AFS-15-3313-E Exemption No. 15464

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION WASHINGTON, DC 20591

In the matter of the petition of

LOCKHEED MARTIN Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2015-3257

CORPORATION

for an exemption from §§ 61.113(a) and (b); 91.119(c); 91.121; and 91.151(a) and (b) of T itle 14, Code of Federal Regulations

GRANT OF EXEMPTION

By letter posted to the docket on July 29, 2015, Mr. James L. Ferris, Jr., Lockheed Martin Corporation (Lockheed Martin), 1801 Stat e Route 17C, Owego, New York 13827, petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on beha lf of Lockheed Martin for an exemption from §§ 61.113(a) and (b); 91.119(c); 91.121; and 91.151(a) and (b ) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). Lockheed Martin requested an exemption to operate its small unmanned aircraft system (UAS) up to 1,000 feet above ground level (AGL).

The petitioner requests relief from the following regulations:

Section 61.113(a) prescribes that—

(a) No person who holds a private pilot certif icate may act as a pilot in command of an aircraft that is carry ing passengers or property fo r compensation or hire; nor may that person, for compensation or hire, ac t as pilot in comma nd of an aircraft.

(b) A private pilot may, for compensation or hire, act as pilot in command of an

aircraft in connection with any business or employment if:

(1) The flight is only incidental to that business or employment; and

(2) The aircraft does not carry passengers or property for compensation or hire.2

Section 91.119(c) prescribes that, except when necessary for takeoff or landing, no person may operate an aircraft below an al titude of 500 feet above the surface, except over open water or sparsely populated areas. In those cases, the aircraft may not be operated closer than 500 feet to any pe rson, vessel, vehicle, or structure.

Section 91.121 requires each person operating an aircraft to maintain cruising altitude by reference to an altimeter that is set “to the elevation of the de parture airport or an appropriate altimeter setting available before departure.”

Section 91.151(a) and (b) pres cribes that: (a) no person may begin a flight in an airplane under visual flight rules (VFR ) conditions unless (considering wind and forecast weather conditions) th ere is enough fuel to fly to the first point of intended landing and, assuming normal cruising speed, (1) during the day, to fly after that for at least 30 minutes; or (2) At night, to fly after that fo r at least 45 minutes; and (b) No person may begin a flight in a rotorcraft under VFR conditions unless (considering wind and forecast weather conditio ns) there is enough fuel to fly to the first point of intended landing and, assuming normal cruising speed, to fly after that

for at least 20 minutes.

The petitioner supports its request with the following information:

Lockheed Martin notes that it is currently en gaged in the development, testing, and support of small UAS. As part of this activity, Lockheed Martin states that it works with the FAA to support testing and integration of these small UAS in the national airspace system (NAS), under a special airworthiness certification in accordance with FAA Order 8130.34, with all unmanned aircraft vehicles (UAVs ) operations below 1,000 feet AGL.

The petitioner states that the unmanned aircraft (UA) to be operated under this request will be operated under a special airw orthiness certificate for the purposes of research and development, crew training, and market survey in accordance with § 21.191. In general, these classes of small UA do not operate from establis hed airports or airfields and do not require large prepared areas for launch and recovery.

The petitioner stipulates the aircraft are electrically powered, operate on rechargeable batteries that have typical endurance ratings of approximately one hour, and weigh less than 25 pounds. The endurance level of small UA Vs typically does not support a 30 minute landing reserve. As operations ar e relatively close to launch and recovery areas, Lockheed Martin has requested an exemption to § 91.151(a) . The petitioner believes that an operating

endurance estimate of 10 minutes available afte r reaching the first point of intended landing for a fixed or rotary small UAV would provide an equivalent level of safety to the standard manned aircraft day VFR requirement of 30 minutes and 20 minutes for fixed-wing and rotorcraft aircrafts, respectively. Depending on the specific UAV, this 10 minute remaining endurance would vary in the percentage of rema ining battery life, but is a value that is relatively easy for the operator to determine and monitor.3

In support of its request for an exemption fr om § 91.121, Lockheed Martin states that small UAVs typically are designed to support relative altitude measurements and reporting to the ground operator based on the launch site local a ltitude. Lockheed Martin notes that it will limit all operations to less than 1,000 feet AGL. The petitio ner further notes that the operating range of small UAVs is relatively close to this location and within visual line of sight of the operator.

The petitioner has integrated safety features in to the design of each UAS, as described in the petitioner’s proprietary safety ch ecklist, which is reviewed and reviewed in accordance with FAA Order 8130.34, as amended. The petitioner furt her describes in its proprietary safety evaluation that, in the event the UAS loses communications or its GPS signal, the UA will have the capability to return to a pre-determin ed location within the approved operating area.

To assure the proper function of the relativ e altitude measurement and reporting, inspection and routine maintenance operations are incl uded in the operations manual, while more

advanced and detailed maintenance informati on is provided in the advanced maintenance manual. The petitioner notes that it will provid e a written, self-certifying statement that they will comply with the aircraft’s inspection and maintenance program.

The petitioner states that all flights will be opera ted within visual line of sight (VLOS) of a pilot and/or observer, and that UA flights w ill be limited to a maximum altitude of 1,000 feet AGL. The petitioner recognizes that § 91.119(c) requires operation above 500 feet, except during takeoff and landing. The petitioner stat es that the primary method of operation of small UAV aircraft is typical ly below 500 feet and within VLOS of the operator, over sparsely populated or controll ed areas of operation. The peti tioner argues that as most operations are below the 500 feet reference, operating small UAVs below the 500 foot threshold improves the operational safety of the airspace by minimizing potential airspace conflicts with traditional aircraft operations. The petitioner asserts that an equivalent level of safety can be achieved given the size, weight, and speed of the UAS, as well as, the location where it is operated.

In support of its petition, Lockheed Martin states that small UA do not operate from established airports or airfie lds and do not require large prepared areas for launch and recovery. Operation is limited to pre-defined and approved operat ing areas associated with the special airworthiness certificate limitations, with the operating areas being over sparsely populated areas with minimal exposure to gr ound personnel or property. Their flights are required to be conducted within VLOS of th e operator and/or observer which includes the proximity to the launch and recovery area. Under VLOS, th e UAV is operated within areas that support launch and recover y, with suitable landing areas al ways being readily available within a distance easily traversed in 5 minutes or less. Operations within the line of sight operating areas also means the actual flight pl an routes are considerably compressed from traditional manned aviation flight routes.

The petitioner requests an exemption from § 61.113 for the operation of small UAVs. The petitioner notes that as part of supporting FAA special airw orthiness certification in4

accordance with Order 8130.34, the FAA has require d a minimum of a private pilot’s license as evidence of understanding airspace inte gration in support of small UAV operations. However, § 61.113 restricts the application of a pr ivate pilot’s license to incidental business applications. As the piloting operation is geared towards the verification of the operation of the UAV, the intended operational aspects of the private pilot li cense under Order 8130.34

necessitate a waiver to the re strictions of § 61.113 as they re late to application on a small

UAV.

Lockheed Martin stipulates in its proprietar y safety checklist that all UA pilots in command (PIC) hold, at a minimum, an FAA private pilot’ s certificate in the airplane category with single-or multiengine class ratings. PICs will also have, at a minimum, a class-2 medical certificate. The petitioner notes that pilots a nd observers will complete a Lockheed Martin training program to support operating and testing of the UA.

Lockheed Martin believes that granting an ex emption is in the public interest in that it supports the ongoing development, testing, refinement, and safety of small UASs to support a number of functions such as aerial phot ography, assessments for power companies, agriculture, and other co mmercial operations, as well as, uses in search and rescue and other safety functions.

The petitioner has provided the following informa tion to support its requ est for an exemption, which includes proprietary supporting documents:

 Safety checklist in acco rdance with FAA Order 8130.34C

A summary of the petition was published in the Federal Register on August 14, 2015 (80 FR 48953). No comments were received.

The FAA’s analysis is as follows:

The FAA finds that a grant of exemption is in the public interest. The FAA finds that UAS provide support for ongoing development, testi ng, refinement, and safety of small UAS to support a number of operations. These special airworthiness certifi cation activities are conducted for research and development, crew training, and market survey operations, adding a greater degree of flexibility, which supplemen ts the current capabilities offered by manned

aircraft.

The FAA has issued grants of exemption in ci rcumstances similar in all respects to those presented in the petition.

In Grant of Exemption Nos. 11062 to Astraeus Aerial ( see Docket FAA-2014-0352), 11177 to BOSH Precision Agriculture (dba Digital Harvest) ( see Docket FAA-2014-0858), and 11185 to Commonwealth Edison Company (see Do cket No. FAA-2014-0855), the FAA found that granting the requested relief from § 61.113(a) , provided adherence to the conditions and limitations outlined in the exemption, would not adversely affect the safety of the NAS; that5

relief from § 91.119(c) was warranted; and that good cause existed for granting relief from §§ 91.121 and §91.151(a) and (b). 1 The FAA finds that an exemption is warranted in this case because the pilots used in Lockheed Martin ’s operations will have similar experience and knowledge to pilots operating UAS under the exemptions listed above.

The petitioner proposed that it would plan for it s flights to have 10 minutes of reserve power after reaching the first point of intended landing. The petitioner indicated that its flights will be operated in areas with suitable landing ar eas readily available w ithin a distance of 5

minutes or less. The FAA finds that because of the proximity of suitable landing areas and that flights will be conducted in visual line of sight; that 10 minutes of reserve power will sufficiently reduce the risk of the aircraft not reaching the intended poi nt of landing due to unforeseen events, or reaching another landi ng area if the intended landing area becomes unsuitable during the flight.

The petitioner also requested an exemption to § 61.113(b) which provides an exception to the prohibition on private pilot cert ificate holders from acting as PIC of an aircraft for compensation or hire found in § 61.113(a). Howe ver, because relief is granted to the underlying prohibition of § 61.113(a), an exemption to paragraph (b) is unnecessary and is therefore not granted.

The petitioner seeks to operate its sma ll UAS up to 1,000 feet AGL under a special

airworthiness certificate in eith er the special flight permit or experimental categories. The higher altitude is necessary for Lockheed Martin to test cert ain sensors under the Research and Development or production flight aspects of their special airworthin ess certificate. The petitioner states that its sm all UAVs are typically designe d to support relative altitude measurement and reporting to the ground operato r based on the launch site local altitude and are to be operated relatively close to this locat ion and within the visual line of sight of the

operator.

In reviewing this request, the FAA has consider ed the petitioner’s ai rcraft are flown under a

Certificate of Waiver or Aut horization (COA), issued by the FAA’s Air Traffic Organization. The COA is issued after a thorough analysis of the requested airs pace, and the hazards associated with operating at altitudes up to a maximum of 1,0 00 feet AGL. This COA requires the PIC to ensure the visual observer (VO) is able to continually see the aircraft and surrounding airspace throughout the en tire flight, and be able to provide the PIC with the UA’s flight path, and proximity to all avia tion activities and othe r hazards (e.g. terrain, weather, structures) sufficient to exercise effect ive control of the UA. Furthermore, the PIC is required to comply with the right-of-way rules an d give way to any other category of aircraft. Therefore, the FAA has determined that good cause exists for granting th e requested relief to Lockheed Martin to fly its small UAS in visual meteorological conditions at altitudes up to 1,000 feet AGL, as authorized under the COA.

1 Note that some conditions and limitations found in the underlying exemptions are included in the operating limitations issued to Lockheed Martin Corporation as part of its special airworthiness certificate.6

The petitioner requested that the FAA grant an exemption without a defined expiration date because this is an ongoing business activity a nd it anticipates the c onditions requiring these exemptions will remain unchanged. However, the FAA is granting this exemption for a period of two years consistent with the agency ’s exemption practice. Lockheed may petition to extend the exemption at a later date if it need s to continue operating un der its terms past the two year expiration date.

The FAA’s Decision

In consideration of the foregoing, I find that a gr ant of exemption is in the public interest. Therefore, pursuant to the authority c ontained in 49 U.S.C. §§ 106(f), 40113, and 44701, delegated to me by the Administrator, Lockheed Martin Corporation is granted an exemption from §§ 61.113(a); 91.119(c); 91.121; and 91.151(a) a nd (b) to the extent necessary to operate its UAS up to 1,000 feet AGL, subject to the conditions and limitations listed below.

Conditions and Limitations

In this grant of exemption, Lo ckheed Martin Corporation is hereafter referred to as the

operator.

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

1. Operations must be conducted in accordan ce with the operating limitations stipulated as part of the special airwor thiness certificate issued unde r the experimental category or special flight permit for each UAS.

2. The UA may not be operated at a speed exceeding 87 knots (100 miles per hour). The operator may use either grounds peed or calibrated airspeed to determine compliance with the 87 knot speed restriction. In no case will the UA be operated at airspeeds greater than the maximum UA operating ai rspeed recommended by the aircraft

manufacturer.

3. The PIC must possess at least a private pi lot certificate and a current third-class

airman medical certificate. The PIC must also meet the flight review requirements specified in § 61.56 in an aircraft in whic h the PIC is rated on his or her pilot

certificate.

4. All operations must utilize a VO. The VO may be used to satisfy the VLOS requirement as long as the PIC always maintains VLOS capability. The VO and PIC must be able to communicate verbally at al l times. Electronic me ssaging or texting is not permitted during flight operations. The PIC must be designated before the flight

and cannot transfer his or he r designation for the duration of the flight. The PIC must ensure that the VO can perform the functions prescribed in the operating documents.7

5. The UA must be operated at an altitude of no more than 1,000 feet AGL, as indicated by the procedures specified in the operating documents. All altitudes must be reported

in feet AGL.

6. The PIC is prohibited from beginning a UAS flight unless (considering wind and forecast weather conditions and assuming normal cruising speed) there is enough power to fly to the intended landing point and land the UA with 10 minutes of battery power remaining.

Unless otherwise specified in this grant of exemption, the UAS, the UAS PIC, and the UAS operations must comply with al l applicable parts of 14 CFR including, but not limited to, parts 45, 47, 61, and 91.

This exemption terminates on March 31, 2018, unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

Issued in Washington, D.C., on March 17, 2016.

/s/
John Barbagallo Deputy Director, Flight Standards Service