AFS

- 15

- 039

- E Exemption No. 11170

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTME NT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION WASHINGTON, DC 20591

In the matter of the petition of

VIAFIELD

Regulatory Docket No. FAA

- 2014

- 0824

for an exemption from Part 21; and

§§ 45.23; 45.29; 61.23; 61.3;
61.113(a) & (b); 61.133(a); 91.7(a); 91.9; 91.109 (a) ; 91.119; 91.121, 91.151(a);

91.203 ; Subpart E 91.401

- 91.417 of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations

GRANT OF EXEMPTION

By letter dated October 10, 2014, Ms. Regina Hoffman, Agronomy Account Relationship Manager, Viafield Agricultural Cooperative (Viafield),1001 Blunt Parkway, Charles City, IA 50616 petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FA A) for an exemption from part 21; and Sections 45.23, 45.29, 61.23, 61.3, 61.113(a) and (b), 91.7(a), 91.9, 91.109(a), 91.119, 91.121, 91.151(a), 91.203, and Subpart E (91.401

– 91.417) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). The exemption would allow Viafield to operate the eBee unmanned aircraft system (UAS) to conduct precision agriculture operations.

The petitioner requests relief from the following regulations:

Part 21 prescribes the procedural requirements for issuing and changing desig n approvals, productions approvals, airworthiness certificates, and airworthiness approvals.

Section 45.23 prescribes that

—

(a) Each operator of an aircraft must display on that aircraft marks consisting of the Roman capital letter “N” (denoting United States registration) followed by the2

registration number of the aircraft. Each suffix letter used in the marks displayed must also be a Roman capital letter. (b) When marks include only the Roman capital letter “N” and the registration number is displayed on limited, restricted or light

- sport category aircraft or experimental or provisionally certificated aircraft, the operator must also display on that aircraft near each entrance to the cabin, cockpit, or pilot station, in letters not less than 2

inches n or more than 6 inches high, the words “limited,” “restricted,” “light

- sport,” “experimental,” or “provisional,” as applicable.

Section 45.29 prescribes, that the registration number or “N” number on fixed

- wing aircraft must be displayed in letters no less than 12 inches high.

Section 61.23 prescribes that a person m ust hold a first

- class medical certificate w hen exercising the pilot

- in

- command privileges of an airline transport pilot certificate; that a person must hold at least a second

- class medical cer tificate when exercising the privileges of a commercial pilot certificate; and that a person must hold a third

- class medical certificate when exercising the privileges of a private pilot certificate.

Section 61.3 prescribes that no person may serve as a r equired pilot flight crewmember of a civil aircraft of the United States, unless that person has in the person's physical possession or readily accessible in the aircraft when exercising the privileges of that pilot certificate or authorization a pilot cer tificate issued under this part and in accordance with §61.19.

Section 61.113(a) and (b) prescribes that

—

(a) no person who holds a private pilot certificate may act as a pilot in command of an aircraft that is carrying passengers or property for compen sation 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 fligh t is only incidental to that business or employment; and (2) The aircraft does not carry passengers or property for compensation or hire.

Section 61.133(a) prescribes that a person who holds a commercial pilot certificate may act as pilot in command of an a ircraft carrying persons or property for compensation or hire, provided the person is qualified in accordance with this part and with the applicable parts of this chapter that apply to the operation; and may act as a pilot in command for compensation

or hi re, provided the person is qualified in accordance with this part and with the applicable parts of this chapter that apply to the operation.

Section 91.7(a) prescribes that no person may operate a civil aircraft unless it is in an airworthy condition.3

Sec tion 91.9 prohibits operation of U.S.

- registered civil aircraft unless there is available in the aircraft a current approved Airplane or Rotorcraft Flight Manual, approved manual material, markings, and placards, or any combination thereof.

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

Section 91.119 prescribes that, except when necessary for takeoff or landing, no person may operate an aircraft below the following altitudes:

(a) Anywhere. An altitude allowing, if a power unit fails, an emergency landing without undue hazard to persons or property on the surface.

(b) Over congested ar eas. 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 alti tude 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

(2) A powered parachute or weight

- shift

- control aircraft may be operated at less than the minimums prescribed in paragraph (c) of this section.

Section 91.121 requ ires, in pertinent part, each person operating an aircraft to maintain cruising altitude by reference to an altimeter that is set “...to the elevation of the departure airport or an appropriate altimeter setting available before departure.”

Section 91.151(a ) prescribes that 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 [emphasis added]. Section 91.203 prescribes the following:

(a) Prohibits, in pertinent part, any person from operating a civil aircraft unless it has

within it4

(1) an appropriate and current airworthiness certi ficate; and

(2) an effective U.S. registration certificate issued to its owner or, for operation within the United States, the second copy of the Aircraft registration Application as provided for in § 47.31(c).

(b) No person may operate a civil aircraft unless the airworthiness certificate or a special flight authorization issued under § 91.715 is displayed at the cabin or cockpit entrance so that it is legible to passengers or crew.

(c) No person may operate an aircraft with a fuel tank installed within the passe nger compartment or a baggage compartment unless the installation was accomplished pursuant to part 43 of this chapter, and a copy of FAA Form 337 authorizing that

installation is on board the aircraft.

(d) No person may operate a civil airplane (domestic or foreign) into or out of an airport in the United States unless it complies with the fuel venting and exhaust emissions requirements of part 34 of this chapter.

Section 91.405(a) requires, in pertinent part, that an aircraft operator or owner shall have th at aircraft inspected as prescribed in subpart E of the same part and shall, between required inspections, except as provided in paragraph (c) of the same section, have discrepancies repaired as prescribed in part 43 of the chapter.

Section 91.407(a)(1) p rohibits, in pertinent part, any person from operating an aircraft that has undergone maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, or alteration unless it has been approved for return to service by a person authorized under § 43.7 of the same chapter.

Section 91.409(a)(2) prescribes, in pertinent part, that no person may operate an aircraft unless, within the preceding 12 calendar months, it has had an inspection for the issuance of an airworthiness certificate in accordance with part 21 of this chapte r.

Section 91.417(a) and (b) prescribes, in pertinent part, that

—

(a) Each registered owner or operator shall keep the following records for the periods specified in paragraph (b) of this section:

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

the 100

- hour, annual, progressive, and other required or approved inspections, as 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; and5

(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 ser vice.

(2) Records containing the following information:

(i) The total time in service of the airframe, each engine, each propeller, and each

rotor.

(ii) The current status of life

- limited parts of each airframe, engine, propeller, rotor, and appliance.

(iii) The time since last overhaul of all items installed on the aircraft which are required to be overhauled on a specified time basis.

(iv) The current inspection status of the aircraft, including the time since the last inspection required by the ins pection 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 revis ion 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 engin es, 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 o ther work or for 1 year after the work is performed.

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

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

(3) A list of defects furnished to a registered owner or operator under § 43.11 of this chapter shall be retained until the defects are repaired and the aircraft is approved for return to service.6

The petitioner supports its request with the following information:

The petition and the following supporting documentation are hereinafter referred to as the operating documents:

1) Justification of airworthiness and safety assessment, 2) Inspection and maintenance requirements, 3) eBee User Manual, 4) eBee Training documentation, 5) Academy of Model Aeron autics Safety Requirements, and 6) The Viafield sUAS Scouting Announcement Form

The FAA has organized the petitioner’s information into four sections: 1) the unmanned aircraft system (UAS), 2) the UAS pilot in command (PIC), 3) the UAS operating paramet ers and 4) public interest.

Unmanned Aircraft System

The petitioner states it plans to operate a UAS, the eBee, which is manufactured by SenseFly SA of Switzerland and includes a lightweight battery operated aircraft, ground control station,

and associa ted data link equipment. The eBee airframe is constructed of EPP foam and weighs 1.5 lbs. with a wingspan of 3.2 feet. The eBee is powered by a lithium polymer battery that drives an electric pusher propeller. It is hand launched, has a maximum flight time of 45 minutes, and operates at a cruising speed of 22 mph

– 35 mph. The aircraft is linked to the ground control station via a 2.4 GHz USB radio modem with a maximum data link range of 1.6 NM. If onboard sensors detect a critical situation at any time (lo w battery, close proximity to the ground, weak data link signal, etc.) the eBee will automatically initiate a preprogrammed safety procedure.

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

with the aircraf t to be utilized, an exemption from 14 CFR part 21, Subpart H ( Airworthiness Certificates) and § 91.203 (a) and (b) ( Certifications required ), subject to certain conditions and limitations, is warranted and meets the requirements for an equivalent level of safety

under 14 CFR part 11 and Section 333 of P.L. 112

- 95 (Section 333).

The petitioner requests an exemption from the marking requirement in §§ 45.23 and 45.29 ( Display of marks and S ize of marks, respectively), because its UA will not have a cabin,

co ckpit or pilot station on which to mark certain words or phrases. Further, it states that two

inch lettering is impossible to place on such a small aircraft with dimensions smaller than the minimal lettering requirement. Petitioner proposes to attain an e quivalent level of safety “by having the upper part of the eBee stick with a copy of the Aircraft Modeling Association (AMA) membership of the operator in charge. The AMA agrees to provide 2 original copies of the AMA license to every eBee operator.”7

Regar ding the requirements in § 91.109 ( Dual controls ), the petitioner states that an equivalent level of safety during the in

- flight training will be achieved by the manufacturer or affiliate providing the training as described in the eBee training program and through the use of experienced and qualified instructors familiar with the

eBee and members of the AMA.

Regarding the maintenance requirements in §§ 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(2) and 91.417(a) and (b) (Subpart E), ( Maintenance, preventive mainten ance & inspections ) the petitioner proposes that the maintenance of the eBee will be accomplished by the owner or the operator according to the eBee user manual, and that an equivalent level of safety will be achieved because the eBee is small in size, it is not a complex mechanical device and does not carry any external payload. Moreover, the petitioner states that the operator is the person most familiar with the aircraft and is best suited to maintain the aircraft in an airworthy condition

and to ensure an equivalent level of safety. Finally, the petitioner notes that before every flight, the eBee automatically runs a sequence of pre

- flight tests to make sure that every sensor and every critical part is operating properly. If a problem is detected, the eB ee will not be able to be switched on and an error message is displayed on the main screen of the control module. The owner or the operator can then refer to the eBee user manual to troubleshoot the issue. Finally, petitioner states that several parts of t he eBee are easily interchangeable (propellers, wings), which allows the operator to make sure the wings and propulsion system are always airworthy when a mission is initiated.

UAS Pilot in Command (PIC)

The petitioner states that the eBee will be operat ed by an individual who fulfills the following requirements:

• Is a registered member of the Academy of Model Aeronautics (AMA); • Has passed SenseFly’s training program for the eBee • Has completed an AMA

- affiliated small UAS education and training pr ogram and has achieved an AMA UAS endorsement, or has successfully completed a small UAS education and training program provided by any FAA qualified entity;

• Has a valid driver’s license.

The petitioner asserts that relief from the commercial and priva te pilot certificate requirements in §§ 61.3, 61.113(a) and (b), and 61.133(a) is warranted because an equivalent level of safety can be attained by having an operator trained by the AMA (or any FAA qualified entity) and SenseFly, and using the integrated features of the aircraft.

Regarding the medical certificate requirements in § 61.23, the petitioner asserts that, given the size of the eBee, its structure, the limited flight area, and the safety features integrated in the autopilot (among others the Fli ght Termination System), SenseFly believes that an equivalent level of safety can be reached if the operator has a valid driver’s license.8

UAS Operating Parameters

The petitioner makes the following representations of operational enhancements which it

p roposes to abide by to ensure this exemption will provide a level of safety at least equal to existing rules:

• Petitioner will conduct operations over private, controlled

- access, or public property where approved;

• Petitioner will obtain permission from th e landowner/authority before commencing any flight;

• Petitioner will avoid operations over congested areas;

• Petitioner will not conduct operations that interfere with manned aircraft operations, will yield the right of way to manned aircraft, and will see and avoid other aircraft and obstacles at all times;

• Petitioner will limit operations to Visual Flight Rules Meteorological Conditions (VMC) and daylight hours;

• Petitioner will ensure aircraft operations remain within Visual Line of Sight (VLOS)

and wil l be visually monitored at all times;

• Petitioner will ensure VLOS operations with a GPS geo

- fence around operator of 0.15 miles;

• Petitioner will pre

- program flight ceiling at 400 feet;

• Petitioner will verbally coordinate all operations conducted within 5 miles from an airport with the airport authority, or air traffic control when a control tower is present at the airport;

• Petitioner will ensure all operations shall comply with required permissions and permits established by territorial, state, county o r city jurisdictions; including local law enforcement, fire, or other appropriate governmental agencies.

• Petitioner will conduct eBee operations in compliance with existing safety procedures inherent to the activities of the related company.

The petitione r states that § 91.7(a) Civil aircraft airworthiness , prohibits the operation of an aircraft without an airworthiness certificate. The petitioner asserts that since there is currently no certificate applicable to its operation, this regulation is inapplic able. Moreover, petitioner states that an equivalent level of safety will be achieved by ensuring compliance with the eBee user manual prior to each flight.

The petitioner states that § 91.9(b)(2) Civil aircraft flight manual, marking, and placard require ments, requires an aircraft flight manual in the aircraft. However, since there are no pilots or passengers on board his aircraft and given its size, this regulation is inapplicable. The petitioner asserts that an equivalent level of safety will be achieve d by keeping a hard copy of the eBee user manual in the eBee transport box that will be within reach of the operator at all

times.9

The petitioner requests an exemption from the minimum altitude requirements in § 91.119(c) Minimum safe altitudes

, over oth er than congested areas, since the eBee will be operating at a maximum of 400 feet above ground level (AGL). The petitioner proposes to achieve an equivalent level of safety by flying the eBee only fly over private property with the permission of the lando wner. Before every flight, the operator will define a working area radius and a flight area ceiling, preventing the eBee to go beyond the flight area. The landowner and the persons who may be on the ground in the flight area will be briefed on the expected route of flight and the associated risks to persons and property on the ground. Due to the small size of the eBee, the material with which the eBee is built and its specific safety procedures (among others ground detection), the petitioner states that the hazard to persons, vessels, vehicles, and structures is not comparable to that posed by manned aircraft and should be considered in granting the exemption. The petitioner adds that operations will not be conducted over any open

- air assembly of persons.

The petitioner asserts that § 91.121, Altimeter settings, is inapplicable since the UAS utilizes electronic GPS with a barometric sensor. The petitioner notes that the eBEE autopilot calculates the reference altitude (ground level) with the on

- board GPS du ring the pre

- flight

tests.

The petitioner requests relief from the requirements of § 91.319(a)(1), regarding operational limitations of aircraft with experimental certificates, but does not indicate why relief is being sought or how an equivalent level of safety would be achieved if an exemption to this regulation were to be granted.

Petitioner requests an exemption from the reserve fuel requirements in § 91.151(a), and asserts that given the area of operation for the eBee, an equivalent level of safety can be achieved via a mechanism preventing the eBee from accepting a take

- off order if the battery level is below a given value. Moreover, petitioner states that SenseFly has integrated “low” and “critical” battery level warnings and implemented “return to home” and “go land” actions

in these situations.

Public Interest

The petitioner states that by allowing Viafield to conduct agricultural operations with an eBee UAS, the FAA would promote the public interest not only by reducing the risk to persons and property inherent in the use of manned aircraft, but would facilitate economic growth and agricultural sustainability by helping to maximize crop yields.

Discussion of Public Comments:

A summary of the petition was published in the Federal Register on No vember 13, 2014 (79

FR 67536 ). The petition received four comments. The Small UAV Coalition (Coalition) and

the Academy of Model Aeronautics (AMA) supported the petition, and the Air Line Pilots10

Association, International (ALPA) and the National Agricult ural Aviation Association (NAAA) opposed it.

I n supp o r t of the p e tition, the C o a liti o n st a t e s the p e tition e r h a s p r opos e d to a bide b y st r o n g e r

s a fe t y m e a su re s th a n hob b y a nd mod e l e r g r oups op e r a ting simil a r a i r c raf t. The C o a lition

st a t e s th a t it do e s no t b e li e ve th a t h e i g ht e n e d s a f e t y m ea su r e s should be re qui re d f or the

p e tition e r simp l y b eca use o f the c omm e rc i a l n a tu r e of its op e ra tions. The C o a lition u r g e s the

F AA to a dopt a n e v a l u a tion fra m e w o r k f or U AS op era tions und e r s e c t ion 333 of P ub. L

. 112

– 95 th a t w e i g hs the r e l a tive s a f e t y issu e s a nd r isks of UAS b y c l a ss a nd op era tion al

c i rc umst a n c e s, ra th e r th a n a dopting a r ti f i c i a l distin c tions a mong unm a n n e d aer i a l v e h i c l e s b a s e d on c omm erc i a l a nd no n c omm erc i a l op e r a tions. The C o a lition sug g e st s F AA s afe t y

r e g ul a tions be p r opo r tion a te to the r i sks pos e d b y the p ar ti c u l a r p r opos e d UAS op era t i ons b y distin g uishi n g b e tw ee n U A S . The p e tition er’ s UAS pose c onsid e ra b l y l e ss s afe t y r isk th a n l ar g e r U AS. The C o a lition a ss er t s th a t b e ca use UAS op era tions like the p e tition er’ s pose minim a l r isk to s afe t y , th e y should be subj ec t to minim a l a nd a pp r op r i a te r e g ul a tions.

The C o a lition not e s the F AA is to c onsid e r t h e s e v e n fac t o r s 1 in s ec tion 333 a s a minimum.

The C o a lition st a t e s the p e tit i on shows the F AA shou l d c onsi d e r f a c to r s oth e r t h a n those

sp ec i f i e d in Sec tion 333, su c h a s lo ca t ion, a ltitude of its UA S

, a nd pilot t ra ining a nd

e x p er i e n c e . The C o a lition m a int a in s th a t the p e tition er’ s p r opos e d op era tions s a tis f y the

s e v e n fac t o r s in s ec tion 333 a nd in c lude s e v e ra l a ddition a l miti g a ting f a c t o r s to e nsu r e the

s afe t y a n d s ec u r i t y of the p r opos e d UAS op e r a tions. The C o a lition e mph a si z e s the F AA must

e v a l u a te e a c h f a c tor within the c ont e x t of the p e tition er’ s p r opo s e d UAS op e r a tions.

The C o a lition comments th a t the F A A should g r a nt re li e f fr om the r e qui re m e nt to hold a n

a i r m a n ’ s c er ti f i ca t e , but st a t e d th a t a t a minimum the F AA should p r ovi d e a n e x ce ption fr om

p ar t 61 a nd a pp r o v e t ra ini n g a nd t e sting r e g im e nts th a t p er t a in to UAS c omm e r c i a l op era tions

p er tin e nt to the a i r c raf t a nd op era tion p r opos e d. The C o a lition a lso a ss er t s th a t C on g r e ss int e nd e d the s ec tion 333 n a tion a l s ec u r i t y cr it e r ion to f o c us on the op e r a tion ra th e r th a n on

t h e pilot a nd th a t shi f ting th a t f o c us impos e s a n unn e c e ss a r y bu r d e n.

I n re spons e
, a s dis c uss e d in the g r a nt of e x e mption to T r imble N a vig a tion L td. ( No.

1111 0 ) , n e ith e r s ec tion 333 nor t h e F A A ’ s a utho r i t y to e x e mpt fr om its re g ul a tions f ound

in 49 U S C 44701 (f)

, a utho r i z e s the F AA to p r ovide e x e mpt i on to the st a tuto r y

r e qui r e m e nt to hold a n a i r m a n c e r ti f i ca te a s p re s cr ib e d in 49 U S C § 44711. The F AA

d o e s not a g r e e th a t re l y i n g on the pilot cer ti f i ca te f or a n a tion a l s e c u r i t y f i n ding pos e s a n

un n e c e ss a r y bu r d e n b e c a use pilots und e r this e x e mption, a nd the e x e mptions g ra n t e d

p re vious l y to s e c tion 333 re qu e sts, a r e a l r ea d y re qui re d to hold a pilot cer ti f i ca te to

s a tis f y 29 U S C 44711.

1 Secti o n 333(b ) o f P

. L

. 112

- 9 5 s tate s
, in p a r t: “ I n m a k i n g t h e d ete r m i n ati o n u n d er su b s ec ti o n ( a )

, t h e Sec r eta r y

s h all d ete r m i n e, at a mi n i m u m

- - (1 ) w h i c h t y p es o f un m a n n ed ai r c r a f t s ys t e ms
, i f a n y
, as a r e s u l t o f t h eir s ize,

w e i g h t, s p ee d

, op e r ati o n al ca p a b ili t y
, pro x i m i t y to ai rpor ts a n d pop u lated a r ea s
, a n d op e r ati o n w i t h in v is u al l i n e

o f s i g h t do n o t c r eate a h aza r d to us e r s o f t h e n a t i o n al ai r s p ace s ys t e m o r t h e p u b lic o r po s e a t h r eat to n at i o n al

s ec u r i t y ; ...”11

The C o a lition c omm e nt s th a t a visu a l obs er v e r ( VO) should not be re qui r e d f or a ll sm a ll UAS op era tion. The C o a lition f u r th e r a s s er t e d th a t the p re s e n c e of one o r mo r e VOs m a y

a llow the UAS to be op era t e d b e y o nd V L OS of the P I C a nd th a t the p e tition er’ s p r o p os a l to

op era te the UA within V L OS of the P I C and/or VO should b e p er mitt e d. The F AA n ot e s th a t one of the d e t er min a tions f or op e ra t ions und e r s ec tion 333 is o p era tion within visu a l

line of si g ht. As t h e P I C is d e t er min e d to be i n c omm a nd of the UA, h e must m a int a in

V L OS w hile op era ti n g the UA. The F AA a lso not e s th a t a visu a l obs er v e r c o mpl e m e nts the

P I C s ca p a bili t y to s e e a nd a void oth e r a i r cr a f t, in c luding wh e n t h e P I C m a y b e mom e nt ar i l y

a tt e ndi n g to oth e r f l y

i n g t a sks (e

. g ., m a n e u v er i n g the a i rcr a f t c lose to a c to r s a nd ac t re ss e s

a nd oth e r obj ec ts on a f ilm s e t ) . The VO p r ovid e s a n a ddition a l l e v e l of op e ra tion a l s a f e t y

.

AMA comments that it shared the Coal ition’s belief that Viafield’s choice of aircraft, program criteria and proposed method of operation meets and arguably exceeds the level of safety presented by other Section 333 exemptions previously granted. AMA states that it supported Viafield’s propo sal to use the eBee in accordance with AMAs community

- based guidelines.

A L P A e x p re ss e s c on c er n r e g ar di n g s e v e r a l a sp ec t s of the p e tition. A L P A not e d that the anticipated operation is expected to occur below 400 feet above the s urface. A L P A st a t e s

“ th er e must be m e a ns b oth to e nsu r e th a t the s U AS re m a ins within the d ef in e d a i r s p ac e a nd

to e nsu r e th a t the h a z ar d o f o th e r a i r c raf t int r udi n g on the op era tion is miti g a t e d.” The F AA

b e li e v e s the limit a tions und e r whi c h the p e tition e r will op era te ( i. e

. VL OS a nd a t or b e low

4 00 fee t A G L ) a r e su ff i c i e nt miti g a tions to this r isk so th a t the op era tions will not a dv er s e l y

a f

fec t s afe t y

.

ALPA notes that the petition does not address whether the operator will use an observer, nor how the pi lot and the observer will be able to communicate with each other. A L P A st a t e s th a t if voice communication is used, the pilot a nd obs er v e r should be a b le to m a int a in a visu a l

obs er v a tion of the a i rc r a f t a nd ar e a of op e ra tion w h e n using voi c e c ommu n i ca tion. NAAA

st a t e s UAS obs er v er s must be p re s e nt a nd a ble to c om m uni ca te with the op e r a tor fr om the

most minim a l dist a n c e possib l e . The F AA h a s ins e r t e d a c ondition r e g a r ding P I C a nd visu a l

obs er v e r c ommuni ca tions.

A L P A a ss er ts the UA S ’ s lithium po l y m e r b a tt er i e s h a ve num er ous a sso c i a t e d f i r e a nd

e x plosion h a z ar ds a s outlin e d in DOT/ F AA/A R

- 09/55, “ F l a mm a bili t y As s e ssm e nt of

L

ithium

- I on a nd L ithium

- I on P o l y m e r B a t t e r y C e ll D e si g n e d f or Ai rcr a f t P ow e r U s a g e ( J a n u a r y 2010 ) ,” a nd th a t the s af e ca r r i a g e of t h e b a tt e r i e s a nd the mitig a tions in pl ac e f or kn o wn r i s ks should be a dd re ss e d. T h e r e fe r e n ce d stu d y w a s p r im ar i l y c o ndu c t e d to

d e t er mine h o w cer t a in b a tt e r y c e lls reac t in a f i r e situ a tion a b o ar d m a nn e d a i r pl a n e s. Giv e n the si z e of the b a t t e r y a nd the o p era ti n g c onditions of the UA S , the F AA c on c lud e s t h a t the

use of a lithium po l y m e r b a tt e r y will not pose a n undue s a f e t y r isk f or t he p r opos e d

op e ra tions.

A L P A c omm e nts th a t c o mm a nd a nd c ont r ol ( C 2) link fa ilu re s a r e one of th e most c ommon fa ilu re s on a UA S

, a nd t h a t lost link mi t i g a tions should re qui r e s a f e mod e s t o p re v e nt f l y

-12

a w a ys or oth e r s ce n ar ios. The F AA a g r ee s a nd ca r ef ul l y e x a min e d the p r opos e d o p era tion to

e nsu r e th a t the v e hi c le d e s i g n a n d the p e tition er’ s op e r a ting do c u m e nts a dd re s s e d pot e nti a l

h a z ar ds re l a t e d to C 2 fa ilu r e . T h e F AA f inds th a t the U A S to be op era t e d b y the p e tition e r h a s su ff i c i e nt d e si g n f ea tu r e s to a dd re s s th e se h a z ar ds. The F A A a lso f inds th a t the op e r a ting

do c u m e nts h a ve in c o r po ra t e d s afe t y p r o c e du re s to be f ollow e d b y a ll op era t ion a l p ar ti c ip a nts
should a C 2 fa ilu r e o cc u r

. F u r th e r d e t a il is c ont a in e d in the a n a l y sis o f the UAS b e low.

A L P A st a t e s the UAS should be cer ti f i e d to the s a m e l e v e l of s afe t y un d e r p a r t 21 a nd §

91.203 a s oth e r c omm erc i a l l y op e ra t e d a i rcr a f t in the N a ti on a l Ai r sp ac e S y st e m ( NA S )

. A L P A a lso a r g u e s th a t und e r § 91.7, UAS op e r a to r s must d e monst ra te th e ir a i r wo r thin e ss to
the s a me e x t e nt as o p era to r s of ot h e r a i r cr a f t.

A L P A a lso not e s th a t the p e tition er’ s p r opos e d o p era tions a r e f or “c omp e n s a tion or hi re
, ”

a nd a r g u e s the pilot must hold a t l ea st a c u rre nt F AA c omm erc i a l pilot cer ti f i c a te with a n

a pp r o p r i a te ca t e g o r y a nd c l a ss r a ting f or the t y pe of a i rc r af t b e ing f lown, a s w e ll a s sp e c i f ic

a nd a d e qu a te t ra ining on the U AS m a ke a nd mod e l int e nd e d to be us e d

. S imil ar l y
, A L P A

a ss er ts a c u rr e nt s ec ond

- c l a ss a i r m a n m e d i ca l cer ti f i c a te should be re qui re d. N AAA a lso

c o mm e nt e d on pilot qu a li f i ca tion, st a tin g

—

J ust a s m a nn e d a i rcraf t p i lots ar e re qui r e d to und e r g o a

r i g o r ous t ra ini n g c u rr i c ulum a nd show th a t th e y ar e f it to

op era te a c omm erc i a l a i r c raf t, so too must UAS op era to r s. Holding a c omm erc i a l c er ti f i ca te holds UAS op era to r s to
simil a r hi g h st a nd ar ds a s c omm e rc i a l a i rc r af t op e r a to r s a nd

e nsu re s th e y a r e a w a r e of th e ir re sponsibiliti e s a s c omm erc i a l

op e r a t o r s within the NA S . M e di c a l re qui re m e nts e nsu r e th e y h a v e the n e ce ss a r y visu a l a nd m e nt a l ac ui t y to op era te a

c omm erc i a l a i rc r af t re p ea t e d l y ov e r a sust a in e d p er iod of tim e

.

The F A A h a s r e vi e w e d t he knowl e d g e a nd t ra ini n g r e qui re d b y hold e r s of both p r iv a te a nd

c omm erc i a l c er ti f i c a t e s. Addition a l d e t a ils ar e a v a il a ble in the e nsui n g a n a l y sis of this issue

with r e g ar ds to 14 C F R § 61. 1 13.

ALPA stated that although petitioner asked for an exemption from § 91.109 Flight

instruction , they failed to provide any information regarding the qualifications of the persons providing instruction per 14 CFR § 61.195 which defines the requirements for flight instructors. A certificated flight instructor is authorized to provide the instruction required for

the certific ates 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 to be a certificated flight instructor because the instruction is not being provided for a certifi cate or rating listed in § 61.193. We note 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. Of course, any instruction13

provided toward obtaining the pilot certificate required by this exemption would need to be provided by a certificated flight instructor.

A L P A oppos e s a n e x e mption fr om the p re

- f l i g ht a c tion re qui re m e nts of § 9 1.1 03. In addition, A L P A not e s 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. This c omm e nt is

a dd re ss e d in d e t a il in the F AA a n a l y sis b e low.

A L P A m e ntion e d the a i r craf t will not h a v e a b ar o m e t r ic a ltim e t e r a s r e qui r e d b y 14 C F R § 91.121, st a ting the a bili t y to a c c u ra t e l y m a int a in a ltitude must be a dd re ss e d,

a nd p r o ce ss e s o r miti g a tions, su c h a s re dun d a nt c ont r o l ca p a bili t y
, f a il

- s a f e s y st e ms, b ac kups a nd sp ec i f i c , v a lid a t e d p r o ce du re s f or s y st e m a nd e q u ipm e nt fa ilu re s must be in pl ace . The F A A a g ree s with A L P A a nd a dd re ss e s this c on c er n in its a n a l y sis of the

e x e mption fr om 14 C F R § 91.121, f inding th a t the a lt er n a tive m ea ns of c ompli a n c e

p r opo s e d b y t h e p e tition e r do e s not a dv er s e l y af f

ec t s afe t y

.

R e g a r di n g the f u e l re qui r e m e nts of § 91.151, A L P A a r g u e s th a t usi n g b a tt e r i e s a s the on l y

sou r c e of a n a i r cr a f t ’ s pow e r is a subst a nti a l shi f t fr om t ra dition a l m e thods of p r opulsion, a nd

re qui re s f u r th e r r e s e a rc h to d e t e r mine b e st s afe t y p r ac ti c e s. This c omm e nt is a dd r e ss e d in

d e t a il b e low.

A L P A e x p re ss e s c on c e r n on wh e th e r the p e tition er’ s UAS c a n c omp l y wi t h the a i rc r af t
li g ht re qui re m e nts f o r ni g ht o p era tions in § 91.209, g i v e n its lim i t e d e l ec t r ic po w er . The

p e tition e r indi ca t e s th a t this e x e mption l i mits op era tions to d a y time on l y

.

R e g a r di n g §§ 91.405 ( a )

, 91.407 (a)( 1 ) , 91.409 ( a )( 2 )

, a nd 91.417 ( a ) a nd ( b )

, A L P A oppos e s

t h e p e tition er’ s a tt e mpt to a v oid c ompli a n c e with e st a blish e d a i rcr a f t m a int e n a n c e a nd

r ec o r dk ee pi n g re qui re m e nts. A L P A st a t e s the UAS should c omply with the s a me l e v e l of

s afe t y a s oth e r a i rc r af t op e r a t e d c omm e r c i a l l y in the N A S . This c omm e nt is a dd re ss e d in

d e t a il b e low.

A L P A a lso e x p re ss e s c o n cer n th a t the p e tition er ’ s w a iv e r r e qu e st is not f o r a sin g l e sp ec i f i c

op e ra tion or lo c a tion, but f or a ll op e r a tions of the s a me g e n e ra l t y p e

. A L P A st a t e s this

re sults in a c onsid e r a ble in c r ea se i n the F A A ’ s ov er s i g ht t a sks. The F AA no t e s A L P As

c on cer n a nd in o r d e r to minimi z e pot e nt i a l imp ac t to the NA S , the F AA r e qui re s eac h

o p e r a tor s ec u r e a C er ti f i ca te of Autho r i z a tion or C OA whi c h c o v er s sp ec i f ic d e t a ils of the

p e tition er s op era tion. The F A A r e c o g ni z e s th a t UAS int e g r a tion will g e n era te n e w NAS

a cce ss d e m a nd a nd will re vi e w a nd a djust a c c o r d in g l y

.

NAAA st a t e s it re p re s e n t s the int ere sts of sm a ll busin e ss own er s a nd pilots li ce ns e d

a s c omm erc i a l a ppli ca to r s. NAAA e x pl a ins th a t its m e mb er s op e r a te in low

- l e v e l a i r s p ace
,

a nd c l ea r lo w

- l e v e l a i r s p ac e i s vit a l to the s afe t y o f th e se op era to r s.14

NAAA st a t e s th a t s e e i n g a nd a voi ding ot h e r a i r cr a f t a nd h a z ar dous obst r u c t ions is the

b ac kbone f or a g r i c ultu r a l s a f e t y
, a n d a g r i c ultu ra l pilots d e p e nd on pilots of oth e r a i rc r af t to

p erf o r m th e ir s ee

- a n d

- a void f u n c tions n ee d e d to p r e v e nt c ollisions. NAAA b e li e v e s U A

op era tions a t low a l titud e s will in crea se the pot e nti a l of c ollision h azar ds with a g r i c ultu r a l

a i r craf t. N AAA a r g u e s th a t until a d e qu a te s e e

- a n d

- a void t ec hnol og y is d e v e lop e d, the F AA

should re qui r e U AS op era to r s to post a Noti c e to Ai r m e n ( N O TAM) 4 8 to 72 hou r s b ef o r e

o p e r a tions. NAAA p r opos e s UAS a i r c raf t b e p a int e d a h i g h l y visible c olo r , be e quipp e d

with st r obe li g hts, a nd use Autom a tic D e p e n d e nt S u r v e ill a n ce

– B r o a d ca st (A D S

– B ) or oth e r simil a r lo ca tion re po r ti n g t ec hnolo g y . To a dd r e ss th e se c on c er ns the F AA h a s in c o r po r a t e d

a sso c i a t e d c onditions a nd limit a tions i n to this e x e m ption, in c ludin g : a ) NO T AMs issu e d f or

a ll op e r a t ions, b) op era tions c ondu c t e d within V L OS of the P I C a nd the VO, a nd c ) the UAS

P I C must a lw a y s y i e ld r i g ht

- o f

- w a y to m a nn e d a i r c r af t.

NAAA a lso p r o po s e s a n umb e r of op e r a ting limit a tions a nd re qui re m e nts f or UAS op era t o r s. NAAA st a t e s U AS op er a to r s should h a ve p r o c e d u re s to imm e di a t e l y g r ou n d the UAS if

a noth e r low

- f l y i n g a i rc r af t is within 2 mil e s; be a tt e ntive a nd fr e e fr om dist r a c tions; c omp l y wit h a ll a ppli ca ble r e g ul a tions, poli c i e s, a nd p r o c e du re s; b e e quipp e d with a vi a tion ra dios s e t

to a lo ca l l y d ef in e d f r e qu e n c y ; h a ve a s e p a r a te VO with a s e c ond

- c l a ss m e di ca l cer ti f i ca te

a nd p erf o r m duti e s f or on l y o n e UAS a t a tim e ; m a int a in lin e

- o f

- si g ht o p era tions; a nd be

w e ll

- v er s e d in the UAS op era tor d o c um e nt. NAAA f u r th e r st a t e s U AS should be p r op er l y

m a int a in e d, h a ve a r e g ist ere d N

- Numb e r on a n ind e st r u c tible a nd u n mov a ble pl a t e
, a nd b e

r e qui re d to h a ve a n a i r wo r thin e ss c er ti f i ca t e a nd li a bili t y insu r a n c e

. Th e se c omm e nts a r e

a d d re ss e d in the F AA ’ s a n a l y sis a nd c onditions a nd limit a tions.

C on cer ns ra i s e d in this c omm e nt s ec tion ar e a dd r e ss e d in the F A A ’ s a n a l y sis b e low a nd

wh e r e n ece ss a r y a pp r o p r i a te r i s k miti g a tions ar e impl e m e nt e d th r o u g h the c ondit i ons a nd

limit a tions on the op era tions.

The FAA's analysis is as follows:

Unmanned Aircraft System

The petitioner requested relief from 14 CFR part 21, Subpart H, Airworthiness Certificates

. In accordance with the statutory criteria provided in Section 333 of P.L. 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 its operation, the Secretary of Transportation has determined

that this aircraft meets the condi tions of Section 333. Therefore, the FAA finds that the requested relief from 14 CFR part 21, Subpart H, and any associated noise certification and testing requirements of part 36, is not necessary.

Manned aircraft conducting aerial imagery operations can weigh 5,000 to 7,000 lbs. or more, are operated by an onboard pilot and may carry other onboard crewmembers, as well as carry

100

- 200 gallons or more of fuel. The petitioner’s UA weighs approximately 1.5 lbs. The pilot and crew will be remotely located fr om the aircraft. The limited weight and construction15

reduces the potential for harm to persons or damage to property in the event of an incident or accident. The risk to an onboard pilot and crew during an incident or accident is eliminated

with the use of a UAS for the proposed operation.

Manned aircraft are at risk of fuel spillage and fire in the event of an incident or accident. The unmanned aircraft (UA) carries no fuel and therefore the risk of fire following an incident or accident due to fuel spill age is eliminated.

The petitioner’s UAS has the capability to land safely after experiencing certain in

- flight contingencies or failures and is also able to respond to a loss of GPS or a lost

- link event with

pre

- coordinated automated landing maneuvers. T hese safety features provide an equivalent level of safety compared to a manned aircraft holding a restricted airworthiness certificate performing a similar operation.

Regarding the petitioner’s requested relief from 14 CFR § 45.23(b) Display of marks, § 45.29 Size of Marks and § 91.319(a) (1) Aircraft having experimental certificates, the petitioner presumably requests this relief under the assumption that marking with the word “experimental” will be required as a condition of a grant of exemption. Howeve r, this marking is reserved for aircraft that are issued experim ental certificates under

14 CFR § 21.191. The petitioner’s UAS will not be certificated under § 21.191, and therefore the “experimental” marking is not required. Since the petitioner’s UAS wil l not be certificated under § 21.191, a grant of exemption for §§ 45.23(b) and 91.319(a)(1) is not necessary. The petitioner’s UA must be identified by serial number, registered in accordance with

14 CFR part 47, and have identification (N

- Number) mar king s in accordance with

14 CFR part 45, Subpart C. Markings must be as large as practicable per § 45.29(f).

The petitioner requests relief from14 CFR §§ 91.405 (a) Maintenance required

, 91.407(a)(1) O peration after maintenance, preventi ve maintenance, rebuilding, or

alteration , 91.409(a)(2) Inspections , and 91.417(a) and (b) Maintenance records . The FAA has evaluated the petitioner’s request and determined that cause for exemption to these requirements is warranted. The FAA notes that the petitioner’s operating documents contain preflight and post flight checks for the UAS. The FAA has also determined that relief from § 91.409(a)(1) is also necessary because it is an alternate inspection requirement of § 91.409(a)(2). The FAA finds th at adherence to the operating documents, as required by the conditions and limitations below, is sufficient to ensure that safety is not adversely

affected.

UAS Pilot In Command

Regarding the petitioner’s requested relief from 14 CFR § 61.113(a) and (b) Private pilot privileges and limitations, the petitioner requested regulatory relief to operate its UAS with an FAA private airman certificate pilot in lieu of an FAA commercially certificated airman. Although Section 333 provides limited statutory f lexi bility relative to 49 USC § 44704 for the purposes of airworthiness certification, it does not provide flexibility relative to other16

sections of title 49. The FAA does not possess the authority to exempt from the statutory requirement to hold an airman ce rtificate, as prescribed in 49 USC § 44711. For further information see Exemption No. 11110 (Trimble Navigation, Ltd).

T he FAA is also requiring a pilot certificate for UAS operations because pilots holding an FAA issued private or commercial pilot cer tificate are subject to security screening by the Department of Homeland Security that certificated airmen undergo. As previously determined by the Secretary, the requirement to have an airman certificate ameliorates security concerns over civil UAS opera tions conducted in accordance with Section 333.

Given these grounds, the FAA must determine the appropriate level of pilot certification for the petitioner’s proposed operation.

Under current regulations, civil operations for compensation or hire requir e a PIC holding a commercial pilot certificate per 14 CFR part 61. Based on the private pilot limitations in accordance with pertinent parts of 14 CFR § 61.113(a) and (b), a pilot holding a private pilot

certificate cannot act as a PIC of an aircraft for compensation or hire unless the flight is only incidental to a business or employment. However, in Grant of Exemption No. 11062 to Astraeus Aerial (Astraeus), the FAA determined that a PIC with a private pilot certificate operating the Astraeus UAS would not adversely affect operations in the NAS or present a hazard to persons or property on the ground.

The petitioner proposes to operate with a pilot who does not possess an FAA issued pilot certificate. This is similar to other petitions for exemption pr eviously filed with and considered by the FAA. As in Exemption Nos. 11062 (Astraeus) and 11138 (Douglas Trudeau), the FAA has analyzed the petitioner’s proposed operation and determined it does not differ significantly from these grants of exemption. The petitioner plans to operate in the NAS over controlled access property with the permission of the property owner/controller, while also limiting property access to consenting participants while operations are underway. Given: 1) the similar nature of the petitioner’s proposed operating environment to that of Astraeus and Trudeau, 2) the parallel nature of private pilot aeronautical knowledge requirements to those of commercial requirements [ref: Exemption No. 11062], and 3) the airmanship skills necessary to operate the UAS, the FAA finds that the additional manned airmanship experience of a commercially certificated pilot would not correlate to the airmanship skills necessary for the petitioner’s proposed operations. Therefore, the FAA

finds that a PIC h olding a private pilot certificate and a third

- class airman medical certificate is appropriate for the proposed operations.

In conclusion, the FAA finds that a PIC holding a private pilot certificate and a third

- class airman medical certificate, and who h as completed the petitioner’s flight time requirements, can conduct the proposed UAS operations without adversely affecting the safety of the NAS and persons or property on the ground. Upon consideration of the overall safety case presented by the petitio ner and the concerns of the commenters, the FAA finds that granting17

the requested relief from 14 CFR § 61.113(a) and (b), is warranted. Additionally, the requested relief from 14 CFR § 61.23 is not granted.

The petitioner also requested relief from § 61. 3 ( Requirement for certificates, ratings, and
authorizations ). However, the FAA finds that relief is not necessary because the regulation permits pilots to keep pilot and medical certificates in their physical possession when exercising the privileges of that certificate.

The petitioner did not indicate whether it will supplement its proposed operation(s) with a visual observer (VO). The FAA notes that one of the determinations for operations under section 333 is operation within VLOS. As the PIC is det ermined to be in command of the UA, he or she must maintain VLOS while operating the UA. The FAA also notes that a visual observer complements the PIC’s capability to see and avoid other aircraft (per § 91.113), including when the PIC may be momentarily a ttending to other flying tasks (e.g., maneuvering the aircraft close to structures, vehicles, or other objects). The VO provides an additional level of operational safety and thus 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 UA at all times. The conditions and limitations below stipulate that the PIC must ensure that the VO can perform the functions prescribed in the operating documents. It is the respons ibility of the PIC to be limit operations of the UA to distances within the visual capabilities of both the PIC and VO. Therefore, as in Grant of Exemption No. 11062 to Astraeus, the FAA does not consider a medical certificate necessary for the VO.

Operat ing parameters of the UAS

Regarding the petitioner’s requested relief from 14 CFR § 91.7(a) Civil aircraft

airworthiness , the FAA finds that relief from § 91.7(a) is necessary. While the petitioner’s UAS will not require an airworthiness certificate in a ccordance with 14 CFR part 21, Subpart H, the FAA considers the petitioner’s compliance with its operating documents to be a sufficient means for determining an airworthy condition. Therefore, relief from § 91.7(a) is granted. The petitioner is still req uired to ensure that its aircraft is in an airworthy condition

– based on compliance with the operating documents

– prior to every flight, and as stated in the

conditions and limitations below.

I n acc o r d a n c e with 14 C F R § 91.7 ( b ) C i v il Air c raft Air w orthin e ss , the P I C of the UAS is

re sponsible f or d e t er mining w h e th e r the a i rc r af t is in a c ondition f or s a f e f li g ht. Altho u g h the

p e tition e r did not s ee k re l i e f fr om § 91.7 ( b ) in its p e tition, the F AA, a s in g r a nt of E x e mption

No. 11062 to Ast rae us, h a s d e t er mi n e d th a t the op e ra t ing do c um e nts in c lude pr o ce du re s to b e

us e d p r ior to eac h f li g ht th a t c a n e nsu r e c ompli a n c e with § 91.7 ( b ) . Th e r ef o r e
, r e li e f fr om § 91.7 ( b ) is not n ece ss a r y

. The p e tit i on e r is still re qui re d to e nsu r e th a t its a i rc r af t is in a

c onditi on f or s a f e f li g ht

– b a s e d on c ompli a n c e with the op e r a ting d o c um e nts

– p r ior to e v e r y f

li g ht.18

Regarding the petitioner’s requested relief from 14 CFR § 91.9, Civil aircraft flight manual, marking, and placard requirements and 14 CFR § 91.203(a) and (b) Ci vil aircraft: Certifications required , the FAA has previously determined in Grant of Exemption 11062, Astraeus Aerial, that relief from these sections is not necessary. Relevant materials may be kept in a location accessible to the PIC in compliance with the regulations.

Regarding the petitioner’s requested relief from 14 CFR 91.109 Flight instruction; Simulated instrument flight and certain flight tests, the petitioner did not describe training scenarios in

which a dual set of controls would be utilized or required, i.e. dual flight instruction, provided by a flight instructor or other company

- designated individual, that would require that individual to have fully functioning dual controls. Rather, the petitioner intends to accomplish training as describ ed in the eBee training program. Furthermore, the FAA is requiring that the petitioner’s PIC possess at least a private pilot’s certificate. Also, this exemption will require that training operations only be conducted during dedicated training sessions. The FAA finds that safety will not be adversely impacted if the petitioner follows the training outlined in the operating documents. The FAA notes, however, that the eBee ground control station is

computer

- based and therefore will be accessible to both a n instructor and a student at all times and the controls can be passed back and forth between the instructor and student, thus achieving an equivalent level of safety as having two sets of controls

. As such, the FAA finds that the petitioner can conduct i ts operations without the requested relief from § 91.109.

Regarding the petitioner’s requested relief from 14 CFR § 91.119 Minimum safe altitudes , the petitioner did not specify the paragraph(s) in 14 CFR § 91.119 from which it requires relief.

Relief fr om § 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 the petitioner to be able to perform an emergency landing without undue hazard to persons or property on th e surface if a power unit fails. Relief from § 91.119(b), operation over congested areas, is not applicable, because the petitioner states that operations will not be conducted over congested areas.

Relief from § 91.119(c) is necessary because the aircr aft will be operated at altitudes below

400 feet AGL. Section 91.119(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 spar sely populated areas. Section 91.119(c) provides that in operations over water or sparsely populated areas, the aircraft may not be operated closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure. The petitioner states that it will operate

pur suant to the following, self

- imposed restrictions related to § 91.119:

• Petitioner will conduct operations over private, controlled

- access, or public property where approved;

• Petitioner will obtain permission from the landowner/authority before commenci ng any flight;

• Petitioner will avoid operations over congested areas;19

• Petitioner will not conduct operations that interfere with manned aircraft operations, will yield the right of way to manned aircraft, and will see and avoid other aircraft and

obstacl es at all times;

• Petitioner will limit operations to Visual Flight Rules Meteorological Conditions (VMC) and daylight hours;

• Petitioner will ensure aircraft operations remain within VLOSand will be visually monitored at all times;

• Petitioner will ensure VLOS operations with a GPS geo

- fence around operator of 0.15 miles;

• Petitioner will pre

- program flight ceiling at 400 feet;

• Petitioner will verbally coordinate all operations conducted within 5 miles from an airport with the airport authority, or air tr affic control when a control tower is present at the airport;

• Petitioner will ensure all operations shall comply with required permissions and permits established by territorial, state, county or city jurisdictions; including local law enforcement, fire, or other appropriate governmental agencies.

• Petitioner will conduct eBee operations in compliance with existing safety procedures inherent to the activities of the related company.

The petitioner proposes to avoid congested areas and operations over open air assemblies of persons; however the petitioner did not describe specific minimum stand

- off distances from persons, vessels, vehicles and structures. As discussed in Exemption No. 11109 to Clayco, Inc. (see Docket No. FAA

- 2014

- 0507), operations conducte d closer than 500 feet to the ground may require that the UA be operated closer than 500 feet to essential persons, or objects that would not be possible without additional relief. Therefore, the FAA is requiring that prior to conducting UAS operations, a ll persons not essential to flight operations (nonparticipating persons) must remain at appropriate distances. In open areas this requires the UA to remain 500 feet from all persons other than essential flight personnel (i.e. PIC, VO, operator trainees or essential persons).

The FAA has also considered that the UA will weigh about 1.5 pounds. If barriers or structures are present that can sufficiently protect nonparticipating persons from the UA or debris in the event of an accident, then the UA may op erate closer than 500 feet to persons afforded such protection. The operator must also ensure that nonparticipating persons remain under such protection. If a situation arises where nonparticipating persons leave such protection and are within 500 feet of the UA, flight operations must cease immediately. When considering how to immediately cease operations, the primary concern is the safety of those nonparticipating persons. In addition, the FAA finds that operations may be conducted closer

than 500 feet to vessels, vehicles and structures when the property owner/controller grants such permission and the PIC makes a safety assessment of the risk of operating closer to those objects and determines that it does not present an undue hazard.20

Thus, the FAA fi nds that relief from § 91.119(c) is warranted provided adherence to the procedures in the operating documents and the FAA’s additional conditions and limitations outlined below. Relief from § 91.119(a) is unwarranted as the FAA expects the petitioner to

be able to perform an emergency landing without undue hazard to persons or property on the surface. Relief from §§ 91.119(b) and 91.119(d) are not applicable.

Regarding the petitioner’s requested relief from 14 CFR § 91.121 Altimeter Settings , the petition er has a barometric altimeter and GPS derived altitude capabilities. However, as stated in the conditions and limitations below, the FAA requires any altitude reported to ATC to be in feet AGL. The petitioner may choose to set the altimeter to zero feet AGL rather than local barometric pressure or field altitude 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.

Regarding the petitioner’s requested relief from § 91.151(a) Fuel requirements for flight in
VFR conditions, prior relief has been granted for manned aircraft to operate at less than the prescribed minimums, including Exemption Nos. 2689, 57 45, and 10650. In addition, similar

UAS

- specific relief has been granted in Exemption Nos. 8811, 10808, and 10673 for daytime, VFR conditions. The UA batteries provide approximately 45 minutes of powered flight. Information provided in the operating doc uments discusses procedures regarding remaining battery power. Those documents provide explanation of the automatic landing procedures that are executed when the eBee exhausts battery power. However, the FAA believes that, given the limitations on its pro posed operations and the location of those proposed operations, a reduced minimum power reserve for flight in daytime VFR conditions is reasonable. These factors provide the FAA with sufficient reason to grant the relief from 14 CFR § 91.151(a) as

requeste d in accordance with the conditions and limitations below, that prohibit the PIC from beginning a f l i g ht unless ( c onsid e ring wind a nd f o r e ca st w ea ther c ondi t ions) there is enough power to fly at normal cruising speed to the intended landing point and land the UA with 30% battery power remaining.

The petitioner proposed operating in mostly rural areas. The FAA Air Traffic Organization (ATO) reviews all proposed UAS operations and evaluates the safety of these operations relative to the requested airspace t hrough the existing Certificate of Waiver or Authorization (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 provides ATC the ability to consider airspace issues that are unique to UAS operations. The COA will require the operator to request a NOTAM, which is the mechanism for alerting other users of the NAS to

the UA S activities being conducted. The conditions and limitations below prescribe the requirement for the petitioner to obtain an ATO

- issued COA.21

Public Interest

The FAA finds that a grant of exemption is in the public interest. The UA is able to collect

ne ar infrared (NIR) and/or multispectral images that would provide scientists with important information to assist efforts to maximize crop yields. According to the petitioner, this would result in increased agricultural sustainability. In addition, the pe titioner asserts that carrying out these operations using a battery

- powered eBee rather than a manned aircraft would result in less risk to life and property on the ground. The enhanced safety achieved using a UA with the specifications described by the p etitioner and carrying no passengers or crew, rather than a manned aircraft of significantly greater proportions, carrying crew in addition to flammable fuel, gives the FAA good cause to find that the UAS operation enabled by this exemption is in the publi c interest.

The table below summarizes the FAA’s determinations regarding regulatory relief:

Relief considered (14 CFR) FAA determination (14 CFR)
Part 21, Subpart H Relief not necessary

45.23 Relief not necessary

45.29 Relief not necessary

61.23 Re lief not granted

61.3 Relief not necessary

61.113 (a) and (b) Relief granted

61.133 Relief not necessary

91.7(a) and (b) Relief granted for paragraph (a) with
conditions and limitations, (b) relief not

necessary

91.9 Relief not necessary

91.109 Rel ief not necessary

91.119 Relief granted for paragraph (c) with

conditions and limitations

91.121 Relief granted with conditions and limitations

91.151(a) Relief granted for paragraph (a)(1), day, with

conditions and limitations

91.203(a) and (b) Reli ef not necessary

91.405 Relief granted for paragraph (a) with

conditions and limitations

91.407 Relief granted for paragraph (a)(1) with

conditions and limitations

91.409 Relief granted for paragraph (a)(1) and (2)

with conditions and limitations22

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

91 .417 Relief granted for paragraph (a) and (b) 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, Viafield, an agriculture cooperative, is granted an exemption from 14 CFR § § 91.7(a), 91.119(c), 91.121, 91.151(a)(1), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) and (2), and 91.417(a) and (b) to the extent necessary to allow Viafield to operate a UAS for the purpose of aerial imagery to support agriculture. This exemption is subject to the conditions and limitations listed below.

Conditions and Limitations

Relative to this grant of exemption , Viafield is hereafter referred to as the operator.

The petition and the following supporting documentation are hereinafter referred to as the operating documents:

1) Justification of airworthiness and safety assessment, 2) Inspection and maintenance requirements, 3) eBee User Manual, 4) eBee Training documentation, 5) Academy of Model Aeronautics Safety Requirements, and 6) The Viafield sUAS Scouting Announcement Form

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

1) Operations authorized by this grant of exemption are limited to the following aircraft described in the operating documents which is a fixed

- wing aircraft weighing

ap proximately 1.5 pounds: senseFly eBee (eBee). Proposed operations of any other aircraft will require a new petition or a petition to amend this grant.

2) UAS operations under this exemption are limited to conducting operations for the purpose of aerial imag ery to support agriculture.

3) The UA may not be flown at an indicated airspeed exceeding 35 mph.23

4) The UA must be operated at an altitude of no more than 400 feet above ground level
(AGL), as indicated by the procedures specified in the operating documents. All
altitudes reported to ATC must be in feet AGL.

5) The UA must be operated within visual line of sight (VLOS) of the pilot in command (PIC) at all times. This requires the PIC to be able to use human vision unaided by any

device other than corrective len ses, as specified on the PIC’s FAA

- issued airman

medical certificate.

6) All operations must utilize a visual observer (VO). The UA must be operated within the visual line of sight (VLOS) of the PIC and VO at all times. The VO may be used to satisfy the VL OS 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 a nd cannot transfer his or her designation for the duration of the flight. The PIC must ensure that the VO can perform the functions prescribed in the operating documents.

7) The operating documents and this grant of exemption must be accessible during UAS operations and made available to the Administrator upon request. If a discrepancy exists between the conditions and limitations in this exemption and the procedures outlined in the operating documents, the conditions and limitations herein take precedence and must be followed. Otherwise, the operator must follow the procedures as outlined in its operating documents. The operator may update or revise its operating documents. It is the operator’s responsibility to track such revisions and present updated a nd revised documents to the Administrator upon request. The operator must also present updated and revised documents if it petitions for extension or amendment to this grant of exemption. If the operator determines that any update or

revision would affect the basis upon which the FAA granted this exemption, then the operator must petition for an amendment to its grant of exemption. The FAA’s UAS Integration Office (AFS

- 80) may be contacted if questions arise regarding updates or revisions to the operating documents.

8) Prior to each flight, the PIC must inspect the UAS to ensure it is in a condition for safe flight. If the inspection reveals a condition that affects the safe operation of the UAS, the UAS is prohibited from operating until the necessary main tenance has been performed and the UAS is found to be in a condition for safe flight. The Ground Control Station must be included in the preflight inspection. All maintenance and alterations must be properly documented in the aircraft records.

9) Any UAS t hat 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. The PIC who conducts the functional test flight must make an

entr y in the aircraft records.24

10) The pre

- flight inspection section in the operating documents must account for all potential discrepancies, e.g. inoperable components, items, or equipment, not already covered in the relevant sections of the operating documents.

11) The operator must follow the UAS manufacturer’s aircraft/component, maintenance, overhaul, replacement, inspection, and life limit requirements.

12) The operator must carry out its maintenance, inspections, and record keeping requirements, in accordance wi th the operating documents. Maintenance, inspection, alterations, and status of replacement/overhaul component parts must be noted in the aircraft records, including total time in service, description of work accomplished, and the signature of the authori zed person returning the UAS to service.

13) Each UAS operated under this exemption must comply with all manufacturer Safety

Bulletins.

14) The authorized person must make an entry in the aircraft record of the corrective action taken against discrepancies disc overed between inspections.

15) The PIC must possess at least a private pilot certificate and at least a current third class medical certificate. The PIC must also meet the flight review requirements specified in 14 CFR § 61.56 in an aircraft in which the PIC is rated on his or her pilot certificate.

16) The operator may not permit any PIC to operate unless the PIC meets the operator’s qualification criteria and demonstrates the ability to safely operate the UAS in a manner consistent with how the UAS will be ope rated under this exemption, including evasive and emergency maneuvers and maintaining appropriate distances from persons, vessels, vehicles and structures. PIC qualification flight hours and currency must be logged in a manner consistent with 14 CFR § 61. 51(b). The PIC must ensure that the VO is trained appropriately in order to fulfill her or her duties. A record of training must be documented and made available upon request by the Administrator. Flights for the purposes of training the operator’s PICs and VOs (training, proficiency, and experience

- building), are permitted under the terms of this exemption. However, training operations may only be conducted during dedicated training sessions. During training, proficiency, and experience

- building flight s, all persons not essential for flight operations are considered nonparticipants, and the PIC must operate the UA with appropriate distance from nonparticipants in accordance with 14 CFR § 91.119.

17) The operator may not permit the PIC to operate the UAS fo r the purpose of aerial imagery to support agriculture (or similar operations), unless the PIC has demonstrated and logged in a manner consistent with 14 CFR § 61.51(b), the ability to safely operate the UAS in a manner consistent with how the UAS will be operated25

under this exemption, including evasive and emergency maneuvers and maintaining appropriate distances from people, vessels, vehicles and structures.

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

19) The UA may not operate within 5 nautical miles of an airp ort reference point as

denoted on a current FAA

- published aeronautical chart unless a letter of agreement with that airport’s management is obtained, and the operation is conducted in accordance with a NOTAM as required by the operator’s COA. The letter of agreement with the airport management must be made available to the Administrator

upon request.

20) The UA may not be operated less than 500 feet below or less than 2,000 feet horizontally from a cloud or when visibility is less than 3 statute miles from th e PIC.

21) If the UA loses communications or loses its GPS signal, it must return to a pre

determined location within the planned operating area and land or be recovered in accordance with the operating documents.

22) The PIC must abort the flight in the event o f unpredicted obstacles or emergencies in accordance with the operating documents.

23) The PIC is prohibited from beginning a flight unless (considering wind and forecast weather conditions) there is enough power to fly at normal cruising speed to the

intende d landing point and land the UA with 30% battery power remaining.

24) The operator must obtain an Air Traffic Organization (ATO) issued Certificate of Waiver or Authorization (COA) prior to conducting any operations under this grant of exemption. This COA wil l also require the operator to request a Notice to Airman (NOTAM) not more than 72 hours in advance, but not less than 48 hours prior to the operation. All operations shall be conducted in accordance with airspace requirements

in the ATO issued COA includ ing class of airspace, altitude level and potential transponder requirements.

25) 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) mar kings in accordance with 14 CFR part 45, Subpart C. Markings must be as large as practicable.26

26) Before conducting operations, the radio frequency spectrum used for operation and control of the UA must comply with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) or other appropriate government oversight agency requirements.

27) The 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 UAS is operating. These

documents must be made availab le to the Administrator or any law enforcement official upon request.

28) The UA must remain clear and yield the right of way to all manned aviation operations

and activities at all times.

29) The UAS may not be operated by the PIC from any moving device or vehi cle.

30) The UA may not be operated over congested or densely populated areas.

31) Flight operations must be conducted at least 500 feet from all nonparticipating persons, vessels, vehicles, and structures unless:

a) Barriers or structures are present that suffic iently protect nonparticipating persons from the UA and/or debris in the event of an accident. The operator must ensure that nonparticipating persons remain under such protection. If a situation arises where nonparticipating persons leave such protection a nd are within 500 feet of the UA, flight operations must cease immediately and/or;

b) The aircraft is operated near vessels, vehicles or structures where the owner/controller of such vessels, vehicles or structures has granted permission 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, and

c) Operations nearer to the PIC, VO, operator trainees or essential persons do not present an undue hazard to those persons per § 91.119(a).

32) All operations shall be conducted over private or controlled

- access property with permission from the property owner/controller or authorized representative. Permission from property owner/controller or authorized representative will be

obta ined for each flight to be conducted.

33) Any incident, accident, or flight operation that transgresses the lateral or vertical boundaries of the operational area as defined by the applicable COA must be reported to the FAA's UAS Integration Office (AFS

- 80) w ithin 24 hours. Accidents must be reported to the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) per instructions contained on the NTSB Web site: www.ntsb.gov.27

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

This exemption terminates on February 28, 2017 , unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

Issued in Washington, DC, on February 9, 2015.

/s/

John Ba rbagallo Acting Deputy Director, Flight Standards Service