U.S Department of Transportation October 23, 2015

Docket Management System 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE Washington, DC. 20590

Petitioner: Cutting Edge Drone Solutions, LLC

Owner: Kevin Lyle Cutting
1870 Stout Rd. Cantonment, FL. 32533 Email: KCutting42@gmail.com

Dear Sir or Madam,



## Summary

I, Kevin Lyle Cutting

, (Petitioner) am seeking exemption from the listed Federal Aviation Regulations (FARs) under Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 from the requirements of

14 C

. F

. R

. Part 21, subpart H and 14 C

. F

. R

. §91.203, 14 C

. F

. R

. Part 27,14 C

. F

. R

. §91.9(c), 45.23(b) and 45.27(a), §61.113(a) & (b)

, § 91.9(b)(2), § 91.7(a), § 91.119

, § 91.121, § 91.151(a), § 91.405(a), § 91.407(a)(1)

, § 91.409(a)(2), § 91.417(a) &(b), § 91.203(a)&(b) ,§ 91.103, § 91.109 (A)

, in order to commercially operate the Iris+ small Unmanned Aircraft Systems (sUAS) for the purpose of aerial photography and videography in support of road and bridge construction services, survey and mapping operations as well
as real estate services. 

## Operator, Equipment and Procedures

For the commercial (sUAS) operations , a Visual line of site (VLOS) must and will be kept at all times during the flight as per the Visual Flight Rules (VFR) as well as the use of a live view monitor (FPV)
mounted on the radio control for an increase in saf ety. For the (sUAS) equipment the petitioner will utilize the Iris+ quadcopter that is less than 25 pounds including payload. The Iris+ quadcopter has several built in safety features such as, on screen telemetry for instant data as you fly including heigh t above ground (AGL)

, airspeed, distance from takeoff location, integrated LEDs on all 4 arms for direction awareness and line of site, flight protection as it can land itself automatically, or return to home point if it travels out of range or runs low on battery. The Iris+ also monitors the battery level and GPS signal which further increases situational awareness. For procedures, the sUAS flight time (16 to 22 minutes) will be logged appropriately and maintenance procedures will be followed using all ava ilable resources including the user manuals provided by 3D Robotics.



## Specific Exemptions and Extent of Relief Sought:

14 C.F.R. Part 21 Subpart H, Airworthiness Certificates & 14 C.F.R. §91.203(a)(1)

The petition seeks an exemption from 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H, Which establishes the procedural requirements for the issuance of airworthiness certificates as required by 14 C.F.R. §91.203(a)(1). Given the size and limited operating area associated with the sUAS to be utilized by the Petitioner, anexemption from Part 21 Subpart H meets the requirements of an equivalent level of safety under Part

11 and section 333 of the Reform Act.

In all cases, an analysis of these criteria demonstrates that the sUAS operated without an airworthiness
certificate , in the restricted environment and under the conditions proposed will be as safe, or safer, than a conventional rotorcraft operating with an airworthiness certificate without the restrictions and conditions of the proposed sUAS operations.

The sUAS to be operated hereunder is less than 25 lbs. fully loaded, carries neither a pilot nor passengers, and carries no explosive materials or flammable liquid fuels.

The safety enhancements, which already apply to civil aircraft operated in connection with existi ng inspection operations, provide a greater degree of safety to the public and property owners then conventional operations conducted with airworthiness issued under 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H.



### 14 C.F.R. Part 27 Airworthiness Standards: Normal Category Rotorcraft.

14 C.F.R. Part 27 sets forth the procedural requirements for airworthiness certification of normal category rotorcraft. To the extent the petitioner’s sUAS would otherwise require certification under Part 27, as a rotorcraft, Petitioner reque sts an exemption from Part 27’s airworthiness standards for the same reason identified in the exemption request from 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H.



### 14 C.F.R. §91. 9( c), 45.23(b) and 45.27(a): Aircraft Marking and Identification Requirements

This petition seeks an exemption from the aircraft marking and identification requirements of 14 C.F.R. §91.9(c), 45.23(b) and 45.27(a).

14 C.F.R. §91.9(c), Civil aircraft flight manual, marking and placard requirements, provides that:

No person may operate a U.S.

– re gistered civil aircraft unless that aircraft is identified in accordance with part 45 of this chapter.

14 C.F.R. §45.23(b), Markings of the Aircraft, states:

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 ne ar each entrance to the cabin, cockpit, or pilot station, in letters not less than 2 inches no more than 6 inches high, the words “limited,” “restricted,” “light

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

14C.F.R. §45.27(a), Rotorcraft, Sta tes:

E ach operator of a rotorcraft must display on that rotorcraft horizontally on both surfaces of the cabin, cockpit, or pilot station on which the word “Experimental” can be placed. Moreover, given the size of the sUAS, two

- inch lettering would be impo ssible. The word “Experimental” will be placed on the fuselage in compliance with §45.29(f).



### Extent of relief sought:Exemption from §45.23(b) is warranted because the sUAS has no entrance to the cabin, cockpit, or pilot

station on which the word “Experi mental” can be placed. Moreover, given the size of the sUAS, two

- inch lettering would be impossible. The word “Experimental” will be placed on the fuselage in compliance with §45.29(f).

Given the nature of the specific relief sought by this ex emption requ est, Petitioner Requires relief from the associated marking and identification requirements of §45.27(a) and §91.9(c), which would require compliance with §45.23(b).



### 14 C.F.R. §61.113(a) & (b) Private Pilot Privileges and Limitations: Pilot in Command

(a)Except as provided in paragraphs (b) through (h) of this section, no person who holds a private pilot certificate may act as a pilot in command of on aircraft that is carrying passengers or property for compensati on or hire; nor may that person , for com pensation or hire, act as a pilot in command of an
aircraft. (b) A private pilot may, for compensation or hire, act as a pilot in command of an aircraft in connection with any business or employment if:

(1) The flight is only incidental to that business or employment; and (2) The aircraft does not carry passengers or property for compensation or hire.



### Extent of relief sought: Because the sUAS will not carry a pilot or passengers and is inherently stable, with sophisticated computer and GPS controls, the proposed operations can achieve the equivalent level of safety to §61.113(a) and (b), by requiring the PIC operating the sUAS to have significant, unlike a
conventional aircraft that carries the pilot and passengers, the sUAS is remotely controlled with no living thing on board. Moreover, the area of operation is controlled and restricted, and all flights are planned
and coordinated in advanced in accordance with the manu al, and flights are limited in duration and
altitude.



### 14 C.F.R. §91.9(b)(2): Civil Aircraft Flight Manual in the Aircraft

This petition seeks an exemption from the fli ght manual requirements of 14 C. F.R §91.9 (b)(2), which

states:

(b) No person may operate a U. S.

– registered civil aircraft

(2) For which an Airplane or Rotorcraft Flight Manual is not required by §21.5 of this chapter, unless there is available in the aircraft a current approved airplane or Rotorcraft Flight Manual, approved
manual ma terial, markings, and placards, or any combination thereof.



### Extent of relief sought : Given its size, configuration, and load capacity, the sUAS has no ability to carry such a manual on the aircraft, not only because there is no pilot on board, but becaus e there is simply no room or capacity to carry such an item on the aircraft. Petitioner requests an exemption from §91.9(b)(2)’s flight manual requirements, on the condition that the sUAS flight manual be available at the control point during each operati on.



### 14 C.F.R. §91.7(a): Civil Aircraft AirworthinessThis petition seeks an exemption from 14 C.F.R. §91.7(a), which requires that a civil aircraft be in an

airworthy condition to be operated. Inas much there will be no airworthiness certificate issued for the sUAS should this exemption be granted, no FAA regulatory standard will exist for determining
airworthiness.



### 14 C.F.R. §91.103: Preflight Action

T his petition seeks an exemption from §91.103, which requires a PIC to become familiar with specific information before each flight, including information contained in the FAA approved Flight Manual on
board the aircraft.



### Extent of relief sought : Inasmuch as an FAA approved Flight Manual will not be provided for the sUAS, an exemption will be needed.

An equivalent level of safety will be provided by following the Aircraft Operations Manual comprehensive preflight checklist. The PIC will take all actions, including reviewing weather, flight battery requirements, landing and takeoff distances, and aircraft pe rformance data, before initiation of flight.



### 14 C.F.R §91.109(a): Flight Instruction

This petition seeks an exemption from 14 C.F.R. §91.109(a), which provides 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.



### Extent of relief sought : sUAS and remotely piloted aircraft, by their design do not have fully functional dual controls. Instead, flight control is accomplish ed through the use of a control box that
communicates with the sUAS via radio communications.



### 14 C.F.R. §91.119: Minimum Safe Altitudes

This petition seeks an exemption from the minimum safe altitude requirements of 14 C.F.R §91.119. Section 91.119 pre scribes the minimum safe altitudes under which aircraft man not operate, including 500 feet above the surface and away from any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure in non

- congested areas. C.F.R. §91.119(c) . Section §91.119 (d)(1) allows for a helicopter to operate at less than those altitudes when it can be operated “without hazard to persons or property on the surface,” provided that “each person operating the helicopter complies with any routes or altitudes specifically prescribed for helicopters by th e FAA.



### Extent of relief sought : To the extent necessary for the petitioner to conduct commercial operations at or below 400 feet AGL over other than congested areas. Due to the sUAS unique capabilities and small size, emergency landings conducted at o r below 400 feet AGL will pose minimal hazards to persons or property on the surface.



### 14 C.F.R. §91.121 Altimeter Settings

This petition seeks an exemption from 14 C.F.R. §91.121, which requires a person operating anaircraft to maintain cruising alti tude or light level by reference to an altimeter that is set to the elevation

of the departure airport or barometric pressure. An exemption is required because the sUAS does not have a barometric altimeter, but rather a GPS altitude read out.



### Extent of relief sought : An equivalent level of safety will be achieved by following the procedures set forth in the Manual. As prescribed in the Manual, the operator will confirm the altitude of the launch site shown on the GPS altitude indicator before flight. Moreover, the PIC will use the GPS altitude indicator to constantly monitor the sUAS height, thus ensuring operation at safe altitudes.



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

This petition seeks an exemption from 14 C.F.R. §91.151(a)’s fuel requirements for light in VFR
conditions. Section 91.151 states:

(a) No person may begin a flight in an airplane under VFR conditions unless (considering wind and forecast weather conditions) there is enough fuel to fly to the fir st 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.



### Extent of relief sought : To the extent that the petitioner’s sUAS are unable to comply with the VFR fuel requirements for airplanes or helicopters. Wind and weather conditions will be considered before each flight and no flight will begin unless there is enough power available t o conduct the intended operation and to operate after that for at least five minutes or with the reserve power recommended by the manufacturer, if greater.



### 14 C.F.R §91.203(a) & (b): Carrying Civil Aircraft Certification and Registration

This petition seeks an exemption from civil aircraft certification and registration requirements of 14 C.F.R §91.203 (a) and (b). The regulation provides in pertinent part:

(a) Except as provided in §91.715, no person may operate a civil aircraft unless it has within i t the following:

(1)An appropriate and current airworthiness certificate

(a) No person may operate a civil aircraft unless the airworthiness certificate required by paragraph (a) of this section or a special flight authorization issued under §91.715 is di splayed at the cabin or cockpit entrance so that it is legible to passengers or crew.



### Extent of relief sought : In addition to the fact that Petitioner is seeking an exemption from the airworthiness certificate requirements, an exemption to this regulatio n is necessary because: (1) the sUAS’s load capacity and size does not allow it to carry certification and registration documents; (2) the sUAS does not have a cabin or cockpit entrance at which the documents could be dis played; and (3) there are no passen gers or crew for whom the certificates need be displayed.

### 14 C.F.R. § 91.405 (a); 91.407 (a)(1); 91.409(a)(2); 91.417(a) & (b): Maintenance Inspections

This petition seeks an exemption from the maintenance inspection requirements of 14 C.F.R. §91.405(a); 91.407(a)(1); 91.409(a)(2); 91.417(a) & (b). These regulations specify maintenance and inspection standards in reference to 14 C.F.R. Part 43. See, e.g ., 14 C.F.R. §91.405(a) (stating that each owner or operator of an aircraft “shall have that aircraft inspected as prescribed in subpart E of this part and shall between required inspections...have discrepancies repaired as prescribed in part 43 of this chap ter”). An exemption to these regulations is needed because Part 43 and these sections apply only to aircraft with an airworthiness certificate, which the sUAS will not have.



### Extent of relief sought : To the extent that the petitioner’s sUAS have not be en issued Airworthiness Certificates. The petitioner will use trained technicians to perform maintenance, alterations and preventive maintenance on the sUAS using the methods, techniques, and practices prescribed in the sUAS operating documents. Furtherm ore, the petitioner will document and maintain all maintenance
records for the sUAS.



### HOW MY REQUEST WILL BENEFIT THE PUBLIC AS A WHOLE:

T he operation significantly improves safety and reduces risk by alleviating human exposure to danger
associated wit h current aerial survey and inspection methods, namely, full size helicopters. Manned helicopters performing aerial photography have experienced an exceedingly high number accidents and fatalities. The public’s interest is furthered by reducing human exp osure to death or serious injury associated with manned aircraft performing photography, inspections and patrols.

Petitioner’s sUAS are battery powered and create no emissions. If Petitioner’s sUAS crashes, there is no fuel to ignite and explode. Any impact of Petitioner’s lightweight sUAS is, obviously, far less than a full size helicopter. The public’s interest is furthered by minimizing ecological impact of an accident and by reducing human exposure to potentially harmful emissions associated with manned aircraft.

There are numerous reasons why granting this exemption will benefit the public as a whole. First and foremost, sUAS operations will benefit the economy by creating jobs and reducing costs for customers that, up until now, have had to re ly on manned aircraft for the same operations. UAS operational costs are much lower than manned aircraft and those savings will benefit our nation’s economy on many different levels. Jobs will be created in manufacturing, Research and Development, logist ics, and education, operations and maintenance, just to name a few. Using sUAS in lieu of manned aircraft will enhance safety and reduce environmental impact as well. Without a crew on board like a traditional aircraft, sUAS can take over some of the dan gerous operations that manned aircraft once held, such as powerline inspections or work in confined areas. Also, sUAS are much less dangerous to persons on the ground if a catastrophe does happen. They are much smaller and lighter and most do not carry
f lammable fuel onboard. Aerial surveying and inspections can increase work site efficiency, improve
volumetric estima tions and reduce risks. Liability insurance will be obtained commensurate with the granting of this request for exemption.



### GRANTING THI S EXEMPTION WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT PUBLIC SAFETY:

The petitioner firmly believes not only will this exemption not adversely affect public safety, but integrating sUAS into the National Airspace System will actually enhance public safety. Operations thatutilize traditional manned aircraft put the public at risk of a much larger vehicle travelling at a much

higher rate of speed. Also, traditional aircraft have the ability to carry many gallons of flammable fuel that makes an accident that much more dangerous. Furthermore, many of those manned operations contribute to congestion in the NAS resulting in an increased risk of collision with other aircraft. Because the petitioner’s sUAS will be operated away from the airport environment, where the highest risk of collision occurs, using this aircraft in place of a manned aircraft enhances safety.



### A SUMMARY YOU CAN PUBLISH IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER STATING

–

The rules from which I seek the exemption: Kevin Lyle Cutting seeks an exemption from the following rules:

14 C.F.R. Part 21, subpart H and 14 C.F.R. §91.203, 14 C.F.R. Part 27,14 C.F.R. §91.9(c), 45.23(b) and 45.27(a), §61.113(a) & (b),§91.9(b)(2), §91.7(a), §91.119,§91.121, §91.151(a), §91.405(a), §91.407(a)(1), §91.409(a)(2), §91.417(a)&(b), §91.203(a)&(b),§91.103, §91.109(A)

and

A brief descripti on of the exemption I seek: Kevin Lyle Cutting seeks an exemption from the following rules:

14 C.F.R. Part 21, subpart H and 14 C.F.R. §91.203, 14 C.F.R. Part 27,14 C.F.R. §91.9(c), 45.23(b) and 45.27(a), §61.113(a) & (b),§91.9(b)(2), §91.7(a), §91.119, §91.121, §91.151(a), §91.405(a), §91.407(a)(1), §91.409(a)(2), §91.417(a)&(b), §91.203(a)&(b),§91.103, §91.109(A)

For the purposes of conducting aerial photography and videography in support of road and bridge construction services, survey and mapping ope rations as well as real estate services.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO SUPPORT MY REQUEST:

The user manual for the Iris+ sUAS can be found at https://3drobotics.com

Kevin Lyle Cutting does NOT intend to operate the sUAS outside of the United States.

Respectfully,

Kevin Lyle Cutting