May 29, 2015

U. S. Department of Transportation Docket Management System 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE Washington, DC 20590

Re: Exemption Request Pursuant To Section 333 of the FAA Reform Act of 2012

Dear Sir or Madam,

Pursuant to §333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of2012 (the Reform Act) and 14
C.F.R. Part 11, New England Safety Partners, LLC (NESP) , operator of Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems (sUASs) equipped to conduct aerial photography for the construction industry for pre

- planned, controlled area s , photographic and surveying services, hereby applies for an exemption from the listed Federal Aviation Regulations (FARs) to allow commercial operation of its sUASs, so long as such operations are conducted withi n and under the conditions outlined herein or as may be established by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) as required by §333. NESP 's current operation of sUASs for commercial purposes has been halted to comply with recently enacted federal aviation regulations pertaining to sUASs.

As described more fully below, the requested exemption would permit the operation of small, unmanned and relatively inexpensive multirotor aircraft under controlled conditions in airspace that is 1) contained 2) predeterm ined 3) has on

- site safety personnel controlling access, and 4) would provide increased safety and enhancements to clients' business operations.

The name and address of the applicant is: New England Safety Partners, LLC, Attn: Edward

Gardner

, 61 Chapel St ., Newton, MA 02458, ph: (617)219

- 9760

, edg@newenglandsp.com

.

NESP respectfully requests a grant of an exemption of the following sections of Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations:

• 14 CFR 21;

• 14 CFR 91, et seq.;

• 14 CFR 45.23 (b);

• 14 CFR 61.113 (a) & (b);

• 14 CFR 407 (a)(l);

• 14 CFR 409 (a)(2);

• 14 CFR 417(a)&(b).

NESP also respectfully requests an Exemption from Section 333 of the FAA Reform Act and Part 11 of the Federal Aviation Regulations from:• 14 CFR 45.23(b);

• 14 CFR Part 21;

• 14 CFR 61.1 13 (a) & (b);

• 91.7 (a);

• 91.9(b)(2);

• 91.103(b);

• 91.109;

• 91.119;

• 91.12 1;

• 91.151(a);

• 91.203(a) & (b);

• 91.405 (a);

• 91.407 (a) (1 );

• 91.409 (a) (2);

• 91.417 (a) & (b).

I. The Extent of Relief New England Safety Partners, LLC, Seeks and the Reason It Seeks

Such Relief:

NESP submits this application in accordance with the Reform Act, 112 P.L. 95 §§331

- 334, seeking relief from any currently applicable federal aviation regulations PARs pertaining to UASs (unmanned aircraft sy stems) and operating to prevent NESP contemplated commercial photographic, mapping, and other flight operations within the U.S. national airspace system. The Reform Act in §332 provides for such integration of civil UASs into our national airspace

system a s it is in the public's interest to do so. NESP 's lightweight UASs meet the definition of "small unmanned aircraft" as set forth in §331 and combined with a sterling safety record in similar industries, NESP 's light duty UASs are ideal recipients of exempt ion by the intent of the Reform Act. Considerations for relief include a combination of sUAS physical characteristics, safety features, and safe practices identified in §333:

• sUAS weight,

• sUAS overall size,

• sUAS speed over ground,

• sUAS flight zone charact eristecs,

• Non

- operation near airports (civilian or military),

• Tightly controlled operation in populated areas,

• Operation of the UAS by VLOS.

• Coordination by a minimum of 4 persons, three staff members of NESP and one safety

official from the client.

Spec ific consideration is outlined below :14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H : Airworthiness Certificates

14 C.F.R. §91.203 (a)( 1) Subpart H, entitled Airworthiness Certificates, establishes the procedural requirements for the issuance of airworthiness certific ates as required by FAR §91.203 (a) (1 ) . Given the size and limited operating area associated sUASs, an exemption from Part 21 Subpart H meets the requirements of an equivalent level of safety under Part 11 and §333

of the Reform Ac t. The Federal Aviation Act (49 U.S.C.§4470 1 (f)) and §333 of the Reform Act both authorize the FAA to exempt aircraft from the requirement for an airworthiness certificate, upon consideration of the size, weight, speed, operational capability, and proximity to airports and populated areas of the particular sUAS. In all cases, an analysis of these criteria demonstrates that the UAS operated without an airworthiness certificate, in the restricted environment and under the conditions proposed will be at least as sa fe, or safer, than a conventional aircraft (fixed wing or rotorcraft) operating with an airworthiness certificate without the restrictions and conditions proposed.

The sUAS to be operated by NESP is less than 11kg 1 with maximal payload consisting of remote sensing instrumentation, carries no persons, carries no explosive or flammable materials including combustible fuels, and operates exclusively within a secured area. Unlike other civil aircraft, operations under t his exemption will be tightly controlled and monitored by both the pilot (PIC), 'spotter' role designated to act as both the remote sensing controller and secondary monitor for safety issues, and a technician, which assists in matters related to maintainin g the sUAS and also monitors for safety concerns and reports to the on

- site safety officials. These enhancements to current safety practices and regulations, which already apply to civil aircraft, provide a greater degree of safety to the public and proper ty owners than conventional aircraft operations conducted with airworthiness certificates issued under 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H . Lastly, application of these same criteria demonstrates that there is no intrinsic credible threat to national security po sed by the UAS, due to its size, speed of operation, location of operation, lack of intrinsic explosive materials or flammable liquid fuels, and inability to carry a substantial

external load.

14 C.F.R. §45.23 (b). Marking of the Aircraft

The regulation requires: When marks include only the Roman capital letter "N" and the registration number is displayed on limited, restricted or light

- sport category aircraft or experimental or provisionally certificated aircraft, the operator must also display on that a ircraft

near each e ntrance to the cabin, cockpit, or pilot station, in letters not less than 2 inches nor more than 6 inches high, the words " limited ,” "restricted,” "light

- sport,” "experimental ,” or

“ provisional ,” as applicable.

Even though the sUAS wil l have no airworthiness certificate, an exemption may be needed as the

sUAS will have no entrance to the cabin, cockpit or pilot station on which the word

” Experimental" can be placed. Given the size of the sUAS, two

- inch lettering will be impossible.

The word "Experimental" will be placed on the frame in compliance with §45.29 (f) at a size suitable for the available space.

1 In particular, NESP anticipates using the Blade 350 QX2 AP, weighing approximately 1kg.The equivalent level of safety will be provided by having the sUAS marked on its fuselage as required by §45.29 (f) where the pilot, observer and others working with the sUAV will see the

identification of the UAS as "Experimental." The FAA has issued the following exemptions to this regulation to Exemptions Nos. 10700, 8738, 101 67, 10167A , and 11333.

Further markings include the use o f flashing LED illumination on the underside of the sUAS

frame which stands at contrast against a blue or white sky.

14 C. F. R. §61.11 3 (a) and (b): Private Pilot Privileges and Limitations: Pilot in Command.

§61.113 (a) and (b) limit private pilots to n on

- commercial operations. Because the sUAS will not carry a pilot or passengers, the proposed operations can achieve the equivalent level of safety of current operations by requiring a ground crew member to have a private pilot's license rather

than a comm ercial pilot's license to operate this sUAS. Unlike a conventional aircraft that carries the pilot and passengers, the sUAS is remotely controlled with no persons on board. The area of operation is controlled and restricted, and all flights are planned and coordinated in advance. The risks associated with the operation of the sUAS are so diminished from the level of risk associated with commercial operations contemplated by Part 61 when drafted, that allowing operations as requested with a private pilot in the ground crew exceeds the present level of safety achieved by 14 C.F.R. §61.1 13 (a) & (b).

14 C. F .R. §91.7(a): C ivil aircraft airworthiness

.

The regulation requires that no person may operate a civil aircraft unless it is in airworthy

condition. As there will be no airworthiness certificate issued for the aircraft, should this exemption be granted, no FAA regulatory standard will exist for determining airworthiness.

Given the size of the aircraft and the maintenance and preflight safety check lists p rior to each flight, a subset of which are provided in the enclosed Supplemental material, an equivalent level of safety will be provided.

14 C.F.R. §91.9 (b)(2): Civil Aircraft Flight Manual in the Aircraft.

§91.9 (b)(2) provides: “ No person may operate a U.S.

- registered civil aircraft ... (2) For which an Airplane or Rotorcraft Flight Manual is not required by §21.5 of this chapter, unless there is

available in the aircraft a current approved airplane or Rotorcraft Flight Manual, approved

manual materia l, markings, and placards, or any combination thereof. ”

The sUAS, given its size and configuration

, has no ability to carry a physical flight manual

on board the aircraft. The equivalent level of safety will be maintained by keeping the flight

manual at th e ground control point where the pilot flying the sUAS will have immediate access to it. The FAA has issued the following exemptions to this regulation: Exemption s Nos. 8607, 8737, 8738, 9299, 9299A, 9565, 95658, 10167, 10167A, 10602, 32827, 10700, and 113 33.14 C.F.R. §9 1.103: Preflight action

This regulation requires each PIC to take certain actions before flight to insure the safety of flight. As FAA approved rotorcraft flight manuals will not be provided for the aircraft, an exemption will be needed. The PIC will take all actions including reviewing weather, flight battery requirements, landing and takeoff distances and aircraft performance data before initiation of flight . Further, we have manuals created by the manufacturer, as well as our own preflight checklists which have been developed to ensure best safe practices are adhered to.

14 C.F .R. §91.109: Flight instruction

§91.103 provides that no person may operate a civil aircraft (except a manned free ba lloon) that is being used for flight instruction unless that aircraft has fully functioning dual controls. sUASs and remotely piloted aircraft, by their design

, do not have fully functional dual controls. Flight control is accomplished through the use of a control box that communicates with the aircraft via radio communications. The FAA has approved exemptions for flight training without fully functional dual controls for a number of aircraft and for flight instruction in experimental aircraft. See Exemptio n s Nos. 5778K & 9862A. See also Exemption No. 11333. The equivalent level of safety is provided by the fact that neither a pilot nor passengers will be carried in the aircraft and by the size and speed of the aircraft. Enhancing this safety is the technol ogy inherent

in the remote controls u tilizing digital communications paired to the sUAS , thus making it nearly impossible to have the control communications interrupted unintentionally or i ntentionally

.

14 C.F.R. §91.119: Minimum safe altitudes

§91.119 establishes safe altitudes for operation of civil aircraft. §91.119 (d) allows helicopters to be operated at less than the minimums prescribed, provided the person operating the helicopter complies with any route or altitudes prescribed for helicopters by the FAA. As this exemption is for a sUAS that closely mimics the behavior of a helicopter, and the exemption requests authority to operate at altitudes up to 400 AGL, an exemption may be needed to allow such operations. As set forth herein, the UAS will ne ver operate at higher than 400 AGL or beyond unaided visual line of sight, whichever is closer. It will however be operated in a restricted area with security officials tasked with ensuring public safety, and where buildings and people will not be exposed to operations without their pre

- obtained consent and training.

The equivalent level of safety will be achieved given the size, weight, speed of the UAS as well

as the location where it is operated. No flight operation will be taken without the permission of the property owner in t he case of private property or local officials i n the case of public property or private property with public interests.

Because of the advance notice to the property owner and participants in the remote sensing activity, all aff ected individuals will be aware of the planned flight operations. Compared to flight operations with aircraft or rotorcraft weighting far more than the maximum 11kg of

NESP 's sUASs proposed herein and the lack of flammable fuel, any risk associated with these operations is far less than t hose presently presented with conventional aircraft operating at or below 500 AGL. In addition, the low

- altitude operations of the sUAS will ensure separationbetween these small

- UAS operations and the operations of conv entional aircraft that must comply with §91.119.

14 C.F.R . §91.121 Altimeter Settings

§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 departure airpor t or an appropriate altimeter setting available before departure." As the sUAS may not have a barometric altimeter, but instead a GPS altitude read out, an exemption may be needed. An equivalent level of safety will be achieved by the operator, confirming the altitude of the launch site shown on the GPS altitude indicator before flight. The PIC and Technician will also ensure effective pairing with multiple GPS sources to guarantee accurate detection of height.

14 C.F.R. §91.15 1 (a): Fuel Requirements for Flight in VFR Conditions

§ 91.151 (a) prohibits an individual from beginning "a flight in an airplane under VFR conditions

unless (considering wind and forecast weather conditions) there is enough fuel to fly to the first point of intended landing, and, assuming normal cruising speed

- (1) During the day, to fly after that for at least 30 minutes; or (2) At night, to fly after that for at least 45 minutes ” The battery powering the sUAS provides approximately 15 minutes of powered flight in hover mode witho ut payload. NESP 's sUAS will not be able to meet the 30 minute reserve requirement in 14 CPR §9 1.15 1. Operating the small UAS, in a tightly controlled area where only people and property owners or official representatives who have signed waivers will be allowe d

, with less than 30 minutes of reserve power, does not engender the type of risks that Section 9l.l51(a) was intended to alleviate given the size and speed of the small UAS. NESP believes that an equivalent level of safety can be achieved by limitin g flights to 10 minutes or 25% of battery power whichever happens first. This restriction would be more than adequate to return the sUAS to its planned landing zone from anywhere in its limited o p era ti n g a rea.

Similar exemption s have been granted to othe r operations, including Exemptions 2689F, 5745,
10673, 10808, and 11333.

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

The regulation provides in pertinent part:

(a) Except as provided in §91.715, no person may operate a civil aircraft unless it has within it the following: ( 1 ) An appropriate and current airworthiness certificate... (b) No person may operate a civil aircraft unless the airworthiness certificate required by paragraph (a) of this section or a speci al flight authorization issued under §91.715 is displayed at the cabin or cockpit entrance so that it is legible to passengers or crew.

The sUAS fully loaded weighs no more than 11 kg and is operated without an onboard pilot. As such, there is no ability o r place to carry certification and registration documents or to displaythem on the sUAS. An equivalent level of safety will be achieved by keeping these documents at the ground control point where the pilot flying the sUAS will have immediate access to th em, to the extent they are applicable to the sUAS.

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

and 11333.

14 C. F .R. § 91.405 (a); 407 (a)(1); 409 (a)(2); 417 (a) & (b): Maintenance Inspections

These regulations require that an aircraft operator or owner "shall have that aircraft inspected as prescribed in subpart E of this part and shall between required inspections, exc ept as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, have discrepancies repaired as prescribed in part 43 of this chapter

. ..” and others shall inspect or maintain the aircraft in compliance with Part 43. Given that these section and Part 43 apply only to air craft with an airworthiness certificate, these sections will not apply to the applicant. Maintenance will be accomplished by the operator pursuant to the flight manual. An equivalent level of safety will be achieved because these small UASs are very

limite d in size and will carry a small payload and operate only in restricted areas for limited periods of time. If mechanical issues arise the UAS can land immediately and will be operating from no higher than 400 feet AGL. The operator will ensure that the UAS is in working order prior to initiating flight, perform required maintenance, and keep a log of any maintenance performed. Moreover, the operator is the person most familiar with the aircraft and best suited to maintain the aircraft in an airworthy condit ion to provide the equivalent level of safety.

An exemption granted to NESP would permit its operation of lightweight, unmanned, remotely controlled, sUASs in a tightly controlled environment with limited airspace. NESP utilizes local

business es ' safety o fficers in specifically determined areas (designed flight zone) to mitigate injury and property damage while fulfilling clients' goals. Technical enhancements to current safety controls will allow NESP to operate exceeding current safety specifications, an d stay ahead of, or meet, new ones being implemented by the FAA and Department of Transportation. Further, NESP conducts its operations in compliance with protocols described herein or as otherwise established by the FAA.

II. Commercial and Public Benefit s

We at NESP believe that granting this exemption request furthers the public interest by providing

safe (by way of an unmanned system) and efficient means to meet technical problems solvable by elevated data collection instruments. NESP 's client base con sists typically of small to medium

sized busines ses looking to increase their awareness of structures or landscape on their respective properties through data collection by photographic, videographic or lidar based surveying . By moving these functions onto sUAS based aircraft, the potential for loss of life or property is diminished due to the greater control in a smaller and safe r aircraft that holds no persons. Second, there are n o r eac tive or combustible mate rial s on board the sUAS and thus the pote nti al for fire or explosions is greatly diminished. Third, the small size and extreme man e uverability of

NESP ’ s UASs allow the PIC to avoid hazards. Lastly, due to the nature of the remote sensing instrumentation on board, the sU AS can maintain quite a safe distance between the aircraft andthe object(s) undergoing scrutiny. Additionally, NESP carries CGL coverage through Acord Insurance (certificate attached). Accordingly, NESP 's UASs have operated and will continue to

operate a t and above current safety levels.

A. The costs and benefits of your proposed action to society in general and specific

gr ou ps withi n s ociety

As described above, NESP 's past customers have been small to medium business es seeking a remote sensing solution to specific issues before a larger effort on the ir part would come underway. Examples include construction efforts that sought elevated photographic imagery of specific landforms to minimize cost of efforts to develop

.

. The impact to society, fin ancial and otherwise, would be extremely minimal. Indeed, it has s be e n demonstrated that sUASs have the abi lity to drastically increase the inf o rmation availa ble to policymakers at a fraction of the cost of measuring this data by terrestrial me a ns. One suc h impact would be inconvenience to directly proximal and non

- essential personnel that would be displaced from public or business owned property if it is deemed to be unsafe. In this case we relay our needs for a f1ight zone with the requirement that it be safe from casual intrusions and allow the business time to shift operations in order to minimize potential safety issues. This is best performed with the aid of safety perso n nel that actively steer non

- essential persons around

the flight zone.

1. The effect of an exemption for NESP on the quality of t he natural and social

environments

Utilizing sUASs minimizes the requirement for conventional aircraft. This eliminates the need

for an on board pilot, time consuming adher e nce to regulations surround ing boo k keeping

, and

submiss ion of fli ght paths to local civilia n or military airports, and detrimental effects to the environment caused by operating a combustible fuel based, large scale aircraft, with restrictions on the proximity to the target for remo te sensing.

Ill. Flight Capabilities and Cha ra cteristics of NESP 's UASs

P u rsuant to 112 P.L. 95 §333 (a), concerns for public safety are mitigated by the overall capabilities and characteristics of the sUAS.

NESP ’s UASs utilizes four (4) counter

- rotati ng propellers paired oppositely to each other for balance, control and stability. The total span of the sUAS is 46.5c m all owing for stable flight or landing even with the sudden onset of detrimental environmental conditions. The sUAS's have a

combined unit and payload mass of approximately 1kg , including cinematic/photographic or other surveying equipment. NESP 's sUAS is designed to primarily hover in place to capture photographic data and then operate at less than a 35 knot maximum speed to the next po int of interest. They are capable of vertical and horizontal operations but, in practice, are operated only

within unaided VLOS of the PIC.In addition to the PIC, NESP employs a spotter (VOS role) which are equipped with FCC Part 90 two way radios for c ommunication (FCC license WQUC203, see attached) as well as unaided

communication . These personnel are supplemented by additional safety officials provided by the client who are instructed to cordon off and otherwise minimize pedestrian access in the fligh t zone of the client's grounds. In the event of loss of visual of the UAS, the PIC can change flight controls to recall the VAS to the PIC's position without concern to the current heading of the sUAS. In the event of loss of sight of the sUAS into an area containing hazards or possible hazards, the spotter and the pilot has a real time live video feed which can be used to locate the UAS while it maintains its position in hover mode. The sUAS has demonstrated its ability to maintain its position by GPS coor dinates in hover mode in 25

- kph wind gusts at 25 feet representing an extreme environmental condition beyond the range of conditions within the scope for sUAS operation.

All of NESP 's sUASs utilize LiPo (lithium polymer) battery based power sources, decre asing safety risks from more easily combustible, fuel based, power sources. Flight times generally last

between eight (8) to ten (10) minutes allowing the staff to work with small flight areas per phase. The maximum flight time without payload is 13 to 15 minutes, however practical safe operation limits this to 10 to give ample time to control the sUAS to a safe landing zone. NESP further restricts flight time by not operating its sUASs with less than twenty

- five percent battery capacity. Further safety management systems in place include a GPS mode that allows NESP sUASs to hover in place if communication with the PIC is lost and optionally return at a set speed and height to a 'home base' predesignated safe landing zone . In the event of unfor e seen motor(s) failure, the system will enter into a controlled descent while allowing full use of all

UAS flight controls by the PIC. All commands sent via remote controller received during a

controlled descent are translated to an 'as meant' paradig m meaning the flight control package

will use its realtime 3 dimensional position and compensate rotors control the sUAS regardless of spin velocity. Landing gear is also programmed to deploy based on sensing of range to ground

from non

- GPS based sources. This assures that if one system is compensated a safe and successful landing can still occur.

IV. Reasons Why an Exempt i on to NESP Will Not Adversely Affect Safety Standards

NESP 's contends that operation of its sUASs will not "create a hazard to users of the national airspace system or the public:' as stated in 112 P.L. 95 §333 (b). Given the diminutive size and weight of NESP 's sUASs, combined with their operation in cordoned off and well

- controlled

areas, NESP 's sUA Ss fall well within Congress's contemplated safety zone. NESP sUASs have an established safety record bolstered by multi

- point preflight checklist, awareness of their surroundings

, and intimate knowle d ge of the behavior of the sUAS platform in many weather

conditions. T h is safety record and implemented operational practices demonstrate an awareness of public safety.

NESP operations routinely provide a level of safety at least equal to existing rules, and in nearly

every instance, exceed existing rules. NES P has worked very closely with the regional vendors and support for this unit to create a tightly integrated and highly fau lt tolerant platform that has

been tested th o roughly by a vendor with a proven record for safety and solid designs.Though it does not mitigate safety it is of note that as of May 2015 there are few companies that

will insure sUAS operations and sUAS based companies. NESP does not operate its UASs on or near airports and generally has only operated its fleet on private grounds with cordoned off areas or areas under the control of the property owner/ client with assistance by safety officials employed by the business. NESP determines the areas needed to fulfill the clients' goals and only operates its UASs in these flight zones and only in compliance with well

- regarded safety protocols set forth initially by the RC UAS trade and hobby groups and recently codified by

relevant FARs.

NESP standardized on the following practices to ensure safe operation of its UASs:

• Work with on

- site personnel to plan the flight goals,

• Work with on

- site personnel to restrict access to non

- essential persons,

• Operation by unaided VLOS operation only,

• Operation in phases 10 minutes in length,

• Operation to minimal 25% battery power,

• Operation of de vice to telemetry

- aided readout to 4 00ft at maximum,

• Numerous pre

- programmed fail

- safes that ensure specific behavior per issue,

• Three m a in roles supplemented by on

- site safety personnel,

• Employ controlled life cycle management of components to guard agai nst multiple failures,

• Preform a site check before flight to identify potential issues,

• Subscribe to relevant local weather and safety alerts,

• Expertly choose data collection instruments and accessories to minimize flight requirements or e xpertise

.

NESP h as experience in similar fields and has adapted this experience in its use of UASs to

increase safety. In combination to the ever expanding knowle d ge r epositori es from hobbyists and experts alike, NESP is constantly evolving its practices when there is a clear benefit to operations or increased safety element.

Summary

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

NESP {applicant) seeks an exemption from the following rules: 14 C.F.R. §21, subpart H; 14

C.F.R 45.23(b); 14 C.F.R. §§61.113( a) & (b); 91.7 (a); 91.9 (b) (2); 9 1.1 03{b); 91.109; 91.119; 91.121; 91.151(a); 91.203(a) & (b); 91.405 (a); 91.407 (a) (1 ); 9 1.409 (a) (2); 91.409 (a) {2) and 91.417 (a) & (b) to operate commercially a small unmanned vehicle (11kg or less) in elevated photographic and remote sensing operations.

Approval of exemptions allowing commercial operations of sU ASs in the media industry will

enhance safety by reducing risk associated with conventional aircraft ope r ations and other means

of elevated remote sensing involving persons. The public benefit served by approval of this petition is increased awareness of characteristics of difficult imaging targets. A sUAS w e ighing

fewer than 11 kg and powered by sealed batteries eliminates virtually all associated risk inherentin operating conventional aircraft in close proximity to buildings or persons or otherwise

el evating persons to a position they would be able to collect needed data.

The operation of small UASs, weigh in g less than 55lbs., 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.

As identified and described herein, New England Safety Partners, LLC

, is an New England Safety Partners helps small and medium sized business mitigate risk associated with traditionally disparate spheres of influence

– Physical Security, Cyber Security and Compliance. We provide our clients with comprehensive cyber and physical security and safety services, including executive protection and training

.

The FAA has been given the authority to issue the exemption to New England Safety Partners,
LLC, pursuant to the Federal Aviation Act, 85 P.L. 726 (1958), and as such, we humbly seek your consideration and approval of this petition.

Respectfully submitted

,

Ed ward Gardner

New England Safety Partners, LLC