1

Petition for Exemption 14 CFR § 11.81

U.S. Department of Transportation August 21, 2015

Docket Management System

1200 New Jersey Ave S.E. 

Washington, D.C. 20590

Re: Request for Exemption under Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform

Act of 2012 and Part 11 of the Federal Aviation Regulations from Certain Provisions of

14 C.F.R. 

Dear Sir or Madam:

Pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (the Reform

Act) and 14 C.F.R. Part 11, Firefly Aerial Photography Services LLC files this petition for 

exemption, an operator of Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems (“sUAs”) used for real estate 

photography, remote sensing to support (i) precision farming and other agriculture applications; 

(ii) asset management for utilities, government agencies, and private firms; (iii) construction and 

land management; (iv) disaster response and search and rescue; and (v) conducting research 

flights to collect data and establish and refine forensic processes, procedures, and tools for 

investigation of accidents and crimes involving UAs, real estate photography; and (vii) aerial 

cinematography photography for the motion picture/television industry and sports photography1

Specifically, petitioner seeks an exemption from the Federal Aviation Regulations (“FARs”) 

listed in Appendices A and B to allow commercial operation of its UAs, so long as such 

operations are conducted within and under the conditions outlined herein or as may be 

established by the FAA in a grant of this petition. This request is substantially similar to other 

data collection petitions previously approved, and should be considered under the expedited 

summary grant procedure. Additionally, this petition should be eligible for the summary grant 

because of the voluntary altitude restriction to 200 feet above ground level (AGL). 

Approval of the exemption for petitioner will allow commercial operation of the sUASs in Class 

G airspace nationwide, or as otherwise prescribed by an Air Traffic Organization (ATO) issued 

COA. The UA operations contemplated by this petition are in the public interest because they 

clearly satisfy the "Four D's" of exemplary uses of UAs: to replace work that is Dangerous, 

Difficult, Dull, or Dirty, and at the same time provide an equivalent or greater level of safety 

than alternative manned aircraft operations. The UA covered by this petition will weigh no more 

than 55lbs. (24 kg.), inclusive of battery and payload. Operation of the UAs under the strict 

conditions proposed below will provide an equivalent level of safety, as Congress intended, 

while still allowing commercial operations. Operations using these UAs are far safer than 

conventional operations conducted with helicopters and fixed-wing aircraft that weigh thousands 

of pounds, carry highly flammable fuel, and operate in close proximity to the ground, trees, 

infrastructure, and people. 

 

1

conditions proposed by the applicant are drawn from Order 8900.1 CHG 0, Volume 3, 

Chapter 8-Issue a Certificate of Waiver for Motion Picture and Television Filming.
2

Congress directed the FAA to consider seven factors in deciding whether to approve 

Section 333 exemption petitions - size, weight, speed, operational capability, proximity to

airports, proximity to populated areas, and operation within visual line of sight. In this case,

each factor supports the exemption request. In particular, the UA is small, and will operate at 

slow speeds and close to the ground. It will be able to more safely and efficiently conduct 

operations. The substantial increase in safety and decrease of risk to human life and to property

weighs heavily in favor of granting the exemption.

For your ease in reviewing this petition, please refer to the table of contents which begins on 

page 3. If I can provide any additional information to assist your understanding or review of this 

document, please do not hesitate to contact me at 920-946-1832 or via email at 

drotte63@gmail.com.

Daniel R. Otte

Owner/PIC

Firefly Aerial Photography Services LLC [FFAPS]

W3303 State Road 28

Sheboygan Falls WI 53085

Tel: 920-946-1832
3

I. Published Summary...........................................................................................5

II. Petitioner’s Contact Information .....................................................................5

III. Proposed Operations .........................................................................................6

a. The UAs.........................................................................................................6

b. The Crew.......................................................................................................7

c. Flight Conditions..........................................................................................7

d. Flight Operations.........................................................................................8

IV. Aircraft and equivalent level of safety .............................................................8

V. Proposed conditions and exemptions...............................................................9

VI. Privacy ................................................................................................................12

VII. Public interest and safety ..................................................................................13

VIII. Regulations from which exemption is requested.............................................19

a. Appendix A: FAR’s as to which Firefly Aerial Photography Services wishes 

the same determination to be made as has

been made previously .................................................................................19

b. FFAFS argument for exemption from 14 C.F.R. 61.113: 

Private pilot privileges and limitations: Pilot in Command ....................24

1.The FAA and foreign regulators recognize that 

obtaining a manned aircraft pilot license is unnecessary for safe operation of a UA..............................................24

2.The FAA has and has already exercised the authority

to exempt petitioners from the airman certificate

requirement ......................................................................................27

Exhibit 1 – Training and operations Manual Doc# QS-01.........................................29
4

I. Publishable Summary

Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. § 11, the following summary is provided for publication in the

Federal Register, should it be determined that publication is needed:

Petitioner seeks an exemption from the following rules: 

14 C.F.R 21(h); 14 C.F.R. 43.7; 14 C.F.R. 43.11; 14 C.F.R. 45.11; 14 C.F.R. 45.27; 14 C.F.R. 

45.29; 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(b)(2); 14 

C.F.R. 91.105; 14 C.F.R. 91.109; 14 C.F.R. 91.113(b); 14 C.F.R. 91.119 (c); 14 C.F.R. 91.121; 

14 C.F.R. 91.151(a); 14 C.F.R. 91.203(a) and (b); 14 C.F.R. 215; 14 C.F.R. 91.403; 14 C.F.R. 

91.405(a); 14 C.F.R. 91.407(a)(1); 14 C.F.R. 409(a)(1) and (2); and 14 C.F.R. 91.417(a) and (b) 

to operate commercially a small unmanned aircraft system (UA) (6 lbs. or less).

Approval of the exemption requested by petitioner will allow commercial operation of sUAS for

real estate photography, remote sensing to support (i) precision farming and other agriculture 

applications; (ii) asset management for utilities, government agencies, and private firms; (iii) 

construction and land management; (iv) disaster response and search and rescue; as well as (v) 

conducting research flights to collect data and establish and refine forensic processes, 

procedures, and tools for investigation of accidents and crimes involving UAs,(vi) real estate 

photography; and (vii) aerial cinematography photography for the motion picture/television 

industry and sports photography in Class G airspace or as otherwise prescribed in an ATO 

issued COA nationwide. The requested exemption should be granted because operation of small 

UAs, weighing no more than 55lbs. (24 kg.), inclusive of battery and payload, conducted in the 

strict conditions outlined below, will provide an equivalent level of safety, while still allowing 

commercial operations. The lightweight aircraft covered by the exemption are far safer than 

conventional operations conducted with helicopters and fixed-wing aircraft weighing thousands 

of pounds and carrying highly flammable fuel, and operating in close proximity to the ground 

and people. The seven factors Congress directed the FAA to consider when approving Section 

333 exemption petitions - size, weight, speed, operational capability, proximity to airports, 

proximity to populated areas, and operation within visual line of sight – each support the request. 

In particular, the aircraft are small, and will operate at slow speeds, and close to the ground in 

order to more safely and efficiently conduct operations that would otherwise involve a risk of 

death to the inspectors. The substantial increase of safety and decrease of risk to human life,

coupled with the low risk use of UAs to conduct these operations, weigh heavily in favor of 

granting the exemption. 

II. Petitioner’s Contact Information 

Daniel R. Otte

Owner

Firefly Aerial Photography Services LLC

[FFAPS]

W3303 State Road 28

Sheboygan Falls, WI 53085
5

III. Proposed Operations

A. The UAs

The requested exemption will permit petitioner to operate UAVs which weigh no more than 55 

lbs. (24 kg) and will be operated as otherwise prescribed in an Air Traffic Organization 

(“ATO”) issued COA and all other FAA requirements. 

B. The Crew

The crew will consist of a pilot in command. (PIC) A visual observer (VO) may be used in 

applicable circumstances, but not required for each flight. The PIC and VO will have, at 

minimum, have a valid U.S. driver’s license. 

The PIC and VO will have been trained in operation of UAs generally and received up to-date 

information on the UAs to be operated pursuant to this grant.

The PIC will have completed, at a minimum, 25 hours of UA flight training with the specific 

UAs prior to operations, and will be required to participate in annual training thereafter.

The PIC will have completed the training programs provided by the manufacturer, as described 

in Exhibit 1, Firefly Aerial Photography Services [FFAPS] training syllabus and all requirements 

set forth by the FAA.

The VO will have completed the training set forth by the manufactures of the UAV’s being 

operated, as defined in in Exhibit 1 and as defined by the FAA.

The specific conditions of the proposed exemption that relate to the training and characteristics 

of the crew are numbers 3 and 6-9 in Section V below. Each has been adopted or imposed by the 

FAA in numerous previous grants of Section 333 exemption petitions.

C. Flight Conditions

The UAs will be used for remote sensing to support (i) precision farming and other agriculture 

applications; (ii) asset management for utilities, government agencies, and private firms; (iii) 

construction and land management; (iv) disaster response and search and rescue; and (v) 

conducting research flights to collect data and establish and refine forensic processes,

procedures, and tools for investigation of accidents and crimes involving UAs; real estate 

photography; and (vii) aerial cinematography photography for the motion picture/television 

industry and sports photography. All flights will be in Class G airspace or as otherwise 

prescribed in an ATO issued COA under 400 feet above ground level (“AGL”) and under 

controlled conditions. Petitioner will work with the local FSDO when planning operations. 

Petitioner will only operate its UAs in visual meteorological conditions (VMC). The UA will at 

all times be no less than 500 feet below and no less than 2,000 feet horizontally from a cloud, 

and petitioner will not conduct operations unless visibility is at least 3 statute miles from the PIC. 
6

The flight crew will always make a safety assessment of the risk of every operation, and will 

only operate when it is determined that no hazards are present. 

The following common sense rules will be followed:

(1) Before your first flight, please allow yourself some flight training (Using a flight simulator to 

practice flying, getting instruction from an experienced person, etc.). 

(2) DO NOT fly in bad weather, such as rain or wind (more than moderate breeze) or fog. 

(3) The flying field should be open and void of tall buildings or other obstacles; the steel 

structure within buildings may interfere with the compass. 

(4) Keep the aircraft away from obstacles, crowds, power lines, trees, lakes and rivers etc. 

(5) Try to avoid interference between the remote controller and other wireless equipment (No 

base stations or cell towers around). 

(6) The flight control system will not work properly at the South Pole or North Pole. 

(7) Never use the aircraft in a manner that infringes upon or contravenes international or 

domestic laws and regulations.

The specific conditions of the proposed exemption that relate to the flight conditions in which 

the UA will be operated are numbers 2, 4, 16, and 28-29 in Section V below. Each has been 

adopted or imposed by the FAA in numerous previous grants of Section 333 exemption petitions.

D. Flight Operations

The purpose of every UA flight will be to safely, accurately, and efficiently support: (i) precision 

farming and other agriculture applications; (ii) asset management for utilities, government 

agencies, and private firms; (iii) construction and land management; (iv) disaster response and 

search and rescue; as well as (v) research flights to develop processes, procedures, and tools for 

accident and crime investigations of UA’s; (vi) real estate photography; and (vii) aerial 

cinematography photography for the motion picture/television industry and sports photography.

The standard operational procedures that they will follow are set out in the operating documents, 

specifically Exhibit 1. Please refer to the following sections of Exhibit 1 for information 

pertaining to operations: 

V: Operational Control

VI: Operating Procedures

Appendix A: Risk Management

Petitioner will keep records of operations as indicated in Exhibit 2.

The specific conditions of the proposed exemption that relate to flight operations are numbers 

11-12, 17-25, and 32-35 in Section V below. Each has been accepted or imposed by the

FAA in numerous previous grants of Section 333 exemption petitions. 

IV. Aircraft and Equivalent Level of Safety
7

Petitioner proposes that the exemption apply to UAs that have the characteristics and that operate 

with the limitations proposed herein. These limitations provide for a level of safety at least an 

equivalent to or higher than manned aircraft operations under the current regulatory structure. 

Section V below identifies the limitations and conditions to which petitioner agrees to be bound 

when conducting commercial operations under a grant of this petition. Appendix A contains 

matrix connecting (i) the specific proposed condition with (ii) the FAR provision for which it 

provides equivalent level of safety and (iii) one or more recent Section 333 exemption grants in 

which the FAA recognized this equivalent level of safety. 

Approval of the commercial operations outlined in this petition presents no national security 

issue. 

. 

V. Proposed Conditions of the Exemption 

1. The UAs will weigh no more than 55 lbs. (24 kg.), inclusive of battery and payload. 

2. UA operations under this exemption will be limited to conducting operations for the purpose 

of providing (i) precision farming and other agriculture applications; (ii) asset management for 

utilities, government agencies, and private firms; (iii) construction and land management; (iv) 

disaster response and search and rescue; and (v) conducting research flights to collect data and 

establish and refine forensic processes, procedures, and tools for investigation of accidents and 

crimes involving UAs in Class G airspace nationwide; (vi) real estate photography; and/or (vii) 

Cinematography for movies and sports, unless otherwise prescribed in an ATO-issued COA.

3. Flights will be operated within line of sight. 

4. Flights will be operated at an altitude of no more than 400 feet AGL, as indicated by the

procedures specified in the operating documents. All altitudes reported to ATC must be in feet 

AGL.

5. The UA will not be flown at an indicated airspeed exceeding 87 knots (100 mph).

6. Minimum flight crew for each operation will consist of the UA pilot in command (PIC) and

may include a visual observer (VO) where the pre assessment has deemed it preferable. 

7. The PIC will have, at minimum U.S. driver’s license.

8. The petitioner will not permit any PIC to operate unless the PIC meets its qualification criteria 

and demonstrates the ability to safely operate the UA in a manner consistent with how the UA 

will be operated under this exemption, including evasive and emergency maneuvers and 

maintaining appropriate distances from persons, vessels, vehicles and structures. PIC 

qualification flight hours and currency will be logged in a manner consistent with 14 CFR § 

61.51(b). A record of the PIC training will be documented and made available upon request by 

the Administrator. Training operations will only be conducted during dedicated training sessions. 

During training, proficiency, and experience-building flights, all persons not essential for flight 
8

operations will be considered nonparticipants, and the PIC will operate the UA with appropriate 

distance from nonparticipants in accordance with 14 CFR § 91.119. 

9. The VO will not perform any other duties beyond assisting the PIC with seeing and avoiding

other air traffic and other ground based obstacles/obstructions, and will not be permitted to

operate the camera or other instruments.

10. The PIC will be designated before the flight and will not be allowed to transfer his or her

designation for the duration of the flight. The PIC will ensure that the VO can perform the

functions prescribed in these conditions and the operating documents. 

11. A briefing will be conducted in regard to the planned UA operations prior to each day’s

activities. It will be mandatory that all personnel who will be performing duties in connection

with the operations be present for this briefing. 

12. Prior to each flight, the PIC will inspect the UA, including the Ground Control Station, to

ensure it is in a condition for safe flight. If the inspection reveals a condition that affects the safe 

operation of the UA, the PIC will not operate the UA until the necessary maintenance has been 

performed and the UA is found to be in a condition for safe flight. All maintenance and 

alterations will be properly documented in the aircraft records.

13. Petitioner will conduct a functional flight test on any UA that has undergone maintenance or

alterations that affect the UA operation or flight characteristics, e.g. replacement of a flight

critical component. The PIC who conducts the functional test flight will make an entry in the

aircraft records. 

14. The petitioner will carry out its maintenance, inspections, and record keeping requirements, 

in accordance with the UA manufacturer’s aircraft/component, maintenance, overhaul,

replacement, inspection, and life limit requirements set forth in the operating documents.

Maintenance, inspection, alterations, and status of replacement/overhaul component parts will be 

noted in the aircraft records, including total time in service, description of work accomplished, 

and the signature of the authorized person returning the UA to service. The authorized person 

will make an entry in the aircraft record of the corrective action taken against discrepancies 

discovered between inspections. 

15. The UA will be operated within visual line of sight (VLOS) of the PIC or VO at all times. 

This requires the PIC to be able to use human vision unaided by any device other than corrective 

lenses. PIC and VO will at all times be able to communicate verbally. They will not be permitted 

to use electronic messaging or texting to communicate during flight operations. 

16. The PIC will not begin a flight unless (considering wind and forecast weather conditions)

there is enough power to fly at normal cruising speed to the intended landing point and prepare 

to land each UA with 20% battery life remaining. 

17. Actual total flight time for each operational flight will result in no less than a 20% battery

reserve.
9

18. The UA will have the capability to abort a flight in case of unexpected obstacles or

emergencies. 

19. The UA will be programmed so that if it loses communications or loses its GPS signal, it will

return to a pre-determined location within the planned operating area and land or be recovered in 

accordance with the operating documents 

20. If the UA and its radio control link disconnect during flight, the system’s failsafe protection 

will be triggered and the multirotor will return to home and land automatically, rather than flying 

off uncontrollably or landing at an unknown location. 

21. The operating documents required under 14 CFR §§ 91.9 and 91.203 will be maintained and 

available to the PIC at the Ground Control Station of the UA any time the UA is operating.

These documents will be made available to the Administrator or any law enforcement official

upon request. If a discrepancy exists between the conditions and limitations in the exemption

grant and the procedures outlined in the operating documents, the grant conditions and

limitations will take precedence and will be followed. Otherwise, the petitioner will follow the 

procedures outlined in its operating documents. If it updates or revises it’s operating documents, 

it will present updated and revised documents to the Administrator upon request. If the petitioner 

determines that any update or revision would affect the basis upon which the FAA granted the 

exemption, then the Petitioner will petition for an amendment to the grant of exemption. 

22. Petitioner will obtain written and/or oral permission from the landowners/authorized agents 

of the landowners over which flights will be conducted.

23. Petitioner will obtain all required permissions and permits from territorial, state, county or

city jurisdictions, including local law enforcement, fire, or other appropriate governmental

agencies. 

24. UA operations will not be conducted during night, as defined in 14 CFR § 1.1. All operations 

will be conducted under visual meteorological conditions (VMC). Flights will not be conducted 

under special visual flight rules (SVFR). 

25. The petitioner will obtain an Air Traffic Organization (ATO) issued Certificate of Waiver or 

Authorization (COA) prior to conducting any operations under the grant of exemption. All 

operations will be conducted in accordance with airspace requirements in the ATO issued COA, 

including class of airspace, altitude level and potential transponder requirements. 

26. The UA will not be operated within 5 nautical miles of an airport reference point as denoted

on a current FAA-published aeronautical chart unless a letter of agreement with that airport’s

management has been obtained. . Any letter of agreement with the airport management will be 

made available to the Administrator upon request. 

27. The UA will not be operated less than 500 feet below, or less than 2,000 feet horizontally

from, a cloud or when visibility is less than 3 statute miles from the PIC. 
10

28. All operations shall be conducted in Class G airspace or as otherwise prescribed in an ATO

issued COA. 

29. All aircraft operated in accordance with this exemption will be identified by serial number, 

registered in accordance with 14 CFR part 47, and have identification (N-Number) markings in 

accordance with 14 CFR part 45, Subpart C. Markings will be as large as practicable. 

30. Before conducting operations, petitioner will ensure that the radio frequency spectrum used

for operation and control of the UA complies with the Federal Communications Commission

(FCC) or other appropriate government oversight agency requirements. 

31. The UA will remain clear and yield the right of way to all manned aviation operations and 

activities at all times. 

32. The UA will not be operated by the PIC from any moving device or vehicle. 

33. Petitioner will conduct all flight operations at least 500 feet from all nonparticipating

persons, vessels, vehicles, and structures unless one of the following three conditions is met: 

a. Barriers or structures are present that sufficiently protect nonparticipating persons from the 

UA and/or debris in the event of an accident. The petitioner will ensure that nonparticipating 

persons remain under such protection. If a situation arises where nonparticipating persons leave 

such protection and are within 500 feet of the UA, the PIC will ensure that flight operations 

cease immediately. 

b. The aircraft is operated near vessels, vehicles or structures where the owner/controller of such 

vessels, vehicles or structures has granted permission and the PIC has made a safety assessment 

of the risk of operating closer to those objects and determined that it does not present an undue 

hazard. 

c. Operations nearer to the PIC, VO, operator trainees or essential persons do not present an 

undue hazard to those persons per § 91.119(a).

34. Petitioner will report any incident, accident, or flight operation that transgresses the lateral or

vertical boundaries of the operational area as defined by the applicable COA to the FAA's

UAS Integration Office (AFS-80) within 24 hours. Petitioner will report accidents to the

National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) per instructions contained on the NTSB Website: 

www.ntsb.gov.

VI. Privacy

Firefly Aerial Photography Services [FFAPS] will follow the Association of Unmanned Vehicles 

Systems International’s Code of Conduct, available at http://www.auvsi.org/conduct. When 
11

conducting search and rescue operations, the images received will be turned over to the incident 

commander (the individual in charge of the disaster or search) and the GIS staff on hand, who 

are almost always law enforcement personnel. This is a similar privacy protocol to when taking 

pictures on the ground for disaster response and search and rescue operations. 

VII. Public Interest and Safety

The planned UA use will increase ground safety for (i) precision farming and other agriculture 

applications; (ii) asset management for utilities, government agencies, and private firms; (iii) 

construction and land management; (iv) disaster response and search and rescue; and (v) 

conducting research flights to collect data and establish and refine forensic processes,

procedures, and tools for investigation of accidents and crimes involving UAs; (vi) real estate 

photography; and (vii) aerial cinematography photography for the motion picture/television 

industry and sports photography. The enhanced safety and reduced environmental impact 

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, carrying 

crew in addition to flammable fuel, gives the FAA good cause to find that the UA operation 

enabled by this exemption is in the public interest. 

Satisfaction of the criteria provided in Section 333 of the Reform Act of 2012 – size, weight, 

speed, operating capabilities, proximity to airports and populated areas and operation within 

visual line of sight and national security – provide more than adequate justification for the grant 

of the requested exemption allowing commercial operation of petitioner’s UAs, pursuant to

FFAPS’s rules of operation. 

A. Precision Farming and Agriculture Applications 

The planned UA use will increase ground safety in the precision agriculture industry. The 

enhanced safety and reduced environmental impact 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, carrying crew in addition to flammable fuel, gives the FAA

good cause to find that the UA operation enabled by this exemption is in the public interest. 

Satisfaction of the criteria provided in Section 333 of the Reform Act of 2012 – size, weight, 

speed, operating capabilities, proximity to airports and populated areas and operation within 

visual line of sight and national security – provide more than adequate justification for the grant 

of the requested exemption allowing commercial operation of petitioner’s UA for precision

agriculture operations, pursuant to petitioner’s rules of operation. 

Use of UA technology to assist in precision agriculture is a benefit not only to farmers, but to the 

public as a whole, and to the environment. Farmers will have greater analytical tools at their 

disposal for managing crops, leading to decreased use of resources. This will result in both

reduction of cost and increase in quality – benefits that will be passed on to the public.

Additionally, using less water and chemicals during commercial farming operations will reduce

the impact that the operation has on the environment. 
12

As Jeff Vanderwerff testified on behalf of the American Farm Bureau Federation before 

members of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, & Transportation on March 24, 2015:

[The benefit of UA comes from] their ability to provide detailed scouting information on weed 

emergence, insect infestations and potential nutrient shortages. This valuable information allows 

the farmer to catch these threats before they develop into significant and catastrophic problems. 

By addressing threats quickly, the farmer has a greater likelihood of being able to respond

appropriately so as to optimize yields.

The imagery from UAS also allows the farmer to spot-treat sections of the fields as opposed to 

watering or spraying the entire field. The quicker a farmer can discover a potential threat, the 

quicker the farmer can address the issue. Images from UAS allow the farmer to identify the 

specific location where a specific treatment – be it fertilizer, water, pesticides, or herbicides is 

necessary; in doing so, the farmer can eliminate the need to use these applications more broadly

across the entire field. By spot-treating threats to the crop, the farmer not only lowers the cost 

of treatment but also has the potential of lowering the environmental impact by minimizing 

application.”(Emphasis added)2

The FAA has previously determined that commercial UA use for the precision farming industry

is within the public interest. It has approved the E384 for precision farming and agriculture 

applications in Exemption No. 11166. 

Additionally, the FAA has previously approved a variety of other UAs for commercial precision 

farming and agriculture applications in Exemption Nos.:

11110 (precision aerial surveys);

11136 (photogrammetry and crop scouting in order to perform precision agriculture); 

11167 (high-resolution aerial imagery in support of biomass analysis and estimation, yield 

monitoring, leaf area indexing and reporting of geographical data and overall crop health to a 

domestic agricultural seed company);

11170 (precision agriculture operations); 

11177 (commercial precision agriculture surveys);

11192 (aerial photography and 3D mapping for the agriculture industry);

11193 (precision photogrammetry and crop scouting for precision agriculture);

11195 (aerial photography for agriculture);

11222 (collect high quality, actionable data for use by agronomists, crop consultants, and

forestry professionals);

11223 (precision agriculture survey and inspection operations);

11226 (precision aerial surveys);

11228 (aerial acquisition and research in support of the agriculture industry); and

11229 (aerial acquisition and research in support of the agriculture industry).

 

2 Unmanned Aircraft Systems: Key Considerations Regarding Safety, Innovation, Economic

Impact, and Privacy Before the S. Comm. On Commerce, Science, & Transportation, 114th

Cong. 1 (2015) (written statement of Jeff Vanderwerff on behalf of the American Farm Bureau

Federation).
13

 

B. Asset Management Applications

Petitioner proposes utilizing its UAs for asset management applications including windfarm, 

power transmission system, and pipeline inspections. 

Currently, many wind farm inspections are conducted by people in harnesses, dangling from 

each individual tower, and power transmission system and pipeline inspections are conducted by

individuals in manned aircraft. Both wind farm and power transmission systems inspections 

involve a serious risk of falls. Wind farm inspectors often conduct inspections of towers and 

blades from the structure and are at risk of falling, sometimes over 100 feet or more.3

Similarly, inspectors of power transmission systems have a similar risk of falling, which is 

augmented by the danger of being near electrical wires. There have been several instances in

recent years in which inspectors and crew members lost their lives performing these inspections.

Three people were killed in an accident in Silt, Colorado in January 2014. The helicopter struck

the power line and crashed, quickly killing all those on board.4Two people lost their lives in a

similar situation in August 2014 in Alabama.5In Texas, in 2013, two transmission line 

inspectors that were suspended from the helicopter by large cables were killed when the cables 

struck the power line and snapped.6 Moreover, especially in populated areas, the use of manned 

helicopters to conduct these inspections creates a substantial risk of injury or death for 

individuals on the ground. 

Additionally, people involved in pipeline inspection must walk along the pipeline with sensor 

equipment. This can be time consuming, due to the length of pipelines. Inspectors may also 

have to traverse lengths of the pipeline in adverse weather and geographic conditions. 

Furthermore, inspectors may be exposed to hazardous materials, such as crude oil and natural

gas. According to the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Pipeline and Hazardous Materials

 

3 United States Department of Energy, Occupational Safety & Hazard Administration, Green Job

Hazards: Wind Energy – Falls, https://www.osha.gov/dep/greenjobs/windenergy_falls.html. 

4 Brian Hernandez, 3 Killed in Crash When Helicopter Hits Power Lines Near Silt in Western

Colorado, ABC7 NEWS DENVER Jan. 27, 2014, 

http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/localnews/3-killed-in-helicopter-crash-nearsilt01272014

5 Power-line-inspection Copter Crashes in Alabama; 2 Killed, COLUMBUS DISPATCH, Aug. 20,

2014, http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/national_world/2014/08/20/power-lineinspectioncopter-crashes-2-killed.html

6

Sabra Stafford, Turlock Man Killed in Power Line Accident, TURLOCK JOURNAL (Texas), Aug.

8, 2013, http://www.turlockjournal.com/archives/21204/ 
14

Safety Administration (PHMSA), in 2014, there were 29 serious pipeline incidents, and an

additional 268 significant pipeline incidents, with 19 fatalities and 96 injuries.7

Conversely, all three types of asset management inspection can be easily, quickly, and much 

more safely, conducted by operators controlling UAs from the ground. Human inspectors will 

not be at risk of falls from great heights or onto electrical wires, and will not be subjected to the 

risks associated with manned flight. 

The FAA has previously determined that commercial UA use for asset management is within the 

public interest. It has approved commercial UA asset management applications in Exemption 

Nos.: 

11184 (inspection of towers and structures);

11185 (electric transmission and distribution utility system monitoring, inspections, and

damage assessments);

11217 (aerial inspections of wind turbine blades and towers);

11224 (inspections of energy infrastructure);

11225 (safety inspections and aerial surveying);

11228 (research in support of Government entities, utility companies, local infrastructure)

11229 (research in support of Government entities, utility companies, local infrastructure)

11230 (tower inspections and mapping operations to an existing tower structure);

11238 (aerial inspections of electric and gas facilities); and

11239 (utility, power line inspections).

C. Construction and Land Management Applications 

Use of a UA for construction and land management applications will provide a greater level of 

safety than what is currently available. The construction industry has traditionally been very

dangerous for workers, both based on the working conditions and equipment used, including 

helicopters and cranes. Currently, aerial inspections are not done on many construction projects. 

Instead, inspections are conducted from the ground, or from within the structure being

constructed, giving a limited view of the project. OSHA reports that in 2013, 20.3% of worker

fatalities in private industry were related to construction, and the leading cause of those fatalities

were falls, with 294 out of the 796 total fatalities.8This limits the capabilities of architects and

construction crews examining the work that has been done, and could lead to misidentification or

 

7 The PHMSA defines “serious incidents” as those including a fatality or injury requiring 

inpatient hospitalization, but this data excludes first far incidents, which are gas distribution 

incidents with a cause of “other outside force damages” and sub-cause of “nearby fire/explosion” 

as the primary cause of incident. “Significant incidents” include any of the following conditions,

excluding first fire incidents: (1) fatality or injury requiring in-patient hospitalization; (2)

$50,000 or more in total costs, measured in 1984 dollars; (3) highly volatile liquid releases of 5 

barrels or more or other liquid releases of 50 barrels or more; or (4) liquid releases resulting in an 

unintentional fire or explosion. 

8 United States Department of labor, Occupational Safety & Health Administration Commonly

Used Statistics, https://www.osha.gov/oshstats/commonstats.html
15

failure to identify flaws in the construction. Those projects that do incorporate aerial inspections

must rely upon manned helicopters or other types of aircraft, devices that can pose a great risk to

those piloting and those on the ground below, without providing the most accurate results.

Similarly, land management applications are limited to either expensive and dangerous manned

flights, or ground-level inspections that do not capture the full wealth of knowledge available. 

Alternatively, using a UA to videotape and photograph these areas will allow the construction 

crew to gain a better vantage point of the structure. Safety concerns can be better identified and 

fixed, and the inspectors will be able to gain a more thorough understanding of construction 

progress. This UA will be able to provide a quick and cost effective aerial inspection of an entire 

jobsite, something that is much more difficult to perform without this technology. The device can 

be used to check the progress of the project and provide visual information on hard-to-reach 

areas that may not be adequately inspected otherwise without putting people in danger. UAs can 

be equipped with specialized cameras and sensors that provide enhanced detection of other 

concerns, such as gas leaks and lack of structural integrity. 

 

The FAA has previously determined that using a UA will provide an equivalent or greater level 

of safety than manned flight when inspecting construction sites and has approved Exemption 

Nos. 11109 (monitor and ensure safety of construction sites), 11204 (aerial photography for the 

architectural, engineering, and construction industry sites), and 11286 (aerial imaging of 

construction sites). 

D. Disaster Response and Search and Rescue 

Petitioner wishes to use its UAs when conducting disaster response and search and rescue 

operations. Although petitioner will not be conducting this sort of operation for profit, because

petitioner is a commercial UA operator in other respects, petitioner has included this sort of

operation in this petition. Petitioner wishes to conduct these operations under the auspices of the

FAA. The Owner of FFAFS Mr. Otte wishes to assist where assistance is needed by using UAs 

as an aid. 

The major benefit to conducting disaster response and search and rescue operations with a UA 

rather than a manned aircraft is cost. Government agencies across the country have turned to 

UAs as a possible source for assistance during emergency situations. The Washington State

Department of Transportation has conducted research on using UAs and determined that they

would be useful for both search and rescue and disaster response operations, including avalanche

response. The department has previously paid $800 an hour for manned helicopters for search 

and response operations.9

The Mesa County, Colorado Sherriff’s Office uses a UA equipped with infrared sensors for 

search and rescue operations, and has projected that a UA costs $25 an hour to operate, 

compared with manned aircraft, which cost between $400 and $1,200 an hour to operate.10 The 

 

9 Edward D. McCormack, Use of Small Unmanned Aircraft by the Washington State Department

of Transportation, 14 (June, 2008) available at

http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/research/reports/fullreports/703.1.pdf. 

10 Sheriff Rebecca Spiess, MSCO Unmanned Aircraft Systems Team, Frequently Asked
16

Henry County, Indiana Office of Emergency Management (“HCOEM”) determined that owning 

an emergency response manned aircraft could cost $800,000, not including personnel costs, 

compared to the one-time purchase price of $1,700 to purchase their UA, and concluded that 

investing in a manned aircraft for emergency management would not happen: 

“The cost to Henry County to use manned aerial services is something that has and 

most likely will not be budgeted for.”11 (Emphasis added).

Additionally, operators of UAs are able respond much more quickly in an emergency than the 

pilot of a manned aircraft. They can be launched from an area close to the scene of an

emergency, compared to a manned aircraft which would depart from an airport, potentially 

several miles away from the area of concern. Additionally, pilots of manned aircraft are subject

to significantly more risks by being in the air, while UA operators are able to monitor the

situation safely from the ground. 

The FAA has previously approved disaster response operations in Exemption No. 11283 and 

search and rescue operations in Exemption No. 11282.

E. Research Flights to Develop Processes, Procedures, and Tools for Accident and 

Crime Investigations of UAs.

Petitioner wishes to conduct commercial UA operations for the purpose of conducting research 

flights to collect data and establish and refine forensic processes, procedures, and tools for 

investigation of accidents and crimes involving UAs. Petitioner wishes to fly UAs in order to 

collect flight data and the ground control station and then using forensic analysis to determine 

what the UA was doing, where it had been, and other information regarding that flight. 

Unfortunately, the past year in manned aviation has demonstrated the importance of having a 

wealth of information regarding airplane disappearances and crashes. The National

Transportation and Safety Board (NTSB) has a database covering civil manned aviation

accidents that dates back to 1962. No such record exists for UAs, where the technology is rapidly

developing. It is imperative for the safe integration of UAs into the NAS that this type of

research occur. 

 

Questions, available at http://sheriff.mesacounty.us/uav. 

11 Henry County Office of Emergency Management, Standard Operating Procedures and

Standard Operating Guidelines for Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS), 8 (December 4, 2014), 

available at: 

http://www.henrycoema.org/forms/HCOEM%20Aerial%20Equipment%20Standard%20Operati

ng%20Procedures%20and%20Guidlines%20Ver%201-3.pdf.
17

F. Real Estate photography.

The planned UA use will increase ground safety for real estate photography. The enhanced 

safety and reduced environmental impact 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, carrying crew in addition to flammable fuel, gives the FAA

good cause to find that the UA operation enabled by this exemption is in the public interest. 

Satisfaction of the criteria provided in Section 333 of the Reform Act of 2012 – size, weight, 

speed, operating capabilities, proximity to airports and populated areas and operation within 

visual line of sight and national security – provide more than adequate justification for the grant 

of the requested exemption allowing commercial operation of petitioner’s UA in the purposes of 

commercial real estate photography, pursuant to FFAPS rules of operation. The FAA has 

previously approved members of the DJI Phantom family for real estate photography in 

Exemption Nos. 11191, 11195, 11271, 11295, 11300, and 11318. 

Congress’s determination that government agencies should be allowed to operate such aircraft in 

these situations, with no further restrictions on location, population density, or pilot experience 

and training, indicates that Congress did not believe that aircraft of this size and weight 

warranted additional attention. 

G. Aerial cinematography photography for the motion picture/television industry and 

sports photography.

The planned UA use will increase ground safety for motion picture and sport photography.

Approval of exemptions allowing commercial operations of sUASs in the film industry will 

enhance safety by reducing risk. Conventional film operations, using jet or piston power aircraft, 

operate at extremely low altitudes just feet from the subject being filmed and in extreme 

proximity to people and structures; and present the risks associated with vehicles that weigh in 

the neighborhood of 4,000lbs., carrying large amounts of jet A or other fuel (140 gallons for jet 

helicopters shown below). Such aircraft must fly to and from the film location. In contrast, a 

sUAS weighing fewer than 55 lbs. and powered by batteries eliminates virtually all of that risk 

given the reduced mass and lack of combustible fuel carried on board. The sUAS is carried to 

the film set and not flown. The sUAS will carry no passengers or crew and, therefore, will not 

expose them to the risks associated with manned aircraft flights.

The operation of small UASs, weighting less than 55 lbs., conducted in the strict conditions 

outlined above, will provide an equivalent level of safety supporting the grant of the exemptions 

requested herein, including exempting the applicant from the requirements of Part 21 and 

allowing commercial operations. These lightweight aircraft operate at slow speeds, close to the 

ground, and in a sterile environment and, as a result, are far safer than conventional operations 

conducted with turbine helicopters operating in close proximity to the ground and people. 
18

Additionally in sports applications cranes carrying human occupants operating video cameras are 

used regularly to film practices and large equipment strapped to cable networks are used to 

operate video equipment over players and staff. On at least one occasion, this equipment has 

malfunctioned and crashed to the ground causing injury to those below. UAVs are lighter and 

more maneuverable and thereby significantly reduce the risk of injury. Eliminated raising people 

into the air to achieve video during practice significantly reduces the risk of injury to people.

The enhanced safety and reduced environmental impact 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, carrying crew in addition to flammable fuel, 

gives the FAA good cause to find that the UA operation enabled by this exemption is in the 

public interest. 

Satisfaction of the criteria provided in Section 333 of the Reform Act of 2012 – size, weight, 

speed, operating capabilities, proximity to airports and populated areas and operation within 

visual line of sight and national security – provide more than adequate justification for the grant 

of the requested exemption allowing commercial operation of petitioner’s UA in the purposes of 

commercial real estate photography, pursuant to FFAPS rules of operation.

The FAA has previously approved the use of UAVs under 55 lbs to be used in the filming of 

Motion picture filming.

Congress’s determination that government agencies should be allowed to operate such aircraft in 

these situations, with no further restrictions on location, population density, or pilot experience 

and training, indicates that Congress did not believe that aircraft of this size and weight 

warranted additional attention. 
19

VIII. Regulations from Which Exemption is Requested

A. Appendix A: FARs as to which FFAPS wishes the same determination to be made as has been 

made previously. 

FAR 

Provision

Applicable condition(s) in

Section 5 of petition 

FAA Exemption Decision 

21(h) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 15, 24, 27, 28,

33,34

Nos. 11062, 11063, 11064, 11065, 11066, 

11067, 11080, 11109, 11111, 11110, 11114, 

11136, 11138, 11150, 11153, 11156, 11157, 

11166, 11167, 11170, 11171, 11172, 11174, 

11176, 11177, 11178, 11184,11185, 11188, 

11189, 11191, 11192, 11193, 11195 

43.7 13, 14 No. 11208

43.11 12 No. 11208 

45.11 29,30 No. 11208

45.23 (b)

45.27 29,30 No. 11188

45.29 29,30 Nos. 11136, 11157, 11170, 11185, 11193

61.23(a) and (c)

61.101 (e)(4) and (5)

61.113(a) (b)

61.315(a)

7 See Appendix B for argument regarding why 

petitioner should be exempted from the 

private pilot license requirement

91.7(a) 12 Nos. 11062, 11063, 11064, 11065, 11066, 

11067, 11080, 11109, 11110, 11136, 11138, 

11150, 11153, 11156, 11157, 11158, 11160, 

11161, 11166, 11167, 11170, 11171, 11172, 

11174, 11177, 11178, 11184, 11185, 11188, 

11189, 11191, 11192, 11193, 11195, 11204 
20

FAR Provision Applicable condition(s) in

Section 5 of petition 

FAA Exemption Decision

91.9(b)(2) 22 Nos. 11062, 11063, 11064, 11065, 

11066, 11067, 11080, 11109, 11110, 

11111, 11112, 11114, 11136, 11138, 

11150, 11153, 11156, 11157, 11062, 

11063, 11064, 11065, 11066, 11067, 

11080, 11109, 11110,11111, 11112, 

11114, 11136, 11138, 11150, 

11153,11156, 11157, 11174, 11177, 

11178, 11184, 11185,11189, 11192, 

11193, 11195 

91.9(c) 30 Nos. 11136, 11170, 11171, 11174, 

11185

91.103

91.103(b)(2)

3, 9, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20,

27,28

Nos. 11062, 11063, 11064, 11065, 

11066, 11067,11080, 11109, 11138, 

11150, 11153, 11156, 11158,11160, 

11161, 11166, 11167, 11171, 11172, 

11176,11177, 11178, 11184, 11185, 

11188, 11188, 11189,11191, 11192, 

11193, 11195, 11204 

91.105 6 No. 11185 

91.109 7,8

Nos. 11062, 11063, 11064, 11065, 

11066, 11067, 11080, 11109, 11110, 

11112, 11136, 11138, 11150, 11153, 

11156, 11157, 11166, 11167, 11170, 

11171, 11174, 11177, 11184, 11185, 

11189, 11191, 11192, 11193, 11194, 

11195, 11206, 11208

91.113(b) 3,31,32 No. 11238 
21

FAR

Provision 

Applicable condition(s) in

Section 5 of petition 

FAA Exemption Decision 

91.119

91.119(c ) 

4,33 Nos. 11162, 11163, 11164, 

11165, 11166, 111080,

111109, 11110, 11111, 

11112, 11114, 11136, 11138, 

11150, 11153, 11156, 11160 

11161, 11166,11167, 11170, 

11171, 11172, 11174, 11176, 

11178,11185, 11188, 11189, 

11190, 11193 

91.121 4 Nos. 11162, 11163, 11164, 

11165, 11166, 111080, 

111109, 11136, 11138, 

11150, 11153, 11156, 11160

11161, 11166, 11167, 11170, 

11171, 11174, 11176, 11178, 

11185, 11188, 11189, 11190, 

11193 

91.151(a) 16, 17, 18 Nos. 11110, 11153, 11156, 

11161; 111109, 11110,

11112, 11136, 11138, 11150, 

11153, 11156, 11160 11161, 

11166, 11167, 11170, 11171, 

11172, 11174, 11176, 11178, 

11185, 11188, 11189, 11190, 

11193 

91.203 (a) and (b) 21, 22 Nos. 11062, 11063, 11064, 

11065, 11066, 11067, 11080, 

11109, 11110, 11111, 11112,

11114, 11136, 11138, 11150, 

11153, 11156, 11157, 11170, 

11171, 11172, 11174, 11176,

11177, 11178, 11184, 11185, 

11188, 11188, 11189, 11191, 

11192, 11193, 11195 

91.215 25,26, 27 Nos. 11185, 11195

91.403 12,13,14 No. 11185
22

FAR

Provision 

Applicable condition(s) in

Section 5 of petition 

FAA Exemption Decision 

91.405(a) 12,13,14 Nos. 11062, 11063, 11064, 

11065, 11066, 11067, 11080, 

11109, 11110, 11111, 11112,

11114, 11136, 11138, 11150, 

11153, 11156, 11157, 11158, 

11160, 11161, 11166, 11167,

11170, 11171, 11172, 11174, 

11176, 11177, 11178, 11184, 

11185, 11188, 11188, 11189,

11191, 11192, 11193, 11195, 

11204 

91.407(a)(1) 14 Nos. 11062, 11063, 11064, 

11065, 11066,11067, 11080, 

11109, 11110, 11111, 11112,

11114, 11136, 11138, 11150, 

11153, 11156, 11157, 11158, 

11160, 11161, 11166, 11167,

11170, 11171, 11172, 11174, 

11176, 11177, 11178, 11184, 

11185, 11188, 11188, 11189,

11191, 11192, 11193, 11195, 

11204 

91.409(a)(1) (2) 12,13,14 Nos. 11062, 11063, 11064, 

11065, 11066, 11067, 11080, 

11109, 11110, 11111, 11112,

11114, 11136, 11138, 11150, 

11153, 11156, 11157, 11158, 

11160, 11161, 11166, 11167,

11170, 11171, 11172, 11174, 

11176, 11177, 11178, 11184, 

11185, 11188, 11188, 

11189,11191, 11192, 11193, 

11195, 11204 

91.409(a)(2) 12,13,14 Nos. 11062, 11063, 11064, 

11065, 11066, 11067, 11080, 

11109, 11110, 11111, 11112,

11114, 11136, 11138, 11150, 

11153, 11156, 11157, 11158, 

11160, 11161, 11166, 11167,

11170, 11171, 11172, 11174, 

11176, 11177, 11178, 11184, 

11185, 11188, 11188, 11189,

11191, 11192, 11193, 11195, 

11204 
23

FAR

Provision 

Applicable condition(s) in

Section 5 of petition 

FAA Exemption Decision 

91.417(a) (b) 12, 13, 14 Nos. 11062, 11063, 11064, 

11065, 11066, 11067, 11080, 

11109, 11110, 11111, 11112,

11114, 11136, 11138, 11150, 

11153, 11156, 11157, 11158, 

11160, 11161, 11166, 11167,

11170, 11171, 11172, 11174, 

11176, 11177, 11178, 11184, 

11185, 11188, 11188, 11189,

11191, 11192, 11193, 11195, 

11204 

91.417(b) 12, 13, 14 Nos. 11062, 11063, 11064, 

11065, 11066, 11067, 11080, 

11109, 11110, 11111, 11112,

11114, 11136, 11138, 11150, 

11153, 11156, 11157, 11158, 

11160, 11161, 11166, 11167,

11170, 11171, 11172, 11174, 

11176, 11177, 11178, 11184, 

11185, 11188, 11188, 11189,

11191, 11192, 11193, 11195, 

11204 
24

B. Appendix B: Fire Fly Aerial Photography Services argument for exemption from 14 

CFR §§ 61.23(a) and

(c), 61.101(e)(4) and (5), 61.113(a), 61.315(a). 

Firefly Aerial Photography Services requests an exemption from 14 CFR §§ 61.23(a) and (c), 

61.101(e)(4) and (5), 61.113(a), 61.315(a), so that the PIC of the UA will not be required to 

possess any pilot license (sports, recreational, private or commercial). As the FAA and numerous 

other national airspace regulators have recognized, UA operations conducted by persons who do 

not hold a pilot’s license can still achieve the equivalent level of safety of current operations by 

manned aircraft with pilots holding any level of pilot’s license. 

Although it recognizes that a pilot’s license is unnecessary for safe UA operation, the 

FAA has to date declined to allow grant exemptions under Section 333 that would permit

individuals who possess any pilot license (sports, recreational, private or commercial) to conduct

commercial UA operations. It has specified two reasons for declining to do so. First, it has stated

that it does not possess the authority under Section 333 to exempt individuals from the

requirement under 49 U.S.C. §44711 to hold an airman certificate authorizing the airman to

serve in the capacity for which the certificate was issued. Exemption No. 11110 at 14. Second,

the FAA has concluded that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) security screening

required of all certified airmen meets the statutory requirement in Section 333 that operations not

pose a threat to national security. Exemption No. 11110 at 15.

Firefly Aerial Photography Services respectfully requests that the FAA reconsider its position. 

There is no dispute that it is unnecessary for an operator of a UA to go through the rigorous 

process of becoming a certified pilot in order to safely operate a UA. In addition, the FAA does 

have the authority to exempt UA operators from the requirement in 49 U.S.C. §44711to hold an 

airman certificate for “serv[ing] in the capacity for which the certificate was issued.” Indeed, it 

has exercised that authority repeatedly in the Section 333 process. Finally, the FAA’s security

concerns can be addressed by a variety of methods involving operator background checks to be

conducted by government agencies. 

1. The FAA and foreign regulators recognize that obtaining a manned aircraft pilot license 

is unnecessary for safe operation of a UA. 

The FAA, like the other national airspace regulators that have considered the issue, has 

concluded that UA operations conducted by persons who do not hold a pilot’s license can still

achieve the equivalent level of safety of current operations by manned aircraft with pilots

holding any level of pilot’s license. In its recent UAS NPRM, the FAA stated: 

“While these airman certification requirements are necessary for manned aircraft

operations, they impose an unnecessary burden for many small UAS operations. This is 

because a person typically obtains a private or commercial pilot certificate by learning 

how to operate a manned aircraft. Much of that knowledge would not be applicable to 

small UAS operations because a small UAS is operated differently than manned aircraft. 

In addition, the knowledge currently necessary to obtain a private or commercial pilot 

certificate would not equip the certificate holder with the tools necessary to safely operate 

a small UAS... Thus, requiring persons wishing to operate a small UAS to obtain a 
25

private or commercial pilot certificate imposes the cost of certification on those persons, 

but does not result in a significant safety benefit because the process of obtaining the 

certificate does not equip those persons with the tools necessary to mitigate the public 

risk posed by small UAS operations.” Operation and Certification of Small Unmanned

Aircraft, 80 Fed. Reg. 9543 at 9550 (proposed Feb. 23, 2015 (to be codified at 14

C.F.R. Parts 21, 43, 45, et al.).

The FAA’s conclusion that manned aircraft flying experience is unnecessary for the operation of 

a UA is supported by research by the FAA and the Army Research Laboratory. They 

demonstrate that UAs, even those much larger than the UAs proposed by Firefly Aerial, can be 

safely flown by non-certificated pilots with a small amount of training. For example, one Army

Research Laboratory study concluded: 

"[T]he specific motor skills needed to control the radio-controlled UAV would have to be

learned by aviators independently of the motor skills learned in flying an aircraft. In 

particular, the somatic and visual cues that pilots use during aircraft landings would not 

be useful (and perhaps even counter-productive) for the different skill sets and perceptual 

viewpoint necessary for radio-controlled landings.”12

Additional research reports lend further support for the exclusion requested. For example, a 

report sponsored by the FAA concluded that "We know that certain systems, like the

U.S. Army Hunter and Shadow systems, are successfully flown by pilots with no manned aircraft 

experience."13

In addition, foreign government airspace regulators that have examined the issue have 

consistently recognized that the skills required to fly a manned aircraft are irrelevant to operating

a UA. For that reason, they have concluded that UA operators do not need to have a private or

commercial pilot’s license. Canada, for example, does not require a pilot’s license to operate a

UA. Transport Canada requires training of UA operators, but that training is limited to pilot

ground school and flight operation training on UAs, not manned aircraft.14 Moreover, Canada

 

12 Michael J. Barnes, Beverly G. Knapp, Barry W. Tillman, Brett A. Walters & Darlene Veliki,

Crew systems analysis of unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) future job and tasking environments,

Technical Report ARL-TR-2081, Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD: Army Research Laboratory, 

page 12 (2000), available at http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a374230.pdf. 

13 Kevin W. Williams, Unmanned Aircraft Pilot Medical Certification Requirements, Report

DOT/FAA/AM-07/3, FAA Civil Aerospace Medical Institute, page 2, (2007), available at

http://fas.org/irp/program/collect/ua-pilot.pdf. While the authors speculated that UA use in 

populated areas may change this assessment, indicating further research was needed to address 

this concern, this concern is inapplicable as Firefly Aerial’s flights will not be in congested areas.

See also Jason S. McCarley & Christopher D. Wickens, Human Factors Implications of UAVs in

the National Airspace, Institute of Aviation, Aviation Human Factors Division, University of

Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 13 (2004), available at

http://www.tc.faa.gov/logistics/grants/pdf/2004/04-G-032.pdf.

14 See Civil Aviation, Standards, Transport Canada, Advisory Circular: Guidance Material for
26

allows this training to be “provided by other pilots, manufacturers, [UA] flight training

organizations or . . . self-taught.”15

 

Similarly, the United Kingdom’s Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) recognized that determining 

“Remote Pilot qualification requirements on the same basis as manned aircraft may yield 

requirements that are too inflexible, too onerous and inappropriate for UAS operations.”16

As a result, the CAA only requires UA operators to demonstrate UA operator competence.17

While there are a variety of ways to demonstrate competence, the most common is to complete a

course that will lead to a ground exam and flight test. Australia, too, requires only passage of a

UA-specific ground school program in lieu of a manned airman certificate.18 Finally, more than a

dozen countries, including Germany, Italy, France, Spain and the Netherlands, have adopted the

National UAS Certificate for Small Unmanned Aircraft (BNUC-S) Standard for UA pilot

certification.19 This standard results in a type-specific UA certificate and does not require the

operator to have a pilot’s license. The process involves taking a short ground school course,

passing a ground school test and then passing a practical test on commercial operation of the

specific UA per the UA manufacturer’s operations manual. 

All of this experience and evidence indicates that the proposed exemption will provide a greater 

level of safety than operations under 14 C.F.R. §61.113. In this instance, the PICs will have gone 

through training as described above in Section III B. This training and education is focused on 

UAs generally, and in particular on the aircraft to be operated, rather than taking additional time 

and risk to train on a manned aircraft, weighing several thousand pounds and carrying highly 

flammable fuel. 

The FAA has concluded in the NPRM that such UA-specific training is more than sufficient to 

provide an equivalent level of safety for UA operations. Sometime in the next 1824 months, that

position will be enshrined in a valid regulation. However, in the meantime, the FAA claims it 

lacks the authority to relax the requirement to possess a pilot certificate. As we show in the next 

section, that position is both incorrect and contradicted by the FAA’s recent decisions.

 

Operating Unmanned Air Vehicle Systems under an Exemption at 14 and 18-22, (Nov. 27, 2014) 

available at http://www.tc.gc.ca/media/documents/ca-opssvs/ac-600-004.pdf. 

15 Id. at 14.

16 Civil Aviation Authority, Safety Regulation Group, Unmanned Aircraft System Operations in

UK Airspace – Guidance, Section 2, Chapter 5, Page 2 (Aug. 10, 2012), available at 

https://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP722.pdf. 

17 Civil Aviation Authority, Unmanned Aircraft and Aircraft Systems, available at 

http://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?catid=1995&pagetype=90 

18 Australian Government Civil Aviation Safety Authority, available at 

http://www.casa.gov.au/scripts/nc.dll?WCMS:STANDARD::pc=PC_100374. 

19 See EuroUSC International, “Pilot Qualification,” available at 

http://eurousc.com/services/pilot-qualifications/.
27

2. The FAA does have, and has already, exercised the authority to exempt petitioners from 

the airman certificate requirement. 

The FAA claims that it lacks authority to exempt UA operators from the requirement of 

49 U.S. §44711 to hold an airman certificate authorizing the airman “to serve in the capacity for

which the certificate was issued.” See, e.g., Exemption No. 11110 at 14. This claim is

inconsistent with both (i) the statutory language of that section and Section 333, and (ii)

numerous recent FAA decisions. 

The operative part of 49 USC §44711 provides that a “person may not . . . serve in any 

capacity as an airman with respect to a civil aircraft, . . . used, or intended for use, in air 

commerce — (A) without an airman certificate authorizing the airman to serve in the 

capacity for which the certificate was issued . . . “ If the FAA’s interpretation were 

correct, this language would require that any person wishing to operate a UA for 

commercial operations have an airman certificate authorizing the person to serve as an 

airman in commercial operations. 

However, in all of its recent grants of Section 333 petitions, the FAA has – without explicitly

acknowledging the fact - exempted commercial UA operators from the §44711(A) requirement 

that they hold an airman certificate authorizing them “to serve in the capacity for which the 

certificate was issued.” It has done so by allowing them to operate UA so long as they hold a 

private pilot’s or sport pilot’s authorization, even though such a certificate does not permit 

commercial operations. Exemption No. 11062 at 15-18; Exemption No. 11110 at 14-16;

Exemption No. 11191 at 3-5; and Exemption No. 11229 at 3 and 8. 

The FAA argues that it cannot exempt petitioners from the requirements of §44711 because, 

while the specific language of Section 333 grants it limited statutory flexibility relative to 49 

U.S.C. §44704 for the purposes of airworthiness certification, Section 333 does not provide 

flexibility relative to §44711 and other sections of Title 49. Exemption No. 11110 at 14. This 

argument ignores the plain language of Section 333. The relevant language of Section 333 is:

(a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other requirement of this subtitle, and not later 

than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Transportation 

shall determine if certain unmanned aircraft systems may operate safely in the national 

airspace system before completion of the plan and rulemaking required by section 332 of 

this Act or the guidance required by section 334 of this Act.

(b) ASSESSMENT OF UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS.—In making the 

determination under subsection (a), the Secretary shall determine, at a minimum—

(1) which types of unmanned aircraft systems, if any, as a result of their size, 

weight, speed, operational capability, proximity to airports and populated areas, 

and operation within visual line of sight do not create a hazard to users of the 

national airspace system or the public or pose a threat to national security; and
28

(2) Whether a certificate of waiver, certificate of authorization, or airworthiness 

certification under section 44704 of title 49, United States Code, is required for 

the operation of unmanned aircraft systems identified under paragraph (1).

(c) REQUIREMENTS FOR SAFE OPERATION.—If the Secretary determines under 

this section that certain unmanned aircraft systems may operate safely in the national 

airspace system, the Secretary shall establish requirements for the safe operation of such 

aircraft systems in the national airspace system.

The language of Section 333(b) is permissive: it requires that the Secretary “determine, at a 

minimum . . . whether a certificate of waiver, certificate of authorization, or airworthiness 

certification under section 44704 of title 49, United States Code, is required for the operation of 

unmanned aircraft systems identified under paragraph (1).” Nothing in (b) precludes the 

Secretary from determining whether or not a pilot’s license is required for operation of a UA 

identified under paragraph (b) (1). 

Indeed, the FAA has implicitly conceded the point by granting exemptions from the requirement 

that commercial UA operators hold a commercial pilot certificate. From an analytical standpoint, 

there is no difference between granting an exemption from the commercial pilot’s license 

requirement and granting an exemption from the private or sport pilot’s license requirement. 

Both are clearly exemptions from a specific statutory requirement in 49 U.S.C.

§44711. If the FAA has the statutory authority under Section 333(b) to do the former, it has the 

same authority to do the latter.20

 

20 The FAA has not specifically identified the statutory provision that underpins its authority to 

grant the exemptions from the commercial pilot’s license requirement. Whether the statutory

basis is Section 333 or some other provision makes no difference. If there is a basis for a partial 

exemption from in 49 U.S.C. § 44711, that basis also justifies an exemption from the entire 

provision.
29

Document #

QS-01

Revision # 0

Date Prepared

07/26/2015

Effective Date

8/1/2015 Training and Equipment Maintenance manual Status: FInal

Purpose (Why)

The purpose of this manual is to define the process used to train [PIC] Pilot in Command and [VO] 

Visual observers in the safe and consistent operation and required preflight and post flight operations 

of UAV’s.

Scope (What)

All PIC’s and VO’s will undergo the defined training of this manual before commercial operation of 

UAV’s for Firefly Aerial Photography Services.

Responsibility (Who)

Pilots, VO’s and maintenance technicians

Definitions

PIC – Pilot in Command

VO – Visual observer

UAV – Unmanned Aerial Vehicles

Procedure (How)(When)
30

Personnel Training

1. All PIC’s and VO’s will be required to complete a written knowledge exam equal to the 

required Sport Pilot license, or as defined by the FFA for operation of UAV’s

2. All PIC’s and VO’s will need to complete 25 hours of flight operations under the guidance of an 

experienced PIC or VO before performing and commercial UAV flights, or a manufacture 

provided training course for each UAV model to be operated.

3. PIC’s VO’s and maintenance technicians who inspect UVA pre and post flight or clear UAV’s for 

operation will be familiar with each individual UAV’s manufacturers manual and 

recommendations for operation and must sign off as completing the review of manufactures 

operation manual and operation recommendation if supplied by the manufacturer. 

a. In the event, a manufacturer does not supply a operations manual or 

recommendations of flight, the PIC and VO will complete 25 flight hours with an 

experienced PIC on each UAV model before conducting commercial operations.

b. Maintenance technicians must have 3 months of UAV specific experience before 

eligible to release equipment into operation.

Equipment

1. Equipment will be inspected preflight for the following:

ENVIRONMENTAL

 Check for people, animals, property in the light vicinity.

 Notify any bystanders or nearby property owner of your intentions.

 If flying FPV, discuss flight plan with your check-pilot.

 If flying in controlled airspace, notify airspace authority of your intentions.

 First Aid I Safety Kit on hand, stocked , readily accessible, and visible to anyone in the

area

HARDWARE/ EQUIPMENT

VISUALLY INSPECT THE AIRFRAME:

 Cracks (especially in high stress areas like joints).

 Loose or damaged screws I fasteners I bands I straps I ties

 Loose or damaged wiring.

 Loose or damaged connections (solder, plugs, etc.).

 Inspect prop mounts & screws & apply slight counter pressure on arms to check for

loosened construction.

 FPV, inspect/clean FPV and/or Gopro camera lens and ensure that cameras are secured.

 Battery/batteries fully charged, properly seated & secured.

 Remove props and test fail-safe behavior (if applicable).
31

 Props are smooth and free of damage/defect ( check blade, surface, & hub). D Tighten 

prop adapters (careful not to over tighten which may damage prop). D Ensure voltage

alarm is connected.

 Ensure arming/idle timeout is properly configured (6-15 seconds is generally 

acceptable).

 Check whether the right model is selected in the transmitter (if applicable).

 Check your RC transmitter shows the right range and centering for all sticks.

 If desired, perform range test.

PRE-FLIGHT

POWER UP:

 Batteries charged & secured.

 Position quad in a level, safe location for takeoff.

 for FPV, power up ground station, video receiver, goggles, etc.

 If using onboard video recorder (i.e., Gopro), turn on camera.

 All transmitter controls move freely in all directions.

 All transmitter trims in its neutral position.

 All transmitter switches in correct position (typically away).

 Transmitter throttle to zero.

 Radio transmitter on.

 Connect/power o n battery to airframe.

 Ensure led indicators & audible tones are all correct.

 Timer on (if applicable).

 for FPV, check video in goggles.

 Scan for nearby people or animals.

 Stand clear - audibly, loudly announce the word "CLEAR!"

 Arm flight controller.

PRE TAKEOFF:

 Increase throttle slightly listening for any abnormalities.

 Short 20-30 second hover at 3-5 feet (listen for any weird vibrations or

anything that sounds loose).

2. Equipment will be inspected by the PIC post flight for any damage or irregularities in 

operation. 

a. Any irregularities must be reported to maintenance and equipment removed 

immediately from service.

b. Any equipment removed from service by the PIC must undergo a complete diagnostic 

and be signed off as operational by a trained maintenance technician.
32

Revision History

Revision # Revision 

Date

Description of changes