DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration Docket No: FAA-2013-0061 Unmanned Aircraft System Test Site Program April

23, 2013 Comes now Griffiss International Airport (KRME) located in Rome, New York (www.ocgov.net/airport) by and through its Team Partner, Northeast UAS Airspace Integration Research Alliance, Inc. (NUAIR) (www.nuair.org) located at 572 South Salina Street, Syracuse, New York 13202 and offers the following comments: KRME and NUAIR have formed a team (NYGFI Team) applying for designation by FAA as one of the six Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Test Sites mandated by Congress in the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, Public Law 112-95. In doing so NYGFI Team members have weighed the various legal, ethical, and safety requirements that Test Site operators should comply with in order to protect the public's interest and the national airspace system. We are mindful of and share the public's concern regarding the potential for infringement of individual privacy rights by abusive or unlawful civil operation of UAS. Our NYGFI Team is comprised of American residents and citizens that value the great liberties of our nation as much as anyone. The NYGFI Team is committed to operating in a safe and responsible manner, respecting existing privacy laws and ensuring transparency and accountability of operations. We believe that existing law fully protects the public interest and that introduction of UAS into the National Airspace System does not weaken or eviscerate that legal protection. It's important to note that all that is happening is the pilot of the aircraft is moving from the aircraft to the ground. The NYGFI Team fully supports the prosecution of any individual or entity that violates privacy laws using manned or unmanned aircraft. In order for the NYGFI Team to be assured that its test range activities are legally compliant, we have established some organizational safeguards: 1. The NYGFI Team has adopted the Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International (AUVSI) Industry Code of Conduct (www.auvsi.org/conduct). Each member of the NYGFI Team will sign a pledge to abide by this code.

2. Each test plan will be preapproved for safety, operations, airworthiness, and legal compliance. A legal review and "signoff" from the NYGFI Team's General Counsel (GC) must be obtained before testing begins. The GC review will cover compliance with aviation law and regulations as well as any other laws and regulations that might apply, such as privacy or environmental. 3. The NYGFI Team's GC will monitor the body of law and regulation pertaining to UAS operations and provide education and training in the law to the NYGFI Team members. The NYGFI Team also understands the very human "fear of the unknown". We want to help alleviate that fear by having a robust NYGFI community engagement program as part of our team's core operation. Our public affairs effort will include outreach to governmental bodies, elected officials, educational organizations, media, and local and state interest groups that want to learn more about UAS. We see an extraordinary public benefit for UAS operations and want others to have an opportunity to see and understand that as well. The NYGFI Team is a public entity bound to lawfully abide by applicable local, state, and federal freedom of information laws. Accordingly, unless exempt by law or regulation, data or images collected, processes, and procedures would be available to the public. Data submitted by the NYGFI Team to the FAA would include only those data listed in Appendix B to the Other Transaction Agreement, or otherwise mandated by the FAA or other government regulation, and be subject to public view under the Freedom of Information Act unless exempt. Lastly, the FAA's assertion in item 2 of the proposed privacy requirements states "Should criminal or civil charges be filed by the US Department of Justice or a state's law enforcement authority over potential (emphasis added) violation of such laws, the FAA may take appropriate action, including suspending or modifying the relevant operational authority (e.g., Certificate of Operation, or OTA), until proceedings are completed." Ironically the FAA, a government agency, proposes, without due process, to take punitive action against another party based solely on "charges". This is contrary to both the law and existing FAA procedure. An FAA Certificate Holder, no matter what type of certificate, is entitled to due process when confronted with

FAA enforcement proceedings. Current FAA processes should be followed. We sincerely hope that this paragraph is simply in-artfully drafted and that FAA is not considering taking any enforcement action without due process.

Respectfully submitted, Lawrence H. Brinker, Esq. General Counsel, NUAIR Counsel for Griffiss International Airport