1

February 15, 2015

U.S. Department of Transportation

Docket Management System

1200 New Jersey Avenue SE

Washington, D.C. 20590

Re: Exemption Request Pursuant To Section 333 of the FAA Reform Act of 2012

Dear Sir:

This letter is for the purpose of petitioning the Secretary of Transportation and Federal Aviation 

Administration for exemption to the below referenced Federal Aviation Regulations that currently apply 

to Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS). 

NOTE: For purposes of this request, the Petitioner uses the nomenclature “UAS” to 

include the aerial vehicle and the ground station component, which together comprise 

the “system”. When speaking of the aerial component only, the term Unmanned Aerial 

Vehicle (UAV) is used.

Airborne Information Systems (AIS) is a dba of Aerial Patrol Incorporated (API), headquartered in 

Maumelle, Arkansas. API, holder of Air Carrier Certificate VLNA 335S, was incorporated in 1983 and is in 

the business of operating helicopters for the support of public utility companies and various industrial 

customers. Most of its business is associated with inspection of electric transmission lines, electrical 

substations, gas pipelines, and associated telemetry equipment, such as fiber optic lines, microwave, 

radio, and cellular communications networks. Much of the work we perform for these customers is 

aerial photography including digital stills, videography, and thermal imaging. This work is done at low 

levels and sometimes can’t be conducted because of noise constraints or safety considerations.

AIS would like to augment API’s current capabilities by offering the services of a UAS. This would be 

especially helpful when getting detailed shots of electrical powerlines, substations, and associated 

equipment where hovering a manned helicopter in close proximately to them could be catastrophic in 

the event of a mechanical failure. (See addendum for photos for examples of typical powerline 
2

damages) The UAV’s have the added benefit of producing virtually no rotor wash or noise. When 

operating low-level, noise is often a concern when animals are nearby. 

Many powerlines are located in close proximity to poultry houses and near livestock. In certain areas, 

racehorse training facilities are common. In API’s operating area there, are several places where 

powerlines traverse wildlife sanctuaries or exotic animal habitats. Some places within API’s operating 

area are no-fly zones due to helicopter noise. Some of these areas are currently inspected by personnel 

actually climbing structures, while others are remain virtually inaccessible by any ordinary means. UAS 

are particularly well suited to perform these inspections. AIS and API believe that UAS can perform 

these operations with less impact on persons and animals in certain critical areas, and is in that regard,

in the public interest. Obviously, it goes without saying that keeping energy flowing is in the public 

interest.

Consistent with existing conditions and limitations previously granted, AIS proposes to supplement 

existing aircraft operations with UAS, which will inspect powerlines, including supporting structures as 

well as the various wires and components connecting those structures, substations and towers in areas 

where manned aircraft can’t operate due to noise concerns. In certain circumstances where necessary, 

such as for the inspection of transmission conductors, these operations may be conducted from a 

moving vehicle.

The UAS operations proposed in this petition will be consistent with previously granted UAS Section 333 

exemptions and FAA guidance. 

Petitioner Information

Airborne Information Systems, a dba of Aerial Patrol Incorporated 

6 Braeswood Place

Maumelle, Arkansas 72113

Phone: (501) 352-3861

Fax: (501) 851-3469

Specific Regulations for Which Exemption is Sought

Several regulations have been previously determined by other granted exemptions either not to be 

applicable or not to require relief, so these will not be addressed. The petitioner will accept any 

conditions and limitations as previous exemptions.

 14 CFR part 21 – Certification procedures for products and parts

 14 CFR 45.23(b) – Display of marks

 14 CFR 61.133(a) – Commercial pilot privileges and limitations 

 14 CFR 91.7(b) – Civil aircraft airworthiness

 14 CFR 91.9(b)(2) – Civil aircraft flight manual, marking, and placard requirements

 14 CFR 91.103 – Preflight action

 14 CFR 91.109(a) – Flight instruction; simulated instrument flight and certain flight tests
3

 14 CFR 91.203(a) and (b) – Civil aircraft: Certifications required

However, the petitioner may need relief from others as evidenced by previous petitioners. Specifically, 

relief is requested from the following the FARs.

 14 CFR 91.7(a) – Civil aircraft airworthiness

 14 CFR 91.405(a) – Maintenance required

 14 CFR 91.409(a)(2) – Inspections 

 14 CFR 91.417(a) and (b) – Maintenance records

 14 CFR 91.119(b) – Minimum safe altitudes, over congested areas

 14 CFR 91.119(c) – Minimum safe altitudes, over other than congested areas

 14 CFR 91.121 – Altimeter settings

 14 CFR 91.151(a) – Fuel requirements for flight in VFR conditions

Extent of, and Reason for Seeking Relief

14 CFR 61.133 Commercial pilot privileges and limitations

This section requires the PIC of an aircraft engaged in operations for compensation or hire have 

qualifications listed in 61.123, 125, 127, and 129. As argued and granted previously, AIS requests that in 

lieu of these requirements that the PIC meet the requirements of: 

 14 CFR 61.113(a) and (b) – Private pilot privileges and limitations

 14 CFR 61.23 – Medical certificates: Requirement and duration 

 14 CFR 61.56 – Flight review 

 14 CFR 61.57 – Recent flight experience: Pilot in command

14 CFR §91.7(a) – Civil aircraft airworthiness

The regulation requires that no person may operate a civil aircraft unless it is in airworthy condition. 

Because airworthiness certificate has been issued for the aircraft, no FAA regulatory standard exists for 

determining airworthiness. Given the size of the aircraft and the requirements contained in the 

Petitioner’s Operations Manual for the use of an inspection checklist prior to each flight, an equivalent 

level of safety will be provided.

14 CFR 91.119(b) – Minimum safe altitudes, congested area

Paragraph (b) of this section states that the minimum safe altitude “over any congested area of a city, 

town, or settlement, or over any open air assembly of persons, [is] an altitude of 1,000 feet above the 

highest obstacle within a horizontal radius of 2,000 feet of the aircraft.” The Petitioner proposes to 

conduct flights on property owned by, or property under a utility easement that may lie in areas 

considered to be “congested”. These flights will be hovering flights at or near zero ground speed, and at 

altitudes below 100’ AGL. They will be conducted entirely over utility property or easements, and at an 

altitude and in a fashion that should a power unit fail, procedures that will ensure that it will not drift 

from utility property.
4

14 CFR 91.119(c) – Minimum safe altitudes, other than congested area

Paragraph (c) of this section states that the minimum altitude allowed “over other than congested areas 

[be] 500 feet above the surface, except over open water or sparsely populated areas. In those cases, 

the aircraft may not be operated closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure.” 

The operations proposed by this exemption request require that operations be conducted in close 

proximity to structures. Under section (c), the Petitioner requests that no restrictions with regard to 

minimum distances from structures, vessels, and vehicles, and a 200-foot minimum distance from 

persons not associated with the operation be granted. Petitioner further requests that with regard to 

crew required for the operation of the UAS, no minimum distance be required. 

Under certain conditions—such as inspection of conductors strung across several consecutive spans of a 

transmission line—a single flight of as long as a mile might be required. In this instance, in order for the 

PIC to maintain the necessary spatial orientation and for the Visual Observer to assure situational 

awareness, the crew proposes to follow the UAV from a safe distance in a moving vehicle. 

14 CFR 91.121 – Altimeter settings

This regulation requires the pilot to set the altimeter to the current “altimeter setting” or ground 

elevation along the route of flight. This regulation does not pertain to the operation of UAS because the 

altimeter is specifically intended to be read by the onboard pilot. Neither the pilot nor altimeter are 

onboard the UAV. Operations will typically be avoided around airports, so there will not be a local 

altimeter setting available. Also, there is no “route of flight”, as all operations will be within visual range 

of the PIC. The PIC will need to know the height of the aircraft above the ground primarily to keep from 

venturing into airspace used by manned aircraft. That information is sent to the pilot in real time via 

telemetry, and is rendered in feet AGL. This arrangement satisfies the intent of the regulation and 

provides for an equivalent degree of safety.

14 CFR 91.151(a) and (b) – Fuel requirements for flight in VFR conditions

Paragraph (a) of this regulation states in pertinent part, “no person may begin a flight in an airplane 

unless there is enough fuel to fly to the first point of intended landing and, assuming normal cruising 

speed...during the day, to fly after that for at least 30 minutes.” This part pertains to airplanes, and 

while a “multirotor” UAS is not certificated and is therefore neither an airplane nor rotorcraft, its flight 

characteristics are inarguably more closely associated with a rotorcraft than an airplane, so the 

appropriate paragraph would be (b) rotorcraft, and not (a) airplanes. Paragraph (b) requires the craft to 

be able to fly to the point of intended landing and thereafter for 20 minutes.

The Petitioner proposes to employ a UAS that has an 18-minute battery life, and can therefore not 

comply with the 20-minute requirement of 91.151(b). However, telemetry provides a constant 

indication of remaining power, along with a low-voltage visual and audible warning when the power 

gets critically low. In this event, the UAS can be landed safely within a minute or two while maintaining 

some power in reserve. The Petitioner requests that the reserve requirement be set at 20% instead of 

20 minutes.
5

14 CFR §91.405(a) – Maintenance required

This section requires periodic inspections, repairs made as necessary, and those procedures 

documented. Inspections will be performed before the first flight of each day and repairs completed in 

accordance with the AIS Operations Manual, thus assuring an equivalent level of safety.

14 CFR § 91.407 Operation after maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, or alteration

This section requires that after maintenance, proper entries be made in the aircraft record, and that 

necessary certain checks, including flight checks be performed. Flight checks will be performed prior to 

the first flight of the day in accordance with the AIS Operations Manual to ensure proper functionality of 

all systems and components. 

14 CFR §91.409 – Inspections

This section requires that annual and 100-hour inspections be performed on certain aircraft, and that 

they be returned to service by properly authorized personnel. The petitioner asserts that the personnel 

that operate the UAS have received training on its proper care and maintenance, and are as qualified to 

determine that it is in condition for safe flight than the personnel authorized by 43.7, thereby achieving 

an equivalent level of safety.

14 CFR 91.417(a) & (b) – Maintenance records

This section describes requirements for maintenance recordkeeping. The Petitioner will maintain 

records of all inspections, maintenance, alterations, and repairs in accordance with the AIS form AIS002. They will be kept on site by the PIC and will be available to the Administrator or his representative.

Public Interest

No one could disagree that keeping the power flowing safely across America is in the public interest. 

Aerial Patrol Inc. has been in the business of helping keep the oil, gas, and electricity flowing for over 30 

years using conventional manned helicopters. We view the use of UAS as a useful tool that we can use 

to augment our current capabilities. There are places, especially where noise is a concern, that we 

cannot currently provide our patrol and inspection service. There are other situations, such as hovering 

over an electric substation or a natural gas pumping station where our hazard mitigation assessment has 

determined that the risk of a manned aircraft loaded with jet fuel is too great for the mission to be 

attempted. Often, we have to perform detailed inspections (See attached photos) while hovering in the 

middle of the Height-Velocity (HV) curve. There are other times when the sheer size of a Bell Jet Ranger 

prohibits us from maneuvering into the position where we need to be to conduct our inspection. 

We believe that a small UAS could allow us to perform certain of our current missions more safely and 

effectively, while at the same time having less environmental impact on the public. We are not 

requesting that we be allowed to do anything we are not currently doing, only that we be allowed to do 

it with a lightweight, quiet UAV instead of a 3,200-pound turbine helicopter. We anticipate that virtually 

all of our flights will continue to be conducted in manned helicopters, and that the UAS will be used for 
6

niche missions where its unique flight characteristics and capabilities suit the mission profile and 

requirements.

Level of Safety

We believe that our proposed operation under this requested exemption will be performed at a level of 

safety equivalent to, or exceeding current methods employed. As stated before, most of the missions 

are currently being performed in a 3,200-pound Jet Ranger with a crew of three. Because of HV 

considerations, power requirements, or physical size constraints, some mission can’t be performed 

safely in a helicopter and have to be done by a man climbing a tower or pole, or someone going into a 

place on foot where gas is leaking. Opposed to the current procedures employed, we believe that the 

lightweight, fuel-less aircraft remotely piloted from a safe distance, is a much safer and more practicable 

means of conducting these niche operations. 

The operations proposed by this exemption request require that operations be conducted in close 

proximity to structures. The Petitioner understands the need to keep aircraft at a safe distance from the 

general public, but 500 feet is the minimum for student pilots operating a 10,000-pound multiengine 

airplane with 200 gallons of highly flammable fuel onboard. Even a 10,000-pound helicopter operated 

by a student pilot can fly closer than that to persons on the surface. The Petitioner argues that a 20-

pound multirotor aircraft with a sextuple-redundancy powerplant operating at a maximum speed of 30 

mph would pose much less of a hazard than either of these previous examples. 

Our affiliated company has previously had a waiver issued under Order 8900.1, Volume 3, Chapter 7, 

Section 1, Paragraph 3-185 C and F, which allowed flight in fixed wing aircraft as close as 200 feet from 

persons, with no restrictions regarding distances from vessels, vehicles, or structures. The Petitioner 

believes that an equivalent level of safety can be achieved with the practices and safeguards contained 

in its Operating Manual. 

Under paragraph (c), the Petitioner requests that no restrictions with regard to minimum distances from 

structures, vessels, and vehicles, and a 200-foot minimum distance from persons not associated with the 

UAS operation be granted. Petitioner further requests that with regard to crew required for the 

operation of the UAS, no minimum distance be required. 

Our parent company operates helicopters over congested areas in compliance with 91.119(a), which 

states in pertinent part that if “a power unit fails, an emergency landing without undue hazard to 

persons or property on the surface” and (d). Since our operations are conducted directly above the 

utility right-of-way (ROW), even though we operate below the altitudes of 91.119(b) or (c), we can 

always land on their easement, and therefore cause no undue hazard to persons or property on the 

surface. Our proposed UAS operation will operate under those same parameters. We propose that the 

UAV fly at or below 100’ AGL, and wholly within the lateral boundaries of the utility’s right-ofway/easement. 
7

Our UAS has three pairs of opposing powerplants, and it will automatically and instantly match the 

thrust of the opposing powerplant in the event of a loss of power. Under this condition, it maintains full 

controllability and adequate power to affect a normal landing on the ROW. Should the craft lose GPS 

data, it will automatically enter a preprogrammed descent and land protocol. If the control link 

between the UAS and the PIC should be compromised, it will automatically initiate a return-to-launch 

(return to home) maneuver. 

We have discussed this potential enterprise with the electric utility company engineers, and they feel 

certain that because our craft is relatively small and is mostly made from non-conductive materials, that 

it poses no serious threat to any of their high-voltage components. Conversely, these high-voltage 

transmission lines and their electromagnetic fields don’t pose any significant threat to the 

electronics/communication links onboard the aircraft. Obviously, we won’t operate at such a close 

proximity that the UAV’s controllability is compromised.

With respect to operating the UAS from a moving vehicle, the Petitioner believes and it has been 

demonstrated using model aircraft that the closer the PIC is to the aircraft, the more precise control he 

has over the craft. Additionally the closer he is to the aircraft the earlier he can detect an anomaly, and 

can react to it therefore mitigating any potential adverse effects. Our proposed operation requires the 

aircraft to fly in close proximity to powerlines and other such structures, and it makes no sense for the 

PIC to have to continuously relocate and conduct separate missions each time the aircraft moves a few 

hundred feet. Control of the aircraft from a moving vehicle enhances safety under this scenario; 

therefore we request that we not have this restriction.

As stated earlier, the requirement of a 20-minute fuel reserve for rotorcraft, which is the more 

appropriate aircraft to equate a multirotor to, is not germane to our operation because a rotorcraft’s 

fuel may not be usable, and is subject to operation of pumps and other devices and systems that may 

actually limit its availability. Out of trim (uncoordinated) flight can limit fuel’s availability, and in 

turbulent conditions, sloshing may cause intermittent power surges. All these factors that contribute to

the 20-minute reserve aren’t relevant to electric-powered aircraft, which have no limitations on the 

availability of its power.

Also, the regulation states that prior to beginning a flight the rotorcraft have enough fuel to fly to the 

point of intended landing and to fly afterwards for 20 minutes. Since in our typical scenario the 

departure point and landing point are the same, no fuel is required to fly between those points, so prior 

to beginning the flight the only fuel required to be onboard is 20 minutes. The regulation does not state 

how much if any, fuel has to be in reserve upon landing. Our UAV has 18 minutes of battery life, which 

should be sufficient to begin a flight, and we propose to land with 20% or 3.5 minutes held in reserve. 

20% voltage is a level that allows for full power with reserve, which the Petitioner believes meets or 

exceeds the fuel requirements of 91.151.
8

Publication Summary

Pursuant to 14 CFR Part 11, the following summary is provided for publication in the Federal Register

Petitioner seeks an exemption from the following rules:

 14 CFR part 21 – Certification procedures for products and parts

 14 CFR 45.23(b) – Display of marks

 14 CFR 61.133(a) – Commercial pilot privileges and limitations 

 14 CFR 91.7(a) – Civil aircraft airworthiness

 14 CFR 91.7(b) – Civil aircraft airworthiness

 14 CFR 91.9(b)(2) – Civil aircraft flight manual, marking, and placard requirements

 14 CFR 91.103 – Preflight action

 14 CFR 91.109(a) – Flight instruction; simulated instrument flight and certain flight tests

 14 CFR 91.119(b) – Minimum safe altitudes, over congested areas

 14 CFR 91.119(c) – Minimum safe altitudes, over other than congested areas

 14 CFR 91.121 – Altimeter settings

 14 CFR 91.151(a) – Fuel requirements for flight in VFR conditions

 14 CFR 91.203(a) and (b) – Civil aircraft: Certifications required

 14 CFR 91.405(a) – Maintenance required

 14 CFR 91.409(a)(2) – Inspections 

 14 CFR 91.417(a) and (b) – Maintenance records

The purpose of the proposed exemption is for the operation of UAS weighing less than 55 pounds for 

the inspection of powerlines and pipelines and associated equipment. These aircraft will be operated

above the utility’s right-of-ways below 400 feet AGL. The maximum speed is 30 mph, and they will be 

operated by visual line of sight with the pilot. Additionally, a visual observer will maintain a vigil for 

other aircraft and incursions into the proposed flight area. All flights will be conducted in daytime VMC 

by pilots holding at least a Private Pilot Certificate and a minimum of a current Class 3 Medical 

Certificate. Additionally, the Pilot In Command will maintain currency requirements of FAR 61.56 and 

61.57.

Respectfully submitted,

Zane Anderson, President

Airborne Information Systems
9

Aircraft

The aircraft the Petitioner purposes is a DJI S900, equipped with a DJI A2 flight controller/autopilot, 

capable of preprogrammed autonomous functions, including:

 Auto hover

 Auto descent and land 

 Auto orientation

 Rotation around a GPS waypoint

 Multiple assignable waypoint flight planning

Among the built-in safety features of the S900 are:

 Automatic compensation upon loss of a power unit

 Upon loss of GPS signal, the aircraft will conduct an autonomous emergency landing without any 

action by the PIC.

 Upon loss of control link, the aircraft will automatically conduct a “return to home” (return to 

launch) procedure.

 When low voltage is indicated, the aircraft will automatically enter a descend and land 

procedure.

Telemetry linked to the pilot’s display includes:

 Altitude (AGL)

 Speed (Knots)

 Distance from home (Feet)

 Battery life (Percent)

Physical Specifications

 Diagonal Dimension 35.4 inches

 Height 14.2 inches

 Takeoff Weight 10.4 ~ 18.1 pounds

 Hover Time 18min @ 15 pounds TO Weight