1 | Page January 5, 2016 U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations West Building Ground Floor, Room w12

- 140 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590

Petition for Exemption Under Section 333 of the FAA Reform Act and Part 11 of the Federal Aviation Regulations from 14 C.F.R. 45.23(b);14 CFR Part 21;14 CFR 61.113 (a) & (b); 91.7 (a);91.9 (b) (2);91.103(b); 91.109;91.119; 91.121; 91.151(a);91.203(a) & (b);91.405 (a); 91.407(a) (1); 91.409 (a) (2);91.417 (a) & (b).

Dear Sir or Madam:

Pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (the Reform Act) and 14 C.F.R.
Part 11, DLZ Corporation (hereinafter referred to as PETITIONER ) , operator of Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems (“sUASs”) equipped to conduct aerial data collectio n applies for an exemption from the listed Federal Aviation Regulations (“FARs”) to allow commercial operation of its sUASs, so long as such operations are conducted within their supplied Flight Operations Manual and associated Aircraft Flight

Manuals as m ay be established by the FAA as required by Section 333.

Approval of this exemption would thereby enhance safety and fulfill the Secretary of Transportation’s (the

FAA Administrator’s) responsibilities to “...establish requirements for the safe operation of such aircraft systems in the national airspace system.” Section 333(c) of the Reform Act.

The name and address of the applicant is:

PETITIONER

Attn: Barry Lubow

- DLZ Corportaion
Ph one : 614

- 888

- 0040
Email: blubow@dlzlegal.com
Address: 1621 Huntley Road

The proposed aircraft utilized are:
PrecisionHawk Lancaster SenseFly Exom SenseFly eBee RTK Fixed Wing DJI Phantom 2/3
Trimble UX5

3DR Iris
Flexrotor

FireFLY6 FlyAbility Javad Triumph

- F1
Leica Aibot X6 Kespry Commercial Drone Systems
Hawk Aerial2 | Page This exem ption application 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 na tional airspace system (NAS) before completion of the rulemaking 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 publi c or pose a threat to national security in light of the following:

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

• Operation in close proximity to airports and populated areas; and

• Operation within visual line of sight of the operator.

The Fede ral Aviation Act expressly grants the FAA the authority to issue exemptions. This statutory authority by its terms includes exempting civil aircraft, as the term is defined under §40101 of the Act, that includes sUASs, from the requirement that all civil aircraft must have a current airworthiness

certificate.

PETITIONER sUA Ss weigh less than 55 lbs. and operate, under normal conditions at a speed of no more

than 100 kts with the capability to hover, and move in the vertical and horizontal plane simultaneously. All operations will be conducted within line of sight and will operate within the sterile area described in the Flight Operations Manual (FOM)

. As a result, the proposed o perations will insure that the sUAS will

“not create a hazard to users of the national airspace system or the public.”

Given the above

, PETITIONER s ervices falls squarely within th e intended level of safety Congress

envisioned that the FAA must allow commercial operations of UASs to commence. Given the clear

direction in Section 333 of the Reform Act, and subsequent grants of approval, the achieved equivalent level of safety surrounding the proposed operations, the public benefit, the enhanced safety, associated with allowing UASs operations for aerial data collection t he grant of the requested exemptions is in the public interest. Accordingly, the applicant respectfully requests that the FAA grant the requested exemption without delay.

Relevant Statutory Authority

This petition for exemption is submitted to fulfill Con gress' goal in passing Section 333(a) through (c) of the Reform Act. In the Reform Act, Congress directed the FAA "to safely accelerate the integration of civil unmanned aircraft systems into the national airspace system" and, under Section 333 of that la w, directed the Secretary of Transportation ("FAA Administrator") to consider whether certain unmanned aircraft systems may operate safely in the National Airspace System ("NAS") before completion of the rulemaking 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 following:

The UAS's size, weight, speed, and opera tional 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.3 | Page If the Secretary determines that such vehicles "may operate safely in the National Airspace Sy stem, the Secretary shall establish requirements for the safe operation of such aircraft in the National Airspace System"

.
In addition, the FAA Administrator has general authority to grant exemptions from its safety regulations

and minimum standards when the Administrator decides a requested exemption is in the public interest. See 49 U.S.C. § 44701(f) (authorizing the grant of exemptions from a requirement of regulations prescribed pursuant to section 44701(a)

– (b) and sections 44702

– 44716). A party req uesting an exemption must explain the reasons why the exemption: (1) would benefit the public as a whole, and; (2) would not adversely affect safety (or how it would provide a level of safety at least equal to the existing rules). See 14 C.F.R. § 11.81; FA A, Petition for Exemptions.

Qualification for Approval Under Section 333 of The Reform Act

The proposed operations in this petition for exemption qualify for expedited approval under Section 333 of the Reform Act. Each of the statutory criterial and oth er potentially relevant factors are satisfied.

The proposed operations would permit the use of small and relatively inexpensive UAS under controlled conditions in airspace that is: (1) limited; (2) predetermined; (3) controlled as to access, and; (4) wo uld provide an increased level of safety beyond that existing when fixed or rotor wing aircraft are used to accomplish the same purpose.

As discussed in Subsection A below, PETITIONER 's sUAS, weighting 55 lbs. or less, including payload operates, under n ormal conditions, at a speed of no more than 100 knots and has the capability to hover, and move in the vertical and horizontal plane simultaneously.

PETITIONER 's sUASs will operate in line of sight and will operate only within a sterile area described in

the ir Flight Operations Manual. Such operations will insure that the sUAS will "not create a hazard to users of the National Airspace System or the public."

Given the size of the sUASs involved and the restricted sterile environment within which they wil l operate, this petition for exemption falls squarely within that zone of safety i.e., an equivalent level of safety, in which Congress envisioned that the FAA must, by exemption, allow commercial operations of UASs to commence immediately. Also, due to t he size of the UASs and the restricted areas in which the sUASs will operate, approval of the application presents no national security issue.

Considering the clear direction in Section 333 of the Reform Act, the authority contained in the Federal

Aviatio n Act, as amended, the equivalent level of safety surrounding the proposed operations, and the significant public benefit, including enhanced safety, reduction in environmental impacts, including reduced emissions associated with allowing UASs for the prop osed operations, the grant of the requested exemptions is also in the public interest.

Accordingly, PETITIONER respectfully requests that the FAA grant the requested exemption without delay.

Aircraft & Equivalent Level of Safety

PETITIONER proposes that the recent standard of limitations for UAS Section 333 Grants , and the conditions listed within the provided FOM and AFMs provide for at least an equivalent or even higher4 | Page level of safety to operations under the current regulatory structure that utilizes conventional fixed wing

or rotorcraft aircraft.

As a result of recent Section 333 Exemptions, PETITIONER agrees to abide by the limitations and conditions afforded to other recent Grant recipients conducting commercial operations with sUAS ai rcraft

. 

### Introduction and Interest of PETITIONER

PETITIONER , is a sUAS operator and professional organization with a culture of safety and compliance

in the conduct of their operations, training, and safety and management programs as evidenced in
the structure of their submitted documentation . The mission of PETITIONER is to support, develop and validate unmanned system operations while providing unmatched quality and safety for their
business

.

General Information Pertaining to Aircraft Operations

PETITIONER intends to operate a sUAS less than fifty

- five pounds, with the ability to conduct under
the command of the PETITIONER Pilot In Command (PIC) and perform operations consistent with

co nductin g aerial data collection.

Prior to each flight the PIC shall inspect the sUAS to ensure it is in a condition for safe flight. If the inspection reveals a condition that affects the safe operation of the sUAS, the aircraft will be prohibited from operatin g until the necessary maintenance has been performed and the sUAS is found to be in a condition for safe flight. The Ground Control Station (if utilized) shall be included in the preflight inspection. All maintenance and alterations shall be properly docum ented in aircraft records as indicated in the Flight Operations Manual. All discrepancies noted shall be documented as
described in the PETITIONER Flight Operations Manual (FOM).

Any sUAS that has undergone maintenance or alterations that affect the sUAS operation or flight characteristics, e.g. replacement of a flight critical component, shall undergo a functional test flight
in accordance with the manufacturer’s manual and PETITIONER FOM.

PETITIONER shall follow the manufacturer’s sUAS aircraft/compon ent, maintenance, overhaul, replacement, inspection and life limit requirements, with particular attention to flight critical components that may not be addressed in the manufacturer’s manuals. Each sUAS operated under the proposed exemption shall comply w ith all manufacturer System and Safety Bulletins as well as
the PETITIONER AFM for that Aircraft.

Flight Team: Aircraft Pilot in Command (PIC) & Visual Observer (VO)
All PETITIONER Flight Crews, including PIC and Visual Observer(s) (VO), will be qualified as directed by PETITIONER FOM.

**PETITIONER requests exemption from the following sections of Title 14:**  Part 21 prescribes the procedural requirements for issuing and changing desi gn approvals, productions approvals, airworthiness certificates, and airworthiness approvals. Regulations from which the exemption is requested:

a) 14 CFR Part 21 , Subpart H

– Airworthiness Certificates & 14 C.F.R. 91.203(a)(1) b) 14 CFR 91.9 (b) (2), 14 C.F.R. 45.23(b)5 | Page c) 14 CFR 61.113 (a) & (b) d) 14 C.F. R. 91.119 e) 14 CFR 91.151 (a) f) 14 CFR 91.203 (a) & (b) g) 14 CFR 91.405 (a), 14 CFR 407 (a) (1), 14 CFR 409 (a) (2) , 14 CFR 417 (a) & (b) h) 14 C.F.R. 91.7 (a) i) 14 C.F.R. 91.103 j) 14 C.F.R. 91.109 k) 14 C.F.R. 91.121



### a) 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H

— Airworthiness Certificates & 14 C.F.R. § 91.203(a)(1).

This 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 requir ed 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 , an exemption from Part 21 Subpart H meets the requirements of an equivalent level of safety under Part 11
and Section 333 of the Reform Act.

The Federal Aviation Act (49 U.S.C.§ 44701(f)) and Section 333 of the Reform Act both authorize the FAA to exempt aircraft from the requirement for an airworthiness certificate, upon consideration of the size, weight, speed, operational capability, and proximity to airports and populated areas of the particular UAS.

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 at least as safe, or safer, than a conventional rotorcraft operating with an airworthiness certificate without the restrictions and conditions of the proposed sUAS operations.

Equivalent Level of Safety

PETITIONER intends to use the pr oposed aircraft to perform the proposed operations.

These aircraft have a demonstrated safety track record. These aircraft are equipped with advanced safety features such as intelligent fault handling

— the system will automatically fly home and land if the communication link is broken, if battery levels get too low or if pre

- defined wind thresholds are exceeded.

The sUAS to be operated hereunder weighs than 55 lbs. fully loaded, carries neither a pilot nor passenger, carries no explosive materials or flammable liquid fuels, and operates exclusively within a secured area as
set out in the Manual.

Unlike other civil aircraft, the proposed operations in this peti tion for exemption will be controlled and monitored by the operator, pursuant to the PETITIONER Flight Operations Manual and associated Aircraft Fight Manual’s requirements.

These safety enhancements, which already apply to civil aircraft operated in con nection with existing inspection operations, provide a greater degree of safety to the public and property owners than conventional operations conducted with airworthiness certificates issued under 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart6 | Page H. Lastly, application of thes e same criteria demonstrates that there is no credible threat to national security posed by the sUAS, due to its size, speed of operation, location of operation, lack of explosive materials or flammable liquid fuels, and inability to carry a substantial ex ternal load.



### b) Aircraft Marking and Identification Requirements: 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.9(c), 45.23(b) and 45.27(a).

Section 45.23(b) prescribes that when marks include only the Roman capital letter “N” and the registration number is displayed on limited, restric ted 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 nor more than 6 inches high, the words “limited,” “restricted,” “light

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



### Equivalent Level of Safety

An equivalent level of safety for exemptions to the aircraft marking and identification requirements of §§ 91.9(c), 45.23(b) and 45.27(a), will be provided by having the sUA S marked on its fuselage as required by §45.29(f) where the pilot, observer, and others working with the sUA S will see the identification of the UAS as "Experimental." Additionally, PETITIONER will ensure compliance with any requests of sUAS marking by the FAA.

The FAA has issued the following exemptions to the aircraft marking requirements of § 45.23(b): Exemptions Nos. 10700, 8738, 10167 and 10167A.



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

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 compensation or hire; nor m ay that person, for compensation or hire, act as pilot in command of an aircraft.

(b) a private pilot may, for compensation or hire, act as pilot in command of an aircraft in connection with any business or employment if: (1) The flight is only incidental to that business or employment; and (2) The aircraft does not carry passengers or property for compensation or hire. Section 91.7(a) prescribes that no person may operate a civil aircraft unless it is in an airworthy condition.

Section 91.7(b) prescribes that the pilot in command of a civil aircraft is responsible for determining whether that aircraft is in condition for safe flight and that the PIC shall discontinue the flight when not airworthy mechanical, electrical, or structural conditions occur.

Se ction 91.9(b)(2) 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.7 | Page Section 91.103(b) prescribes that a pilot shall for any flight, become familiar with runway lengths at airports of intended use, and takeoff and landing distance information.

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



### Equivalent Level of Safety

As required by the Manual, PETITIONER 's sUAS operators acting as PIC will hold a sport pilot certificate or higher. Because the sUAS will not carry a pilot or passengers, 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 a Sport
Pilot certificatio n or higher.

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 coordinate d in advance as set forth in the Flight Operations Manual.

The level of safety provided by the requirements included in the Flight Operations Manual exceeds that provided by a single individual holding a commercial pilot's certificate operating a conventi onal aircraft in accordance with § 61.113 (a) & (b). The risks associated with the operation of small, lightweight UAS are diminished from the level of risk associated with commercial operations contemplated by Part 61 when drafted, that allowing the propo sed operations in this petition for exemption with a private pilot as the PIC exceeds the present level of safety achieved by § 61.113 (a) & (b).

d) 

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

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 areas . Over any congested a rea of a city, town, or settlement, or over any open air assembly of persons, an altitude of 1,000 feet above the highest obstacle within a horizontal radius of 2,000 feet of the aircraft.

(c) Over other than congested areas . An altitude of 500 feet above the surface, except over open water or sparsely populated areas. In those cases, the aircraft may not be operated closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure.

(d) Helicopters, powered parachutes, and weight

- shift

- control aircraft. If the operation is conducted without hazard to persons or property on the surface

—8 | Page (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 a ny 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 requires, 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.”



### Equivalent Level of Saf ety

Compared to flight operations with rotorcraft weighting far more than 55 lbs. proposed herein, and the lack of flammable fuel, any risk associated with these operations is far less than those presently presented with conventional aircraft. An equiva lent level of safety will be achieved given the size, weight, speed of the UAS as well as the location where it is operated.

As set forth in the Flight Operations Manual, the sUAS will be operated in a restricted area, where buildings and people will no t be exposed to operations without their pre

- obtained consent. No flight will be taken without the permission of the property owner and/or local officials. Because of the advance notice to the property owner and participants, all affected individuals wil l be aware of the planned flight operations as set forth in the Flight Operations Manual. Furthermore, by operating at such lower altitudes, the sUAS will not interfere with other aircraft that are subject to the minimum safe altitude regulations.



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

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.



### Equivalent Level of Safety

An equivalent level of safety can be achieved by limiting flights to their low voltage warning at which time
a return to land must be accomplished . This restriction would be more than adequate to return the sUAS to its planned landing zone from anywhere within its limited operating area. Operation of the sUAS with
less th an 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. Moreover, operation will be limited to controlled areas where only people and property owners, or official representatives who have signed
waivers will be allowed.

This request for exemption falls within the scope of prior exemptions. See e.g. Exemption 10673 (allowing

PETITIONER to operate without compliance with § 91.151 (a)); see also Exemptions 2689F, 5745, 10673,
and 10808.9 | Page 

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

Section 91.203(a) prohibits, in pertinent part, any person from operating a civil aircraft unless it has within it (1) an appropriate an d current airworthiness certificate; 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).

Section 91.203( b) prescribes, in pertinent part, that 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.

Equivalent Level of Safety

To the extent these regulations are applicable to the proposed sUAS operations, an equivalent level of safety will be achieved by keeping these documents at the ground control point where the pilot flying the
sUAS will hav e immediate access to them.

The FAA has issued numerous exemptions to this regulation. A representative sample of other exceptions includes Exemption Nos. 9565, 9665, 9789, 9789A, 9797, 9797A, 9816A, and 10700

.



### g) 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.405(a); 91.407(a)(1); 91. 409(a)(2); 91.417 (a) & (b): Maintenance Inspections.

Section 91.405(a) requires, in pertinent part, that an aircraft operator or owner shall have that 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) prohibits, in pertinent part, any person from operating an aircraft that has undergone maintenance, prevent ive 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 chapter.

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 inspection s, 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;
and10 | Page (ii ) The date of completion of the work performed; and (iii) The signature, and certificate number of the person approving the aircraft for return to

service.

(2) Records containing the following information: (i) The total time in service of the airframe, ea ch 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
overhaule d on a specified time basis. (iv) The current inspection status of the aircraft, including the time since the last inspection required by the inspection program under which the aircraft and its appliances are maintained. (v) The current status of applicab le airworthiness directives (AD) and safety directives including, for each, the method of compliance, the AD or safety directive number and revision date. If the AD or safety directive involves recurring action, the time and date when the next action is

re quired. (vi) Copies of the forms prescribed by § 43.9(d) of this chapter for each major alteration to the airframe and currently installed engines, rotors, propellers, and appliances.

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

(1) The records specified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section shall be retained until the work is repeated or superseded by other work or for 1 year after the work is performed.

(2) The records specified in paragraph (a)(2) of this sect ion 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 a pproved for

return to service.



### Equivalent Level of Safety

An equivalent level of safety will be achieved because maintenance and inspections will be performed in
accordance with the Flight Operations Manual and the Aircraft Operations Manual

. As provided in the Flight Operations Manual, 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. 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.

If mechanical issues arise, the UAS can land immediately and will be operating from no higher than 400 feet AGL. Moreover, the UAS's small size, carrying capacity, and the fact that flight operations will only take place in restricted areas for limited periods of time, create less risk than the same factors associated
with conventional fixed

- wing aircraft and rotorcraft performing the s ame operation

.11 | Page 

### h) 14 C.F.R. § 91.7(a): Civil Aircraft Airworthiness.

This 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. Inasmuch there will be no airworthiness certi ficate issued for the sUAS, should this exemption be granted, no FAA regulatory standard will exist for determining
airworthiness. 

### Equivalent Level of Safety

PETITIONER pilots that will be flying the sUAS have a stellar safety record. Given the size of the sUAS and the requirements contained in the Manual for maintenance and use of safety checklists prior to each flight, an equivalent level of safety will be provided.

The FAA has issued the following exemptions to this regulation: Exemption Nos. 8607, 8 737, 8738, 9299, 9299A, 9565, 9565B, 10167, 10167A, 10602, 32827, and 10700.



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

This petition seeks an exemption from § 91.103, which requires a PIC to become familiar with specific information before each flight, includ ing information contained in the FAA

- approved Flight Manual on board the aircraft. Inasmuch as an FAA approved flight manual will not be provided for the sUAS, an exemption will be needed.

Equivalent Level of Safety

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



### j) 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 “[n]o person may operate a civil aircraft (except a manned free balloon) that is being used for flight instruction unless that aircraft has fully functioning dua l controls.” sUASs and remotely piloted aircraft, by their design do not have fully functional dual controls. Instead, flight control is accomplished through the use of a control box that
communicates with the sUAS via radio communications.



### Equivalent Le vel of Safety

Given the size and speed of the sUAS, an equivalent level of safe training can still be performed without dual controls because no pilot or passengers are aboard the sUAS, and all persons will be a safe distance away should the sUAS experien ce any difficulties during flight instruction.

The FAA has approved exemptions for flight training without fully functional dual controls for a number of aircraft and for flight instruction in experimental aircraft. See Exemption Nos. 5778K & 9862A.12 | Page 

### k) 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 an aircraft to maintain cruising altitude or flight level by reference to an altimeter that is set to the elevation of the
de parture airport or barometric pressure. An exemption is required because the sUAS does not have a barometric altimeter, but rather a GPS altitude read out.

Equivalent Level of Safety

An equivalent level of safety will be achieved by following the pro cedures set forth in the Flight Operations
Manual and Aircraft Flight Manual

. The PIC will use the GPS altitude indicator to constantly monitor the sUASs height, thus ensuring operation at safe altitudes.



### Public Interest

Consistent with the requirements of 14 C.F.R. §11.81(d), PETITIONER offers the following reasons why granting this petition for exemption is in the public interest, i.e., how granting it would benefit the public
as a whole.

Approval of exemptions allowi ng commercial operations of small and lightweight sUAS in the utility aerial services industry benefits the public as a whole in the following ways:

• It helps fulfill Congress' goal in passing Section 333(a) through (c) of the Reform Act, namely,
the FAA A dministrator's assessment of whether certain UAS may operate safely in the National Airspace System before completion of the rulemaking required under Section 332 of
the Reform Act.

• The operation significantly improves safety and reduces risk by alleviat ing human exposure to danger associated with current aerial data collection methods , namely, full size helicopters. Manned helicopters performing aerial data collection have experienced an exceedingly high number of accidents and fatalities. The public's interest is furthered by reducing human exposure to death or serious injury associated with such activities

.

• PETITIONER 's sUASs 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 sUASs 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 manne d aircraft.

• Aerial data collection are valuable tools for PETITIONER ’s operations. However, problems with safety, cost, statistical integrity, and logistics continue to impede aerial surveys and inspections from conventional manned aircraft. The use of s UAS addresses these problems and is a powerful tool for performing a wide

- range of such operations . The public as a whole
will benefit from the safer and more cost

- effective utility aerial services that sUAS operations provide.13 | Page PETITIONER supports t heir request with the following information:

PETITIONER has provided the following information

– contained in his petition and supporting documentation including: (1) Aircraft Flight Manual s (AFM) (2) PETITIONER Flight Operations Manual

Unmanned Aircraft System
The PETITIONER will operate the Aircraft per the each appropriate AFM, with the option of an additional transportable ground station. PETITIONER will operate this aircraft in accordance with the PETITIONER Flight Operations Manual and appropriate A ircraft Flight Manual.

All aircraft operations will be conducted under visual meteorological conditions (VMC). The sUAS will not be operated less than 500 feet below or less than 2000 feet horizontally from a cloud or when visibility is
less than 3 statut e miles from the PIC.

The sUAS operated in accordance with this exemption request shall be identified by serial numbers, registered in accordance with 14 CFR part 47, and have identification (N

- Number) markings in accordance with 14 CFR part 45, Subpart C. Markings will be as large as practicable.

UAS Operating Parameters
The PETITIONER states that he will abide by the FAA granted Section 333 operating conditions under this exemption and the Flight Operations Manual for PETITIONER

.

Conclusion Satisfaction of the criteria provided in Section 333 of the Reform Act of 2012

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

— provides more than adequa te justification for the grant of the requested exemptions allowing commercial operation of PETITIONER 's sUAS in the aerial data collection activities of
their business

.

If additional information is required, or if you have any questions regarding this Pe tition for Exemption, please contact Grady Boyce at:

Grady Boyce, Universal Aviation Solutions, Inc. (dba, SkyGen Aviation)
Phone: 770

- 733

- 2939
Email: gboyce@skygenaviation.com

Very truly yours, 

# Grady Boyce

Submitted on January 5, 2016 Grady Bo yce14 | Page Attachments (All Subject to Non

- Disclosure Under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552 et.

seq .): PETITIONER Flight Operations Manual and Aircraft Flight Manuals

.



### List of Attachments

(1) PETITIONER Flight Operations Manual (2) PETITIONER Aircraft Flight Manual for 3DR Iris (3) PETITIONER Aircraft Flight Manual for DJI Phantom 3 (4) PETITIONER Aircraft Flight Manual for PrecisionHawk Lancaster (5) PETITIONER Aircraft Flight Manual for SenseFly eBee (6) PETITIONER Aircraft Flight Manual for Trimble UX5

The se attachments listed are referenced in the request for exemption and contain trade secret and commercial proprietary information that PETITIONER has not and will not share with others except under appropriate confidentiality agreements. Th e PETITIONER Flight Operations Manual (FOM) attachment contains operating conditions and procedures that have been developed exclusively by

PETITIONER , and that are not available to the public. PETITIONER request s that these attachments be treated as propr ietary information pursuant to 14 C.F.R. Section 11.35, and maintains that they are protected from release under the Freedom of Information Act. See 5 U.S.C. 552 et seq

.