September 21, 2015

Exemption No. 12926

Regulatory Docket No. FAA−2015−2546

Mr. Corey Huish

7579 Belgian Lion Street

Las Vegas, NV 89193

Dear Mr. Huish:

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your request for exemption. It transmits our 

decision, explains its basis, and gives you the conditions and limitations of the exemption, 

including the date it ends.

By letter posted to the public docket June 29, 2015, you petitioned the Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA) for an exemption. The petitioner requested to operate an unmanned 

aircraft system (UAS) to conduct real estate photography.

See Appendix A for the petition submitted to the FAA describing the proposed operations and 

the regulations that the petitioner seeks an exemption.

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition 

in the Federal Register because the requested exemption would not set a precedent, and any 

delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to the petitioner.

Airworthiness Certification

The UAS proposed by the petitioner is a DJI Phantom 3.

The petitioner requested relief from 14 CFR part 21, Certification procedures for products 

and parts, Subpart H—Airworthiness Certificates. In accordance with the statutory criteria 

provided in Section 333 of Public Law 112−95 in reference to 49 U.S.C. § 44704, and in 

consideration of the size, weight, speed, and limited operating area associated with the 

aircraft and its operation, the Secretary of Transportation has determined that this aircraft 

meets the conditions of Section 333. Therefore, the FAA finds that the requested relief from 
2

14 CFR part 21, Certification procedures for products and parts, Subpart H—Airworthiness 

Certificates, and any associated noise certification and testing requirements of part 36, is 

not necessary.

The Basis for Our Decision

You have requested to use a UAS for aerial data collection1. The FAA has issued grants of 

exemption in circumstances similar in all material respects to those presented in your petition. 

In Grants of Exemption Nos. 11062 to Astraeus Aerial (see Docket No. FAA−2014−0352), 

11109 to Clayco, Inc. (see Docket No. FAA−2014−0507), 11112 to VDOS Global, LLC (see

Docket No. FAA−2014−0382), and 11213 to Aeryon Labs, Inc. (see Docket No. 

FAA−2014−0642), the FAA found that the enhanced safety achieved using an unmanned 

aircraft (UA) with the specifications described by the petitioner and carrying no passengers or 

crew, rather than a manned aircraft of significantly greater proportions, carrying crew in 

addition to flammable fuel, gives the FAA good cause to find that the UAS operation enabled 

by this exemption is in the public interest.

Having reviewed your reasons for requesting an exemption, I find that—

 They are similar in all material respects to relief previously requested in Grant of 

Exemption Nos. 11062, 11109, 11112, and 11213;

 The reasons stated by the FAA for granting Exemption Nos. 11062, 11109, 11112, and 

11213 also apply to the situation you present; and 

 A grant of exemption is in the public interest.

Our 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, Mr. Corey Huish is granted an exemption from 14 CFR 

§§ 61.23(a) and (c), 61.101(e)(4) and (5), 61.113(a), 61.315(a), 91.7(a), 91.119(c), 91.121, 

91.151(a)(1), 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 the petitioner to operate a UAS to perform aerial data collection. 

This exemption is subject to the conditions and limitations listed below.

Conditions and Limitations

In this grant of exemption, Mr. Corey Huish is hereafter referred to as the operator.

 

1 Aerial data collection includes any remote sensing and measuring by an instrument(s) aboard the UA. 

Examples include imagery (photography, video, infrared, etc.), electronic measurement (precision surveying, RF 

analysis, etc.), chemical measurement (particulate measurement, etc.), or any other gathering of data by 

instruments aboard the UA.
3

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.

1. Operations authorized by this grant of exemption are limited to the DJI Phantom 3

when weighing less than 55 pounds including payload. Proposed operations of any 

other aircraft will require a new petition or a petition to amend this exemption.

2. Operations for the purpose of closed-set motion picture and television filming are 

not permitted. 

3. The UA may not be operated at a speed exceeding 87 knots (100 miles per hour). The 

exemption holder may use either groundspeed or calibrated airspeed to determine 

compliance with the 87 knot speed restriction. In no case will the UA be operated at 

airspeeds greater than the maximum UA operating airspeed recommended by the 

aircraft manufacturer.

4. The UA must be operated at an altitude of no more than 400 feet above ground level 

(AGL). Altitude must be reported in feet AGL.

5. 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 airman medical certificate or

U.S. driver’s license.

6. All operations must utilize a visual observer (VO). The UA must be operated within 

the visual line of sight (VLOS) of the PIC and VO at all times. 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; 

electronic messaging or texting is not permitted during flight operations. The PIC 

must be designated before the flight and cannot transfer his or her designation for the 

duration of the flight. The PIC must ensure that the VO can perform the duties 

required of the VO.

7. This exemption and all documents needed to operate the UAS and conduct its 

operations in accordance with the conditions and limitations stated in this grant of 

exemption, are hereinafter referred to as the operating documents. The operating 

documents must be accessible during UAS operations and made available to the 

Administrator upon request. If a discrepancy exists between the conditions and 

limitations in this exemption and the procedures outlined in the operating documents, 

the conditions and limitations herein take precedence and must be followed. 

Otherwise, the operator must follow the procedures as outlined in its operating 

documents. The operator may update or revise its operating documents. It is the 

operator’s responsibility to track such revisions and present updated and revised 

documents to the Administrator or any law enforcement official upon request. The 
4

operator must also present updated and revised documents if it petitions for extension 

or amendment to this grant of exemption. If the operator determines that any update 

or revision would affect the basis upon which the FAA granted this exemption, then 

the operator must petition for an amendment to its grant of exemption. The FAA’s 

UAS Integration Office (AFS−80) may be contacted if questions arise regarding 

updates or revisions to the operating documents.

8. Any UAS that has undergone maintenance or alterations that affect the UAS operation 

or flight characteristics, e.g., replacement of a flight critical component, must undergo 

a functional test flight prior to conducting further operations under this exemption. 

Functional test flights may only be conducted by a PIC with a VO and must remain at 

least 500 feet from other people. The functional test flight must be conducted in such 

a manner so as to not pose an undue hazard to persons and property.

9. The operator is responsible for maintaining and inspecting the UAS to ensure that it is 

in a condition for safe operation.

10. Prior to each flight, the PIC must conduct a pre-flight inspection and determine the 

UAS is in a condition for safe flight. The pre-flight inspection must account for all 

potential discrepancies, e.g., inoperable components, items, or equipment. If the 

inspection reveals a condition that affects the safe operation of the UAS, the aircraft is 

prohibited from operating until the necessary maintenance has been performed and the 

UAS is found to be in a condition for safe flight.

11. The operator must follow the UAS manufacturer’s maintenance, overhaul, 

replacement, inspection, and life limit requirements for the aircraft and 

aircraft components.

12. Each UAS operated under this exemption must comply with all manufacturer 

safety bulletins.

13. Under this grant of exemption, a PIC must hold either an airline transport, 

commercial, private, recreational, or sport pilot certificate. The PIC must also hold a 

current FAA airman medical certificate or a valid U.S. driver’s license issued by a 

state, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, a territory, a possession, or the Federal 

government. The PIC must also meet the flight review requirements specified in 

14 CFR § 61.56 in an aircraft in which the PIC is rated on his or her pilot certificate.

14. The operator may not permit any PIC to operate unless the PIC demonstrates the 

ability to safely operate the UAS in a manner consistent with how the UAS will be 

operated under this exemption, including evasive and emergency maneuvers and 

maintaining appropriate distances from persons, vessels, vehicles and structures. PIC 

qualification flight hours and currency must be logged in a manner consistent with 

14 CFR § 61.51(b). Flights for the purposes of training the operator’s PICs and VOs 
5

(training, proficiency, and experience-building) and determining the PIC’s ability to 

safely operate the UAS in a manner consistent with how the UAS will be operated 

under this exemption are permitted under the terms of this exemption. However, 

training operations may only be conducted during dedicated training sessions. During 

training, proficiency, and experience-building flights, all persons not essential for 

flight operations are considered nonparticipants, and the PIC must operate the UA 

with appropriate distance from nonparticipants in accordance with 14 CFR § 91.119.

15. UAS operations may not be conducted during night, as defined in 14 CFR § 1.1. All 

operations must be conducted under visual meteorological conditions (VMC). Flights 

under special visual flight rules (SVFR) are not authorized.

16. The UA may not operate within 5 nautical miles of an airport reference point (ARP) as 

denoted in the current FAA Airport/Facility Directory (AFD) or for airports not 

denoted with an ARP, the center of the airport symbol as denoted on the current 

FAA-published aeronautical chart, unless a letter of agreement with that airport’s 

management is obtained or otherwise permitted by a COA issued to the exemption 

holder. The letter of agreement with the airport management must be made available 

to the Administrator or any law enforcement official upon request.

17. 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.

18. If the UAS loses communications or loses its GPS signal, the UA must return to a 

pre-determined location within the private or controlled-access property.

19. The PIC must abort the flight in the event of unpredicted obstacles or emergencies.

20. The PIC is prohibited from beginning a flight unless (considering wind and forecast 

weather conditions) there is enough available power for the UA to conduct the 

intended operation and to operate after that for at least five minutes or with the reserve 

power recommended by the manufacturer if greater.

21. Air Traffic Organization (ATO) Certificate of Waiver or Authorization (COA). All 

operations shall be conducted in accordance with an ATO-issued COA. The 

exemption holder may apply for a new or amended COA if it intends to conduct 

operations that cannot be conducted under the terms of the attached COA.

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 

(N−Number) markings in accordance with 14 CFR part 45, Subpart C. Markings must 

be as large as practicable.
6

23. Documents used by the operator to ensure the safe operation and flight of the UAS and 

any documents required under 14 CFR §§ 91.9 and 91.203 must be available to the 

PIC at the Ground Control Station of the UAS any time the aircraft is operating. 

These documents must be made available to the Administrator or any law enforcement 

official upon request.

24. The UA must remain clear and give way to all manned aviation operations and 

activities at all times. 

25. The UAS may not be operated by the PIC from any moving device or vehicle. 

26. All Flight operations must be conducted at least 500 feet from all nonparticipating 

persons, vessels, vehicles, and structures unless:

a. Barriers or structures are present that sufficiently protect nonparticipating persons 

from the UA and/or debris in the event of an accident. The operator must ensure 

that nonparticipating persons remain under such protection. If a situation arises 

where nonparticipating persons leave such protection and are within 500 feet of 

the UA, flight operations must cease immediately in a manner ensuring the safety 

of nonparticipating persons; and

b. The owner/controller of any vessels, vehicles or structures has granted permission 

for operating closer to those objects and the PIC has made a safety assessment of 

the risk of operating closer to those objects and determined that it does not 

present an undue hazard.

The PIC, VO, operator trainees or essential persons are not considered 

nonparticipating persons under this exemption.

27. All operations shall be conducted over private or controlled-access property with 

permission from the property owner/controller or authorized representative. 

Permission from property owner/controller or authorized representative will be 

obtained for each flight to be conducted.

28. Any incident, accident, or flight operation that transgresses the lateral or vertical 

boundaries of the operational area as defined by the applicable COA must be reported 

to the FAA's UAS Integration Office (AFS−80) within 24 hours. Accidents must be 

reported to the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) per instructions 

contained on the NTSB Web site: www.ntsb.gov.

If this exemption permits operations for the purpose of closed-set motion picture and 

television filming and production, the following additional conditions and limitations apply.

29. The operator must have a motion picture and television operations manual (MPTOM) 

as documented in this grant of exemption.
7

30. At least 3 days before aerial filming, the operator of the UAS affected by this 

exemption must submit a written Plan of Activities to the local Flight Standards 

District Office (FSDO) with jurisdiction over the area of proposed filming. The 3-day 

notification may be waived with the concurrence of the FSDO. The plan of activities 

must include at least the following:

a. Dates and times for all flights;

b. Name and phone number of the operator for the UAS aerial filming conducted 

under this grant of exemption;

c. Name and phone number of the person responsible for the on-scene operation of 

the UAS;

d. Make, model, and serial or N−Number of UAS to be used;

e. Name and certificate number of UAS PICs involved in the aerial filming;

f. A statement that the operator has obtained permission from property owners 

and/or local officials to conduct the filming production event; the list of those 

who gave permission must be made available to the inspector upon request;

g. Signature of exemption holder or representative; and

h. A description of the flight activity, including maps or diagrams of any area, city, 

town, county, and/or state over which filming will be conducted and the altitudes 

essential to accomplish the operation.

31. Flight operations may be conducted closer than 500 feet from participating persons 

consenting to be involved and necessary for the filming production, as specified in the 

exemption holder’s MPTOM.

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.
8

This exemption terminates on September 30, 2017, unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

Sincerely,

/s/

John S. Duncan

Director, Flight Standards Service

Enclosures
In the matter of the petition for :

Corey Huish

The petitioner requests relief from the following regulations for the purpose of Real 

Estate Photography.

The petitioner request for an exemption from part 14 CFR part 11 and Section 333 of the 

FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (PL 112-95)

The petitioner supports its request with the following information: 

Unmanned Aircraft System 

The petitioner states that given the size, weight, speed, and limited operating area 

associated with the aircraft to be utilized by the applicant, an exemption from 14 CFR 

part 21, Subpart H (Airworthiness Certificates), subject to certain conditions and 

limitations, is warranted and meets the requirements for an equivalent level of safety 

under 14 CFR part 11 and Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 

2012 (PL 112-95). The petitioner further states that UAS operated without an 

airworthiness certificate in the restricted environment and under the conditions and 

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

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

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

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

less than 55 lbs. fully loaded, flies at a speed of no more than 50 knots, carries neither a 

pilot nor passenger, carries no explosive materials or flammable liquid fuels, and operates 

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

integrated safety features into the design of the UAS, as described in the petitioner’s 

FOPM, to ensure the safety of persons and property within and surrounding the limited 

operating area. The petitioner further describes that, in the event the UAS loses 

communications or its GPS signal, the UA will have the capability to return to a predetermined location within the Security Perimeter and land. It will also have the 

capability to abort a flight in the event of unpredicted obstacles or emergencies. 

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

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

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

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

petitioner asserts that an equivalent level of safety will be provided by having the UA 

marked with the word “experimental” on the fuselage in compliance with 14 CFR § 

45.29(f), in a location where the pilot, observer, and others working with the UA will see 

the identification. 
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. The petitioner also states that it intends to follow any manufacturers’ 

recommended instructions and procedures when those procedures exist for certain 

components of UAS. 

UAS Pilot In Command (PIC) 

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

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

aircraft to have a private pilot’s license rather than a commercial pilot’s license. In 

support of its position, the petitioner argues that, since there are no standards for either 

private or commercial UAS pilot certificates, knowledge of airspace regulations and 

dexterity in the control and operation of the UAS acquired from actual operation of the 

aircraft will be the most important factors in establishing an equivalent level of safety. 

Furthermore, the petitioner explains that, given the restricted and controlled airspace 

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

of the airspace within which the “closed-set filming” operation will take place and how 

that airspace fits into the National Airspace System (NAS). The petitioner also states that 

it cannot be assumed that a commercial pilot, approved to operate a helicopter or fixed 

wing aircraft, has the skill or ability to safely operate an unmanned aerial vehicle, 

operating at 200 feet AGL or lower, within strictly controlled pre-approved airspace. 

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

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

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

consented to the risks associated with being in the operating area. Should there be a 

mishap, the UA being flown pose significantly less of a threat than the helicopters and 

fixed wing aircraft now being employed because they are a fraction of the size, carry no 

flammable fuel, and do not carry crew or passengers. This is in stark contrast to 

conventional aircraft that are flown to the site, carry flammable fuel, carry passengers and 

crew, and operate in a much larger area. 

UAS Operating Parameters 

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

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

200 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 5 feet based upon an equivalent level of safety 

determination. The petitioner asserts that an equivalent level of safety can be achieved 

given the size, weight, and speed of the UAS, as well as the location where it is operated. 

The petitioner states that the UAS will be operated within a safe operating perimeter, the 

boundaries of which will be determined by production personnel and the UAS PIC based 

on the site-specific filming activities and speed of the UAS required for the operation, 
and coordinated with the jurisdictional FAA FSDO and local government officials as 

applicable. The petitioner states that only participating and consenting production 

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

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

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

compared to flight operations with aircraft or rotorcraft weighing far more than its 

maximum 55 lb. UA, and the lack of flammable fuel, any risk associated with its UAS 

operations is far less than those with conventional aircraft operating at or below 500 feet 

AGL. 

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 by the manufacture, including reviewing weather, flight battery 

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

initiation of flight. Additionally, the petitioner states that a briefing will be conducted 

prior to each day’s filming regarding planned UAS operations, and all personnel who will 

be performing duties within the boundaries of the safety perimeter will be required to 

attend. 

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

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

to approximately 10 minutes. The petitioner argues that, given the limitations on the 

UA’s proposed flight area and the location of its proposed operations within a 

predetermined area, a longer time frame for flight in daylight or night VFR conditions is 

reasonable. The petitioner believes that an equivalent level of safety can be achieved by 

limiting flights to 30 minutes or 25% of battery power, whichever occurs first. 

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

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

that an equivalent level of safety will be achieved, as outlined by the manufacture. 

Specifically, the altitude information will be provided to the UAS PIC via a digitally 

encoded telemetric data feed. Prior to each flight, a zero altitude initiation point will be 

established and confirmed for accuracy by the PIC. 

Public Interest 

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

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

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

that the FAA must, by exemption, allow commercial operations of UAS to commence 

immediately.” Also due to the size of the UA and the restricted areas in which the UAS 

will operate, approval of the application presents no national security issue. The 

petitioner states that, given the clear direction in Section 333, the strong equivalent level 

of safety surrounding the proposed operations, and the significant public benefit, 

including enhanced safety, reduction in environmental impacts, and including reduced 
emissions associated with allowing UAS for movie and television operations, granting 

the requested exemptions is in the public interest. 

The FAA's analysis is as follows: 

Unmanned aircraft system (UAS) 

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

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

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

petitioner has demonstrated that its operations would not adversely affect safety 

compared to similar operations conducted with aircraft that have been issued an 

airworthiness certificate under 14 CFR part 21, Subpart H. 

Commercial motion picture and television aerial filming operations with manned aircraft 

are typically conducted with aircraft holding standard airworthiness certificates issued 

under

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

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

original aircraft design. 

Manned helicopters conducting motion picture and television aerial filming can weigh 

6,000 lbs. or more and are operated by an onboard pilot, in addition to other onboard 

crewmembers, as necessary. The petitioner’s UA will weigh less than 55 lbs. with no 

onboard pilot or crew. The pilot and crew will be remotely located from the aircraft. The 

limited weight significantly reduces the potential for harm to participating and 

nonparticipating individuals or property in the event of an incident or accident. The risk 

to an onboard pilot and crew during an incident or accident is eliminated with the use of a 

UA for the aerial filming operation. 

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

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

due to fuel spillage is eliminated. 

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

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

proximity to participating persons. The safety of these individuals is maintained through 

use of an aircraft with standard airworthiness certification under 14 CFR part 21, Subpart 

H, operation of the aircraft by a qualified and competent pilot, and operating according to 

limitations necessary to ensure safety. In these situations, the filming subject and 

production personnel are exposed to risk by virtue of their close proximity to an aircraft 

in flight. Compared to manned aircraft, the UA being operated by the petitioner reduces 

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

weight, operating conditions, and design safety features of the UAS. 
This exemption does not require an electronic means to monitor and communicate with 

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

mitigating the risk of these operations by placing limits on altitude, requiring stand-off 

distance from clouds, permitting daytime operations only, and requiring that the UA be 

operated within visual line of sight and yield right of way to all other manned operations. 

Additionally, the exemption provides that the operator will request a NOTAM prior to 

operations to alert other users of the NAS. 

The petitioner’s UAS has the capability to operate safely after experiencing certain inflight failures. The UA is also able to respond to a lost-link event with a pre-coordinated, 

predictable, automated flight maneuver. With regard to USHPA’s concerns about dual 

control systems, current FAA regulations permit motion picture and television filming 

operations by manned aircraft that do not require a copilot. Additionally, under this 

exemption, the FAA requires that the UAS PIC hold a current third class medical 

certificate. Historically, instances of complete PIC incapacitation are rare. In all other 

cases other than complete incapacitation, the PIC has the ability to terminate the flight 

operation or initiate the automated return to home procedure outlined within the FOPM.