

With respect to the fuel requirements, the petitioner notes that, in order to meet the 30 minute 

reserve requirements in 14 CFR § 91.151, UAS flights would have to be limited to 

approximately 10 minutes. The petitioner argues that, given the limitations on the UA’s 

proposed flight area and the location of its proposed operations within a predetermined area, a 

longer time frame for flight in daylight or night VFR conditions is reasonable. The petitioner 

believes that an equivalent level of safety can be achieved by limiting flights to 30 minutes or 

25% of battery power, whichever occurs first.

The petitioner notes that it may need an exemption from 14 CFR § 91.121, as its UAS may 

have a GPS altitude read out instead of a barometric altimeter. The petitioner asserts that an 

equivalent level of safety will be achieved, as outlined in its MPTOM. Specifically, the

altitude information will be provided to the UAS PIC via a digitally encoded telemetric data 

feed. Prior to each flight, a zero altitude initiation point will be established and confirmed for 

accuracy by the PIC.

Public Interest

The petitioner states that, given the small size of the UA involved and the restricted sterile 

environment within which it will operate, its proposed operation “falls squarely within that 

zone of safety (an equivalent level of safety) in which Congress envisioned that the FAA 

must, by exemption, allow commercial operations of UAS to commence immediately.” Also 

due to the size of the UA and the restricted areas in which the UAS will operate, approval of 

the application presents no national security issue. The petitioner states that, given the clear 

direction in Section 333, the strong equivalent level of safety surrounding the proposed 

operations, and the significant public benefit, including enhanced safety, reduction in 
9

environmental impacts, and including reduced emissions associated with allowing UAS for 

movie and television operations, granting the requested exemptions is in the public interest.

Discussion of Public Comments:

A summary of the petition was published in the Federal Register on June 26, 2014 (79 FR

36378). Eighty-six comments were received.

Of the 86 comments received, including eight from associations, 50 comments supported the 

exemption request, 22 opposed, and 14 were neutral. The petition received comments on the 

following topics: economic impact, UAS, PIC, operational capabilities, airspace, privacy, 

sense and avoid, and data link.

Comments supporting the exemption request came from individuals and industry groups, 

including the Association of Unmanned Vehicle Systems International (AUVSI), Aerospace 

Industries Association (AIA), the National Association of Realtors, the News Media 

Coalition, and the National Press Photographers Association. Supporting comments cited the 

petitioner’s intent to use controlled access airspace, licensed airmen, and preflight safety 

briefings, as well as the economic benefits of UAS.

Several trade organizations submitted letters to the docket, expressing various issues and 

concerns with the Astraeus petition for exemption, including the Air Line Pilots Association

International (ALPA), the National Agricultural Aviation Association (NAAA), and the 

United States Hang Gliding and Paragliding Association (USHPA).

ALPA expressed concern regarding certain conditions outlined in Astraeus’ petition. ALPA 

notes that the proposed operations will be for “compensation or hire,” and ALPA believes that 

the pilot must hold at least a current FAA Commercial Pilot Certificate with an appropriate 

category and class rating for the type of aircraft being flown as well as specific and adequate 

training on the UAS make and model intended to be used. Similarly, a current 2nd Class FAA 

Medical certificate should be required for a UAS pilot operating an aircraft for compensation 

or hire commercial operations as is required in the NAS today. NAAA and USHPA also 

commented on pilot qualification. Specifically,

NAAA believes that the Part 61 regulations currently in effect do not address the licensing of 

pilots of an unmanned aircraft used for commercial purposes. We believe it is necessary for 

the FAA to evaluate pilots of these aircraft on their knowledge and skills in UAV operations. 

Requirements for this licensing should be developed along with other rigorous rules and 

qualifications to ensure safe integration of the unmanned aircraft into the NAS.

The FAA has carefully reviewed the knowledge and training required by holders of both 

private and commercial certificates, as well as the separation of Astraeus’ proposed operations 

from other manned operations. Additional details are available in the ensuing analysis of this 

issue with regards to 14 CFR § 61.113.

ALPA commented that although the anticipated operation is expected to occur below 400 feet 

above the surface, the petition also makes reference to operations 200 feet above structures of 

unspecified and therefore unlimited height. This would put the aircraft at the same altitude 
10

strata as other aircraft in the NAS, with only geographic separation to mitigate the risk of 

collision. However, in subsequent materials posted to the docket, Astraeus has removed 

operation from elevated platforms. All operations will be limited to 400 feet AGL, which is 

specified in the conditions and limitations below. 

ALPA further notes that the aircraft “may not have a barometric altimeter” so the ability to 

accurately maintain altitude must be addressed. NAAA noted the same in its comments. The 

FAA agrees with ALPA and NAAA and addresses this concern in its analysis of the 

exemption from 14 CFR § 91.121, finding that the alternative means of compliance proposed 

by Astraeus does not adversely affect safety.

ALPA and an individual comment that Command and Control (C2) link failures are one of the 

most common failures on a UAS, and that lost link mitigations should require safe modes to 

prevent fly-aways or other scenarios. The FAA agrees and carefully examined the proposed 

operation to ensure that the vehicle design and the petitioner’s MPTOM and FOPM addressed 

potential hazards related to C2 failure. The FAA finds that the UAS to be operated by 

Astraeus has sufficient design features to address these hazards. The FAA also finds that the 

MPTOM and FOPM have incorporated safety procedures to be followed by all operational 

participants should a C2 failure occur. Further detail is contained in the analysis of the UAS

below.

NAAA stated that it represents the interests of small business owners and pilots licensed as 

commercial applicators. NAAA members operate in low-level airspace, and clear low-level 

airspace is vital to the safety of these operators.

NAAA stated that seeing and avoiding other aircraft and hazardous obstructions is the 

backbone for agricultural safety, and agricultural pilots depend on pilots of other aircraft to 

perform their see and avoid functions needed to prevent collisions. NAAA believes that UA

operations at low altitudes will increase the potential of collision hazards with agricultural 

aircraft. In its comments, the USHPA submitted similar concerns relative to activities of other 

low altitude user groups including ballooning, skydiving, powered ultralights, etc.

NAAA acknowledged Astraeus’ plan to submit a written Plan of Activities to the FSDO three 

days before the proposed operations, as required by the petitioner’s MPTOM. However, 

NAAA maintains, as does the USHPA, that in addition to this, issuance of a NOTAM 

advising nonparticipating pilots of the planned activity is vital to disseminating this safety 

information. The FAA agrees and has incorporated this into the conditions and limitations of 

this exemption. Further detail is contained in the analysis of the operating parameters below.

NAAA commented that UA should have assigned numbers that can be read from a suitable 

distance to aid in identification when enforcement of flight regulations is required. The 

USHPA commented similarly, noting that while the current identification standards are not 

feasible on small UA given their reduced size, identification appropriate for these design 

parameters could be defined and created without undue burden or negative impacts on UAS 

operations. The FAA partially agrees with NAAA and USHPA. UA operated under this 

exemption will be marked in accordance with 14 CFR part 45 or as otherwise authorized by 

the FAA. Further detail is contained in the analysis of the UAS below.
11

USHPA states that it is a nonprofit member organization with the specific and primary 

purpose to engage exclusively for scientific and educational purposes in the development, 

study, and use of fuel-less flight systems and aircraft capable of being launched by human 

power alone. USHPA commented that it believes with proper notification of time and place, 

along with other considerations, safety can be maintained. USHPA’s notification concerns

will be addressed by the conditions and limitations that will require an Air Traffic 

Organization issued Certificate of Waiver or Authorization (COA) to address airspace 

requirements and notification. Further detail is contained in the analysis of the UAS operating

parameters below.

Related to the operation of the UA within visual line of sight (VLOS) of the pilot and/or 

observer, USHPA believes operation of any UA in three-dimensional space presents unique 

challenges in accurately determining position in relation to stationary or mobile objects. 

USHPA comments that utilization of an observer for operational redundancy is prudent and 

encouraged, but should not be considered a viable replacement for the pilot in command. 

USHPA believes that the identification of navigational requirements and accurately conveying 

them to the pilot in command would not be provided with adequate precision or sufficient 

response time in a crisis situation and recommends that dual control systems be utilized as a 

redundant safety measure common in commercial aviation environments. The FAA notes 

USHPA’s concerns; additional detail is provided in the analysis of the UAS below.

USHPA also asserts that manned flight should always maintain right of way over all UA 

operations. The FAA agrees and has incorporated this into the conditions and limitations of 

this exemption.

Several comments noted that small UAS can be hard to see during the day, due to their small 

size and factors such as sun glare. Commenters also noted concerns with regard to weather

and wind conditions affecting operations. The FAA addressed these concerns by adding 

operating restrictions in the conditions and limitations regarding stand-off distance from 

clouds, altitude restrictions, and operating distance from non-participating personnel. Further 

detail is contained in the analysis of the UAS operating parameters below.

The petition received several comments suggesting that UAS operated under this exemption 

should have the ability to monitor and communicate with other aircraft or install transponders, 

or that the UAS should not operate until they can sense and avoid other aircraft. One 

commenter suggested that the FAA should implement a buffer between these UAS operations 

and manned operations, while another raised concern with near misses with other aircraft.

Two comments noted that UAS are susceptible to accidents and GPS jamming. The FAA 

believes the limitations under which the petitioner will operate (i.e. VLOS and at or below 

400 feet AGL) and the UAS emergency procedures as outlined in the petitioner’s FOPM and 

MPTOM are sufficient mitigations to this risk so that the operations will not adversely affect 

safety. Further information is contained in the analysis of the UAS below.

One commenter suggested that the FAA should require testing of software and systems prior 

to operation, including testing to RTCA standards. The FAA believes the preflight checks 

discussed in the analysis of the UAS operating parameters are sufficient to mitigate this risk, 

and addresses this in the conditions and limitations below.
12

The FAA also received comments not related to the UA and its operation as proposed by the 

petitioner, but rather addressing more general UAS issues, which are discussed below.

The FAA received two comments asking how the FAA plans to monitor or conduct 

surveillance of the petitioner’s UAS operations. The FAA expects operators to comply with 

its regulations and the terms of the exemption. The jurisdictional FSDO will be the primary 

office responsible for oversight of the operations.

The FAA received several comments that integrating UAS operations via a broadly applicable 

rule was a more suitable method than the exemption process, and that industries other than the 

motion picture industry should be allowed to participate. Section 333 provides interim 

authority to the Secretary of Transportation, which facilitates limited, controlled UAS 

operations prior to the completion of a UAS regulatory structure. The FAA is using its 

exemption process to facilitate implementation of Section 333 and to address FAA rules that 

would be applicable to the proposed operations. We have received and are considering 

exemption petitions from a broad array of industries and applications for this technology. 

Additionally, the FAA is engaged in a rulemaking process that will allow broader applications 

of UAS operations. 

Two commenters suggested this exemption process should be available to anybody, regardless 

of organizational size or resources. The FAA will consider any request for exemption 

submitted to it, no matter the source.

One commenter stated that meaningful public review of the petition was not possible because 

some of the documents submitted by the petitioner are confidential. The FAA routinely 

considers confidential materials in its exemption process. The FAA reviewed and considered

the petitioner’s information in its analysis of the petition.

The petition received several comments on privacy. A commenter expressed concern that the 

UAS could be used for spying. Other commenters stated that there are strong privacy 

regulations in place. Specifically, a commenter states that the petitioner addressed privacy 

issues in its request by mandating that all filming be within a contained environment with all 

participants fully aware that they are being filmed. The petitioner states that all UAS flights 

will occur over private or controlled access property with the property owner’s prior consent 

and knowledge, and that only people who have consented or otherwise have agreed to be in 

the area where filming will take place will be filmed. The FAA notes that the terms of this 

grant of exemption are consistent with the petitioner’s proposal in this area. 

The FAA's analysis is as follows:

Unmanned aircraft system (UAS)

Regarding the petitioner’s requested relief from 14 CFR part 21 Certification procedures for 

products and parts, the FAA finds that, based on the limited size, weight, operating 

conditions, design safety features, and the imposed conditions and limitations, the petitioner 

has demonstrated that its operations would not adversely affect safety compared to similar 
13

operations conducted with aircraft that have been issued an airworthiness certificate under 

14 CFR part 21, Subpart H.

Commercial motion picture and television aerial filming operations with manned aircraft are 

typically conducted with aircraft holding standard airworthiness certificates issued under 

part 21, subpart H. These aircraft are normally modified via the Supplemental Type Certificate 

(STC) process to install cameras and other equipment not included in the original aircraft 

design. 

Manned helicopters conducting motion picture and television aerial filming can weigh 6,000 

lbs. or more and are operated by an onboard pilot, in addition to other onboard crewmembers, 

as necessary. The petitioner’s UA will weigh less than 55 lbs. with no onboard pilot or crew. 

The pilot and crew will be remotely located from the aircraft. The limited weight significantly 

reduces the potential for harm to participating and nonparticipating individuals or property in 

the event of an 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 aerial filming operation.

Manned aircraft are at risk of fuel spillage and fire in the event of an incident or accident. The 

UA carries no fuel, and therefore the risk of fire following an incident or accident due to fuel 

spillage is eliminated. 

During motion picture and television aerial filming with manned aircraft under the conditions 

of an FAA issued Certificate of Waiver, aircraft can be operated in very close proximity to 

participating persons. The safety of these individuals is maintained through use of an aircraft 

with standard airworthiness certification under 14 CFR part 21, Subpart H, operation of the 

aircraft by a qualified and competent pilot, and operating according to limitations necessary to 

ensure safety. In these situations, the filming subject and production personnel are exposed to 

risk by virtue of their close proximity to an aircraft in flight. Compared to manned aircraft, the 

UA being operated by the petitioner reduces the risk to participating persons in close 

proximity to the aircraft due to the limited size, weight, operating conditions, and design 

safety features of the UAS. 

This exemption does not require an electronic means to monitor and communicate with other 

aircraft, such as transponders or sense and avoid technology. Rather the FAA is mitigating the 

risk of these operations by placing limits on altitude, requiring stand-off distance from clouds, 

permitting daytime operations only, and requiring that the UA be operated within visual line 

of sight and yield right of way to all other manned operations. Additionally, the exemption 

provides that the operator will request a NOTAM prior to operations to alert other users of the 

NAS.

The petitioner’s UAS has the capability to operate safely after experiencing certain in-flight 

failures. The UA is also able to respond to a lost-link event with a pre-coordinated, 

predictable, automated flight maneuver. With regard to USHPA’s concerns about dual control 

systems, current FAA regulations permit motion picture and television filming operations by 

manned aircraft that do not require a copilot. Additionally, under this exemption, the FAA

requires that the UAS PIC hold a current third class medical certificate. Historically, instances 

of complete PIC incapacitation are rare. In all other cases other than complete incapacitation, 
14

the PIC has the ability to terminate the flight operation or initiate the automated return to 

home procedure outlined within the FOPM. The FAA also believes that the multiple control 

redundancies described in the petitioner’s FOPM are sufficient to mitigate risks associated 

with the loss of GPS signal. In consideration of these factors and the UA size, weight, speed 

and other operating limitations associated with this aerial filmmaking operation, the FAA 

finds that there is no adverse safety affect relative to similar operations conducted by manned 

aircraft with a flight crew complement of one.

These safety features also provide for no adverse safety affect to participating and 

nonparticipating individuals compared to a manned aircraft that holds a standard airworthiness 

certificate performing a similar operation.

In accordance with the statutory criteria provided in Section 333 of PL 112-95 in reference to 

49 USC 44704, and in consideration of the size, weight, speed, and limited operating area 

associated with the aircraft and its operation, the Secretary of Transportation has determined 

that this aircraft meets the conditions of Section 333. Therefore, the FAA finds that the 

requested relief from 14 CFR part 21, and any associated noise certification and testing 

requirements of part 36, is not necessary.

Regarding the petitioner’s requested relief from 14 CFR § 45.23(b) Display of marks, the 

petitioner’s request is made under the assumption that marking with the word “experimental” 

will be required as a condition of an exemption request. This marking is reserved for aircraft 

that are issued experimental certificates under § 21.191. Since the petitioner’s UAS will not 

be certificated under 14 CFR § 21.191, a grant of exemption for 14 CFR § 45.23(b) is not 

necessary.

The petitioner’s UA must be identified by serial number, registered in accordance with 14 

CFR part 47, and have identification (N-Number) markings in accordance with 14 CFR part 

45, Subpart C. Markings must be as large as practicable.

Regarding the petitioner’s requested relief from 14 CFR §§ 91.405(a) Maintenance 

required, 91.407(a)(1) Operation after maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, or 

alteration, 91.409(a)(2) Inspections, and 91.417(a) and (b) Maintenance records, the FAA has 

determined that relief from 91.409(a)(1) is also necessary, because it is an alternate inspection 

requirement of 91.409(a)(2).

The petitioner’s FOPM contains the maintenance requirements for the V.3 UAS, to include 

“on-condition” maintenance and modifications. The petitioner’s MPTOM and FOPM were

reviewed and do not sufficiently support the regulatory relief sought under 14 CFR part 91,

Subpart E. The FAA has carefully considered the petitioner’s supplemental information and 

determined that its operations will not adversely affect safety with regard to the regulatory 

maintenance and alteration requirements of 14 CFR §§ 91.405(a)(1), 91.407(a)(1), 

91.409(a)(1) and (2), and 91.417(a) and (b), provided changes are made to the MPTOM and 

FOPM as required by the conditions and limitations included in this exemption. These 

changes include: requirements to develop and document maintenance, overhaul, replacement, 

and inspection requirements in the absence of manufacturer’s requirements; procedures to 

document and maintain maintenance records with regard to the petitioner’s UAS; and UAS 
15

technician qualification criteria. They also require the petitioner’s FOPM to include preflight 

inspection procedures that account for any discrepancies not already covered in the manual. 

The FAA finds these additional requirements are necessary to ensure the petitioner’s proposed 

UAS operations do not adversely affect safety in the NAS and of people and property on the 

ground. Therefore, the FAA finds that exemption from 14 CFR §§ 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 

91.409(a)(1) and (2), and 91.417(a) and (b) is warranted subject to the conditions and 

limitations below.

Pilot In Command of the UAS

Regarding the petitioner’s requested relief from 14 CFR § 61.113(a) and (b) Private pilot 

privileges and limitations, comments were received that voiced concerns about pilot 

certification. One such comment came from ALPA, which states that one of the “areas that 

must be addressed to ensure safe operations” is Astraeus’ proposal to use a private pilot with a 

third class medical as its UAS PIC. ALPA believes that the UAS pilot should possess a 

commercial pilot certificate with appropriate category and class rating for the type of aircraft 

being flown and the corresponding second class medical certificate, as well as specific and 

adequate training on the UAS make and model intended to be used. Similar concerns were 

also raised by other associations such as USHPA and NAAA.

Given these grounds, the FAA must determine the appropriate level of pilot certification for

Astraeus’ proposed operation. Title 14 CFR part 61 requires that operations conducted for 

compensation or hire necessitate a commercial pilot certificate and at least a second class 

medical certificate. In considering the petitioner’s requested relief from 14 CFR § 61.113(a)

and (b), the FAA must consider the following factors as they relate specifically to Astraeus’

proposed operations:

Separation from manned aircraft operations: Astraeus proposes operations in a “sterile 

environment” of closed-set motion-picture filming. In this controlled environment, their 

operations will remain within visual line of site (VLOS) and below 400 feet AGL.

Additionally, the FAA has added further conditions and limitations that will require a 

Certificate of Waiver or Authorization (COA) from the FAA Air Traffic Organization to 

address airspace requirements and notification requiring Astraeus to request a Notice to 

Airman (NOTAM) not more than 72 hours in advance, but not less than 48 hours prior to the 

operation. Astraeus will also be required to avoid and yield right-of-way to all manned

operations.

The current aeronautical knowledge requirements for a private pilot compared to a 

commercial pilot: The FAA analyzed the areas of knowledge specified in 14 CFR part 61 for 

that of a commercial pilot versus a private pilot. The results show that the required areas of 

knowledge for a commercial versus private pilot cover the same fundamental principles, as 

shown in the following table.
16

Commercial Knowledge Private Knowledge

**Airplane Single Engine Land (ASEL) used for comparison**

§ 61.125 Aeronautical knowledge.

(a) General. A person who applies for a commercial 

pilot certificate must receive and log ground 

training...

§ 61.105 Aeronautical knowledge.

(a) General. A person who is applying for a private 

pilot certificate must receive and log ground 

training...

(b) Aeronautical knowledge areas. (b) Aeronautical knowledge areas.

(1) Applicable Federal Aviation Regulations of this 

chapter that relate to commercial pilot privileges, 

limitations, and flight operations;

(1) Applicable Federal Aviation Regulations of this 

chapter that relate to private pilot privileges, 

limitations, and flight operations;

(2) Accident reporting requirements of the National 

Transportation Safety Board; 

(2) Accident reporting requirements of the National 

Transportation Safety Board;

(3) Basic aerodynamics and the principles of flight; (10) Principles of aerodynamics, powerplants, and 

aircraft systems; 

(4) Meteorology to include recognition of critical 

weather situations, windshear recognition and 

avoidance, and the use of aeronautical weather 

reports and forecasts; 

(6) Recognition of critical weather situations from the 

ground and in flight, windshear avoidance, and the 

procurement and use of aeronautical weather reports 

and forecasts; 

(5) Safe and efficient operation of aircraft; (7) Safe and efficient operation of aircraft, including 

collision avoidance, and recognition and avoidance of 

wake turbulence;

(6) Weight and balance computations; (9) Weight and balance computations;

(7) Use of performance charts; (8) Effects of density altitude on takeoff and climb 

performance;

(8) Significance and effects of exceeding aircraft 

performance limitations; 

**Related to other areas within the private 

requirements but not referenced specifically**

(9) Use of aeronautical charts and a magnetic 

compass for pilotage and dead reckoning; 

(4) Use of aeronautical charts for VFR navigation 

using pilotage, dead reckoning, and navigation 

systems;

(10) Use of air navigation facilities; (4) Use of aeronautical charts for VFR navigation 

using pilotage, dead reckoning, and navigation 

systems;

(5) Radio communication procedures;

(11) Aeronautical decision making and judgment; (12) Aeronautical decision making and judgment; and

(12) Principles and functions of aircraft systems; (10) Principles of aerodynamics, powerplants, and 

aircraft systems;

(13) Maneuvers, procedures, and emergency 

operations appropriate to the aircraft; 

(7) Safe and efficient operation of aircraft, including 

collision avoidance, and recognition and avoidance of 

wake turbulence; 

(11) Stall awareness, spin entry, spins, and spin 

recovery techniques for the airplane and glider 

category ratings;

(14) Night and high-altitude operations;  Although not mentioned in § 61.105, 3 hours of 

night flight training is required for the private per §

61.107 and § 61.109. For this comparison, highaltitude operations are considered not applicable.** 

(15) Procedures for operating within the National 

Airspace System; and 

(3) Use of the applicable portions of the “Aeronautical 

Information Manual” and FAA advisory circulars; 

(13) Preflight action that includes— (i) How to obtain 

information on runway lengths at airports of intended 
17

use, data on takeoff and landing distances, weather 

reports and forecasts, and fuel requirements; and (ii) 

How to plan for alternatives if the planned flight 

cannot be completed or delays are encountered.

(16) Procedures for flight and ground training for 

lighter-than-air ratings.** 

**For this comparison (ASEL), these operations are 

considered not applicable.**

§ 61.127 Flight proficiency.

(a) General. A person who applies for a commercial 

pilot certificate must receive and log ground and 

flight training

§ 61.107 Flight proficiency.

(a) General. A person who applies for a private pilot 

certificate must receive and log ground and flight 

training

(b) Areas of operation. (1) For an airplane category 

rating with a single-engine class rating:

(b) Areas of operation. (1) For an airplane category 

rating with a single-engine class rating:

(i) Preflight preparation; (i) Preflight preparation; 

(ii) Preflight procedures; (ii) Preflight procedures; 

(iii) Airport and seaplane base operations; (iii) Airport and seaplane base operations; 

(iv) Takeoffs, landings, and go-arounds; (iv) Takeoffs, landings, and go-arounds; 

(v) Performance maneuvers; (v) Performance maneuvers; 

(vi) Ground reference maneuvers; (vi) Ground reference maneuvers; 

(vii) Navigation; (vii) Navigation; 

(viii) Slow flight and stalls; (viii) Slow flight and stalls; 

(ix) Emergency operations; (x) Emergency operations;

(x) High-altitude operations; and **For this comparison, high-altitude operations are 

considered not applicable.**

(xi) Postflight procedures. (xii) Postflight procedures. 

**Not referenced specifically** (ix) Basic instrument maneuvers; 

**Not referenced specifically** (xi) Night operations, except as provided in §61.110 

of this part; and

The specific UAS airmanship skills required for Astraeus’ PIC(s): Some of the 

requirements for Astraeus’ PIC(s) are provided in their proprietary documents. However, as 

with other exemptions that contain specific pilot qualifications, e.g. Exemption Nos. 7830,

6802K, and 6540N, those pilot requirements become conditions and limitations within the 

grant of exemption. An abbreviated summary of those PIC requirements include the 

following:

a. The PIC must possess a Private Pilot’s Certificate and a valid third-class 

medical certificate;

b. The PIC must have accumulated and logged a minimum of 200 flight cycles 

and 25 hours of total time as a UAS rotorcraft pilot and at least 10 hours 

logged as a UAS pilot with a similar UAS type (single blade or multirotor).

c. The PIC must have accumulated and logged a minimum of five hours as UAS 

pilot with the make and model of UAS to be utilized for operations under the 

exemption and three take-offs and landings in the preceding 90 days. 

d. The PIC must have successfully completed the qualification process as 

specified in the MPTOM and FOPM, to include a knowledge and skill test.

The FAA’s analysis regarding PIC requirements: The parallel foundation of aeronautical 

knowledge required for private and commercial pilots is shown in the above table. Private 
18

pilot airmanship skills are furthered through manned flights in the NAS. Commercially 

certificated pilots build additional experience through these manned flights as well. The 

additional experience and airmanship skills obtained by commercially certificated airmen 

contribute to their ability to overcome adverse situations that could be encountered in flights 

conducted for compensation or hire. However, the experience obtained beyond a private pilot 

certificate in pursuit of a commercial pilot certificate in manned flight does not necessarily aid 

a pilot in the operational environment proposed by the petitioner; the FAA considers the 

overriding safety factor for the limited operations proposed by the petitioner to be the

airmanship skills acquired through UAS-specific flight cycles, flight time, and specific make 

and model experience, culminating in verification through testing.

The FAA shares ALPA’s concerns regarding appropriate training on the UAS being utilized. 

The FAA has reviewed the petitioner’s knowledge and experience criteria for its PICs. The 

FAA finds that the combination of aeronautical knowledge, UAS airmanship skills, and 

verification through testing is a sufficient method for Astraeus to evaluate a pilot’s 

qualifications, given that operations will be conducted within the limitations outlined in this 

exemption. 

The knowledge and airmanship test qualifications have been developed by Astraeus for the 

UAS operations proposed in their petition for exemption. There are no established practical 

test standards that support a jurisdictional FAA FSDO evaluation and approval of company 

designated examiners. The petitioner will conduct these tests in accordance with its FOPM 

and the conditions and limitations noted below. Given the constraints of the proposed 

operations, the FAA believes this would not adversely affect the safety of the NAS.

The petitioner plans to operate in a unique and limited environment. Given the 1) separation

of these closed-set filming operations from other manned operations, 2) the parallel nature of 

private pilot aeronautical knowledge requirements to those of commercial requirements, and 

3) the UAS airmanship skills of Astraeus’ PICs, the FAA finds that the additional manned 

airmanship experience of a commercially certificated pilot would not correlate to the 

airmanship skills necessary for Astraeus’ specific proposed operations. Upon consideration of 

the overall safety case presented by the petitioner and the concerns of the commenters, the 

FAA finds that granting the requested relief from 14 CFR § 61.113(a) and (b), provided the 

conditions and limitations outlined below, would not adversely affect the safety of the NAS. 

Another consideration supporting the certificate requirement is that pilots holding a private 

pilot certificate are subject to security screening by the Department of Homeland Security.

This requirement should ameliorate security concerns over UAS operations under this 

exemption.

Operating parameters of the UAS

Astraeus has stated that it plans to comply with the waiver process as described in FAA Order 

8900.1, Volume 3, Chapter 8, Section 1 (V3, C8, S1) Issue a Certificate of Waiver for Motion 

Picture and Television Filming. The FAA agrees with this philosophy; however, the current 

section of Order 8900.1 has specific processes that preclude a jurisdictional FAA FSDO from 

issuing the required Certificate of Waiver, because the section did not originally provide for
19

UA operations. One example of this is the minimum pilot qualifications – the pertinent

section of Order 8900.1 provides no way to relieve Astraeus from the pilot requirements. 

Also, the sample form 7711-1 used for issuing the Certificate of Waiver specifically states 

“this section not used for Unmanned Air Vehicle authorizations.”

Therefore, the FAA will exempt Astraeus from the applicable regulations normally waived 

during that process. The FAA will then include the required notifications and coordination 

with jurisdictional FSDOs through the conditions and limitations listed below. Motion picture 

and television filming waivers similar to Astraeus’ operation are normally issued from one 

jurisdictional FSDO and can be used in locations covered by other geographically responsible

FSDOs through notification. Those local FSDOs then have the ability to review the proposed 

plan of activities and associated operations manual(s) and levy any additional local special 

provisions. Since Astraeus’ operation deals specifically with UAS, this exemption will take 

the place of the Certificate of Waiver normally issued by a jurisdictional FSDO under 8900.1 

V3, C8, S1. Every FSDO with jurisdiction over the area that Astraeus plans to operate within 

must still be notified, just as with manned filming operations, and those FSDOs will have the 

ability to coordinate further conditions and limitations with the UAS Integration Office to 

address any local concerns, as stated below in the conditions and limitations section of this 

exemption.

The petitioner must also obtain a Certificate of Waiver or Authorization (COA) from the 

FAA’s Air Traffic Organization (ATO) prior to conducting any operations. This is an existing 

process that not only makes local Air Traffic Control (ATC) facilities aware of UAS 

operations, but also provides ATO the ability to consider airspace issues that are unique to 

UAS operations. The COA will require the operator to request a Notice to Airman (NOTAM),

which is the mechanism for alerting other users of the NAS to the UAS activities being 

conducted. Therefore, the FAA believes that adherence to this process is the safest and most 

expeditious way to permit Astraeus to conduct their proposed UAS operations. The conditions 

and limitations below prescribe the requirement for Astraeus to obtain an ATO-issued COA.

Regarding the petitioner’s requested relief from 14 CFR § 91.7(a) Civil Aircraft 

Airworthiness, Astraeus’ request is based on the fact that no airworthiness certificate will be 

issued for the UAS. As previously noted, the petitioner’s UAS will not require an 

airworthiness certificate in accordance with 14 CFR part 21, Subpart H. Based on the fact that 

an airworthiness certificate will not be issued, exemption from § 91.7(a) is not necessary.

In accordance with the pertinent part of 14 CFR § 91.7(b), the PIC of the UAS is responsible 

for determining whether the aircraft is in condition for safe flight. The petitioner’s manuals for 

maintenance and operations include safety checklists to be used prior to each flight.

Regarding the petitioner’s requested relief from 14 CFR § 91.9(b)(2) Civil aircraft flight 

manual, marking, and placard requirements and § 91.203(a) and (b) Civil aircraft: 

Certifications required, the original intent of these regulations was to display an aircraft’s 

airworthiness, certification, and registration documents so they would be easily available to 

inspectors and passengers. Based on the FAA Memorandum subject “Interpretation regarding 

whether certain required documents may be kept at an unmanned aircraft’s control station,”
20

dated August 8, 2014, the requested relief from 14 CFR §§ 91.9(b)(2) and 91.203(a) and (b) is 

not necessary.

Regarding the petitioner’s requested relief from 14 CFR § 91.103 Preflight action, although 

there will be no approved Airplane or Rotorcraft Flight Manual as specified in paragraph 

(b)(1), the FAA believes that the petitioner can comply with the other applicable requirements 

in 14 CFR § 91.103(b)(2). The procedures outlined in the petitioner’s MPTOM and FOPM 

address the FAA’s concerns regarding compliance with § 91.103(b). The petitioner has also 

stated its intent to comply with § 91.103(a): “The PIC will take all actions including reviewing

weather, flight battery requirements, landing and takeoff distances and aircraft performance 

data before initiation of flight.” The FAA has imposed stricter requirements with regard to 

visibility and distance from clouds; this is to both keep the UA from departing VLOS and to 

preclude the UA from operating so close to a cloud as to create a hazard to other aircraft 

operating in the NAS. The FAA also notes the risks associated with sun glare; the FAA 

believes that the PIC’s and VO’s ability to still see other air traffic, combined with the PIC’s 

ability to initiate a return-to-home sequence, are sufficient mitigations in this respect. The PIC 

will also account for all relevant site-specific conditions in their preflight procedures. 

Therefore, the FAA finds that exemption from 14 CFR § 91.103 is not necessary.

Regarding the petitioner’s requested relief from 14 CFR § 91.109 Flight instruction; 

Simulated instrument flight and certain flight tests, the petitioner did not describe training 

scenarios in which a dual set of controls would be utilized or required, i.e. dual flight 

instruction, provided by a flight instructor or other company-designated individual, that would 

require that individual to have fully functioning dual controls. Rather, Astraeus evaluates the 

qualification of its PICs based on their experience with the UAS to be operated and verifies

through testing, in lieu of formalized training. As such, the FAA finds that the petitioner can 

conduct its operations without the requested relief from 14 CFR § 91.109.

Regarding the petitioner’s requested relief from 14 CFR § 91.119 Minimum safe altitudes, the 

petitioner failed to specify the pertinent part of 14 CFR § 91.119 from which they require 

relief. Relief from 14 CFR § 91.119(a) , which requires operating at an altitude that allows a 

safe emergency landing if a power unit fails, is unprecedented and unwarranted. Relief from § 

14 CFR 91.119(b), operation over congested areas, is not applicable, because the petitioner 

states that operations will only be conducted within the sterile area described in the MPTOM. 

Although the petitioner specifically mentioned relief from 14 CFR § 91.119(d), the FAA finds 

that relief is only needed from 14 CFR § 91.119(c), which is consistent with the relief 

typically provided to manned operations in FAA Order 8900.1 V3, C8, S1 Issue a Certificate 

of Waiver for Motion Picture and Television Filming. This Order allows for relief from §

91.119(c) with respect to those participating persons, vehicles, and structures directly involved 

in the performance of the actual filming. In accordance with the petitioner’s stated intention to 

adhere to Order 8900.1 V3, C8, S1, persons other than participating persons1 are not allowed 

1 Per Order 8900.1 V3, C8, S1, participating persons are all persons associated with the filming production, and 

they must be briefed on the potential risk of the proposed flight operation(s) and must acknowledge and accept 

those risks. Nonparticipating persons are the public, spectators, media, etc., not associated with the filming 

production.
21

within 500 feet of the operating area. This provision may be reduced to no less than 200 feet if 

an equivalent level of safety can be achieved and the Administrator has approved it. For 

example, an equivalent level of safety may be determined through evaluation by an aviation 

safety inspector of the filming production area to note terrain features, obstructions, buildings, 

etc. Such barriers may protect nonparticipating persons (observers, the public, news media, 

etc.) from debris in the event of an accident.

The FAA notes the petitioner’s additional guidelines in its MPTOM to protect its participating 

production personnel, and finds that relief from 14 CFR § 91.119(c) is warranted, provided 

adherence to the procedures outlined in the petitioner’s MPTOM and FOPM, and the FAA’s 

additional conditions and limitations outlined below. However, all nonparticipating personnel 

will be required to be at least 500 feet from flight operations, with possible relief to allow 

reductions to 200 feet, as specified above.

Regarding the petitioner’s requested relief from 14 CFR § 91.121 Altimeter Settings, the FAA 

believes that an altitude reading is a critical safety component of the petitioner’s proposed 

operation. Although the petitioner will not have a typical barometric altimeter onboard the 

aircraft, the FAA finds the petitioner’s intention to operate the UA within VLOS and at or 

below 400 feet AGL, combined with the petitioner’s intention to provide altitude information 

to the UAS pilot via a digitally encoded telemetric data feed, which downlinks from the 

aircraft to a ground-based on-screen display, to be a sufficient method for ensuring the UAS 

operations do not adversely affect safety. The altitude information will be generated by 

equipment installed onboard the aircraft, as specified using GPS triangulation, or digitally 

encoded barometric altimeter, or radio altimeter, or any combination thereof. Prior to each 

flight, a zero altitude initiation point will be established and confirmed for accuracy by the 

UAS PIC. The FAA has determined that good cause exists for granting the requested relief to 

14 CFR § 91.121.

Regarding the petitioner’s requested relief from 14 CFR § 91.151(a) Fuel requirements for 

flight in VFR conditions, relief has been granted for manned aircraft to operate at less than the 

minimums prescribed in 14 CFR § 91.151(a), including Exemption Nos. 2689, 5745, and 

10650. In addition, similar UAS-specific relief has been granted in Exemption Nos. 8811, 

10808, and 10673 for daytime, Visual Flight Rules (VFR) conditions. The petitioner states 

that its UAS operations will be conducted in a controlled closed-set filming environment, with

UA under 55 pounds, at speeds below 50 Knots, and within VLOS. These factors, combined 

with Astraeus’ stated intention to terminate flights after 30 minutes or with 25% remaining 

battery power (whichever occurs first), provides the FAA sufficient reason to grant the relief 

from 14 CFR § 91.151(a) as requested in accordance with the conditions and limitations 

proposed by Astraeus.

With respect to the petitioner’s request to operate at night, the FAA finds that the petitioner 

has not provided a sufficient safety case and mitigations, per FAA Order 8900.1 V16, C5, S3 

General Operational Requirements, to avoid collision hazards at night. All previous UASspecific grants of relief from 14 CFR § 91.151(a) have restricted flights to daytime VFR 

conditions only. While the FAA acknowledges the petitioner’s stated film set lighting 

techniques to mitigate the risks of nighttime operations, the petitioner has not provided 
22

sufficient data and analysis regarding the PICs’ and VOs’ ability to maintain VLOS with the 

UA and conduct their functions to see and avoid other potential obstacles and air traffic, 

relative to the lighting configuration on the film set. There is a limitation outlined below that 

precludes nighttime UAS operations. The petitioner may provide additional data and seek an 

amendment to its exemption to permit night operations.

Additionally, in evaluating the petitioner’s proposed operating parameters with regard to 

VLOS and a safe operating perimeter, the FAA considered operations from a moving device 

or vehicle. Since the petitioner did not discuss provisions for these circumstances, the 

conditions and limitations below preclude operations from moving devices or vehicles. 

Public Interest

The FAA finds that a grant of exemption is in the public interest. The enhanced safety 

achieved using a UA with the specifications described by the petitioner and carrying no 

passengers or crew, rather than a manned aircraft of significantly greater proportions, carrying 

crew in addition to flammable fuel, gives the FAA good cause to find that the UAS operation 

enabled by this exemption is in the public interest. The FAA also finds that UAS provide an 

additional tool for the filmmaking industry, adding a greater degree of flexibility, which 

supplements the current capabilities offered by manned aircraft.

The table below summarizes the FAA’s determinations regarding the relief sought by the 

petitioner:

Relief sought by petitioner (14 CFR) FAA determination (14 CFR)

Part 21 Not necessary

45.23(b) Not necessary

61.113(a) and (b) Granted with conditions and limitations

91.7(a) Not necessary

91.9(b)(2) Not necessary

91.103 Not necessary with conditions and limitations

91.109 Not necessary

91.119 Paragraph (c) granted with conditions and 

limitations

91.121 Granted with conditions and limitations

91.151(a) 91.151(a)(1), day, granted with conditions and 

limitations; 91.151(a)(2), night, denied

91.203(a) and (b) Not necessary

91.405(a) Granted with conditions and limitations

91.407(a)(1) Granted with conditions and limitations
23

91.409(a)(2)

Granted with conditions and limitations; relief 

from 91.409(a)(1) also granted with 

conditions and limitations

91.417(a) and (b) Granted with conditions and limitations

The FAA’s Decision

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

Therefore, pursuant to the authority contained in 49 U.S.C. §§ 106(f), 40113, and 44701,

delegated to me by the Administrator, Astraeus Aerial is granted an exemption from 

14 CFR §§ 61.113(a) and (b); 91.119(c); 91.121; 91.151(a); 91.405(a); 91.407(a)(1); 

91.409(a)(1) and (2); and 91.417(a) and (b) to the extent necessary to allow Astraeus to 

operate unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) for the purpose of scripted, closed-set filming for 

the motion picture and television industry. This exemption is subject to the conditions and 

limitations listed below.

Conditions and Limitations

Relative to this grant of exemption, Astraeus is hereafter referred to as the operator.

The Flight Operations and Procedures Manual (FOPM) and Motion Picture and Television 

Operations Manual (MPTOM) are hereafter collectively referred to as the operator’s manual.

Failure to comply with any of the conditions and limitations of this grant of exemption will be 

grounds for the immediate suspension or rescission of this exemption.

The operator proposed the following conditions and/or limitations, which were accepted by 

the FAA.2

1. The unmanned aircraft (UA) must weigh less than 55 pounds (25 Kg), including energy 

source(s) and equipment. Operations authorized by this grant of exemption are limited to 

the following aircraft described in the operator’s manual: Astraeus Aerial Cinema System 

V.3CS UAS aircraft variant, serial #001 onward (V.3). Proposed operations of any other 

aircraft will require a new petition or a petition to amend this grant.

2. The UA may not be flown at a ground speed exceeding 50 knots.

3. Flights must be operated at an altitude of no more than 400 feet above ground level 

(AGL), as indicated by the procedures specified in the operator’s manual. All altitudes 

reported to ATC must be in feet AGL.

2 Conditions and limitations outlined by the operator may have been modified for clarity.
24

4. The UA must be operated within visual line of sight (VLOS) of the PIC at all times. This 

requires the PIC to be able to use human vision unaided by any device other than 

corrective lenses, as specified on the PIC’s FAA-issued medical certificate.

5. All operations must utilize a visual observer (VO). The VO may be used to satisfy the 

VLOS requirement as long as the PIC always maintains VLOS capability. The VO and 

PIC must be able to communicate verbally at all times.

6. The operator’s manual is considered acceptable to the FAA, provided the additional 

requirements identified in these conditions and limitations are added or amended. The 

operator’s manual and this grant of exemption must be maintained and made available to 

the Administrator upon request. If a discrepancy exists between the conditions and 

limitations in this exemption and the procedures outlined in the operator’s manual, the 

conditions and limitations herein take precedence and must be followed. Otherwise, the 

operator must follow the procedures as outlined in its operator’s manual.

The operator may update or revise its operator’s manual. It is the operator’s responsibility 

to track such revisions and present updated and revised documents to the Administrator

upon request. The operator must also present updated and revised documents if it petitions 

for extension or amendment. If the operator determines that any update or revision would 

affect the basis for which the FAA granted this exemption, then the operator must petition 

for amendment to their exemption. The FAA’s UAS Integration Office (AFS-80) may be 

contacted if questions arise regarding updates or revisions to the operator’s manual. 

7. Prior to each flight the PIC must inspect the UAS to ensure it is in a condition for safe 

flight. If the inspection reveals a condition that affects the safe operation of the UAS, the 

aircraft is prohibited from operating until the necessary maintenance has been performed 

and the UAS is found to be in a condition for safe flight. The Ground Control Station, if 

utilized, must be included in the preflight inspection. All maintenance and alterations must 

be properly documented in the aircraft records.

8. Any UAS that has undergone maintenance or alterations that affect the UAS operation or 

flight characteristics, e.g. replacement of a flight critical component, must undergo a 

functional test flight in accordance with the operator’s manual. The PIC who conducts the 

functional test flight must make an entry in the UAS aircraft records of the flight. The 

requirements and procedures for a functional test flight and aircraft record entry must be 

added to the operator’s manual.

9. The operator must follow the manufacturer’s UAS aircraft/component, maintenance, 

overhaul, replacement, inspection, and life limit requirements. When unavailable, aircraft 

maintenance/component/overhaul, replacement, and inspection/maintenance requirements 

must be established and identified in the operator’s manual. At a minimum, requirements 

for the following must be included in the operator’s manual:
25

a. Actuators / Servos;

b. Transmission (single rotor);

c. Powerplant (motors);

d. Propellers;

e. Electronic speed controller;

f. Batteries;

g. Mechanical dynamic components (single rotor);

h. Remote command and control;

i. Ground control station (if used); and

j. Any other components as determined by the operator;

10. The Pilot In Command (PIC) must possess at least a private pilot certificate and at least a 

current third-class medical certificate. The PIC must also meet the flight review 

requirements specified in 14 CFR § 61.56 in an aircraft in which the PIC is rated on his or 

her pilot certificate.

11. Prior to operations conducted for the purpose of motion picture filming (or similar 

operations), the PIC must have accumulated and logged, in a manner consistent with 

14 CFR § 61.51(b), a minimum of 200 flight cycles and 25 hours of total time as a UAS 

rotorcraft pilot and at least ten hours logged as a UAS pilot with a similar UAS type 

(single blade or multirotor). Prior documented flight experience that was obtained in 

compliance with applicable regulations may satisfy this requirement. Training, 

proficiency, and experience-building flights can also be conducted under this grant of 

exemption to accomplish the required flight cycles and flight time. During training, 

proficiency, and experience-building flights, all persons not essential for flight operations

are considered nonparticipants, and the PIC must operate the UA with appropriate distance 

from nonparticipants in accordance with 14 CFR § 91.119.

12. Prior to operations conducted for the purpose of motion picture filming (or similar 

operations), the PIC must have accumulated and logged, in a manner consistent with

14 CFR § 61.51(b), a minimum of five hours as UAS pilot operating the make and model 

of UAS to be utilized for operations under the exemption and three take-offs and three 

landings in the preceding 90 days. Training, proficiency, experience-building, and take-off 

and landing currency flights can be conducted under this grant of exemption to accomplish 
26

the required flight time and 90 day currency. During training, proficiency, experiencebuilding, and take-off and landing currency flights all persons not essential for flight

operations are considered nonparticipants, and the PIC must operate the UA with

appropriate distance from nonparticipants in accordance with 14 CFR § 91.119.

13. Prior to any flight operations authorized by this grant of exemption, the PIC and VO must 

have successfully completed a qualification process, as outlined in the operator’s manual. 

As this is a requirement stipulated by the operator, the test must be developed and 

implemented by a qualified person designated at the sole discretion of the operator. A 

record of completion of this qualification process must be documented and made available 

to the Administrator upon request.

14. Prior to operations conducted for the purpose of motion picture filming (or similar 

operations), a flight demonstration, administered by an operator-approved and -qualified 

pilot must be successfully completed and documented. This documentation must be 

available for review upon request by the Administrator. Because the knowledge and 

airmanship test qualifications have been developed by the operator, and there are no 

established practical test standards that support a jurisdictional FAA FSDO evaluation and 

approval of company designated examiners, the petitioner will conduct these tests in 

accordance with the operator’s manual.

15. The UA may not be operated directly over any person, except authorized and consenting 

production personnel, below an altitude that is hazardous to persons or property on the 

surface in the event of a UAS failure or emergency.

16. Regarding the distance from participating persons, the operator’s manual has safety 

mitigations for authorized and consenting production personnel. At all times, those 

persons must be essential to the closed-set film operations. Because these procedures are 

specific to participating persons, no further FSDO or aviation safety inspector approval is 

necessary for reductions to the distances specified in the petitioner’s manuals. This is 

consistent with the manned aircraft procedures described in FAA Order 8900.1, V3, C8,

S1 Issue a Certificate of Waiver for Motion Picture and Television Filming.

17. Regarding distance from nonparticipating persons, the operator must ensure that no 

persons are allowed within 500 feet of the area except those consenting to be involved and 

necessary for the filming production. This provision may be reduced to no less than 

200 feet if it would not adversely affect safety and the Administrator has approved it. For 

example, an equivalent level of safety may be determined by an aviation safety inspector’s

evaluation of the filming production area to note terrain features, obstructions, buildings, 

safety barriers, etc. Such barriers may protect nonparticipating persons (observers, the 

public, news media, etc.) from debris in the event of an accident. This is also consistent 

with the same FAA Order 8900.1, V3, C8, S1.
27

18. If the UAS loses communications or loses its GPS signal, the UA must return to a predetermined location within the security perimeter and land or be recovered in accordance 

with the operator’s manual.

19. The UAS must abort the flight in the event of unpredicted obstacles or emergencies in 

accordance with the operator’s manual.

20. Each UAS operation must be completed within 30 minutes flight time or with 25% battery 

power remaining, whichever occurs first.

In addition to the conditions and limitations proposed by the operator, the FAA has 

determined that any operations conducted under this grant of exemption must be done 

pursuant to the following conditions and limitations:

21. The operator must obtain an Air Traffic Organization (ATO) issued Certificate of Waiver 

or Authorization (COA) prior to conducting any operations under this grant of exemption. 

This COA will also require the operator to request a Notice to Airman (NOTAM) not 

more than 72 hours in advance, but not less than 48 hours prior to the operation.

22. All aircraft operated in accordance with this exemption must be identified by serial 

number, registered in accordance with 14 CFR part 47, and have identification (NNumber) markings in accordance with 14 CFR part 45, Subpart C. Markings must be as 

large as practicable. 

23. The operator must develop procedures to document and maintain a record of the UAS 

maintenance, preventative maintenance, alterations, status of replacement/overhaul 

component parts, and the total time in service of the UAS. These procedures must be 

added to the operator’s manual.

24. Each UAS operated under this exemption must comply with all manufacturer Safety 

Bulletins.

25. The operator must develop UAS technician qualification criteria. These criteria must be 

added to the operator’s manual.

26. The preflight inspection section in the operator’s manual must be amended to include the 

following requirement: The preflight inspection must account for all discrepancies, i.e. 

inoperable components, items, or equipment, not covered in the relevant preflight 

inspection sections of the operator’s manual.

27. Before conducting operations, the radio frequency spectrum used for operation and control 

of the UA must comply with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) or other 

appropriate government oversight agency requirements.
28

28. At least three days before scheduled filming, the operator of the UAS affected by this 

exemption must submit a written Plan of Activities to the local FSDO with jurisdiction

over the area of proposed filming. The 3-day notification may be waived with the 

concurrence of the FSDO. The plan of activities must include at least the following:

a. Dates and times for all flights;

b. Name and phone number of the operator for the UAS filming production conducted 

under this grant of exemption;

c. Name and phone number of the person responsible for the on-scene operation of the 

UAS;

d. Make, model, and serial or N-number of UAS to be used;

e. Name and certificate number of UAS PICs involved in the filming production event;

f. A statement that the operator has obtained permission from property owners and/or 

local officials to conduct the filming production event; the list of those who gave 

permission must be made available to the inspector upon request;

g. Signature of exemption-holder or representative; and

h. A description of the flight activity, including maps or diagrams of any area, city, town, 

county, and/or state over which filming will be conducted and the altitudes essential to 

accomplish the operation.

29. The documents required under 14 CFR §§ 91.9 and 91.203 must be available to the PIC at 

the Ground Control Station of the UAS any time the aircraft is operating. These 

documents must be made available to the Administrator or any law enforcement official 

upon request.

30. The UA must remain clear and yield the right of way to all other manned operations and 

activities at all times (including, but not limited to, ultralight vehicles, parachute activities, 

parasailing activities, hang gliders, etc.).

31. UAS operations may not be conducted during night, as defined in 14 CFR § 1.1. All 

operations must be conducted under visual meteorological conditions (VMC). Flights 

under special visual flight rules (SVFR) are not authorized.

32. The UAS may not be operated by the PIC from any moving device or vehicle.

33. The UA may not be operated less than 500 feet below or less than 2,000 feet horizontally 

from a cloud or when visibility is less than 3 statute miles from the PIC.
29

34. The UA may not operate in Class B, C, or D airspace without written approval from the 

FAA. The UA may not operate within 5 nautical miles of the geographic center of a nontowered airport as denoted on a current FAA-published aeronautical chart unless a letter of 

agreement with that airport’s management is obtained, and the operation is conducted in 

accordance with a NOTAM as required by the operator’s COA. The letter of agreement 

with the airport management must be made available to the Administrator upon request.

35. Any incident, accident, or flight operation that transgresses the lateral or vertical 

boundaries of the operational area as defined by the applicable COA must be reported to 

the FAA’s UAS Integration Office (AFS-80) within 24 hours. Accidents must be reported 

to the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) per instructions contained on the 

NTSB Web site: www.ntsb.gov. Further flight operations may not be conducted until the 

incident, accident, or transgression is reviewed by AFS-80 and authorization to resume 

operations is provided.

Unless otherwise specified in this grant of exemption, the UAS, the UAS PIC, and the UAS 

operations must comply with all applicable parts of 14 CFR including, but not limited to, parts 

45, 47, 61, and 91.

This exemption terminates on September 30, 2016, unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

Issued in Washington, DC, on September 25, 2014. .

/s/

Michael J. Zenkovich

Deputy Director, Flight Standards Service
Attachment 5 
FAA FORM 7711-1 UAS COA Attachment

2014-ESA-102

Version 2.1: June 2012

Page 1 of 21

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

CERTIFICATE OF WAIVER OR AUTHORIZATION

ISSUED TO

TEST SITE - Griffiss International Airport

592 Hangar Rd, Suite 200

Rome, NY 13441

 This certificate is issued for the operations specifically described hereinafter. No person shall conduct any 

operation pursuant to the authority of this certificate except in accordance with the standard and special provisions 

contained in this certificate, and such other requirements of the Federal Aviation Regulations not specifically 

waived by this certificate.

OPERATIONS AUTHORIZED

Operation of the Delair-Tech DT-18 Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) in Class G airspace at or 

below 400 feet Above Ground Level (AGL) at Musgrave Research Farm, in the vicinity of Aurora, 

NY, under the jurisdiction of Elmira TRACON.

LIST OF WAIVED REGULATIONS BY SECTION AND TITLE

N/A

STANDARD PROVISIONS

1. A copy of the application made for this certificate shall be attached and become a part hereof.

2. This certificate shall be presented for inspection upon the request of any authorized representative of the 

Federal Aviation Administration, or of any State or municipal official charged with the duty of enforcing local laws 

or regulations.

3. The holder of this certificate shall be responsible for the strict observance of the terms and provisions contained 

herein.

4. This certificate is nontransferable.

Note-This certificate constitutes a waiver of those Federal rules or regulations specifically referred to above. It 

does not constitute a waiver of any State law or local ordinance.

SPECIAL PROVISIONS

Special Provisions are set forth and attached.

This certificate 2014-ESA-102 is effective from September 22, 2014, to September 21, 2016,

and is subject to cancellation at any time upon notice by the Administrator or his/her authorized 

representative.

BY DIRECTION OF THE ADMINISTRATOR

 

 FAA Headquarters, AJV-115 Jacqueline R. Jackson 

 (Region) (Signature)

September 17, 2014 Acting Manager, UAS Tactical Operations Section

 (Date) (Title)

FAA Form 7711-1 (7-74)
FAA FORM 7711-1 UAS COA Attachment

2014-ESA-102

Version 2.1: June 2012

Page 2 of 21

COA Number: 2014-ESA-102

Issued To: TEST SITE - Griffiss International Airport, referred herein as the “proponent”

Address: 592 Hangar Rd, Suite 200

Rome, NY 13441

Activity: Operation of the Delair-Tech DT-18 Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) in Class G 

airspace at or below 400 feet Above Ground Level (AGL) at Musgrave Research Farm, in the 

vicinity of Aurora, NY, under the jurisdiction of Elmira TRACON. See Attachment 1.

Purpose: To prescribe UAS operating requirements in the National Airspace System (NAS) for 

the purpose of research flights.

Dates of Use: This COA is valid from September 22, 2014, through September 21, 2016.

Should a renewal become necessary, the proponent shall advise the Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), in writing, no later than 60 business days prior to the requested effective 

date.

Public Aircraft

1. A public aircraft operation is determined by statute, 49 USC §40102(a)(41) and §40125. 

2. All public aircraft flights conducted under a COA must comply with the terms of the 

statute.

3. All flights must be conducted per the declarations submitted on COA on-line. 
FAA FORM 7711-1 UAS COA Attachment

2014-ESA-102

Version 2.1: June 2012

Page 3 of 21

STANDARD PROVISIONS

A. General.

The review of this activity is based upon current understanding of UAS operations and their 

impact in the NAS. This COA will not be considered a precedent for future operations. (As 

changes in or understanding of the UAS industry occur, limitations and conditions for 

operations will be adjusted.)

All personnel connected with the UAS operation must read and comply with the contents of 

this authorization and its provisions.

A copy of the COA including the special limitations must be immediately available to all 

operational personnel at each operating location whenever UAS operations are being 

conducted. 

This authorization may be canceled at any time by the Administrator, the person authorized 

to grant the authorization, or the representative designated to monitor a specific operation. As 

a general rule, this authorization may be canceled when it is no longer required, there is an 

abuse of its provisions, or when unforeseen safety factors develop. Failure to comply with the 

authorization is cause for cancellation. The proponent will receive written notice of 

cancellation.

During the time this COA is approved and active, a site safety evaluation/visit may be 

accomplished to ensure COA compliance, assess any adverse impact on ATC or airspace, 

and ensure this COA is not burdensome or ineffective. Deviations,

accidents/incidents/mishaps, complaints, etc. will prompt a COA review or site visit to 

address the issue. Refusal to allow a site safety evaluation/visit may result in cancellation of 

the COA. Note: This section does not pertain to agencies that have other existing agreements 

in place with the FAA.

B. Airworthiness Certification. 

The unmanned aircraft must be shown to be airworthy to conduct flight operations in the 

NAS. The Griffiss International Airport has made its own determination that the Delair-Tech 

DT-18 unmanned aircraft is airworthy. The Delair-Tech DT-18 must be operated in strict 

compliance with all provisions and conditions contained in the Airworthiness Safety Release, 

including all documents and provisions referenced in the COA application.

1. A configuration control program must be in place for hardware and/or software changes 

made to the UAS to ensure continued airworthiness. If a new or revised Airworthiness 

Release is generated as a result of changes in the hardware or software affecting the 

operating characteristics of the UAS, notify the UAS Integration Office of the changes as 

soon as practical. 
FAA FORM 7711-1 UAS COA Attachment

2014-ESA-102

Version 2.1: June 2012

Page 4 of 21

a. Software and hardware changes should be documented as part of the normal 

maintenance procedures. Software changes to the aircraft and control station as well 

as hardware system changes are classified as major changes unless the agency has a 

formal process, accepted by the FAA. These changes should be provided to the UAS 

Integration office in summary form at the time of incorporation. 

b. Major modifications or changes, performed under the COA, or other authorizations 

that could potentially affect the safe operation of the system must be documented and 

provided to the FAA in the form of a new AWR, unless the agency has a formal 

process, accepted by the FAA.

c. All previously flight proven systems to include payloads, may be installed or 

removed as required, and that activity recorded in the unmanned aircraft and ground 

control stations logbooks by persons authorized to conduct UAS maintenance

Describe any payload equipment configurations in the UAS logbook that will result in 

a weight and balance change, electrical loads, and or flight dynamics, unless the 

agency has a formal process, accepted by the FAA.

d. For unmanned aircraft system discrepancies, a record entry should be made by an 

appropriately rated person to document the finding in the logbook. No flights may be 

conducted following major changes, modifications or new installations unless the 

party responsible for certifying airworthiness has determined the system is safe to 

operate in the NAS and a new AWR is generated, unless the agency has a formal 

process, accepted by the FAA. The successful completion of these tests must be 

recorded in the appropriate logbook, unless the agency has a formal process, accepted 

by the FAA.

2. The Delair-Tech DT-18 must be operated in strict compliance with all provisions and 

conditions contained within the spectrum analysis assigned and authorized for use within 

the defined operations area.

3. All items contained in the application for equipment frequency allocation must be 

adhered to, including the assigned frequencies and antenna equipment characteristics. A 

ground operational check to verify the control station can communicate with the aircraft 

(frequency integration check) must be conducted prior to the launch of the unmanned 

aircraft to ensure any electromagnetic interference does not adversely affect control of the 

aircraft. 

4. The use of a Traffic Collision Avoidance System (TCAS) in any mode while operating an 

unmanned aircraft is prohibited.

C. Operations.

1. Unless otherwise authorized as a special provision, a maximum of one unmanned aircraft 

will be controlled:

a. In any defined operating area,
FAA FORM 7711-1 UAS COA Attachment

2014-ESA-102

Version 2.1: June 2012

Page 5 of 21

b. From a single control station, and

c. By one pilot at a time. 

2. A Pilot-in-Command (PIC) is the person who has final authority and responsibility for 

the operation and safety of flight, has been designated as PIC before or during the flight, 

and holds the appropriate category, class, and type rating, if appropriate, for the conduct 

of the flight. The responsibility and authority of the PIC as described by 14 CFR 91.3, 

Responsibility and Authority of the Pilot-in-Command, apply to the unmanned aircraft 

PIC. The PIC position may rotate duties as necessary with equally qualified pilots. The 

individual designated as PIC may change during flight. Note: The PIC can only be the 

PIC for one aircraft at a time. For Optionally Piloted Aircraft (OPA), PIC must meet 

UAS guidance requirements for training, pilot licensing, and medical requirements when 

operating OPA as a UAS.

3. The PIC must conduct a pre-takeoff briefing as applicable prior to each launch. The 

briefing should include but is not limited to the

a. Contents of the COA, 

b. Altitudes to be flown, 

c. Mission overview including handoff procedures, 

d. Frequencies to be used, 

e. Flight time, including reserve fuel requirements,

f. Contingency procedures to include lost link, divert, and flight termination, and

g. Hazards unique to the flight being flown.

Note: Flight Crew Member (UAS). In addition to the flight crew members identified in 

14 CFR Part 1, Definitions and Abbreviations, an Unmanned Aircraft System flight crew 

members include pilots, sensor/payload operators, and visual observers and may include 

other persons as appropriate or required to ensure safe operation of the aircraft.

4. All operations will be conducted in compliance with Title 14 CFR Part 91. Special 

attention should be given to:

a. § 91.3 Responsibility and authority of the pilot in command

b. § 91.13 Careless or reckless operation

c. § 91.17 Alcohol or drugs

d. § 91.103 Preflight Actions

e. § 91.111 Operating near other aircraft.

f. § 91.113 Right-of-way rules: Except water operations

g. § 91.115 Right-of-way rules: Water operations

h. § 91.119 Minimum safe altitudes: General

i. § 91.123 Compliance with ATC clearances and instructions.

j. § 91.133 Restricted and prohibited areas
FAA FORM 7711-1 UAS COA Attachment

2014-ESA-102

Version 2.1: June 2012

Page 6 of 21

k. § 91.137 Temporary flight restrictions in the vicinity of disaster/hazard areas

l. § 91.145 Management of aircraft operations in the vicinity of aerial demonstrations 

and major sporting events 

m. § 91.151 Fuel requirements for flight in VFR conditions

n. § 91.155 Basic VFR weather minimums 

o. § 91.159 VFR cruising altitude or flight level

p. § 91.209 Aircraft Lights

q. § 91.213 Inoperative instruments and equipment

r. § 91.215 ATC transponder and altitude reporting equipment and use

s. Appendix D to Part 91—Airports/Locations: Special Operating Restrictions

5. Unless otherwise authorized as a special provision, all operations must be conducted in 

visual meteorological conditions (VMC) during daylight hours in compliance with Title 

14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 91 §91.155 and the following:

6. Special Visual Flight Rules (VFR) operations are not authorized.

a. VFR cloud clearances specified in 14 CFR Part 91 §91.155, must be maintained, 

except in Class G airspace where Class E airspace visibility requirements must be 

applied, but not less than 3 statute miles (SM) flight visibility and 1000’ ceiling.

b. Flights conducted under Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) in Class A airspace shall 

remain clear of clouds. NOTE: Deviations from IFR clearance necessary to comply 

with this provision must have prior ATC approval.

c. Chase aircraft must maintain 5 NM flight visibility.

7. Night operations are prohibited unless otherwise authorized as a special provision.

8. Operations (including lost link procedures) must not be conducted over populated areas, 

heavily trafficked roads, or an open-air assembly of people.

D. Air Traffic Control (ATC) Communications.

1. The pilot and/or PIC will maintain direct, two-way communication with ATC and have 

the ability to maneuver the unmanned aircraft in response to ATC instructions, unless 

addressed in the Special Provision Section. 

When required, ATC will assign a radio frequency for air traffic control during flight. 

The use of land-line and/or cellular telephones is prohibited as the primary means for inflight communication with ATC.

2. The PIC must not accept an ATC clearance requiring the use of visual separation, 

sequencing, or visual approach.

3. When necessary, transit of airways and routes must be conducted as expeditiously as 

possible. The unmanned aircraft must not loiter on Victor airways, jet routes, Q and T 

routes, IR routes, or VR routes.
FAA FORM 7711-1 UAS COA Attachment

2014-ESA-102

Version 2.1: June 2012

Page 7 of 21

4. For flights operating on an IFR clearance at or above 18,000 feet mean sea level (MSL), 

the PIC must ensure positional information in reference to established National Airspace 

System (NAS) fixes, NAVAIDs, and/or waypoints is provided to ATC. The use of 

latitude/longitude positions is not authorized, except oceanic flight operations.

5. If equipped, the unmanned aircraft must operate with

a. An operational mode 3/A transponder with altitude encoding, or mode S transponder 

(preferred) set to an ATC assigned squawk

b. Position/navigation and anti-collision lights on at all times during flight unless 

stipulated in the special provisions or the proponent has a specific exemption from 14 

CFR Part 91.209.

6. Operations that use a Global Positioning System (GPS) for navigation must check 

Receiver Autonomous Integrity Monitoring (RAIM) notices prior to flight operations. 

Flight into a GPS test area or degraded RAIM is prohibited for those aircraft that use GPS 

as their sole means for navigation. 

E. Safety of Flight.

1. The proponent or delegated representative is responsible for halting or canceling activity 

in the COA area if, at any time, the safety of persons or property on the ground or in the 

air is in jeopardy, or if there is a failure to comply with the terms or conditions of this 

authorization.

2. ATC must be immediately notified in the event of any emergency, loss and subsequent 

restoration of command link, loss of PIC or observer visual contact, or any other 

malfunction or occurrence that would impact safety or operations.

3. Sterile Cockpit Procedures.

a. Critical phases of flight include all ground operations involving 

(1) Taxi (movement of an aircraft under its own power on the surface of an airport) 

(2) Take-off and landing (launch or recovery)

(3) All other flight operations in which safety or mission accomplishment might be 

compromised by distractions

b. No crewmember may perform any duties during a critical phase of flight not required 

for the safe operation of the aircraft.

c. No crewmember may engage in, nor may any PIC permit, any activity during a 

critical phase of flight which could

(1) Distract any crewmember from the performance of his/her duties or 

(2) Interfere in any way with the proper conduct of those duties.

d. The pilot and/or the PIC must not engage in any activity not directly related to the 

operation of the aircraft. Activities include, but are not limited to, operating UAS 

sensors or other payload systems.
FAA FORM 7711-1 UAS COA Attachment

2014-ESA-102

Version 2.1: June 2012

Page 8 of 21

e. The use of cell phones or other electronic devices is restricted to communications 

pertinent to the operational control of the unmanned aircraft and any required 

communications with Air Traffic Control.

4. See-and-Avoid. 

Unmanned aircraft have no on-board pilot to perform see-and-avoid responsibilities; 

therefore, when operating outside of active restricted and warning areas approved for 

aviation activities, provisions must be made to ensure an equivalent level of safety exists 

for unmanned operations. Adherence to 14 CFR Part 91 §91.111, §91.113 and §91.115, is 

required.

a. The proponent and/or delegated representatives are responsible at all times for 

collision avoidance with all aviation activities and the safety of persons or property 

on the surface with respect to the UAS.

b. UAS pilots will ensure there is a safe operating distance between aviation activities 

and unmanned aircraft at all times.

c. Any crew member responsible for performing see-and-avoid requirements for the UA 

must have and maintain instantaneous communication with the PIC.

d. UA operations will only be conducted within Reduced Vertical Separation Minimum 

(RVSM) altitudes, when appropriately equipped or having received a clearance under 

an FAA deviation. NOTE: UA operations should not plan on an en-route clearance in 

RVSM altitudes, without being RVSM equipped.

e. Visual observers must be used at all times except in Class A airspace, active 

Restricted Areas, and Warning areas designated for aviation activities. 

(1) Observers may either be ground-based or in a chase plane. 

(2) If the chase aircraft is operating more than 100 feet above/below and/or more than 

1⁄2 NM laterally of the unmanned aircraft, the chase aircraft PIC will advise the 

controlling ATC facility.

f. The PIC is responsible to ensure visual observers are; 

(1) Able to see the aircraft and the surrounding airspace throughout the entire flight, 

and

(2) Able to provide the PIC with the UA’s flight path, and proximity to all aviation 

activities and other hazards (e.g., terrain, weather, structures) sufficiently to 

exercise effective control of the UA to:

(a) Comply with CFR Parts 91.111, 91.113 and 91.115, and 

(b) Prevent the UA from creating a collision hazard.

5. Observers must be able to communicate clearly to the pilot any instructions required to 

remain clear of conflicting traffic, using standard phraseology as listed in the 

Aeronautical Information Manual when practical.

6. A PIC may rotate duties as necessary to fulfill operational requirements; a PIC must be 

designated at all times.
FAA FORM 7711-1 UAS COA Attachment

2014-ESA-102

Version 2.1: June 2012

Page 9 of 21

7. Pilots flying chase aircraft must not concurrently perform observer or UA pilot duties. 

8. Pilot and observers must not assume concurrent duties as both pilot and observer.

9. The required number of ground observers will be in place during flight operations.

10. The use of multiple successive observers (daisy chaining) is prohibited unless otherwise 

authorized as a special provision.

11. The dropping or spraying of aircraft stores, or carrying of hazardous materials (including 

ordnance) outside of active Restricted, Prohibited, or Warning Areas approved for 

aviation activities is prohibited unless specifically authorized as a special provision.

F. Crewmember Requirements.

1. All crewmembers associated with the operation of the unmanned aircraft, including chase 

operations, must be qualified or must be receiving formal training under the direct 

supervision of a qualified instructor, who has at all times, responsibility for the operation 

of the unmanned aircraft.

2. Pilots and observers must have an understanding of, and comply with, Title 14 Code of

Federal Regulations, and/or agency directives and regulations, applicable to the airspace 

where the unmanned aircraft will operate.

3. Pilots, supplemental pilots, and observers must maintain a current second class (or 

higher) airman medical certificate that has been issued under 14 CFR Part 67, or an FAA 

accepted agency equivalent based on the application.

4. At a minimum, the use of alcohol and/or drugs in violation of 14 CFR Part 91 §91.17 

applies to UA pilots and observers.

5. At a minimum, observers must receive training on rules and responsibilities described in 

14 CFR Part 91 §91.111. §91.113 and §91.115, regarding cloud clearance, flight 

visibility, and the pilot controller glossary, including standard ATC phraseology and 

communication.

6. Recent Pilot Experience (Currency). The proponent must provide documentation, upon 

request, showing the pilot/supplemental pilot/PIC maintains an appropriate level of recent 

pilot experience in either the UAS being operated or in a certified simulator. At a 

minimum, he/she must conduct three takeoffs (launch) and three landings (recovery) in 

the specific UAS within the previous 90 days (excluding pilots who do not conduct 

launch/recovery during normal/emergency operations). If a supplemental pilot assumes 

the role of PIC, he/she must comply with PIC rating requirements.

7. A PIC and/or supplemental pilot have the ability to assume the duties of an internal or an 

external UAS pilot at any point during the flight. 

8. A PIC may be augmented by supplemental pilots.

9. PIC Ratings. 

Rating requirements for the UAS PIC depend on the type of operation conducted. The 

requirement for the PIC to hold, at a minimum, a current FAA private pilot certificate or 

the FAA accepted agency equivalent, based on the application of 14 CFR Part 61, is 

predicated on various factors including the location of the planned operations, mission 
FAA FORM 7711-1 UAS COA Attachment

2014-ESA-102

Version 2.1: June 2012

Page 10 of 21

profile, size of the unmanned aircraft, and whether or not the operation is conducted 

within or beyond visual line-of-sight. 

a. The PIC must hold, at a minimum, a current FAA private pilot certificate or the FAA 

accepted agency equivalent, based on the application or 14 CFR Part 61.under all 

operations:

(1) Approved for flight in Class A, B, C, D, E, and G (more than 400 feet above 

ground level (AGL)) airspace

(2) Conducted under IFR (FAA instrument rating required, or the FAA accepted 

agency equivalent, based on the application or 14 CFR Part 61

(3) Approved for night operations

(4) Conducted at or within 5 NM of a joint use or public airfields

(5) Requiring a chase aircraft 

(6) At any time the FAA has determined the need based on the UAS characteristics, 

mission profile, or other operational parameters

b. Operations without a pilot certificate may be allowed when all of the following 

conditions are met:

(1) The PIC has successfully completed, at a minimum, FAA private pilot ground 

instruction and passed the written examination, or the FAA accepted agency 

equivalent, based on the application. Airman Test reports are valid for the 24-

calendar month period preceding the month the exam was completed, at which

time the instruction and written examination must be repeated. 

(2) Operations are during daylight hours.

(3) The operation is conducted in a sparsely populated location.

(4) The operation is conducted from a privately owned airfield, military installation, 

or off-airport location. 

(5) Operations are approved and conducted solely within visual line-of-sight in Class 

G airspace. 

(6) Visual line-of-sight operations are conducted at an altitude of no more than 400 

feet Above Ground Level (AGL) in class G airspace at all times. 

c. The FAA may require specific aircraft category and class ratings in manned aircraft 

depending on the UAS seeking approval and the characteristics of its flight controls 

interface.

10. PIC Recent Flight Experience (Currency). 

a. For those operations that require a certificated pilot or FAA accepted agency 

equivalent, based on the application, the PIC must have flight reviews 14 CFR Part 

61.56, and if the pilot conducts takeoff, launch, landing or recovery the PIC must 

maintain recent pilot experience in manned aircraft per 14 CFR Part 61.57,; Recent 

Flight Experience: Pilot in Command. 
FAA FORM 7711-1 UAS COA Attachment

2014-ESA-102

Version 2.1: June 2012

Page 11 of 21

b. For operations approved for night or IFR through special provisions, the PIC must 

maintain minimum recent pilot experience per 14 CFR Part 61.57, Recent Flight 

Experience: Pilot in Command, as applicable.

11. Supplemental Pilot Ratings. 

Supplemental pilots must have, at a minimum, successfully completed private pilot 

ground school and passed the written test or the FAA accepted agency equivalent, based 

on the application. The ground school written test results are valid for two years from the 

date of completion, at which time the instruction and written examination must be 

repeated. If a supplemental pilot assumes the role of PIC, he/she must comply with PIC 

rating, currency, medical, and training requirements listed in this document. 

12. Ancillary personnel such as systems operators or mission specialists must be thoroughly 

familiar with and possess operational experience of the equipment being used. If the 

systems being used are for observation and detection of other aircraft for collision 

avoidance purposes, personnel must be thoroughly trained on collision avoidance 

procedures and techniques and have direct communication with the UAS pilot, observer, 

and other crewmembers.

13. The Agency will ensure that Crew Resource Management (CRM) training is current for 

all crew members before flying operational or training missions. The CRM program 

must consist of initial training, as well as CRM recurrent training during every recurrent 

training cycle, not to exceed a 12 month interval between initial training and recurrent 

training or between subsequent recurrent training sessions.

G. Notice to Airmen (NOTAM).

1. A distant (D) NOTAM must be issued when unmanned aircraft operations are being 

conducted. This requirement may be accomplished 

a. Through the proponent’s local base operations or NOTAM issuing authority, or

b. By contacting the NOTAM Flight Service Station at 1-877-4-US-NTMS (1-877-487-

6867) not more than 72 hours in advance, but not less than 48 hours prior to the 

operation, unless otherwise authorized as a special provision. The issuing agency will 

require the:

(1) Name and address of the pilot filing the NOTAM request

(2) Location, altitude, or operating area

(3) Time and nature of the activity.

2. For proponents filing their NOTAM with the Department of Defense: The requirement to 

file with an Automated Flight Service Station (AFSS) is in addition to any local 

procedures/requirements for filing through the Defense Internet NOTAM Service 

(DINS).

H. Data Reporting.

1. Documentation of all operations associated with UAS activities is required regardless of 

the airspace in which the UAS operates. This requirement includes COA operations 

within Special Use airspace. NOTE: Negative (zero flights) reports are required.
FAA FORM 7711-1 UAS COA Attachment

2014-ESA-102

Version 2.1: June 2012

Page 12 of 21

2. The proponent must submit the following information through UAS COA On-Line on a 

monthly basis:

a. The number of flights conducted under this COA. (A flight during which any portion 

is conducted in the NAS must be counted only once, regardless of how many times it 

may enter and leave Special Use airspace between takeoff and landing)

b. Aircraft operational hours per flight

c. Ground control station operational hours in support of each flight, to include Launch 

and Recovery Element (LRE) operations

d. Pilot duty time per flight

e. Equipment malfunctions (hardware/software) affecting either the aircraft or ground 

control station

f. Deviations from ATC instructions and/or Letters of Agreement/Procedures

g. Operational/coordination issues

h. The number and duration of lost link events (control, vehicle performance and health 

monitoring, or communications) per aircraft per flight.

I. Incident/Accident/Mishap Reporting.

Immediately after an incident or accident, and before additional flight under this COA, the 

proponent must provide initial notification of the following to the FAA via the UAS COA 

On-Line forms (Incident/Accident).

1. All accidents/mishaps involving UAS operations where any of the following occurs:

a. Fatal injury, where the operation of a UAS results in a death occurring within 30 days 

of the accident/mishap

b. Serious injury, where the operation of a UAS results in a hospitalization of more than 

48 hours, the fracture of any bone (except for simple fractures of fingers, toes, or 

nose), severe hemorrhage or tissue damage, internal injuries, or second or thirddegree burns

c. Total unmanned aircraft loss

d. Substantial damage to the unmanned aircraft system where there is damage to the 

airframe, power plant, or onboard systems that must be repaired prior to further flight

e. Damage to property, other than the unmanned aircraft.

2. Any incident/mishap that results in an unsafe/abnormal operation including but not 

limited to

a. A malfunction or failure of the unmanned aircraft’s on-board flight control system 

(including navigation)

b. A malfunction or failure of ground control station flight control hardware or software 

(other than loss of control link)

c. A power plant failure or malfunction
FAA FORM 7711-1 UAS COA Attachment

2014-ESA-102

Version 2.1: June 2012

Page 13 of 21

d. An in-flight fire

e. An aircraft collision

f. Any in-flight failure of the unmanned aircraft’s electrical system requiring use of 

alternate or emergency power to complete the flight

g. A deviation from any provision contained in the COA

h. A deviation from an ATC clearance and/or Letter(s) of Agreement/Procedures

i. A lost control link event resulting in 

(1) Fly-away, or 

(2) Execution of a pre-planned/unplanned lost link procedure.

3. Initial reports must contain the information identified in the COA On-Line 

Accident/Incident Report.

4. Follow-on reports describing the accident/incident/mishap(s) must be submitted by 

providing copies of proponent aviation accident/incident reports upon completion of 

safety investigations. Such reports must be limited to factual information only where 

privileged safety or law enforcement information is included in the final report.

5. Public-use agencies other than those which are part of the Department of Defense are 

advised that the above procedures are not a substitute for separate accident/incident 

reporting required by the National Transportation Safety Board under 49 CFR Part 830 

§830.5.

6. This COA is issued with the provision that the FAA be permitted involvement in the 

proponent’s incident/accident/mishap investigation as prescribed by FAA Order 8020.11, 

Aircraft Accident and Incident Notification, Investigation, and Reporting. 

FLIGHT STANDARDS SPECIAL PROVISIONS

A. Contingency Planning 

1. Point Identification. The proponent must submit contingency plans that address 

emergency recovery or flight termination of the unmanned aircraft (UA) in the event of 

unrecoverable system failure. These procedures will normally include Lost Link Points 

(LLP), Divert/Contingency Points (DCP) and Flight Termination Points (FTP) for each 

operation. LLPs and DCPs must be submitted in latitude/longitude (Lat/Long) format 

along with a graphic representation plotted on an aviation sectional chart (or similar 

format). FTPs or other accepted contingency planning measures must also be submitted 

in latitude/longitude (Lat/Long) format along with a graphic representation plotted on an 

aviation sectional chart, or other graphic representation acceptable to the FAA. The FAA 

accepts the LLPs, DCPs, FTPs, and other contingency planning measures, submitted by 

the proponent but does not approve them. When conditions preclude the use of FTPs, the 

proponent must submit other contingency planning options for consideration and 

approval. At least one LLP, DCP, and FTP (or an acceptable alternative contingency 

planning measure) is required for each operation. The proponent must furnish this data 

with the initial COA application. Any subsequent changes or modifications to this data 
FAA FORM 7711-1 UAS COA Attachment

2014-ESA-102

Version 2.1: June 2012

Page 14 of 21

must be provided to AJV-13 for review and consideration no later than 30 days prior to 

proposed flight operations.

2. Risk Mitigation Plans. For all operations, the proponent must develop detailed plans to 

mitigate the risk of collision with other aircraft and the risk posed to persons and property 

on the ground in the event the UAS encounters a lost link, needs to divert, or the flight 

needs to be terminated. The proponent must take into consideration all airspace 

constructs and minimize risk to other aircraft by avoiding published airways, military 

training routes, NAVAIDs, and congested areas. In the event of a contingency divert or 

flight termination, the use of a chase aircraft is preferred when the UAS is operated 

outside of Restricted or Warning Areas. If time permits, the proponent should make every 

attempt to utilize a chase aircraft to monitor the aircraft to a DCP or to the FTP. In the 

event of a contingency divert or flight termination, the proponent will operate in Class A 

airspace and Special Use airspace to the maximum extent possible to reduce the risk of 

collision with non-participating air traffic.

a. LLP Procedures.

(1) LLPs are defined as a point, or sequence of points where the aircraft will proceed 

and hold at a specified altitude, for a specified period of time, in the event the 

command and control link to the aircraft is lost. The aircraft will autonomously 

hold, or loiter, at the LLP until the communication link with the aircraft is 

restored or the specified time elapses. If the time period elapses, the aircraft may 

autoland, proceed to another LLP in an attempt to regain the communication link, 

or proceed to an FTP for flight termination. LLPs may be used as FTPs. In this 

case, the aircraft may loiter at the LLP/FTP until link is re-established or fuel 

exhaustion occurs.

(2) For areas where multiple or concurrent UAS operations are authorized in the same 

operational area, a segregation plan must be in place in the event of a 

simultaneous lost link scenario. The segregation plan may include altitude offsets 

and horizontal separation by using independent LLPs whenever possible.

b. DCP Procedures. 

(1) A DCP is defined as an alternate landing/recovery site to be used in the event of 

an abnormal condition that requires a precautionary landing. Each DCP must 

incorporate the means of communication with ATC throughout the descent and 

landing (unless otherwise specified in the Special Provisions) as well as a plan for 

ground operations and securing/parking the aircraft on the ground. This includes 

the availability of ground control stations capable of launch/recovery, 

communication equipment, and an adequate power source to operate all required 

equipment.

(2) For local operations, the DCP specified will normally be the airport/facility used 

for launch and recovery; however, the proponent may specify additional DCPs as 

alternates.

(3) For transit and/or mission operations that are being conducted in Class A airspace 

or Class E airspace above flight level (FL)-600, DCPs will be identified during 

the flight to be no further than one hour of flight time at any given time, taking 
FAA FORM 7711-1 UAS COA Attachment

2014-ESA-102

Version 2.1: June 2012

Page 15 of 21

into consideration altitude, winds, fuel consumption, and other factors. If it is not 

possible to define DCPs along the entire flight plan route, the proponent must 

identify qualified FTPs along the entire route and be prepared to execute flight 

termination at one of the specified FTPs if a return to base (RTB) is not possible.

(4) It is preferred that specified DCPs are non-joint use military airfields, other 

government-owned airfields, or private-use airfields. However, the proponent 

may designate any suitable airfield for review and consideration.

c. Flight Termination Procedures.

(1) Flight termination is the intentional and deliberate process of performing 

controlled flight into terrain (CFIT). Flight termination must be executed in the 

event that all contingencies have been exhausted and further flight of the aircraft 

cannot be safely achieved or other potential hazards exist that require immediate 

discontinuation of flight. FTPs or alternative contingency planning measures must 

be located within power off glide distance of the aircraft during all phases of 

flight and must be submitted for review and acceptance. The proponent must 

ensure sufficient FTPs or other contingency plan measures are defined to 

accommodate flight termination at any given point along the route of flight. The 

location of these points is based on the assumption of an unrecoverable system 

failure and must take into consideration altitude, winds, and other factors.

(2) Unless otherwise authorized, FTPs must be located in sparsely populated areas. 

Except for on- or near-airport operations, FTPs will be located no closer than five 

nautical miles from any airport, heliport, airfield, NAVAID, airway, populated 

area, major roadway, oil rig, power plant, or any other infrastructure. For offshore 

locations, the proponent must refer to appropriate United States Coast Guard 

(USCG) charts and other publications to avoid maritime obstructions, shipping 

lanes, and other hazards. Populated areas are defined as those areas depicted in 

yellow on a VFR sectional chart or as determined from other sources.

(a) It is preferred that flight termination occurs in Restricted or Warning Areas, 

government-owned land, or offshore locations that are restricted from routine 

civil use. However, the proponent may designate any suitable location for 

review and consideration.

(b) The proponent is required to survey all designated areas prior to their use as 

an FTP. All FTPs will be reviewed for suitability on a routine and periodic 

basis, not to exceed six months. The proponent assumes full risk and all 

liability associated with the selection and use of any designated FTP.

(c) It is desirable that the proponent receive prior permission from the land owner 

or using agency prior to the use of this area as an FTP. The proponent should 

clearly communicate the purpose and intent of the FTP.

(d) For each FTP, plans must incorporate the means of communication with ATC 

throughout the descent as well as a plan for retrieval/recovery of the aircraft.

(e) Contingency planning must take into consideration all airspace constructs and 

minimize risk to other aircraft by avoiding published airways, military 
FAA FORM 7711-1 UAS COA Attachment

2014-ESA-102

Version 2.1: June 2012

Page 16 of 21

training routes, NAVAIDs, and congested areas to the maximum extent 

possible.

(f) In the event of a contingency divert or flight termination, if time permits, the 

use of a chase aircraft is preferred when the UA is operated outside of 

Restricted or Warning Areas.

(g) In the event of a contingency divert or flight termination or other approved 

contingency measures, the proponent will operate in Class A airspace and 

Special Use airspace to the maximum extent possible to reduce the risk of 

collision with non-participating air traffic.

B. Night Operation Limitations.

Night operations are not authorized. UAS night operations are those operations that occur 

between the end of evening civil twilight and the beginning of morning civil twilight, as 

published in the American Air Almanac, converted to local time. (Note: this is equal to 

approximately 30 minutes after sunset until 30 minutes before sunrise). 

C. It is noted that the proponent has several COAs operating from the Musgrave Research Farm. 

It is incumbent upon the proponent to ensure only one UAS is airborne at any one time.

AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL SPECIAL PROVISIONS

A. Coordination Requirements.

1. Submission of proposed flight schedules to ATC is not required.

2. Notify Elmira Approach at 607-739-1971 fifteen (15) minutes prior to UA flight 

operations and immediately after flights are completed for each time block or day.

3. The Match Mate Airport is a private airport in close proximity of this UAS operational 

area. Prior to the commencement of operations under this authorization, the proponent 

must contact the manager of the airport and notify him of the proposed UAS operation. 

An agreement should be reached on what the airport will require for coordination, if any, 

prior to and/or post UAS operations. This notification may be accomplished via phone 

calls, e-mails, or another preferred method. Contact information for the airport owner: 

Mr. Ronald Buxenbaum at 2663 Dog Corners Road, Aurora, NY 13026. Phone 315-

364-7635.

B. Communication Requirements.

1. Two-way communication with ATC is not required.

2. The PIC will monitor Elmira Approach frequency VHF 124.3 for situational awareness.

C. Flight Planning Requirements.

Flight plans are not required as this is a VFR operation.

D. Lost Link & Emergency/Contingency Procedures.

1. Lost Link Procedures:

a. ATC does not need to be notified in the event of a lost link.
FAA FORM 7711-1 UAS COA Attachment

2014-ESA-102

Version 2.1: June 2012

Page 17 of 21

b. The following explains the procedures that the UA will follow should a lost link 

occur.

(1) The DT-18 will terminate assigned mission and return to a predetermined holding 

pattern location.

(2) The PIC will attempt to reestablish the command and control link. If link cannot 

be reestablished, the PIC can initiate the DT-18 to recover at the predefined 

landing zone using the back-up controller (safety link).

(3) In the unlikely case that both the main link to the GCS and the safety link cannot 

establish communication with the DT-18, the UA will continue holding until such 

time the battery reaches 12.5 volts. At this point the UA will have multiple faults 

(lost link and battery) and will go into the auto landing mode.

c. In the event of a “fly-away,” the UAS pilot will immediately notify Elmira Approach 

on landline 607-739-1971. Additionally, if the UA departs in a westerly direction 

toward Rochester Approach Control (ROC) airspace (see Atch 2), contact Approach 

on landline 585-463-3822. If the UA departs in a northeasterly direction toward 

Syracuse Approach (SYR) airspace (see Atch 2), contact Approach on VHF 126.12 

(backup on landline 315-455-3840). The PIC will advise ATC of the situation and 

provide information:

a. UA altitude

b. UA last known location

c. Direction of flight/heading

d. Fuel on board/Battery Time

e. Pilots intentions

f. Termination of flight/emergency condition

2. If lost link occurs within a restricted or warning area, or the lost link procedure above 

takes the UA into the restricted or warning area – the aircraft will not exit the restricted or 

warning areas until the link is re-established.

3. The unmanned aircraft lost link mission will not transit or orbit over populated areas.

a. Lost link programmed procedures will avoid unexpected turn-around and/or altitude 

changes and will provide sufficient time to communicate and coordinate with ATC.

b. Lost link orbit points shall not coincide with the centerline of Victor airways.

4. Lost Communications:

In the event of loss of communication between the PIC, visual observer, and/or ATC (if 

required), the procedures will be as follows:

a. Change to back-up frequency on VHF Radio.

b. Call using cellular phone.

c. If communication is not possible, the PIC will commence mission termination and 

recover the UA. There will be no further flights until communications are restored.
FAA FORM 7711-1 UAS COA Attachment

2014-ESA-102

Version 2.1: June 2012

Page 18 of 21

AUTHORIZATION

This Certificate of Waiver or Authorization does not, in itself, waive any Title 14 Code of 

Federal Regulations, nor any state law or local ordinance. Should the proposed operation 

conflict with any state law or local ordinance, or require permission of local authorities or 

property owners, it is the responsibility of the Griffiss International Airport to resolve the matter. 

This COA does not authorize flight within Special Use airspace without approval from the using 

agency. The Griffiss International Airport is hereby authorized to operate the Delair-Tech DT18 Unmanned Aircraft System in the operations area depicted in the Activity section of this

attachment.
FAA FORM 7711-1 UAS COA Attachment

2014-ESA-102

Version 2.1: June 2012

Page 19 of 21

Attachment 1: Page 1 of 2
FAA FORM 7711-1 UAS COA Attachment

2014-ESA-102

Version 2.1: June 2012

Page 20 of 21

Attachment 1: Page 2 of 2

Operations Area
FAA FORM 7711-1 UAS COA Attachment

2014-ESA-102

Version 2.1: June 2012

Page 21 of 21

Attachment 2

Sector Boundaries – ELM, ROC, and SYR
Attachment 6 




Attachment 7