Benjamin Pelletier

9860 Sunland Blvd

Shadow Hills, CA 91040

October 7th, 2015

U.S. Dept. of Transportation, Docket Operations

West Building Ground Floor, Room w12-140

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,

Washington, DC 20590

VIA FEDERAL DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

Re: Exemption Request under Section 333 of the FAA Reform Act and Part 11 of the Federal

Aviation Regulations

Dear Sir or Madam:

Pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (the “Reform Act”)

and 14 C.F.R. Part 11, Benjamin Pelletier seeks an exemption from Federal Aviation Regulations

(“FARs”) detailed below for the DJI Phantom 3, 3D Robotics Inc. (“3DR”) Solo, and 3DR Iris+ unmanned 

aircraft systems (“UAS”):

The requested exemption would support an application for a commercial Certificate of Authorization to 

conduct aerial photography and videography, as well as aerial data collection such as photogrammetry.

The DJI Phantom 3, 3DR Solo, and 3DR Iris+ systems consist of a lightweight battery-operated aircraft, 

each weighing less than 10 pounds with payload, as well as a handheld controller and ground station on 

a mobile device such as a tablet. In aerial photography and videography, the aircraft carries an onboard 

camera capable of being positioned, oriented, and moved in ways that are impossible for traditional 

camera systems. This enables a wide range of creative expression and artistic choice in the production 

of multimedia presentations. In aerial data collection, the aircraft’s onboard camera captures many 

geo-referenced images from different points of view that enable precise measurement of features of 

interest. This request will benefit the public as a whole by allowing wider access to these services at 

substantially lower costs than are required for manned aircraft operation.

The unmanned aircraft, powered by a small battery, is lighter than, is more maneuverable than, and 

carries a small fraction of the impact energy of the alternative larger manned aircraft using combustible 

fuel. It operates at lower altitudes with no crew and will therefore reduce current risk levels by 

diminishing the likelihood of death or serious bodily injury to both persons both in the air and on the 

ground.

Additionally, I request that I be allowed to use the UAS to benefit first responders requesting assistance, 

while remaining subject to all limitations cited in this application as I do so.
The UAS will be operated in the field with both a Pilot in Command (“PIC”) and a Visual Observer (“VO”)

in accordance with FAA Policy N 8900.227 Section 14 "Operational Requirements for UAS", the 

applicable Certificate of Waiver or Authorization (“COA”), and with the following restrictions when not 

otherwise authorized in the COA:

1. No flight will be made with the unmanned aircraft gross weight exceeding 55 pounds

2. All operations must occur at no more than 200 feet above ground level, within visual line of 

sight no farther than 0.5 nautical miles from the PIC at all times

3. While the aircraft is airborne, the VO must maintain voice communication with the PIC

4. The aircraft will not be operated within

a. 5 nautical miles of an airport having an operational control tower

b. 3 nautical miles from an airport with a published instrument flight procedure but not an 

operational tower

c. 2 nautical miles from an airport without a published instrument flight procedure or an 

operational tower

d. 2 nautical miles from a heliport with a published instrument flight procedure

e. Restricted airspace and other areas, such as major cities, where the FAA prohibits UAS 

operations

5. Operations will be limited to daylight Visual Flight Rules (“VFR”) conditions

The PIC and VO will meet the requirements outlined in FAA Policy N 8900.227 Section 16 “Personnel 

Qualifications”. The PIC will perform maintenance on the system in accordance to manufacturer 

specifications.

I submit that the combination of the UASs’ small mass, historically-demonstrated flight performance and 

ability, fully-qualified flight crew, and operation under the guidelines established in 8900.227, and under

all of the restrictions listed above, the FAA can have full confidence that the operation will have an 

equivalent or greater level of safety than manned aircraft performing the same mission. I believe this 

petition is eligible for a summary grant because previous granted exemptions 11062, 11109, 1112, and 

11213 are similar in all material respects to this petition, and the reasons stated by the FAA for granting 

them also apply to my situation.

The name and contact information of the applicant are:

Benjamin Pelletier

Ph: 626-676-7044

Email: bjpcaltech@gmail.com

The regulations from which the exemption is requested are as follows

14 CFR Part 21

14 CFR 91.203

14 CFR 45.23, 45.29

14 CFR 91.9

14 CFR 61.113(a) & (b), 61.133(a)

14 CFR 91.109, 91.119

14 CFR 91.121, 91.151

14 CFR Subpart E (91.401-91.417)

FAA Policy 8900.227 Paragraph 16(c)(4) and Paragraph 16(e)(l)
I am prepared to modify or amend any part of this request to satisfy the need for an equivalent level of 

safety. Please contact me at any time if you require additional information or clarification. I look forward 

to hearing from your office.

Sincerely,

Benjamin J Pelletier

Appendices:

A. Exemption Request and Equivalent Level of Safety

B. Preflight Checklist

Appendix	A:	Exemption	Requests	and	Equivalent	Level	of	Safety

Benjamin Pelletier requests an exemption from the following regulations as well as any additional 

regulations that may technically apply to the operation of the DJI Phantom 3 and 3D Robotics Inc. (3DR) 

Solo and Iris+.

14	CFR	Part	21,	Subpart	H:	Airworthiness	Certificates

This part establishes the procedures for the issuance of an airworthiness certificate. While the FAA 

continues to work to develop airworthiness standards for UAS, I request an experimental certificate be 

issued for the DJI Phantom 3, 3DR Solo, and 3DR Iris+ under either or both of the following provisions:

21.191 Experimental certificates

Experimental certificates are issued for the following purposes:

(a) Research and development. Testing new aircraft design concepts, new aircraft equipment, 

new aircraft installations, new aircraft operating techniques, or new uses for aircraft.

(b) Showing compliance with regulations. Conducting flight tests and other operations to show 

compliance with the airworthiness regulations including flights to show compliance for issuance 

of type and supplemental type certificates, flights to substantiate major design changes, and 

flights to show compliance with the function and reliability requirements of the regulations.

Since the experimental certificate can be used for commercial purposes such as market surveys, sales 

demonstrations, and customer crew training, I would expect that an experimental certificate would 

allow for my commercial purpose as well.

The aircraft will not carry persons or property, will not carry fuel, and will only fly under strict operation 

requirements. Combined with the fact that the DJI Phantom 3 weighs only 2.8 pounds, the 3DR Solo 

weighs only 3.9 pounds, and the Iris+ weighs only 3.7 pounds, I propose that these unmanned aircraft

will be at least as safe, if not safer, than a conventionally-certificated aircraft performing the same 
mission. If an experimental airworthiness ce1iificate is not appropriate for this application, then I

request an exemption of 14 CFR Part 21, Subpart H, and the requirement for an airworthiness certificate 

in general, citing the equivalent level of safety outlined in the previous paragraph.

14	CFR	91.203(a)	&	(b)	Civil	aircraft:	Certifications	required.

This regulation provides that an airworthiness certificate, with the registration number assigned to the 

aircraft and a registration certificate must be aboard the aircraft. Additionally, subparagraph (b) 

provides that the airworthiness certificate be "displayed at the cabin or cockpit entrance so that it is 

legible to passengers or crew." The DJI Phantom 3, 3DR Solo, and 3DR Iris+ are too small to carry 

documentation, do not have an entrance, and are not capable of carrying passengers or a crew.

To obtain an equivalent level of safety and meet the intent of 91.203, I propose that documents deemed 

appropriate for this aircraft by the FAA will be located with the crew at the ground control station and 

available for inspection upon request. In order to identify the aircraft, I propose that the following 

information be permanently affixed to the aircraft via placard:

Manufacturer: DJI or 3D Robotics Inc.

Model: Solo or Iris+

Serial Number:

Registered to:

Benjamin Pelletier

9860 Sunland Blvd

Shadow Hills, CA 91040

If found please contact: (626) 676-7044

14	CFR	45.23	Display	of	marks;	general	and	45.29	Size	of	marks.

These regulations provide that each aircraft must display "N" and the aircraft's registration number in 

letters at least 3 inches high. Additionally, the aircraft must display the word "EXPERIMENTAL" in letters 

at least 2 inches high near the entrance to the cabin, cockpit, or pilot station. The DJI Phantom 3, 3DR 

Solo, and 3DR Iris+ do not have an entrance in which the word "EXPERIMENTAL" can be placed and do 

not have the space to display the registration number as large as required.

I propose to achieve an equivalent level of safety by including the word "EXPERIMENTAL" on the top of 

the aircraft, where the PIC, VO and others in the vicinity of the aircraft while it is preparing for launch 

will be able to see the designation. I feel that the permanent placard discussed in the previous 

paragraph will provide the aircraft's registration information should it be found on the ground. I will also 

mark the aircraft with any registration number as large as the aircraft will practically allow. I will also 

display at the ground station a high contrast flag or banner that contains the words “Unmanned Aircraft 

Ground Station”. Since the aircraft will operate within 0.5 nautical miles of the ground station, the 

banner should be visible to anyone that observes the aircraft and chooses to investigate its point of 

origin.

14	CFR	91.9	Civil	aircraft	flight	manual,	marking,	and	placard	requirements.
This regulation provides that no person may operate an aircraft unless a current, approved flight manual 

is in the aircraft. I assume that the intent of this requirement is to ensure that flight manual information 

is available to the aircrew while operating the aircraft. I request an exemption to this requirement since 

the aircraft is not only too small to carry documentation, documentation aboard the aircraft would not 

be available to the crew. To obtain an equivalent level of safety and meet the intent of 91.9, I propose 

that a current approved Airplane Flight User Manual (appendix G) must be available to the flight crew at 

the ground station anytime the aircraft is operating.

14	CFR	61.113	Private	pilot	privileges	and	limitations:	Pilot	in	Command	and	61.133

Commercial	pilot	privileges	and	limitations

Section 61.113(a) states that "no person who holds a private pilot certificate may act as a pilot in 

command of an aircraft that is carrying passengers or property for compensation or hire; nor may that 

person, for compensation or hire, act as pilot in command of an aircraft."

Section 61.113(b) states that "A private pilot may, for compensation or hire, act as pilot in command of 

an aircraft in connection with any business or employment if: (1) The flight is only incidental to that 

business or employment; and (2) The aircraft does not carry passengers or property for compensation or 

hire."

Section 61.133(a) states that "(1) General. A person who holds a commercial pilot certificate may act as 

pilot in command of an aircraft - (i) Carrying persons or property for compensation or hire, provided the 

person is qualified in accordance with this part and with the applicable parts of this chapter that apply to 

the operation; and (ii) For compensation or hire, provided the person is qualified in accordance with this 

part and with the applicable parts of this chapter that apply to the operation."

I request exemption from sections 61.113(a) and (b), and section 61.133(a) because my proposed 

operations include commercial operations. Considering the size, weight and operating characteristics of 

the UAS in question, and the limited areas in which the UAS will be operated, I request an exemption 

from section 61.113(a) and (b) with the following conditions:

1. The PIC of the UAS must hold at least a private pilot airman certificate and either a third-class 

airman medical certificate or a valid driver’s license

2. UAS operation will additionally require a VO and the VO must have acceptable vision such that 

they can maintain visual line of sight (VLOS) with the UAS at all times

Additionally, all requested aircraft are equipped with an onboard autopilot for autonomous flight, 

capable of being monitored by a Ground Control Station (GCS) at all times. The onboard autopilot will 

also ensure flight operation is kept within the controlled airspace, including prohibiting operation above 

a defined maximum altitude.

14	CFR	91.109	Flight	instruction;	Simulated	instrument	flight	and	certain	flight	tests

This regulation provides that "No person may operate a civil aircraft that is being used for flight 

instruction unless that aircraft has fully functioning dual controls." The ground control stations for the 

3DR Solo and 3DR Iris+ are based on a hand-held controller that offers a trainer plug for a second set of

"controls" that both the student and instructor can and will operate simultaneously. With both student 
and instructor having "hands-on" the controls during flight, I feel that this meets the intent of 91.1 09 

and provides an equivalent level of safety.

14	CFR	91.119	Minimum	safe	altitudes:	General

This regulation provides that over sparsely populated areas the aircraft cannot be operated closer than 

500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure. Since the aircraft will be operating at a maximum of 

400 feet AGL, I cannot comply with this requirement. To provide an equivalent level of safety I will only 

fly near people involved with the flight operation, and never near enough to vessels, vehicles, and 

structures owned by people who have not given permission to pose a hazard. I maintain that due to the 

small size of UASs in question, the hazard to persons, vessels, vehicles, and structures is not comparable 

to manned aircraft and should be considered in granting the exemption.

The aircraft will not be operated over congested areas nor over any open air assembly of persons.

The aircraft will be operated at an altitude allowing, if a power unit fails, an emergency landing without 

undue hazard to persons or property on the surface.

14	CFR	91.121	Altimeter	settings

This regulation provides that aircraft shall maintain cruising altitudes by reference to an altimeter 

setting available within 100 nautical miles of the aircraft. The aircraft will fly below 400 feet AGL and will 

not need to maintain hemispherical cruising altitudes in order to de-conflict with other aircraft. An 

appropriate altimeter measurement presented to the pilot should be above ground level and should be 

based on the barometric pressure and GPS position at the point of launch. To provide an equivalent 

level of safety, the UAS's AGL altimeter will be set to zero on the ground prior to every flight. Since none 

of the UASs in question will fly more than 40 minutes, even rapid changes in barometric pressure will 

have limited effect on the safety of the flight.

14	CFR	91.151	Fuel	requirements	for	flight	in	VFR	conditions

This regulation provides that no person may begin a flight in an airplane under day-VFR conditions 

unless there is enough fuel to fly to the first point of intended landing and to fly after that for at least 30 

minutes. I feel that the intention of this paragraph is to provide a reserve of energy as a safety buffer for 

go-arounds and other delays to landing.

The UASs in question are battery operated and the maximum duration of flight from a single battery 

charge is under 25 minutes. Since the aircraft will never fly more than 0.5 nautical miles from the point 

of intended landing, a full battery charge at launch will ensure that I meet the reserve energy intent of 

this paragraph. I request an exemption to the word "fuel" and ask for an equivalent interpretation with 

the word "energy", and also request a reduction from 30 minutes to 10 minutes.

14	CFR	Subpart	E	(91.401-91.417)- Maintenance,	Preventive	Maintenance,	and	Alterations
This regulation provides that the operator is primarily responsible for maintaining the aircraft in an 

airworthy condition, including compliance with part 39 and 43. Paragraphs 91.407 and 91.409 require 

that the aircraft be "approved for return to service by a person authorized under 43.7" after 

maintenance and inspection.

It is my intention that the PIC perform maintenance and inspection of the aircrafts and "be authorized to 

approve the aircrafts for return to service." As provided in the attached Maintenance Procedures 

(appendices D & E), the PIC will ensure that the aircraft is in an airworthy condition prior to flight and 

conduct detailed inspections after every 10 hours. Maintenance will performed and maintained by the 

PIC per the operating manual, which contains instructions and procedures for inspecting, maintaining, 

and repairing the UAS. The PIC will document work performed in accordance with 91.417. We feel that 

due to the size, construction, and simplicity of the aircrafts, the PIC can ensure an equivalent level of 

safety.

8900.227	Paragraph	16(c)	(4)	PIC	Medical.	And	Paragraph	16(e)	(1)	Observer	Medical

This policy provides that both the PIC and VO must have a valid FAA second-class medical certificate 

issued under Part 67 in order to perform as a pilot or observer. The aircrafts weigh less than 10 pounds. 

Requiring the crew to meet the same medical requirements as a commercial pilot carrying passengers in 

a large aircraft is an unnecessary burden.

I propose that the minimum medical requirements be a valid, state-issued driver's license. Due to the 

size and weight of the aircraft, the greatest hazard of my proposed operation will be driving to the 

launch site. A licensed driver is medically qualified to operate a much larger vehicle. The 20/20 vision 

requirement will ensure that the PIC and VO can see and avoid air traffic. Given the unlikely event that 

both the PIC and VO become medically incapacitated while the aircraft is in flight, the aircraft will return 

autonomously to the landing location designated prior to launch without crew intervention.

Appendix	B:	Preflight	Checklist

Safety	check	of	aircraft	performed	prior	to	every	flight

Visual Inspection of Aircraft:

 Check airframe for any cracks

 Check motor/engine and attachment point to the airframe

 Examine propellers and mounting hardware for chips and deformation

 Ensure that propellers are fastened tightly to the motors

 Check the landing gear integrity

 Ensure there are no loose or insecure wire connections

 Calibrate compass when suggested by the aircraft manual

If any aspect of the visual inspection reveals a condition making the aircraft unairworthy, the PIC will log 

failure and ground aircraft. Aircraft will not be put back into service until PIC has rectified the problem. If 

the problem cannot be rectified, the aircraft will be returned to manufacturer for replacement or 

retired.
Pre-arm	Safety	Checks

After the ground station and aircraft are powered on but before the aircraft is armed for takeoff, the 

ground station will perform a number of automatic tests and communicate any problems to the ground 

station and to the pilot directly via indicator lights on the aircraft. If any problems are detected in this 

phase that make the aircraft unairworthy, the PIC will attempt to resolve. If immediate resolution is 

impossible, the PIC will log the failure and ground the aircraft. Aircraft will not be put back into service 

until PIC has rectified the problem. If the problem cannot be rectified, the aircraft will be returned to 

manufacturer for replacement or retired.