December 3 0, 2015

Mr. James Williams Manager, Flight Standards Service Unmanned Aircraft Sy stems I ntegration Office Federal Aviation Administration 800 I ndependence Avenue, SW Cam MacGregor 707 South Creek Street #416 Fredericksburg, TX 78624 310

- 497

- 6232
Washington, DC 20591

U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operation West Building Ground Floor, Room w12

- 140 1200 New Jersey

Avenue, SE Washington, DC 20590

Re: Request for exemption from multiple regulatory provisions to allow the use of small
unmann ed aerial s ys tems controlled by Cam MacGregor

Dear Mr. Williams:
Cam MacGregor respectfully requests an exemption from several provisions of Title 14 of the Code of Fede ral Regulations (C.F.R.) to permit the use of small unmanned aerial sy stems (sUAS) to assist in the evaluation of infra structure and operations for his clients. This request is motivated primarily b y the desire to maximize safety in infrastructure and oper ations. While an exemption would not eliminate the current need for in

- person visual inspection required b y v arious federal regulatory departments, it would allow Cam MacGregor to broadl y evaluate assets and operations with sUAS, resulting in a safer and
m ore efficient infrastructure network. Accordingly, the grant of an exemption is consistent with Congress’ intent, reflected in Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (Modernization Act), 1 that safe systems be permitted in the national airspace prior to the issuance of final regulations governing general use of these s ys tems. 2 A summary

of this request suitable for publication in the Federal Register is provided as Appendix A.
Appendix B provides the manufacturers information regard ing the design, aircraft performa nce, and fail

- safe features. Cam MacGregor has provided manufacturer information related to operating limitations, normal and emergency procedures, and maintenance a nd inspection procedures. As aircraft designs are added, Cam MacGregor will update this appendix appropriately.
Appendix C provides T he Cam MacGregor Operations Manual for flights covered under this Exemption Request.

1 P.L. 112

- 95, 126 Stat 11, February 14, 2012.2 Section 333(b) (2) specifically contemplates that the FAA may issue a certificate of waiver upon a finding that a type of UAS, as a result of its size, weight, speed, operational capacity, proximity to airports and populated areas, and operations within visual line of sight do not create a hazard to users of the NAS or the public or pose a threat to national security. **Background Information**
Cam MacGregor is in the busin ess of collecting agricultural data through the use of sUAS for his farm and ranch clients. Cam MacGregor’s c lients look for Safe Operations of sUAS. Cam MacGregor has developed specific Safe UAV Operational Procedures

. **Infrastructure Safety Inspection Operations** : Agriculture Inspection
As part of this , Cam MacGregor is requesting FAA Exemption for sU AS operations for safet y, inspection and video capture usage.
**Regulatory Basis for Exemption Request** In addition to the waiver authority provided in §333 of the Modernization Act, the FAA may grant an exemption under 49 U.S.C. §44701(f) if it has deter mined that such an exemption is in the public interest. The FAA has imposed a separate requirement in its procedural regulations, providing that the petitioner shall explain why granting the exemption would not adversel y affect safet y or how the exemption would provide at least an equivalent level of safety as compliance with the underl yi ng regulation. In this case, approval of this exemption would advance the public interest by significantly

enhancing
Aerial analy sis by

traditional fixed wing aircraft is impractical because the required altitudes for safe flight reduce visibility below meaningful levels

– it is simply not possible to see all asset anomalies from such heig hts. Helicopters present good vantage points; however manned helicopters are much more costly , subject to human safet y and
carr y highl y explosive aviation fuel making them impractical for deplo ym ent. By using sUAS for supplemental asset e valuation, Cam MacGregor will be a ble to substantially upgrade his capacit y to detect and address i ssues with the assets before they become a problem for safe operations. Thus, the use of sUAS has the potential to improve efficiency , resulting i n greater agriculture production and quality , vital to the U.S.
econom y.

**Granting an Exemption will not Adversely Affect Safety** Cam MacGregor notes that there is no applicable standard for an equivalency determination. Some have argued that the appropriate standard is that for model aircraft, noting that their operations, if c onducted for recreational purposes, would fall completely within the allowable o perations for model aircraft. Cam MacGregor believe s it is difficult to argue that there is sufficient correlation between model operations controlled by the Academ y of Model A eronautics a nd the ones contemplated b y Cam MacGregor . At the same time, it is clear that equivalency cannot be established for traditional, manned civilaircraft because the design and use profiles between traditional aircraft and sUAS are

s imply too diff erent. As such, Cam MacGregor believe s it makes more sense to focus on why the contemplated operations would not adversely affect safety , which is all that §11.81(e) requires.
Granting an exemption will n ot adversely affect safety . Cam MacGregor contemp lates conducting sUAS operations over client owned or controlled land, solel y during daylight hours, at altitudes well below that which would pose a risk to other aircraft. I n general, sUAS operations are intended to be conducted in areas distant from both congested areas and airports. The nature o f operations anticipated by Cam MacGregor requires that the sUAS be flown at relatively low altitudes and relatively low speeds. Cam MacGregor expects that in most instances, the sUAS will be flown no less than 17 5 feet above the highest structure along the path of the sUAS. Accordingl y, the risk of interference with
a nother aircraft is minimal. Cam MacGregor also plans to conduct sUAS operations at least three miles from any public airports (including heliports). In the event an operation needs to be conducted closer to an airport, Cam MacGregor will inform the airport operator and airport air traffic control tower of the contemplated operation and will comply with an y directions issued by air traffic control at th at airport.
Approval of exemptions allowing commercial operations of sUASs in the infrastructure aerial inspection industry will enhance safet y b y reducing risk. Conventional operations, using jet or piston power aircraft, operate at extremely low alti tudes just feet from the subject being inspected and in extreme proximity to people and structures; and present the risks associated with vehicles that weigh in the neighborhood of 4 0 ,000lbs., carr yi ng large amounts of jet or other fuel (140 gallons for je t helicopters). Such aircraft must fly to and from the inspection site. I n contras t, a sUAS weighing fewer than 55 lbs. and powered b y batteries eliminates virtually all of that risk given the reduced mass and lack of combustible fuel carried on board. The sUAS is carried to the inspection site. The sUAS will carry

no passengers or crew and, therefore, will not expose them to the risks associated with manned aircraft flights.
The operation of small UASs, weighing less than 55 lbs., conducted in the strict conditions outlined above, will provide an equivalent level of safet y supporting the grant of the exemptions requested herein, including 333 Aircraft Exemption Status exemptin g the applicant from conventional aircraft requirements and allowing commercial operations. These lightweight aircraft operate at slow speeds, close to the ground, and in a controlled environment and, as a result, are far safer than conventional operations conducted with turbine helicopters operating in close proximity to the ground and people.

The safet y of those on the ground is protected b y t he fact that no one will be allowed into the area witho ut the permission of the propert y owner . Securit y will b e established for the flight area as part of the pre

- flight control. Each individual within the secure area will be briefed prior to flight and will consent to being in the area. All others will be excluded from the area.Cam MacGregor intends to use a dedicated staff for sUAS operations. All operations will

be within visual line

- of

- sight (i.e., no more than approximately 0.5 miles from the manipulator of the controls, or pilot in command (PI C)). Each PIC will conduct at least three take

- offs and landing s with the sUAS on which he or she is trained every 90 day s. PI C’s will establish their qualifications thru a combination	of	aeronautical knowledge, UAS	airmanship	skills,	and	verification	through	testing of	flight	ability before i nfrastructures	operations	have commenced. Depending on the t yp e of operation, additional ground

- based visual observers may be employ ed as well. These observers will be within constant visual line of sight and in constant contact with the PIC at all times

. The visual observers will assist the PI C in avoiding objects near the sUAS.
There are no standards for either Private or Commercial sUAS pilot certificates. The safe operation and control of the UAS as described in this application does not depend on t he ty pe of FAA license held by the PIC. Given the restricted and controlled airspace within which operations will take place, the key factors needed b y the PIC are knowledge of the airspace within which the operation will take place and how that airspace f its into the National Airspace Sy stem (NAS). That knowledge can be and is gained primarily through ground school and not through flight training in fixed wing or rotor aircraft, nor is it dependent on the acquisition of a commercial or private pilot’s cert ificate. Those certificates demonstrate knowledge of the factors and skills needed for the safe operation of those ty

pes of aircraft (fixed wing or rotorcraft). I t cannot be assumed that a commercial pilot, approved to operate a helicopter or fixed wing ai rcraft, has the skill or ability to safel y operate a small unmanned aerial vehicle, operating at 400 ’ AGL or lower, within strictly

controlled pre

- approved airspace. Besides knowledge of airspace regulations, dexterity

in the control and operation of the s UAS acquired from actual operation of the aircraft is the most important factor in establishing an equivalent level of safet y.

If the PI C has acquired the necessary knowledge of airspace requirements, the relevant issues are (1) where the aircraft will be flown, (2) the size of the aircraft relative to what is being used today

to accomplish the same mission, and (3) what precautions will be taken to ensure the safety of those in the area of operation. We propose that the PI C has at least an FAA Private Pilots Certificate and a Class III medical; the aircraft be operated within a secure environment; and that no one be allowed to enter the secure environment unless they

are part of the operation, have been fully briefed of the risks prior to operation of t he sUAS, and have consented to the risks associated with being in the operating area. Should there be a mishap, the sUAS being flown pose significantly less of a threat than the helicopters and fixed wing aircraft now being employ ed because they are a frac tion of the size, carry

no flammable fuel, do not carry crew or passengers, and pose an infinitesimal risk to others. This is in stark contrast to conventional aircraft that are flown to the site, carry

explosive fuel, carry

passengers and crew, and operat e in a much larger
area. From a practical standpoint, there are relatively few licensed full

- scale aircraft pilots who are also qualified to fl y the type of sUAS that are utilized for infrastructure image

- captureoperations. There are even fewer commerc ial pilots that can fl y these sUAS

– to the point

that to do both is considered rare. Assuming that it is unlikely for a company

to find a pilot that has both qualifications, that compan y would either have to source a qualified sUAS pilot to train and obta in a commercial certificate, or find a commercial certificated pilot who would be willing to learn to fl y a sUAS to the competency level required for professional use. The incidence of locating said licensed pilot in rural SW Texas is low.
Minimum requir ements for the PI C include: 1) Private Pilot’s license and a Class III medical; 2) A minimum of 200 flight cy cles and 25 hours of total time as a sUAS rotorcraft pilot and at least 10 hours logged as a sUAS pilot with a similar sUAS ty pe (single blade o r multirotor); 3) A minimum of 5 hours as sUAS pilot with the make and model of sUAS to be utilized for operations under the exemption and 3 take offs and landings in the preceding 90 day s; 4) Have undergone a qualification process as specified in the Flight Operations & Procedures Manual consisting of a knowledge & skill test of the aircraft to be used.
Another consideration supporting the certificate requirement is that pilots holding a private pilot certificate are subject to securit y screening b y the Department of Homeland Security . This requirement should ameliorate security concerns over UAS operations under this exemption.
Cam MacGregor intends to u se commerciall y available sUAS c omponents for sUAS. These sUAS s ys tems will be tested for qualit y & safet y in his test facility before being deploy ed to the field. The sUAS is less than 55 lbs. fully loaded, carries neither a pilot nor passenger, and operates exclusively within a secured area. Cam MacGregor has a routine maintenance schedule to verif y that the sUAS will remain in safe and operational condition. Please see **Appendix B** , for Specific Types of sUAS.
Notes Regarding: 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H In	accordance with	the	statutory	criteria	provided	in	Section	333	of	PL	112

- - -95 in ref erence	to	49	USC44704,	and	in	consideration	of	the	size,	weight,	speed, and limited operating	area associate d	with	the	aircraft an d	its	operation,	we request that	this aircraft	exemption meet s	the	conditions	of S ection	333.	Therefore,	if	granted Secti on 333	relief	of	14	CFR	part	21,	and	any	associated	noise	certification	and	testing requirements of part	36,	is	not necessary.

Notes Regarding: 14 C.F.R. § 45.23 (b). Marking of the Aircraft Given the size of the sUAV, two

- inch lettering will be imp ossible. UA	will be identifiedb y	serial	number,	registered	in	accordance with	14 CFR	part	47,	and	have id entification

(N

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

Notes Re garding: 14 CFR § 91.7(a) Civil Aircraft Airworthiness Cam MacGregor ’s request is based on the fact that no airworthiness certificate will be issued for the UAS. Cam MacGregor ’s UAS will not require an airworthiness certificate in accordance with 14 CFR part 21, Subpart H. Based on the fact that an airworthiness certificate will not be issued, exemption from § 91.7(a) is not necessary

. Notes Regarding: 14 CFR § 91.9(b)(2) Civil aircraft flight manual, marking & placard Certifications required, the ori ginal intent of these regulations was to display an aircraft’s airworthiness, certification, and registration documents so they would be easily

available to inspectors and passengers. Based on the FAA Memorandum subject “Interpretation regarding whether ce rtain required documents may be kept at an unmanned aircraft’s control station,” dated August 8, 2014, the requested relief from 14 CFR §§ 91.9(b)(2) and 91.203(a) and (b) is not necessary

. Notes Regarding: §91.109 Flight instruction; Simulated instrume nt & certain flight tests Small UASs, 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. Aircraft being considered f or u se b y Cam MacGregor allow the UAS I nstructor to place the aircraft into ‘loiter’ mode (fixed altitude stationary hold). In the event of the student losing control, the UAS Instructor can quickl y and via alternate equipment (equipment not in the hands of th e student) place the aircraft into a mode that then allows the instructor to bring the aircraft back into control and back to the predetermined and/or safe landing location. All aircraft have GPS

- controlled hover mode.
Cam MacGregor does not describe training scenarios in which a dual set of controls would be utilized or required, i.e. dual flight instruction, provided by a flight instructor or other compan y - designated individual, that would require that individual to have full y func tio ning dual controls. Rather, Cam MacGregor evaluates the qualification of its PI Cs based on their experience with the UAS to be operated and verifies through testing, in lieu of fo rmalized training. As such, Cam MacGregor does not seek relief from 14 CFR § 91.109.
Notes Regarding § 14 CFR 91.119(b) Relief from § 14 CFR 91.119(b), operation over congested areas, is not applicable, because Cam MacGregor ’s operations will only be conducted within the secured agricultural area described herein.**Cam MacGregor Safety Operations & Procedures Overview:** 

Technology Considerations: Best

- in

- class, tried and proven technologies that are in advanced iterations. Software from highly

- reputable industry partners will include features

- 1. Auto descent (land ing) if communication signal were to be severed. If the sUAS loses communications, the sUAS will have capability to return to a pre

- determined location within the Security Perimeter and land. 2. Auto descent (landing) if battery were to drop lower than nom inal level. 3. Flights will be terminated at 25% battery power reserve. 4. Li ve video for operator gives real

- time position ing feedback. In other words, Cam MacGregor can monitor the scene from the vehicle's perspective for collision avoidance, and to maintain spatial orientation. 5. The sUAS will have the capability to abort a flight in case of unpredicted obstacles or emergencies. 6. On

- Screen

- Display (OSD) contains operating information to ascertain vehicle health at all times: speed, altitude, number of GPS sat ellites (when available), heading and voltage. 7. GPS lock supplies for return

- to

- home (RTH). Should Command and Control (C2) link failures occur (highly improbable), vehicle returns automatically to the point of launch. 8. Altitude information will be provi ded to the sUAS pilot via a digitally encoded telemetric data feed, which downlinks from the aircraft to a ground

- based on

screen display . This altitude information will be generated by equipment installed on board the aircraft, using GPS triangulation, or digitally encoded barometric altimeter, or radio altimeter, or any combination thereof. Prior to each flight, a zero altitude initiation point will be established and confirmed for accuracy by the pilot.
Mechanical/Physical: 1. Cam MacGregor will fly line

- of

- sight (LOS) only. The vehicle will always remain in direct LOS to the pilot, thus eliminating the concern of signal severance (flying behind objects/walls). 2. The sUAS will weigh less than 55 lbs and travel at less than 50 knots. 3. Batteri es should far exceed the capacity required for actual flight time. 4. Flights will be operated at an altitude of no more than 400 feet AGL. 5. Fireproof bags for storage a nd charging of high capacity LiP o batteries on

- site. 6. UA Ss operated under	this	exemption w ill	be marked in	accordance	with	14 CFR	part	45 or	as	otherwise	authorized	by	the FAA.

Personnel: 1. Spotters ensure safe operation and act as a redundant set of eyes for operators (pilot, gimbal op erator , mission director) 2. Radio spectrum analy sis for interference on the frequencies utilized for vehicle control/communication.3. A briefing will be conducted in regard to the planned sUAS operations prior to each day ’s activities. It will be mandatory that all personnel who will be performing duties within the boundaries of the safety perimeter be present for this briefing. 4. The operator will obtain the consent of all persons involved in the sUAS operations and ensure that only

consenting persons will be allowed within 100 feet of the flight operatio ns. 5. Observer and pilot will at all times be able to communicate by voice. 6. Written and/or oral permission from the relevant pro perty owners will be obtained. 7. Pilot and observer will have been trained in operation of UAS generally and received up

- to

- date information on the particular UAS to be operated.
Operations: 1. The unmanned aircraft (UA) must weigh less than 55 pounds (25 Kg), including energy

source(s) and equipment. Operations authorized by this petition of exemption are limited to the following aircraft described in Appendix B. Proposed operations of an y other ai rcraft will require a new petition or a petition amendment to this request.

2. The UA may

not be flown at a ground speed exceeding 50 knots.

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

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

- issued medical certificate.

5. All op erations must utilize a visual observer (VO). The VO may be used to satisfy the VLOS requirement as long as the PI C alway s maintains VLOS capability . The VO and PIC must be able to communicate verbally at all times.

6. The operator’s manual included as App endix C and this petition of exemption must be maintained and made available to the Administrator upon request. If a discrepancy

exists between the conditions and limitations in this exemption and the procedures outlined in the operator’s manual, the condi tions and limitations herein take precedence and must be followed. Otherwise, the operator must follow the procedures as outlined in its operator’s manual.
The operator may

update or revise its operator’s manual. I t is the operator’s responsibility

to t rack such revisions and present updated and revised documents to the Administrator upon request. The operator must also present updated and revised documents if it petitions for extension or amendment. If the operatordetermines that an y update or revision would affect the basis for which the FAA grants this petition for exemption, then the operator must petition for amendment to their exemption. The FAA’s UAS Integration Office (AFS

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

7. Prior to each flight the PIC must inspect the UAS to ensure it is in a condition for safe flight. If the inspection reveals a condition that affects the safe operation of the UAS, the aircraft is prohibited from operating until the necessary maintenance has been performed and the UAS is found to be in a condition for safe flight. The Ground Control Station, if utilized, must be included in the preflight inspection. All maintenance and alterations must be properl y documented in the aircraft records.

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

9. The operator must follow the manufacturer’s UAS aircraft/component, maintenance, overhaul, replacement, inspection, and life limit requirements. When unavailable, aircraft maintenance/component/overhaul, replacement, and inspection/main tenance requirements must be established and identified in the operator’s manual. At a minimum, requirements for the following must be included in the operator’s manual:

a. Actuators / Servos b. Transmission (single rotor)

c. Powerplant (motors) d. Propellers
e. Elec tronic speed controller f. Batteries g. Mechanical dy

namic components (single rotor) h. Remote command and control i. G round control station (if used) j. Any other components as determined by the operator;

10. The Pilot I n Command (PI C) must possess at least a n FAA private pilot certificate and at least a current third

- class medical certificate. The PIC must also meet the flight review requirements specified in 14 CFR § 61.56 in an aircraft in which the PIC is rated on his or her pilot certificate.11. Prior to operat ions conducted for the purpose of infrastructure inspections, the PI C must have accumulated and logged, in a manner consistent with 14 CFR § 61.51(b), a minimum of 200 flight cy cles and 25 hours of total time as a UAS rotorcraft pilot and at least 10 hours logged as a UAS pilot with a similar UAS ty pe (single blade or multirotor). Prior documented flight experience that was obtained in compliance with applicable regulations may satisfy this requirement. Training, proficiency , and experience

- building flights can also be conducted under this petition of exemption to accomplish the required flight cy cles and flight time. During training, proficiency , and experience

- building flights, all pe rsons not essential for flight operations are considered nonparticipants, and the PI C must operate the UA with appropriate distance from nonparticipants in accordance with 14 CFR § 91.119.

12. Prior to operations conducted for the purpose of in frastructure inspection, the PI C must have accumulated and logged, in a manner consistent with 14 CFR § 61.51(b), a minimum of five hours as UAS pilot operating the make and model of UAS to be utilized for operations under the exemption and three take

- offs and three landings in the preceding 90 day s. Training, proficiency , experience building, and take

- off and landing currency flights can be conducted under this petition of exemption to accomplish the required flight time and 90 day

currency . During training, proficiency , experience

- building, and take

- off and landing currency flights all persons not essential for flight operations are considered nonparticipants, and the PI C must operate the UA with appropriate distance from nonparticipants in accordance with 14 CFR § 91.119.

13. Prior to any

flight operations authorized by this petition of exemption, the PIC and VO must have successfully completed a qualification process, as outlined in the operator’s manual. As this is a requirement stipulated by the operator, the test must be de veloped and implemented by a qualified person designated at the sole discretion of the operator. A record of completion of this qualification process must be documented and made available to the Administrator upon request.

14. Prior to operations conducted for the purpose of infrastructure inspection, a flight demonstration, administered by an operator

- approved and operator

- qualified pilot must be successfully completed and documented. This documentation must be available for review upon request by the Admin istrator. Because the knowledge and airmanship test qualifications have been developed by the operator, and there are no established practical test standards that support a jurisdictional FAA FSDO evaluation and approval of company designated examiners, th e petitioner will conduct these tests in accordance with the operator’s manual.15. The UA may not be operated directly over any person, except authorized and consenting personnel, below an altitude that is hazardous to persons or property on the surface i n the event of a UAS failure or emergency.

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

17. Reg arding distance from nonparticipating persons, the operator must ensure that no persons are allowed within 500 feet of the area except those consenting to be involved and necessary for the infrastructure inspection operations. This provision may be reduced to no less than 200 feet if it would not adversely affect safety and the Administrator has approved it. For example, an equivalent level of safety may be determined by an aviation safety inspector’s evaluation of the infrastructure inspection area to note terrain features, obstructions, buildings, safety barriers, etc. Such barriers may protect nonparticipating persons (observers, the public, news media, etc.) from debris in the event of an accident.

18. If the UAS loses communications or loses its GPS sig nal, the UA must return to a pre
- determined location within the security perimeter and land or be recovered in accordance with the operator’s manual.

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

20. Each UAS operation must be completed with 25% battery power remaining.

21. The operator must obtain an Air Traffic Organization (ATO) issued Certificate of Waiver or Authorization (COA) prior to conducting any operations under th is petition of exemption. This COA will also require the operator to request a Notice to Airman (NOTAM) not more than 72 hours in advance, but not less than 48 hours prior to the operation.

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

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

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

24. Each UAS operated under this exemption must comply with all manufacturer Safety Bulletins.25. The operator must develop UAS technician qualification criteria. These criteria must be added to the operator’s manual.

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

27. Before conducting operations, the radio frequency spectrum used for operation and control of the UA must comply with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) or other appropriate government oversight agency requirements.

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

- day

notification may

be waived with the concurrence of the FSDO. The plan of activitie s must include at least the following:

a. Dates and times for all flights; b. Name and phone number of the operator for the UAS infrastructure inspection operations conducted under this petition of exemption;
c. Name and phone number of the person responsible for the on

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

- number of UAS to be used;
e. Name and certificate number of UAS PICs involved in the infrastructure inspection event; f. A statement that th e operator has obtained permission from property owners and/or local officials to conduct the infrastructure inspection event; the list of those who gave permission must be made available to the inspector upon request; g. Signature of exemption

- holder or re presentative; and h. A description of the flight activity, including maps or diagrams of any area, city , town, county , and/or state over which infrastructure inspection will be conducted and the altitudes essential to accomplish the operation.

29. The docum ents 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

.
30. The UA must remain clear and yield the right of way to all other manned operations and activities at all times (including, but not limited to, ultralight vehicles, parachute activities, parasailing activities, hang gliders, etc.).31. UAS operations may not be conducted during night, as defined in 14 CFR § 1.1. All operations must be conducted under visual meteorological conditions (VMC). Flights under special visual flight rules (SVFR) are not authorized.

32. The UAS may

not be operated by

the PIC fr om any

moving device or vehicle.

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

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

34. The UA may not operate in Class B, C, or D airspace without written approval from the FAA. The UA may not operate within 5 nautical miles of the geographic center of a non

- towered airport as denoted on a current FAA

- published aeronautical chart unless a le tter of agreement with that airport’s management is obtained, and the operation is conducted in accordance with a NOTAM as required by

the operator’s COA. The letter of agreement with the airport management must be made available to the Administrator upon request.

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

- 80) within 24 hours. Accidents must be reported to the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) per instructions contained on the NTSB Web site: www.ntsb.gov. Further flight operations may not be conducted until the incident, accident, or transgression is reviewed by

AFS

- 80 and autho rization to resume operations is provided.

**Support for Petition for Exemption** In accordance with the procedural requir ements of 14 C.F.R. §11.81, Cam MacGregor provides the following information:

**Contact Information:** Cam MacGregor 707 South Creek Street #416 Fredericksburg, TX 78624 310

- 497

- 6232
c ammacgregor@aol.com
**Regul atory Provisions from which Cam MacGregor**  **seeks an Exemption** Cam MacGregor believes he may need an exemption from the following provisions to conduct the contemplated operations. In some instances, relief is needed because relief from another provision renders compliance with the regulation at hand infeasible. 333 Aircraft Exemption Status 14 C.F.R. §61.113(a) and (b)14 C.F.R. §91.119(c) 14 C.F.R. §91.121 14 C.F.R. §91.151 14 C.F.R. §91.405(a) 14 C.F.R. §91.407(a) 14 C.F.R. §91.409(a)(1)&(2) 14 C.F.R. §91.417(a)&(b) Cam MacGregor believes an exemption is only needed from the above

- listed regulatory provisions. To the extent that the FAA believes that additi onal relief is required for Cam MacGregor to conduct t he operations described here, Cam MacGregor request s an exemption from any

such regulatory

provisions as well. 3

3 For example, 14 C.F.R. §91.417(a) imposes certain maintenance record keeping requirements “as applicable”. Since none of the underlying requirements (e.g., inspection intervals) can be met and wi ll require an exemption, Cam MacGregor believes a separate exemp tion should not be required for §91.417(a). **The Extent of Requested Relief and the Reasons Relief is Needed**
**Section 333 Aircraft Exemption Status:** Section 333 of the Modernization Act authorizes the FAA to exempt aircraft from the requirement for an airworthiness certificate based on a consideration of the size, weight, speed, operational capability of the particular UAS, as well as its proximity to airports and populated areas. An analysis of these criteria demonstrates that the sUAS operated withou t an airworthiness certificate in the areas and under the conditions contemplated by Cam MacGregor will be at least as safe, or safer, than a conventional aircraft (fixed wing or rotorcraft) operating with an airworthiness certificate without the condition s proposed in this request.

The sUAS is less than 55 lbs. fully loaded, carries neither a pilot nor passenger, and operates exclusively within a secured area. Unlike other civil aircraft, operations under this exemption will be tightly

controlled and monitored by the operator and observer. O perations will be conducted in compliance with the FAA and with local public safety requirements to provide security for the area of operation as is now done with conventional equipment, infrastructure, bridge and out building evaluation. These safety enha ncements provide an expanded degree of safety to the inspectors over conventional operations. Lastly, application of these same criteria demonstrates that there is no credible threat to national security posed by the sUAS, due to its size, speed of operati on, location of operation, lack of explosive materials and inability to carry a substantial external load.
Given the size and limited operating area associated with the aircraft to be utilized by the Applicant, this meets the requirements of an equival ent level of safet y under Part 11 and Section 333 of the Reform Act. The Federal Aviation Act (49 U.S.C.§44701 (f)) and Section 333 of the Reform Act both authorize the FAA to exempt aircraft from the requirement for an airworthiness certificate, upon con sideration of the size, weight, speed, operational capability , and proximity to airports and populated areas of the particular sUAS. I n all cases, an anal ys is of these criteria demonstrates that the UASoperated without an airworthiness certificate, in the restricted environment and under the

conditions proposed will be at least as safe, or safer, than a conventional aircraft (fixed wing or rotorcraft) operating with an airworthiness certificate without the restrictions and conditions proposed.

14 C.F. R. §61.113(a) and (b)

**§61.113 Private pilot privileges and limitations: Pilot in command.** (a) Except as provided in paragraphs (b) through (h) of this section, no person who holds a private pilot certificate may act as pilot in command of an aircraft that is carry ing passengers or propert y for compensation or hire; nor may that person, for compensation or hire, act as pilot in command of an aircraft. (b) A private pilot may , for compensation or hire, act as pilot in command of an aircraft in connection wit h any business or employment if: (1) The flight is only incidental to that business or employ ment; and (2) The aircraft does not
carr y passengers or property for compensation or hire. ***** Cam MacGregor anticip ates initially using specially

trained staf

f to conduct the sUAS operations. While these individuals will not hold commercial pilot licenses. The sUAS will not carry

propert y for compensation or hire since they will be used solely to assist in evalu ation of the client’s agricultural propert y in fur therance of Cam MacGregor ’s client’s primary

business, the successful operation of a infrastructure; however, the employ ees’ operation of the sUAS will not be incident al to their employ ment with Cam MacGregor , and they

will be compensated for such work. Wi thout an exemption, the pilot would be required to hold a commercial pilot certificate under §61.133. However, the risk associated with the contemplated operations is less than the risk posed by a traditional aircraft. The sUAS will fly at altitudes well b elow the permissible limits for other civil aircraft, eliminating the risk to other aircraft, and within a geographical envelop e under the sole control of Cam MacGregor . Accordingl y, the risk wo uld be limited to Cam MacGregor , who will be appropriatel y ou t fitted in safet y gear, and the client’s propert y on the ground. Requiring a commercial pilot certificate would provide no appreciable safet y benefit and would needlessl y impose additional cost on Cam MacGregor . Because the contemplated operations would not comply with §61.113(b)(1) and none of the other exceptions to paragraph (a) appl y, relief is needed from both paragraphs (a) and (b).
14 C.F.R. 91.119(c)

**§91.119 Minimum safe altitudes: General.** Except when necessary

for takeoff or landing, no person may operate an aircraft below the following altitudes: *** (c) Over other than congested a reas, an altitude of 500 feet above the surface, except over open water or sparsel y populated areas. I n those cases, the aircraft may not be operated closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure.Cam MacGregor submits that the only relief he requires from §91.119 is from the minimum altitudes listed in paragraph (c). Relief is required from paragraph (c) for fixed wing operations because asset evaluation conducted at 500 feet or higher is insufficiently distinct to be meaningful. Since operations at this al titude also pose a heightened risk of collision with another aircraft, safet y can onl y be assured through the grant of an exemption. The anticipated rotorcraft operations should be adequately addressed by paragraph (d) (1). Additionally , relief should not be needed from paragraph (a) because an emergency

landing of the aircraft due to a power failure will not create an undue hazard to persons or property on the surface. As noted in the explanation of why an exemption will n ot adversely affect safety , Cam Ma cGregor clients have exclusive ownership of the land over which the sUAS will be operated, and public access is restricted. It also has exclusive use of significant portions of land adjacent to the infrastructure and structures that will be the objects of evaluation and anal ysis. Cam MacGregor ’s c lients tightly control access to land and have the ability to assure that no individuals unassociated with the planned operations are on the affected land. As such, the risk of injury

is minimal. Cam MacGregor does not contemplate conducting operations over congested areas, so relief is not requested from paragraph (b).

14 C.F.R. 91.121 **14 C.F.R. §91.121 Altimeter Settings** This regulation requires each person operating an aircraft to maintain cruising altitude by

reference to an altimeter that is set “...to the elevation of the departure airport 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 exemptio n may

be needed. An equivalent level of safet y will be achieved by the operator, pursuant to the Manual and Safety Check list, confirming the altitude of the launch site shown on the GPS altitude indicator before flight.
Altitude information will be prov ided to the sUAS pilot via a digitally encoded telemetric data feed, which downlinks from the aircraft to a ground

- based on

- screen display. This altitude information will be generated by equipment installed on board the aircraft, using GPS triangulation, o r digitally encoded barometric altimeter, or radio altimeter, or any combination thereof. Prior to each flight, a zero altitude initiation point will be established and confirmed for accuracy by the pilot. 14 C.F.R. 91.151

**§91.151 Fuel requirements fo r flight in VFR conditions.**  (a) No person may

begin 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. (b) No person may

begin a flight in a rotorcraft under VFR conditions unless (considering wind and forecast weather conditions) there is enough fuel to flyto the first point of intended landing and, assuming normal cruising speed, to fly after that for at least 20 minutes. ***** Operating the sUAS in a p re
- defined area with less than 20 minutes of reserve battery does not raise the t ype of risk contemplated b y §91.151, i.e., that a n aircraft could run out of power in the event it has to be flown to an alternate airport or circle the planned airport in the event o f unanticipated conditions. Cam MacGregor does not intend to use the sUAS for point

- to

- point flights and will not operate the sUAS be yond visual line of sight. Nor will the sUAS require an airpor t in order to land. Rather, Cam MacGregor will operate the sUAS using pre

- planned flight paths (taking into account weather conditions) designed to allow the sUAS to fly to the point of intended landing. As such, there is no need for a time

- based e xcess battery requirement. Rather it should be sufficient to require only as much additional excess flight capacit y as necessary to safel y land the sUAS. We believe that a 25% battery reserve is more th an sufficient to meet this objective.

14 C.F.R. 91.405(a), 91.407(a) (1), 14 C.F.R. 91.409(a) (1)&(2) and 14 C.F.R. 91.417(a) & (b)

**§91.405 Maintenance required.** Each owner or operator of an aircraft

– (a) Shall have that aircraft inspected as pres cribed in subpart E of this part and shall between required inspections, except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, have discrepancies repaired as prescribed in part 43 of this chapter; ***** **§91.407 Operation after maintenance, preventive main tenance,**  **rebuilding, or alteration.** (a) No person may

operate any

aircraft that has undergone maintenance, rebuilding, or alteration unless

– (1) It has been approved for return to service b y a person authorized under §43.7 of this chapter; ***** **§91.409 Inspections.** (a) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, no person may operate an aircraft unless, within the preceding 12 calendar months, it has had __ (1) An annual inspection in accordance with part 43 of this chapter and has been approved for return to service b y a person authorized by §43.7 of this chapter; or (2) An inspection for the issuance of an airworthiness certificate in accordance with part 21 of this chapter. ***** **§91.417 (a) & (b)** ***** Cam MacGregor believes that an exemption from these three maintenance requirements is appropriate because the FAA has not developed maintenance standards that wouldallow an operator to meet the part 91 maintenance requirements. In particular, there are

no individuals authorized by the FAA to approve a sUAS for return to service under §91.407(a) or to conduct the initial airworthiness and annual return to service inspecti ons required b y §91.409(a). Cam MacGregor will maintain the aircraft as instructed in the owner’s ma nual and ASTM F2909, where applicable, and will not operate the aircraft until it has reasonably

determined that any

needed repairs have been made. However, because of the technical impossibility of meeting the requirements of §§91.405(a), 407(a), 409(a) a nd 417(a)&(b), we believe an exemption from these provisions is appropriate.
Please do not hesitate to contact me at the phone number or via the e

- mail address provided above should you have an y questions or concerns.

Respectfully

submitted, Cam MacGregor
**Appendix A** Summary for Federal Register Publication
Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. Part 11, the following summary is provided for publication in the Federal Register should the FAA determine that publication is needed.

P etitioner: Cam MacGregor

Sections of 14 C.F.R. Affected: 333 Aircraft Exemption Status 14 C.F.R. §61.113(a) and (b) 14 C.F.R. §91.119(c) 14 C.F.R. §91.121 14 C.F.R. §91.151 14 C.F.R. §91.405(a) 14 C.F.R. §91.407(a) 14 C.F.R. §91.409(a) 14 C.F.R. §91.417(a)&(b)
Description of Relief Sought:
Cam MacGregor seeks relief from the requirements of 333 Aircraft Exemption Status, 14 C.F.R., 61.113(a)&(b)), 91.119(c), 91.121, 91.151, 91.405(a), 91.407(a), 91.409(a), and 91.417(a)&(b) to c onduct sUAS operations over Cam MacGregor’s c lient’s owned or controlled land, solel y during daylight hours, to assist in the safe evaluation and anal ys is of infrastructure and operations. I n general, sUAS operations are intended to be conducted in areas remote f rom both congested areas and airports. The nature ofoperations anticipated b y Cam MacGregor requires that the sUAS be flown a t relativel y

low altitudes. Cam MacGregor expects that in most instan ces, the sUAS will be flown greater than 1 75 feet from the hi ghest structure along the path of the sUAS and in no instances will be flown higher than 400 feet above the ground. Accordingly, the risk of interference with other aircraft is minimal.

**Appendix B**
**Specific type(s),**  **make	and model** 


## #1

**- -**  **-DJ I**  **S1000**

**See	Attached	Flight	Manual :**  **DJI	S1000	User	Manual V1.08**  **DJI	A2	Flight Control** 

## #2

**- -**  **-DJI	Phantom	2**

**See	Attached	Flight Manuals:**  **DJI	Phantom	2	User Manual**  **NAZA**

**- -**  **-M_Flight	Control System_v1.26** 

## #3

**- -**  **-DJI	Phantom	3**

**See	Attached	Flight	Manuals: DJI	Phantom	3**  **User	Manual NAZA** 

**- -**  **-M_Flight	Control	System_v1.26**

## #4

**- -**  **-DJI	FlameWheel	450**

**See	Attached	Flight	Manuals: DJI	FlameWheel	450	User	Manual**  **NAZA**

**- -**  **-M_Flight	Control	System_v1.26**