UNITED STATES OF AMERICA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

WASHINGTON, DC

Regulatory Docket No. _______________

IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION FOR EXEMPTION OF: K & R AVIATION , LLC FOR AN EXEMPTION SEEKING RELIEF FROM THE R EQUIREMENTS OF TITLE 14 OF THE CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATION S SECTIONS 61.23(a) & (c), 61.101(e)(4) & (e)(5), 61.113(a) , 61.315(a), 91.7(a), 91.119(c), 91.121 , 91.151( a ) (1) , 91.405(a), 91.407(a)( 1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), AND 91.417(a) & (b) CONCERNING COMMER CIAL OPERATION OF THE DJI PHANTOM 3 UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEM S PURSUAN T TO SECTION 333 OF THE F AA MODERNIZATION AND REFORM ACT OF 2012 ( PUBLIC LAW 112

- 95)

Submitted on December 10
, 201 5

G REGORY S

. W INTON , E SQ

. T HE A VIATION L AW F IRM 1997 Annapolis Exchange Parkway Suite 300 Annapolis, Maryland 21401 Tel: (301) 294

- 8550 Fax: (866) 568

- 9886 Attorney for Petitioner2 TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page

GLOSSARY OF ABBREVIATIONS

................................ ................................ ................. 3

SUMMARY

................................ ................................ ................................ ......................... 4

INTRODUCTION AND INTERESTS OF PETITIONER

................................ ................. 4

BACKGROUND

................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 5

BASIS FOR THE PETITION

................................ ................................ .............................. 5

NAME AND ADDRESS OF THE PETITIONER

................................ ........................ 6

THE SPECIFIC SECTIONS OF 14 C.F.R. FROM WHICH K & R AVIATION , LLC SEEKS EXEMPTION

................................ ................................ ................................ ... 6

THE EXTENT OF RELIEF K & R AVIATION SEEKS AND THE REASON K & R AVIATION , LLC SEEKS THE RELIE F

................................ ................................ ...... 7

THE REASONS WHY GRANTING THE EXEMPTION WOULD NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT SAFETY

................................ ................................ .............. 10

THE REASONS WHY GRANTING K & R AVIATION LLC 'S REQUEST WOULD BE IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST

................................ ............................... 23

SUMMARY THAT CAN BE PUBLISHED IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER

.......... 26

ANY ADDITIONAL INFORM ATION, VIEWS, OR ARGUMENTS AVAILABLE TO SUPPORT K & R AVIATION LLC 'S REQUEST

................................ .............. 26

CONCLUSION

................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 273 GLOSSARY OF ABBREVIATIONS

AGL Above Ground Level
AOI Area of Interest
ATC Air Traf fic Control
ATO Air Traffic Organization
C.F.R. Code of Federal Regulation s COA Certificate of Authorization
FAA Federal Aviation Administration
FAR Fe deral Aviation Regulation
FCC Federal Communications Commission
GCS Ground Control Station
GPS Global Positioning System
NAS National Airspace System
NOTAM Notice to Airmen
OEM Original Equipment Manufacturer
PIC Pilot I n Command
RTH Return To Home
Section 333 FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (FMRA) Section 333
UA Unmanned Aircraft
UAS Unmanned Aircraft Sys tem
VFR Visual Flight Rules
VLOS Visual Line of Sight
VMC Visual Meteorological Conditions
VO Visual Observer
VTOL Vertical Takeoff and Landing4 SUMMARY

K & R AVIATION , LLC (hereinafter “ K & R ”) seeks exemption from the requirements

of 14 C.F.R

. §§ 61.23(a) & (c), 61.101(e)(4) & (e)(5), 61.113(a), 61.315(a), 91.7(a), 91.119(c),
91.121, 91.151( a ) (1)
, 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), and 91.417(a) & (b) , to

operate the DJI Phantom 3 Unmanne d Aircraft System s (UAS) pursuant to Section 333 of the

FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (FMRA)

. This exem ption will permit K & R to

operate an Unmanned Aircraft System for the commercial purpose of aerial data collection

.

INTRODUCTION AND INTERES TS OF THE PETITIONER

K & R Aviation
, LLC, founded in 2005
, is a Washington
, D

. C

. based FAA approved Part
135 Air Carrier specializing in on demand, mission critical, 24

- hour flight operations and do es

business as O penAir. K & R is additionally authorize d by the FAA to accept, handle, and carry
materials regulated as hazard ous materials (Hazmat). K & R has experience in the public sector,
working with the United States Navy Test Pilot School and Government Contractors ManTech
International and Six3 Syste ms , as well as the private sector, flying high profile clients such as

Governors and U.S. Senators , Professional Athletes, and the President of the National Business

Aviation Association , with a specialization i n being ready on short notice and with increa sed
flexibility through access to Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport (DCA) as part of the

D

. C

. Access Standard Security Program (DASSP) . K & R also conducts emergency organ and
tissue flights, aerial photo shoot missions, and can conduct flight tra ining activities. K & R is a
qualified small business with an unblemished safety record and has both a former NTSB safety
inspector and current NASA AMES research contractor on staff.

K & R will utilize the DJI Phantom 3 to commercially provide professi onal geospatial
data collection, aerial photography, infrastructure inspection services, and disaster area damage5

and debris assessments to their clients. Use of the DJI Phantom 3 will provide K & R a safe and
efficient platform to perform its business op erations and will help serve organizations in need of
reliable, affordable unmanned systems in connection with intelligence, surveillance, and
reconnaissance (ISR) missions, as well as for experimentation purposes. K & R has a long
history of providing su perior aviation services and seeks to extend that standard into the UAS
industry.

BACKGROUND
Unmanned Aircraft System: DJI Phantom 3

K & R seeks an exemption to operate the DJI Phantom 3 UAS (Phantom 3 ) , most
recently approved for use pursuant to Section 333 under Grant of Exemption No. 1 2863
, for
compensation or hire within the NAS

. The Phantom 3 is comprised of a vertical takeoff and
landing (VTOL) Unmanned Aircraft (UA) and a Remote Controller capable of connecting to a

Mobile Device

. The Phantom 3 has a maximum gross weight, with payload, of approximately

2. 8 pounds; measures 13.8 in. x 13.8 in. x 13.8 in.; and has a maximum speed of approximately

31 knots. The Phantom 3 UAS is equipped with four roto rs mounted in a quad

- copter
configuration
, each driven by a Lithium Polymer b attery powered electric motor.

The Phantom 3 (also referred to as “the subject UAS”) that will be operated by K & R
will be registered in a ccordance with 49 U.S.C. 44103
, Registration of Aircraft
, as well as 14

C.F.R

. Part 47, Aircraft Registration
, and marked in accordance with 14 C.F.R. Part 45
, Identification and Registration Marking

.
BASIS FOR THE PETITION
K & R, by and through undersign ed counsel, pursuant to the provisions of the Federal
Aviation Regulations (14 C.F.R. § 11.61) and the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012,6

Section 333
, Special Rules for Certain Unmanned Aircraft Systems , hereby petitions the
Administrator to operate the subject UAS within the National Airspace System (NAS) , and for
an exemption from the requirements of 14 C.F.R. §§ 61.23(a) & (c), 61.101(e)(4) & (e)(5),
61.113(a), 61.315(a) , 91.7(a), 91.119(c), 91.121, 91.151(a)(1), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1),
91.409(a) (1) & (a)(2), and 91.417(a) & (b). In consideration of its size, weight, speed, and
limited operating area, K & R’s operation of the Phantom 3 UAS meets the conditions of FMRA

Sec tion 333.

A. Name A nd Address Of T he Petitioner

.
The name and address of the Petitioner is:

K & R Aviation, LLC d/b/a OpenAir 7940 Airpark Road, Suite O Gaithersburg, Maryland 20879
The point of contact for this P etition and specific contact information is as follows:
Gregory S. Winton, Esq. The Aviation Law Firm 199 7 Annapolis Exchange Parkway
, Suite 300 Annapolis, Maryland 21401 Tel: (301) 294

- 8550 | Fax: (866) 568

- 9886 Ema il: Greg@aviationlawexperts.com

B. The Specific Sections Of 14 C.F.R. From Which K & R Seeks Exemption.
K & R seeks exempt ion f rom the following sections of Title 14 of the C ode of F ederal

R egulations:

 61.23(a) & (c) , entitled Medical certificates: Requirement and duration

 61.101(e)(4) & (e)(5) , entitled Recreational pilot privileges and limitations

 61.113(a)
, entitled Privat e pilot privileges and limitations: Pilot in command

 61.315(a) , entitled What are the privileges and limitations of my sport pilot certificate7  91.7(a) , entitled Civil aircraft airworthiness

 91.119(c) , entitled Minimum safe altitudes: (c) Over other than c ongested areas

 91.121 , entitled Altimeter settings

 91.151(a)(1) , entitled Fuel requirements for flight in VFR conditions

 91.405(a)
, entitled Maintenance required

 91.407(a)(1)
, entitled Operation after maintenance, preventative maintenance, rebuilding, or a lteration

 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2) , entitled Inspections

 91.417(a) & (b) , entitled Maintenance records

C

. The Extent Of Relief K & R Seeks And The Reason K & R Seeks The Relief

.
1. Extent of Relief K & R Seeks And The Reason K & R Seeks Relief From Section 61.23(a) & (c).

Relief from Section s 61.23(a) & (c) entitled Medical certificates: Requirement and

duration
, is requested to the extent necessary to allow an adequately certificated PIC holding an

FAA

- issued med ical certificate or U.S. issued driver’s license , to conduct the proposed UAS
flight operations for compensation or hire

. This relief is requested since the limitations set forth i n Section 61.23(a) state that the

holder of a recreational pilot, private pilot, commercial pilot, airline transport pilot certificate, or
flight instructor certificate must also hold the appropriate FAA

- issued medical certificate to
exercise the privileges of th e pilot certificate. The relief is further requested since the limitations
set forth in Section 61.23(c) state that the holder of a spo rt pilot certificate must also hold a U.S.
issued driver’s license when exercising the privileges of the certificate in a light sport aircraft.8

2

. Extent of Relief K & R Seeks And The Reason K & R Seeks Relief From Section s 61.101(e)(4) & (e) (5), 61.113(a) , and 6 1.3 1 5(a)

.
Relie f from Section s 61.101(e)(4) & (e)(5), entitled Recreational pilot privileges and

limitations ; Section 61.113(a)
, entitled Private pilot privileges and limitations: Pilot in

command ; and S ection 61.315(a), entitled What are the privileges and limits of my sport pilot
certificate
, is requested to the extent necessary to allow a PIC holding a sport pilot, recreational
pilot
, or private pilot certificate , as well as an airman medical certificate or U.S. issued driver’s

license , and who has met certain flight

- hour and currency requirements
, to conduct the proposed

UAS flight operations for compensation or hire , subject to the conditions and limitations below

.
This relief is re quested since the limitations set for th in Section s 61.101(e)(4) & (e) (5)
state that no person who holds a recreational pilot certificate may act as pilot in command of an

aircraft f or compensation or hire or in furtherance of a business. Relief is requested from
61.113(a) since the limitations set forth in th at section state that no person who holds a private
pilot certificate may act as pilot in command of an aircraft that is carry ing passengers or property
for compensation or hire ; nor may that person, for compensation or hire, act as pilot in command

of an aircraft

. Re lief is requested from 61.315(a) since the limitations set forth in that section
only allow a person who holds a sport pilot certificate to act as pilot in command of a light

- sport

aircraft.

3

. Extent of Relief K & R Seeks And The Reason K & R Seeks Relief From Section 91. 7(a)

.
R elief from Section 91. 7( a)
, entitled Civil aircraft airworthiness
, is requested to the
extent required to allow K & R to determine that the subject UAS is in an airworthy condition
prior to every flight by ensuring that the subject UAS is in compliance with its operating

documents

.9

K & R seeks the requested relief because the subject UAS do es not require an air worthiness

certificate in accordance with 14 C

. F

. R

. P art 21, Subpart H

.
4

. Extent of Relief K & R Seeks And The Reason K & R Seeks Relief From Section 91.119(c).
Relief from Section 91.119(c), entitled Minimum safe altitudes: (c) Over other than
congested areas , is required because a ll proposed operations of the subject U AS will take place

at an altitude at or below 400 feet AGL

. Th is relief is requested since the limitations set forth in
Section 91.119(c) state that no person may operate an aircraft below 500 feet above the surface

. Additionally, relief from Section 91 .119(c) is requested to the extent necessary to allow
operations to be conducted closer than 500 feet to persons, vessels, vehicles, or structures, under

certain conditions . This relief is requested since the limitations set forth in Section 91.119(c)

pro hibit operating an aircraft closer than 500 feet to a person, vessel, vehicle, or structure.

5

. Extent O f Relief K & R Seeks And The Reason K & R Seeks Relief From Section 91. 121

. Relief from Section 91.121, entitled Altimeter settings , may be required to allow flight
operations of the subject UAS
, because the subject UA S ’ altitude reporting equipment may be

set on the ground to zero feet AGL, rather t han local barometric pressure or field altitude, before
each flight. Considering the limited altitude of the proposed operations, relief from 14 C

. F

. R

. §

91.121 is sought to the extent necessary to comply with the applicable conditions and limit ations

stated below.

6

. Extent O f Relief K & R Seeks And The Reason K & R Seeks Relief From Section 91.151( a ) (1)

.
R elief from Section 91.151( a ) (1)
, entitled Fuel requirements for flight in VFR conditions
, is requ ested to the extent required to allow flights of the battery powered subject UAS during
daylight hours in visual meteorological conditions (VMC)
, under visual flight rules ( VFR )

.10

K & R seeks the requested relief because without an exemption from Section 91.151( a ) (1) , the
flight time duration of the subject UAS will severely constrain the pr acticality of any aerial
acquisition and research flight operations that K & R propose s to conduct pursuant to this

Petition.

7

. Extent O f R elief K & R Seeks And The Reaso n K & R Seeks Relief From Sections 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), A nd 91.417(a) & (b).
K & R requests relief from Sections 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a) (2), and
91.417(a) & (b) to the extent necessary to allow the proposed operations in accordance with the

conditions and limitations set forth below. Since the aforementioned Sections only apply to

aircraft wit h an airworthiness certificate, K & R requests relief from these Sections because the
subject UAS do es not require an airworthiness certificate.

D

. The Reasons Why Granting The Exemption Would Not Adversely Affect Safety, Or How The Exemption Would Provide A Level Of Safety At Least Equal To That Provided By The Rule F rom Which K & R Seeks Exemption.

1. Reasons Why The Subject UAS Meet s The Conditions Of The FAA Modernizatio n and Reform Act of 2012 (FMRA) Section 333.
In consideration of the size, weight, speed, an d operating limitations associated wi th the

unmanned aircraft and their operation, K & R ’ s operation of the subject UAS meets the

conditions of FMRA Section 333
, and will not require an airworthiness certificate in accordance
with 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H. I n seeking this exemption, K & R submits that Phantom 3

UAS can operate safely in the NAS pursuant to FMRA Section 333, as demonstrated by : ( a ) the

characteristics of the Phantom 3 UAS ; ( b ) the pilot certification requirement; and ( c ) the specific
operating limitations

. Additionally, the UAS and proposed operations requested in this petition
are similar in all material respects to relief previously requested in Grant of Exemption Nos.11

11062 , 11109, 11112, 11213, and 11977
, and the reasons stated by the FAA for granting those
Exemptions also apply to the present situation

.

a . The S ubject UAS I s S afe For Use B ased U pon I ts S ize, W eight, S peed, A nd O perati onal L imitations.

T he Phantom 3 UAS has previously been deemed safe for operation by the FAA under

Section 333 based upon its size, weight, speed, and operational limitations
, most recently
approved for use i n Grant of Exemption No. 1 2863

.

b

. Flight Operations Of The Subject UAS Are Limited To The Line Of Sight Of A Certificated Pilot I n Command With A Safety Observer.

K & R will only utilize certificated p ilot s who possess a current and valid FAA issued

ai rman m edical c ertificate or valid U.S. issued driver’s license to act as a pilot in command (PIC)

of the subject UAS. Additionally, a safety ob server will assist all pilots during flight operations.

c . Flight s Of The Subject UAS Will B e Conducted Pursuant To S pec ific Operating L imitations.

In seeking this exemption, K & R proposes to commercially operate the subject UAS for
the special purpose of conducting aerial acquisitions within the NAS
, pursuant to the following
specific operati ng limitations:
1. Operations authorized by this grant of exemption are limited to the DJI Phantom 3 Unmanned Aircraft System when weighing less than 55 pounds including payload. Proposed operations of any other aircraft will require a new petition or a p etition to amend this grant.

2. Operations for the purpose of closed

- set motion picture and television filming are not permitted.

3. The UA may not be operated at a speed exceeding 87 knots (100 miles per hour). The exemption holder may use either grou ndspeed 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 airspeed recommended by the aircraft manufacturer.12

4. The UA must be operated at an altitude of no more than 400 feet above ground level (AGL). Altitude must be reported in feet AGL

. 5. The UA must be operated within visual line of sight (VLOS) of the PIC at all times. This requires the PIC to be able to use human vision unaided by any device other than corrective lenses, as specified on the PIC’s FAA

- issued airman medical certificate or U.S. driver’s license

.
6 . All operations must utilize a visual observer (VO). The UA must be operated within the visual line of sight (VLOS) of the PIC and VO at all times. 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 all times. Electronic messaging or texting is not permitted during flight operations. The PIC must be designated before the flight and cannot transfer his or her designation for the duration of the flight. The PIC must also ensure that the VO can perform the duties required of the VO.

7

. This exemption and all documents needed to operate the UAS and conduct its operations in accordance with the conditions and limitations stated in this grant of exemption, are hereinafter referred to as the operating documents. The operating documents must be accessible during UAS operati ons and made available to the Administrator upon request. If a discrepancy exists between the conditions and limitations in this exemption and the procedures outlined in the operating documents, the conditions and limitations herein take precedence and mus t be followed. Otherwise, the operator must follow the procedures as outlined in its operating documents. The operator may update or revise its operating documents. It is the operator’s responsibility to track such revisions and present updated and revised documents to the Administrator or any law enforcement official upon request. The operator must also present updated and revised documents if it petitions for extension or amendment to this grant of exemption. If the operator determines that an y update or revision would affect the basis upon which the FAA granted this exemption, then the operator must petition for an amendment to its grant of exemption. The FAA’s UAS Integration Office (AFS

- 80) may be contacted if questions arise regarding updates or revisi ons to the operating documents.

8

. Any UAS that has undergone maintenance or alterations that affect the UAS operation or flight characteristics, e.g. replacement of a flight critical component, must undergo a functional flight test prior to conducting fu rther operations under this exemption. Functional test flights may only be conducted by a PIC with a VO and must remain at least 500 feet from other people. The functional test flight must be conducted in such a manner so as to not pose an undue hazard to persons or property.

9

. The operator is responsible for maintaining and inspecting the UAS to ensure that it is in a condition for safe operation.

1 0

. Prior to each flight, the PIC must conduct a pre

- flight inspection and determine the UAS is in a condi tion for safe flight

. The pre

- flight inspection must account for all potential discrepancies, e.g. inoperable components, items, or equipment. If the13

inspection reveals a condition that affects the safe operation of the UAS, the aircraft is prohibited from operating until the necessary maintenance has been performed and the UAS is found to be in a condition for safe flight.

1 1 . The operator must follow the UAS manufacturer’s maintenance, overhaul, replacement, inspection, and life limit requirements for t he aircraft and aircraft components

.
1 2

. Each UAS operated under this exemption must comply with the manufacturer safety bulletins

.
1 3

. Under this grant of exemption, a PIC must hold either an airline transport, commercial, private, recreational, or sp ort pilot certificate. The PIC must also hold a current FAA airman medical certificate or a valid U.S. driver’s license issued by a state, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, a territory, a possession, or the Federal government. The PIC must also meet t he flight review requirements specified in 14 CFR § 61.56 in an aircraft in which the PIC is rated on his or her pilot certificate.

1 4

. The operator may not permit any PIC to operate unless the PIC demonstrates the ability to safely operate the UAS in a m anner consistent with how the UAS will be operated under this exemption, including evasive and emergency maneuvers and maintaining appro priate distances from persons, vessels, vehicles and structures. PIC qualification flight hours and currency must be log ged in a manner consistent with 14 CFR § 61.51 (b). Flights for the purposes of training the operator’s PICs and VOs (training, proficiency, and experience

- building) and determining the PIC’s ability to safely operate the UAS in a manner consistent with how the UAS will be operated under this exemption are permitted under the terms of this exemption. However, training operations may only be conducted during dedicated training sessions. During training, proficiency, and experience

- building flights, all person s not essential for flight operations are considered nonparticipants in accordance with 14 CFR § 91.119.

1 5 . UAS operations may not be conducted during night, as defined in 14 C

. F

. R

. § 1.1. All operations must be conducted under visual meteorological cond itions (VMC). Flights under special visual flight rules (SVFR) are not authorized.

16 . The UA may not operate within 5 nautical miles of an airport reference point (ARP) as denoted on a current FAA Airport/Facility Directory (AFD) or for airports not den oted with an ARP, the center of the airport symbol as denoted on the current FAA

- published aeronautical chart, unless a letter of agreement with that airport’s management is obtained or otherwise permitted by a COA issued to the exemption holder. The lette r of agreement with the airport management must be made available to the Administrator or any law enforcement official upon request

.
1 7 . The UA may not be operated less than 500 feet below or less than 2,000 feet horizontally from a cloud or when visibil ity is less than 3 statute miles from the PIC.14

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

determined location within the private or controlled

- access property.

19 . The PIC must abort the flight in the event o f unpredicted obstacles or emergencies

.
20 . The PIC is prohibited from beginning a flight unless (considering wind and forecast weather conditions) there is enough power for the UA to conduct the intend ed operation and to operate after that for at least f ive minutes or within the reserve power recommended by the manufacturer if greater

.
21

. Air Traffic Organization (ATO) Certificate of Waiver or Authorization (COA) . All operations shall be conducted in accordance with an ATO

- issued COA. The exemption hol der may apply for a new or amended COA if it intends to conduct operations that cannot be conducted under the terms of the attached COA.

2 2 . All aircraft operated in accordance with the exemption must be identified by serial number, registered in accorda nce with 14 C

. F

. R

. part 47, and have identification (N

Number) markings in accordance with 14 C

. F

. R

. part 45, Subpart C. Markings must be as large as practicable.
23. Documents used by the operator to ensure the safe operation and flight of the UAS and a ny documents required under 14 CFR §§91.9 and 91.203 must be available to the PIC at the Ground Control Station of the UAS any time the aircraft is operating. These documents must be made available to the Administrator or any law enforcement official upon request.
24. The UA must remain clear and give way to all manned aviation operations and activities at all times.
25. The UAS may not be operated by the PIC from any moving device or vehicle.

26

. All Flight operations must be conducted at least 500 fee t from all nonparticipating persons , vessels, vehicles, and structures unless:
a. Barriers or structures are present that sufficiently protect nonparticipating persons from the UA and/or debris in the event of an accident. The operator must ensure that no nparticipating persons remain under such protection. If a situation arises where nonparticipating persons leave such protection and are within 500 feet of the UA, flight operations must cease immediately in a manner ensuring the safety of nonparticipating persons; and
,
b. The owner/controller of an y vessels, vehicles or structures has granted permission for operating closer to those objects and the PIC has made a safety assessment of the risk of operating closer to those objects and determined that it doe s not present an undue hazard.15 The PIC, VO, operator trainees or essential persons are not considered nonparticipating persons under this exemption.

27 . All operations shall be conducted over private or controlled

- access property with permission from t he property owner/controller or authorized representative. Permission from the land owner/controller or authorized representative will be obtained for each flight to be conducted.

28 . Any incident, accident, or flight operation that transgresses the later al or vertical boundaries of the operational area as defined by the applicable COA must be reported to the FAA's UAS Integration Office (AFS

- 80) within 24 hours. Accidents must be reported to the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) per instructions contained on the NTSB Web site: www.ntsb.gov.
If this exemption permits closed

- set motion picture and television filming and production, the following additional conditions and limitations apply.
29. The operator must have a motion picture and televisi on operations manual (MPTOM) as documented in this grant of exemption.
30. At least 3 days before aerial filming, the operator of the UAS affected by this exemption must submit a written Plan of Activities to the local Flight Standards District Office (FS DO) with jurisdiction over the area of proposed filming. The 3

- day notification may be waived with the concurrence of the FSDO. The plan of activities must include at least the following:
a. Dates and times for all flights; b. Name and phone number of the operator for the UAS aerial filming conducted under this grant of exemption; c. Name and phone number of the person responsible for the on

- scene operation of the UAS; d. Make, model, and serial or N

- Number of UAS to be used; e. Name and certificat e number of UAS PICs involved in the aerial filming; f. A statement that the operator has obtained permission from property owners and/or local officials to conduct the filming production event; the list of those who gave permission must be made availab le to the inspector upon request; g. Signature of exemption holder or representative; and h. A description of the flight activity, including maps or diagrams of any area, city, town, county , and/or state over which filming will be conducted and the alti tudes essential to accomplish the operation.
31. Flight operation may be conducted closer than 500 feet from participating persons consenting to be involved and necessary for the filming production, as specified in the exemption holder’s MPTOM.16

2. Reasons Why An Exemption From The Requirements Of Sections 61.23 (a) & (c) Would Not Adversely Affect Safety.

K & R submits that an equivalent level of safety es tablished by Sections 61.23(a) & (c)

will be maintained because no PIC will be allowed to operate the subject UAS unless that PIC

holds either a valid FAA

- issued medical certificate or a valid U.S. issued driver’s license.
Additionally, no PIC will be allowed to operate the subject UAS unless that PIC has
demonstrated, b y meeting minimum flight

- hour and currency requirements, that the PIC is able
to safely operate the subject UAS in a manner consistent with the exemption, including evasive
and emergency maneuvers and maintaining appropriate distances from people, vessels, vehicles,

and structures.
Considering K & R ’ s proposed area of operations, the relatively small size of the subject

UAS, and the operating limitations set forth in this Petition, as well as the parallel nature of sport
pilot, recreational pilot, and priv ate pilot medical requirements, relating to the proposed
operations, K & R submits the additional requirements of at least a third

- class airman medical

certificate would not correlate to K & R ’ s proposed operations.

3

. Reasons Why An Exemption From The Req uirements Of Section s 61.101(e)(4) & (e)(5), 61.113(a), and 61.315(a) Would Not Adversely Affect Safety.

K & R submits that an equivalent level of safety established by Section s 61.101(e)(4) &
(e)(5), 61.113(a), and 61.315(a ) will be maintaine d because no PIC will be allowed to operate t he
subject UAS unless that PIC has demonstrated, by meeting minimum flight

- hour and currency
requirements, that the PIC is able to safely operate the subject UAS in a manner consistent with

th e exemption, includ ing evasive and emergency maneuvers and maintaining appropriate
distances from people, vessels, vehicles
, and structures.17

Specifically, the PIC must have accumulated and logged, in a manner consistent with 14
C.F.R. § 61.51(b), 25 hours of total time as a UAS pilot ( with a minimum of 5 hours of those

hours as a UAS pilot operating the same make and model of UAS to be used for operations under
the exemption ). In addition to the hour requirements, the PIC must accomplish 3 take

- offs and
landings in the prec eding 90 days (for currency purposes).
Considering K & R ’ s proposed area of operations, and the operating limitations set forth
above; the parallel nature of sport pilot, recreational pilot, and private pilot aeronautical
knowledge requirements
, with respect to the proposed oper ations, to those of commercial pilot
requirements ( See Exemption No s . 11062 and 11213 ); and the airmanship skills necessary to
safely operate the subjec t UAS, K & R submits that the additional mann ed airmanship
experience of a commercially certificated pilot would not correlate to the airmanship skills
necessary for K & R ’ s specific proposed flight operations.
As in Exemption Nos. 11062
, 11138, and 11153
, prior documented flight experience that
was obtained in compliance with applicable regulations will ensure an equivalent level of safety
during K & R ’ s proposed operations. The Administrator has held that prior documented flight
experience that was obtained in complian ce with applicable regulations would ensure safe
operations , stating as follows:
In Exemption No. 11062, the FAA required that prior to conducting operations for the purpose of motion picture filming (or similar operations), the PIC must have accumulated

a nd logged, in a manner consistent with 14 CFR 61.51(b), 25 hours of total time as a UAS rotorcraft pilot including at least 10 hours logged as a UAS pilot with a multi

- rotor UAS. Prior to operations under Exemption No. 11062, the PIC must also have accumul ated and logged a minimum of 5 hours as a UAS pilot operating the same make and model of UAS to be used for operations under the exemption. For clarification, the FAA considers these minimum hour requirements to be inclusive rather than additive; i.e. 5 ho urs make and model time may be included in the 10 hours of multi

- rotor time and the 10 hours may be included in the total 25 hours of UAS rotorcraft time. In addition to the hour requirements, the PIC must accomplish 3 take

- offs and landings in the precedi ng 90 days (for currency purposes). The FAA finds that at a minimum, the flight

- hour18

requirements in Exemption No. 11062 are appropriate to practice and build proficiency in the skills necessary to safely conduct K & R ’s proposed operations. The FAA also f inds that prior documented flight experience that was obtained in compliance with applicable regulations would satisfy this requirement. Training, proficiency, and experience

building flights can also be conducted under the grant of exemption to ac complish the required flight time. During training, proficiency, and experience

- building flights the PIC is required to operate the UA with appropriate distances in accordance with 14 C.F.R 91.119.
Exemption No. 11138 at page 15.
Accordingly, K & R will ensure safe operations by not allow ing any PIC to operate the
subject UAS unless that PIC has demonstrated
, by meeting minimum flight

- hour and currency
requirements
, that the PIC i s able to safely operate the subject UAS in a manner consistent with

the exemption, including evasive and emergency maneuvers and maintaining appropriate
distances from people, vessels, vehicles and structures.

4

. Reasons Why An Exemption Fr om The Requirements Of Section 91. 7(a) Would Not Adversely Affect Safety.

The equivalent level of safety established by Section 91. 7(a) will be maintained because
prior to every flight, K & R will ensure that the subject UAS is in an airworthy condition based

up on the subject UAS’ compliance with its relevant operating documents , and as stated in the

conditions and limitations herein

.
5

. Reasons Why An Exemption From The Requirements Of Section 9 1.119(c) Would Not Adversely Affect Safety.
The equivalent level of safety established by Section 91.1 19(c) will be maintai ned

because in any operation to be conducted closer than 500 feet from any nonparticipating persons,
barriers or structures will be present to sufficiently protect any nonparticipating perso ns from
debris in the event of an accident during operation of the subject UAS , which weigh less than

three ( 3 ) pounds and will be operated below an altitude of 400 feet AGL. The nonparticipating
persons will be required to remain in the area of protection
, and i f any nonparticipating person19

leaves the area of protection and is within 500 feet of the subject UA S , flight operations w ill
cease immediately.
Additionally, any operation to be conducted closer than 500 feet from persons, vessels,
vehicles, and structures would first require the permission of the land owner/con troller and a
safety assessment of the risk of operating closer to those objects by the PIC.

6

. Reasons Why An Exemption Fr om The Requirements Of Section 91. 121 Would Not Adversely Affect Safety.
The equivalent level of safety established by Section 91 .121 will be maintained because

the altitude of the subject UAS will be reported to air traffic control (ATC) in feet above ground
level (AGL), and K & R will operate the subject UA S within visual li ne of sight, at or below 4 00

feet AGL. Furthermore, the altitude information of the Phantom 3 UA will be provided to the

PIC via a barometric pressure sensor , GPS equipment
, a Visual Positioning System using
ultrasonic and image data
, and a radio communic ations telemetry data link, which downlinks

from the UA to the Remote Controller for active monitoring of the flight path and altitude

. Prior
to each flight, a zero altitude initiation point is automatically establish ed by the UAS at ground

level.

7

. Reasons Why An Exemption F rom The Requirements Of Section

91.151( a ) (1) Would Not Adversely Affect Safety.
A grant of this exemption would ensure an equiv a lent level of safety established by 14

C.F.R. Section 91.151( a ) (1) as a result of (1) the technical s pecifications of the subject UAS ; (2)

the limitations on the proposed flight operations ; and (3) the location of the proposed flight
operations

. Accordingly, K & R will ensure that it will safely operate the battery powe red
subject UA S during daylight hours in visual metrological conditions (VMC) under visual flight20

rules (VFR)
, with enough battery power for the subject UA S to fly after th e first point of
intended landing for at least f ive (5) minutes

. In addition to the level of safety established by the technical specifications of the UAS;
the limitations on the proposed flight operations; and the location of the proposed operations, the
subject UAS provide s audible and visual warnings to the PIC at the Remote Controller when the

UA has low batter y power remaining. Together
, these factors will ensure an equivalent level of
safety established by 14 C.F.R. Section 91.151( a ) (1)

.
P revious exemptions granted by the FAA concerning Section 91.151
, establish that safety
is not adversely affected when the technical characteristics and operating limitations of the
subject UAS are considered. Relief has also been granted for manned aircraft to operate at less

than the minimums prescribed in Section 91.151 , including Exemption Nos. 2689, 5745, and

10650.

8

. Reasons Why An Exemption From The Requirements Of Sections 91.405(a),

91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), And 91.417(a) & (b) Would Not Adversely Affect Safety.
In seeking this exemption, K & R submits that the equivalent leve l of safety with regard
to the regulatory maintenance and alteration requirements established by Sections 91.405(a),
91.407(a)(1), 91.409( a)(1) & (a)(2), and 91.417(a) & (b) will be met because a ll maintenance,
alterations, and preventive maintenance of th e subject UAS performed by K & R will be in

accordance with the methods, techniques, and practices prescribed in the operating documents

. Furthermore, only the Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) or qualified OEM maintainers
will perform higher level inspections and maintenance per the operating documents and OEM

standards. K & R will document and maintain all maintenance records for the subject UAS.

Since th e subject UAS will be inspected as prescribed by t he operating documents,21

K & R will maintain the equivalent level of safety established by Sections 91.405(a),
91.409(a)(1)
, and 91.409(a)(2)

. Additionally , a n equivalent level o f safety established by

Sections 91.407 (a)(1) , 91.417(a)
, and 91.417(b) will be m aintained because K & R will

document and maintain all of the maintenance records for the subject UAS

.
9

. T he FAA May Prescribe Any Other Conditions For Safe Operati on.

In accordance with Sec tion 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012
(FMRA) and 14 C.F.R. § 21.16 entitled Special Conditions
, K & R requests that the FAA
prescribe special conditions for the intended operation of the subject UAS , which contain such
safety standards that the Administrator finds necessary to establish a level of safety equivalent to
that established by 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H
, and 14 C.F.R

. §§ 61.23(a) & (c), 61.101(e)(4)
& (e)(5), 61.113(a), 61. 315(a), 91.7(a), 91.119(c), 91.121, 91.151(a), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1),
91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), AND 91.417(a) & (b) . Such special conditions will permit safe operation

of the subject UAS for the limited purpose of conducting aerial acquisitions within the NAS for
compensation or hire

. FMRA Sec tion 333 sets forth the requirem ents for considering whether a

UAS will create a hazard to users of the NAS or the public
, or otherwise pose a threat to national
security; and further, provides the authority for such UAS to operate without airworthiness
certification in accordance with any requirements that must be established for the safe operation

of the UAS in the NAS

.
Likewise , the Administrator may pr escribe special conditions pursuant to 14 C.F.R.
§ 21.16
, for operation of the Phantom 3 UAS
, since the airworthiness regulations of 14 C.F.R.
Part 21 do not contain adequate o r appropriate safety standards
, due to the novel or unusual
design fea tures of the aircraft . Section 21.16, entitled Special Conditions , states the following:
If the FAA finds that the airworthiness regulations of this subchapter do not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards for an aircraft, aircraft engine, or pr opeller22

because of a novel or unusual design feature of the aircraft, aircraft engine or propeller, he prescribes special conditions and amendments thereto for the product. The special conditions are issued in accordance with Part 11 of this chapter and co ntain such safety standards for the aircraft, aircraft engine or propeller as the FAA finds necessary to establish a level of safety equivalent to that established in the regulations.

See 14 C.F.R. § 21.16

. Therefore, in accordance with FMRA Sec tion 333 and 14 C.F.R. § 21.16 , the FAA may
prescribe special conditions for K & R ’ s intended operation of the subject UAS , which contain
such safety standards that the Administrator finds necessary to establish a level of safety
equivalent to that established by 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H
, and 14 C.F.R Sections 61.23(a) &
(c), 61.101(e)(4) & (e)(5), 61.113(a), 61.315(a), 91.7(a), 91.119(c), 91.121, 91.151(a), 91.405(a),
91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), and 91.417(a) & (b)

.
E

. The Reasons Why Granting K & R’s Request Would Be In The Public Interest; That Is, How It Would Benefit The Public As A Whole

. Granting the present Petition will further the public interest by allowing K & R to safely,

efficie ntly, and economically provide professional geospatial data collection, aerial photography,
infrastructure inspection services, and disaster area damage and debris assessments to clients in
both the public and private sectors

. Additional ly, use of the subject UAS will decrease
congestion of the NAS, reduce pollution, and provide significant benefits to the economy.
Notably, the benefits of K & R’s proposed operation of the subject UA S will be realized without
implicating any privacy issues.

2. The Public Will Benefit From Decreased Congestion Of The NAS.

The subject UAS is battery powered and serve as a safe, efficient, and economical

alternative to the manned aircraft tradi tionally utilized to obtain aerial imagery. By reducing the
amount of manned aircraft needed to perform aerial acquisitions, an exemption allowing the use23

of the subject UAS would reduce the amount of manned aircraft in the NAS, reduce noise and air
pollu tion, and increase the safety of life and property in the air and on the ground.
Furthermore, by reducing the number of manned aircraft operating in the NAS,
congestion around airports caused by arriving and departing aircraft will be reduced. The subj ect

UAS do es not require an airport to takeoff or land. Likewise, a reduction of manned aircraft
conducting aerial survey missions would result in fewer aircraft that must be handled by air
traffic control during the ground, takeoff, departure, arrival, and landing phases of flight
operations.

3

. The Public Will Benefit From The Safety And Efficiency Of The Subject UAS.
Conducting aerial acquisitions with the subject UAS , instead of manned aircraft, will
greatly benefit the public by drastically reducing the levels of air and noise pollution generated
during traditional aerial survey flight operations. By using battery power and e lectric moto r s , the
subject UAS produc es no air pollution, and is the most viable environmental ly conscious
alternative to the cabin class, six cylinder internal combustion twin engine aircraft that are
typically utilized for aerial acquisitions, and burn approximately 20

- 30 gallons per hour of leaded

aviation fuel. The subject UAS , while reducing the carbon footprint of aerial acquisitions , also

reduce s noise pollution, as it is propelled by battery powered electric motors, rather than internal
combustion engine s

. By using the subject UAS to perform aerial acquisitions, the substantial risk t o life and
property in the air and on the ground, which is usually associated with traditional manned aircraft
flight operations, will be substantially reduced or completely eliminated. Aside from the lack of
flightcrew members located onboard the aircraf t, the subject UAS , ha s less physical potential for
collateral damage to life and property on the ground, and in the air, compared to the manned24

aircraft that typically conduct aerial acquisitions (weighing approximately 6,500 pounds with a
wingspan of ap proximately 40 feet, a length of 34 feet, and a fuel capacity of 180 gallons).
Additionally, using the subject UAS to perform aerial acquisitions will increase the level
of safety and efficiency for K & R ’s employees, associated contractors, and public e mployees by
minimizing exposure to a number of hazards typically encountered in a field environment, such as
bridges, wetland areas, and steep terrain, as well as lowering the number of incidents and
associated costs, such as maintaining a certain level o f insurance, that normally coincide with
operations in a hazardous field environment.

4

. Performing Aerial Acquisition Operations With The Subject UAS Will Benefit The Economy.
In addition to being safe and efficient, the su bject UAS is also an economical alternative
to using manned aircraft to conduct aerial acquisitions . As such, operation of the subject UAS
will allow United States based companies, like K & R , to remain competitive and contribute to
growth of t he U.S. economy. Specifically, with the rising cost of aviation fuel and the
Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) regulatory actions phasing out leaded aviation fuels,
U.S. owned and operated companies must adopt new and alternative technology in order to
remain competitive. Operati on of UAS such as th e one in this petition is one such technology
that not only allows companies greater operational flexibility compared to manned aircraft, but
provides such flexibility without the high operational cost of a traditional manned aircraft.
By operating UAS , companies such as K & R
, can remain competitive and profitable, and
therefore, provide greater job stability to employees and contractors, which will ultimately
contribute to growth of the U.S. economy. Improved financial performance of U.S. companies,
through commercial use of the subject UAS , provides a stable workforce that increases consumer25

spending; improves local, state, and federal tax revenues; and allows companies to invest in

researc h and development in order to remain competitive both in the United States and abroad.

5

. There Are No Privacy Issues

. Similar to the manned aerial acquisition flight operations that have been conducted for

d ecades, K & R ’ s proposed operation of the subject UAS will not implicate any privacy issues.
Specifically, the subject UAS will only be operated pursuant to the specific conditions and

limitations set forth herein , and in accordance with the Federal Aviation Regulations, including
the minimum altitude requirements of 14 C.F.R. § 91.119. Most significantly, the subject UAS
will not be operated closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure, that is not
directly involved in the operation unless specific c onditions are met

.
F. A S ummary That C an Be P ublish ed In T he Federal Register, stating: The Rules From Which K & R Seeks Exemption:

K & R Aviation , LLC seeks exemption from the requirements of 14 C.F.R

. Sect ions 61.23(a) & (c), 61.101(e)(4) & (e)(5), 61.113(a), 61.315(a), 91.7(a), 91.119(c), 91.121, 91.151(a), 91.405(a), 91.407 (a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), and 91.417(a) & (b)

. A Brief Description Of The Nature Of The Exemption K & R Seeks:
This exemption will permit K & R Aviation , LLC to commercially operate an Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) for the purpose of conducting aerial acquisitions within the National Airspace System (NAS)

.
G. Any Additional Information, Views, Or Arguments Available To Support K & R ’ s Request.

This Petition is made p ursuant to the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012
(FMRA) Section 333, which dire cts the Secretary of Transportation to determine if certain UAS
may operate safely in the NAS

. As such
, K & R ’ s request for exemption may be granted
pursuant to the authority of FMRA Sec tion 333 and 14 C.F.R. Part 11, as set forth above.26

FMRA Section 333 sets forth the require ments for considering whether a UAS will create

a hazard to users of the NAS or the public
, or otherwise pose a threat to national security; and
further, provides the authority for such UAS to operate without airwo rthiness certification.

As discussed in detail above
, K & R will operate the subject UAS safely in the NAS
, without creating a hazard to users of the NAS
, or the public
, or otherwise pose a thr eat to
national security

.
CONCLUSION

As set forth herein
, K & R Aviation , LLC seeks an exemption pursuant to 14 C.F.R. §

11.61 and Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (FMRA)
, which will
permit safe operation of th e Phantom 3 UAS commercially
, without an airworthiness certificate
,
for the limited purpose of conducting aerial acquisitions within the National Airspace System
( NAS )

. By granting this Petition, the F AA Administrator will be fulfill ing the Congressional

mandate of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, while also advancing the interests

of the public
, by allowing K & R to safely, efficiently, and economically operate the subject

UAS commercially with in the NAS

.
WHEREFORE , in accordance with the Federal Aviation Regulations and the FAA
Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, Section 333, K & R Aviation , LLC respectfully requests

that the Ad ministrator grant this Petition for an exemption from the requirements of 14 C.F.R

Sections 61.23(a) & (c), 61.101(e)(4) & (e)(5), 61.113(a), 61.315(a), 91.7(a), 91.119(c), 91.121,
91.151(a), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), and 91.417(a) & (b)
, and permit

K & R Aviation , LLC to operate the DJI Phantom 3 UAS commercially for the purpose of
conducting aerial acquisitions within the NAS

.27

Dated: D ecember 10
, 20 15 Respectfully submitted,

The Aviation Law Firm
/s/ Gregory S. Winton

____________________________ Gregory S. Winton, Esq. 1997 Annapolis Exchange Parkway Suite 300 Annapolis, Maryland 21401 T el: (301) 294

- 8550 Fax: (866) 568

- 9886 Attorney for Petitioner