HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP

 

 

 

 

 

 

BEFORE THE 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

___________________________________________________

Samuel Roberts Noble Foundation,

Petitioner. Docket No. FAA-2015-3603

AMENDMENT TO PETITION OF SAMUEL ROBERTS NOBLE FOUNDATION

FOR AN EXEMPTION FROM CERTAIN FEDERAL AVIATION REGULATIONS TO PERMIT 

UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS (UAS) OPERATIONS

Lisa Ellman

Patrick R. Rizzi

Matthew J. Clark

Hogan Lovells US LLP

555 13th Street, N.W.

Washington, DC 20004

Phone: 202-637-8644 / -5659

Fax: 202-637-5910

lisa.ellman@hoganlovells.com

patrick.rizzi@hoganlovells.com

matt.clark@hoganlovells.com

COUNSEL FOR SAMUEL ROBERTS NOBLE FOUNDATION

DATE: October 29, 2015
HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP

- 1 -

1. THE AMENDMENT REQUEST 

On June 30, 2015, The Samuel Roberts Noble Foundation (“Noble Foundation”) petitioned 

the Federal Aviation Administration (“FAA”), pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and 

Reform Act of 2012 (“FMRA”) and 14 C.F.R. §§ 11.61(b), 11.63(a), and 11.81, for an exemption from 

certain sections of the Federal Aviation Regulations (“FAR”) so that the Noble Foundation could 

commercially operate the PrecisionHawk Hawkeye Mk-III UAS for aerial data collection, including

aerial imaging, remote sensing, and aerial surveying in support of the Noble Foundation’s research 

operations. The Noble Foundation hereby amends its Petition for Exemption to allow operation of 

three additional UAS vehicles—the DJI Inspire 1, SenseFly eBee, and the Versadrones Heavy Lift 

Octocopter (“Versadrones HLO”). In all other respects, the Noble Foundation’s June 30, 2015 

Petition for Exemption remains the same. 

For ease of use, this amendment sets forth the heading of the applicable section in the June 

30, 2015 Petition for Exemption, followed by a description of changes to that section. 

3.1 Conditions and limitations regarding the proposed UAS

In addition to the Hawkeye Mk-III, the Noble Foundation also seeks to operate the DJI 

Inspire 1, SenseFly eBee, and the Versadrones HLO. Accordingly, the first paragraph in this section 

is amended as follows:

The Noble Foundation intends to operate several small, lightweight UAS 

under the requested exemption, including, the PrecisionHawk Hawkeye Mk-III, DJI 

Inspire 1, SenseFly eBee, and the Versadrones HLO. The Hawkeye Mk-III is a 

miniature propeller fixed-wing airplane built by PrecisionHawk that weighs less than 

six pounds. It has been approved previously by the FAA in other exemptions, 

including the PrecisionHawk Exemption and Exemption No. 11309 (April 8, 2015;

Docket FAA-2014-0946) (“USAA Exemption”). The DJI Inspire 1 and SenseFly eBee 

have also previously been approved by the FAA in other exemptions. See e.g., 

Exemption No. 11310A (June 3, 2014; Docket FAA-2014-0608) (“Colin Hinkle 

Amended Exemption”) and Exemption No. 11239A (August 19, 2015; Docket FAA2014-0838) (Southern Company Services, Inc. Amended Exemption”). The 

Versadrones HLO is substantially similar to UAS approved by the FAA in previously 

granted exemptions.1

 

1

See also discussion on the Versadrones HLO in Section 2, infra. 
HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP

- 2 -

 

 

 

Consistent with the foregoing, the Noble Foundation amends Petition Limitation No. 3.1.1. to 

state the following:

3.1.1. Operations under the exemption will be limited to the 

Hawkeye Mk-III, DJI Inspire 1, SenseFly eBee, and 

Versadrones HLO UAS. The UA will have a gross weight of 

not more than 55 pounds, including energy sources, 

equipment, and payload. Proposed operations of any other 

UAS will require a new petition or a petition to amend this 

exemption. [Aeryon Labs Exemption Limitation No. 1;

PrecisionHawk Exemption Limitation No. 1; Colin Hinkle 

Amended Exemption Limitation No. 1; Southern Company 

Services, Inc. Amended Exemption Limitation No. 1].

3.4 Conditions and Limitations regarding the Noble Foundation manuals related to 

UAS operations

This section is amended to clarify that the Noble Foundation has, or prior to operation will 

have, all the manufacturer manuals and checklists for the Hawkeye Mk-III, DJI Inspire 1, SenseFly 

eBee, and Versadrones HLO UAS (collectively, the “Manuals”). 

5.3 The extent of relief south and the reasons relied is sought: 

This section makes several references to operation of the Hawkeye Mk-III. The Noble 

Foundation amends this section to also include reference to the DJI Inspire 1, SenseFly eBee, and 

Versadrones HLO in each location where the Hawkeye Mk-III is referenced. 

5.4 Reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest:

This section is amended to clarify that operation of all the UAS models proposed by the 

Petitioner is in the public interest. The third paragraph in this section is amended to read as follows:

Second, operation of the proposed UAS in this Petition would enable the

Noble Foundation to enhance research efforts on how UAS may benefit agricultural 

productivity. This research will positively impact agriculture in local communities, as 

well as across the United States and around the world. The Noble Foundation’s 

research benefits consumers and the public by exploring and improving production 

agriculture techniques, advancing science, and making the Foundation’s findings 

publicly available.

For these same reasons, the fifth paragraph in this section is amended to read as follows:
HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP

- 3 -

 

 

 

In sum, the ability to operate the proposed UAS will benefit the Noble 

Foundation's research and education programs tremendously, as well as the Noble 

Foundation’s ability to enhance agricultural production. The surveying and research 

operations proposed in this Petition would be far less risky, and more efficient, than if 

conducted with larger, faster, heavier, combustible fuel-powered manned aircraft.

5.5 Reasons why granting the exemption would not adversely affect safety, or how 

the exemption would provide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by 

the rule from which exemption is sought:

This section is amended to explain how the Noble Foundation will ensure a level of safety 

equal to or greater than the rule from which exemption is sought when operating the Hawkeye Mk-III, 

DJI Inspire 1, SenseFly eBee, and Versadrones HLO UAS. To that end, the second paragraph in 

this section is amended to read as follows: 

In general, the risks of any small UAS operation proposed in this Petition 

interfering with a manned aircraft would be minimized by numerous factors, including 

but not limited to:

 the low altitude at which the UAS would operate;

 the locations at which the UAS would operate (e.g., remote areas; private or 

controlled access property; away from airports);

 the small size, light weight, and relatively slow speed of the Hawkeye Mk-III UAS, DJI 

Inspire 1, SenseFly eBee, and Versadrones HLO UAS;

 the restriction on UAS operations to VMC and daytime conditions; and

 the requirement for the UA to be operated within the VLOS of the PIC and VO at all

times.

Importantly, the Hawkeye Mk-III, DJI Inspire 1, SenseFly eBee, and 

Versadrones HLO UAS have several other safety-related protocols including 

continuous in-flight diagnostics and monitoring, in-the-air flight path calculations, 

auto-pilot detection of lost GPS or insufficient satellites, loiter and return home 

capabilities, autonomous emergency recovery ability, emergency flight termination 

system, and manual override capabilities.

The fourth paragraph in section 5.5 is amended to read as follows:

The conditions and limitations proposed in this Petition (which have been acceptable 

for other summary grant exemptions) and the operational safety features of the 

proposed UAS provide substantial protection against interference with manned 

aircraft operations or with the safety of persons or property on the ground. For these 

reasons, granting an exemption from each section of the FAR from which relief is 

sought would not adversely affect safety, and would provide a level of safety at least 

equal to, or greater than, that provided by the rule from which exemption is sought.
HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP

- 4 -

 

 

 

2. THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT SHOULD BE GRANTED

Similar to the Hawkeye Mk-III, the FAA is familiar with and has already determined that the 

DJI Inspire 1 and SenseFly eBee meet the requirements of Section 333 of the FMRA due to their 

weight, speed and operational capabilities. See e.g., Exemption No. 11310A (June 3, 2014; Docket 

FAA-2014-0608) (adding the DJI Inspire 1) (“Colin Hinkle Amended Exemption”); Exemption No. 

11239A (August 19, 2015; Docket FAA-2014-0838) (adding the SenseFly eBee) (Southern 

Company Services, Inc. Amended Exemption”).

The Versadrones HLO is substantially similar to UAS approved by the FAA in previously 

granted exemptions. The Versadrones HLO is a small battery powered UAS with 8 brushless 

motors configured in an octagon formation. The vehicle is composed primarily of plastic and carbon 

fiber and its dimensions measure 1200mm x 1200mm x 400mm. The Versadrones HLO weights 

4,000g (~8.8 lbs.) and has a maximum takeoff weight of 16,000g (~35 lbs.). It operates on a 

command and control frequency of 2.4 GHz and has a cruise speed of 44 mph (~38.2 kts). Similar 

to the Hawkeye Mk-III, DJI Inspire 1, and SenseFly eBee, the Versadrones HLO also has the 

capability to operate safely after experiencing certain in-flight contingencies or failures and uses an 

auto-pilot system to maintain UAS stability and control. The UAS is also able to respond to a loss of 

GPS or a lost-link event with a precoordinated, predictable, automated flight maneuver. Like the 

Hawkeye Mk-III, the safety features of the DJI Inspire 1, SenseFly eBee, and Versadrones HLO 

provide an equivalent level of safety compared to a manned aircraft performing a similar operation 

and mitigate the risk of command and control link failures.2 

To the extent processing and consideration of this Petition may be slowed or delayed by the 

request for authority to operate the Versadrones HLO UAS, the Noble Foundation respectfully 

requests that the FAA move expeditiously to grant the Petition with respect to the other UAS models 

 

2

Additional information on the specifications and operational capabilities of the Versadrones HLO is 

available here: http://versadrones.com/products/heavy-lift-octocopter/
HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP

- 5 -

 

 

 

encompassed by this Amended Petition for Exemption, all of which previously have been designated 

approved by the Secretary of the Department of Transportation for operation under Section 333 and 

designated by the FAA in previously granted Section 333 exemptions. The FAA has previously 

followed this procedure. See, e.g., Exemption No. 12714 (July 27, 2015; Docket FAA-2015-1851) 

(granting Section 333 exemption as to several UAS makes/models, but not others for which the FAA 

had not completed its review).

3. PUBLICATION OF THIS AMENDED PETITION FOR EXEMPTION IS NOT NECESSARY

As this amendment only seeks to add three additional small UAS models that have already 

been approved by the FAA in prior grants of exemption, or are substantially similar in all material 

respects to models previously approved by the FAA, no new precedent will be set. For this reason, 

the Noble Foundation respectfully submits that good cause exists so that notice does not need to be 

published in the Federal Register for the requested amendment. 

4. CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, the Noble Foundation respectfully requests that the FAA refrain 

from publishing a summary of this Petition in the Federal Register, and grant this Amended Petition 

for Exemption without delay. If you have any questions, or need any additional information to 

process this Amended Petition for Exemption, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned. 

Respectfully submitted, 

 Patrick R. Rizzi

 Lisa Ellman 

 Matthew J. Clark3

 Hogan Lovells US LLP

 Counsel for Samuel Roberts Noble Foundation

 

3 Matthew Clark is only licensed to practice law in the Commonwealth of Virginia and his practice is

limited consistent with Rule 49(c) of the D.C. Court of Appeals.