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 Moderniz ation and Reform Act of 2012 (the Reform Act) and 14 C.F.R. Part 11, Pro Dr ones 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 aircra ft. 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 o il and gas pipeline inspections, solar installation inspections, power line/cable inspections, cooling tower insp ections, forestry, critical infrastructure inspections, wind turbine inspections, safety a nd security monitoring, ra diation 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, spec ifically 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 pr ocessing 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 inspecti on activities reduces the need to operate conventional aircraft for the same purposes a nd 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 ensu re at least an equivalent level of safety to currently authorized opera tion using manned aircraft. 2

I. REGULATIONS FOR WHICH EXEMPTION IS REQUESTED

Pro Drones requests exemption fr om 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 Ma nual, the Pro Drones DT-18 Training/Experience Manual, and the DT-18 Operator Manual, (together, th e “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 a ccordance with Section 333 of the Reform Act. Congress has directed the FAA “to safely acce lerate the integration of civil unmanned aircraft systems into the national airspace syst em.” Pursuant to Section 333 of the Reform Act, the FAA Administrator is to permit operatio n of an unmanned aircraft system where it does not create a hazard to users of the nationa l airspace system (NAS) or the public or pose a threat to national security base d on the following considerations:

 The size, weight, speed a nd operational capability;

 Operation in proximity to air ports 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 ex emption is in the public interest. See 49 U.S.C. §§ 106(f), 44701-44716, et seq . A party requesting an exempti on 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 professi onal Unmanned Aircraft System solutions, delivering customized services with its UAS products in cluding surveying and mapping solutions.

Pro Drones is based in New York (USA) and Alma (Canada). In 2014, Pro Drones acquired the exclusive rights to manufact ure, distribute and develop cust om solutions for Microdrones products in North America. Pro Drones also sells Delair-Tech products , including the DT-18.

Pro Drones provides UAS solutions for utilit ies, allowing for safer and high precision inspections of sites including power lines, pi pelines, railways, and wind farms. Pro Drones’ services also support security and safety operatio ns, 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 pr oducts 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’Conno r 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 ma nufactured 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 w ith a 5m precision. Every aspect of the landing is automatic. It is the first and only UAS certified by the Direction Generale de l’Aviati on Civile (DGAC) for flight be yond line of sight (BLOS) up to 15km from the base station in the French civi lian airspace (Scenario S4). However, flights pursuant to the requested exemption will be opera ted 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 oversp eed 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 includi ng mission planning, near real-time mission progress, video display, and function monitoring.

The GCS consists of a laptop and mission planni ng/execution software (SolApp), a case with a built-in joystick and slider, a back-up controller, a stee rable command and control link antenna, and a steerable data link antenna.

The SolApp program conducts mission planni ng 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 fli ght 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 (magnetome ter, GPS, et c) calibration

 Payload functionality

 Weather inputs

 Carrying case controller (joysti ck and slider) calibration

 Antennae placement and calibration

 Uploading of mission information to DT-18

During flight, SolApp provides complete mana gement of the DT-18 mission. The following is provided during flig ht 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 alarmsU.S. Department of Transportation February 9, 2015 Page Seven

sd-655014 Figure 3: SolApp Mission Planning Software

The DT-18 system operates under autopilot du ring 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. Th e operator can bypass the DT-18 autopilot with the back-up controller.

Figure 4: GCS Joystick and SliderU.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 w ill automatically track the location of the DT18. The main command and control link betw een the DT-18 and the GCS operates at a frequency of 915 MHz (ISM Band). This link pr ovides 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, whic h has FCC regulatory approval. See Figure 7, XBee-Pro 900 Specifications. The data li nk on the DT-18 allows for the payload information to be transmitted in near real-t ime 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 AntennaU.S. Department of Transportation February 9, 2015 Page Nine

sd-655014 Figure 7: Specifications for XBee-Pro 900U.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 holdi ng 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 (saf ety-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 annuncia tor panel, giving the pilot the alarm level at a glance. SolApp monito rs various parameters such as the communication status, accelerator status, GPS status and so forth. The autopilot goes into the different levels of alarm dependi ng 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 usi ng the current heading, or powering the motor off and circling over the current location while lo sing 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, de signed to stop the airc raft from flying by creating an important amount of drag to cau se 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 boar d. If it is activated, the heating element melts the nylon bolt, which breaks. This nyl on bolt holds the V-Tail to the fuselage, causing the V-Tail to pivot on a pin and beco me perpendicular to the airflow. This system will activate under three circumstances:

o Total power loss (main electrica l and avionics buses unpowered)

o Critical autopilot failure (physical damage to the autopilot)

o Manual activation from the ground stati on (to prevent the UAV from colliding with another aircraft or any othe r 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 SystemU.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 onl y on privately-owned, remote locations and within the limitations and performance specif ications 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 fee d, security and safety monitoring with streaming vi sual and infra-red video, ge ospatial analysis for civil engineering projects, and data co llection for agricultural lands.

The proposed operations do not create any hazard to users of the national airspace system or pose a threat to national securit y. The aircraft is battery ope rated and weighs approximately 4.4 pounds. The vehicle’s ground speed has a maxi mum 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 i ndependent 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 proxi mity to the aircraft due to the limited size, weight, operating conditions, and desi gn 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 tran sponders or sense and avoid technology, is mitigated by placing limits on altitude, requi ring stand-off distance from clouds, permitting daytime operations only, and requiring that the ai rcraft be operated within visual line of sight and yield right of way to all other manned opera tions. 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, a ttached hereto as Attachment 4.

The petitioner’s aircraft has the capability to operate safely after experiencing certain inflight failures, as spec ified above in the description of th e 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 e nvironment within which they will operate, the procedures listed below, and pilot certif ication 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 nati onal security.” Reform Act Section 333(b)(1).

1. The aircraft is a pproximately 4.4 pounds.

2. The aircraft will be identified by serial number, registered with the FAA, and will have identification (N-Number) ma rkings 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 di stance of at least 500 feet from any persons or property not associated wi th 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 cons ist 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 Missi on 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 ri ght 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 Pr o Drones’ operations will be required to be at least 500 feet from flight operations.

16. The aircraft will only operate over site s 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 jurisdic tions 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 wi ll 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 w ithin the operati onal 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 co mmunications, 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 approv als 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 Resear ch 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 Certif icates (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 Dr ones 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 fr om several interrelated provisions of 14 C.F.R. Parts 21, 45, 61, and 91 for purposes of conducting the requ ested operations using the DT-18. Listed below are (1) the specific FAR sections for wh ich exemption is sought, and (2) the operating procedures and safeguards that Pro Drones has es tablished 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 app lication. These criteria are met, and therefore no exemption is needed. See Attachment 1, Grant of Exempti on 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 m eet the requirements of the Reform Act, an exemption is requested.

Equivalent Level of Safety : The DT-18 is safe when taki ng 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 vi sual 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 fla mmable 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-spor t category aircraft or experimental or provisionally certificated aircra ft, the operator must also di splay on that aircraft near each entrance to the cabin, cockpit, or pilo t station, in letters not less than 2 inches nor more than 6 inches high, the words “limited,” “restricted,” “light-sport, “experimental,” or “provi sional,” as applicable.

14 C.F.R. § 91.9(c) states:

No person may operate a U.S.-registered civil ai rcraft 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 th e aircraft “have iden tification (N-Number) markings in accordance with 14 CFR part 45, S ubpart 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 marki ngs that are as large as practicable.

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

Pro Drones seeks exemption from 14 CFR § 61.113, which restrict s private pilots from flying aircraft for compensation or hi re and would also require a se cond 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 we ll 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 Exem ption in FAA Docket No. FAA-2014-0352, the FAA determined that the unique characteristic s of UAS operation outside of controlled airspace did not warrant the addi tional cost and restrictions a ttendant with requiring the PIC to have a commercial pilot certificate and a cl ass II medical certificate. The FAA has also determined that the required knowledge for a co mmercial 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 certif icate, 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 mo re 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 operatio ns proposed by the petitioner to be the airmanship skills acquired through UAS-specific f light cycles, flight time, and specific make and model experience, culminating in veri fication 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 ope ration. 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 th e 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 in applicable. Accordingly, Pro Drones requests that the requirements fo r 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 Rotorc raft Flight Manual is required by § 21.5 of this chapter, unless there is available in the aircraft a currentU.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 curren t airworthiness certificate...

(b) No person may operate a civil aircra ft unless the airworthiness certificate required by paragraph (a) of this secti on or a special flight authorization issued under § 91.715 is displayed at the cab in or cockpit entr ance 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 Chie f 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 consti tutes 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 performa nce data before initiation of flight. Under these circumstances, the FAA ha s 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 weathe r, flight requirements, batte ry charge, landing and takeoff distance, aircraft performance data, and con tingency 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 manne d free balloon) that is being used for flight instruction unless that aircraft has fully f unctioning dual controls.” UASs and remotely piloted aircraft, by their design, do not have func tional dual controls. Inst ead, flight control is accomplished through the use of the Ground Control System consisting of the antenna with the command and control link a nd the data link, a case with a built-in joystick, and a back-up controller that communicates with the ai rcraft via radio m odem 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 leve l of safe training can still be performed without dual controls becau se no pilot or passengers are aboard the aircraft, and all persons will be a safe distance aw ay in the event that the aircraft experiences any difficulties during flight instruction. In addition, Pro Drones will co nduct flight training at a remote facility away from population cente rs. 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 Sa fe Altitudes in Uncongested Areas

Pro Drones requests an exemption from the minimu m safe altitude requirements of 14 C.F.R. § 91.119(c). Section 91.119(c) prescribes that an aircraft may not be ope rated closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or struct ure. 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 si milar flight re strictions 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 he rein, and given the lack of flammable fuel, any risk associated with these operations is fa r less than those that presently existing with conventional aircraft. An equivalent level of sa fety 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 ar e 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 le vel by reference to an altimeter that is set to the elevation of th e departure airport.

Equivalent Level of Safety: The FAA has stated that an equi valent level of safety can be achieved if the aircraft will be operated at orbelow 400 feet AGL and within visual line-ofsight in addition to GPS based altitude info rmation 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 Requi rements 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 c onditions) there is enough fuel to fly to the first point of intended landi ng 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 th at 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 re maining or (b) fifteen minutes of flight time remaining.

Equivalent Level of Safety: The FAA has stated that an equiva lent level of safety is provided if the UAS flight is conducted under day time VFR flight conditions using VLOS, and terminated with at least 25% rese rve battery power still available. See Grant of Exemption No. 11062, p. 21-22. The Manuals provi ding an equivalent level of safety by safely landing with no less than the greater of (a) 20% battery li fe remaining or (b) fifteen minutes of flight time remaining and otherwise complying w ith the flight rest rictions 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 mainte nance 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 standa rds 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 airc raft “[s]hall have the aircraft inspected as prescribed in s ubpart E of this part and sha ll 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 perfor med in accordance with the Manuals. This includes maintenance, overhaul , replacement, and inspection requirements for the aircraft and procedures to document and maintain main tenance records for the aircraft. This also includes preflight in spection 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 airc raft’s components. The Manuals also set requirements for maintenance log books and record keeping as we ll as routine a nd post-flight maintenance. The Manuals set requirements fo r both annual maintenance and preventative maintenance.

VII. PUBLIC INTEREST

Granting Pro Drones’ petition for exemption furthe rs 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 ma nned 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 a nd small airplanes. The public has an interest in reducing the hazards to human health and safety and pr operty associated with such traditional manned aircraft for inspection operations. Moreover, an additional benefit is the reduced emissionsU.S. Department of Transportation February 9, 2015 Page Twenty-Two

sd-655014 associated with the proposed UAS use, whic h addresses both environmental and human health imperatives.

The DT-18 also allows for safer agricultural su rveying 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, th e benefits to human health an d safety and property obtain. But in addition to the environmen tal benefits of reduced emissi ons from traditional aircraft, the use of UAS can support more targeted ap plications of irriga tion, herbicides, and fertilizers to agricultural lands, wh ich 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 fede ral, 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 determ ined that publication is needed:

Pro Drones seeks an exemption from the followi ng 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 Opera tions, 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 C OA Attachment, 2014-ESA-102 –Certificate of Waiver of Authorization for Gri ffiss 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 pur suant to Section 333 of the Reform Act). If you have any questions or require any additi onal information, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned a ttorneys for Pro Drones.

XI. CONCLUSION

Satisfaction of the criteria pr ovided in Section 333 of the Re form Act - size, weight, speed, operating capabilities, proximity to airports and populated areas, operation within visual line of sight, and national security c onsiderations - provides more th an adequate justification for the grant of the requested ex emptions to permit Pro Drones to operate the DT-18 for commercial purposes.

Granting the requested exemption will benefit th e public interest as a whole in many ways, including (1) significantly improving safety a nd reducing risk by alleviating human exposureU.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 surv ey 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 Free dom 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 Free dom 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 Free dom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C § 552 et
seq.

# Attachment 4AFS-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 Fede ral Regulations

GRANT OF EXEMPTION

By letter dated May 27, 2014, Jona than B. Hill, Cooley LLC, Counsel for Astraeus Aerial, and John McGraw, Aerospace Consulting, LLC, Agent for Astraeus Aerial, 1299 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Suite 700, Wa shington, 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) an d (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 Fede ral Regulations (14 CFR). The proposed exemption, if granted, would allow operation of unma nned 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 appr ovals, airworthiness certificates, and airworthiness approvals.

Section 45.23(b) prescribes, in pertinent pa rt, that when marks include only the Romancapital letter “N” and the registration number is displayed on limited, restricted or lightsport category aircraft or experimental or provisionally certificated aircraft, the operator2
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 pilo t certificate may act as a pilot in command of an aircraft that is carrying passengers or property for compensation or hire; nor may that pe rson, 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 an y business or employment if:

(1) The flight is only incidental to that business or employment; and

(2) The aircraft does not carry passe ngers or property for compensation or hire.

Section 91.7(a) prescribes, in pertinent part, that no person ma y operate a civil aircraft unless it is in an airworthy condition.

Section 91.9(b)(2) prohibits operation of U.S.-re gistered civil aircraft unless there is available in the aircraft a current approve d Airplane or Rotorc raft 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 tr affic delays of which the pilot in command has been advised by ATC;

(b) For any flight, runway lengths at air ports 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 takeo ff and landing distance data is required, the takeoff and landing di stance data contained therein; and3

(2) For civil aircraft other than t hose specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section, other reliable informa tion appropriate to the aircraft, relating to aircraft performance unde r expected values of airport elevation and runway slope, airc raft gross weight, and wind and temperature.

Section 91.109 prescribes, in pertinent part, th at no person may operate a civil aircraft (except a manned free balloon) that is being used for flight instruction unless that aircraft has fully f unctioning dual controls.

Section 91.119 prescribes that, except when ne cessary 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 c ongested area of a city, town, or settlement, or over any ope n air assembly of pers ons, 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 opera ted closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure.

(d) Helicopters, powered parachutes, a nd weight-shift-control aircraft. If the operation is conducted w ithout 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 th is 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 airc raft 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 a nd 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 fro m operating a civil aircraft unless it has within it (1) an appropriate and current airwor thiness 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 Aircra ft 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 pe rtinent part, that an airc raft operator or owner shall have that aircraft inspected as prescribed in subpart E of the same part and shall, between required inspections, except as provi ded 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, rebuild ing, or alteration unless it has been approved for return to se rvice by a person authorized under § 43.7 of the same chapter.

Section 91.409(a)(2) prescribes, in pertinent part, that no pers on 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 appropria te, 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; and5

(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 requi red by the inspection program under which the aircraft and its appliances are maintained.

(v) The current status of applicab le airworthiness directives (AD) and safety directives includi ng, for each, the method of compliance, the AD or safety directive number and revision date. If the AD or safety direc tive 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, prope llers, 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 MPTO M) – in support of its exemption request. The petitioner submitted additional informati on in response to the FAA’s August 7, 2014 request which is posted to the doc ket. The FAA has orga nized the petitioner’s information into three sections: 1) the unma nned 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 proprieta ry 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, S ubpart 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 Sec tion 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 environmen t and under the conditions and limitations proposed by the petitioner will be at l east as safe, or safer, than a conventional aircraft (fixed wing or rotorc raft) operating with an airworth iness certificate issued under 14 CFR part 21, Subpart H and not subject to the proposed conditions and limitations.
The petitioner states that the unm anned aircraft (UA) to be opera ted 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 fl ammable liquid fuels, a nd operates exclusively within a secured area as set out in the MPT OM. 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 “expe rimental” 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 an y manufacturers’ recommende d instructions and procedures when those procedures exis t 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 advers ely affect safety by requiring the PIC operating the aircraft to have a private pilot’s license rather than a commercial pilot’s li cense. 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 regula tions 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 e quivalent level of safe ty. Furthermore, the petitioner explains that, given th e restricted and controlled ai rspace 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 petiti oner 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 vehicl e, 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 fu rther 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 th ey 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 operatin g area. Should there be a mishap, the UA being flown pose significantly less of a threat than th e helicopters and fixed wi ng 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 airc raft that are flown to the site, carry flammable fuel, carry pa ssengers 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 lo cal 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 pers onnel and the UAS PIC based on the site-specific filming activities and speed of the UAS required fo r the operation, and c oordinated with the jurisdictional FAA FSDO and local government officials as applicable, as outlined in the MPTOM and FOPM. The petitioner states that only participating a nd 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 pe rimeter. The petitioner ar gues 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 associ ated 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 revi ewing weather, flight battery requirements, landing and takeoff distances, and aircraft performance data before initiation of flight. Additionally, the petitioner states that a briefin g will be conducted prio r to each day’s filming regarding planned UAS operati ons, and all personnel who will be performing duties within the boundaries of the safety per imeter will be re quired 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 propos ed operations within a predetermined area, a longer time frame for flight in daylight or night VFR conditi ons 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 initia tion point will be estab lished and confirmed for accuracy by the PIC.

Public Interest
The petitioner states that, given the small size of the UA involved and th e restricted sterile environment within which it will operate, its proposed operation “f alls squarely within that zone of safety (an e quivalent level of safe ty) in which Congress envisioned that the FAA must, by exemption, allow co mmercial 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 equivale nt level of safety surrounding the proposed operations, and the significant public benefit, including e nhanced safety, reduction in9
environmental impacts, and including reduced e missions associated with allowing UAS for movie and television operations, gr anting 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 eigh t from associations, 50 comments supported the exemption request, 22 opposed, and 14 were neut ral. 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 Vehicl e Systems International (AUVSI), Aerospace Industries Association (AIA), the National A ssociation of Realtors, the News Media Coalition, and the National Pre ss Photographers Association. Supporting comments cited the petitioner’s intent to use controlled access airs pace, licensed airmen, and preflight safety briefings, as well as th e economic benefits of UAS.
Several trade organizations submitted letters to the docket, expressing various issues and concerns with the Astraeus petition for exempti on, including the Air Line Pilots Association International (ALPA), the National Agricu ltural Aviation Associ ation (NAAA), and the United States Hang Gliding and Paragliding Association (USHPA).
ALPA expressed concern regarding certain c onditions outlined in Astraeus’ petition. ALPA notes that the proposed operations will be for “co mpensation or hire,” a nd 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. S imilarly, a current 2nd Class FAA Medical certificate should be re quired 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 ope ration 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 altitude10
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 operati ons 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 a ltitude must be addressed. NAAA noted the same in its comments. The FAA agrees with ALPA and NAAA and addresse s 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 a nd Control (C2) link failures are one of the most common failures on a UAS, and that lost link mitigations should re quire safe modes to prevent fly-aways or other scenarios. The F AA 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 incorpor ated 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 a nd 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 a voiding other aircraft and ha zardous obstructions is the backbone for agricultural safety, and agricultural pilots depend on pilots of other aircraft to perform their see and avoid f unctions 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 re quired 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 incorporat ed 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 enfor cement 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 w ithout undue burden or negative impacts on UAS operations. The FAA partially agrees w ith 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 be ing launched by human power alone. USHPA commented th at it believes with proper no tification of time and place, along with other considerations, safety can be maintained. USHPA’s notification concerns will be addressed by the cond itions and limitations that w ill require an Air Traffic Organization issued Certificate of Waiver or Authorization (COA) to address airspace requirements and notification. Furt her 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 believe s operation of any UA in three-d imensional space presents unique challenges in accurately deter mining position in relation to st ationary or mobile objects. USHPA comments that utilization of an obser ver for operational redunda ncy is prudent and encouraged, but should not be considered a viable replacement for the pilot in command. USHPA believes that the identif ication of navigational require ments and accurately conveying them to the pilot in command would not be pr ovided with adequate precision or sufficient response time in a crisis situa tion and recommends that dual cont rol systems be utilized as a redundant safety measure common in commerc ial 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 shoul d always maintain ri ght 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 sma ll UAS can be hard to see during the day, due to their small size and factors such as sun glare. Commenter s 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, a nd operating distance from non-par ticipating personnel. Further detail is contained in the analysis of the UAS operating parameters below.
The petition received several co mments 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 imple ment a buffer between these UAS operations and manned operations, while another raised concern with n ear misses with other aircraft. Two comments noted that UAS are susceptib le to accidents and GPS jamming. The FAA believes the limitations under whic h the petitioner will operate (i .e. VLOS and at or below 400 feet AGL) and the UAS emergency procedur es 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 containe d in the analysis of the UAS below.
One commenter suggested that the FAA should re quire testing of softwa re and systems prior to operation, including testing to RTCA sta ndards. 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 exempti on. The jurisdictional FSDO will be the primary office responsible for oversight of the operations.
The FAA received several comments that integra ting UAS operations via a broadly applicable rule was a more suitable method than the exempti on process, and that industries other than the motion picture industry should be allowed to participate. Secti on 333 provides interim authority to the Secretary of Transpor tation, which facilitate s 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 operati ons. We have received and are considering exemption petitions from a broad array of industr ies 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 proce ss 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 exemp tion process. The FAA reviewed and considered the petitioner’s information in its analysis of the petition.
The petition received several comme nts on privacy. A commenter expressed concern that the UAS could be used for spying. Other comment ers 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 peopl e who have consented or otherw ise have agreed to be in the area where filming will take place will be f ilmed. 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, bas ed 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 similar13
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 aircra ft holding standard airworth iness certificates issued under part 21, subpart H. These aircraft are normally m odified via the Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) process to install cameras and other equi pment not included in the original aircraft design.
Manned helicopters conduc ting motion picture and televisi on aerial filming can weigh 6,000 lbs. or more and are operated by an onboard pilot, in additi on to other onboard crewmembers, as necessary. The petitioner’s UA will weigh less than 55 lbs. w ith 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 nonpa rticipating individua ls or property in the event of an incident or acci dent. The risk to an onboard pilot and crew during an incident or accident is eliminated with the us e of a UA for the aerial filming operation.
Manned aircraft are at risk of fuel spillage and fi re 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 f ilming with manned aircra ft 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 main tained 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 filmin g 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 si ze, weight, operating c onditions, and design safety features of the UAS.
This exemption does not require an electronic means to mon itor and communicate with other aircraft, such as transponders or sense and a void technology. Rather the FAA is mitigating the risk of these operations by placing limits on a ltitude, requiring stand-o ff 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 othe r 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 w ith 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 re quire 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 ar e 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 describe d in the petitioner’s FOPM are suffi cient to mitigate risks associated with the loss of GPS signal. In c onsideration of these factors and the UA size, weight, speed and other operating limitations a ssociated with this aerial filmmaking operation, the FAA finds that there is no adverse safety affect relative to similar operati ons conducted by manned aircraft with a flight cr ew complement of one.
These safety features also provide for no a dverse safety affect to participating and nonparticipating individuals compar ed 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 si ze, weight, speed, a nd limited operating area associated with the aircraft and its operation, the Secretary of Transportation has determined that this aircraft meets the conditions of S ection 333. Therefore, the FAA finds that the requested relief from 14 CFR part 21, and any associated noise certif ication and testing requirements of part 36, is not necessary.
Regarding the petitioner’s reque sted relief from 14 CFR § 45.23(b) Display of marks, the petitioner’s request is ma de under the assumption that markin g with the word “experimental” will be required as a condition of an exemption request. This marking is reserved for aircraft that are issued experiment al certificates under § 21.191. Sin ce 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 seri al 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 afte r maintenance, preventive ma intenance, 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 r egulatory 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 alterati on requirements of 14 CFR §§ 91.405(a)(1), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) and (2), and 91.417(a) and (b), provi ded changes are made to the MPTOM and FOPM as required by the conditions and limita tions 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 UAS15
technician qualification criteria. They also require the petitioner’s FOPM to include preflight inspection procedures that account for any discre pancies not already c overed 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 a nd 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 wa rranted subject to the conditions and limitations below.

Pilot In Command of the UAS
Regarding the petitioner’s re quested relief from 14 CFR § 61.113(a) and (b) Private pilot privileges and limitations, comme nts were received that voi ced concerns about pilot certification. One such comment came from ALPA, which states that one of the “areas that must be addressed to ensure sa fe operations” is Astraeus’ proposal to use a private pilot with a third class medical as its UAS PIC. ALPA be lieves 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 associa tions such as USHPA and NAAA.
Given these grounds, the FAA must determine the appropriate leve l of pilot certification for Astraeus’ proposed operation. Title 14 CFR pa rt 61 requires that ope rations conducted for compensation or hire necessita te a commercial pilot certificate and at least a second class medical certificate. In considering the pe titioner’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 adva nce, but not less than 48 hours prior to the operation. Astraeus will also be required to avoid and yiel d 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 knowle dge 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 fundame ntal 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 r eceive 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) Us e 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 intended17

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 proprieta ry documents. However, as with other exemptions that contain specific pilot qualifications, e.g. Exemption Nos. 7830, 6802K, and 6540N, those pilot requirements beco me 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 ro torcraft 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 co mpleted 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 foundati on of aeronautical knowledge required for private a nd commercial pilots is shown in the above table. Private18
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 situ ations that could be encountered in flights conducted for compensation or hi re. 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 opera tions 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 knowledg e and experience criteria for its PICs. The FAA finds that the combination of aeronau tical knowledge, UAS airmanship skills, and verification through testing is a sufficient method for Astraeus to evaluate a pilot’s qualifications, given that opera tions will be conducte d within the limitations outlined in this exemption.
The knowledge and airmanship test qualificati ons have been developed by Astraeus for the UAS operations proposed in their petition for ex emption. There are no established practical test standards that support a jurisdictional FAA FSDO evalua tion and approval of company designated examiners. The petitioner will conduc t 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 requirement s to those of commercia l 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’ speci fic 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 re lief 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 re quirement is that pilots holding a private pilot certificate are subject to security screening by the Department of Homeland Security. This requirement should ameliorate secur ity 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, becau se the section did not originally provide for19
UA operations. One example of this is the minimum pilot qualifications – the pertinent section of Order 8900.1 provides no way to relieve Astraeus fro m the pilot requirements. Also, the sample form 7711-1 used for issuing th e Certificate of Waiver specifically states “this section not used for Unma nned 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 locati ons covered by other ge ographically responsible FSDOs through notification. Those local FSDOs th en 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 norma lly issued by a jurisdictional FSDO under 8900.1 V3, C8, S1. Every FSDO with jurisdiction over th e 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 th e 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 c onsider airspace issues that are unique to UAS operations. The COA will require the operato r 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 belie ves that adherence to this pro cess is the safest and most expeditious way to permit Astr aeus 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 re lief 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 CF R part 21, Subpart H. Based on the fact that an airworthiness certificate will not be issu ed, exemption from § 91.7(a) is not necessary.
In accordance with the pertinent part of 14 CF R § 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 fro m 14 CFR § 91.9(b)(2) Civil aircraft flight manual, marking, and pl acard 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 Me morandum subject “Inter pretation regarding whether certain required documents may be kept at an unmanne d aircraft’s control station,”20
dated August 8, 2014, the requested relief fro m 14 CFR §§ 91.9(b)(2) and 91.203(a) and (b) is not necessary.
Regarding the petitioner’s re quested 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 outlin ed in the petitioner’s MPTOM and FOPM address the FAA’s concerns regarding comp liance 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 require ments, landing and takeoff dist ances 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 releva nt site-specific conditions in their preflight procedures. Therefore, the FAA finds that exemp tion from 14 CFR § 91.103 is not necessary.
Regarding the petitioner’s requested relie f 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 ot her 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 th e 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 reque sted 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 c ongested 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 mentione d 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 pa rticipating persons, vehicles, a nd structures directly involved in the performance of the actual filming. In acco rdance with the petitioner’s stated intention to adhere to Order 8900.1 V3, C8, S1, pers ons other than participating persons 1 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, spect ators, media, etc., not associated with the filming production.21
within 500 feet of the operating area. This provisi on 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 th rough evaluation by an aviation safety inspector of the filming production area to note terrain features, obstructions, buildings, etc. Such barriers may protect nonparticipating persons (obser vers, 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 a nd limitations outlined below. Howeve r, all nonparticip ating personnel will be required to be at least 500 feet from f light operations, with possible relief to allow reductions to 200 feet, as specified above.
Regarding the petitioner’s reque sted relief from 14 CFR § 91.121 Altimeter Settings , the FAA believes that an altitude readin g is a critical safety compone nt of the petitioner’s proposed operation. Although the petitioner will not have a typical baro metric altimete r 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-scr een display, to be a sufficien t method for ensuring the UAS operations do not adversely affect safety. The altitude information will be generated by equipment installed onboard the aircraft, as sp ecified 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 fo r manned aircraft to opera te 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 ha s been granted in Exemption Nos. 8811, 10808, and 10673 for daytime, Visual Flight Rule s (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, a nd within VLOS. These factors, combined with Astraeus’ stated intention to terminate flights after 30 minutes or with 25% remaining battery power (whichever occurs first), provide s 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 a nd mitigations, per FAA Order 8900.1 V16, C5, S3General Operational Requirements, to avoid collision hazards at night. All previous UASspecific grants of relief from 14 CFR § 91.151(a) have restricted flig hts 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 provided22
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 propos ed operating parameters with regard to VLOS and a safe operating per imeter, the FAA considered ope rations 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. T he 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 signific antly greater proportions, carrying crew in addition to flammable fuel, gives th e FAA good cause to find that the UAS operation enabled by this exemption is in the public in terest. The FAA also fi nds that UAS provide an additional tool for the filmmaking industry, adding a greater degree of flexibility, which supplements the current capabilitie s 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 c onditions and limitations

91.151(a) 91.151(a)(1), day, grante d with conditions and limitations; 91.151(a)(2), night, denied
91.203(a) and (b) Not necessary

91.405(a) Granted with c onditions and limitations

91.407(a)(1) Granted with conditions and limitations23

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, Astraeu s is hereafter referred to as the operator.

The Flight Operations and Procedures Manua l (FOPM) and Motion Picture and Television Operations Manual (MPTOM) are hereafter coll ectively 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, wh ich were accepted by the FAA. 2

1. The unmanned aircraft (UA) must weigh le ss 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 opera tor’s manual: Astraeus Aerial Cinema System V.3CS UAS aircraft variant, serial #001 onward (V.3). Propos ed 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 th an 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 accepta ble 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 discrepa ncy 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 revi se 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 docum ents if it petitions for extension or amendment. If the operator determines that any upda te or revision would affect the basis for which the FAA granted th is 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 update s or revisions to the operator’s manual.

7. Prior to each flight the PIC must inspect th e UAS to ensure it is in a condition for safe flight. If the inspection reveals a condition th at 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 fo r safe flight. The Gr ound Control Station, if utilized, must be included in the preflight in spection. All maintenance and alterations must be properly documented in the aircraft records.

8. Any UAS that has undergone maintenance or a lterations 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 th e 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 ai rcraft record entry must be added to the operator’s manual.

9. The operator must follow the manufacture r’s UAS aircraft/com ponent, maintenance, overhaul, replacement, inspection, and life limit requirements. When una vailable, aircraft maintenance/component/overhau l, replacement, and inspecti on/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 de termined 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 ai rcraft in which the PI C is rated on his or her pilot certificate.

11. Prior to operations conducted for the pur pose 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 cycl es and 25 hours of total time as a UAS rotorcraft pilot and at least ten hours logge d 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-bu ilding flights can also be conducted under this grant of exemption to accomplish the required flight cycles and flight time. During training, proficiency, and experience-bu ilding 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 pur pose of motion picture filming (or similar operations), the PIC must have accumulate d and logged, in a manner consistent with 14 CFR § 61.51(b), a minimum of five hours as UAS pilot operating th e make and model of UAS to be utilized for operations under th e 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 accomplish26
the required flight time and 90 day currency. During training, proficiency, experiencebuilding, and take-off and landi ng currency flights all pers ons not essential for flight operations are considered nonparticipants, and the PIC must operate the UA with appropriate distance fro m 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 th e operator, the test mu st be developed and implemented by a qualified pers on designated at the sole di scretion 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 pur pose of motion picture filming (or similar operations), a flight demons tration, administered by an operator-approved and -qualified pilot must be successfully completed a nd 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 st andards that support a jurisdic tional FAA FSDO evaluation and approval of company designated examiners, the petitioner will c onduct 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 a ltitude 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 consentin g 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 descri bed in FAA Order 8900.1, V3, C8, S1 Issue a Certificate of Waiver for Motion Picture and Television Filming.

17. Regarding distance from nonparticipating pe rsons, the operator must ensure that no persons are allowed within 500 feet of the ar ea except those consenting to be involved and necessary for the filming production. This pr ovision may be reduced to no less than 200 feet if it would not advers ely affect safety and the Admin istrator 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 not e terrain features, obstructions, buildings, safety barriers, etc. Such barriers may pr otect nonparticipating pe rsons (observers, the public, news media, etc.) from debris in the even t 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 per imeter and land or be recovered in accordance with the operator’s manual.

19. The UAS must abort the flight in the even t of unpredicted obstacl es 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 operati ons conducted under this grant of exemption must be done pursuant to the following conditions and limitations:

21. The operator must obtain an Air Traffic Organi zation (ATO) issued Certificate of Waiver or Authorization (COA) prior to conducting an y 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 pa rt 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, a lterations, status of replacement/overhaul component parts, and the tota l time in service of the UAS. These procedures must be added to the operator’s manual.

24. Each UAS operated under this exemption mu st 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 opera tor’s manual must be am ended to include the following requirement: The preflight inspecti on 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 us ed for operation and control of the UA must comply with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) or other appropriate government ove rsight 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-da y 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 res ponsible 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 PI Cs involved in the filming production event;

f. A statement that the operator has obtaine d permission from prope rty owners and/or local officials to conduct the filming produc tion event; the list of those who gave permission must be ma de available to the inspector upon request;

g. Signature of exemption-hol der or representative; and

h. A description of the flight activity, including maps or diag rams of any area, city, town, county, and/or state over wh ich filming will be c onducted and the altit udes essential to accomplish the operation.

29. The documents required under 14 CFR §§ 91.9 a nd 91.203 must be available to the PIC at the Ground Control Station of the UAS an y 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 righ t of way to all othe r 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 c onducted during night, as de fined in 14 CFR § 1.1. All operations must be conducted under visual meteorological conditions (VMC). Flights under special visual flight rule s (SVFR) are not authorized.

32. The UAS may not be operated by the P IC 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 nauti cal miles of the geographic center of a nontowered airport as denoted on a current FAA-pub lished 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) w ithin 24 hours. Accident s 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 supers eded or rescinded.

Issued in Washington, DC, on September 25, 2014. .

/s/ Michael J. Zenkovich Deputy Director, Flight Standards Service

# Attachment 5FAA FORM 7711

- 1 UAS COA Attachment 2014

- E SA

- 102

Ver si on 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 specific ally 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 Aviatio n 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 vicinit y 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 certific ate 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 cancellati on 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 A cting Manager , UAS Tactical Operations Section

(Date) (Title)

FAA Form 7711

- 1 (7

- 74)FAA FORM 7711

- 1 UAS COA Attachment 2014

- E SA

- 102

Ver si on 2.1 : June 2012 Page 2 of 21

COA Number : 2 0 14

- E SA

- 102

Issued To : TEST SITE

- Griffi s s International Airport , referred herein as the “proponent”

Address : 592 Hangar Rd, Suite 200

Rome, NY 13 441

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 R esearch Farm, in the vicinity of Aurora, NY

, under the jurisdiction of Elmira TRACON. See Atta chment 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 necessar y, 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 §4012 5. 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

- E SA

- 102

Ver si on 2.1 : June 2012 Page 3 of 21



### STANDARD PROVISIONS

A. General.

The review of this activity is based upon curren t 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 p ersonnel 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 loc ation 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 ot her 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 applicati on.

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 affecti ng 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

- E SA

- 102

Ver si on 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, ac cepted 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 discrepa ncies, 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 f ormal 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 contai ned 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 i ntegration 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 operat ing 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

- E SA

- 102

Ver si on 2.1 : June 2012 Page 5 of 21

b. From a single control station, and

c. By one pilot at a time.

2. A Pi lot

- 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 th e 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 qualifi ed 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 r equirements 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 t o 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 areasFAA FORM 7711

- 1 UAS COA Attachment 2014

- E SA

- 102

Ver si on 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 ev ents

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 co mpliance 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 Clas s 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 an d 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 ce llular telephones is prohibited as the primary means for in

flight 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 b e 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

- E SA

- 102

Ver si on 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 ens ure 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 unmanne d 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 sp ecial 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 i nto 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 (movemen t 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 du ring 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 dut ies 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

- E SA

- 102

Ver si on 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 h ave 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 maint ain 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 no t 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 ensur e 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, structur es) 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

rema in 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

- E SA

- 102

Ver si on 2.1 : June 2012 Page 9 of 21

7. Pilots flying chas e 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 Warnin g 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 recei ve 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 Experie nce (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 mu st 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/s he 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.

Rati ng 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 pred icated on various factors including the location of the planned operations, missionFAA FORM 7711

- 1 UAS COA Attachment 2014

- E SA

- 102

Ver si on 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 FA A 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

- ai rport 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 requi re 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

- E SA

- 102

Ver si on 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: Pilo t 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 groun d 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, medica l, 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 o bservation 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 c ycle, 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. T his 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 hou rs 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. Do cumentation 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

- E SA

- 102

Ver si on 2.1 : June 2012 Page 12 of 21

2. The pro ponent 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

m ay 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 fligh t

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 (contro l, 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 notific ation 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

o f 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 third

degree 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 t han 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 g round control station flight control hardware or software (other than loss of control link)

c. A power plant failure or malfunctionFAA FORM 7711

- 1 UAS COA Attachment 2014

- E SA

- 102

Ver si on 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 alt ernate 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 ac cident/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 ar e 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. Contingenc y 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 si milar 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 considerat ion 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 t his dataFAA FORM 7711

- 1 UAS COA Attachment 2014

- E SA

- 102

Ver si on 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 ai rcraft 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 othe r 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 Spec ial 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 s pecified 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 per iod 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

- esta blished 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 al titude 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 m ust 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 availab ility 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 furth er than one hour of flight time at any given time, takingFAA FORM 7711

- 1 UAS COA Attachment 2014

- E SA

- 102

Ver si on 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 a irfields. 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 termi nation 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

accom modate 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 authori zed, 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 pl ant, 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 civ il 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 basi s, 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) Conti ngency planning must take into consideration all airspace constructs and minimize risk to other aircraft by avoiding published airways, militaryFAA FORM 7711

- 1 UAS COA Attachment 2014

- E SA

- 102

Ver si on 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 div ert 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 prop onent 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 min utes 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 Re quirements.

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 Air port 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 Plann ing 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

- E SA

- 102

Ver si on 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 s uch 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) airspac e (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 lin k 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 coord inate 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. Chang e 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

- E SA

- 102

Ver si on 2.1 : June 2012 Page 18 of 21

AUTHORIZATION This Certifica te 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 authoriti es or property owners, it is the responsibility of the Griffis s International Airport to resolve the matter. This COA does not authorize flight within Special Use a irspace without approval from the u sing

a gency. The Griffis s International Airport is here by authorized to operate the Delair

- Tech DT

18 Unmanned Aircraft System in the operations area depicted in the Activity section of th is attachment.FAA FORM 7711

- 1 UAS COA Attachment 2014

- E SA

- 102

Ver si on 2.1 : June 2012 Page 19 of 21

Attachment 1: Page 1 of 2FAA FORM 7711

- 1 UAS COA Attachment 2014

- E SA

- 102

Ver si on 2.1 : June 2012 Page 20 of 21

Attachment 1: Page 2 of 2 Operations AreaFAA FORM 7711

- 1 UAS COA Attachment 2014

- E SA

- 102

Ver si on 2.1 : June 2012 Page 21 of 21

Attachment 2 Sector Boundarie s

– ELM, ROC, and SYR

# Attachment 6

# Attachment 7