Exemption No. 13465

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION WASHINGTON, DC 20591

In the matter of the petition of

Kansas State University

for an exemption from part 21 and §§ 61.113 (a) and (b), 61.3(d)(2)(iii), 91.7 (a)

, 91.9 (b)(2)

, 91.109, 91.119, 91.121, 91.151 (a)

, 91.203(a) and (b), 91. 4 05(a ), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(2), and 91.417(a) and (b) of
Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations Regulatory Docket No. FAA−2014− 1088

GRANT OF EXEMPTION

By letter dated December 18 , 2014

, 1 Mr. Mark Blanks

, Kansas State University (hereinafter petitioner or operator), 2310 Centennial Road, Salina, Kansas 67401

, petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for an exemption from part 21 , and §§

, 61.3(d ) (2)(iii)

, 61.113(a) and (b)

, 91.7(a), 91.9(b)(2 ) , 91.109

, 91.119, 91.121, 91.151(a), 91.203(a) and (b), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(2), and 91.417(a) and (b) of Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). The petitioner requested to operate several unmanned aircraft system s (UAS) to conduct flight instruction of UAS

.

The petitioner supports its request with the following information:

The petition for exemption de scribing the proposed operation and the regulations from which the petitioner seeks exemption is posted to the docket

. To view the petition, visit http://www.regulations.gov , e nter the regulatory docket number found on the first page of this

1 The petitioner responded to the FAA’s request for information on June 1, 2015.2

document into the search box and click “Search

, ” then click on the “Open Docket Folder” link
next to a result associated with the docket number.

The petitioner has provided the following information along with its petition to support its request for an exemption:

1) Crow Flight Operations and Maintenance Manual 2) Penguin B Flight Operations and Maintenance Manual

The petition and the document s above are hereinafter referred to as the operating documents.

Discussion of Public Comments:

A summary of the petition was published in the Federal Register on January 8, 2015 ( 80 FR
1068 ). The Air Line Pilots Association, International (ALPA) and the N ational Agricultural Aviation Association (NAAA) filed comments oppos ing the petition

ALPA expressed concern regarding several aspects of the petition. ALPA noted that while the anticipated operation will occur below 400 feet above ground l evel ( AGL ) and in predetermined and sterile areas, the petition does not define “predetermined” nor does it offer a means to control the airspace or areas of operation. Specifically, ALPA stated, “there must
be means both to ensure that the sUAS remains within the defin ed airspace and to ensure that
the hazard of other aircraft intruding on the operation is mitigated. Without clear and specific information detailing the flight operations, airspace, environment and location, and mitigations strategies along with the KSU SOP, the petition does not quantify how the equivalent level of safety is being measured and maintained in the NAS. ”

The FAA believes the requirement s to operate within visual line of sight ( VLOS ) and fly no higher than 400 feet AGL which allow the opera tor to see both the aircraft and its operating
environment are sufficient mitigation s to this risk so that the operations will not adversely
affect the safety of the airspace in which the operations occur

.

ALPA noted that the petitioner does not clearly state how the pilot and the observer will be
able to communicate with each other. ALPA stated that when voice communication is used, both the pilot and observer should be able to maintain visual observation of both the aircraft and the area of operation in accordance with FAA N otice 8900.227

. NAAA stated UAS observers must be present and able to communicate with the operator from the most minimal distance possible. The condition s and limitations below require that the PIC and VO both3

maintain VLOS capabili ty and communicate verbally during flight operations and address th e

concerns regarding PIC and VO communication

.

ALPA asserted the unmanned aircraft’s ( UA ) lithium polymer batteries have numerous associated fire and explosion hazards as outlined in DOT/FAA/AR

- 09/55, “Flammability
Assessment of Lithium

- Ion and Lithium

- Ion Polymer Battery Cell Designed for Aircraft Power Usage (January 2010),” and that the saf e carriage of the batteries and the mitigations in place for known risks should be addressed. The FAA notes that the referenced study was primarily conducted to determine how certain battery cells react in a fire situation aboard manned airplanes. Given th e size of the battery and the operating conditions of the UAS, the FAA concludes that the use of a lithium polymer battery will not pose an undue safety risk for the proposed operations.

ALPA commented that the petitioner’s system does not have a barometr ic altimeter as required by 14 CFR § 91.121 . ALPA stated that processes or mit i gations must be in place to ensure the UA can accurately maintain altitude includ ing engineering processes, software development and control, electronic hardware development and control, configuration management, and design assurance to ensure the aircraft and its control system(s) operate to
the same level of safety as other aircraft ope rated commercially in the National Airspace System (NAS). The FAA has inserted conditions and limitations in this exemption to mitigate
the risk associated with the absence of a traditional barometric altimeter , including the
condition that the PIC and VO must maintain VLOS capability during all flight operations and the limitation of a maximum operating altitude of 400 feet AGL

.

ALPA commented that command and control (C2) link failures are one of the most common failures on a UAS, and that lost link miti gations should require safe modes to prevent fly

aways or other scenarios. The FAA has inserted conditions and limitations in this exemption requiring operators to reestablish link, immediately recover or land the UA, or terminate the flight to mitigate th e risk associated with such failures.

ALPA also noted that the petit ioner’s proposed commercial operations are for “compensation or hire,” and therefore contends the pilot must hold at least a current FAA commercial pilot certificate with an appropriate c ategory and class rating for the type of aircraft being flown, as well as specific and adequate training on the UAS make and model intended to be used. Similarly, ALPA asserted a current second

- class airman medical certificate should be required. NAAA al so commented on pilot qualification, stating

—

Just as manned aircraft pilots are required to undergo a rigorous training curriculum and show that they are fit to operate a commercial aircraft, so too must UAS operators.4

Holding a commercial certificate h olds UAS operators to similar high standards as commercial aircraft operators and ensures they are aware of their responsibilities as commercial operators within the NAS. Medical requirements ensure they have the necessary visual and mental acuity to oper ate a commercial aircraft repeatedly over a sustained period of time.

The FAA has reviewed the knowledge and training requir e ments of sport, recreational, private
and commercial certificate s and concluded that a UAS PIC holding a minimum of a sport pilot
certificat e, and operating under this exemption, would not adversely affect operations in the NAS or present a hazard to persons or property on the ground. Additional discussion of the
FAA’s review is found in the FAA’s a nalysis section of this exemption

.

A L P A not ed the p e tition e r must sp ec i f y a m ea ns to m ee t s e e a nd a void re qu i re m e nts in § 91.113 g i v e n the a bs e n c e of a n onbo ar d pilot. The FAA notes that all flights must be operated within VLOS of the PIC and VO.

ALPA also expressed concern that the petition makes no reference to compliance with, or a request for waiver from, 14 CFR 61.195, Flight instructor limitations and qualifications

, which defines the requirements for flight instructors. The FAA notes that a certificated flight instructor is authorized to provide the instruction required for the certificates or ratings or currency listed in 14 CFR § 61.193. A person instructing on how to operate the UAS under the petitioner’s training program would not need t o be a certificated flight instructor because the instruction is not being provided for a certificate or rating listed in § 61.193. The FAA has
determined that none of the UAS operations proposed by the petitioner require such flight instruction because § 61.31( l ) allows for operation of the UAS by an airman who is current per 14 CFR § 61.56 without a category and class rating. However, i nstruction provided toward obtaining the pilot certificate required by this exemption would need to be provided by

a cer tificated flight instructor.

ALPA oppose d the petitioners request to avoid providing aircraft documentation ( such as
used for aircraft maintenance tracking, AD issuance, related performance information) of its
small UAS. The FAA has granted relief from 14 CFR 91.417 (a) and (b) to the extent necessary, requiring that the PIC determine that the UAS is in a condition for safe flight prior to every operation.

ALPA opposed the petitioner’s request for an exemption from the aircraft maintenance and record keeping requirements. ALPA asserted that the petitioner’s small UAS “should comply to the same level of safety as other aircraft operated commercially in the NAS.” The FAA5

finds that adherence to the petitioner’s operating documents, as required by the conditions and limitations below, is sufficient to ensure that safety is not adversely affected.

ALPA also expressed concern that the petitioner’s request is not for a single specific operation or location, but for all operat ions of the same general type. ALPA stated that this results in a considerable increase in the FAA’s oversight tasks. The FAA notes ALPA’s concern and in order to minimize potential impact to the NAS, the FAA requires that each operator operate
under a Cer tificate of Waiver or Authorization (COA) issued by the Air Traffic Organization.
The COA covers specific air traffic requirements. The FAA recognizes that UAS integration will generate new NAS access demand and will review and adjust accordingly.
NAAA not ed that its members operate in low

- level airspace, and therefore clear low

- level airspace is vital to the safety of these operators. NAAA stated that seeing and avoiding other aircraft and hazardous obstructions is the backbone for agricultural safety, and that agricultural pilots depend on pilots of other aircraft to perform their see

- and

- avoid fu nctions to prevent collisions. NAAA believes UAS operations at low altitudes will increase the potential for collisi on with agricultural aircraft.

The FAA recog nizes these concerns and has incorporated associated conditions and limitations into this exemption, including: ( a) operator must operate under a COA issued by ATO, which covers specific air traffic requirements for all operations ; ( b) operations
conducted within VLOS of the pilot in command (PIC) and the VO ; and ( c) the UAS PIC must always yield right

- of

- way to manned aircraft.

NAAA stated that FAA airworthiness certification should be a requirement for all unmanned aircraft to operate within the NAS. NAA A recommended UAS be equipped with ADS

- B or similar identification and positioning systems, strobe lights, high

- visibility markings and registration numbers. NAAA also recommended UAS be operated strictly within the line

- of

sight of the ground controller, with the assistance of a VO and clear of a ny low

- flying manned
aircraft.

As discussed in greater detail below, Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 authorizes the Secretary of Transportation to determine, considering a number of
fa ctors laid out in the statute, that an airworthiness certificate is not necessary for certain operations. The Secretary has made that determination in this case and therefore the aircraft operated by the petitioner will not need to be certificated by the FAA.6

The FAA ’ s analysis is as follows :

The FAA has organized its analysis into f ive sections: (1) Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS), (2) the UAS pilot in command (PIC), (3) Training Operations, ( 4 ) the UAS operating parameters, and ( 5 ) the public interest.

Unmanned Aircraft System s (UAS)

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

. In accordance with the statutory criteria provided in Section 333 of PL 112

- 95 in reference to 49 USC 44704, and in consideration of the size, weight, speed, and limited operating area associated with the aircraft and their operation, the Secretary of Transportation
has determined that these aircraft meet the conditions of Section 333 and that an airworthiness

ce rtificate is not required . Therefore, the FAA finds that the requested relief from 14 CFR part

21 and any associated noise certification and testing requirements of part 36 is not necessary.

The petitioner requested operating with both gas and electric all y powered UA

. Gas powered aircraft are at risk of fuel spillage and fire in the event of an incident or accident. The petitioner’s gas powered UAS carries less than one gallon of fuel and therefore the risk of fire following an incident or accident due to fuel spillage is reduced compared to gas powered
manned aircraft . However, the use of liquid fuel warrants additional consideration. Liquid fuels are subject to spill ing and potential ignition during fueling and in the event the aircraft impacts another object during operation. The conditions and limitations require the petitioner to assess these hazards and appropriately mitigate them prior to operation.

The petitio ner requested relief from the following sections 14 CFR §§ 91.405(a) Maintenance required , 91.407(a)(1) Operation after maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, or
alteration , 91.409(a)(2) Inspections , and 91.417(a) and (b) Maintenance records

. The FAA has determined that relief from § 91.409(a)(1) is also necessary , because it is an alternate inspection requirement of 91.409(a)(2). Prior UAS specific relief has been granted in Grant
of Exemption No. 11213 to Aeryon Labs

, Inc

. Therefore the FAA finds that exemption from 14 CFR §§ 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) and (2), and 91.417(a) and (b) is warranted subject to the conditions and limitations below.

UAS Pilot in Command (PIC)

The petitioner stated that all its UAS pilots will possess a private pilot certificate and second
class medical certificate . The petitioner also stated that students and non

- current UAS7

operators may participate in UAS operations under the supervision of an appropriately qualified UAS flight instructor , as discuss ed in the UAS Operating Parameters section below

.

In this exemption the FAA is exempting KSU pilots from the prohibition on receiv ing compensation for providing UAS flight training to non

- certificated student pilots. As in previously issued exemptions, KSU pilots will be required to hold an FAA pilot certificate.
We note that during these operation s , the PIC is responsible for the safe ty of flight rega rdless
of whether the PIC or the student is manipulating the aircraft controls

.

In Exemption No. 11213, the FAA compared the aeronautical knowledge requirements of the commercial and private pilot certificates to the recreational and sport pilot certifica tes to
determine how they differed and what would be required for a UAS pilot. The FAA
determined that the UAS PIC must hold either an airline transport, commercial, private, recreational, or sport pilot certificate along with a current FAA airman medical certificate or a
valid U.S. driver’s license

.

14 CFR §1.1 defines a PIC as the person who has final authority and responsibility for the operation and safety of the flight, has been designated as pilot in command before or during the flight, and holds the appropriate category, class, and type rating, if appropriate for the
conduct of the flight

. Accordingly, the FAA grants relief from §§ 61.101(e)(4) and (5), and 61.113(a), to allow a PIC holding a recreational or private pilot certificate to operate a UAS for compensation and hire, subject to the conditions and limitat ions below. 2 The petitioner also requested relief from § 61.113( b ) ; however relief is not necessary since relief is already granted to § 61.113( a )

. The FAA is also granting relief from § 61.315(a) as previously determined in Exemption No. 11213, to permit the holder of a sport pilot certificate to act as the PIC of UAS operated under this exemption.

Additionally, the PIC must hold either a medical certificate issued under 14 CFR part 67 or a
U.S. issued driver’s license a s previously determined in Exemption No. 11213

. The PIC must also comply with 14 CFR § 61.53, Prohibition on operations during medical deficiency

. See Exemption 11213 (Aeryon Labs) for relief granted from Medical certificates: Requirement
and duration § 61.23(a) and § 61.23(c )

.

The FAA also considered medical certificate requirements for a visual observer . A s in Exemption No. 11213

, the FAA determined that this is not necessary subject to the conditions
and limitations below. In particular, the UA must never be operated beyond the actual visual capabilities of the VO, and the VO and PIC must have the ability to maintain VLOS with the

2 Similar relief from § 61.315(c)(2) and (3) is not necessary because these limitations on sport pilot certificate privileges only apply to light

- sport aircraft (LSA). T he UAS being operated under this exemption are not LSA.8

UA at all times. It is the responsibility of the PIC to be aware of the VO’s visual limitations and limit operations of the UA to distances within the visual capabilities of both the PIC and
VO.

The petitioner also requested relief from 14 CFR § 61.3(d)(2)(iii), Requirements for certificates, ratings, and authorizations. Given that the training the petitioner intends to provide is not for an FAA ai rman certific ate and the log books recording training given are not part of an FAA certificate program, the FAA finds that relief from 14 CFR § 61.3(d)(2)(iii) is not necessary.

Training Operations

The petitioner propos es to conduct flight operations to provid e UAS training or instruction to

non

- certificated persons for compensation or hire. The proposal included training scenarios with a trainer holding a sport pilot certificate or higher serv ing as the PIC

. The FAA is granting the exemption to permit KSU instructors to receive compensation for providing flight instruction to students.

These operations will be consistent with FAA’s requirements for student pilots of manned
aircraft. Student pilots may manip ulate the controls of an aircraft in most part 91 operations unless specifically restricted. Students do not need to obtain a medical certification or pass a knowledge test prior to solo flight. See 14 CFR § 61.87. When a student, or other non

qualified person, is manipulating the controls of an aircraft, the PIC retains responsibility for the safety of the flight. Student flight operations under this exemption must always be conducted under the supervision of a PIC.

The instructor is designated the PIC for the entire duration of the flight operation. Trainees are considered participants in the operation and are not required to hold any certification or meet any of the operating requirements (including maintaining VLOS of the aircraft) in this exemption . The trai nees may be the manipulators of the controls; however, the PIC must have sufficient override capability to safely abort the operation if necessary.

The FAA considered whether to require the instructor /trainer to hold an

- FAA issued flight
inst ructor certificate. However, the agency previously determined that risk posed by UAS operations under FAA exemptions is mitigated in part by demonstration of aeronautical knowledge through a pilot certificate and UAS specific training rather than flight ho urs in a
manned aircraft. See Exemption Nos. 11062, 11213. Moreover, a certificated flight instructor would not have a basis for evaluating a student’s proficiency as the FAA has not established UAS flight training standards. Accordingly, the FAA has det ermined that a PIC qualified9

under this exemption has the requisite knowledge to ensure that instructional operations are conducted safely.

When conducting training , the PIC is responsible for conducting safe operation s and for meeting all applicable conditions and limitations as prescribed in this exemption and ATO

issued COA, and operating in accordance with the operating documents. All training operations must be conducted during dedicated training sessions and trainers m ay receive compensation under this exemption. The petitioner may not conduct operat ions during training sessions for any purpose other than training

. In accordance with the conditions and limitations, t he training operation must be conducted with a dedica ted VO . The visual observer’s responsibility is to maintain constant visual contact with the unmanned aircraft to
be able to advise the PIC if other aircraft or unexpected people or objects have entered the operational area . Given the nature of th is task , the VO must be dedicated only to v isual observer responsibilities. Students receiving instruction or observing an operation may not
serve as visual observers. A student who is focus ed on learning the UAS operation would not
be able to focus on VO dutie s as well , as that would increas e the risk of the operation

.

Regarding the petitioner ’s requested relief from 14 CFR § 91.109 Flight instruction; Simulated instrument flight and certain flight tests, t he petition er describe s training scenarios
in which a dual set of controls w ill be utilized. The petitioner proposed using two types of dual controls: either (1) a “buddy box” system using two transmitters , with one being operated by the PIC and the other operated by the studen t; or (2) a ground control system (GCS) operated by the student and the PIC having a secondary transmitter with full override capability. The FAA finds that the PIC must have sufficient override capability to safely abort the operation if necessary such as through proposed mitigations above . The capability to safely abort the operation provides that safety will not be adversely affected even if the UAS
does not have a dual set of controls. Therefore, the FAA is granting relief from 14 CFR § 91.109 (a) subj ect to the applicable conditions and limitations stated below

.

UAS Operating Parameters

The petitioner has requested relief from 14 CFR § 91.7(a), Civil aircraft airworthiness . While the petitioner’s UAS will not require an airworthiness certificate, th e FAA has determined that for the purposes of this exemption the pilot may determine the aircraft is in an airworthy condition prior to flight. The FAA’s regulations state that the PIC of a civil aircraft is responsible for determining whether the aircraft is in a condition for safe flight. Therefore, relief from § 91.7(a) is granted.10

The petitioner requested relief from 14 CFR § 91.9(b)(2) Civil aircraft flight manual, marking, and placard requirements and § 91.203(a) and (b) Civil aircraft: Certifications required. The FAA has previously determined that relief from these sections is not necessary.

See Exemption No. 11213. Relevant materials may be kept in a location accessible to the PIC in compliance with the regulations.

The petitioner has requested relief from 14 CFR § 91.119

, Minimum safe altitudes . In previous exemptions, the FAA classified UAS operations as closed

- set motion picture and
television film ing operations or aerial data collection

. S ee Exemption No. 11213. Due to the close proximity to persons, only c losed

- set film ing oper ations were required to have a Motion Picture and Television Operations Manual ( MPTOM ) in accordance with their exemption. Aerial data collection and any operation not classified as closed

- set filming were not required
to have an MPTOM o r similar manual because their operations were not conducted within close proximity to people unless adequate barriers were provided.

T he FAA has changed its approach to the requirements for operating within 500 feet of people so that the petitioner will be able to follow the provisions previously granted only for closed

set filmmaking

. T he FAA is focusing on t he safety critical characteristics of the operation
which are primarily related to the proxim ity of the aircraft to people, property, and other users of the airspace , rather than focusing on the type of work petitioner is seeking to do.

Operations near People

An unmanned aircraft may be operated over or near people if they are required for the safe operation of the UA or are required for the successful completion of the intended purpose of
the operation, these people are considered essential flight personnel. Essential flight personnel include the PIC, VO, p ayload operators, and any other personnel that the PIC has
determined are essential for the safe operation of the UA. The UA may be operated within 500 feet of essential flight personnel and they do not need to be protected by barriers.

An unmanned airc raft may also be operated over or near p eople who are not essential flight personnel but are essential for the intended purpose of the operation includ ing ; actors

, students obtaining UAS instruction, researchers or engineers monitoring the flight , workers at a site being inspected by UAS or a person providing non

- safety related information during the operation about where the aircraft should be flown.

Nonparticipat ing persons are those other than essential flight personnel or those required for the intended purpose of the operation as defined previously. A UA may only be operated
within 500 feet of nonparticipating persons when b arriers or structures are present that11

sufficiently protect nonparticipating persons from the UA and/or debris or haza rdous
materials such as fuel or chemicals in the event of an accident. Under these conditions, t he operator must ensure that non participating persons remain under such protection for the duration of the operation . If a situation arises where non participati ng persons leave such protection and are within 500 feet of the UA, flight operations must cease immediately in a

manner that does not cause undue hazard to persons.

Additionally, operations for training, proficiency, or experience building for PICs to qualify to operate under this exemption may not be conducted within 500 feet of nonparticipa ting

persons to ensure the safety of others while the PIC gains experience.

A UAS may be flown over or near people, subject to the conditions and limi tation below

.

All people associated with the operations must be briefed by the PIC on the potential risk of the proposed flight operation(s) and acknowledge and consent to those risks. The FAA routinely uses briefings as a means to notify passengers and others of safety information and to risks of certain operations. See , e.g. , 14 CFR §§ 91.319(d)(1) (advising passengers of experimental nature of an aircraft); 136.7 (air tour briefings). The requirement to obtain

consent provides an additional margin of safety by build ing upon the briefing requirement to ensure that participants have acknowledged that a UA will be operated within 500 feet. The consent requirement is consistent with exemptions authorizing UAS closed

- set fi lmmaking.
See Exemption No. 11062.

In Exemption No. 11062 ( Astraeus Aerial ) , the FAA granted exemption to the part 91
minimum safe altitude rules consistent with the relief typically provided to manned operations in FAA Order 8900.1 V3, C8, S1

, Issue a Certificate of Waiver for Motion Picture and Television Filming . The order allows UA to be operated within 500 feet of participating persons, vehicles, and structures directly involved in the performance of the actual filming

. That exemption required the operator to ha ve an approved Motion Picture and Television Operations Manual (MPTOM). Based on existing motion picture filming practice, Exemption No. 11062 established the requirement that UAS operations must comply with the petitioner ’s
MPTOM when condu cting closed

- set film ing operation s

.

The FAA also recognizes that there are other UAS operations in which the UA will be operated within 500 feet of consenting people

. The FAA recognizes that there are additional risks when operating a UA close to people , whether for the purpose of closed

- set filming or otherwise. As such the FAA has determined that when conducting these types of operations, the operator must have a n operations manual addressing the items as specified in the
conditions and limitatio ns below. Unmanned aircraft operations conducted in close proximity12

to people (less than 500 feet) invoke added safety risks. Regardless of the operation type (closed set film

- making or other operation types), the operations manual requirement ensures that safety will not be adversely affected because the operator must document and address operational safety practices relevant to its operation

. An operations manual must include
items such as ; the operator’s contact information, distribution an d revision information, persons authorized, plan of activities, permission to operate, security methodology, briefing instructions, essential flight personnel minimum requirements, communications information, and accident notification plan

. Documented ope rational safety practices and procedures ensure a safe and repeatable process for conducting flight operations

. Formal procedures ensure adequate safety guidelines are available and adhered to in normal operational environments, but also during emergency circumstances. T he operations manual is considered part of the operating documents and must be accessible to the PIC during operations. This operations manual is based on the requirement in previous exemptions for a
MPTOM for closed

- set filming.

Operator s conducting these operations must also submit a written Plan of Activities to the local Flight Standards District Office at least 24 hours prior to initiating operations as described in the conditions and limitations below

. The written plan of activities includes pertinent items provided to Flight Standards District Offices . The written plan of activities is necessary for Aviation Safety Inspectors to conduct surveillance of activities and ensure compliance with the provisi ons of the authorization and waiver, associated special provisions, operations manual, and the plan of activities in accordance with FSIM S 8900.1 to ensure the safety of the NAS.

The petitioner describes operations in which a PIC will be training students. Under this exemption students manipulating the controls or observing the flight operations could be participants in the UAS operation. This training scenario poses risks similar to closed

- set filming operations because of the reduced distances between the students and the UA. Operations N ear Vessels, Vehicles, and Structures

Operations near vessels, vehicles, and structures are those operations in which a UA is operated within 500 feet of such objects. To conduct such operations, the PIC must : ( 1) have permission from a person with legal authority over any vessels, vehicles or structures located within 500 feet of the UA’s operating area ; and ( 2) make a safety assessment of the risk of operating closer to those objects and determine that no undue hazard would result from the operation

.

In consideration of the above, the FAA finds that:

a. Relief from § 91.119(a), which requires operating at an altitude that allows a safe emergency landing if a power unit fails, is not granted. The FAA expects the13

petitioner to be able to perform an emergency landing without undue hazard to persons or property on the surface if a power unit fails.
b. Relief from § 91.119(b ), operation over congested areas, is not granted , because this exemption prohibits operations over congested or densely populated areas.

c. Relief from § 91.119(c) is necessary because the aircraft will be operated at altitudes
below 500 feet AGL. Section 9 1.119(c) states that no person may operate an aircraft below the following altitudes: over other than congested areas , an altitude of 500 feet above the surface, except over open water or sparsely populated areas. The FAA finds operations conducted in comp liance with the conditions and limitations in this exemption warrant relief from § 91.119(c).
d. Relief from § 91.119(d) is not necessary. Although this section allows operations below the minimums set forth in the other paragraphs of 91.119 for helicopters, the conditions and limitations below control operations under this exemption

.

Per 14 CFR § 91.119, manned aircraft are commonly flown at altitudes of 500 feet above the surface in areas over other than congested areas. The petitioner has proposed operatin g its

gas

- powered aircraft at altitudes up to 1,200 feet above ground level (AGL). The petitioner states that operatin g gas

- powered aircraft at higher altitudes reduces the risks associated with internal combustion engine powered aircraft. In all previous grants of exemption under Section 333, the FAA has limited operating altitudes to less than 400 feet AGL. The FAA
finds that UAS operations at altitude s above 400 feet AGL introduce greater risks to manned
aviation because of see

- and

- avoid difficulties when manned and unmanned aircraft operate in shared airspace . As in prior exemptions, the FAA is limiting operations under this exemption
to 400 feet AGL as stated in the conditions and limitations below.

The petitioner requested relief from 14 CFR § 91. 121, Altimeter settings . When the UA is equipped with a barometric altimeter, relief from § 91.121 is not necessary. When the UA is not equipped with a barometric altimeter, an alternate means for measuring and reporting UA altitude is necessary, such as g lobal positioning system ( GPS ) . As stated in the conditions and limitations below, the FAA requires altitude be reported in feet AGL. The petitioner may choose to set the altitude indicator to zero feet AGL rather than local barometric pressure or
field al titude before flight. Considering the limited altitude of the proposed operations, relief from 14 CFR § 91.121 is granted to the extent necessary to comply with the applicable
conditions and limitations stated below.

In previous exemption s , the FAA requir ed that the UA be returned to a pre

- determined
location with in the private or controlled area of operation if the UAS loses communication or GPS signal

. The FAA has re

- examined the situation where the GPS signal is lost or the PIC
loses communications with the UA and determined that these two situations employ unique14

functions and incur different failure modes. Therefore, the FAA has included two separate
conditions and limitations addressing each situation

. In the situation where the UAS uses
GPS nav igation and the GPS signal is necessary to safely operate the UA, the PIC is required

to immediately recover or land the UA. However, if the UA can be operated safely without a GPS signal

, the operation may continue. I f the PIC loses command or control li nk with the UA, the UA must follow a pre

- determined route to either reestablish link or immediately land.
The modified conditions and limitations preserve the same intent and level of safety, while also adding clarity and reducing restrictiveness for the operator.

T he petitioner has requested relief from 14 CFR § 91.151(a), Fuel requirements for flight in
VFR conditions , for the electric ally powered UAS only

. P rior UAS specific relief has been granted in Exemption Nos. 8811, 10808, and 10673 for daytime, Visual Flight Rules (VFR) conditions. The conditions and limitations below prohibit the PIC from beginning a UAS flight unless (considering wind and forecast weather conditions) there is enough available power for UAS to operate for the intended operationa l time and to operate after that for at least five minutes or with the reserve power recommended by the manufacturer if greater. The FAA finds that this provides sufficient reason to grant relief from 14 CFR § 91.151(a)(1) to the extent necessary and in ac cordance with the conditions and limitations below for all UAS listed in this exemption.

The FAA Air Traffic Organization (ATO) reviews all proposed UAS operations and evaluates the safety of these operations relative to the requested airspace through th e existing COA

process. The majority of current UAS operations occurring in the NAS are being coordinated through air traffic control ( ATC ) by the issuance of a COA. This process not only makes local ATC facilities aware of UAS operations, but also provi des ATC the ability to consider airspace issues that are unique to UAS operations.

The FAA has issued a COA to this operator

, which is attached to this exemption. The COA sets the requirements for alerting other users of the NAS to the UAS activities bei ng conducted. The conditions and limitations below prescribe the requirement for the petitioner to follow the terms of a COA. If the petitioner intends to conduct operations outside of the parameters of what is permitted under the attached COA it may app ly to the ATO for a new or
amended COA.

In previous exemptions, the FAA limited UAS operations to outside 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 (LOA) with that airport’s management is obtained or otherwise permitted by a COA issued to the exemption15

holder. In order to maintain operational safety in the vicinity of airports, particularly as it
affects Class B, C, or D airspace, instead of contacting the airport management, the petitioner must apply to the ATO for a new or amended COA. The ATO will coordinate an LOA with
local air traffic management via the COA process

. The FAA finds that this approach facilitates consistency between the exemption and the COA.

Public Interest

The FAA finds that a grant of exemption is in the public interest. P rofessional training programs for UAS operators will positively affect unmanned aviation activities by providing future UAS operators with a safe environment to gain proficiency and experience. This gives the FAA good cause to find that the UAS operation enabled by this exemption is in the public
interest

.

The following table summarizes the FAA’s determinations regarding the relief sought by the petitioner:

Relief considered (14 CFR) FAA determination (14 CFR)

21 Relief not necessary

45.23(b) Relief not necessary

61.23(a) and (c) Relief granted with conditions and limitations

61.101(e)(4) and (5) Relief granted with conditions and limitations

61.113(a) Relief granted with conditions and limitations

61.133 Relief not necessary

61.3(d)(2)(iii) Relief not necessary

61.315(a) Relief granted with conditions and limitations

91.7(a) Relief granted with conditions and limitations

91.7(b) Relief not necessary

91.9(b)(2) Relief not necessary

91.9(c) Relief not granted

91.103 Relief not granted

91.109 (a) Relief granted with conditions and limitations16

Relief considered (14 CFR) FAA determination (14 CFR)

91.119(a) Relief not granted

91.119(b) Relief not granted

91.119(c) Relief granted with conditions and limitations

91.119(d) Relief n ot necessary

91.121 Relief granted with conditions and limitations

91.151(a)(1) Relief granted with conditions and limitations

91.203(a) and (b) Relief not necessary

91.405(a) Relief granted with conditions and limitations

91.407(a)(1) Relief granted with conditions and limitations

91.409(a)(1) and (2) Relief granted with conditions and limitations

91.417(a) and (b) Relief granted with conditions and limitations

The FAA’s Decision

In consideration of the foregoing, I find that a grant of exemption is in the public interest. Therefore, pursuant to the authority contained in 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 40113,
and 44701, delegated to me by the Administrator, Kansas State University is granted a n exemption from 14 CFR §§ 61.23(a) and ( c ), 61.101(e)(4) and (5), 61.113(a), 61.315(a), 91.7(a), 91.109, 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 conduct UAS operations a ccording to the conditions and limitations listed below.

Conditions and Limitations

In this grant of exemption , Kansas State University is hereafter referred to as the operator.

Failure to comply with any of the conditions and limitations of this exemption will be grounds for the immediate suspension or rescission of this exemption.

1. Operations authorized by this exemption are limited to the KSU Crow , the 3DR Aero
and Aero

- M

, and the UAV Factory Penguin B UAS when weighing l ess than 55 pounds including payload. Proposed operations of any other aircraft will require a new petition or a petition to amend this grant.17

2. The UA may not be operated at a speed exceeding 87 knots (100 miles per hour). The exemption holder may use eit her 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.

3. The UA must be ope rated at an altitude of no more than 400 feet above ground level (AGL). Altitude must be reported in feet AGL. This limitation is in addition to any altitude restrictions that may be included in the applicable COA.

4. Air Traffic Organization (ATO) Certificate of Waiver or Authorization (COA). All operations must be conducted in accordance with an ATO

- issued COA. The exemption holder m ust apply for a new or amended COA if it intends to conduct operations that cannot be conducted under the terms of the attached COA.

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 medi cal certificate or
valid U.S. driver’s license issued by a state, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, a territory, a possession, or the Federal Government

.

6. All operations must utilize a visual observer (VO). The UA must be operated within
the visual l ine 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 exemption, are hereinafter referred to as the operating documents. The operating documents must
be acces sible during UAS operations and made available to the Administrator upon request. If a discrepancy exists between the conditions and limitations in this exemption , the applicable ATO

- issued COA, and the procedures outlined in the operating documents, the m ost restrictive conditions, limitations, or procedures apply
and must be followed. The operator may update or revise its operating documents as18

necessary

. The o perator is responsib le for tracking revisions and present ing updated
and revised documents to the Administrator or any law enforcement official upon request. The operator must also present updated and revised documents if it petitions for extension or amendment to this 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 exemption. The FAA’s UAS Integration Office may be contacted if questions arise regarding updates or revisions to the operating documents.

8. Any UA S 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.

Fu nctional test flights may only be conducted by a PIC with a VO and essential flight personnel only and must remain at least 500 feet from all 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 fo r 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 opera ting 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. Each UAS operated under this exemption must comply with all manufacturer safety bulletins.

12. PIC certification: Under this exemption, a PIC must hold either an airline transport, commercial, private, recreational, or sport pilot c ertificate. 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 Col u mbia, 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.19

13. PIC qualifications: The PIC must demonstrate the ability to safely operate the UAS in a manner consistent with how it will be operat ed under this exemption, including evasive and emergency maneuvers and maintaining appropriate distances from persons, vessels, vehicles and structures before operating non

- training, proficiency, or experience

- building flights under this exemption. PIC qua lification flight hours and

currency may be logged in a manner consistent with 14 CFR § 61.51(b), however UAS pilots must not log this time in the same columns or categories as time accrued during manned flight. UAS flight time must not be recorded as part of total time.

14. Training: The operator may conduct training operations when t he trainer/instructor is qualified as a PIC under this exemption and designated as PIC for the entire duration of the flight operation. Students/t rainees are considered essential for the operation and are not required to hold any certificat e or meet any of the operating requirements (including maintaining VLOS of the aircraft) in this exemption. The student/ trainees may be the manipulators of the controls; however, the PIC must have sufficient override capability to safely abort the operatio n if necessary including taking any action necessary to ensure safety of other aircraft as well as persons and property on the ground in the event of unsafe maneuvers and/or emergencies for example landing in an empty area away from people and property.

Under all training situations, the PIC is responsible for the safety of the operation. The PIC is also responsible for meeting all applicable conditions and limitations as prescribed in this exemption and ATO

- issued COA, and operating in accordance with the operating documents. All training operations must be conducted during dedicated training sessions and may or may not be for compensation or hire

. The operation must
be conducted with a VO who is not a student and not the PIC . The VO must maintain
vi sual sight of the aircraft at all times during flight operations without distraction in
accordance with the conditions and limitations below. Furthermore, the PIC must operate the UA not closer than 500 feet to any nonparticipating person without exception.

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 m ay 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.20

17. For UAS operations where GPS signal is necessary to safely operate the UA, the PIC

must immediately recover/land the UA upon loss of GPS signal.

18. If the PIC loses command or control link with the UA, the UA must follow a pre

determined route to either reestablish link or immediately recover or land.

19. The PIC must abort the flight operation if unpredicted circumstances or emergencies
that could potentially degrade the safety of persons or property arise. The PIC must terminate flight operations without causing undue hazard to persons or property in the
air or on the ground

.

20. The PIC is prohibite d 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 th e manufacturer if greater.

21. 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.

22. 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.

23. The UA must remain clear and give way to all manned aircraft at all times.

24. The UAS may not be operated by the P IC from any moving device or vehicle.

25. All flight operations must be conducted at least 500 feet from all persons, vessels, vehicles, and structures unless when operating :

a. Over or n ear essential flight personnel. Essential flight personnel include the PIC , VO, and other consenting personnel that the PIC has determined are essential to the safe operation of the UA

. b. Over or n ear people essential for the intended purpose of the operation

. People essential for the intended purpose of the operation must be briefed on the potential risk s and acknowledge and consent to those risks

. Operators must21 notify the local Flight Standards District Office (FSDO) with a plan of activities at least 24 hours prior to flight operations.

c. Near nonparticipating persons: A UA may only be operated closer than 500 feet from nonparticipating persons when barriers or structures are present that sufficiently protect nonparticipating persons from the UA and/or debris or hazardous materials such as fuel or chemicals in the even t of an accident. Under these conditions, the operator must ensure that nonparticipating persons remain under such protection for the duration of the operation. If a situation arises where nonparticipating persons leave such protection and are within 500 f eet of the UA, flight operations must cease immediately in a manner that does not cause undue hazard to persons. d. Near vessels, vehicles and structures. Prior to conducting operations t he operator must obtain permission from a person with the legal authori ty over any vessels, vehicles or structures that will be within 500 feet of the UA during operations . T he PIC must make a safety assessment of the risk of operating closer to those objects and determined that it does not present an undue hazard.

26. All ope rations shall be conducted over private or controlled

- access property with permission from a person with legal authority to grant access . Permission will be obtained for each flight to be conducted.

27. Any incident, accident, or flight operation that transgr esses 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 within 24 hours. Accidents must be reported to the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) in accorda nce with its UAS accident reporting requirements

.

For operations conducted closer than 500 feet t o people essential to the intended purpose of the operation

, not protected by barriers (e.g. closed

- set motion picture and television filming and production), the following additional conditions and limitations apply:

28. The operator must have an operations manual that contains at least the following items, although it is not restricted to these items.

a. Operator name, address, and telephone number.
b. Distribution and Revision. Procedures for revising and distributing the operations manual to ensure that it is kept current. Revisions must comply with the applicable
condi tions and limitations in this exemption.

c. Persons Authorized . Specify c riteria for designating individuals as essential personnel

. . The operations manual must include procedures to ensure that all operations are conducted at distances from persons in accordance with the conditions and limitations of the exemption.22

d. Plan of Activities. The operations manual must include procedures for the
submission of a written plan of activities.

e. Permission to Operate. The operations manual shall specify requirements a nd procedures that the operator will use to obtain permission to operate over property or near vessels, vehicles, and structures in accordance with this exemption.
f. Security. The manual must specify the method of security that will be used to
ensure the saf

ety of nonparticipating persons. This should also include procedures that will be used to stop activities when unauthorized persons, vehicles, or aircraft enter the operations area, or for any other reason, in the interest of safety.

g. Briefing of essential personnel and all other participating persons. Procedures must be included to brief personnel and participating persons on the risks involved, emergency procedures, and safeguards to be followed during the operation.
h. Essential Flight Personnel Minimum Re quirements. In accordance with this exemption, the operator must specify the minimum requirements for all essential flight personnel in the operating manual. The PIC at a minimum will be required to
meet the certification s tandard s specified in this exempt ion

. i. Communications. The operations manual must contain procedures to provide communications capability with participants during the operation. The operator can use oral, visual, or radio communications as along as the participants are apprised of the current status of the operation. j. Accident Notification. The operations manual must contain procedures for notification and reporting of accidents in accordance with this exemption.

In accordance with this exemption, the operating manual a nd all other operating
documents must be accessible to the PIC during UAS operations.

29. At least 24 hours prior to operations, the operator must submit a written Plan of Activities to the local Flight Standards District Office having jurisdiction over the

p roposed operating area.

The P lan of A ctivities must include at least the following:

a. Dates and times for all flights. For seasonal or long

- term operations, this can include the beginning and end dates of the timeframe, the approximate frequency (e.g. daily , every weekend, etc.), and what times of the day operations will occur. A new plan of activities must be submitted prior to each season or period of operations.
b. Name and phone number of the on

- site person responsible for the operation.

c. Make, model, and s erial or N

- Number of each UAS to be used.
d. Name and certificate number of each UAS PIC involved in the operations.23

e. A statement that the operator has obtained permission from property owners. Upon request, the operator will make available a list of those who gave permission.
f. Signature of exemption holder or representative stating the plan is accurate

. g. A description of the flight activity, including maps or diagrams of the area over which operations will be conducted and the altitudes essenti al to accomplish the operation.

In accordance with this exemption, the Plan of Activities and all other operating
documents must be accessible to the PIC during UAS operations. A new Plan of Activities must be submitted should there be any changes to items ( a ) through ( g )

.

Unless otherwise specified in this exemption, the UAS, the UAS PIC, and the UAS operations must comply with all applicable parts of 14 CFR including, but not limited to, parts 45, 47, 61, and 91.

This exemption terminates on October 31, 2017 , unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

Issued in Washington, DC, on

John S. Duncan, Director, Flight Standards Service

Enclosure