sd-654905 Writer’s Direct Contact

+1 (858) 720.7932

WOConnor@mofo.com 12531 HIGH BLUFF DRIVE
SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA

92130-2040

TELEPHONE: 858.720.5100

FACSIMILE: 858.720.5125

WWW.MOFO.COM MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP

BEIJING

, BERLIN

, BRUSSELS

, DENVER

, HONG KONG

, LONDON

, LOS ANGELES

, NEW YORK

, NORTHERN VIRGINIA

, PALO ALTO

, SACRAMENTO

, SAN DIEGO

, SAN FRANCISCO

, SHANGHAI

, SINGAPORE

, TOKYO

, WASHINGTON

, D

. C

.

February 9, 2015

U.S. Department of Transportation Docket Operations, M-30 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Room W12-140, West Building Ground Floor Washington, DC 20590-0001

Re: Petition of Pro Drones Canada Inc. for an Exemption Pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 to Operate an Unmanned Aircraft System

Dear Sir or Madam:

Pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Moderniz ation and Reform Act of 2012 (the Reform Act) and 14 C.F.R. Part 11, Pro Dr ones Canada Inc. (Pro Drones), 1 the North American manufacturer, distributor, and operator of the MD4-200, hereby applies for an exemption from the Federal Aviation Regulations identified below.

The requested exemption would permit Pro Drones’ commercial operation of the MD4-200, which is a miniaturized VTOL-aircraft (Ver tical Take Off and La nding). The MD4-200 can fly by remote control or autonomously with th e aid of Pro Drones’ GPS Waypoint navigation system. The MD4-200 can be used for a variet y of purposes, including oil and gas pipeline inspections, solar installation inspections, power line/cable inspections, cooling tower inspections, forestry, critical infrastructure inspections, wind turbine inspections, and radiation measurement and monitoring.

Use of the MD4-200 for survey and inspecti on activities reduces the need to operate conventional aircraft for the same purposes a nd provides extremely high quality imagery and modeling at a fraction of the price and time for the same activities done by conventional

aircraft. Use of the MD4-200 therefore results in enhanced efficiency, environmental benefits, and increased safety.

1 Pro Drones Canada Inc. dba Avyon, www.Avyon.com, and dba Flyterra , www.Flyterra.com.U.S. Department of Transportation February 9, 2015 Page Two

sd-654905 Operation under the requested exemption will be subject to strict operating parameters, set forth more fully herein. These parameters will ensu re at least an equivalent level of safety to currently authorized opera tion using manned aircraft. 2

I. REGULATIONS FOR WHICH EXEMPTION IS REQUESTED

Pro Drones requests exemption fr om the following regulations:

 14 C.F.R Part 21, Subpart H;

 14 C.F.R Part 27;

 14 C.F.R § 45.23(b);

 14 C.F.R. § 45.27(a);

 14 C.F.R § 61.113;

 14 C.F.R § 91.7(a);

 14 C.F.R § 91.9(b)(2);

 14 C.F.R § 91.9(c);

 14 C.F.R § 91.103;

 14 C.F.R § 91.109(a);

 14 C.F.R § 91.119;

 14 C.F.R § 91.121;

 14 C.F.R § 91.151(a) & (b)

 14 C.F.R § 91.203 (a) & (b);

 14 C.F.R § 91.405(a);

 14 C.F.R § 91.407(a)(l);

 14 C.F.R § 91.409(a)(2);

 14 C.F.R § 91.417 (a) & (b).

This petition incorporates the material contained in the Pro Drones MD4-200 Operations, Inspection, and Maintenance Manual , the Pro Drones MD4- 200 Training/Experience Manual, and the MD4-200 Operators Handbook (t ogether, the “Manuals ” at Attachments 1- 3). The Manuals are submitted herewith as confidential under 14 C.F.R. § 11.35(b), because they contain commercial and proprietary inform ation that Pro Drones has not and will not share with others, is not available to the public, and is protected from release under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552 et seq

.

2 While Pro Drones is filing this petition for exemption on its own behalf, it anticipates that future customers may file exemptions to allow them to operate the MD 4-200 at their own facilities, which will be substantially similar to this petition.U.S. Department of Transportation February 9, 2015 Page Three

sd-654905 II. STATUTORY AUTHORITY FOR REQUESTED EXEMPTIONS

This petition for exemption is submitted in a ccordance with Section 333 of the Reform Act. Congress has directed the FAA “to safely acce lerate the integration of civil unmanned aircraft systems into the national airspace syst em.” Pursuant to Section 333 of the Reform Act, the FAA Administrator is to permit operatio n of an unmanned aircraft system where it

does not create a hazard to users of the nationa l airspace system (NAS) or the public or pose a threat to national security base d on the following considerations:

 The size, weight, speed a nd operational capability;

 Operation in proximity to air ports and populated areas; and

 Operation within visual line of sight of the operator.

Furthermore, the Federal Aviation Act grants the FAA Administrator general authority to grant exemptions from the agency’s safety regulations and minimum standards when the Administrator decides a requested ex emption is in the public interest. See 49 U.S.C. §§ 106(f), 44701-44716, et seq . A party requesting an exempti on 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. 14 C.F.R. § 11.81.

III. DESCRIPTION OF PRO DRONES AND ITS SERVICES

Pro Drones provides professi onal Unmanned Aircraft System solutions, delivering customized services with its UAS products in cluding surveying and mapping solutions.

Pro Drones is based in New York (USA) and Alma (Canada). In 2014, Pro Drones acquired the exclusive rights to manufact ure, distribute and develop cust om solutions for Microdrones products in North America. Mi crodrones, GmbH is the pioneer of vertical take-off and landing drones for professionals and has sold several thousand drones in Europe, Asia,

Russia and North America. Pro Drones is now the exclusive manufacturer and distributor of Microdrones products in North Am erica, and is a permanent part of the Microdrones research and development program.

Pro Drones provides UAS solutions for utilit ies, allowing for safer and high precision inspections of sites including power lines, pipelines, railways, wind mills. Pro Drones’ services also support security and safety operatio ns, such as monitoring or searching hard to access areas. Pro Drones’ products also allow unprecedented access to geospatial data to support civil engineering proj ects, providing up-to date imagery to allow for precise volumetric measurement of stockpiles and bul k materials. The UAS products can also provide detailed and timely land and crop info rmation from scouting land to conductingU.S. Department of Transportation February 9, 2015 Page Four

sd-654905 multispectral imagery collection for applications from precision agriculture to monitoring

conservation lands.

The contact information for Pro Drones is as follows:

Vivien Hériard Dubreuil Pro Drones Higher Solutions President
www.Pro Drones.com Tel (418) 800-0403 vivien@Pro Drones.com C/O William V. O’Conno r William D. Janicki Joanna L. Simon Morrison & Foerster LLP 12531 High Bluff Drive San Diego, CA 92130 Tel (858) 720-5100 WOConnor@mofo.com WJanicki@mofo.com JoannaSimon@mofo.com

IV. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED OPERATIONS

A. The MD4-200

The MD4-200 was conceived and manufactured by Microdrones GmbH, but is operated and sold in North America by Pro Drones. Over 600 MD4-200s have been sold to date. Globally, the MD4-200 has completed thousan ds of flight hours. The MD4-200 is operational throughout Canada, Europe, China, S outh-East Asia and Australia, performing tasks in the field of documentation, coordi nation, exploration, su rveying, communication, inspection and observation.

The MD4-200 flight and navigation controller ce nters around an inertia l measurement unit, consisting of an accelerometer and a gyroscope for each axis, supplemented by a 3-axis magnetometer, a barometric altitude sensor and a GNSS receiver. With all these sensor readings put together in software called a “Kal man Filter,” the MD4-200 is able to fly selfstabilized with GNSS Position Hold. The opera tor can control the movements in terms of going forward or backward, left or right, up or down, turning left or right, trigger payload cameras to take pictures or ch ange the zoom. As soon as there is no input from the operator, the MD4-200 will stay on the spot, waiting fo r the next command. It is possible to let the MD4-200 hover in the same spot for several minutes.

The complete MD4-200 is a system of systems. Every important function is maintained by

its own controller. From the central unit for flight and navigation control the main bus connects to an independent motor controller for e ach of the four motors as well as an I/O andU.S. Department of Transportation February 9, 2015 Page Five

sd-654905 payload controller. This dist ributed architecture ensures re liable and high performance operation of the MD4-200.

Figure 1: The MD4-200

Figure 2: Technical Specifications

Number of motors 4

Type of Motors Flat-core brushless

Rotor Speed (hovering) 1800 rpm

Cruise Speed 18 mph

Power Battery – 14.8V, 4S LiPO, 2300 mA

Total weight (not including payload) 1.76 lbs

Max Payload 0.66 lbs

Climb Rate 16 mph

Max Thrust 15.5 N

Maximum Endurance 35 minutesU.S. Department of Transportation February 9, 2015 Page Six

sd-654905 Figure 3: Operations Specifications

Temperature -4 degrees F – 122 degrees F

Humidity Max. 90%

Wind tolerance Steady pictures up to 4m/s

Flight radius Minimum 500m on RC, with WP up to 6km/4 miles

Ceiling altitude Up to 1000m/3,200ft

Take-off altitude Up to 4000m ASL/13,000ft

Figure 4 : Technical Drawings of the MD4-200U.S. Department of Transportation February 9, 2015 Page Seven

sd-654905 B. The MD4-200 Flight Control System

The MD4-200 Ground Control Station (GCS) serv es as the operator interface, coordinating

the mission and communication functions includ ing mission planning, near real-time mission progress, video display and function monitoring. The GCS consists of a laptop and mission planning/execution software (mdCockpit), the command and control (mdDRC) and the data

link receiver.

The MD4-200 can be operated in two modes: in the first mode, the pilot is in control of the MD4-200 and in the second mode, the mission is conducted through automated waypoints planned in the mdCockpit software. The md Cockpit program conducts mission planning for the MD4-200, with complete route planning to include waypoints, identify No-Fly zones and take into consideration the terrain height. Th e mission planning information is up-loaded to the MD4-200 prior to flight. During flight, mdCockpit provides complete management of the MD4-200 mission. The following is pr ovided during flight to the operator:

 Moving map showing the location of the MD4-200

 Speed

 Heading

 Altitude

 Climb rate

 GNSS status and availability

 Link status

 Battery status

 All safety systems and alarms (audio and visual)

Figure 5: mdCockpit Mission Planning SoftwareU.S. Department of Transportation February 9, 2015 Page Eight

sd-654905 The mdDRC provides the command and contro l link to the MD4-200. The MD4-200 system provides to the user the data downlink from th e main variables during the flight, which is received by the mdDRC. The information is decoded and shown on the Graphical User Interface (GUI), allowing the us er to know in real time the st atus of the MD4-200. The main command and control link operates at a freque ncy of 900 MHz and provides command inputs from the pilot and flight information from the MD4-200 back to the mdDRC. The mdDRC uses the 9XTend Modem, which has FCC regulatory approval.

Figure 6: Command and Control Link

The data link on the MD4-200 allows for the payload and MD4-200 system information to

be transmitted in near real-time between the MD4-200 and the GCS. The data link operates at a frequency of 2.4 GHz.

Figure 7: Data Link and LaptopU.S. Department of Transportation February 9, 2015 Page Nine

sd-654905 Notable features include:

 Lost Link Mission Procedures : If at any time during the mission the command and control link is lost between the mdDRC and the MD4-200, the MD4-200 will immediately enter into the GPS Position Ho ld and try to acquire the signal for a specified time (set at 30 seconds). If th e time runs out before reacquiring the signal, the MD4-200 will enter into emergency landing or homing mode, depending on the operator’s setting. Emergency landing will la nd the MD4-200 in location at a descent speed of 1.0 mph. In homing mode, the MD4- 200 will climb to a pr edefined altitude

and then return to the take-off location in a straight line for em ergency landing at the take-off location. If at any time during the procedure the link is reacquired, the operator will take full control.

 Lost GPS Procedures : Flight control will revert to inertial navigation mode and MD4-200 stabilization is maintained. The p ilot is notified by te xtual, graphic and spoken message and has to hold position with input from the mdDRC. GPS hold will reactive when the signal improves.

 Lost Link and GPS Procedures : If both signals are lost, the MD4-200 will immediately enter emergency landing with a descent speed of 1 mph.

 GPS Hold : If the MD4-200 approaches the Virt ual Fence (a virtual boundary set by GPS data points), it will slow down and stop before entering the fenced area. The GPS Position Hold stays in effect until th e pilot steers the MD4-200 back towards the

interior of the fence. GPS Hold will also stabilize the flight if the MD4-200 reaches critical speed or critical pitch or role angle.

 Monitoring and Notification of Emergency Situations : The pilot is notified to take corrective action if wind speed increases, th e flight reaches critical altitude and/or distance, the motor approaches the perf ormance limit, or the battery voltage approaches a level just adequate to return to the landing zone.

C. Pro Drones’ Proposed Operations Demonstrate an Equivalent Level of Safety

1. General Description of Proposed Flight Operations

Pro Drones proposes to operate only on privately-owned, remote locations and within the limitations and performance specifications listed in the Manuals, which are summarized

below.U.S. Department of Transportation February 9, 2015 Page Ten

sd-654905 The MD4-200 will be used for a variety of purpo ses including utilities inspections, vertical inspections of infrastructure, security and sa fety monitoring, geospatial analysis for civil engineering projects, and data co llection for agricultural lands.

The proposed operations do not create any hazard to users of the national airspace system or pose a threat to national securit y. The aircraft is a battery operated quadcopter and weighs approximately 1.76 pounds with a maximum takeo ff weight of approximately 2.42 pounds. The vehicle’s ground speed has a maximum of 18 mph, and it will operate at or below 400 feet AGL. The MD4-200 has a 3-axis magnetome ter, a barometric altitude sensor and a GNSS receiver, enabling it to fly self-s tabilized with GNSS Position Hold.

Manned aircraft are at risk of fuel spillage and fire in the event of an incident or accident. The MD4-200 carries no fuel, and therefore the risk of fire following an incident or accident due to fuel spillage is eliminated. Compar ed to manned aircraft, the MD4-200 reduces the risk to participating persons in close proximity to the aircraft due to the limited size, weight, operating conditions, and design sa fety features of the MD4-200.

The FAA has determined that the risk of not having an electronic means to monitor and communicate with other aircraft, such as tran sponders or sense and avoid technology, is mitigated by placing limits on altitude, requi ring stand-off distance from clouds, permitting daytime operations only, and requiring that the ai rcraft be operated within visual line of sight and yield right of way to all other manned opera tions. Additionally, the operator will request a NOTAM prior to operations to alert other users of the NAS. See Exemption No. 11062, Docket No. FAA 2014-0352, at p. 13, a ttached hereto as Attachment 4.

The petitioner’s aircraft has the capability to operate safely after experiencing certain inflight failures, as sp ecified above in the description of the Flight Control System. The

aircraft is also able to res pond to a lost-link event with a pre-coordinated, predictable, automated flight maneuver either landing safely at that location or returning to its take-off location, which can be set by the operator.

2. Specific Limitations on Proposed Flight Operations

Given the small size involved, the restricted e nvironment within which they will operate, the procedures listed below, and pilot certif ication requirements, Pro Drones’ proposed operations using the MD4-200 would “not create a hazard to users of the national airspace system or the public or pose a threat to nati onal security.” Reform Act Section 333(b)(1).

1. The aircraft is a pproximately 1.76 pounds.

2. The aircraft will be identified by serial number, registered with the FAA, and will have identification (N-Number) ma rkings as large as practicable.U.S. Department of Transportation February 9, 2015 Page Eleven

sd-654905 3. Flights will be operated within visual line of sight of the pilot in command (PIC).

4. Prior to each flight, a zero altitude initiation point will be established and confirmed for accuracy by PIC.

5. Maximum flight time for each operational flight will be 35 minutes.

6. The aircraft will be safely landed with no less than the greater of (a) 20% battery life remaining or (b) seven minutes of flight time remaining.

7. The aircraft will be operated during daylight and in VFR conditions.

8. Flights will not exceed 400 feet AGL.

9. Flights will be operated at a lateral di stance of at least 50 feet from any persons or property not associated wi th the operation who have not given prior permission.

10. Flights will be limited to a groundspeed of 18 mph.

11. Minimum crew for each flight will cons ist of a PIC and a Visual Observer.

12. All PICs will be qualified pursuant to one of the two options below.

a) FAA private pilot certificate, third cl ass medical certificate, and completed factory certified training in md4-200 operations; or

b) Approved for md4-200 operations by Tr ansport Canada pursuant to Special Flight Operations Certificate, comp eted FAA certified pr ivate pilot ground school, passed FAA private pilot wr itten exam, and completed factory certified training in md4-200 operations. See SFOC dated September 12, 2014 and SFOC dated September 19, 2014 attached as Exhibits 6 and 7.

13. Pro Drones will designate a Flight Operat ions Manager in accordance with its Manuals. The Flight Operations Mana ger will be trained on UAS operations, will oversee all training/operations and ensure all PICs and VOs receive proper training and abide by all pertinent regulations.

14. Prior to the flight, a Missi on Plan will be created setting forth the limitations for the flight as well as contact information for the PIC.U.S. Department of Transportation February 9, 2015 Page Twelve

sd-654905 15. The flight operations will yield the ri ght of way to other manned aircraft operations.

16. All persons who are not involved with Pr o Drones’ operations will be required

to be at least 500 feet from flight operations.

17. The aircraft will only operate over site s with the consent of the owner.

18. Pro Drones will provide NOTAM details to the FAA 24 hours prior to each flight.

19. All required permissions and permits will be obtained from territory, state, county or city jurisdic tions prior to flight.

20. Prior to commencing operations, Pro Drones will obtain a Certificate of Waiver or Authorization (COA) from the FAA.

21. If the aircraft loses communications, it wi ll have the capability to return to a pre-determined location within the operational area and land.

22. If the aircraft loses its GPS signal it will have the capability of being flown manually to a predetermined location w ithin the operati onal area and land.

23. The flight will be aborted in case of unpredicted obstacles or emergencies.

24. Each flight will be recorded in an Ai rcraft Logbook and by the PIC in a Pilot Logbook.

25. Maintenance on the aircraft will be recorded in an Aircraft Logbook.

3. Flight Recovery, Lost Communications, and Lost GPS

Procedures

The flight recovery, lost co mmunications, and lost GPS procedures are documented above, and are more fully documented in the attached Operators Handbook. See Attachment 3.

V. PRIOR OPERATIONAL APPROVALS

The MD4-200 has received prior op erational approvals in both the U.S. and Canada, further verifying it is safe for use.

 The MD4-200 was granted a COA by the FAA for the “Operation of the Microdrones MD4-200 Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) in Class G airspace at or below 400 feetU.S. Department of Transportation February 9, 2015 Page Thirteen

sd-654905 Above Ground Level (AGL) at Musgrave Resear ch Farm, in the vicinity of Aurora, NY, under the jurisdiction of Elmira TRACON.” See Attachment 5.

 The MD4-200 was granted two Special Flight Operations Certificates (SFOCs) by Transport Canada. See Attachments 6 - 7.

The FAA COA noted that “[t] he Griffiss International Airport has made its own determination

that the Microdrones MD4-200 unmanned aircraft is airworthy.” (Attachment 5 p. 3) Transport Canada made a similar finding, stating that Pro Dr ones dba Flyterra “is adequately equipped and able to conduct a safe operation” using the md4-200. (Attachment 6 p. 1)

VI. SPECIFIC FAR EXEMPTIONS REQUESTED

Pro Drones seeks an exemption fr om several interrelated provisions of 14 C.F.R. Parts 21, 45, 61, and 91 for purposes of conducting the requested operations using the MD4-200. Listed below are (1) the specific FAR sections for which exemption is sought, and (2) the operating procedures and safeguards that Pro Drones has established which will ensure a level of safety better than or equal to the rules from which exemption is sought. See 14 C.F.R. § 11.81 (e).

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

The FAA has stated that no exemption is needed from this section if a finding is made under the Reform Act that the UAS selected provides an equivalent level of safety when compared to aircraft normally used for the same app lication. These criteria are met, and therefore no exemption is needed. See Attachment 1, Grant of Exempti on to Astraeus Aerial, Docket No. FAA 2014-0352 at 13-14, 22. If, however, the FAA determines that there are some

characteristics of the MD4-200 that fail to m eet the requirements of the Reform Act, an exemption is requested.

Equivalent Level of Safety : The MD4-200 is safe when taking into account its size, weight, speed, and operational capability. The MD 4-200 weighs approximately 1.76 pounds and will be flown at speeds less than 25 miles per hour, in visual line of sight of the operator, and in remote and unpopulated airspace over land only with the consent of the owner. The MD4- 200 does not carry pilots, passenge rs, explosive materials, or flammable liquid fuels. The MD4-200 will be operated within th e parameters of the Manuals.

Pro Drones will also provide the FAA with advance notice of all operations via NOTAM and coordination with the local FSDO. The proposed operations will be at least as safe as, or safer than, conventional aircraft and/or rotorcraft operating with an airworthiness certificateU.S. Department of Transportation February 9, 2015 Page Fourteen

sd-654905 without the restrictions and conditions proposed here. The proposed operations will also be as safe, or safer than traditional surveying or inspection activities.

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

Rotorcraft

14 C.F.R. Part 27 sets forth the procedural re quirements for airworthin ess certification of normal category rotorcraft. To the extent the MD4-200 would otherwise require certification under Part 27, Pro Drones seeks an exemption fro m Part 27’s airworthiness standards for the same reasons identified in the request for exemption from 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H.

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

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-spor t category aircraft or experimental or provisionally certificated aircra ft, the operator must also di splay on that aircraft near each entrance to the cabin, cockpit, or pilo t station, in letters not less than 2 inches nor more than 6 inches high, the words “limited,” “restricted,” “light-sport, “experimental,” or “provi sional,” as applicable.

14 C.F.R. § 45.27(a) states:

Rotorcraft. Each operator of a rotorcraft must display on that rotorcraft horizontally on both surfaces of the cabin, fuselage, boom, or tail the marks required by § 45.23.

14 C.F.R. § 91.9(c) states:

No person may operate a U.S.-registered civil ai rcraft unless that aircraft is identified in accordance with part 45 of this chapter.

In a previous Grant of Exemption, the FAA determined that exemption from these requirements was warranted provided that th e aircraft “have iden tification (N-Number) markings in accordance with 14 CFR part 45, S ubpart C if the markings are “as large as practicable.” See Exemption No. 11062, Docket No. FAA 2014-0352, at p. 14.

Equivalent Level of Safety : Pro Drones will mark all MD4-200s with their N-Number in a prominent spot on the fuselage with marki ngs that are as large as practicable.U.S. Department of Transportation February 9, 2015 Page Fifteen

sd-654905 D. 14 C.F.R. § 61.113: Private Pi lot Privileges and Limitations

Pro Drones seeks exemption from 14 CFR § 61.113, which restrict s private pilots from flying aircraft for compensation or hi re and would also require a se cond class medical certificate. The purpose of Part 61 is to ensure that the skill and competency of any PIC matches the airspace in which the PIC will be operating, as we ll as requiring certifications if the pilot is carrying passengers or cargo for hire.

While the MD4-200 will be operated as part of a commercial operation, it carries neither passengers nor cargo. In the Grant of Exem ption in FAA Docket No. FAA-2014-0352, the FAA determined that the unique characteristics of small UAS operation ou tside of controlled airspace did not warrant the addi tional cost and restrictions a ttendant with requiring the PIC to have a commercial pilot certificate and a cl ass II medical certificate. The FAA has also determined that the required knowledge for a co mmercial pilot covers the same fundamental principles as a private pilot. The FAA determined that an equivalent level of safety for small UAS operation could be achieved by requiring a private pilot certificate, a third class medical certificate, and appropriate UAS operational training.

Pro Drones’ PICs for the md4-200 will be qua lified pursuant to one of the two options

below.

a) FAA private pilot certificate, third cl ass medical certificate, and completed factory certified training in md4-200 operations; or

b) Transport Canada approval for md4-200 ope rations pursuant to a Special Flight Operations Certificate, competed FAA private pilot ground school, passed FAA private pilot written exam, and complete d factory certified training in md4-200 operations. See Transport Canada SF OC dated September 12, 2014 and SFOC dated September 19, 2014. (Attachments 6 and 7)

Transport Canada found that Pro Drones, dba Flyterra, and its pilots are “adequately equipped and able to conduct a safe operation” using the md4-200 for the purposes of aerial imagery. (Attachments 6 and 7, p. 1)

Pro Drones’ visual observers (VOs) will be trained in Pro Drones’ UAS operations. Pro Drone’s PICs and VOs will be trained and maintain currency according to the Pro Drones md4-200 Training/Experience Manual. (Attachment 2.)

The requirements above ensure that all PICs and VOs have the knowledge, skill, and training to conduct operations using the md4-200 UAS with an equivalent level of safety.U.S. Department of Transportation February 9, 2015 Page Sixteen

sd-654905 The FAA stated in its grant of an exception to Astraeus Aerial the “the FAA considers the overriding safety factor for the limited operatio ns proposed by the petitioner to be the airmanship skills acquired through UAS-specific f light cycles, flight time, and specific make and model experience, culminating in veri fication through testing.” See Exemption No. 11062, Docket No. FAA 2014-0352, at p. 18. The proposed operations can achieve an equivalent level of safety by requiring the knowledge and experience in MD4-200 operations

described above.

Furthermore, the security screening conducted by the Transportation Security Administration of certificated airmen and applicants for the FAA written examination satisfies the statutory requirement of Section 333 for operations to not pose a threat to national security.

Pro Drones will designate a Flight Operati ons Manager with an FAA commercial pilot certificate or equivalent Transpor t Canada pilot certificate and f light instructor certificate. The Flight Operations Manage r will be trained in UAS ope rations and will oversee all training/operations and will ensure all PICs and VOs receive proper training and abide by all pertinent regulations.

The restrictions Pro Drones has placed on its MD4-200 operations meet or exceed the restrictions similarly imposed on Astraeus Aerial in FAA Docket No. FAA-2014-0352. Pro Drones will operate in unpopulated areas with the consent of the land owner away from persons and property not involve d in the operation. The small ai rcraft will be flown based on

VLOS at or below 400 feet AGL. A NOTAM will be issued at least 24 hours before the flight is to occur, and the fli ght will be coordinated with the applicable FSDO. Therefore Pro Drones’ proposed PIC requirements demonstrate an equivalent level of safety for small UAS operations.

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

Pro Drones seeks an exemption from 14 C.F.R. § 91.7(a), which requires that a civil aircraft be in airworthy condition to be operated. The FAA has stated that no exemption is required to the extent that the requirements of Part 21 are waived or found in applicable. Accordingly, Pro Drones requests that the requirements fo r Section 91.7 be treated in accordance with FAR Part 21 Subpart H. See Grant of Exemption No. 11062, p. 19.

F. 14 C.F.R. § 91.9(b)(2): Civil Aircraft Flight Manual in the Aircraft; 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.203(a) and (b): Carrying Civil Aircraft

Certification and Registration

Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. § 91.9(b)(2):

(b) No person may operate a U.S. -registered civil aircraft -U.S. Department of Transportation February 9, 2015 Page Seventeen

sd-654905 ...

(2) For which an Airplane or Rotorc raft Flight Manual is required by § 21.5 of this chapter, 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.

Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. § 91.203(a) and (b):

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

(1) An appropriate and curren t airworthiness certificate...

(b) No person may operate a civil aircra ft unless the airwor thiness certificate required by paragraph (a) of this secti on or a special flight authorization issued under § 91.715 is displayed at the cab in or cockpit entr ance so that it is legible to passengers or crew.

Pro Drones does not request an exemption from this section but instead notifies the FAA that, in accordance with FAA Office of Chie f Counsel’s Opinion dated August 8, 2014, the UAS flight manual, registration certificate and other documentation will be kept at the control station with the PIC during flight. The Chief Counsel’s Office has held that for all UAS operations, this alternate method consti tutes full compliance with the regulations. See

also Grant of Exemption No. 11062, pp. 19-20, and Grant of Exemption No. 8607.

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

Pro Drones seeks an exemption from 14 C.F. R. § 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. The aircraft will not have a Flight

Manual on board. The PIC will take all actions including reviewing weather, flight battery requirements, landing and takeoff distances and aircraft performa nce data before initiation of flight. Under these circumstances, the FAA ha s stated that no exemption is required. See Grant of Exemption No. 11062, p. 20. An exemption is requested to the extent that an FAAapproved Flight Manual is required.

Equivalent Level of Safety: An equivalent level of safety will be provided by following the Manuals. The PIC will take all required preflight actions - including performing all required checklists and reviewing weathe r, flight requirements, batte ry charge, landing and takeoff distance, aircraft performance data, and con tingency landing areas - before initiation of flight. The Manuals will be kept at the ground station with the operator at all times.U.S. Department of Transportation February 9, 2015 Page Eighteen

sd-654905 H. 14 C.F.R. § 91.109(a): Flight Instruction

Pro Drones seeks an exemption from 14 C. F.R. § 91.109(a), which provides that “[n]o person may operate a civil aircraft (except a manne d free balloon) that is being used for flight instruction unless that aircraft has fully f unctioning dual controls.” UASs and remotely piloted aircraft, by their design, do not have func tional dual controls. Inst ead, flight control is accomplished through the use of the Ground Control System consisting of the handheld

mdDRC command and control link and the laptop based data li nk that communicates with

the aircraft via radio modem communications.

Equivalent Level of Safety: When flight instruction is performed, no pilots will be on the

aircraft and the GCS will be a safe distance from the aircraft and the public, causing no safety hazard. Given the size and speed of the MD4-200, an equivalent level of safe training can still be performed without dual controls b ecause no pilot or passengers are aboard the aircraft, and all persons will be a safe distance aw ay in the event that the aircraft experiences any difficulties during flight instruction. In addition, Pro Drones will co nduct flight training at a remote facility away from population cente rs. These training flights will comply with the provisions in the Manuals. Accordingly, Pro Drones’ proposed method of operation provides superior levels of safety.

I. 14 C.F.R. § 91.119(c): Minimum Sa fe Altitudes in Uncongested

Areas

Pro Drones requests an exemption from the minimu m safe altitude requirements of 14 C.F.R. § 91.119(c). Section 91.119(c) prescribes that an aircraft may not be ope rated closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or struct ure. The Manuals provide for operations away from congested population areas, but in close proximity to potential inspection sites and structures. The FAA has already determined that relief from Section 91.119(c) is warranted for UAS operations in uncongested areas with si milar flight re strictions as those imposed by

Pro Drones. See Grant of Exemption No. 11062, p. 20-21.

Equivalent Level of Safety: Compared to flight operations with rotorcraft/aircraft weighing far more than the maximum weights proposed he rein, and given the lack of flammable fuel, any risk associated with these operations is fa r less than those that presently existing with conventional aircraft. An equivalent level of sa fety will be achieved given the size, weight, and speed of the MD4-200, as we ll as the locations where it is operated. In order to avoid any risk to aircraft, flight operations will be restricted to 400 feet AGL or below. This is airspace where other aircraft do not normally operate. As set forth in the Manuals and herein, the MD4-200 will be operated over land with the cons ent of the owner, away from persons or structures not involved in the operation. All pe rsons who are not invol ved with Pro Drones’ operations will be required to be at least 500 feet from flight operations.U.S. Department of Transportation February 9, 2015 Page Nineteen

sd-654905 J. 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 le vel by reference to an altimeter that is set to the elevation of the departur e airport. As described abov e, the MD4-1000 is capable of maintaining altitude through pre- determined altitude settings. Equivalent Level of Safety: The FAA has stated that an equi valent level of safety can be achieved if the aircraft will be operated at orbelow 400 feet AGL and within visual line-ofsight in addition to GPS based altitude info rmation relayed in real time to the operator. See Grant of Exemption No. 11062, p. 20-21. As the attached Manuals indicate, the MD4-200 will be operated at or below 400 feet AGL and otherwise comply with the limitations in the Grant of Exemption No. 11062.

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

Pro Drones requests an exemption from 14 C.F.R. § 91.151(a)’s fuel requirements for flight

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 c onditions) there is enough fuel to fly to the first point of intended landi ng 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 th at for at least 45 minutes.

Here, the technological limitations on MD4-200 battery power means that no meaningful flight operations can be conducted while still main taining a 30 minute reserve. The aircraft is battery powered with a maximu m flight time of 35 minutes. Pro Drones proposes that the maximum flight time for each operational flight will be 70 minutes. The aircraft will be safely landed with no less than the greater of (a) 20% battery life remaining or (b) fifteen minutes of flight time remaining.

Equivalent Level of Safety: The FAA has stated that an equiva lent level of safety is provided if the UAS flight is conducted under day time VFR flight conditions using VLOS, and
terminated with at least 25% rese rve battery power still available. See Grant of Exemption No. 11062, p. 21-22. The Manuals provi ding an equivalent level of safety by safely landing with no less than the greater of (a) 20% battery life remaining or (b) seven minutes of flight time remaining and otherwise complying w ith the flight rest rictions above.U.S. Department of Transportation February 9, 2015 Page Twenty

sd-654905 L. 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.405(a) , 91.407(a)(l), 91.409( a)(2); 91.417(a) and (b): Maintenance Inspections

Pro Drones seeks an exemption from the mainte nance inspection requirements contained in 14 C.F.R. § 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(l), 91.409(a)(2); 91.417(a) and (b). These regulations specify maintenance and inspection standa rds 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 airc raft “[s]hall have the aircraft inspected as prescribed in s ubpart E of this part and sha ll between required inspections ... have discrepancies repaired as prescribed in part 43 of this chapter”). An exemption from these regulations is needed because Part 43 and these sections only apply to aircraft with an airworthiness certificate, which the MD4-200 will not have.

Equivalent Level of Safety: An equivalent level of safety will be achieved because maintenance and inspections will be perfor med in accordance with the Manuals. This includes maintenance, overhaul , replacement, and inspection requirements for the aircraft and procedures to document and maintain main tenance records for the aircraft. This also includes preflight in spection procedures. See Exemption No. 11062, Docket No. FAA 2014- 0352, at p. 14-15.

As provided in the Manuals, flights will not be conducted unless a flight operations checklist is performed that includes all of the airc raft’s components. The Manuals also set requirements for maintenance logbo oks and record keeping as we ll as routine a nd post-flight maintenance. The Manuals set requirements fo r both annual maintenance and preventative

maintenance.

VII. PUBLIC INTEREST

Granting Pro Drones’ petition for exemption furthe rs the public interest. National policy set by Congress favors early integration of UAS into the NAS in controlled, safe working environments. By granting this petition, the FAA will fulfill Congress’ s intent of allowing UAS to operate safely in the NAS before completion of the rulemaking required under

Section 332 of the Reform Act.

Pro Drones’ MD4-200 allows for safer and more thorough surveys and inspections of buildings, construction sites, pipelines, railways, etc. Such inspections and surveys traditionally required either manned aircraft or people surveying on foot.

The MD4-200 is a safer option than tradi tional manned aircraft. The MD4-200 is approximately 1.76 pounds, carries no passengers or crew and has no flammable fuel, as opposed to larger and more powerful helicopter s and small airplanes. The public has an interest in reducing the hazards to human health and safety and property associated with such traditional manned aircraft for inspection operations. Moreover, an additional benefit is theU.S. Department of Transportation February 9, 2015 Page Twenty-One

sd-654905 reduced emissions associated with the proposed UAS use, which addresses both environmental and human health imperatives.

The MD4-200 is also a safer and more efficien t option than traditional foot surveys. Inspections on foot require a surveyor to clim b aggregate piles with the risk of falling or navigate unsafe construction sites. The MD4- 200 offers a much safer alternative at much less cost and for much better precision. The public has an interest in protecting its citizens from unsafe conditions during surveys and inspec tions, and an interest in having businesses conduct such inspections efficiently so that unnecessary costs are not passed on to

consumers.

The MD4-200 also allows for sa fer agricultural surveying comp ared to manned aircraft and or higher precision surveying compared to sa tellite. Satellite imagery has much lower precision and is not “on demand.” The MD4- 200 will allow for high precision imagery and surveying of agricultural fields . Here too, the benefits to human health and safety and property obtain. But in addition to the envir onmental benefits of reduced emissions from traditional aircraft, the use of UAS can support more targeted applica tions of irrigation, herbicides, and fertilizers to agricultural lands, which also benefit the environment.

VIII. PRIVACY

All flights will occur over unpopulated areas, with the consent of the landowner. All flights will be conducted in accordance with any fede ral, state or local laws regarding privacy.

IX. SUMMARY FOR FEDERAL REGISTER

Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. Part 11, the following summary is provided for publication in the Federal Register, should it be determ ined that publication is needed:

Pro Drones seeks an exemption from the followi ng rules for the commercial operation of a small unmanned aerial system: 14 C.F.R Part 21, Subpart H; 14 C.F.R Part 27; 14 C.F.R § 45.23(b); 14 C.F.R. § 45.27(a); 14 C.F.R § 61.113; 14 C.F.R § 91.7(a); 14 C.F.R § 91.9(b)(2); 14 C.F.R § 91.9(c); 14 C.F.R § 91.103; 14 C.F.R § 91.109( a); 14 C.F.R § 91.119; 14 C.F.R § 91.121; 14 C.F.R § 91.151(a) & (b) 14 C.F.R § 91.203 (a) & (b); 14 C.F.R § 91.405(a); 14 C.F.R § 91.407(a)(l ); 14 C.F.R § 91.409(a)(2); 14 C.F.R § 91.417 (a) & (b).

The exemption will enhance safety by reducing risk to the operator, the general public and property owners from the substantial hazards associated with performing equivalent work using conventional aircraft and rotorcraft.U.S. Department of Transportation February 9, 2015 Page Twenty-Two

sd-654905 X. ATTACHMENTS

Attachment 1: Pro Drones MD4-200 Op erations, Inspection, and Maintenance

Manual

Attachment 2: Pro Drones MD 4-200 Training/Experience Manual

Attachment 3: MD4-200 Operators Handbook

Attachment 4: Grant of Exemption to Astraeus Aerial, Docket No. FAA 2014-0352

Attachment 5: FAA Form 7711-UAS C OA Attachment, 2014-ESA-111 –Certificate

of Waiver of Authorization for Gri ffiss International Airport Test Site

Attachment 6: Special Flight Operations Certificate (SFOC) for MD4-200 issued by Transport Canada on September 12, 2014 for operations at unspecified

locations in the Province of Ontario.

Attachment 7: Special Flight Operations Certificate (SFOC) for MD4-200 issued by Transport Canada on September 19, 2014 for operations across Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba , Yukon, Northwest Territories and

Nunavut.

Attachments 1-3 are confidential documents submitted under 14 C.F.R. § 11.35(b) and are exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552 et seq., and any other requirements established by the FAA pur suant to Section 333 of the Reform Act). If you have any questions or require any additi onal information, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned a ttorneys for Pro Drones.

XI. CONCLUSION

Satisfaction of the criteria pr ovided in Section 333 of the Re form Act - size, weight, speed, operating capabilities, proximity to airports and populated areas, operation within visual line of sight, and national security c onsiderations - provides more th an adequate justification for the grant of the requested ex emptions to permit Pro Drones to operate the MD4-200 for commercial purposes.U.S. Department of Transportation February 9, 2015 Page Twenty-Three

sd-654905 Granting the requested exemption will benefit th e public interest as a whole in many ways, including (1) significantly improving safety and reducing risk by alleviating human exposure to danger; (2) improving the quality of services Pro Drones can provide to its customers; (3) decreasing operating costs related to surv ey and inspection activities; (4) reducing environmental impacts aerial surveys and inspections; and (5) supporting agricultural applications and treatments that reduce environmental impacts.

Sincerely,

William V. O’Connor

William D. Janicki

Joanna L. Simon

Morrison & Foerster LLP 12531 High Bluff Drive, Suite 100 San Diego, CA 92130-2040 Telephone: (858) 720-5100 Facsimile: (858) 720-5125

woconnor@mofo.com wjanicki@mofo.com joannasimon@mofo.com

# Attachment 1

### Submitted confidentially under 14 C.F.R § 11.35(b). Exempt from disclosure under the Free dom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C § 552 et

seq.

# Attachment 2

### Submitted confidentially under 14 C.F.R § 11.35(b). Exempt from disclosure under the Free dom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C § 552 et

seq.

# Attachment 3

### Submitted confidentially under 14 C.F.R § 11.35(b). Exempt from disclosure under the Free dom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C § 552 et

seq.

# Attachment 4AFS

- 14

- 320

- E Exemption No. 11062

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION WASHINGTON, DC 20591

In the matter of the petition of

AS TRAEUS AERIAL Regulatory Docket No. FAA

- 201 4

- 0352

for an exemption from p art 21; § § 45.23 (b); 61.113(a) and (b); 91.7(a); 91.9(b)(2); 91.103 ; 91.109; 91.119; 91.121; 91.151(a); 91.203(a) and (b); 91.405(a); 91. 407(a)(1); 91.409(a)(2); and 91.417(a) and (b)

o f Tit le 14, Code of F ederal Regulations

GRANT OF EXEMPTION

By letter dated May 27, 2014, Jonathan B. Hill, Cooley LLC, Counsel for Astraeus A erial,

and John McGraw

, Aerospace Consulting, LLC, Agent for Astraeus Aerial, 1299 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

. , Suite 700, Washington, DC 20004 petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on behalf of Astraeus Aerial (Astraeus) for an exemption

from p art 21

, § § 45.23(b)

, 61.113(a) and (b)

, 91.7(a)

, 91.9(b)(2)

, 91.103

, 91.109

, 91.119

, 91.121

, 91.151(a)

, 91.203(a) and (b)

, 91.405(a)

, 91.407(a)(1)

, 91.409(a)(2)

, and 91.417(a) and (b) of Title 14, C ode of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). The proposed exempti on, if granted,

would allow operation of unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) for the purpose of scripted

, closed

- set filming for the motion picture and television industry.

The petitioner requests relief from the following regulations:

Part 21 prescribes

, in pertinent part, the procedural requirements for issuing and changing design approvals, prod uction approvals, airworthiness certificates, and airworthiness approvals

.

Section 45.23(b) prescribes, in pertinent part, that w hen marks include only the Roman

ca pital letter “N” and the registration number is displayed on limited, restricted or light

sport category aircraft or experimental or provisionally certificated aircraft, the operator2

must also display on that aircraft near each entrance to the cabin, cockp it, 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.

Section 61.113(a) and (b) prescribes that

—

(a) no person who holds a priv ate pilot certificate may act as a pilot in command of an aircraft that is carrying passengers or property for compensation or hire; nor may that person, for compensation or hire, act as pilot in command of an aircraft.

(b) a private pilot may, for compe nsation 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.

S ection 91.7(a) prescribes, in pertinent part, that n o person may operate a civil aircraft unless it is in an airworthy condition.

Section 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.

Section 91.103 prescribes, in pertinent part, that e ach pilot in command shall, before beginning a flight, become familiar with al l available inf ormation concerning that flight , to in clude

—

(a) For a flight under IFR or a flight not in the vicinity of an airport, weather reports and forecasts, fuel requirements, alternatives available if the planned flight cannot be completed, and any k nown traffic delays of which the pilot in command has been advised by ATC;

(b) For any flight, runway lengths at airports of intended use, and the following takeoff and landing distance information:

(1) For civil aircraft for which an approved Airplane or Rotorc raft Flight Manual containing takeoff and landing distance data is required, the takeoff and landing distance data contained therein;

and3

(2) For civil aircraft other than those specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section, other reliable information appropr iate to the aircraft, relating to aircraft performance under expected values of airport elevation and runway slope, aircraft gross weight, and wind and
temperature.

Section 91.109 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, e xcept when necessary for takeoff or landing, no person may operate an aircraft below the f ollowing 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 area of a city, town, or settlement, or over any open a ir 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 populate d 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 pr operty 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 b y 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 referenc e to an altimeter that is set “ to the elevation of the departure airport or an appropriate altimeter setting available before departure.”4

Section 91.151(a) prescribes that n o p e rson m a y b e g in a f l i g ht i n a n a irpl a ne und e r
VF R c ondi t io ns unless ( c onsid e ring wind a nd f o r e ca st w ea ther c ondi t ions) the r e is

enou g h fu e l t o fly to t he fi r st po i nt of in t e nd e d landing a nd, a ssu m ing norm a l

c r uis i ng spe e d

, (1) d uring the da y , to f ly after that for at l e ast 30 minutes ; or (2) At night, to fly afte r that for at least 45 minutes. [ e mph a sis added ]

Section 91.203(a) prohibits, in pertinent part, any person from operating a civil aircraft unless it has within it (1) a n appropriate and current airworthiness certificate ; and (2) a n effective U.S. regist ration certificate issued to its owner or, for operation within the United States, the second copy of the Aircraft R egistration Application as provided for in § 47.31(c) . Section 91.203(b) prescribes , in pertinent part, that n o person may operate a civil a ircraft 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.

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 operat ing an aircraft that has undergone maintenance, preventive maintenance, r ebuilding, or alteration

unless i t has been approved for return to service by a person authorized un der § 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 a n inspection for the

issuance of an airworthiness certificate in accord ance with part 21 of this chapter.

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

—

(a) E ach 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; and

(ii) The date of completion of the work performed; and5

(iii ) The signature, and certificate number of the person approving

the aircr aft for return to service.

(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, r otor, 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 inspecti on required by the inspection 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 dir ective number and revision 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 cu rrently installed engines, 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 repe ated or superseded by other 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 furnishe d 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 petitioner has provided the following information

– contained in its petition and supplemental proprietary Flight Operations and Procedures Manual (hereafter FOPM) and Motion Picture and Television Operations Manual (hereafter MPTOM)

– in support of its exemption request

. T he petitioner submitted additional information in response to the FAA’s August 7, 2014 request which is posted to the docket. T he FAA has organized the petitioner’s

information into three sections : 1) the unmanned aircraft system, 2) the UAS Pilot In

Co mmand (PIC), and 3) the UAS operating parameters

. Unmanned Aircraft System

The UAS proposed by the petitioner is a proprietary design, conceived and constructed by Astraeus Aerial, and referred to as the Astraeus Aerial Cinema System V.3CS UAS aircraft

var iant, serial #001 onward ( hereafter referred to as V.3). This aircraft has eight rotors and eight motors in a quadcopter configuration (X8)

. T he petitioner states that given the size

, weight, speed, and limited operating area associated with the aircraft t o be utilized by the applicant, an exemption from 14 CFR p art 21, S ubpart H (Airworthiness Certificates)

, subject to certain conditions and limitations, is warranted and meets the requirements for an equivalent level of safety under 14 CFR p art 11 and S ect ion 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (PL 112

- 95)

. The petitioner further states that UAS operated without

an airworthiness certificate in the restricted environment and under the conditions and limitations proposed by the petitioner will be at least as safe, or safer, than a conventional aircraft (fixed wing or rotorcraft) operating with an airworthiness certificate issued under 14

CFR p art 21, S ubpart H and not subject to the proposed conditions and limitations.

The petitioner states tha t the unmanned aircraft ( UA ) to be operated under this request is less than 55 lbs. fully loaded , flies at a speed of no more than 50 knots, carries neither a pilot nor passenger, carries no explosive materials or flammable liquid fuels, and operates exclu sively

within a secured area as set out in the MPTOM . In addition, the petitioner has integrated safety features into the design of the UAS, as described in the petitioner’s FOPM

, to ensure the safety of persons and property within and surrounding the limi ted operating area. The petitioner further describes that

, i n the event the UAS loses communications or its GPS signal,

the UA will have the capability to return to a pre

- determined location with in the Security Perimeter and land. It will also have the cap ability to abort a flight in the event of unpredicted obstacles or emergencies.

T he petitioner states that even though its UAS will have no airworthiness certificate, an

ex emption may be needed from 14 CFR § 45.23 as the UA will have no entrance to the ca bin, cockpit, or pilot station on which the word “experimental” can be placed. Given the size of the

UA

, the petitioner notes that the two

- inch lettering will be impossible. The petitioner asserts that an equivalent level of safety will be provided by havi ng the UA marked with t he word “experimental” on the fusela ge in compliance with 14 CFR § 45.29(f), in a location where the pilot, obser ver
, and other s working with the UA will see the identification

.7

The petitioner states that the maintenance requirements in the pertinent sections of 14 CFR

p art 91 are only applicable to aircraft with an airworthiness certificate in accordance with p art
43. The petitioner states that its V.3 UAS does not have specific maintenance instructions ; therefore the petitioner has developed and documented in its MPTOM and FOPM an “on

condition” maintenance process for the V.3 UAS affected by this exemption. The petitioner

has also stated that it intends to follow any manufacturers ’ recommended instructions and procedures when those procedures exist for certain components of its V.3 UAS.

UAS Pilot In Command (PIC)

The petitioner asserts that since the UA will not carry a pilot or passengers on board, the proposed operations will not adversely affect safety by requiring the PIC operati ng the aircraft to have a private pilot’s license rather than a commercial pilot’s license. In support of its position, the petitioner argues that

, since there are no standards for either private or commercial UAS pilot certificates, knowledge of airspace regulations and dexterity in the control and operation of the UAS acquired from actual operation of the aircraft will be the most important factors in establishing an equivalent level of safety. Furthermore, the petitioner explains that, given the restrict ed and controlled airspace within which operations will take place, the key factors needed by the PIC are knowledge of the airspace within which

the “closed

- set filming” operation will take place and how that airspace fits into the National Airspace System (NAS). The petitioner also states that it cannot be assumed that a commercial pilot, approved to operate a helicopter or fixed wing aircraft, has the skill or ability to safely operate an unmanned aerial vehicle, operating at 400 feet AGL or lower,

within strictly controlled pre

- approved airspace. The petitioner asserts that there are relatively few certificated pilots who are also qualified to fly the type of UAS utilized in motion picture

indu stry image

- capture operations. Astraeus further asserts that t here are even fewer commercially certificated pilots that can fly these UAS, to the point that to do both is

considered rare.

Additionally, the petitioner states that the aircraft will be opera ted within a secure environment, which no one will be allowed t o enter unless they are part of the production, have been fully briefed of the risks prior to operation of the UAS, and have consented to the risks associated with being in the operating area. Should there be a mishap, the UA being flown pose significantly less of a threat than the helicopters and fixed wing aircraft now being employed because they are a fraction of the size, carry no flammable fuel, and do not carry crew or passengers. This is in stark contrast to conventional aircraft that are flown to th e site,

carry flammable fuel, carry passengers and crew, and operate in a much larger area.

UAS Operating Parameters

The petitioner states that all flights will be operate d within visu al line of sight (VLOS) of a pilot a nd/or observer, and that the UA flig hts will be limited to a maximum altitude of 400

feet AGL. The petitioner further states that an operator will ensure that only consenting production personnel will be al lowed within 100 feet of the UA operation, but this radius may

be reduced to 30 feet b ased upon an equivalent level of safety determination, as stated in their MPTOM, with the advance permission of the local Flight Standards District Office ( FSDO )

. The petitioner asserts that an equivalent level of safety can be achieved given the size, wei ght,8

and speed of the UAS

, as well as the location where it is operated

. The petitioner states that the UAS will be operated within a safe operating perimeter, the boundaries of which will be determined by production personnel and the UAS PIC based on the site

- specific filming activities and speed of the UAS required for the operation, and coordinated with the jurisdictional FAA FSDO and local government officials as applicable, as outlined in the MPTOM and FOPM. The petitioner states that only participatin g and consenting production personnel will be allowed within this perimeter; the petitioner also states their intention to comply with the guidelines outlined in Order 8900.1 V3, C8, S1 with regard to nonparticipating personnel outside the safety perimeter

. The petitioner argues that

, compared to flight operations with aircraft or rotorcraft weighing far more than its maximum 55 lb . UA

, and the lack of flammable fuel, any risk associated with its UAS operations is far less than

those with conventional aircr aft operating at or below 500 feet AGL in the movie industry.

With respect to preflight actions, the petitioner notes it may need an exemption from 14 CFR § 91.103

, because it will not have approved rotorcraft flight manuals. The petitioner asserts

that a n equivalent level of safety will be achieved by t he PIC taking all preflight actions as set

forth in their M P T OM and FOPM, including reviewing weather, flight battery requirements, landing and takeoff distances, and aircraft performance data before initia tion of flight. Additionally, the petitioner states that a briefing will be conducted prior to each day’s filming regarding planned UAS operations, and all personnel who will be performing duties within the boundaries of the safety perimeter will be requir ed to attend.

With respect to the fuel requirements, the petitioner notes that

, in order to meet the 30 minute reserve requirements in 14 CFR § 91.151, UAS flights would have to be limit ed to approximately 10 minutes. The petitioner argues that

, given the limitations on the UA’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. The petitioner believes that an equivalent level of saf ety can be achieved by limiting flights to 30 minutes or 25% of battery power, whichever occurs first.

The petitioner notes that it may need an exemption from 14 CFR § 91.121, as its UAS may

have a GPS altitude read out instead of a barometric altimeter. T he petitioner asserts that an equivalent level of safety will be achieved, as outlined in its M P T OM. Specifically, the altitude information will be provided to the UAS PIC via a digitally encoded telemetric data feed. Prior to each flight, a zero altitude initiation point will be established and confirmed for accuracy by the PIC

.
Public Interest

The petitioner states that, given the small size of the UA involved and the restricted sterile

environment within which it will operate, its proposed operation “fal ls squarely within that zone of safety (an equivalent level of safety) in which Congress envisioned that the FAA must, by exemption, allow commercial operations of UAS to commence immediately.” Also

due to the size of the UA and the restricted areas in whi ch the UAS will operate, approval of the application presents no national security issue. The petitioner states that, given the clear direction in Section 333, the strong equivalent level of safety surrounding the proposed operations, and the significant p ublic benefit, including enhanced safety, reduction in9

environmental impacts, and including reduced emissions associated with allowing UAS for movie and television operations, granting the requested exemptions is in the public interest.

Discussion of Publ ic Comments :
A summary of the petition was published in the Federal Register on June 2 6 , 2014 (79 FR

36378 ). Eighty

- six comments were received.

Of the 86 comments received, in cluding eight from associations, 50 comment s supported the exemption request, 22 opposed

, and 1 4 were neutral. The petition received comments on the following topics: economic impact, UAS, PIC , operational capabilities, airspace, privacy, sense and avoid, and data link.

Comments supporting the exemption request came from individuals an d industry groups, including the Association of Unmanned Vehicle Systems International (AUVSI), Aerospace

Industries Association (AIA) , the National Association of Realtors, the News Media Coalition, and the National Press Photographers Association. Suppor ting comments cited the petitioner’s intent to use controlled access airspace, licensed airmen, and preflight safety briefings, as well as the economic benefits of UAS.

Several trade organizations submitted letters to the docket, expressing various issues and

concerns with the Astraeus p etition for e xemption, including the Air Line Pilots Association International (ALPA), the National Agricultural Aviation Association (NAAA), and the United States Hang Gliding and Paragliding Association (USHPA )

.

ALPA expr essed concern regarding certain conditions outlined in Astraeus’ petition. A LPA notes that the proposed operations will be for “compensation or hire,” and ALPA believes that the pilot must hold at least a current FAA Commercial Pilot Certificate with an ap propriate category and class rating for the type of aircraft being flown as well as specific and adequate training on the UAS make and model intended to be used. Similarly, a current 2nd Class FAA Medical certificate should be required for a UAS pilot oper ating an aircraft for compensation or hire commercial operations as is required in the NAS today. NAAA and USHPA also commented on pilot qualification. Specifically,

NAAA believes that the Part 61 regulations current ly in effect do not address the licensin g of pilots of an unmanned aircraft used for commercial purposes. We believe it is necessary for the FAA to evaluate pilots of these aircraft on their knowledge and skills in UAV operations. Requirements for this licensing should be developed along with ot her rigorous rules and qualifications to ensure safe integration of the unmanned aircraft into the NAS.

The FAA has carefully reviewed the knowledge and training required by holders of both private and commercial certificates , as well as the separation of Astraeus’ proposed operations from other manned operations

. Additional details are available in the ensuing analysis of this issue with regards to 14 CFR § 61.113.

ALPA commented that although the anticipated operation is expected to occur below 400 feet

a bove the surface, the petition also makes reference to operations 200 feet above structures of unspecified and therefore unlimited height. This would put the aircraft at the same altitude10

strata as other aircraft in the NAS, with only geographic separation to mitigate the risk of

collision. However, in subsequent materials posted to the docket, Astraeus has removed

oper ation from elevated platforms. All operations will be limited to 400 feet AGL, which is specified in the conditions and limitations below.

ALPA further notes that the aircraft “may not have a barometric altimeter” so the ability to accurately maintain altitude must be addressed. NAAA n oted the same in its comments. The FAA agrees with ALPA and NAAA and addresses this concern in its analysis o f the exemption from 14 CFR § 91.121, finding that the alternative means of compliance proposed by Astraeus does not adversely affect safety.

ALPA and an individual comment that Command and Control (C2) link failures are one of the

most common failures on a UAS, and that lost link mitigations should require safe modes to prevent fly

- aways or other scenarios. The FAA agrees and carefully examined the proposed operation to ensure that the vehicle design and the petitioner’s MPTOM and FOPM addressed potential hazards related to C2 failure. The FAA finds that the UAS to be operated by Astraeus has sufficient design features to address these hazards. The FAA also finds that the MPTOM and FOPM have incorporated safety procedures to be followed by all operational

p articipants should a C2 failure occur. Further detail is contained in the analysis of the UAS

below.

NAAA stated that it represents the interests of small business owners and pilots lice nsed as commercial applicators. NAAA members operate in low

- level airs pace
, and clear low

- level airspace is vital to the safety of these operators.

NAAA stated that s eeing and avoiding other aircraft and hazardous obstructions is the backbone for agricultural safety

, and agricultural pilots depend on pilots of other aircraft to perform their see and avoid functions needed to prevent col lisions. NAAA believes that UA operations at low altitudes will increase the potential of collision haza rds with agricultural

aircraft. In its comments, the USHPA submitted similar concerns rel ative to activities of other low altitude user groups including ballooning, skydiving, powered ultralights, etc.

NAAA acknowledged Astraeus’ plan to submit a written Plan of Activities to the FSDO three days before the proposed operations, as required by t he petitioner’s MPTOM

. However, NAAA maintains, as does the USHPA, that in addition to this, issuan ce of a NOTAM advising non participating pilots of the planned activity is vital to dissemin ating this safety

information. The FAA agrees and has incorporated this into the conditions and limitations of this exemption. Further detail is contained in the analysis of the operating parameters below.

NAAA commented that UA should have assigned numbers that can be read from a suitable

distance to aid in identificati on when enforcement of flight regulations is required. The USHPA commented similarly, noting that while the current identification standar ds are not

feasible on small UA given their reduced size, identification appropriate for these design parameters could be defined and created without undue burden or negative impacts on UAS operations. The FAA partially agre es with NAAA and USHPA. UA operated under this exemption will be marked in accordance with 14 CFR part 45 or as otherwise authorized by

the FAA. Furth er detail is contained in the analysis of the UAS below.11

USHPA states that it is a nonprofit member organization with the specific and primary purpose to engage exclusively for scientific and educational purposes in the development, study, and use of fuel

- less flight systems and aircraft capable of being launched by human power alone. USHPA commented that it believes with proper notification of time and place, along with other considerations, safety can be maintained. USHPA’s notification concerns

will be a ddressed by the conditions and limitations that will require an Air Traffic Organization issued Certificate of Waiver or Authorization (COA) to address airspace requirements and notification. Further detail is contained in the analysis of the UAS operating parameters below.

Related to the operation of the UA within visual line of sight (VLOS) of the pilot and/or observer, U SHPA believes operation of any UA in three

- dimensional space presents unique challenges in accurately determining position in relation t o stationary or mobile objects. USHPA comments that utilization of an observer for operational redundancy is prudent and encouraged, but should not be considered a viable replacement for the pilot in command. USHPA believes that the identification of navig ational requirements and accurately conveying them to the pilot in command would not be provided with adequate precision or sufficient response time in a crisis situation and recommends that dual control systems be utilized as a redundant safety measure co mmon in commercial aviation environments. The FAA notes

USHPA’s concerns ; additional detail is provided in the analysis of the UAS below

. USHPA also asserts that manned flight should always maintain right of way over all UA operations. The FAA agrees and h as incorporated this into the conditions and limitations of this exemption.

Several comments noted that small UAS can be hard to see during the day, due to their small size and factors such as sun glare . Commenters also noted concerns with regard to weathe r and wind conditions affecting operations. The FAA addressed these concerns by adding operating restrictions in the conditions and limitations regarding stand

- off distance from

clouds

, altitude restrictions , and operating distance from non

- participating p ersonnel . Further detail is contained in the analysis of the UAS operating parameters below.

The petition received several comments suggesting that UAS operated under this exemption should have the ability to monitor and communicate with other aircraft or install transponders, or that the UAS should not operate until they can sense and avoid other aircraft. One commenter suggested that the FAA should implement a buffer between these UAS operations and manned operations, while another raised concern with nea r misses with other aircraft. Two comments noted that UAS are susceptible to accidents and GPS jamming. The FAA

believes the limitations under which the petitioner will operate (i.e. VLOS and at or below 400 feet AGL) and the UAS emergency procedures as ou tlined in the petitioner’s FOPM and

MPTOM are sufficient mitigation s to this risk so that the operations will not adversely affect safety. F urther information is contained in the analysis of the UAS below.

One commenter suggested that the FAA should requir e testing of software and systems prior to operation, including testing to RTCA standards. The FAA believes the preflight checks discussed in the analysis of the UAS operating parameters are sufficient to mitigate this risk,

and addresses this in the condi tions and limitations below.12

The FAA also received comments not related to the UA and its operation as proposed by the petitioner, but rather addressing more general UAS issues, which are discussed below.

The FAA received two comments asking how the FAA pl ans to monitor or conduct surveillance of the petitioner’s UAS operations. The FAA expects operators to comply with

its regulations and the terms of the exemption. The jurisdictional F SDO will be the primary office responsible for oversight of the operatio ns.
The FAA received several comments that integrating UAS operations via a broadly applicable rule was a more suitable method than the exemption process, and that industries other than the motion picture industry should be allowed to participate. Section 333 provides interim authority to the Secretary of Transportation, which facilitates limited, controlled UAS operations prior to the completion of a UAS regulatory structure. The FAA is using its exemption process to facilitate implementation of Section 33 3 and to address FAA rules that would be applicable to the proposed operations. We have received and are considering exemption petitions from a broad array of industries and applications for this technology. Additionally, t he FAA is engaged in a rulemaking process that will allow broader applications of UAS operations.

Two commenters suggested this exemption process should be available to anybody, regardless of organizational size or resources. The FAA will consider any request for exemption

submitted to i t

, no matter the source.

One commenter stated that meaningful public review of the petition was not possible because some of the documents submitted by the petitioner are confidential. The FAA routinely considers confidential materials in its exemption pro cess. The FAA reviewed and considered the petitioner’s information in its analysis of the petition.

The petition received several comments on privacy. A commenter expressed concern that the UAS could be used for spying. Other commenters stated that there a re strong privacy regulations in place. Specifically, a commenter states that the petitioner addressed privacy issues in its request by mandating that all filming be within a contained environment with all participants fully aware that they are being filme d. The petitioner states that all UAS flights will occur over private or controlled access property with the property owner’s prior consent and knowledge, and that only people who have consented or otherwise have agreed to be in the area where filming will take place will be filmed. The FAA notes that the terms of this grant of exemption are consistent with the petitioner’s proposal in this area.

The FAA's analysis is as follows :

U nmanned aircraft system (UAS )

Regarding the petitioner’s requested relief f rom 14 CFR part 21 Certification procedures for products and parts

, the FAA finds that

, based on the limited size, weight, operating conditions, design safety features, and the imposed conditions and limitations, the petitioner

has demonstrated that its op erations would not adversely affect safety compared to similar13

operations conducted with aircraft that have been issued an airworthiness certificate under

14 CFR p art 21, S ubpart H.

Commercial motion picture and television aerial filming operations with ma nned aircraft are typically conducted with aircraft holding standard airworthiness certificates issued under

p art 21, subpart H. These aircraft are normally modified via the Supplemental Type Certificate ( STC ) process to install cameras and other equipment not included in the original aircraft design.

Manned helicopters conducting motion picture and television ae rial filming can weigh 6,000

lbs . or more and are operated by an onboard pilot, in addition to other onboard crewmembers,

as necessary. The petiti oner’s UA will weigh less than 55 lbs. with no onboard pilot or crew. The pilot and crew will be remo tely located from the aircraft. The limited weight significantly reduces the potential fo r harm to participating and non participating individuals or prope rty 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 UA for the aerial filming operation

. Manned aircraft are at risk of fuel spillage and fire in the event of a n incident or accident. The

UA carries no fuel

, and therefore the risk of fire following an incident or accident due to fuel spillage is eliminated.

During motion picture and television aerial filming with manned aircraft under the conditions

of an FAA is sued Certificate of Waiver, aircraft can be operated in very close proximity to participating persons

. The s afety of these individuals is maintained through use of an aircraft

with standard airworthiness certification under 14 CFR part 21, S ubpart H, opera tion of the aircraft by a qualified and competent pilot

, and operating according to limitati ons necessary to ensure safety. In these situations, the filming subject and production personnel are exposed to risk by virtue of their close proxi mity to an aircr aft in flight. Compared to manned aircraft, the UA being operated by the petitioner reduces the risk to participating persons in close proximity to the aircraft due to the limited size, weight, operating conditions, and design safety features of the UAS.

This exemption does not require an electronic means to monitor and communicate with other

aircraft , such as transponders or sense and avoid technology . Rather the FAA is mitigating the risk of these operations by placing limits on altitude, requiring stand

- off distance from clouds, permitting daytime operations only, and requiring that the UA be operated within visual line of sight and yield right of way t o all other manned operations. Additionally, the exemption provides that the operator will request a NO TAM prior to operations to alert other users of the

NAS.

The petitioner’s UAS has the capability to operate safely after experienci ng certain in

- flight

failures. The UA is also able to respond to a lost

- link event with a pre

- coordinated, predictable, auto mated flight maneuver. With regard to USHPA’s concerns about dual control
systems, c urrent FAA regulations permit motion picture and television filming operations by manned aircraft that do not require a copilot

. Additionally, u nder this exemption, the FAA requires that the UAS PIC hold a current th ird class medical certificate. Historically, instances of complet e PIC incapacitation are rare. I n all other cases other than complete incapacitation,14

the PIC has the ability to terminate the flight operation or initiate the automated return to home proce dure outlined within the FOPM. T he FAA also believes that the multiple control redundancies described in the petitioner’s FOPM are sufficient to mitigate risks associated

with the loss of GPS signal

. In considerat ion of these factors and the UA size, weight, speed and other operating limitations associated with this aerial filmmaking operation, the FAA finds that there is no adverse safety affect relative to similar operations conducted by manned

aircraft with a fl ight crew complement of one.

These safety features also provide for no adverse safety affect to participating and

non participating individuals compared to a manned aircraft that holds a standard airworthiness certificate performing a similar operation.

In accordance with the statutory criteria provided in Section 33 3 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 Transport ation has determined

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

Regarding the petitioner’s reque sted relief from 14 CFR § 45.23 (b) Display of marks , t he petitioner’s request is made under the assumption that marking with the word “experimental” will be required as a condition of an exemption request. T his marking is reserved for ai rcraft that are issued experim ental certificates under § 21.191. Since t he petitioner’s UAS will not

be certificated under 14 CFR § 21.191, a grant of exemption for 14 CFR § 45.23 (b) is not

necessary.
The petitioner’s UA must be identified by serial numbe r, registered in accordance with 14 CFR part 47, and have identification (N

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

Regarding the petitioner’s requested relief from 14 CFR § § 91.405(a) Mainte nance required

, 91.407(a)(1) Operation after maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, or

alteration

, 91.409(a)(2) Inspections , and 91.417(a ) and (b) Maintenance records , the FAA has

determined that relief from 91.409(a)(1) is also necessary

, becaus e it is an alternate inspection requirement of 91.409(a)(2)

.
The petitioner ’s FOPM contains the maintenance requirements for the V.3 UAS, to include

“ on

- condition ” maintenance and modifications. The petitioner ’ s MPTOM and FOPM wer e reviewed and do not suf ficiently support the regulatory relief sought under 14 CFR part 91

, Subpart E. The FAA has carefully considered the petitioner ’ s supplemental information and

determined that its operations will not adversely affect safety with regard to the regulatory

mai ntenance and alteration requirements of 14 CFR § § 91.405(a) (1), 91.40 7 (a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) and (2) , and 91.417(a) and (b)

, provided changes are made to th e MPTOM and

FOPM as required by the conditions and limitations included in this exemption. These chang es include : requirements to develop and document maintenance, overhaul, replacement, and inspection requirements in the absence of manufacturer’s requirements; procedures to document and maintain maintenance records with regard to the petitioner’s UAS; and UAS15

technician qualification criteria. They also require the petitioner’s FOPM to include preflight inspection procedures that account for any discrepancies not already covered in the manual.

The FAA finds these additional requirements are necessary to en sure the petitioner’s proposed UAS operations do not adversely affect safety in the NAS and of people and property on the ground. Therefore, t he FAA finds that exemption from 14 CFR § § 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1),

9 1 .409(a) (1) and (2), and 91.417 (a) and (b) is warranted subject to the conditions and

limitatio ns below.

Pilot In Command of the UAS

Regarding the petitioner’s requested relief from 14 CFR § 61.113 (a) and (b) Private pilot privileges and limitations

, c omments were received that voiced concerns about pilot

certification

. One such comment came from ALPA

, which states that one of the “areas that must be addressed to ensure safe operations” is Astraeus ’ proposal to use a private pilot with a

third class medical as its UAS PIC . ALPA believes that the UAS p ilot should possess a commercial pilot certificate with appropriate category and class rating for the type of aircraft being flown and the corresponding second class medical certificate, as well as specific and adequate training on the UAS make and mo del i ntended to be used. S imilar concerns were also raised by other associations such as USHPA and NAAA.

Given these grounds, the FAA must determine the appropriate level of pilot certification for Astraeus’ proposed operation. Title 14 CFR part 61 requires tha t operations conducted for compensation or hire necessitate a commercial pilot certificate and at least a sec ond class

medical certificate. In considering the petitioner ’s requested relief from 14 CFR § 61.113(a)

and (b)

, the FAA must consider the followin g factors as they relate specifically to Astraeus ’ proposed oper a tions:

Separation from manned aircraft operations : Astraeus proposes operations in a “sterile

environment” of closed

- set motion

- picture filming. In this controlled environment, t heir operati ons will remain within visual line of site (VLOS) and below 400 feet AGL

. Additionall y, the FAA has added further conditions and limitations that will require a Certificate of Waiver or Authorization (COA) from the FAA Air Traffic Organization to
address a irspace requirements and notific ation requiring Astraeus to request a Notice to Airman (NOTAM) not more than 72 hours in advance, but not less than 48 hours prior to the operation. Astraeus will al so be required to avoid and yield right

- of

- way to all manne d operations.

The current aeronautical knowledge requirements for a private pilot compared to a commercial pilot : The FAA analyzed the areas of knowledge specified in 14 CFR part 61 f or that of a commercial pilot versus a private pilot. The results show t hat the required areas of knowledge for a commercial v ersus private pilot cover the same fundamental princip les, as shown in the following table.16

Commercial Knowledge Private Knowledge
**Airplane Single Engine Land (ASEL) used for comparison**
§ 61.125 Aeronautical knowledge. (a) General. A person who applies for a commercial pilot certificate must receive and log ground training... § 61.105 Aeronautical knowledge. (a) General. A person who is applying for a private pilot certificate must receive and lo g ground training... (b) Aeronautical knowledge areas. (b) Aeronautical knowledge areas. (1) Applicable Federal Aviation Regulations of this chapter that relate to commercial pilot privileges, limitations, and flight operations; (1) Applicable Federal Avia tion Regulations of this chapter that relate to private pilot privileges, limitations, and flight operations;

(2) Accident reporting requirements of the National Transportation Safety Board; (2) Accident reporting requirements of the National Transportat ion Safety Board; (3) Basic aerodynamics and the principles of flight; (10) Principles of aerodynamics, powerplants, and aircraft systems; (4) Meteorology to include recognition of critical weather situations, windshear recognition and avoidance, and t he use of aeronautical weather reports and forecasts; (6) Recognition of critical weather situations from the ground and in flight, windshear avoidance, and the procurement and use of aeronautical weather reports and forecasts; (5) Safe and efficient op eration of aircraft; (7) Safe and efficient operation of aircraft, including collision avoidance, and recognition and avoidance of wake turbulence; (6) Weight and balance computations; (9) Weight and balance computations; (7) Use of performance charts; (8) Effects of density altitude on takeoff and climb performance; (8) Significance and effects of exceeding aircraft performance limitations; **Related to other areas within the private requirements but not referenced specifically** (9) Use of aeronau tical charts and a magnetic compass for pilotage and dead reckoning; (4) Use of aeronautical charts for VFR navigation using pilotage, dead reckoning, and navigation
systems; (10) Use of air navigation facilities; (4) Use of aeronautical charts for VFR navigation using pilotage, dead reckoning
, and navigation
systems ; (5) Radio communication procedures; (11) Aeronautical decision making and judgment; (12) Aeronautical decision making and judgment; and (12) Principles and functions of aircraft systems; (10) Principles of aerodynamics, powerplants, and aircraft systems; (13) Maneuvers, procedures, and emergency operations appropriate to the aircraft; (7) Safe and efficient operation of aircraft, including collision avoidance, and recognition and avoid ance of wake turbulence; (11) Stall awareness, spin entry, spins, and spin recovery techniques for the airplane and glider category ratings; (14) Night and high

- altitude operations;  Although not mentioned in § 61.105, 3 hours of night flight trainin g is required for the private per §

61.107 and § 61.109. For this comparison, high

altitude operations are considered not applicable.**  (15) Procedures for operating within the National Airspace System; and (3) Use of the applicable portions of the “Aer onautical Information Manual” and FAA advisory circulars; (13) Preflight action that includes

— (i) How to obtain information on runway lengths at airports of intended17

use, data on takeoff and landing distances, weather reports and forecasts, and fuel requ irements; and (ii) How to plan for alternatives if the planned flight cannot be completed or delays are encountered. (16) Procedures for flight and ground training for lighter

- than

- air ratings.** **For this comparison (ASEL), these operations are

conside red not applicable.** § 61.127 Flight proficiency. (a) General. A person who applies for a commercial pilot certificate must receive and log ground and flight training § 61.107 Flight proficiency. (a) General. A person who applies for a private pilot

ce rtificate must receive and log ground and flight training (b) Areas of operation. (1) For an airplane category rating with a single

- engine class rating: (b) Areas of operation. (1) For an airplane category rating with a single

- engine class rating: (i) Pr eflight preparation; (i) Preflight preparation; (ii) Preflight procedures; (ii) Preflight procedures; (iii) Airport and seaplane base operations; (iii) Airport and seaplane base operations; (iv) Takeoffs, landings, and go

- arounds; (iv) Takeoffs, landings, and go

- arounds; (v) Performance maneuvers; (v) Performance maneuvers; (vi) Ground reference maneuvers; (vi) Ground reference maneuvers; (vii) Navigation; (vii) Navigation; (viii) Slow flight and stalls; (viii) Slow flight and stalls; (ix) Emergency operations; (x) Emergency operations; (x) High

- altitude operations; and **For this comparison, high

- altitude operations are considered not applicable.** (xi) Postflight procedures. (xii) Postflight procedures. **Not referenced specifi cally** (ix) Basic instrument maneuvers; **Not referenced specifically** (xi) Night operations, except as provided in §61.110 of this part; and

The specific UAS airmanship skills required for Astraeus’ PIC(s) : Some of the requirements for Astraeus’ PI C ( s ) are provided in their proprietary documents. However, as with other exemptions that contain specific pilot qualifications, e.g. Exemption Nos

. 7830, 6802K, and 6540N, those pilot requirements become conditions and limitations within the grant of exemp tion. An abbreviated summary of those PIC requirements include the following:

a. The PIC must possess a Private Pilot’s Certificate and a valid third

- class medical certificate;

b. The PIC must have accumulated and logged a minimum of 200 flight cycles

and 25 hou rs of total time as a UAS rotorcraft pilot and at least 10 hours logged as a UAS pilot with a similar UAS type (single blade or multirotor).

c. The PIC must have accumulated and logged a minimum of five hours as UAS pilot with the make and model of UAS to be utilized for operations under the exemption and three take

- offs and landings in the preceding 90 days.

d. The PIC must have successfully completed the qualification process as specified in the MPTOM and FOPM, to include a knowledge and skill test.

T he FAA’ s a nalysis regarding PIC requirements : The parallel foundation of aeronautical knowledge required for private and commercial pilots is shown in the above table. Private18

pilot a irmanship skills are furthered through manned flights in the NAS. Commercially

ce rtificated pilots build additional experience through these manned flights as well . The

additional experience and airmanship skills obtained by commercially certificated airmen

contribute to their ability to overcome adverse situations that could be encoun tered in flights conducted for compensation or hire . However, the experience obtained beyond a private pilot certificate in pursuit of a commercial pilot certificate in manned flight does not necessarily aid a pilot in the operational environm ent proposed by the petitioner; the FAA considers the overriding safety factor for the limited operations proposed by the petitioner to be the airmanship skills acquired through UAS

- specific flight cycles, flight time, and specific make and model experience , culminatin g in verification through testing

. The FAA shares ALPA’s concerns regarding appropriate training on the UAS being utilized. The FAA has reviewed the petitioner’s knowledge and experience criteria for its PICs. The

FAA finds that the combination of aeronaut ical knowledge, UAS airmanship skills, and verification through testing is a sufficient method for Astraeus to evaluate a pilot’s qualifications, given that operations will be conducted within the limitations outlined in this exemption.

T he knowledge and airmanship test qualifications have been developed by Astraeus for the UAS operations proposed in their petition for exemption

. There are no established practical test standards that support a jurisdictional FAA FSDO evaluation and approval of company

desi gnated examiners. The petitioner will conduct these tests in accordance with its FOPM and the conditions and limitations noted below. Given the constraints of the proposed operations, the FAA believes this would not adversely affect the safety of the NAS.

The petitioner plans to operate in a unique and limited environment. Given the 1) separation

of the se closed

- set filming operations from other manned operations

, 2) t he parallel nature of private pilot aeronautical knowledge requirements to those of commer cial requirements , and 3) the UAS airmanship skills of Astraeus’ PICs, the FAA finds that the additional manned airmanship experience of a commercially certificated pilot would not correlate to the airmanship skills necessary for Astraeus’ specific propose d operations. Upon consideration of the overall safety case presented by the petitioner and the concerns of the commenters, the FAA finds that granting the requested relief from 14 CFR § 61.113 (a) and (b) , provided the

c onditions and l imitations outlined b elow, would not adversely affect the safety of the NAS.

Another consideration supporting the certificate requirement is that p ilots holding a private pilot certificate are subject to security screening by the Department of Homeland Security

. This requirem ent should ameliorate security concerns over UAS operations under this exemption.

Operating parameters of the UAS

Astraeu s has stated that it plan s to comply with the waiver process as described in FAA Order 8900.1, V olume 3 , C hapter 8 , S ection 1 (V3, C8

, S1) Issue a Certificate of Waiver for Motion Picture and Television Filming

. The FAA agrees with this philosophy ; however, the current
section of Order 8900.1 has specific processes that preclude a jurisdictional FAA FSDO from issuing the required C ertifi cate of Waiver

, because the section did not originally provide for19

UA operations. One example of this is the minimum pilot qualifications

– t he pertinent

section of Order 8900.1 provides n o way to reli e ve Astraeus from the pilot requirements. Also, the sam ple form 7711

- 1 used for issuing the Certificate of Wai ver specifically states

“ this section not used for Unmanned Air Vehicle authorizations.”

Therefore, the FAA will exempt Astraeus from the applicable regulations normally waived during that process . The FAA will then in clude the required notification s and coordination

with jurisdictional FSDOs through the conditions and li mitations listed below. M otion picture and television filming waivers similar to Astraeu s’ operation are normally issued from one juri sdictional FSDO and can be used in locations covered by other geographically responsible FSDOs through notification . Those local FSDOs then have the ability to review the proposed plan of activities and associated o perations manual (s) and levy any addition al local special provisions

. Since Astraeu s’ operation deals specifically with UAS, this exempt ion will take the place of the Certificate of W aiver normally issued by a jurisdictional FSDO under 8900.1 V3, C8, S1

. Every FSDO with jurisdiction over the area that Astr aeu s plans to op erate within

must still be notified

, just as with manned fi lming operations

, and those FSDOs will have the ability to coordinate further conditions and limitations with the UAS Integration Office to address any local concerns

, as stated below in the conditions and limitations section of this exemption.

The petitioner must also obtain a Certificate of Waiver or Authorization (COA) from the FAA’s Air Traffic Organization (ATO) prior to conducting any operations. This is an existing

p rocess that not only makes local Air Traffic Control ( ATC ) facilities aware of UAS operations

, but also provides ATO the ability to consider airspace issues that are unique to UAS operations. The COA will require the operator to request a Notice to Airman (NOTAM)

, which is the mechanism for alerting other users of the NAS to the UAS activities being

conducted. Therefore, the FAA believes that adherence to this process is the safest and most expeditious way to permit Astraeus to conduct their proposed UAS op erations. The conditions

and limitations below prescribe the requireme nt for Astraeus to obtain an ATO

- issued COA.

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

Airworthiness

, Astraeus ’ request is based on the fact that n o airworthiness certificate will be

issued for the UAS . As previously noted, the petitioner’s UAS will not require an airworthiness certificate in accordance with 14 CFR part 21, Subpart H. Based on the fact that

an airworthiness certificate will not be is sued, exemption from § 91.7(a) is not necessary

.

I n accordance with the pertinent part of 14 CFR § 91.7(b), the PIC of the UAS is responsible for determining whether the aircraft is in condition for safe flight. The petitioner’s manuals for

maintenance and operations include s afety check lists to be used prior to each flight.

Regarding the petitioner’s requested relief from 14 CFR § 91.9 (b)(2) Civil aircraft flight manual, marking, and placard requirements and § 91.203 (a) and (b) Civil aircraft:

Certificatio ns required

, t he original intent of these regulations was to display an aircraft’s airworthiness, certification, and registration documents so they would be easily available to inspectors and passengers. Based on the FAA Memorandum subject “Interpretation regarding whether certain required documents may be kept at an unmanned aircraft’s control station

, ”20

dated August 8, 2014, t he request ed relief from 14 CFR § § 91.9(b)(2) and 91.203(a) and (b) is

no t necessary

. Regarding the petitioner’s requested relief fr om 14 CFR § 91.103 Preflight action

, although there will be no approved Airplane or Rotorcraft Flight Manual as specified in paragraph (b)(1)

, the FAA believes that the petitioner can comply with the other applicable requirements

in 14 CFR § 91.103(b)(2). T he procedures outlined in the petitioner’s MPTOM and FOPM

address the FAA’s concerns regarding compliance with § 91.103(b). The petitioner has also stated its intent to comply with § 91.103 (a): “The PIC will take all actions including reviewing weather, f light battery requirements, landing and takeoff distances and aircraft performance data before initiation of flight. ” The FAA has imposed stricter requirements with regard to visibility and distance from clouds; this is to both keep the UA from departing V LOS and to preclude the UA from operating so close to a cloud as to create a hazard to other aircraft operating in the NAS. The FAA also notes the risks associated with sun glare; the FAA believes that the PIC’s and VO’s ability to still see other air traf fic, combined with the PIC’s ability to initiate a return

- to

- home sequence, are sufficient mitigations in this respect. The PIC

will also account for all relevant site

- specific conditions in their preflight procedures. Therefore, the FAA finds that exempti on from 14 CFR § 91.103 is not necessary.

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 c ontrols 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, Astraeus evaluates the qualific ation of its PICs based on their experience with the UAS to be operated and verifies through testing, in lieu of formalized training. As such, the FAA finds that the petitioner can

conduct its operations without the requested relief from 14 CFR § 91.109

.

R egarding the petitioner’s requested relief from 14 CFR § 91.119 Minimum safe altitudes, the petitioner failed to specify the pertinent part of 14 CFR § 91.119 from which they require

relief. Relief from 14 CFR § 91.119(a) , which requires operating at an a ltitude that allows a safe emergency landing if a power unit fails, is unprecedented and unwarranted. Relief from §

14 CFR 91.119(b) , operation over congested areas, is not applicable

, because the petitioner states that operations will only be conducted wi thin the sterile area described in the MPTOM.

Although the petitioner specifically mentioned relief from 14 CFR § 91.119(d), the FAA finds that relief is only needed from 14 CFR § 91.119(c), which is consistent with the relief typically provided to manned operations in FAA Order 8900.1 V3, C8 , S1 Issue a Certificate of Waiver for Motion Picture and Television Filming. This Order allows for relief from § 91.119(c) with respect to those participating persons, vehicles, and structures directly involved

in the per formance of the actual filming. In accordance with the petitioner’s stated intention to

adhere to O rder 8900.1 V3, C8, S1, persons other than participating persons 1 are not allowed

1 Per Order 8900.1 V3, C8, S1, participating persons are all persons associated with the filming production, and they must be briefed on the potential risk of the p roposed flight operation(s) and must acknowledge and accept those risks. Nonparticipating persons are the public, spectators, media, etc., not associated with the filming production.21

within 500 feet of the operating area. This provision may be reduced to no less than 200 feet if an equivalent level of safety can be achieved and the Administrator has approved it. For example, an equivalent level of saf ety may be determined through evaluation by an aviation safety inspector of the filming production area to note terrain features, obstructions, buildings,

etc . Such barriers may protect non participating persons (observers, the public, news media, etc.) from debris in the event of an accident.

The FAA notes the petitioner’s additional guidelines in its MPTOM to protect its participating production personnel , and finds that relief from 14 CFR § 91.119(c) is warranted, provided

adherence to the procedures outlined in the petitioner’s MPTOM and FOPM , and the FAA’s

additional conditions and limitations outlined belo w. However, all non participating personnel will be required to be at least 500 feet from flight operations , with possible relief to allow reductions to 200 feet, as specified above.

Regarding the petitioner’s requested relief from 14 CFR § 91.121 Altimete r Settings

, the FAA believes that an altitude reading is a critical safety component of the petitioner’s proposed operation. Although the petitioner will not have a typical barometric altimeter onboard the aircraft, the FAA finds the petitioner’s intention to operate the UA within VLOS and at or below 400 feet AGL, combined with the petitioner’s intention to provide altitude information

to the UAS pilot via a digitally encoded telemetric data feed, which downlinks from the aircraft to a ground

- based on

- scre en display , to be a sufficient method for ensuring the UAS operations do not adversely affect safety

. The altitude information will be gene rated by equipment installed on board the aircraft, as specified using GPS triangulation, or digitally

encoded baromet ric altimeter, or radio altimeter, or any combination thereof. Prior to each flight, a zero altitude initiation point will be established and confirmed for accuracy by the

UAS PIC

. The FAA has determined that good cause exists for granting the requested re lief to

14 CFR § 91.121.

Regarding the petitioner’s requested relief from 14 CFR § 91.15 1 (a) Fuel requirements for flight in VFR conditions, relief has been granted for manned aircraft to operate at less than the minimums prescribed in 14 CFR § 91.151(a), including Exempt ion Nos. 2689, 5745, and

10650. In addition, similar UAS

- specific relief has been granted in Exemption Nos. 8811, 10808, and 10673 for daytime, Visual Flight Rules (V FR) conditions. The petitioner states that its UAS operations will be cond ucted in a controlled c losed

- set filming environment, with

UA under 55 pounds , at speeds below 50 Knots, and within VLOS . These factors, combined

with Astraeus’ stated intention to terminate flights after 30 minutes or with 25% remaining battery power (whi chever occurs first)

, provides the FAA sufficient reason to grant the relief from 14 CFR § 91.151(a) as requested in accordance with the conditions and limitations proposed by Astraeus

. With respect to the petitioner’s request to operate at night, the FAA finds that the petitioner has not provided a sufficient safety case and mitigations, p er FAA Order 8900.1 V16, C5, S3 General Operational Requirements, to avoid collision hazards at night. All previous UAS

specific grants of relief from 14 CFR § 91.151(a) have restricted flights to daytime VFR conditions only

. While t he FAA acknowledges the petitioner’s stated film set lighting techniques to mitigate the risks of nighttime operations

, the petitioner has not provided22

sufficient data and analysis regarding t he PICs’ and VOs’ ability to maintain VLOS with the UA and conduct their functions to see and avoid other potential obstacles and air traffic,

relative to the lighting configuration on the film set. There is a limitation outlined below that precludes night time UAS operations. The petitioner may provide additional data and seek an amendment to its exemption to permit night operations.

Additionally, in evaluating the petitioner’s proposed operating parameters with regard to VLOS and a safe operating perimete r, the FAA considered operations from a moving device or vehicle. Since the petitioner did not discuss provisions for these circumstances, the conditions and limitations below preclude operations from moving devices or vehicles.

Public Interest

The FAA f inds that a grant of exemption is in the public interest. T he e nhanced safety achieved using a UA with the specifications described by the petitioner and carrying no

passengers or crew , rather than a manned aircraft of significantly greater proportions, ca rrying

crew in addition to flammable fuel, gives the FAA good cause to find that the UAS operation enabled by this exemption is in the public interest. The FAA also finds that UAS provide an additional tool for the filmmaking industry, adding a greater deg ree of flexibility, which supplements the current capabilities offered by manned aircraft.

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

Relief sought by petitioner (14 CFR) FAA determination (14 CFR)

P art 21 Not necessary

45.23(b) Not necessary

61.113(a) and (b) Granted with conditions and limitations

91.7(a) Not necessary

91.9(b)(2) Not necessary

91.103 Not necessary with conditions and limitations

91.109 Not necessary

91.119 Paragraph (c) grant ed with conditions and

limitations

91.121 Granted with conditions and limitations

91.151(a) 91.151(a)(1), day, granted with conditions and limitations; 91.151(a)(2), night, denied

91.203(a) and (b) Not necessary

91.405(a) Granted with conditions and li mitations

91.407(a)(1) Granted with conditions and limitations23

91.409(a)(2) Granted with conditions and limitations; relief from 91.409(a)(1) also granted with

conditions and limitations

91.417(a) and (b) Granted with conditions and limitations

The FA A’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, Astraeus Aerial is gr anted an exemption from

14 CFR § § 61.113(a) and (b); 91 .119 (c) ; 91.121; 91.151(a); 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 Astraeus to
operate unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) for the purpose of scripted, closed

- set filming for the motion picture and television industry. This exemption is subject to the conditions and

limitations listed below.

Conditions and Limitations

Relative to this grant of exemption, Astraeus is hereafter referred to as th e o perator.

The Flight Operations and Procedures Manual (FOPM) and Motion Picture and Television Operations Manual (MPTOM) are hereafter collectively referred to as the o perator’ s m anual.

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

The operator proposed the following conditions and/or limitations, which were accepted by

the FAA. 2

1. The unmanned aircraft (UA) must weigh less than 55 po unds (25 Kg), including energy source(s) and equipment. Operations authorized by this grant of exemption are limited to the following aircraft described in the operator’s manual : Astraeus Aerial Cinema System V.3CS UAS aircraft variant, serial #001 onward (V.3). Proposed operations of any other aircraft will require a new petition or a petition to amend this grant.

2. The UA may not be flown at a ground speed exceeding 50 knots.

3. Flights must be operated at an altitude of no more than 400 feet above ground l evel (AGL) , as indicated by the procedures specified in the operator’s manual. All altitudes reported to ATC must be in feet AGL.

2 Conditions and limitations outlined by the operator may have been modi fied for clarity.24

4. The UA must be operated within visual line of sight (VLOS) of the PIC at all times. This requires the PIC to be able to use h uman vision unaided by any device other than

corrective lenses , as specified on the PIC’s FAA

- issued medical certificate

.

5. All operations must utilize a visual observer (VO). The VO may be used to satisfy the VLOS requirement as long as the PIC always main tains VLOS capability. The VO and PIC must be able to communicate verbally at all times.

6. The operator’s manual is considered acceptable to the FAA, provided the additional requirements identified in these conditions and limitations are added or amended. T he operator’s manual and this grant of exemption must be maintained 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 operator’s manual, the conditions and limitations herein take precedence and must be followed. Otherwise, the operator must follow the procedures as outlined in its operator’s manual.

The operator may update or revise its operator’s manual. It is the operator’s responsibil ity to track such revisions and present updated and revised documents to the Administrator
upon request

. The operator must also present updated and revised documents if it petitions for extension or amendment. If the operator determines that any update or revision would affect the basis for which the FAA granted this exemption, then the operator must petition for amendment to their exemption. The FAA’s UAS Integration Office (AFS

- 80) may be contacted if questions arise regarding updates or revisions to the operator’s manual.

7. 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 aircraft is prohibited from operating until the nec essary maintenance has been performed

and the UAS is found to be in a condition for safe flight. The Ground Control Station, if utilized, must be include d in the preflight inspection. All maintenance and alterations must be properly documented in the aircr aft records.

8. Any UAS that has undergone maintenance or alterations that affect the UAS operation or flight characteristics, e.g. replacement of a flight critical component, must undergo a functional test flight in accordance with the operator’ s manual. Th e PIC who conducts the functional test flight must make an entry in the UAS aircraft records of the flight. The requirements and procedures for a functional test flight and aircraft record entry must be added to the operator’s manual.

9. The operator must fo llow the manufacturer’s UAS aircraft/component, maintenance, overhaul, replacement, inspection, and life limit requirements

. When unavailable, aircraft maintenance/component/overhaul, replacement, and inspection/maintenance requirements

must be established and identified in the operator’ s manual. At a minimum, requirements

for the following must be included in the operator’s manual:25

a. Actuators / Servos ;

b. Transmission (single rotor) ;

c. Powerplant (motors) ;

d. Propellers ;

e. Electronic speed controller ;

f. Batteries ;

g. Mec hanical dynamic components (single rotor) ;

h. Remote command and control ;

i. Ground control station (if used) ; and

j. Any other components as determined by the operator ;

10. The Pilot In Command (PIC) must possess at least a private pilot c ertificate and at least a

cu rrent third

- class medical certificate

. The PIC must also meet the flight review requirements specified in 14 CFR § 61.56 in an aircraft i n which the PIC is rated on his or her pilot certificate.

11. P rior to operations conducted for the purpose of motion pict ure filming (or similar operations), the PIC must have accumulated and logged, in a manner consistent with

14 CFR § 61.51(b), a minimum of 200 flight cycles and 25 hours of total time as a UAS rotorcraft pilot and at least ten hours logged as a UAS pilot w ith a similar UAS type (single blade or multirotor). Prior documented flight experience that was obtained in compliance with applicable regulations may satisfy this requirement. Training, proficiency, and experience

- building flights can also be conducted u nder this grant of exemption to accomplish the required flight cycles and flight time. During training, proficiency, and experience

- building flights

, all persons not essential for flight operations

are considered non participants , and the PIC must operate t he UA with appropriate distance

from non participants in accordance with 14 CFR § 91.119

.

12. P rior to operations conducted for the purpose of motion picture filming (or similar operations), t he PIC must have accumulated and logged, in a manner consistent with

14 CFR § 61.51(b), a minimum of five hours as UAS pilot operating the make and model of UAS to be utilized for operations under the exemption and three take

- offs and three landings in the preceding 90 days. Training, proficiency, experience

- building, and take

- off and landing currency flights can be conducted under this grant of exemption to accomplish26

the required flight time and 90 day currency. During training, proficiency, experience

building, and take

- off and landing currency flights all persons not es sential for fligh t operations are considered non participants , and the PIC must operate the UA wit h appropriate distance from non participants in accordance with 14 CFR § 91.119

.

13. Prior to any flight operations authorized by this grant of exemption, the PIC and VO must have successfully completed a qualification process, as outlined in the operator’s manual. As this is a requirement stipulated by the operator, the test must be developed and implemented by a qualified person designated at the sole discretion o f the operator. A record of completion of this qualification process must be documented and made available

to the Administrator upon request.

14. Prior to operations conducted for the purpose of motion picture filming (or similar operations), a flight demonst ration, administered by an operator

- approved and

- qualified pilot must be successfully completed and documented . This documentation must be available for review upon request by the Administrator . Because the knowledge and airmanship test qualifications hav e been developed by the operator, and there are no established practical test standards that support a jurisdictional FAA FSDO evaluation and approval of company designated examiners, the petitioner will conduct these tests in accordance with the operator’ s manual.

15. The UA may not be operated directly over any person, except authorized and consenting production personnel, below an altitude that is hazardous to persons or property on the surface in the event of a UAS failure or emergency.

16. Regarding the dist ance from participating persons, the operator’s manual has safety mitigations for authorized and consenting production personnel. At all times, those persons must be essential to the closed

- set film operations. Because these procedures are specific to part icipati ng persons, no further FSDO or a viation s afety i nspector approval is necessary for reductions to the distances specified in the petitioner’s manuals. This is consistent with the manned aircraft procedures described in FAA Order 8900.1, V3, C8

, S1 Is sue a Certificate of Waiver for Motion Picture and Television Filming.

17. Regarding distance from non participating persons, the operator must ensure that no persons are allowed within 500 feet of the area except those consenting to be involved and

necessary for the filming production. This provision may be reduced to no less than

200 feet if it would not adversely affect safety and the Administrator has approved it. For example, an equivalent level of safety may be determined by an aviation safety inspector ’s evaluation of the filming production area to note terrain features, obstructions, buildings, safety barriers, etc. Such barriers may protect nonparticipating persons (observers, the public, news media, etc.) from debri s in the event of an accident. This i s also consistent

wi th the same FAA Order 8900.1, V3, C8 , S1.27

18. If the UAS loses communications or loses its GPS signal, the UA must return to a pre

determined location within the security perimeter and land or be recovered in accordance with the operator’s manual

.

19. The UAS must abort the flight in the event of unpredicted obstacles or emergencies in accordance with the operator’s manual

.

20. Each UAS operation must be completed within 30 minutes flight time or with 25% battery power remaining, whichever occurs first.

In addition to the conditions and limitations proposed by the operator, the FAA has determined that any operations conducted under this grant of exemption must be done
pursuant to t he following c onditions and l imitations:

21. 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 will 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.

22. All aircraft operated in accordance with this exemption must be identified by serial number, registered in accordance with 14 CFR part 47, and have identification (N

Number) markings in accordan ce with 14 CFR part 45, Subpart C. Markings must be as large as practicable.

23. The operator must develop procedures to document and maintain a record of the UAS maintenance, preventative maintenance, alterations, status of replacement/overhaul
component pa rts, and the total time in service of the UAS. These procedures must be added to the operator’s manual.

24. Each UAS operated under this exemption must comply with all manufacturer Safety

Bulletins.

25. The operator must develop UAS technician qualification crit eria. These criteria must be added to the operator’s manual.

26. The preflight inspection section in the operator’s manual must be amended to include the following requirement: The preflight inspection must account for all discrepancies, i.e. inoperable compo nents, items, or equipment, not covered in the relevant preflight inspection sections of the operator’s manual.

27. 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

.28

28. At least three days before scheduled filming, the operator of the UAS affected by this exemption must submit a written Plan of Activities to the local FSDO with jurisdiction over the area of proposed filming. The 3

- day notification may be waived with the

concurrence of the F SDO. The plan of activities must include at least the following:

a. Dates and times for all flights ;

b. Name and pho ne number of the operator f or the UAS film ing production conducted under this grant of exemption ;

c. Name and phone number of the person responsible for the on

- scene operation of the

UAS ;

d. Make, model, and serial or N

- number of UAS to be used ;

e. Name and certificate number of UAS PICs involved i n the filming production event ;

f. A statement that the operator has obtained permission from property owners and/or

local officials to conduct the filming production event; t he list of those who gave permission must be made availabl e to the inspector upon reques t ;

g. Signature of exemption

- holder or representative ; and

h. A description of the flight activity

, including maps or diagrams of any area, city, town, county, and/or s tate over which filming will be conducted and the altitudes essent ial to accomplish the oper ation

.

29. The documents required under 14 CFR § § 91.9 and 91.203 must be available to the PIC at

the G round C ontrol S tation of the UAS any time the aircraft is operating. These documents must be made available to the Administrator or any law enforcement offi cial
upon request.

30. The UA must remain clear and yield the right of way to all other manned operations and

activities at all times (including, but not limited to, ultralight vehicles, parachute activities, parasailing activities, hang gliders, etc.).

31. UAS operations may not be conducted during night, as defined in 14 CFR § 1.1

. All

o perations must be conducted under visual meteorological conditions (VMC). Flights under special visual flight rules (SVFR) are not authorized.

32. The UAS may not be operated by th e PIC from any moving device or vehicle

.

33. 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 tha n 3 statute miles from the PIC

.29

34. The UA may not operate in Class B, C, or D airsp ace without written approval from the

FAA

. The UA may not operate within 5 nautical miles of the geographic center of a non

towered airport 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.

35. Any incident, accident, or flight oper ation 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) within 24 hours. Accidents must be reported to the National Transportation Saf ety Board (NTSB) per instructions contained on the

NTSB Web site: www.ntsb.gov

. Further flight operations may not be conducted until the

incident , accident

, or transgression is reviewed by AFS

- 80 and authorization to res ume operations is provided.

Unless otherwise specified in this grant of exemption, the UAS

, the UAS PIC

, and the UAS operations must comply with all applicable parts of 14 CFR including, but not limited to, parts 45, 47, 61

, and 91.

This exemption termin ates on September 30

, 2016 , unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

Issued in Washington, DC, on September 25, 2014.

.

/s/

Michael J. Zenkovich Deputy Director, Flight Standards Service

# Attachment 5FAA FORM 7711

- 1 UAS COA Attachment

2014

- E SA

- 116

Ver si on 2.1 : June 20 12 Page 1 of 21

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

### CERTIFICATE OF WAIVER OR AUTHORIZATION

ISSUED TO TEST SITE

- Griffiss International Airport 592 Hangar Rd, Suite 200 Rome, NY 13441
This certificate is issued for the operations specific ally described hereinafter. No person shall conduct any operation pursuant to the authority of this certificate except in accordance with the standard and special provisions contained in this certificate, and such other requirements of the Federal Aviatio n Regulations not specifically waived by this certificate.

OPERATIONS AUTHORIZED Operation of the Microdrones MD4

- 1000 Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) in Class G airspace at or below 400 feet Above Ground Level (AGL) at Musgrave Research Farm, in the vici nity of Aurora, NY, under the jurisdiction of Elmira TRACON.

LIST OF WAIVED REGULATIONS BY SECTION AND TITLE

N/A

STANDARD PROVISIONS 1. A copy of the application made for this certificate shall be attached and become a part hereof.
2. This certific ate shall be presented for inspection upon the request of any authorized representative of the Federal Aviation Administration, or of any State or municipal official charged with the duty of enforcing local laws or regulations.
3. The holder of this certi ficate shall be responsible for the strict observance of the terms and provisions contained
herein.
4. This certificate is nontransferable.

Note

- This certificate constitutes a waiver of those Federal rules or regulations specifically referred to above. It does not constitute a waiver of any State law or local ordinance.

SPECIAL PROVISIONS
Special Provisions are set forth and attached.

This certificate 2014

- ESA

- 11 6 is effective from September 22, 2014, to September 21, 2016, and is subject to cancell ation at any time upon notice by the Administrator or his/her authorized representative.

BY DIRECTION OF THE ADMINISTRATOR

FAA Headquarters, AJV

- 115 Jacqueline R. Jackson

(Region) (Signature)

September 17, 2014 Acting Manager, UAS Tactical Operations Section

(Date) (Title)

FAA Form 7711

- 1 (7

- 74)FAA FORM 7711

- 1 UAS COA Attachment

2014

- E SA

- 116

Ver si on 2.1 : June 20 12 Page 2 of 21

COA Number : 2 0 14

- E SA

- 116

Issued To : TEST SITE

- Griffi s s International Airport , referred herein as the “proponent”

Address : 592 Hangar Rd, Suite 200

Rome, NY 13441

Activity : Operation of the Microdrones MD4

- 1000 Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) in Class G airspace at or below 400 feet Above Ground Level (AGL) ] at Musgrave research Farm in the vicinity of Aurora , NY

, under the jurisdiction of Elmira TRACON. S ee Attachment 1.

Purpose : To prescribe UAS operating requirements in the National Airspace System (NAS) for the purpose of research flights.

Dates of Use : This COA is valid from September 22, 2014 through September 2 1 , 201 6

. Should a renewal become ne cessary, the proponent shall advise the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), in writing, no later than 60 business days prior to the requested effective

date.

Public Aircraft

1. A public aircraft operation is determined by statute, 49 USC §40102(a)(41) and §40125.

2. All public aircraft flights conducted under a COA must comply with the terms of the

statute.
3. All flights must be conducted per the declarations submitted on COA on

- line.FAA FORM 7711

- 1 UAS COA Attachment

2014

- E SA

- 116

Ver si on 2.1 : June 20 12 Page 3 of 21



### STANDARD PROVISIONS

A. General.

The review of this activity is based upon current understanding of UAS operations and their impact in the NAS. This COA will not be considered a precedent for future operations. (As changes in or understanding of the UAS industry occur, limitations and conditions for operations will be adjusted.)

All personnel connected with the UAS operation must read and comply with the contents of this authorization and its provisions.

A copy of the COA including the special limitations must be immediately available to all operational personnel at each operati ng location whenever UAS operations are being

conducted.

This authorization may be canceled at any time by the Administrator, the person authorized to grant the authorization, or the representative designated to monitor a specific operation. As a general rule, this authorization may be canceled when it is no longer required, there is an abuse of its provisions, or when unforeseen safety factors develop. Failure to comply with the authorization is cause for cancellation. The proponent will receive written notice of

cancellation.

During the time this COA is approved and active, a site safety evaluation/visit may be accomplished to ensure COA compliance, assess any adverse impact on ATC or airspace,

and ensure this COA is not burdensome or ineffective. Devia tions, accidents/incidents/mishaps, complaints, etc. will prompt a COA review or site visit to address the issue. Refusal to allow a site safety evaluation/visit may result in cancellation of the COA. Note: This section does not pertain to agencies that h ave other existing agreements in place with the FAA.

B. Airworthiness Certification.

The unmanned aircraft must be shown to be airworthy to conduct flight operations in the

NAS. The Griffiss International Airport has made its own determination that the

M icrodrones MD4

- 1000 unmanned aircraft is airworthy. The Microdrones MD4

- 1000 must be operated in strict compliance with all provisions and conditions contained in the Airworthiness Safety Release, including all documents and provisions referenced in the C OA application.

1. A configuration control program must be in place for hardware and/or software changes

made to the UAS to ensure continued airworthiness. If a new or revised Airworthiness Release is generated as a result of changes in the hardware or soft ware affecting the operating characteristics of the UAS, notify the UAS Integration Office of the changes as soon as practical.FAA FORM 7711

- 1 UAS COA Attachment

2014

- E SA

- 116

Ver si on 2.1 : June 20 12 Page 4 of 21

a. Software and hardware changes should be documented as part of the normal maintenance procedures

. Software changes to the a ircraft and control station as well as hardware system changes are classified as major changes unless the agency has a formal process, accepted by the FAA. These changes should be provided to the UAS Integration office in summary form at the time of incor poration.

b. Major modifications or changes, performed under the COA, or other authorizations that could potentially affect the safe operation of the system must be documented and provided to the FAA in the form of a new AWR, unless the agency has a formal process, accepted by the FAA.

c. All previously flight proven systems to include payloads, may be installed or removed as required, and that activity recorded in the unmanned aircraft and ground control stations logbooks by persons authorized to conduct UAS maintenance Describe any payload equipment configurations in the UAS logbook that will result in a weight and balance change, electrical loads, and or flight dynamics, unless the agency has a formal process, accepted by the FAA.

d. For unmanned aircraft sys tem discrepancies, a record entry should be made by an appropriately rated person to document the finding in the logbook. No flights may be conducted following major changes, modifications or new installations unless the party responsible for certifying ai rworthiness has determined the system is safe to operate in the NAS and a new AWR is generated, unless the agency has a formal process, accepted by the FAA. The successful completion of these tests must be recorded in the appropriate logbook, unless the ag ency has a formal process, accepted by the FAA.

2. The Microdrones MD4

- 1000 must be operated in strict compliance with all provisions and conditions contained within the spectrum analysis assigned and authorized for use within the defined operations area.

3. A ll items contained in the application for equipment frequency allocation must be adhered to, including the assigned frequencies and antenna equipment characteristics. A ground operational check to verify the control station can communicate with the aircra ft (frequency integration check) must be conducted prior to the launch of the unmanned aircraft to ensure any electromagnetic interference does not adversely affect control of the

aircraft.

4. The use of a Traffic Collision Avoidance System (TCAS) in any mo de while operating an unmanned aircraft is prohibited.

C. Operations.

1. Unless otherwise authorized as a special provision, a maximum of one unmanned aircraft

will be controlled:

a. In any defined operating area,FAA FORM 7711

- 1 UAS COA Attachment

2014

- E SA

- 116

Ver si on 2.1 : June 20 12 Page 5 of 21

b. From a single control station, and

c. By one pilot a t a time.

2. A Pilot

- in

- Command (PIC) is the person who has final authority and responsibility for the operation and safety of flight, has been designated as PIC before or during the flight, and holds the appropriate category, class, and type rating, if appr opriate, for the conduct of the flight. The responsibility and authority of the PIC as described by 14 CFR 91.3, Responsibility and Authority of the Pilot

- in

- Command, apply to the unmanned aircraft PIC. The PIC position may rotate duties as necessary with equally qualified pilots. The individual designated as PIC may change during flight. Note: The PIC can only be the PIC for one aircraft at a time. For Optionally Piloted Aircraft (OPA), PIC must meet UAS guidance requirements for training, pilot licensing , and medical requirements when operating OPA as a UAS.

3. The PIC must conduct a pre

- takeoff briefing as applicable prior to each launch. The briefing should include but is not limited to the

a. Contents of the COA,

b. Altitudes to be flown,

c. Mission overview inc luding handoff procedures,

d. Frequencies to be used,

e. Flight time, including reserve fuel requirements,

f. Contingency procedures to include lost link, divert, and flight termination, and

g. Hazards unique to the flight being flown.

Note: Flight Crew Member (UAS)

. In addition to the flight crew members identified in 14 CFR Part 1, Definitions and Abbreviations, an Unmanned Aircraft System flight crew members include pilots, sensor/payload operators, and visual observers and may include other persons as appropriate or required to ensure safe operation of the aircraft.

4. All operations will be conducted in compliance with Title 14 CFR Part 91. Special attention should be given to:

a. § 91.3 Responsibility and authority of the pilot in command

b. § 91.13 Careless or reckless operation

c. § 91.17 Alcohol or drugs

d. § 91.103 Preflight Actions

e. § 91.111 Operating near other aircraft.

f. § 91.113 Right

- of

- way rules: Except water operations

g. § 91.115 Right

- of

- way rules: Water operations

h. § 91.119 Minimum safe altitudes: General

i. § 91.123 Comp liance with ATC clearances and instructions.

j. § 91.133 Restricted and prohibited areasFAA FORM 7711

- 1 UAS COA Attachment

2014

- E SA

- 116

Ver si on 2.1 : June 20 12 Page 6 of 21

k. § 91.137 Temporary flight restrictions in the vicinity of disaster/hazard areas

l. § 91.145 Management of aircraft operations in the vicinity of aerial demonstrations

and ma jor sporting events

m. § 91.151 Fuel requirements for flight in VFR conditions

n. § 91.155 Basic VFR weather minimums

o. § 91.159 VFR cruising altitude or flight level

p. § 91.209 Aircraft Lights

q. § 91.213 Inoperative instruments and equipment

r. § 91.215 ATC transpond er and altitude reporting equipment and use

s. Appendix D to Part 91

— Airports/Locations: Special Operating Restrictions

5. Unless otherwise authorized as a special provision, all operations must be conducted in visual meteorological conditions (VMC) during dayli ght hours in compliance with Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 91 §91.155 and the following:

6. Special Visual Flight Rules (VFR) operations are not authorized.

a. VFR cloud clearances specified in 14 CFR Part 91 §91.155, must be maintained, except in Class G airspace where Class E airspace visibility requirements must be applied, but not less than 3 statute miles (SM) flight visibility and 1000’ ceiling.

b. Flights conducted under Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) in Class A airspace shall

remain c lear of clouds. NOTE: Deviations from IFR clearance necessary to comply with this provision must have prior ATC approval.

c. Chase aircraft must maintain 5 NM flight visibility.

7. Night operations are prohibited unless otherwise authorized as a special provisi on.

8. Operations (including lost link procedures) must not be conducted over populated areas, heavily trafficked roads, or an open

- air assembly of people.

D. Air Traffic Control (ATC) Communications.

1. The pilot and/or PIC will maintain direct, two

- way communicat ion with ATC and have the ability to maneuver the unmanned aircraft in response to ATC instructions, unless addressed in the Special Provision Section.

When required, ATC will assign a radio frequency for air traffic control during flight.

The use of land

- line and/or cellular telephones is prohibited as the primary means for in

flight communication with ATC.

2. The PIC must not accept an ATC clearance requiring the use of visual separation, sequencing, or visual approach.

3. When necessary, transit of airways an d routes must be conducted as expeditiously as possible. The unmanned aircraft must not loiter on Victor airways, jet routes, Q and T routes, IR routes, or VR routes.FAA FORM 7711

- 1 UAS COA Attachment

2014

- E SA

- 116

Ver si on 2.1 : June 20 12 Page 7 of 21

4. For flights operating on an IFR clearance at or above 18,000 feet mean sea level (MSL),

t he PIC must ensure positional information in reference to established National Airspace System (NAS) fixes, NAVAIDs, and/or waypoints is provided to ATC. The use of latitude/longitude positions is not authorized, except oceanic flight operations.

5. If equipp ed, the unmanned aircraft must operate with

a. An operational mode 3/A transponder with altitude encoding, or mode S transponder (preferred) set to an ATC assigned squawk

b. Position/navigation and anti

- collision lights on at all times during flight unless stipu lated in the special provisions or the proponent has a specific exemption from 14

CFR Part 91.209.

6. Operations that use a Global Positioning System (GPS) for navigation must check Receiver Autonomous Integrity Monitoring (RAIM) notices prior to flight opera tions. Flight into a GPS test area or degraded RAIM is prohibited for those aircraft that use GPS as their sole means for navigation.

E. Safety of Flight.

1. The proponent or delegated representative is responsible for halting or canceling activity

in the COA area if, at any time, the safety of persons or property on the ground or in the air is in jeopardy, or if there is a failure to comply with the terms or conditions of this

authorization.

2. ATC must be immediately notified in the event of any emergency, loss and subsequent restoration of command link, loss of PIC or observer visual contact, or any other malfunction or occurrence that would impact safety or operations.

3. Sterile Cockpit Procedures.

a. Critical phases of flight include all ground operations involving

(1) Taxi (movement of an aircraft under its own power on the surface of an airport)

(2) Take

- off and landing (launch or recovery)

(3) All other flight operations in which safety or mission accomplishment might be compromised by distractions

b. No crewmember may perfor m any duties during a critical phase of flight not required for the safe operation of the aircraft.

c. No crewmember may engage in, nor may any PIC permit, any activity during a critical phase of flight which could

(1) Distract any crewmember from the performance of his/her duties or

(2) Interfere in any way with the proper conduct of those duties.

d. The pilot and/or the PIC must not engage in any activity not directly related to the operation of the aircraft. Activities include, but are not limited to, operating UAS

s ensors or other payload systems.FAA FORM 7711

- 1 UAS COA Attachment

2014

- E SA

- 116

Ver si on 2.1 : June 20 12 Page 8 of 21

e. The use of cell phones or other electronic devices is restricted to communications pertinent to the operational control of the unmanned aircraft and any required

communications with Air Traffic Control.

4. See

- and

- Avoid.

Unma nned aircraft have no on

- board pilot to perform see

- and

- avoid responsibilities; therefore, when operating outside of active restricted and warning areas approved for aviation activities, provisions must be made to ensure an equivalent level of safety exist s for unmanned operations. Adherence to 14 CFR Part 91 §91.111, §91.113 and §91.115, is required.

a. The proponent and/or delegated representatives are responsible at all times for collision avoidance with all aviation activities and the safety of persons or property on the surface with respect to the UAS.

b. UAS pilots will ensure there is a safe operating distance between aviation activities

and unmanned aircraft at all times.

c. Any crew member responsible for performing see

- and

- avoid requirements for the UA

must have and maintain instantaneous communication with the PIC.

d. UA operations will only be conducted within Reduced Vertical Separation Minimum (RVSM) altitudes, when appropriately equipped or having received a clearance under

an FAA deviation. NOTE: UA opera tions should not plan on an en

- route clearance in RVSM altitudes, without being RVSM equipped.

e. Visual observers must be used at all times except in Class A airspace, active Restricted Areas, and Warning areas designated for aviation activities.

(1) Observers may either be ground

- based or in a chase plane.

(2) If the chase aircraft is operating more than 100 feet above/below and/or more than 1⁄2 NM laterally of the unmanned aircraft, the chase aircraft PIC will advise the controlling ATC facility.

f. The PIC is respo nsible to ensure visual observers are;

(1) Able to see the aircraft and the surrounding airspace throughout the entire flight,

and

(2) Able to provide the PIC with the UA’s flight path, and proximity to all aviation activities and other hazards (e.g., terrain, we ather, structures) sufficiently to

exercise effective control of the UA to:

(a) Comply with CFR Parts 91.111, 91.113 and 91.115, and

(b) Prevent the UA from creating a collision hazard.

5. Observers must be able to communicate clearly to the pilot any instructions r equired to remain clear of conflicting traffic, using standard phraseology as listed in the Aeronautical Information Manual when practical.

6. A PIC may rotate duties as necessary to fulfill operational requirements; a PIC must be designated at all times.FAA FORM 7711

- 1 UAS COA Attachment

2014

- E SA

- 116

Ver si on 2.1 : June 20 12 Page 9 of 21

7. Pil ots flying chase aircraft must not concurrently perform observer or UA pilot duties.

8. Pilot and observers must not assume concurrent duties as both pilot and observer.

9. The required number of ground observers will be in place during flight operations.

10. The u se of multiple successive observers (daisy chaining) is prohibited unless otherwise authorized as a special provision.

11. The dropping or spraying of aircraft stores, or carrying of hazardous materials (including ordnance) outside of active Restricted, Prohib ited, or Warning Areas approved for aviation activities is prohibited unless specifically authorized as a special provision.

F. Crewmember Requirements.

1. All crewmembers associated with the operation of the unmanned aircraft, including chase operations, must b e qualified or must be receiving formal training under the direct supervision of a qualified instructor, who has at all times, responsibility for the operation

of the unmanned aircraft.

2. Pilots and observers must have an understanding of, and comply with, T itle 14 Code of Federal Regulations, and/or agency directives and regulations, applicable to the airspace where the unmanned aircraft will operate.

3. Pilots, supplemental pilots, and observers must maintain a current second class (or higher) airman medical c ertificate that has been issued under 14 CFR Part 67, or an FAA accepted agency equivalent based on the application.

4. At a minimum, the use of alcohol and/or drugs in violation of 14 CFR Part 91 §91.17 applies to UA pilots and observers.

5. At a minimum, obser vers must receive training on rules and responsibilities described in 14 CFR Part 91 §91.111. §91.113 and §91.115, regarding cloud clearance, flight visibility, and the pilot controller glossary, including standard ATC phraseology and

communication.

6. Recen t Pilot Experience (Currency). The proponent must provide documentation, upon request, showing the pilot/supplemental pilot/PIC maintains an appropriate level of recent pilot experience in either the UAS being operated or in a certified simulator. At a

min imum, he/she must conduct three takeoffs (launch) and three landings (recovery) in the specific UAS within the previous 90 days (excluding pilots who do not conduct launch/recovery during normal/emergency operations). If a supplemental pilot assumes

the ro le of PIC, he/she must comply with PIC rating requirements.

7. A PIC and/or supplemental pilot have the ability to assume the duties of an internal or an external UAS pilot at any point during the flight.

8. A PIC may be augmented by supplemental pilots.

9. PIC Ratings.

Rating requirements for the UAS PIC depend on the type of operation conducted. The requirement for the PIC to hold, at a minimum, a current FAA private pilot certificate or the FAA accepted agency equivalent, based on the application of 14 CFR P art 61, is predicated on various factors including the location of the planned operations, missionFAA FORM 7711

- 1 UAS COA Attachment

2014

- E SA

- 116

Ver si on 2.1 : June 20 12 Page 10 of 21

profile, size of the unmanned aircraft, and whether or not the operation is conducted within or beyond visual line

- of

- sight.

a. The PIC must hold, at a minimu m, a current FAA private pilot certificate or the FAA accepted agency equivalent, based on the application or 14 CFR Part 61.under all operations:

(1) Approved for flight in Class A, B, C, D, E, and G (more than 400 feet above ground level (AGL)) airspace

(2) Cond ucted under IFR (FAA instrument rating required, or the FAA accepted agency equivalent, based on the application or 14 CFR Part 61

(3) Approved for night operations

(4) Conducted at or within 5 NM of a joint use or public airfields

(5) Requiring a chase aircraft

(6) At a ny time the FAA has determined the need based on the UAS characteristics, mission profile, or other operational parameters

b. Operations without a pilot certificate may be allowed when all of the following

conditions are met:

(1) The PIC has successfully complete d, at a minimum, FAA private pilot ground instruction and passed the written examination, or the FAA accepted agency equivalent, based on the application. Airman Test reports are valid for the 24

- calendar month period preceding the month the exam was comp leted, at which time the instruction and written examination must be repeated.

(2) Operations are during daylight hours.

(3) The operation is conducted in a sparsely populated location.

(4) The operation is conducted from a privately owned airfield, military installa tion,

or off

- airport location.

(5) Operations are approved and conducted solely within visual line

- of

- sight in Class G airspace.

(6) Visual line

- of

- sight operations are conducted at an altitude of no more than 400 feet Above Ground Level (AGL) in class G airspa ce at all times.

c. The FAA may require specific aircraft category and class ratings in manned aircraft depending on the UAS seeking approval and the characteristics of its flight controls

interface.

10. PIC Recent Flight Experience (Currency).

a. For those operat ions that require a certificated pilot or FAA accepted agency equivalent, based on the application, the PIC must have flight reviews 14 CFR Part 61.56, and if the pilot conducts takeoff, launch, landing or recovery the PIC must maintain recent pilot experi ence in manned aircraft per 14 CFR Part 61.57,; Recent Flight Experience: Pilot in Command.FAA FORM 7711

- 1 UAS COA Attachment

2014

- E SA

- 116

Ver si on 2.1 : June 20 12 Page 11 of 21

b. For operations approved for night or IFR through special provisions, the PIC must maintain minimum recent pilot experience per 14 CFR Part 61.57, Recent Flight

Ex perience: Pilot in Command, as applicable.

11. Supplemental Pilot Ratings.

Supplemental pilots must have, at a minimum, successfully completed private pilot ground school and passed the written test or the FAA accepted agency equivalent, based on the applica tion. The ground school written test results are valid for two years from the date of completion, at which time the instruction and written examination must be repeated. If a supplemental pilot assumes the role of PIC, he/she must comply with PIC rating, c urrency, medical, and training requirements listed in this document.

12. Ancillary personnel such as systems operators or mission specialists must be thoroughly familiar with and possess operational experience of the equipment being used. If the systems being used are for observation and detection of other aircraft for collision avoidance purposes, personnel must be thoroughly trained on collision avoidance procedures and techniques and have direct communication with the UAS pilot, observer,

and other crewmemb ers.

13. The Agency will ensure that Crew Resource Management (CRM) training is current for all crew members before flying operational or training missions. The CRM program must consist of initial training, as well as CRM recurrent training during every recur rent training cycle, not to exceed a 12 month interval between initial training and recurrent training or between subsequent recurrent training sessions.

G. Notice to Airmen (NOTAM).

1. A distant (D) NOTAM must be issued when unmanned aircraft operations are bei ng conducted. This requirement may be accomplished

a. Through the proponent’s local base operations or NOTAM issuing authority, or

b. By contacting the NOTAM Flight Service Station at 1

- 877

- 4

- US

- NTMS (1

- 877

- 487

- 6867) not more than 72 hours in advance, but not l ess than 48 hours prior to the operation, unless otherwise authorized as a special provision. The issuing agency will require the:

(1) Name and address of the pilot filing the NOTAM request

(2) Location, altitude, or operating area

(3) Time and nature of the activity.

2. For proponents filing their NOTAM with the Department of Defense: The requirement to file with an Automated Flight Service Station (AFSS) is in addition to any local procedures/requirements for filing through the Defense Internet NOTAM Service (DINS).

H. Dat a Reporting.

1. Documentation of all operations associated with UAS activities is required regardless of the airspace in which the UAS operates. This requirement includes COA operations within Special Use airspace. NOTE: Negative (zero flights) reports are re quired.FAA FORM 7711

- 1 UAS COA Attachment

2014

- E SA

- 116

Ver si on 2.1 : June 20 12 Page 12 of 21

2. The proponent must submit the following information through UAS COA On

- Line on a monthly basis:

a. The number of flights conducted under this COA. (A flight during which any portion is conducted in the NAS must be counted only once, regardless of how many times it may enter and leave Special Use airspace between takeoff and landing)

b. Aircraft operational hours per flight

c. Ground control station operational hours in support of each flight, to include Launch and Recovery Element (LRE) operations

d. Pilot duty time per flight

e. Equipment malfunctions (hardware/software) affecting either the aircraft or ground

control station

f. Deviations from ATC instructions and/or Letters of Agreement/Procedures

g. Operational/coordination issues

h. The number and duration of lost link events (control, vehicle performance and health monitoring, or communications) per aircraft per flight.

I. Incident/Accident/Mishap Reporting.

Immediately after an incident or accident, and before additional flight under this COA, the proponent must provide initial notification of the following to the FAA via the UAS COA

On

- Line forms (Incident/Accident).

1. All accidents/mishaps involving UAS operations where any of the following occurs:

a. Fatal injury, where the operation of a UAS results in a death occurring w ithin 30 days of the accident/mishap

b. Serious injury, where the operation of a UAS results in a hospitalization of more than 48 hours, the fracture of any bone (except for simple fractures of fingers, toes, or nose), severe hemorrhage or tissue damage, inte rnal injuries, or second or third

degree burns

c. Total unmanned aircraft loss

d. Substantial damage to the unmanned aircraft system where there is damage to the airframe, power plant, or onboard systems that must be repaired prior to further flight

e. Damage to pr operty, other than the unmanned aircraft.

2. Any incident/mishap that results in an unsafe/abnormal operation including but not

limited to

a. A malfunction or failure of the unmanned aircraft’s on

- board flight control system (including navigation)

b. A malfunction or failure of ground control station flight control hardware or software (other than loss of control link)

c. A power plant failure or malfunctionFAA FORM 7711

- 1 UAS COA Attachment

2014

- E SA

- 116

Ver si on 2.1 : June 20 12 Page 13 of 21

d. An in

- flight fire

e. An aircraft collision

f. Any in

- flight failure of the unmanned aircraft’s electrical system requi ring use of alternate or emergency power to complete the flight

g. A deviation from any provision contained in the COA

h. A deviation from an ATC clearance and/or Letter(s) of Agreement/Procedures

i. A lost control link event resulting in

(1) Fly

- away, or

(2) Execution o f a pre

- planned/unplanned lost link procedure.

3. Initial reports must contain the information identified in the COA On

- Line Accident/Incident Report.

4. Follow

- on reports describing the accident/incident/mishap(s) must be submitted by providing copies of propon ent aviation accident/incident reports upon completion of safety investigations. Such reports must be limited to factual information only where privileged safety or law enforcement information is included in the final report.

5. Public

- use agencies other than those which are part of the Department of Defense are advised that the above procedures are not a substitute for separate accident/incident reporting required by the National Transportation Safety Board under 49 CFR Part 830 §830.5.

6. This COA is issued wit h the provision that the FAA be permitted involvement in the proponent’s incident/accident/mishap investigation as prescribed by FAA Order 8020.11, Aircraft Accident and Incident Notification, Investigation, and Reporting.



### FLIGHT STANDARDS SPECIAL PROVIS IONS

A. Contingency Planning

1. Point Identification . The proponent must submit contingency plans that address emergency recovery or flight termination of the unmanned aircraft (UA) in the event of unrecoverable system failure. These procedures will normally in clude Lost Link Points (LLP), Divert/Contingency Points (DCP) and Flight Termination Points (FTP) for each operation. LLPs and DCPs must be submitted in latitude/longitude (Lat/Long) format along with a graphic representation plotted on an aviation section al chart (or similar format). FTPs or other accepted contingency planning measures must also be submitted in latitude/longitude (Lat/Long) format along with a graphic representation plotted on an aviation sectional chart, or other graphic representation ac ceptable to the FAA. The FAA accepts the LLPs, DCPs, FTPs, and other contingency planning measures, submitted by the proponent but does not approve them. When conditions preclude the use of FTPs, the proponent must submit other contingency planning options for consideration and approval. At least one LLP, DCP, and FTP (or an acceptable alternative contingency planning measure) is required for each operation. The proponent must furnish this data with the initial COA application. Any subsequent changes or mod ifications to this dataFAA FORM 7711

- 1 UAS COA Attachment

2014

- E SA

- 116

Ver si on 2.1 : June 20 12 Page 14 of 21

must be provided to AJV

- 13 for review and consideration no later than 30 days prior to proposed flight operations.

2. Risk Mitigation Plans . For all operations, the proponent must develop detailed plans to mitigate the risk of collisio n with other aircraft and the risk posed to persons and property on the ground in the event the UAS encounters a lost link, needs to divert, or the flight needs to be terminated. The proponent must take into consideration all airspace

constructs and minimi ze risk to other aircraft by avoiding published airways, military training routes, NAVAIDs, and congested areas. In the event of a contingency divert or flight termination, the use of a chase aircraft is preferred when the UAS is operated

outside of Restri cted or Warning Areas. If time permits, the proponent should make every attempt to utilize a chase aircraft to monitor the aircraft to a DCP or to the FTP. In the event of a contingency divert or flight termination, the proponent will operate in Class A

ai rspace and Special Use airspace to the maximum extent possible to reduce the risk of

collision with non

- participating air traffic.

a. LLP Procedures

. (1) LLPs are defined as a point, or sequence of points where the aircraft will proceed and hold at a specified al titude, for a specified period of time, in the event the command and control link to the aircraft is lost. The aircraft will autonomously hold, or loiter, at the LLP until the communication link with the aircraft is restored or the specified time elapses. If the time period elapses, the aircraft may autoland, proceed to another LLP in an attempt to regain the communication link, or proceed to an FTP for flight termination. LLPs may be used as FTPs. In this case, the aircraft may loiter at the LLP/FTP until link is re

- established or fuel

exhaustion occurs.

(2) For areas where multiple or concurrent UAS operations are authorized in the same operational area, a segregation plan must be in place in the event of a simultaneous lost link scenario. The segregation plan may include altitude offsets and horizontal separation by using independent LLPs whenever possible.

b. DCP Procedures

. (1) A DCP is defined as an alternate landing/recovery site to be used in the event of an abnormal condition that requires a precautionary land ing. Each DCP must incorporate the means of communication with ATC throughout the descent and landing (unless otherwise specified in the Special Provisions) as well as a plan for ground operations and securing/parking the aircraft on the ground. This inclu des the availability of ground control stations capable of launch/recovery, communication equipment, and an adequate power source to operate all required equipment.

(2) For local operations, the DCP specified will normally be the airport/facility used

for laun ch and recovery; however, the proponent may specify additional DCPs as

alternates.

(3) For transit and/or mission operations that are being conducted in Class A airspace

or Class E airspace above flight level (FL)

- 600, DCPs will be identified during the flight to be no further than one hour of flight time at any given time, takingFAA FORM 7711

- 1 UAS COA Attachment

2014

- E SA

- 116

Ver si on 2.1 : June 20 12 Page 15 of 21

into consideration altitude, winds, fuel consumption, and other factors. If it is not possible to define DCPs along the entire flight plan route, the proponent must identify qualified FTPs along the entire route and be prepared to execute flight termination at one of the specified FTPs if a return to base (RTB) is not possible.

(4) It is preferred that specified DCPs are non

- joint use military airfields, other
government

- owned airfields, o r private

- use airfields. However, the proponent may designate any suitable airfield for review and consideration.

c. Flight Termination Procedures

. (1) Flight termination is the intentional and deliberate process of performing controlled flight into terrain (CFIT ). Flight termination must be executed in the event that all contingencies have been exhausted and further flight of the aircraft cannot be safely achieved or other potential hazards exist that require immediate discontinuation of flight. FTPs or alternati ve contingency planning measures must be located within power off glide distance of the aircraft during all phases of flight and must be submitted for review and acceptance. The proponent must ensure sufficient FTPs or other contingency plan measures are d efined to accommodate flight termination at any given point along the route of flight. The location of these points is based on the assumption of an unrecoverable system failure and must take into consideration altitude, winds, and other factors.

(2) Unless ot herwise authorized, FTPs must be located in sparsely populated areas. Except for on

- or near

- airport operations, FTPs will be located no closer than five nautical miles from any airport, heliport, airfield, NAVAID, airway, populated area, major roadway, oi l rig, power plant, or any other infrastructure. For offshore locations, the proponent must refer to appropriate United States Coast Guard (USCG) charts and other publications to avoid maritime obstructions, shipping lanes, and other hazards. Populated are as are defined as those areas depicted in yellow on a VFR sectional chart or as determined from other sources.

(a) It is preferred that flight termination occurs in Restricted or Warning Areas,
government

- owned land, or offshore locations that are restricted f rom routine civil use. However, the proponent may designate any suitable location for

review and consideration.

(b) The proponent is required to survey all designated areas prior to their use as an FTP. All FTPs will be reviewed for suitability on a routine an d periodic basis, not to exceed six months. The proponent assumes full risk and all liability associated with the selection and use of any designated FTP.

(c) It is desirable that the proponent receive prior permission from the land owner or using agency prior to the use of this area as an FTP. The proponent should clearly communicate the purpose and intent of the FTP.

(d) For each FTP, plans must incorporate the means of communication with ATC throughout the descent as well as a plan for retrieval/recovery of the aircraft.

(e) Contingency planning must take into consideration all airspace constructs and minimize risk to other aircraft by avoiding published airways, militaryFAA FORM 7711

- 1 UAS COA Attachment

2014

- E SA

- 116

Ver si on 2.1 : June 20 12 Page 16 of 21

training routes, NAVAIDs, and congested areas to the maximum extent possible.

(f) In the event of a contingency divert or flight termination, if time permits, the use of a chase aircraft is preferred when the UA is operated outside of Restricted or Warning Areas.

(g) In the event of a contingency divert or flight termination or other approved contingency mea sures, the proponent will operate in Class A airspace and Special Use airspace to the maximum extent possible to reduce the risk of

collision with non

- participating air traffic.

B. Night Operation Limitations

. Night operations are not authorized. UAS night operations are those operations that occur between the end of evening civil twilight and the beginning of morning civil twilight, as published in the American Air Almanac, converted to local time. (Note: this is equal to approximately 30 minutes after suns et until 30 minutes before sunrise).

C. Flight Standards has determined that the Microdrones MD4

- 1000 is not a helicopter and does not possess the ability to mane uver following a power unit fai lure; therefore the pilot

- in

command must comply with the require ments in 14 CFR sections 91.119 (a), (b) and (c).

D. It is noted th at the proponent has several CO As operating from the Musgrave Research Farm. It is incumbent upon the proponent to ensure only one UAS is airborne at any one time.



### AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL SPECIAL PROVISIONS

A. Coordination Requirements.

1. Submission of proposed flight schedules to ATC is not required.

2. Notify Elmira Approach at 607

- 739

- 1971 fifteen (15) minutes prior to UA flight operations and immediately after flights are completed for each time block or day.

3. The Match Mate Airport is a private airport in close proximity of this UAS operational area. Prior to the commencement of operations under this authorization, the proponent must contact the manager of the airport and notify him of the proposed UA S operation. An agreement should be reached on what the airport will require for coordination, if any, prior to and/or post UAS operations. This notification may be accomplished via phone calls, e

- mails, or another preferred method. Contact information for the airport owner: Mr. Ronald Buxenbaum at 2663 Dog Corners Road, Aurora, NY 13026. Phone 315

- 364

- 7635.

B. Communication Requirements.

1. Two

- way communication with ATC is not required.

2. The PIC will monitor Elmira Approach frequency VHF 124.3 for situatio nal awareness.

C. Flight Planning Requirements.

Flight plans are not required as this is a VFR operation.

D. Lost Link & Emergency/Contingency Procedures.FAA FORM 7711

- 1 UAS COA Attachment

2014

- E SA

- 116

Ver si on 2.1 : June 20 12 Page 17 of 21

1. Lost Link Procedures:

a. ATC does not need to be notified in the event of a lost link.

b. The following explains the procedures that the UA will follow should a lost link

occur.

(1) The MD4

- 1000 will enter GPS Position Hold immediately and try to reacquire the command and control (C2) signal for a specified time (set at 30 seconds).

(2) If the time runs out and the MD4

- 1000 has not reacquired the signal the UA will enter into emergency landing or homing mode (depending on the operators setting).

(3) Emergency landing will land the MD4

- 1000 in location at a decent speed of 1.0 mph.

(4) Homing mode: climb to a predefined altitude and then return to the takeoff location in a straight line. If the C2 signal was not recovered, the UA will enter emergency landing at the takeoff location.

(5) If at any time during the procedure the C2 link is reacquired, the operator will

take full control.

c. In the event of a “fly

- away,” the UAS pilot will immediately notify Elmira Approach

on landline 607

- 739

- 1971. Additionally, if the UA departs in a westerly direction toward Rochester Approach Control (ROC) airspace (see Atch 2), contact Approach

on landline 585

- 463

- 3822. If the UA departs in a northeasterly direction toward Syracuse Approach (SYR) airspace (see Atch 2), contact Approach on VHF 126.12 (backup on landline 315

- 455

- 3840). The PIC will advise ATC of the situation and provide information:

a. UA alti tude

b. UA last known location

c. Direction of flight/heading

d. Fuel on board/Battery Time

e. Pilots intentions

f. Termination of flight/emergency condition

2. If lost link occurs within a restricted or warning area, or the lost link procedure above

takes the UA into the r estricted or warning area

– the aircraft will not exit the restricted or warning areas until the link is re

- established.

3. The unmanned aircraft lost link mission will not transit or orbit over populated areas.

a. Lost link programmed procedures will avoid unex pected turn

- around and/or altitude changes and will provide sufficient time to communicate and coordinate with ATC.

b. Lost link orbit points shall not coincide with the centerline of Victor airways.

4. Lost Communications:FAA FORM 7711

- 1 UAS COA Attachment

2014

- E SA

- 116

Ver si on 2.1 : June 20 12 Page 18 of 21

In the event of loss of communication between the PIC, visual observer, and/or ATC (if required), the procedures will be as follows:

a. Change to back

- up frequency on VHF Radio.

b. Call using cellular phone.

c. If communication is not possible, the PIC will commence mission termination and

recover the UA. There will be no further flights until communications are restored.

AUTHORIZATION This Certificate of Waiver or Authorization does not, in itself, waive any Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations, nor any state law or local ordinance. Should the propose d operation conflict with any state law or local ordinance, or require permission of local authorities or property owners, it is the responsibility of the Griffiss International Airport to resolve the matter. This COA does not authorize flight within Spec ial Use airspace without approval from the using agency. The Griffiss International Airport is hereby authorized to operate the Microdrones

MD4

- 1000 Unmanned Aircraft System in the operations area depicted in the Activity section of

this attachment.FAA FORM 7711

- 1 UAS COA Attachment

2014

- E SA

- 116

Ver si on 2.1 : June 20 12 Page 19 of 21

Attac hment 1: Page 1 of 2FAA FORM 7711

- 1 UAS COA Attachment

2014

- E SA

- 116

Ver si on 2.1 : June 20 12 Page 20 of 21

Attachment 1: Page 2 of 2 Operations AreaFAA FORM 7711

- 1 UAS COA Attachment

2014

- E SA

- 116

Ver si on 2.1 : June 20 12 Page 21 of 21

Attachment 2
Sector Boundaries

– ELM, ROC, and SYR

# Attachment 6

# Attachment 7