v v

Jonathan B. Hill

+1 202 776 2725 jhill@cooley.com v ia regulations.gov

1299 PENNSYLVANIA AV ENUE, NW, SUITE 700, WASHINGTON, DC 20004

- 2400 T: (202) 842

- 7800 F: (202) 842

- 7899 WWW.COOLEY.COM August 24 , 2015

U. S. Department of Transportation Docket Management System 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE Washington, DC 20590

Re: FAA

- Docket 2015

- 0513 Amendment

- Exemption 11857

Dear Sir or Madam:

On June 19, 2015, the Federal Aviation Admin i stration ( “ FAA ” ) granted Liberty Mutual Insurance Company ( “ Liberty Mutual ” ) Exemption No. 11857 (the “ Exemption ” ) p ursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (the Re form Ac t) and 14 C.F.R. Part 11. (FAA Docket 20125

- 0513) That exemption authorize d the operation of several designated aircraft , as described in the exemption, in commercial service for the conduct of aerial photography for home and business roof inspection and large structure/fire site inspection

. The Exemption contained the FAA standard restrictions for operating closer than 500 feet to a structure, Condition 26. This request for an amendment addresses those restrictions, requesting a reduction in the restrict ion to allow operation of commercial UAS within

50 0 feet of nonparticipating person , vehicles and structure under the conditions proposed

herein

. 1 Liberty Mutual proposes that it be allowed under the conditions proposed to operate its Liberty 4 UAS

, weighing less than 4.4 lbs

. and flying at no more than 5 mph

, within a 25 f oot perimeter of a building to be inspected and no higher than 100 AGL.

The requirements of Condition 26 go beyond the need for safety when one considers the

use of UASs of less tha n 4.4 lbs. The UAS that will be used by Liberty Mutual weigh s less than 2 kgs

. , will be programmed to fly at speeds of no more than 5 mph , ha s nylon rotors and will be
operate d at an altitude of no more than 100 AGL

. These diminutive aircraft , operated u nder the conditions proposed, pose much less of a safety issue than a 55 lbs. UAS operating at speeds
up to 100 mph and at altitude of 400 feet . Because the safety requirements needed to protect persons, property and vehicles are significantly less with a UAS of the size described above , it is respectfully suggested that the requirements of Condit ion 26 can and should be changed

when a UAS , as described, is used, under the conditions set forth in this request for an amended exemption.

The issue that is pr esented by the Exemption ’s condition

, operating 500 feet from a

structure , can be illustrated by reviewing the diagram s set out in Exhibit A. As can be seen from

1 To the extent that Condition 27 of the Exemption is involved, Liberty Mutual will obtain the permission of the property owner for whose property Liberty Mutual provides insurance coverage before undertaking any inspection with a sUAS. Liberty Mutual will a lso need to obtain, to the extent required by local regulatory requirements, the approval of the local government before any such flight.August 24

, 2015 Page Two

1299 PENNSYLVANIA AV ENUE, NW, SUITE 700, WASHINGTON, DC 20004

- 2400 T: (202) 842

- 7800 F: (202) 842

- 7899 WWW.COOLEY.COM randomly selected neighborhoods in the five mun i cipalities : Amarillo, Texas ; Brooklyn, New York; Denver, Colorado; Oklahoma City, Oklahoma; St. Louis, Missouri ; and Winchester

Massachusetts

, the number of approvals needed from persons, vehicles and structures to allow operation of a ny small UAS

, would be the same whether it weighs 55 lbs or less than 4.4 lbs. This requirement is not related to the safety risks presented, especially when the aircraft to be used is restricted as to weight

, speed and altitude. The 500 foot radius far exceed s that needed to provide an equivalent level of safety under the current air regulations with the smaller, slower

aircraft

.

A radius of 500 feet is excessive give n the mass and speed of a U AS weighing less than

4.4lbs. Th e current “ buffer zone ” of 500 f ee t results in a vastly expanded number of per missions

needed to operate

, and in fact it makes the use of a ny UAS , no matter the size, impractical in any urban or suburban environment . It also extends protection to those who are not reasonably exposed to safety risks. In an urban environment such as Brooklyn, New York the requirement

could reach to over 137 individual consents just from the home owners within that radius. The

number of vehicles for which consents would be needed is unknowable. As can be seen t he

numbe r of consents decreases as the area to be inspected moves from a dense urban area to a
more rural or suburban area, such as Winchester or Amarillo , but the current limitations are not necessary to protect people or structures from possible harm from the sm all UAS , Liberty 4

, as approved for us e in the Exemption

.

Th ese realit ies of urban/suburban geography are such that requiring consent from all

homeowners with in the 500 foot radius is well beyond the safety needs that could or would be imposed on an equiv alent level of safety basis under the current regulations or the current

requ irements contained in the standard exemption for small UASs particularly in the case of a UAS the size proposed in this request . If , as proposed herein, all flight operations were

conducted within a n area that extends 25 feet out from the perimeter of the building to be inspected , at the weight and speed proposed, th at 25 foot buffer would provide protection to those who reasonably would be exposed and would not impose unworkable restrictions on operators for remote, if none existent

, safety concerns

. To comply with the current exemption
an operator would have to e nsure that all person s within the marked 500

- foot area, some as much as three or four blocks away, are either under co ver or behind a barrier sufficient to protect from them from a UAS that is operating several block s away

. Given the proposed restrictions on the aircraft size, weight

, speed and altitude , there simply is no credible risk to all

the people, structures or v ehicles within th at entire 500

- foot radius

. Under the terms of the current Exemption one owner of a building or automobile

, if th at person can be found, three blocks away from the proposed inspection

, could stop the flight by withholding approval. A

person walking on the sidewalk three or four blocks away would require termination of the flight.

Neither the building owner n or a pedestrian would reasonably be exposed to a safety risk where

the small UASs , as propose d herein, are in use.

Liberty Mutual, recog niz es that roof or structure inspections may pose some minimal level of risk to persons

, structures or vehicles

, g iven the size and speed restrictions contained in the standard exemption . Liberty Mutual

, therefore

, proposes that the FAA grant Liberty Mutual an amended exemption allowing roof inspections via aerial photography with the following

conditions:August 24

, 2015 Page Three

1299 PENNSYLVANIA AV ENUE, NW, SUITE 700, WASHINGTON, DC 20004

- 2400 T: (202) 842

- 7800 F: (202) 842

- 7899 WWW.COOLEY.COM 1. Roof inspection will only be conducted with an aircraft that weighs less than 4.4 lbs. (2 kilograms).

2. Roof insp ections would be conducted within a safety zone that extends 25 feet from and around the perimeter of the building to be inspected.

3. Roof inspection will not be conducted at an altitude higher than 100 feet above the ground.

4. Roof inspection will not be conducted at more than indicated airspeed of 5 mph (restricted by software in the UAS).

5. Roof inspections will be terminated should any unauthorized person breach the 25 foot safety zone around the building being inspected.

6. Roof inspections will be conducte d with the permission of the property owner/controller or authorized representative for the property over which the aircraft will fly.

7. Roof inspection will only use aircraft that have nylon propellers to minimize debris and potential damage to persons or property.

8. Roof inspection will be conducted with aircraft that have a return to home

function should an issue arise and a “kill switch” built into the UAS. Such a switch, located at the controls available to the operator, will terminate all power to

the a ircraft, causing it land immediately should such capability be needed.

9. For each flight the PIC shall conduct a “safety assessment” as described in the

Amended FOM submitted in this Docket on a confidential basis. If such

assessment does not establish that the flight can be undertaken with adequate safety, no flight will be commenced. If during any such flight conditions should change or alter such an assessment, the flight will be immediately terminated.

For the purposes of operating under this proposed amended exemption Liberty Mutual will operate an aircraft, Liberty 4 , as described in the confidential manuals submitted in this

Docket

.

Confidential Exhibit 1, the amended Flight Operations Manual (AFOM), submitted confidentially in this docket, sets fo rth in Appendix 1, Section 17, “Onsite Safety Assessment” the procedure to be followed by the PIC prior to any flight within the reduced 25

- foot perimeter. Specific reference is made to the Section 17.10 “Operations within the 25’ safety Zone ”. The

manua l restricts the size of the aircraft to 4.4 lbs.; requires all operations to be conducted within

the 25 foo t safety zone of the structure and at a speed no t to exceed 5 mph Confidential Exhibit 2, the Aircraft Flight Manual for Liberty 4, has been amended from that originally submitted in this docket to incorporate the conditions imposed by the Exemption already granted and insert a

new section entitled “25 foot Perimeter Fl ight Team Procedures ” at page 33

- 34.

The name and address of the applicant is:

Liberty Mutual Insurance Company 157 Berkeley Street
Boston, Massachusetts 02116

Attn: Brendan Pich a Special Projects Manager, Strategy & Innovation

_August 24

, 2015 Page Four

1299 PENNSYLVANIA AV ENUE, NW, SUITE 700, WASHINGTON, DC 20004

- 2400 T: (202) 842

- 7800 F: (202) 842

- 7899 WWW.COOLEY.COM Ph: 857.224.6999

Regulatio ns from which the exemption is requested:

14 C.F.R. 61.23(a) and (c) 14 C.F.R. 61.101(e)(4) and (5) 14 C.F.R. 61.113(a) 14 C.F.R. 61.315(a) 14 C.F.R. 91.7(a)

14 C.F.R. 91.119 (c)

14 C.F.R. 91.121 14 C.F.R. 91.151(a) (1) 14 C.F.R. 91.405(a) 14 C.F.R. 407(a)( 1) 14 C.F.R. 409(a) (1) and (2) 14 C.F.R. 417(a) and (b)

This amended exemption application , as was true for Liberty Mutual’s original exemption
request, is expressly submitted to fulfill Congress ’ goal in passing Section 333(a) through (c) of the Reform Act. This law directs the Secretary of Transportation to consider whether certain unmanned aircraft systems may operate safely in the national airspace system (NAS) before completion of the rulemak ing required under Section 332 of the Reform Act. In making this determination, the Secretary is required to determine which types of UASs do not create a hazard to users of the NAS or the public or pose a threat to national security in light of the

follo wing:

• The UAS ’ s size, weight, speed, and operational capability;

• Operation of the UAS in close proximity to airports and populated areas; and

• Operation of the UAS within visual line of sight of the operator.

Reform Act § 333 (a). Lastly, if the Secretary determines that such vehicles “ may operate safely in the national airspace system, the Secretary shall establish requirements for the safe operation of such aircraft in the national airspace system. ” Id. § 333(c) (emphasis added) 2

.

The Federal Aviation Act , in addition to the authority granted by Section 333 of the Reform Act, expressly grants the FAA the authority to issue exemptions. This statutory authority by its terms includes exempting civil aircraft, as defined under § 40101 of the Act, that

include s sUASs, from the requirement that all civil aircraft must have a current airworthiness

certificate.

2 Applicant interprets this provision to place a duty on the Administrator to not only process applications for exemp tions under section 333, but for the Administrator to craft conditions for the safe operation of the

UAS , if it should be determined that the conditions set forth herein do not fulfill the statutory requirements for approval.August 24

, 2015 Page Five

1299 PENNSYLVANIA AV ENUE, NW, SUITE 700, WASHINGTON, DC 20004

- 2400 T: (202) 842

- 7800 F: (202) 842

- 7899 WWW.COOLEY.COM The Administrator may grant an exemption from a requirement of a regulation prescribed under subsection (a) or (b) of section 40101 or any sections 44702

- 4 4716 of the Transportation Act if the Administrator finds the exemption in the public interest. 49 U.S.C. § 44701(f). See

also 49 U.S.C. § 44711(a); 49 U.S.C. § 44704; 14 C.F.R. § 91.203(a)(1).

Liberty Mutual ’s business and its proposed uses for the ai rcraft are described in its original exemption application in this docket, which is incorporated herein. They will operate only within the areas as described in the A FOM and amended Aircraft Flight Manuals ( “ AFMs ” )

attached as Exhibits 1 and 2

. 3 Operatio ns in compliance with these manuals will ensure that the

UAS will “ not create a hazard to users of the national airspace system or the public ” 4 and that the aircraft will operate in compliance with the conditions set forth in this application.

Given the greatly reduced size of the UASs , weighting less than 4.4 lbs., and the

restricted environment and speed envelop e within which they will operate, the applicant falls squarely within that zone of safety (an equivalent level of safety) in which Congress envi sioned that the FAA must, by exemption, allow commercial operations of UASs to commence immediately. Also due to the diminutive size of the UASs, the restricted areas in which the

relevant micro UASs will operate and the individualized safety assessment t hat will be performed before each flight, the risk to people and structures from the operation of these very small and slow moving aircraft, operating at very low altitudes, pos e no safety risk and approval of the application presents no national security issue.

Given the clear direction in Section 333 of the Reform Act, the authority contained in the Federal Aviation Act, as amended; the strong equivalent level of safety surrounding the proposed operations, and the significant public benefit, including enhanced safety, reduc ed environmental impacts, such as reduced emissions associated with allowing battery powered UASs for these functions instead of turbine or gas power aircraft/rotorcraft and operations with pilots having at least an FAA issued pilot license, the grant of the requested exemptions is in the public interest.

Given the height and speed restriction contained in this proposal as well as the built in operational ability to terminate a flight with a “ kill switch ”

, the applicant respectful ly requests that the FAA grant the requested exemption and this amendment without delay.

Attached hereto and made a part of this submission, as Exhibit B , is an analysis of the regulations involved and an equivalent level of safety

*********

3 Applicant submits that the amended Confidential A FOM and Amended AFM for each aircraft

, along

with the manuals already submitted in this docket

, all marked “CONFIDENTIAL”, contain propriety

business information that should not be released to the public and is protected under the Fre edom of Information Act 5 U.S.C. § 55 2(b)(4) C.F.R. part 11.

4 Reform Act Section 333(b).August 24

, 2015 Page Six

1299 PENNSYLVANIA AV ENUE, NW, SUITE 700, WASHINGTON, DC 20004

- 2400 T: (202) 842

- 7800 F: (202) 842

- 7899 WWW.COOLEY.COM Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. Part 11, the following summary is provided for publication in the Federal Register, should it be determined that publication is needed:

Applicant seeks an exemption from the following rules:

14 C.F.R. §§ 61.23 (a) and (c ), 61.101(e)(4) and (5), 61.113(a), 61.315(a), 91.7(a), 91.119(c), 91.121, 91.151(a)(1), 91.405(a), 91.405(a), 91.407, 91.409(a)(1) and (2) and 91.417(a) and (b) to operate commercially a small unmanned vehicle ( 4.4 lbs. or less) in aerial

data collection

, for the inspection of r esidential roofs and commercial structures within a 50 foot

radius of such structure

.

Approval of exemptions allowing commercial operations of small UASs weighing less

than 4.4 lbs

. , for the requested purposes will enhance safety by reducing risk. Keepin g employees and contractors off structures and away from property that is damaged as the result of manmade or natural disasters will reduce injuries and save lives also reducing costs. Conventional operations, using jet or piston power ed aircraft, operat i ng at extremely low altitudes in extreme proximity to people and structures present risks associated with vehicles that weigh in the neighborhood of 6,000 lbs., carrying large amounts of jet A or other fuel (140 gallons for jet helicopters). Such aircraft must fly to and from the pro ject location. In contrast, a UAS weighing fewer than 4.4 lbs. (with nylon rotor blades) and powered by batteries eliminates virtually all of that risk given the reduced mass and lack of combustib le fuel carried on board.

The UAS is carried to the t arget area and not flown. The UAS will carry no passengers or crew and, therefore, will not expose them to the risks associated with manned aircraft flights.

The operation of small UASs, weighing less than 4.4 lbs., conducted in th e strict conditions outlined above, will provide an equivalent level of safety supporting the grant of the exemptions requested herein. These lightweight aircraft operate at slow speeds , less than 5 mph , close to the ground, and in areas that are under th e control of the policy holder requesting

an inspection and therefore are far safer than conventional operations conducted with turbine helicopters operating in close proximity to the ground and people or the use of people to climb

the structures being ins pected.August 24

, 2015 Page Seven

1299 PENNSYLVANIA AV ENUE, NW, SUITE 700, WASHINGTON, DC 20004

- 2400 T: (202) 842

- 7800 F: (202) 842

- 7899 WWW.COOLEY.COM Satisfaction of the criteria provided in Section 333 of the Reform Act

-- size, weight, speed, operating capabilities, proximity to airports and populated areas and operation within visual line of sight and national security

– provide more than adequate justification for the grant of the requested amendment to the E xemption allowing commercial operation of applicant ’ s UAS s for the inspection of roofs, as limited and described herein.

Sincerely,

Jonathan B. Hill

M. Anne Swanson Cooley, LLP

Counsel for Liberty Mutual Insurance Company

John McGraw John McGraw Aerospace Consulting, LLC Agent for Liberty Mutual Insurance Company

cc: William Crozier Robert Pappas

Jake Troutman

Dean Griffith Thuy H. CooperExhibit AEXHIBIT B

AIRCRAFT AND EQUIVALENT LEVEL OF SAFETY

The FAA has granted exemptions to the following regulations in the listed exemptions; 14 C.F.R. §§ 61.23(a) and (c), 61.101(e) (4) and (5), 61.113(a), 61.315(a), 91.7(a), 91.119(c), 91.121, 91.151(a)(1), 91.405(a), 91.405(a), 91.407, 91.409(a)(1) and (2) and 91.417(a) and (b) to allow aerial data collection ( See , FAA Exemptions 11309,11460 and 11490)

14 C.F.R. Part 61 : Private Pilot Privileges and Limitations: Pilot in Command

Sections 61.113(a) and (b) limit private pilots to non

- commercial operations

. Because the UAS will not carry a pilot or passengers, the proposed operations can achieve the equivalent level of safety of current operations by requiring the PIC operating the aircraft to hold a certificate issued by the FAA authorizing oper ation of any aircraft (ATP, Commercial, Private, Recreational or Sport). Unlike a conventional aircraft that carries the pilot and passengers, the sUAS is remotely controlled with no living thing on board. The area of operation is controlled

and restricte d, and all flights are planned and coordinated in advance as set forth in the Manual. The level of safety provided by the requirements included in the Manual exceeds that provided by a single individual holding a commercial pilot ’ s certificate operating a conventional aircraft. The risks associated with the operation of the sUAS are so diminished from the level of risk associated with commercial operations contemplated by Part 61 when drafted, that allowing operations of the sUAS as requested with a ny cer tificate issued by the FAA as the PIC exceeds the present level of safety achieved by 14 C.F.R. Part 61 . The FAA has granted exemptions for private pilots to conduct similar operations in Exemptions 11062, 11213, 11360 and 11447.

14 C.F.R. § 91.119: Mini mum Safe Altitudes

Section 91.119 establishes safe altitudes for operation of civil aircraft. Section 91.119(d) allows helicopters to be operated at less than the minimums prescribed, provided the person operating the helicopter complies with any route o r altitudes prescribed for helicopters by the FAA. As this exemption is for a sUAS that are helicopter s and the amended exemption requests authority to operate at altitudes up to 100 AGL , or 50 feet above the height of the building to be inspected. As se t forth herein, except for the limited conditions stated in the Manual, the UAS will never operate at higher than 400 AGL.

The equivalent level of safety will be achieved given the size, weight, speed of the UAS as well as the location where it is ope rated. No flight will be taken without the permission of the property owner, facility owner and local officials. Because of the advance notice to the property owner and participants all affected individuals will be aware of the planned flight operations as set forth in the Manual. Compared to flight operations with aircraft or rotorcraft weighting far more than the maximum 55lbs. proposed herein and the lack of flammable fuel, any risk associated with these operations is far less than those presently pre sented with conventional aircraft operating at or below 500 AGL in the aerial photography industry. In addition, the low

altitude operations of the sUAS will ensure separation between these small

- UAS operations and the operations of conventional aircraft that must comply with Section 91.119.14 C.F.R. § 91.121: Altimeter Settings

This regulation requires 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. ” As each sUAS model in at least one operating mode will not have a barometric altimeter, but instead a GPS altitude read out, an exemption will be needed. An equivalent level of safety will be achieved by the operator, pursuant to the Manual and Safety Check list, confirming the altitude of the launch site shown on the GPS altitude indicator before flight. The FAA has granted exemptions to conduct similar operations in Exemptions 11062, 112 13, 11360 and 11447

.

14 C.F.R. § 91.151(a): Fuel Requirements for Flight in VFR Conditions

Section 91.151(a) prohibits an individual from beginning “ a flight in an airplane under VFR conditions unless (considering wind and forecast weather conditions) the re is enough fuel to fly to the first point of intended landing, and, assuming normal cruising speed

– (1) During the day, to fly after that for at least 30 minutes; or (2) At night, to fly after that for at least 45

minutes. ”

The battery powering the sU AS provides approximately 40 minutes of powered flight. To meet the 30 minute reserve requirement in 14 C.F.R. § 91.151, sUAS flights would be limited to approximately 10 minutes in length. Given the limitations on the UAS ’ s proposed flight area and

the location of its proposed operations within a predetermined area, a longer time frame for flight in daylight or night VFR conditions is reasonable.

Applicant believes that an exemption from 14 C.F.R. § 91.151(a) falls within the scope of prior exemptions. See Exemption 10673 (allowing Lockheed Martin Corporation to operate without compliance with FAR 91.151 (a)). Operating the small UAS, in a tightly controlled area where only people and property owners or official representatives who have signed waivers w ill be allowed, with less than 30 minutes of reserve fuel, does not engender the type of risks that Section 91.151(a) was intended to alleviate given the size and speed of the small UAS.

Applicant believes that an equivalent level of safety can be achiev ed by limiting flights to

5 minutes of reserve time on the batteries. This restriction would be more than adequate to return the sUAS to its planned landing zone from anywhere in its limited operating area.

Similar exemptions have been granted to other ope rations, including Exemptions 2689F, 5745, 10673, 10808 and Exemptions 11062, 11213, 11360 and 11447.

14 C.F.R. Part 91 : Maintenance Inspections

These regulations require that an aircraft operator or owner “ shall have that aircraft inspected as prescribed in subpart E of this part and shall between required inspections, except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, have discrepancies repaired as prescribed in part 43 of this chapter..., ” and others shall inspect or maintain the aircraft in complianc e with Part 43.

Given that these section and Part 43 apply only to aircraft with an airworthiness certificate, these sections will not apply to the applicant. Maintenance will be accomplished bythe operator pursuant to the flight manual and operating han dbook as referenced in the FOP

attached as confidential See Exhibit 1 . An equivalent level of safety will be achieved because these small UASs are very limited in size and will carry a small payload and operate only in areas for limited periods of time. If mechanical issues arise the UAS can land immediately and will be operating from no higher than 400 feet AGL. As provided in the FOP the operator will ensure that the UAS is in working order prior to initiating flight, perform required maintenance,

and keep a log of any maintenance performed. Moreover, the operator is the person most familiar with the aircraft and best suited to maintain the aircraft in an airworthy condition to provide the equivalent level of safety. The FAA has granted exemptions for similar operations in Exemptions 11062, 11213, 11360 and 11447

.

# E XHIB I T 

# 1

(F iled as Confidential )

# E XHIB I T 

# 2

(F iled as Confidential )