HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP

BEFORE THE 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

___________________________________________________

Robot & Vision, Inc., d/b/a R4Robotics

Petitioner. Docket No. FAA-2015-_____

PETITION OF ROBOT & VISION, INC., d/b/a R4ROBOTICS

FOR SUMMARY GRANT EXEMPTION FROM CERTAIN FEDERAL AVIATION REGULATIONS 

TO OPERATE UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS (UAS) PURSUANT TO SECTION 333 OF THE 

FAA MODERNIZATION AND REFORM ACT OF 2012

Lisa Ellman

Matthew Clark

Hogan Lovells US LLP

555 13th Street, N.W.

Washington, DC 20004

Phone: 202-637-6934 / -5659

Fax: 202-637-5910

lisa.ellman@hoganlovells.com

matt.clark@hoganlovells.com

Counsel for Robot & Vision, Inc., d/b/a R4Robotics 

DATE: November 23, 2015
HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF PROPOSED SMALL UAS 

OPERATIONS.......................................................................................................................... 3

2. BACKGROUND OF PETITIONER .......................................................................................... 4

3. PROPOSED UAS AND CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS................................................... 5

3.1 Conditions and limitations regarding the proposed UAS ..................................... 7

3.2 Conditions and limitations regarding the proposed UAS operations ................. 8

3.3 Conditions and limitations regarding the PIC and other 

crewmember qualifications and training................................................................. 11

3.4 Conditions and limitations regarding R4 manuals related to UAS 

operations................................................................................................................... 11

4. REQUEST FOR DETERMINATION UNDER SECTION 333 OF FMRA ................................ 14

5. INFORMATION REQUIRED BY 14 C.F.R. § 11.81 TO SUPPORT A PETITION 

FOR EXEMPTION.................................................................................................................... 14

5.1 Contact information:.................................................................................................. 14

5.2 The specific section or sections of the FAR from which R4 seeks an 

exemption:.................................................................................................................. 15

5.3 The extent of relief sought and the reason relief is sought:................................. 15

5.4 Reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest: ................... 27

5.5 Reasons why granting the exemption would not adversely affect 

safety, or how the exemption would provide a level of safety at 

least equal to that provided by the rule from which exemption is 

sought: ........................................................................................................................ 27

5.6 Summary that can be published in Federal Register, including the 

rule from which exemption is sought, and a brief description of the 

nature of the exemption sought:.............................................................................. 29

5.7 Additional information that supports request:....................................................... 29

5.8 Request to exercise the privileges of the exemption outside the 

U.S.: ............................................................................................................................. 29

5.9 Attachments: .............................................................................................................. 29

6. CONCLUSION.......................................................................................................................... 29
HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP

3

1. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF PROPOSED SMALL UAS OPERATIONS

Pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (“FMRA”) and 14 

C.F.R. (“FAR”) Part 11, Robot & Vision, Inc., d/b/a R4Robotics (“R4”) seeks an exemption from 

certain sections of the FAR (detailed below in Sections 5.2 and 5.3) to allow commercial operation of 

small unmanned aircraft systems (i.e., “small unmanned aircraft” or “UAS”) for aerial data collection. 

Specifically, R4 seeks to operate the following proprietary vehicles: Small R4 Roller, Large R4 

Roller, R4 Industrial Model—Standard Quad configuration, R4 Industrial Model—Standard Hexa 

configuration, R4 Industrial Model—Long Endurance & High Payload Quad configuration, and the 

Xamen Technologies LE4-8X Dual ATEX Model (collectively referred to as “R4 proprietary 

vehicles”). In addition to these proprietary vehicles, R4 requests that it be allowed to operate any 

UAS that has previously been approved for operations under an exemption to Section 333 of FMRA. 

R4 submits that there is no practical value in requiring an exemption holder to seek to amend its 

exemption (and the FAA to evaluate that request) every time it wants to operate a UAS that the FAA 

has already found merits a waiver from the statutory requirement that the aircraft have an 

airworthiness certificate under Section 333. To the extent that the FAA determines that each UAS 

model must be listed in the exemption, R4 requests that it be allowed to operate the following 

commercially available vehicles in addition to the R4 proprietary vehicles: the DJI Phantom 2 Vision, 

DJI Phantom 3, DJI Inspire 1, DJI Spreading Wings S800, DJI Spreading Wings S900, DJI 

Spreading Wings S1000, DJI Spreading Wings S1000+, DJI F550 FlameWheel, DJI F450 

FlameWheel, 3D Robotics Solo, 3D Robotics X8, 3D Robotics X8+, 3D Robotics Iris, 3D Robotics 

Iris+, 3D Robotics X8-M, 3D Robotics Aero-M, 3D Robotics Spektre Industrial Multi-Rotor Aerial 

Vehicle, Draganflyer X4-ES, Ascending Technologies (AscTec) Falcon 8, Aeryon Labs SkyRanger, 

Aeryon Scout, Altus X-4, Altus X-8, and the Sky Flight Robotics Mantra Ray UAS (collectively 

referred to as “commercially available UAS vehicles”). R4 respectfully submits that this Petition 

qualifies for expedited approval, as the FAA has previously issued grants of exemption in 

circumstances similar in all material respects to those presented herein. 
HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP

4

As explained below, R4’s proposed UAS operations will comply with the conditions and 

limitations imposed in recent summary grant exemptions. See, e.g., Exemption No. 12794 

(September 9, 2015; Docket FAA-2015-2647) (“Aeronautic Imagery Exemption”); Exemption No. 

11741 (June 5, 2015; Docket FAA-2015-0892) (“Witt Tech Exemption”); Exemption No. 11691 (May 

26, 2015; Docket FAA-2015-0119) (“OpenSky Drones Exemption”). Compliance with these 

conditions and limitations will ensure that the proposed operations do not adversely affect safety and 

will provide an equivalent or greater level of safety than that provided by the rules from which 

exemption is sought. See FAR § 11.81. Given R4’s agreement to comply with these conditions and 

limitations, and given that this Petition is similar in all material respects to previously filed petitions 

that have been granted on a summary grant basis, and that the proposed UAS operations fall within 

the “aerial data collection” category of use permitted by numerous summary grant exemptions, no 

new precedent would be set by granting the requested exemption, and any delay in the FAA’s acting 

on this Petition would be detrimental to R4 and delay its research and implementation of these use 

cases. Accordingly, and consistent with the Aeronautic Imagery Exemption, at 1, the Witt Tech 

Exemption, at 1, and the OpenSky Drones Exemption, at 1, good cause exists for the FAA to move 

forward with consideration of this Petition and the grant of the requested exemptions without 

publishing a summary of the Petition in the Federal Register.

In addition to this Petition for Exemption, R4 will also submit a technical data package for the 

R4 proprietary vehicles under separate cover. R4 submits this technical data package as a 

confidential document under separate cover pursuant to FAR § 11.35(b), as the material contains 

confidential commercial and proprietary information that R4 has not and will not share with others. 

The information contained in the technical data package is not generally available to the public and 

is protected from release under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552 et seq.

2. BACKGROUND OF PETITIONER 

R4 has its roots in Vision Guided Robotics, predominantly in the Automotive and Food 

Industries. As early as 2012, R4 sponsored universities seeking to enable UAS related 

technologies. For example, the “Roller” was co-developed with IIT-Chicago and R4 has 
HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP

5

commercialized the product and holds the commercial rights. Other co-operations exist with 

European companies (EXABOTICS, WidaCom) for proven frame, sensor, and data transmission 

technologies. The founding company was joined by the U.S. Champion for remote control gliders 

with thousands of hours in the airspace. R4 is the first company for contract testing with the 

Michigan branch of the NUAIR test site, which also provides licensed and experienced pilots and 

test facilities. 

R4’s presently targeted markets are in infrastructure, especially Utilities and in Security 

markets, including law enforcement SWAT teams. R4 is one of the few companies with a complete 

range of smaller to larger copters. The caged “Rollers” are ideal for close quarters SWAT team 

situations or for inspecting utility poles closely surrounded by trees. The larger payload copters are 

ideal for inspection of high voltage transmission towers or other infrastructure. With its worldwide 

partnerships, its own developments and ongoing research with universities and FAA test sites, R4 is 

flexible enough and poised to answer the ever developing needs in the new UAS field.

3. PROPOSED UAS AND CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS

The FAA is familiar with and has already determined that all but one of the commercially 

available UAS vehicles chosen by R4 meet the requirements of Section 333 of FMRA due to their 

weight, speed and operational capabilities. See e.g.,

 DJI Phantom 2 Vision: Exemption No. 

11768 to Copper City Aviation Services 

LLC 

 DJI Phantom 3: Exemption No. 11788 to 

Birds Eye Aerial Photography, Inc.

 DJI Phantom 1: Exemption No. 11577 to 

HAZON Solutions

 DJI Spreading Wings S800: Exemption 

No. 11606 to Aerial Appeal

 DJI Spreading Wings S900: Exemption 

No. 11710 to Fly Low Aero

 DJI Spreading Wings S1000: Exemption 

No. 11633 to Principia Inc.

 DJI Spreading Wings S1000+: 

Exemption No. 11777 to SkyGizmo

 DJI F550 FlameWheel: Exemption No. 

11318 to Micro Drone Vision, Inc.

 3D Robotics X8: Exemption No. 11521 to 

SkyWard IO, Inc.

 3D Robotics X8+: Exemption No. 11626 

to Olssson Associates

 3D Robotics Iris: Exemption No. 11533 

to AviTronics Integrated Solutions LLC

 3D Robotics Aero-M: Exemption No. 

11626 to Olsson Associates
HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP

6

 3D Robotics X8-M: Exemption No. 12073 

to Crossview Concepts Corporation, Inc.

 3D Robotics Spektre Industrial MultiRotor Aerial Vehicle: Exemption No. 

11206 to BNSF Railway Co.

 Draganflyer X4-ES: Exemption No. 

11281 to Draganfly Innovations, Inc. 

 Ascending Technologies (AscTec)

Falcon 8: Exemption No. 11277 to 

Advanced Aerial Inspection Resources

 Aeryon Labs SkyRanger: Exemption No. 

11259 to the Dow Chemical Company

 Aeryon Scout: Exemption No. 11436 to 

Unmanned Experts, Inc.

 Altus X-4: Exemption No. 11172A to 

Blue-Chip Unmanned Aerial Solutions, 

Inc. 

 Altus X-8: Exemption No. 11172A to 

Blue-Chip Unmanned Aerial Solutions, 

Inc. 

The FAA has found the following shared characteristics of the commercially available UAS 

vehicles chosen by R4 to warrant approval for a grant of exemption:

 They all weight less than 55 pounds including payload;

 They all have the capability to operate safely after experiencing certain in-flight 

contingencies or failures and use an auto-pilot system to maintain UAS stability and 

control. 

 The radio frequencies used for operations and control of the UAS comply with the 

Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) and other appropriate government 

oversight agency requirements; and

 The UAS all operate at a speed of 87 knots or less.

All the R4 proprietary vehicles and the Sky Flight Robotics Mantra Ray UAS also meet the 

requirements of Section 333 of FMRA due to their weight, speed and operational capabilities. A 

brief summary of the design specifications for the R4 proprietary vehicles and the Sky Flight 

Robotics Mantra Ray UAS are located in Appendices A and B of this Petition. Additional details for 

the R4 proprietary vehicles are also located in the technical data package, which will be submitted 

under separate cover. 

The small UAS operations proposed in this Petition will be subject to the following conditions 

and limitations. As noted above, these conditions and limitations are the same conditions and 

limitations as those contained in previously granted Section 333 exemptions, including recent 

summary grant exemptions. To facilitate the FAA’s review of this Petition, R4 provides a chart at the 

end of this Section 3 cross-referencing the conditions and limitations from the Aeronautic Imagery 
HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP

7

Exemption and OpenSky Drones Exemption, with the corresponding conditions and limitations 

outlined below. Collectively, these conditions and limitations ensure that the proposed UAS 

operations will not adversely affect safety and will provide at least an equivalent level of safety to the 

rules from which exemption is sought.

3.1 Conditions and limitations regarding the proposed UAS

Each UAS operated under the exemption will be subject to the following conditions and 

limitations:

3.1.1 Operations under the exemption will be limited to the Small R4 Roller, Large R4 

Roller, R4 Industrial Model—Standard Quad configuration, R4 Industrial Model—

Standard Hexa configuration, R4 Industrial Model—Long Endurance & High 

Payload Quad configuration, Xamen Technologies LE4-8X Dual ATEX Model, DJI 

Phantom 2 Vision, DJI Phantom 3, DJI Inspire 1, DJI Spreading Wings S800, DJI 

Spreading Wings S900, DJI Spreading Wings S1000, DJI Spreading Wings 

S1000+, DJI F550 FlameWheel, DJI F450 FlameWheel, 3D Robotics Solo, 3D 

Robotics X8, 3D Robotics X8+, 3D Robotics Iris, 3D Robotics Iris+, 3D Robotics 

X8-M, 3D Robotics Aero-M, 3D Robotics Spektre Industrial Multi-Rotor Aerial 

Vehicle, Draganflyer X4-ES, Ascending Technologies (AscTec) Falcon 8, Aeryon 

Labs SkyRanger, Aeryon Scout, Altus X-4, Altus X-8, and the Sky Flight Robotics 

Mantra Ray UAS. The UA will have a gross weight of not more than 55 pounds, 

including energy sources, equipment, and payload. Proposed operations of any 

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

[Aeronautic Imagery Exemption Limitation No. 1; OpenSky Drones Exemption

Limitation No. 1.]1

3.1.2 The UA will not be operated at airspeeds greater than the maximum UA operating 

speed recommended by the UA manufacturer, and in no event will it be operated at 

a speed exceeding 87 knots (100 miles per hour). [Aeronautic Imagery Exemption

Limitation No. 3; OpenSky Drones Exemption Limitation No. 3.]

3.1.3 The UA will be identified by its serial number and registered with the FAA in 

accordance with FAR Part 47. [Aeronautic Imagery Exemption Limitation No. 22; 

OpenSky Drones Exemption Limitation No. 22.] 

 

1

Alternatively, should the FAA agree with R4 that there is no practical value in requiring an exemption 

holder to seek to amend its exemption every time it wants to operate a UAS that the FAA has already 

found merits a waiver from the statutory requirement that the aircraft have an airworthiness certificate 

under Section 333, R4 proposes the following condition and limitation: 

“Operations under the exemption will be limited the Small R4 Roller, Large R4 Roller, R4 

Industrial Model—Standard Quad configuration, R4 Industrial Model—Standard Hexa 

configuration, R4 Industrial Model—Long Endurance & High Payload Quad configuration, 

Xamen Technologies LE4-8X Dual ATEX Model, and other small UAS that the FAA has 

previously approved for operations under an exemption to Section 333 of FMRA. The UA 

will have a gross weight of not more than 55 pounds, including energy sources, 

equipment, and payload.”
HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP

8

3.1.4 The UA will have identification markings in accordance with FAR Part 45, with the 

markings being as large as practicable. [Aeronautic Imagery Exemption Limitation 

No. 22; OpenSky Drones Exemption Limitation No. 22.]

3.2 Conditions and limitations regarding the proposed UAS operations

All UAS operations under the exemption will be subject to the following conditions and 

limitations:

3.2.1 All UAS operations will be covered by an Air Traffic Organization (“ATO”)-issued 

Certificate of Waiver or Authorization (“COA”). All UAS operations will be 

conducted in accordance with the airspace requirements in the ATO-issued COA. 

Should R4 want to conduct operations that cannot be conducted under the terms of 

the blanket COA accompanying this exemption, R4 will apply for a new or 

amended COA. [Aeronautic Imagery Exemption Limitation No. 21; OpenSky 

Drones Exemption Limitation No. 21.]

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

not permitted. [Aeronautic Imagery Exemption Limitation No. 2; OpenSky Drones 

Exemption Limitation No. 2.] 

3.2.3 The UA will not operate within 5 nautical miles of an airport’s reference point 

(“ARP”) as denoted in the current FAA Airport/Facility Directory, 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 agreement with that airport’s 

management is obtained or such an operation is otherwise permitted by a COA 

issued to R4. R4 will make the letter agreement available to the FAA or any law 

enforcement official upon request. [Aeronautic Imagery Exemption Limitation No. 

16; OpenSky Drones Exemption Limitation No. 16.]

3.2.4 The minimum crew for each UAS operation will consist of one Pilot in Command 

(“PIC”) and one Visual Observer (“VO”). The PIC will 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 functions prescribed for the VO. 

[Aeronautic Imagery Exemption Limitation No. 6; OpenSky Drones Exemption

Limitation No. 6.] 

3.2.5 The UA will be operated within the visual line of sight (“VLOS”) of the PIC and VO 

at all times. The PIC will maintain VLOS with 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. [Aeronautic Imagery Exemption Limitations No. 

5, 6; OpenSky Drones Exemption Limitations No. 5, 6.] The VO may be used to 

satisfy the VLOS requirement as long as the PIC always maintains VLOS 

capability. [Aeronautic Imagery Exemption Limitation No. 6; OpenSky Drones 

Exemption Limitation No. 6.] 

3.2.6 During each UAS operation, the PIC and the VO will be able to communicate 

verbally with each other at all times. Electronic messaging or texting by the PIC 

and the VO shall not permitted during UAS flight operations. [Aeronautic Imagery

Exemption Limitation No. 6; OpenSky Drones Exemption Limitation No. 6.]
HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP

9

3.2.7 The PIC will be prohibited from beginning a UAS 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, 

if greater, with the reserve power recommended by the UA manufacturer. 

[Aeronautic Imagery Exemption Limitation No. 20; OpenSky Drones Exemption

Limitation No. 20.] 

3.2.8 Prior to each UA flight, the PIC will conduct a pre-flight inspection and determine 

that the UAS (including the Ground Control Station) is in a condition for safe flight. 

The pre-flight inspection will account for all potential discrepancies, e.g., nonfunctioning components, items or equipment. If the inspection reveals a condition 

that affects the safe operation of the UAS, the UA is prohibited from operating until 

the necessary maintenance has been performed and documented, and the UAS is 

found to be in a condition for safe flight. [Aeronautic Imagery Exemption Limitation 

No. 10; OpenSky Drones Exemption Limitation No. 10.] 

3.2.9 The operator shall be responsible for maintaining and inspecting the UAS to ensure 

that it is in a condition for safe operation. [Aeronautic Imagery Exemption Limitation 

No. 9; OpenSky Drones Exemption Limitation No. 9.]

3.2.10 During each UAS operation, the UA will remain at or below 400 feet above ground 

level (“AGL”). [Aeronautic Imagery Exemption Limitation No. 4; OpenSky Drones 

Exemption Limitation No. 4.]

3.2.11 Altitude reports made to ATC or other persons shall be reported in feet AGL. 

[Aeronautic Imagery Exemption Limitation No. 4; OpenSky Drones Exemption

Limitation No. 4.] 

3.2.12 All UAS operations will be conducted over properties owned or controlled by R4 as 

well as other private or controlled-access property with permission from the 

property owner/controller or authorized representative. For properties not owned 

or controlled by R4, permission from the property owner/controller or authorized 

representative will be obtained for each flight to be conducted. [Aeronautic Imagery

Exemption Limitation No. 27; OpenSky Drones Exemption Limitation No. 27.] 

3.2.13 The UA will operate at least 500 feet from all non-participating persons, vessels, 

vehicles, and structures unless: 

(a) Barriers or structures are present that sufficiently protect non-participating 

persons from the UA and/or debris in the event of an accident. R4 must 

ensure that non-participating persons remain under such protection; and 

if a situation arises where non-participating persons leave such protection 

and are within 500 feet of the UA, flight operations must cease 

immediately in a manner ensuring the safety of non-participating persons; 

and/or 

(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. 
HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP

10

The PIC, VO, operator trainees, and essential persons are not considered nonparticipating persons under this exemption. [Aeronautic Imagery Exemption

Limitation No. 26; OpenSky Drones Exemption Limitation No. 26.] 

3.2.14 All UAS operations will take place during visual meteorological conditions (“VMC”) 

only. [Aeronautic Imagery Exemption Limitation No. 15; OpenSky Drones 

Exemption Limitation No. 15.] 

3.2.15 R4 will not operate UAS flights under Special Visual Flight Rules (“SVFR”). 

[Aeronautic Imagery Exemption Limitation No. 15; OpenSky Drones Exemption

Limitation No. 15.] 

3.2.16 All UAS operations will take place during daylight hours. UAS operations will not 

be conducted during night, as defined in 14 C.F.R. § 1.1. [Aeronautic Imagery

Exemption Limitation No. 15; OpenSky Drones Exemption Limitation No. 15.] 

3.2.17 During each UAS operation, the UA will avoid, remain clear of, and yield right-ofway to, all manned aviation operations and activities at all times. [Aeronautic 

Imagery Exemption Limitation No. 24; OpenSky Drones Exemption Limitation No. 

24.] 

3.2.18 The UA will 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. [Aeronautic Imagery Exemption Limitation No. 17; OpenSky Drones 

Exemption Limitation No. 17.]

3.2.19 The UAS will not be operated by the PIC from any moving device or vehicle. 

[Aeronautic Imagery Exemption Limitation No. 25; OpenSky Drones Exemption

Limitation No. 25.] 

3.2.20 Any UAS that has undergone maintenance or alterations that affect the UAS 

operation or UA flight characteristics (e.g., replacement of a flight critical 

component) shall undergo a functional test flight prior to conducting further 

operations under this exemption. Functional test flights will only be conducted by a 

PIC with a VO, and must remain at least 500 feet from other people. The 

functional test flight will be conducted in such a manner so as to not pose an undue 

hazard to persons and property. [Aeronautic Imagery Exemption Limitation No. 8; 

OpenSky Drones Exemption Limitation No. 8.] 

3.2.21 If the UAS loses communications or its GPS signal during any operation, the UA 

will return to a pre-determined location within the private or controlled-access 

property. [Aeronautic Imagery Exemption Limitation No. 18; OpenSky Drones 

Exemption Limitation No. 18.]

3.2.22 The PIC will adhere to the written emergency procedures in the Manuals, and will 

abort the UAS operation and UA flight in the event of unpredicted obstacles or 

emergencies. [Aeronautic Imagery Exemption Limitation No. 19; OpenSky Drones 

Exemption Limitation No. 19.] 

3.2.23 The documents used by the operator to ensure the safe operation and flight of the 

UAS and any documents required under 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.9 and 91.203 will be 

available to the PIC at the Ground Control Station of the UAS at any time the UA is 

operating, and will be made available to the FAA or any law enforcement official 
HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP

11

upon request. [Aeronautic Imagery Exemption Limitation No. 23; OpenSky Drones 

Exemption Limitation No. 23.]

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

boundaries of the operational area as defined by the applicable COA will be 

reported to the FAA’s UAS Integration Office (AFS-80) within 24 hours. Accidents 

will be reported to the National Transportation Safety Board (“NTSB”) per 

instructions contained on the NTSB website: www.ntsb.gov. [Aeronautic Imagery

Exemption Limitation No. 28; OpenSky Drones Exemption Limitation No. 28.] 

3.3 Conditions and limitations regarding the PIC and other crewmember 

qualifications and training

The PIC and other crewmembers for each UAS operation under the requested exemption 

will be subject to the following conditions and limitations:

3.3.1 The PIC must hold (i) either an ATP, commercial, private, recreational or sport pilot 

certificate; and (ii) a current FAA airman medical certificate or a valid driver’s 

license issued by a State, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, a U.S. 

territory/possession, or the Federal Government. The PIC must satisfy the flight 

review requirements of 14 C.F.R. § 61.56 in an aircraft for which the PIC is rated 

on his or her pilot certificate. [Aeronautic Imagery Exemption Limitation No. 13; 

OpenSky Drones Exemption Limitation No. 13.] 

3.3.2 R4 will not permit any PIC to operate the UAS 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 C.F.R. § 61.51(b). Flights for the purposes of training R4’s PICs and VOs 

(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 will be permitted under the terms of this exemption. These 

training operations, however, may only be conducted during dedicated training 

sessions. [Aeronautic Imagery Exemption Limitation No. 14; OpenSky Drones 

Exemption Limitation No. 14.] 

3.3.3 During training, proficiency, and experience-building flights, all persons not 

essential for flight operations are considered non-participants, and the PIC shall 

operate the UA with appropriate distance from non-participants in accordance with 

14 C.F.R. § 91.119. [Aeronautic Imagery Exemption Limitation No. 14; OpenSky 

Drones Exemption Limitation No. 14.]

3.4 Conditions and limitations regarding R4 manuals related to UAS operations

R4 has the manufacturer’s manuals and/or technical data packages for the selected UAS 

platforms (collectively, the “Manuals”). The Manuals will be subject to the following limitations and 

conditions:
HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP

12

3.4.1 The Operating Documents2 must be accessible during UAS operations and made 

available to the FAA upon request. If a discrepancy exists between the conditions 

and limitations in the exemption and the procedures outlined in the other Operating 

Documents, the conditions and limitations in the exemption take precedence and 

must be followed. Otherwise, R4 must follow the procedures as outlined in the 

Operating Documents. [Aeronautic Imagery Exemption Limitation No. 7; OpenSky 

Drones Exemption Limitation No. 7.]

3.4.2 R4 may update or revise its Operating Documents, and it is R4’s responsibility to 

track such revisions and present updated and revised Operating Documents to the

FAA or any law enforcement official upon request. R4 must also present updated 

and revised Operating Documents if it petitions for an extension or amendment of 

the exemption. If R4 determines that any update or revision would affect the basis 

upon which the FAA granted the requested exemption, then R4 must petition for an 

amendment to the exemption. R4 will contact the FAA’s UAS Integration Office 

(AFS-80) if questions arise regarding updates or revisions to the Operating 

Documents. [Aeronautic Imagery Exemption Limitation No. 7; OpenSky Drones 

Exemption Limitation No. 7.]

3.4.3 Each UAS operated under the exemption will comply with all manufacturer safety 

bulletins. [Aeronautic Imagery Exemption Limitation No. 12; OpenSky Drones 

Exemption Limitation No. 12.]

3.4.4 R4 will follow the UAS manufacturer’s maintenance, overhaul, replacement, 

inspection, and life limit requirements for the UAS and UAS components. 

[Aeronautic Imagery Exemption Limitation No. 11; OpenSky Drones Exemption

Limitation No. 11.]

In sum, R4’s operations under this exemption will be subject to the same conditions and 

limitations imposed in the summary grant Aeronautic Imagery Exemption and OpenSky Drones 

Exemption.

CROSS-REFERENCES

Aeronautic Imagery Exemption Limitation No.

OpenSky Drones Exemption Limitation No.

Petition Limitation No.

1 3.1.1

2 3.2.2

3 3.1.2

 

2

“Operating Documents” means this exemption, the Manuals, and all other documents needed by 

R4 to operate the UAS and conduct its operations in accordance with the conditions and limitations stated 

in this grant of exemption. [Aeronautic Imagery Exemption Limitation No. 7; OpenSky Drones Exemption

Limitation No. 7.]
HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP

13

4 3.2.10, 3.2.11

5 3.2.5

6 3.2.4, 3.2.5, 3.2.6

7 3.4.1, 3.4.2

8 3.2.20

9 3.2.9

10 3.2.8

11 3.4.4

12 3.4.3

13 3.3.1

14 3.3.2, 3.3.3

15 3.2.14, 3.2.15, 3.2.16

16 3.2.3

17 3.2.18

18 3.2.21

19 3.2.22

20 3.2.7

21 3.2.1

22 3.1.3, 3.1.4

23 3.2.23

24 3.2.17

25 3.2.19

26 3.2.13

27 3.2.12
HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP

14

28 3.2.24

4. REQUEST FOR DETERMINATION UNDER SECTION 333 OF FMRA

In accordance with FMRA Section 333, R4 requests that the Secretary of Transportation 

determine that its proposed small UAS operations (i) do not create a hazard to users of the National 

Airspace System or the public, and (ii) do not pose a threat to national security. R4 further requests 

that, based on the Secretary’s determination, the FAA determine – as it did in the Aeronautic 

Imagery Exemption and the OpenSky Drones Exemption – that relief from FAR Part 21 and any 

associated noise certification and testing requirements of FAR Part 36 is not necessary for the UAS 

operations proposed in this Petition.

3

5. INFORMATION REQUIRED BY 14 C.F.R. § 11.81 TO SUPPORT A PETITION FOR 

EXEMPTION

As required by FAR § 11.81, R4 provides the following information in support of this Petition:

5.1 Contact information:

Name: R4 submits this Petition for Exemption, through counsel, Lisa Ellman, and 

Matthew Clark

Mailing address: Lisa Ellman and Matthew Clark

 Counsel for Robot & Vision, Inc., d/b/a R4Robotics

 Hogan Lovells US LLP

 555 13th Street, NW

 Washington, DC 20004

Telephone/Facsimile number:

(T) 202-637-6934 (Ellman) / 703-610-6154 (Clark)

(F) 202-637-5910 

 

3 Aeronautic Imagery Exemption, at 2; OpenSky Drones Exemption, at 2. If the FAA concludes 

that the UAS operations proposed in this Petition require an exemption from FAR Parts 21 and/or 36, 

then R4 requests that the FAA include that relief in the exemption.
HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP

15

E-mail addresses:

lisa.ellman@hoganlovells.com

matt.clark@hoganlovells.com

5.2 The specific section or sections of the FAR from which R4 seeks an 

exemption:

FAR Description

§ 61.23(a) and (c) Medical certificates: Requirement and Duration.

§ 61.101(e)(4) and (5) Recreational pilot privileges and limitations.

§ 61.113(a) and (b) Private pilot privileges and limitations: Pilot in 

command.

§ 61.315(a), (c)(2), and (c)(3) What are the privileges and limits of my sport 

pilot certificate?

§ 91.7(a) Civil aircraft airworthiness.

§ 91.119(c), (d) Minimum safe altitudes: General.

§ 91.121 Altimeter settings.

§ 91.151 Fuel requirements for flight in VFR conditions.

§ 91.405(a) Maintenance required.

§ 91.407(a)(1) Operation after maintenance, preventive 

maintenance, rebuilding, and inspections.

§ 91.409(a)(1) and (2) Inspections.

91.417(a) and (b) Maintenance records.

5.3 The extent of relief sought and the reason relief is sought: 

R4 intends to conduct aerial data collection by operating the small UAS models described 

herein. By way of example, the proposed aerial data collection activities, includes, but is not limited 

to, aeronautical research and development activities, marketing and product demonstrations, aerial 

inspection, aerial survey and remote sensing, precision agriculture, capturing high-resolution 

imagery of infrastructure to include items such as elevated oil/gas pipelines, powerlines/power 

infrastructure, wells, tanks, flare stacks, columns, tower structures, antenna systems, tall 

monuments, water towers, dams, power transmission or communication systems, wind turbines, 

agricultural silos, signs/billboards, light poles, bridges, rooftops, building façades, and other industrial 

plant/site infrastructure. In order to be able to conduct these UAS operations, R4 petitions the FAA, 

pursuant to FAR §§ 11.61(b), 11.63(a), and 11.81(b), for an exemption from the following FAR for 

the reasons noted:
HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP

16

FAR § 61.23(a) and (c) -– Medical certificates: Requirement and Duration.

FAR § 61.101(e)(4) and (5) – Recreational pilot privileges and limitations.

The regulation states, in relevant part:

(e) Except as provided in paragraphs (d) and (i) of this section, a recreational pilot may not 

act as pilot in command of an aircraft—

(4) For compensation or hire;

(5) In furtherance of a business; . . . .

FAR § 61.113(a) and (b) – Private pilot privileges and limitations: Pilot in command.

The regulation states, in relevant part:

(a) Except as provided in paragraphs (b) through (h) of this section, no person who holds a 

private pilot certificate may act as pilot in command of an aircraft that is carrying passengers 

or property for compensation or hire; nor may that person, for compensation or hire, act as 

pilot in command of an aircraft. 

(b) A private pilot may, for compensation or hire, act as pilot in command of an aircraft in 

connection with any business or employment if: 

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

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

(c) ****. 

FAR § 61.315(a) and (c)(2), (c)(3) – What are the privileges and limitations of my sport 

pilot certificate? 

The regulation states, in relevant part:

(a) If you hold a sport pilot certificate you may act as pilot in command of a light-sport 

aircraft, except as specified in paragraph (c) of this section. . . . 

. . . .

(2) For compensation or hire.

(3) In furtherance of a business. . . . 

R4 requests an exemption from these regulations to the extent necessary to permit R4 to 

conduct UAS operations using PICs who hold (i) an FAA private pilot, recreational pilot, or a sport 

pilot certificate, and (ii) an FAA airman medical certificate or a state driver’s license. While R4 

recognizes that the FAA normally requires a PIC to hold a commercial pilot certificate where there is 
HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP

17

compensation either to the pilot or for the operation, R4 requests that the FAA exempt R4 and its 

PICs from this requirement since the use of at least a sport pilot as the PIC for the UAS operations 

under this exemption will be more safe than the use of a commercial pilot for manned aircraft 

operations. Unlike conventional aircraft, R4’s UAS are lightweight, remotely controlled, batterypowered (not fuel/gas), and carry no crew or passengers. The fulfillment of the additional 

requirements for a sport, recreational or private pilot to become qualified as a commercial pilot would 

not lead to any additional safety benefits when UAS operations are involved. 

The differences between the aeronautical knowledge and aeronautical experience

requirements for sport pilots and for commercial pilots are significant in the traditional world of 

manned aircraft. However, no aspect of this incremental additional knowledge or aeronautical 

experience is significant for the daytime, VMC, low-altitude, VLOS, small UAS operations over 

private or controlled access properties with property owner/controller permission as proposed in this 

Petition. Put another way, there are stark and fundamental differences between the type of 

experience and aeronautical knowledge that the PIC of a commercial manned aircraft with 

passengers and property should have, versus the type of experience and aeronautical knowledge 

that the PIC of a small UAS should have, in order to avoid imperiling passengers or property. In 

R4’s case, the small amount of property carried aboard the UA will be R4’s property. While the PIC 

will be compensated, all risk of damage to the property (in fact to the UAS itself) will be borne by R4. 

There is no expectation or need for the PIC of the small UA to have the type of experience or 

aeronautical knowledge that a commercial pilot for a manned aircraft would have. Similarly, the 

differences between the flight proficiency requirements for sport pilots and commercial pilots are not 

substantively significant here where the operations will be conducted strictly during daylight VMC 

conditions, within VLOS, at altitudes no higher than 400 feet AGL. Accordingly, there is no reason to 

require the UAS PIC to have more aeronautical knowledge, experience, and flight proficiency than 

that required for a sport pilot certificate.

Given that R4 plans to operate its UAS over private or controlled-access property and at low 

altitudes during daytime in VMC, the parallel nature of sport pilot aeronautical knowledge 
HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP

18

requirements to those of commercial requirements, the limited airmanship skills necessary to 

operate this small UAS, and the lack of additional safety benefits for the proposed UAS operations 

here resulting from commercial pilot experience, the PIC under this exemption should only be 

required to hold, at most, a sport pilot certificate. Such a condition would be consistent with the 

certificate requirements imposed on the PIC in the Aeronautic Imagery Exemption and the OpenSky 

Drones Exemption.

For these reasons, and consistent with recent summary grant exemptions, R4 requests that 

the FAA grant an exemption to permit R4 to use as PIC of its proposed UAS operations pilots who 

hold at least a sport pilot certificate and either an FAA third-class airman medical certificate or a

state driver’s license, so long as they satisfy the conditions and limitations proposed in this Petition, 

including the PIC qualification and training requirements.

FAR § 91.7(a) – Civil aircraft airworthiness.

The regulation states in relevant part: 

(a) No person may operate a civil aircraft unless it is in an airworthy condition. . . . 

To the extent necessary for the proposed operations in this Petition, R4 requests an 

exemption from this provision.4 The UAS will not require an airworthiness certificate under FAR Part 

21, Subpart H, and thus relief is requested from this regulation. See Exemption No. 11110 

(December 10, 2014; Docket FAA-2014-0367) (“Trimble Exemption”), at 16. An exemption is 

warranted because R4 understands that, notwithstanding the lack of an airworthiness certificate, the 

FAA will consider its “compliance with [R4’s Manuals] to be sufficient means for determining an 

airworthy condition” and that R4 must still determine the UA’s airworthiness prior to each flight based 

on compliance with such Manuals. Trimble Exemption, at 16.

FAR § 91.119(c) and (d)(1) – Minimum safe altitudes: General.

The regulation states:

 

4

 R4 requests exemption from FAR § 91.7(a) based on the relief granted in the Trimble Exemption, 

at 16, 21. However, R4 notes that the FAA determined that no such exemption was needed in Exemption 

No. 11062 (September 25, 2014; Docket FAA-2014-0352) (“Astraeus Exemption”) at 19, 22. 
HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP

19

Except when necessary for takeoff or landing, no person may operate an aircraft below the 

following altitudes: 

...

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

any open air assembly of persons, an altitude of 1,000 feet above the highest obstacle within 

a horizontal radius of 2,000 feet of the aircraft.

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

open water or sparsely populated areas. In those cases, the aircraft may not be operated 

closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure. 

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

conducted without hazard to persons or property on the surface—

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

(b) or (c) of this section, provided each person operating the helicopter complies with 

any routes or altitudes specifically prescribed for helicopters by the FAA; and

...

R4 requests an exemption from this regulation to the extent necessary to permit it to conduct 

UAS operations at altitudes lower than those permitted by FAR § 91.119, since the ability to operate 

at those altitudes are one of the key benefits of using small UAS for these flights. Even at these low 

altitudes, R4’s UAS operations will be conducted at a level of safety at least equal to that which 

would be achieved if larger manned aircraft were to be used at the altitudes required by FAR § 

91.119. 

With respect to paragraph (a), R4 intends to comply with this requirement to the same extent 

as would a manned aircraft, meaning that the UA must operate at an altitude such that the loss of a 

single power unit aboard the UA or used by the UAS would still permit an emergency landing 

“without undue hazard to persons or property on the surface.” R4 agrees with the FAA’s reasoning 

on this issue in the Astraeus Exemption, at 20, and therefore does not believe that relief is required 

from paragraph (a). 

Regarding sub-paragraph (b), R4 plans to operate these small UAS over properties that R4 

owns or controls and other private or controlled-access properties (with owner/controller permission) 

in areas that are not congested or densely populated. Accordingly, R4 does not believe that an 

exemption is necessary from this paragraph (b) covering “congested areas”. 
HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP

20

Finally, with respect to sub-paragraph (c), R4 requests an exemption to allow UAS 

operations down to the surface, both in sparsely populated areas and in “other than congested” 

areas. R4’s UAS operations require lower-level flying, but have a number of self-imposed 

restrictions to ensure at least an equivalent level of safety. See Proposed Limitations 2.2.12 and 

2.2.13. 

Even with a grant of this exemption, the UAS operations will be at least as safe as operations 

by manned aircraft that comply with this paragraph. Flying a manned aircraft, given its weight, size, 

speed, and fuel load, would pose a significant risk relative to the use of a small UA, with a much 

smaller size and lighter weight, operating at much slower speeds, with batteries rather than a 

significant fuel load, at all times within VLOS of the PIC on the ground who has a wide view. 

Accordingly, as the FAA determined in the Trimble Exemption, at 17-18, relief is warranted here 

provided that R4 adheres to its Manuals and the additional conditions and limitations outlined above 

and in the exemption. For these reasons, R4 requests relief from the entirety of paragraph (c), as 

was recently granted in the Aeronautic Imagery Exemption, at 2, and the OpenSky Drones 

Exemption, at 2.

To the extent necessary, R4 also requests relief from paragraph (d)(1), which applies only to 

helicopters and allows operation at lower altitudes only if on a prescribed helicopter route. Flying a 

manned helicopter would pose a significantly greater risk than using a small UA for the proposed 

operations, even if the helicopter is on a specific route or at a specific low height prescribed by the 

FAA. A manned helicopter is much heavier, larger, and faster than a small UA. Moreover, unlike an 

unmanned, battery-powered small UA, the helicopter has people on-board and a fuel load. The 

operation of a small UA at all times within the VLOS of the PIC on the ground would be at least as 

safe as a manned helicopter operation operating in conformity with the requirements of paragraph 

(d)(1), and therefore an exemption from Section 91.119(d)(1) is warranted.

FAR § 91.121 – Altimeter settings.

The regulation states, in relevant part:
HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP

21

(a) Each person operating an aircraft shall maintain the cruising altitude or flight level of that 

aircraft, as the case may be, by reference to an altimeter that is set, when operating—

(1) Below 18,000 feet MSL, to—

(ii) The current reported altimeter setting of a station along the route and 

within 100 nautical miles of the aircraft; 

(ii) If there is no station within the area prescribed in paragraph (a)(1)(i) of 

this section, the current reported altimeter setting of an appropriate available 

station; or 

(iii) In the case of an aircraft not equipped with a radio, the elevation of the 

departure airport or an appropriate altimeter setting available before 

departure; or 

(2) At or above 18,000 feet MSL, to 29.92′′ Hg. 

(b) * * * *.

To the extent necessary to conduct for the proposed operations, R4 requests an exemption 

from the altimeter setting requirements of FAR § 91.121. R4 recognizes the critical importance of 

ensuring that any UA it operates maintains altitude to an accurate reference point. The PIC will 

check the UA altitude reading prior to each takeoff, and will effectively zero the UA’s altitude at the 

point of takeoff, to ensure that measurements of the UA’s altitude are as accurate as possible 

relative to the local elevation. To the extent that this methodology does not satisfy FAR § 91.121 or 

any other regulation, R4 requests an exemption to permit UAS operations using this methodology.

FAR § 91.151 – Fuel requirements for flight in VFR conditions.

The regulation states:

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

wind and forecast weather conditions) there is enough fuel to fly to the first point of intended 

landing and, assuming normal cruising speed—

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

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

(b) No person may begin a flight in a rotorcraft under VFR conditions unless (considering 

wind and forecast weather conditions) there is enough fuel to fly to the first point of intended 

landing and, assuming normal cruising speed, to fly after that for at least 20 minutes. 

R4 requests an exemption from FAR § 91.151 to permit R4 to plan its UAS operations as 

described above. The small UAS operations proposed in this Petition will (i) involve operations in 
HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP

22

which one or more UAS is transported by means other than its own power to the operational 

location, and (ii) begin and end at the operational site, with the takeoff, entire flight, and landing all 

taking place within the immediate proximity of each other while remaining at all times within VLOS of 

the PIC. 

The goal of FAR § 91.151 is to ensure that pilots plan for an extra 20 or 30 minutes of fuel at 

their first intended point of landing in order to account for unexpected possible delays en route and 

at the first planned destination. Many of these delays that plague manned aircraft are simply not an 

issue with the proposed small UAS operations over private or controlled access property, because 

there is virtually no “en route” portion of the flight, and any problems at the point of landing are 

extremely unlikely to cause delays, since a UA can always land just a few feet away if the intended 

point of landing becomes unusable. 

Given the technological and durational limitations of UAS battery power, requiring a full 30 

minutes of reserve “fuel” (battery power) could take up much, if not all, of the time available for R4’s 

UAS operations. R4 believes that using a smaller reserve for UAS flight planning purposes will be at 

least as safe as using the reserves required by FAR § 91.151 for manned aircraft. To that end, and 

consistent with Aeronautic Imagery Exemption Limitation No. 20 and OpenSky Drones Exemption

Limitation No. 20, the PIC under the requested exemption will be prohibited from beginning a UAS 

flight unless (considering wind and forecast weather conditions) there is enough power available 

power for the UA to conduct the intended operation and to operate after that for at least five minutes 

or, if greater, with the reserve power recommended by the UA manufacturer. See Proposed 

Limitation 2.2.7. Such a battery reserve is more than sufficient, particularly in light of the FAA’s 

acceptance of a 5-minute reserve in the Aeronautic Imagery Exemption and the OpenSky Drones 

Exemption. R4 believes that these limitations will further ensure at least an equivalent level of 

safety. Accordingly, R4 requests an exemption from FAR § 91.151 to permit it to plan and conduct 

UAS operations subject to the reserve power limitation explained above. 

FAR § 91.405(a) – Maintenance required. 

The regulation states, in relevant part:
HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP

23

Each owner or operator of an aircraft—

(a) Shall have that aircraft inspected as prescribed in subpart E of this part and shall 

between required inspections, except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, have 

discrepancies repaired as prescribed in part 43 of this chapter;

(b) ****.

R4 requests an exemption from the maintenance and inspection requirements of FAR § 

91.405(a). In the Astraeus Exemption and the Trimble Exemption, the FAA determined that the 

proposed UAS operations required exemption from FAR § 91.405(a), and that the achievement of an 

adequate level of safety required certain conditions and limitations. R4 has proposed in Section 3 of 

this Petition several conditions and limitations related to maintenance and inspections which it 

believes provide a level of safety at least equivalent to that provided by FAR § 91.405(a). For this 

reason, and consistent with the exemptions granted from this section in the Aeronautic Imagery

Exemption and the OpenSky Drones Exemption, R4 requests an exemption from FAR § 91.405(a) to 

permit R4 to conduct UAS operations as proposed in this Petition, subject to the conditions and 

limitations proposed above, without having to perform the inspections and discrepancy repairs 

required by FAR § 91.405(a).

R4 does not believe that an exemption from the remaining paragraphs of FAR § 91.405 is 

required, since R4 will make appropriate logbook entries in aircraft maintenance records in 

accordance with paragraph (b), appropriately mark any inoperative instrument or item of equipment 

for which maintenance has been properly deferred in compliance with paragraph (c), and 

appropriately placard listed discrepancies that include inoperative instruments or equipment in 

compliance with paragraph (d). 

FAR § 91.407(a)(1) – Operation after maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding 

or alteration.

The regulation states:

(a) No person may operate any aircraft that has undergone maintenance, preventive 

maintenance, rebuilding, or alteration unless—

(1) It has been approved for return to service by a person authorized under §43.7 of 

this chapter; and 
HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP

24

(2) The maintenance record entry required by §43.9 or §43.11, as applicable, of this 

chapter has been made. 

. . . . 

R4 requests an exemption from FAR § 91.407(a)(1) to allow the proposed operations without 

having to have the UAS approved for return to service by a person authorized under FAR § 43.7. In 

the Astraeus Exemption, the FAA determined that the proposed UAS operations required exemption 

from FAR § 91.407(a)(1), subject to certain conditions and limitations. R4 has proposed in this 

Petition maintenance-related conditions and limitations which it believes provide a level of safety at 

least equivalent to that provided by FAR § 91.407(a)(1). For this reason, and consistent with the 

exemptions granted from this section in the Aeronautic Imagery Exemption and the OpenSky Drones 

Exemption, R4 requests an exemption from FAR § 91.407(a)(1) to permit R4 to conduct UAS 

operations as proposed in this Petition, subject to the proposed conditions and limitations, without 

having to have the UAS approved for return to service by a person authorized under FAR § 43.7.

R4 does not believe that an exemption from the remaining paragraphs of FAR § 91.407 is 

required, since R4 will require that maintenance record entries are made as required, in compliance 

with paragraph (a)(2), and since no persons will be carried following maintenance performed on the 

UAS, making paragraphs (b) and (c) moot. 

FAR § 91.409(a)(1) and (2) – Inspections.

The regulation states, in relevant part:

(a) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, no person may operate an aircraft 

unless, within the preceding 12 calendar months, it has had—

(1) An annual inspection in accordance with part 43 of this chapter and has been 

approved for return to service by a person authorized by §43.7 of this chapter; or 

(2) An inspection for the issuance of an airworthiness certificate in accordance with 

part 21 of this chapter.

No inspection performed under paragraph (b) of this section may be substituted for any 

inspection required by this paragraph unless it is performed by a person authorized to 

perform annual inspections and is entered as an “annual” inspection in the required 

maintenance records. 

(b)  .
HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP

25

R4 requests an exemption from the inspection requirements of FAR § 91.409(a)(1) and (2). 

In the Astraeus Exemption, the FAA determined that the proposed UAS operations required 

exemption from FAR § 91.409(a)(1) and (2), and that achieving an adequate level of safety required 

certain conditions and limitations. R4 has proposed in this Petition maintenance and inspectionrelated conditions and limitations which it believes provide a level of safety at least equivalent to that 

provided by FAR § 91.409(a)(1) and (2). For this reason, and consistent with the exemptions 

granted from this section in the Aeronautic Imagery Exemption and the OpenSky Drones Exemption, 

R4 requests an exemption to permit R4 to conduct UAS operations as proposed in this Petition, 

subject to the conditions and limitations outlined herein, without having to comply with the inspection 

requirements in FAR § 91.409(a)(1) and (2). 

FAR § 91.417(a) and (b) – Maintenance records.

The regulation states, in relevant part:

(a) Except for work performed in accordance with §§91.411 and 91.413, each registered 

owner or operator shall keep the following records for the periods specified in paragraph (b) 

of this section: 

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

of the 100-hour, annual, progressive, and other required or approved inspections, as 

appropriate, for each aircraft (including the airframe) and each engine, propeller, 

rotor, and appliance of an aircraft. The records must include—

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

work performed; and 

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

(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.
HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP

26

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

last inspection required by the inspection program under which the aircraft 

and its appliances are maintained. 

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

directives including, for each, the method of compliance, the AD or safety 

directive number and revision date. If the AD or safety directive involves 

recurring action, the time and date when the next action is required.

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

alteration to the airframe and currently installed engines, rotors, propellers, 

and appliances.

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

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

work is repeated or superseded by other work or for 1 year after the work is 

performed. 

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

transferred with the aircraft at the time the aircraft is sold. 

(3) A list of defects furnished to a registered owner or operator under §43.11 of this 

chapter shall be retained until the defects are repaired and the aircraft is approved 

for return to service.

(c) ** **.

R4 requests an exemption from the maintenance record requirements in FAR § 91.417(a) 

and (b). The FAA determined in the Astraeus Exemption that the proposed UAS operations required 

exemption from FAR § 91.417(a) and (b), and that an adequate level of safety required certain 

conditions and limitations. R4 has proposed in this Petition maintenance, inspection, and recordsrelated conditions and limitations which it believes provide a level of safety at least equivalent to that 

provided by FAR § 91.417(a) and (b). For this reason, and consistent with the exemptions granted 

from this section in the Aeronautic Imagery Exemption and the OpenSky Drones Exemption, R4 

requests an exemption from FAR § 91.417(a) and (b) to allow the proposed operations, subject to 

the conditions and limitations outlined herein, without having to keep the records described in FAR § 

91.417(a) and (b). 

This Petition does not seek exemption from certain regulations based on the reasoning and 

analysis in prior FAA grants of exemption. To the extent that the FAA concludes that an exemption 
HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP

27

from one or more other provisions of the FAR would be required to allow the proposed operations in 

this Petition, R4 also seeks an exemption from those FAR provisions. 

5.4 Reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest: 

The public interest will be served in several ways by granting R4’s Petition. First, Congress 

has established a national policy that favors early integration of UAS into the National Airspace 

System in controlled, safe working environments such as those proposed in this Petition. Granting 

this Petition helps fulfill Congress’ goal in passing Section 333(a) through (c) of the FMRA; namely, 

the FAA Administrator's assessment of whether certain UAS may operate safely in the NAS before 

completion of the rulemaking required under Section 332 of the FMRA.

The proposed UAS operations in this Petition will also improve safety and reduce risk by 

reducing the public’s exposure to danger associated with aerial data collection activities utilizing fullsize fixed-wing aircraft and rotorcraft. R4’s UAS are battery powered and create no emissions, as 

compared to the much faster, larger, and fuel-powered manned aircraft. Any accident involving R4’s 

lightweight UAS will present significantly less danger to the pilot and other individuals on the ground 

than one involving a full-size helicopter or fixed-wing aircraft.

5.5 Reasons why granting the exemption would not adversely affect safety, or how 

the exemption would provide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by 

the rule from which exemption is sought:

Throughout this Petition, R4 has discussed how it will ensure the safety of other manned 

aircraft and persons and property on the ground if the FAA grants the requested exemptions. 

Consistent with the FAA’s findings in the Aeronautic Imagery Exemption, OpenSky Drones 

Exemption, and the Trimble Exemption, the conditions and limitations proposed in this Petition, 

coupled with the operational protocols for the selected UAS platforms, ensure a level of safety that is 

equal to or better than that provided by the rules from which exemption is sought. 

In general, the risks of any small UAS operation proposed in this Petition interfering with a 

manned aircraft would be minimized by numerous factors, including but not limited to: 

 the low altitude at which the UAS would operate;
HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP

28

 the locations at which the UAS would operate (e.g., remote areas; private or controlled 

access property; away from airports); 

 the small size, light weight, and relatively slow speed of R4’s UAS;

 the restriction on UAS operations to VMC and daytime conditions; and

 the requirement for the UA to be operated within VLOS of the PIC and VO at all times. 

Moreover, R4’s UAS have the capability to operate safely after experiencing certain in-flight 

contingencies or failures and uses an auto-pilot system to maintain UAS stability and control. The 

UAS is also able to respond to a loss of GPS or a lost-link event with a pre-coordinated, predictable, 

automated flight maneuver. These safety features provide an equivalent level of safety compared to 

a manned aircraft performing a similar operation and mitigate the risk of command and control link 

failures.

The risks to persons or property on the ground would be substantially mitigated – if not 

eliminated – by these same factors, as well as the 500-foot set-off from non-participating persons, 

vehicles, and structures absent additional safeguards. Per the conditions and limitations proposed 

in this Petition, (i) the PIC will suspend/abort the UAS operation and UA flight in the event of 

unpredicted obstacles or emergencies in accordance with the Manuals; and (ii) R4 will coordinate 

extensively, as warranted, with the FAA, with local airports, and with property owners to ensure that 

all UAS operations under the exemption are at least as safe as would be manned aircraft operations 

used for similar purposes. 

The conditions and limitations proposed in this Petition (which have been found by the FAA 

to be acceptable for other summary grant exemptions), and the operational safety features of the 

selected UAS platforms ensure that the proposed operations will not interfere with manned aircraft 

and will ensure the safety of persons and property on the ground. For these reasons, granting an 

exemption from each section of the FAR from which relief is sought would not adversely affect 

safety, and would provide a level of safety at least equal to, or greater than, that provided by the rule 

from which exemption is sought.
HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP

29

5.6 Summary that can be published in Federal Register, including the rule from 

which exemption is sought, and a brief description of the nature of the 

exemption sought:

R4 proposes that the FAA use the following as the summary:

Docket No.: FAA-2015-______

Petitioner: R4 Robotics

Sections of 14 CFR: 61.23(a) and (c), 61.101(e)(4) and (5), 61.113(a) and (b), 

61.315(a), (c)(2), and (c)(3), 91.7(a), 91.119(c) and (d)(1), 91.121, 91.151, 91.405(a), 

91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) and (2), and 91.417(a) and (b).

Description of Relief Sought: Petitioner seeks an exemption to conduct small UAS 

operations for aerial data collection.

5.7 Additional information that supports request:

R4 is prepared to provide additional information that the FAA might find helpful, or to answer 

questions in response to any FAA requests. 

5.8 Request to exercise the privileges of the exemption outside the U.S.: 

R4 does not request to exercise the privileges of this exemption outside the United States.

5.9 Attachments:

A summary of the design specifications for the R4 proprietary vehicles is attached as 

Appendix A. R4 will also submit a technical data package for the R4 proprietary vehicles under 

separate cover pursuant to 14 C.F.R. § 11.35(b). 

6. CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, R4 respectfully requests that the FAA grant this Petition for 

Exemption. 
HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP

30

Respectfully submitted, 

Lisa Ellman

Matthew J. Clark5

Hogan Lovells US LLP

Counsel for Robot & Vision, Inc., d/b/a 

R4Robotics 

 

5 Matthew Clark is only licensed to practice law in the Commonwealth of Virginia and his practice is 

limited consistent with Rule 49(c) of the D.C. Court of Appeals.
HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP

31

Appendix A
HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP

32
HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP

33
HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP

34
HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP

35
HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP

36
HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP

37

Appendix B

SKY FLIGHT ROBOTICS 

Manta Ray UAS

Manta Ray Operational Parameters

 Flight Endurance 50 minutes

 Operational Range Miles or Meters 1.5 mile radius

 Average Setup Time at Field 10 minutes

 Weight of the UAS with power source without any payload 3.8 pounds

 Normal MTOW With standard Canon S110 sensor is 4.2 pounds- Micro Class Compliant

 Can be outfitted with other sensors including a live video link back to the GCS

 Maximum Speed 65 kts

 Average Cruise Speed 38 kts

 Minimum Speed 25 kts

 Maximum Ceiling Feet 5000’AGL

 Takeoff Type Hand Launch

 Landing Type Belly / Hi Alpha Approach

 Climb Rate Feet/Minute 2000’

 Descent Rate Feet/Minute 2500’

 Approach Speed Kts. 30Kts

 Turn Rate Degrees/Second 120 Deg/ Sec.

 Minimum Recommended Takeoff Distance Feet 50’ x 20’

 Minimum Recommended Landing Zone (L x W) Feet 150’ x 50’

 Maximum Operational Wind Speed Kts 26 Kts

 Maximum Operational Precipitation Level Light Mist / Snow

 Minimum and maximum operating temperatures 25 deg.F to 110 deg. F

 Transmitter Communication and Control Frequency GHz 900 Mhz & 2.4 GHz.

 Is there any airport or restricted airspace avoidance programs incorporated into the UAS 

platform software? Yes all known airports are shown as know fly zones in a amber color 

with a 5 mile no fly ring around them. The aircraft will not navigate to any waypoint 

within these areas.

 How many decibels does the platform produce? 32 dB at 300 feet altitude, 45 dB at 100 ft 

altitude

 Does the UAS have any GPS-based or accelerometer-based stabilization Technology? Yes 

it has GPS, Magnetic Compass and a three axis gyro system.
HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP

38

Standard Payload - Canon S110 Camera

 Resolution of the specified sensor 12 Mega Pixel

 Weight of the sensor 6.1 oz

 Camera battery 1050 MAH/ 3.9 Wh. @ 3.7 Volts

 Power consumption rate .262 amp

 Maximum time the Camera can be used before recharging the battery 4 Hours

 Minimum and maximum operating temperatures 32F min- 104F max

 File format of the data acquired by the sensor JPEG, RAW, RAW + JPEG / H.264

 Storage capacity of the sensor, average file size of an image 8 GB SD card or larger if 

needed, 5 MB average image file size with JPEG Format

 Recommended software for post processing the images to create an orthomosaic Image 

can be used in all Asri, Pix4D, etc...this is not included with the system

 Sample image below – single image from the camera at 300’ AGL
HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP

39

Sample Image below with ~ 170 images stitched together to form an orthomosaic and also a 

digital surface model (DSM)

Services and Replacement Parts

 Sky Flight Robotics offers various training programs for customers who purchase the Manta 

Ray UAS.

 All parts of the Manta Ray system are available for replacement.

 The system is modular and the components are all interchangeable form one aircraft to 

another. Maintenance is made easy by this modular system.

 Normal Parts of the system to check / maintain Servos, propeller and batteries.

 Recommended repair/maintenance schedule Inspect after each flight and before each 

flight.

 Replacement parts included with the purchase of the UAS platform Two propellers and 

Two batteries.