Motorola Solutions, Inc. 1455 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Suite 900 Washington, DC 20004 USA

July 24, 2015

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

Re: Motorola Solutions, Inc. Petition for Exemption Pursuant to Section 333 of the
FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 and Part 11 of the Federal Aviation Regulations

Dear Sir or Madam:

Pursuant to Section 333 of the Federal Avia tion Administration (“FAA”) Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (“FMRA”) and Part 11 of the of the Federal Aviation Regulations (“FAR”), Motorola Solutions, Inc. (“Motorola Solutions ” or “Petitioner”) hereby petitions the FAA for authority to operate unmanned aircraft systems (“UAS”). Motorola Solutions seeks to use a
tethered aerial device 1 for research and development (“R&D”), situational awareness via aerial data collection, and provision of communications links. As this petition is similar in all material respects to other petitions the FAA has granted, Motorola Solutions requests summary approval of this petition.

Motorola Solutions is a global industry leader in communications infrastructure, devices, system software and applications, and a ssociated services. Motorola Solutions has a robust government segment which offers extensive communications pr oducts services to government, public safety and first-responder agencies, municipalities and commercial and industrial customers who operate private communications networks a nd manage a mobile workforce. With 14,000 employees in 60 countries, Motorola Solutions is a pioneer for mobile technology innovations.

1 Until recently, the FAA specifically excluded “tethered aircraft” from its definition of “unmanned aircraft.”
See Integration of Civ il UAS in the National Airspace System (“NAS”) Roadmap, First Editi on 2013, at 8 and 49 (“[Unmanned Aircraft] UA do not in clude . . . tethered aircraft.”); see also UAS Operational Approval, FAA Order 8900.227, July 30, 2013, at A-5 (“UA do not include . . . tethered aircraft.”). Motorola Solutions believes that the unique features of PARC’s tethered operations differentiate it from unmanned aircraft that operate unrestricted and untethered, which clearly fall within the FAA’s definition of “unmanned aircraft.” Motorola Solutions submits this petition to the extent that the FAA may require the operators of tethered aerial devices to obtain exemption authority to operate such devices in the NAS. Motorola Solutions he reby reserves and does not waive its legal right to assert
that its PARC aerial device does not constitute an “unmanned aircraft.”2 Following its investment in CyPhy Works, Inc., Mo torola Solutions seeks to add tethered aerial devices to its portfolio of public safety solu tions. Through this petition, Motorola Solutions proposes to operate CyPhy Works’ Persiste nt Aerial Reconnaissa nce and Communication System (“PARC”) for R&D relating to the use of tethered aerial devices for public safety purposes including aerial data collection for situational awareness and the provision of
communications links. Motorola Solutions also proposes to operate PARC in the context of providing trials and demonstrations of its capabilities to first responders and other public safety users. Motorola Solutions seeks to begin fa miliarizing these entities with the potential public safety solutions that PARC can provide, facilita ting the transition to aerial technology that can enhance the quality, efficiency, and sa fety of public safety operations.

I. PUBLIC INTEREST BENEFITS OF GRANT OF THIS PETITION

The operations proposed herein will have enorm ous public interest bene fits while presenting little to no risk to persons or aircraft. The pub lic depends on first responders, law enforcement, and other entities to maintain pe ace and safety by responding quick ly to dangerous situations. Tethered aerial devices can perfor m aerial data collection that obviates or greatly reduces the need to send people on foot or in helicopters to dangerous areas. They can also provide crucial communications links to people on the ground. Mo torola Solutions’ R&D efforts will explore and perfect the use of tethered aerial devices for these and othe r public safety functions, greatly improving the efficiency, safety, success, and co st-effectiveness of public safety operations. Motorola Solutions’ proposed trials and dem onstrations will simila rly benefit the public interest—these operations will help to familiarize public safety entities with tethered aerial devices and the important functions they can serve. This firsthand experience will help illustrate the need, justify expenditures, a nd otherwise facilitate the entities’ transiti on to this valuable technology.

Motorola Solutions’ operations also present little to no risk to persons or aircraft. Operations will be conducted on private or controlled-access property pursuant to the stringent operating conditions provided herein. PARC will be tethered to ground at all times, presenting very little risk of loss of control. It will carry neither a pilot nor passengers. It will carry no explosive materials nor flammable liquid fuels. Finall y, PARC does not pose any threat to national security due to its size, speed of operation, lo cation of operation, tether-limited range, lack of explosive materials or flammable liquid fuels, and inability to carry a subs tantial external load.

II. REQUEST FOR SUMMARY GRANT

Motorola Solutions respectfully requests that the FAA issue a summary grant to this petition for exemption. Summary treatment is warranted wher e, as here, the agency has already granted a previous exemption similar to the new request. This petition is similar in all material respects to relief previously requested in other grants of exemption. 2 Motorola Solutions requests use of UAS for research and development, situati onal awareness via aeria l data collection, and provision of communications links. The FAA has defined “aerial da ta collection” to include any remote sensing and measuring by an instru ment(s) aboard the UAS including photography,

2 See, e.g. Grant of Exemption Nos. 11062, 11109, 11112, and 11213.3 video, and infrared, or any other gatheri ng of data by instruments aboard the UAS. 3 The FAA has granted numerous petitions for research and development, aerial data collection, and
telecommunications. 4 Accordingly, this petition merits summary grant.

III. THE UAS

Motorola Solutions proposes to conduct ope rations using the CyPhy Works, Inc. PARC. 5 PARC is a small aerial, hex-rotor, te thered device that may elevate up to 400 feet, but at all times remains securely tethered to the ground. The te nsile tether, in additi on to securing the aerial device to the ground, is both a power sour ce and a data communications transmission mechanism. PARC is unusual not only due to the tether feature and its unique properties and functions, but also because it is typically stationary once it reaches its desired altitude and is designed to remain in place at that elevati on for extended periods of time. PARC weighs approximately 21.75 lbs. when operating with its full payload capacity of 3.6 lbs.

The device is designed to initiate an automatic la nding in the event that the tether is cut, the power to the device is lost, or if communications with the base st ation are interrupted. In such situations, PARC makes a controlled descent and gen tly lands in place. Because PARC receives its power from the ground, it does not rely on fuel . It also is not ba ttery-operated (although it does have a small onboard battery, which is a safety feature to enable a controlled descent and landing in the unlikely event that the tether is compromised, or if ground-based power or communications with the operator are interrupt ed). Thus, the operation of PARC does not involve any of the safety risks a ssociated with airborne fuel or battery operations. In addition,
tether-based command and communication is a wi red function, and is not subject to radio interference interruption.

IV. THE FAA’S LEGAL AUTHORITY TO GRANT THIS PETITION

The FAA has authority to grant the exemption re quested herein pursuant to Section 333 of the
FMRA and Section 44701 of the Federal Aviation Ac t. The Federal Aviation Act authorizes the Administrator of the FAA to grant exemptions from regulations prescribed under certain provisions of the Act where such exem ptions are in the public interest. 6 The FAA has established an exemption pro cess in Part 11 of the FAR. 7 The FMRA deals specifically with the integration of UAS into the national airspace, directing the Secretary of Transportation to

3 Grant of Exemption No. 11956, n.1.

4 See, e.g. Grant of Exemption Nos. 11574 (authorizing use of UAS for research and development); 11895 (authorizing use of UAS for research and development); 11946 (authorizing use of UAS for aerial data collection); 11956 (authorizing use of UAS for aerial data collection); 11941 (authorizing use of UAS to provide telecommunications); 11256 (authorizing use of UA S to provide telecommunications).

5 CyPhy Works confidentially submitted the PARC Oper ator’s Technical Manual to the FAA in connection with the company’s Petition for Exemption Pursuant to Section 333 of the FMRA , Docket No. FAA-2015-0836 (posted Mar. 30, 3015).

6 49 U.S.C. § 44701(f) (“The Administrator may grant an exemption from a requirement of a regulation prescribed under subsection (a) or (b) of this section or any of sections 4470 2–44716 of this title if the Administrator finds the exemption is in the public interest.”)

7 See 49 C.F.R. Part 11.4 determine which UAS, “as a result of their size , weight, speed, operational capability, proximity to airports and populated areas, and operation within visual line of si ght do not create a hazard to users of the national airspace sy stem or the public or pose a threat to national security.” 8 Section 333 further directs the Secretary to “establish requirements for the sa fe operation of such aircraft systems in the national airspace system.” 9 The FAA has granted hundreds of exemptions pursuant to its Section 333 and exemption au thority that have enabled commercial UAS operations in a wide variety of industries.

V. APPLICANT INFORMATION

The name and address of the applicant is:

Bruce Mueller Director, Office of the CTO Motorola Solutions, Inc. 1301 E Algonquin Rd Schaumburg, IL 60067

(847) 576-1320
Bruce.D.Mueller@MotorolaSolutions.com

VI. OPERATING PARAMETERS

The limitations and conditions to which Motorola Solutions agr ees to be bound when using UAS under an FAA-issued exemption include:

1. UAS operations will be conducted by a p ilot-in-command (“PIC”) holding either an airline transport, commercial, private, recreational or sport pilot certificate and
a current FAA airman medical certificate or a valid U.S. driver’s license issued by a state, the District of Columbia, Puer to Rico, a territory, a possession, or the Federal government.

2. The operator may not permit any PIC to ope rate unless the PIC demonstrates the ability to safely operate the UAS in a manner consistent with how the UAS will be operated under this exemption, incl uding evasive and emergency maneuvers and maintaining appropriate distances from persons, vessels, vehicles and

structures.

3. UAS may not be flown at ground speeds exceeding 87 knots.

4. Flights will be operated at an altitude of no more than 400 feet AGL. 10

8 Pub. L. No. 112-95, 126 Stat. 75-76 (codified as a Note to 49 U.S.C. § 40101).

9 Id.

10 Petitioner notes that the FAA’s current policy is to is sue a blanket Certificate of Waiver or Authorization (“COA”) to Section 333 exemption holders for flights at or below 200 feet. If this petition is granted, Petitioner will5 5. UAS must be operated within visual line -of-sight (“VLOS”) of the pilot at all
times.

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

7. Prior to each flight, the PIC must conduc t a pre-flight inspection and determine the UAS is in a condition for safe flight.

8. The operator must follow the UAS manu facturer’s maintenance, overhaul, replacement, inspection, and life limit requ irements for the aircraft and aircraft components and comply with all manufacturer safety bulletins.

9. UAS operations may not be conducted during night, as defined in 14 C.F.R. § 1.1. All operations must be conducted unde r visual meteorological conditions (“VMC”). Flights under speci al visual flight rules (“ SVFR”) are not authorized.

10. The UA may not operate within 5 nautical miles of an airport reference point (“ARP”) as denoted in the current FAA Ai rport/Facility Directory (“AFD”) or for airports not denoted with an ARP, the cen ter of the airport symbol as denoted on the current FAA-published aeronautical char t, unless a letter of agreement with that airport’s management is obtained or otherwise permitted by a Certificate of Waiver or Authorization (“COA”) issued to the exemption holder. The letter of agreement with the airport management must be made available to the Administrator or any law enfo rcement official upon request.

11. If the UAS loses communications or loses its GPS signal, it must return to a predetermined location within the planned operating area.

12. The PIC must abort the flight in th e event of unpredicted obstacles and emergencies.

13. All operations shall be conducted in acco rdance with an ATO-issued COA.

14. The UA must remain clear and give wa y to all manned aviation operations and
activities at all times.

15. All operations shall be conducted over priv ate or controlled-access property with permission from the property owner/contro ller or authorized representative.

operate below 200 feet in accordance with the terms of th is “blanket” exemption. Petitioner may also file for a separate COA to operate over 200 feet.6 VII. SPECIFIC SECTIONS OF 14 C.F.R. FROM WHICH PETITIONER SEEKS AN
EXEMPTION

Motorola Solutions requests exemption from th e following FARS to the extent necessary to enable the requested UAS operations for the reasons detailed below:

14 C.F.R. §§ 61.23(a) and (c); 14 C.F.R. §§ 61.101(e)(4) and (5); 14 C.F.R. § 61.113(a); 14 C.F.R. § 61.315(a); 14 C.F.R. § 91.7(a); 14 C.F.R. § 91.119(c); 14 C.F.R. § 91.121; 14 C.F.R. § 91.151(a)(1); 14 C.F.R. § 91.405(a); 14 C.F.R. § 91.407(a)(1); 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.409(a)(1) and (2); 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.417(a) and (b).

A. 14 C.F.R. §§ 61.23(a) and (c) Medical cert ificates: Requirement and duration; 14 C.F.R. §§ 61.101(e)(4) and (5) Recreationa l pilot privileges and limitations; 14 C.F.R. §§ 61.113(a) Private pilot privilege s and limitations; 14 C.F.R. § 61.315(a) What are the privileges and limits of my sport pilot certificate.

Because the UAS will not carry a pilot or passengers, the proposed operations can achieve the equivalent level of safety for its UAS operations by requiring the PIC ope rating the aircraft to have either an airline transport, commercial, private, recreational or sport pilot certificate and a
current FAA airman medical certificate or a valid U.S. driver’s license . Unlike a conventional aircraft that carries the pilot and passengers, th e UAS is remotely contro lled with no living thing on board. The level of safety provided by the op erating parameters exceeds that provided by a single individual holding a commer cial pilot’s certificate operating a conventional ai rcraft. The risks associated with the operation of the UAS are so diminished from the level of risk associated with commercial operations that was contemplated by Part 61 when it was drafted, that allowing operations of the UAS as requested with a privat e pilot as the PIC exceeds the present level of safety achieved by the above cited rule secti ons. The FAA issued an exemption to this regulation in Grant of Exemption No. 11210, among others.

B. 14 C.F.R. § 91.7(a) Civil Aircraft Airworthiness

Petitioner seeks an exemption from 14 C.F.R. § 9 1.7(a), which requires that a civil aircraft be in airworthy condition to be operated. As there will be no airworthiness certificate issued for the UAS, approval of this exemption should be gran ted because no FAA regulatory standard will exist for determining airworthiness. Given th e UAS size and the operating requirements listed herein, an equivalent level of safety to this rule will be achieved. The FAA has issued an exemption to this rule in Exemption No. 11911, among others.

C. 14 C.F.R. § 91.119(c) Minimum safe altit udes over congested and other areas7 Section 91.119(c) establishes safe altitudes for operation of civil aircraft over areas other than congested areas. Petitioner requests relief from this section with respec t to those participating persons, vehicles, and structures directly i nvolved the UAS operations. The UAS will never operate at higher than 400 AGL. Relief from th is provision is warranted as operations will be conducted with the safety provision s as outlined herein. The FAA issued an exemption to this regulation in Grant of Exemption No . 11062, among others.

D. 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 depa rture airport or an appropriate altimeter setting available before departure.” Th is requirement is inapp licable to Petitioner’s UAS, which does not utilize an al timeter. Petitioner’s UAS relies on a digital barometric sensor
and/or GPS altitude readout. To the extent that an exemption from this requirement is necessary, Petitioner notes that an equivalent level of safety will be achieved by the operator using these
sensors to confirm the altitude of the launch site before flight. The FAA issued an exemption to this regulation in Grant of Exem ption No. 11166, among others.

E. 14 C.F.R. § 91.151(a)(1) Fuel requiremen ts for flight in VFR conditions

Section 91.151(a)(1) prohibits an individual from beginning “a fli ght in an airplane under VFR conditions unless (considering wi nd 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.” PA RC is not powered by fuel; it has a tether-powered operational system. Given the limitations on the UAS ’s proposed flight area, this requirement is unnecessary. Operating the small UAS in controlled areas does not engender the type of risks that § 91.151(a)(1) was intended to alleviate give n the size and speed of the small UAS. The FAA issued an exemption to this regulation for UAS operations in Grant of Exemption No. 11204, among others.

F. 14 C.F.R. § 91.405(a) Maintenance require d; 14 C.F.R. § 91.407(a)(1) Operation after maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding or alte ration; 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.409(a)(1) and (2) Inspections; 14 C.F. R. §§ 91.417(a) and (b) Maintenance
records

These regulations require that an aircraft operator or owner “shall ha ve that aircraft inspected as prescribed in subpart E of this part and shall between required inspections , except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, have discrepancie s repaired as prescribed in part 43 of this chapter...,” and others shall in spect or maintain the aircraft in compliance with Part 43.

Given that these sections and Part 43 apply only to aircraft with an airworthiness certificate, these sections will not apply to Petitioner. Maintenance will be accomplished by the operator pursuant to the manufacturer’s requirements. An equivalent level of safety will be achieved because these small UAS are very limited in size and will carry a small payload and operate only
in controlled 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 initia ting flight. Moreover, th e operator is the person8 most familiar with the aircraft and best suited to maintain the aircraft in an airworthy condition to provide the equivalent level of safety. The FAA issued an exemption to these regulations in Grant of Exemption No. 11062, among others.

Such other relief as the FAA deems appropriate to enable the requested operations. Motorola Solutions also requests exemption from such other FARS as the FAA deems appropriate to enable the requested operations. If, during the effective dates of any Grant of Exemption issued pursuant to this Petition, the FAA issues interim or final rules for small UAS, Motorola Solutions requests that it be reliev ed of the requirements of any conditions and limitations of said exemption and allowed to comply with any less burdensome applicable regulations that may have become effective.

VIII. SUMMARY TO BE PUBLISHED IN FEDERAL REGISTER

Petitioner : Motorola Solutions, Inc.

Sections of 14 C.F.R. Affected : 14 C.F.R. §§ 61.23(a) and (c); 14 C.F.R. §§ 61.101(e)(4) and (5); 14 C.F.R. § 61.113(a); 14 C.F.R. § 61.315(a); 14 C.F.R. § 91.7(a); 14 C.F.R. § 91.119(c); 14 C.F.R. § 91.121; 14 C.F.R. § 91.151(a)(1); 14 C. F.R. § 91.405(a); 14 C.F.R. § 91.407(a)(1); 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.409(a)(1) and (2); 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.417(a) and (b).

Description of Relief Sought : Petitioner seeks relief from th e requirements of 14 C.F.R. Part 21 Subpart H; 14 C.F.R. § 21.191(a); 14 C.F. R. § 45.23(b); 14 C.F.R. § 45.27; 14 C.F.R. §§ 61.23(a) and (c); 14 C.F.R. §§ 61.101(e)(4) a nd (5); 14 C.F.R. § 61.113(a); 14 C.F.R. § 61.315(a); 14 C.F.R. § 91.7(a); 14 C.F.R. § 91.119(c); 14 C.F.R. § 91.121; 14 C.F.R. § 91.151(a)(1); 14 C.F.R. § 91.405(a); 14 C.F.R. § 91.407(a)(1); 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.409(a)(1) and (2); 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.417(a) and (b) to operate a tethered aerial device for research and development, situational awareness via aerial da ta collection, and provisi on of communications
links.

IX. CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, Motorola Solutions respectfully requests that the FAA grant this petition for exemption. This petition satisfies the criteria found in Section 333 of the FMRA regarding size, weight, speed, operating capabilities , proximity to airports and populated areas, operation within visual line-of-si ght, and national security. Use of the UAS as proposed in this petition would benefit the public.

Please do not hesitate to contact Petitioner’s out side counsel, Katy Ross of Wiley Rein LLP, at 202-719-7410 (kmross@wileyrein.com) with any questions about this filing.

Sincerely,

/ s / Catherine Seidel
Catherine Seidel Chief, North American and International Spectrum and Regulatory Policy Motorola Solutions, Inc.9 1455 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20004 (202) 371-6900