Petitioning for Exemption under Section 333 (Victor H. Rojas)

 April 22, 2015

Unmanned Aircraft Systems Integration Office

Federal Aviation Administration

800 Independence Avenue, SW

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

unmanned aerial systems on land controlled by Victor H. Rojas

to assist in the safe evaluation, inspection of properties and aerial photography and video

operations for

our clients.

Victor H. Rojas respectfully requests an exemption from

several provisions of Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R.) to permit the

use of small unmanned aerial systems (UAS) to assist in the safe evaluation, inspection of 

properties and

aerial photography and video operations for our clients.

This request is motivated primarily by the desire to

maximize safety in infrastructure and operations. While an exemption would not

eliminate the current need for in-person visual inspection required by various federal

regulatory departments, it would allow Victor H. Rojas to broadly evaluate assets and 

operations

with UA, resulting in a safer and more 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 systems.2 A summary of this request suitable for publication in the

Federal Register is provided as Appendix A.

Appendix B provides the manufacturers information regarding the design, aircraft

performance, and fail-safe features. We have provided manufacturer information related to

operating limitations, normal and emergency procedures, and maintenance and inspection

procedures. As we add aircraft designs, we will update this appendix appropriately.

Appendix C provides the Drone Fleet & Aerospace Management 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.

Victor H. Rojas

854 Harbor Inn Terrace

Coral Springs, FL 33071

(754) 245-7117

Vhrojas2009@hotmail.com

Background Information

Victor H. Rojas is in the business of Web Design, Internet Marketing, Aerial Photography 

and Video helping customers in 

the Construction and Real Estate. 

My Clients look to me for Safe Operations of UA Aero-Photography and Video. I have Keep 

Safe UA Operational Procedures. 

I also hold an FAA Private Pilot License# 2582640 based on my Colombian Commercial 

Pilot license. I now that regulations and

Procedures must be strictly followed always for safety of people in ground and to no affect 

the safety of aerospace system.

I have approximately 500 hrs of UA flying. 

Operations:

Roof Inspection, photography and video capture usage.

Construction Site Inspection. Photography and video capture usage.

Real Estate inspection, photography 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 determined 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 adversely affect safety or how the exemption would provide at least

an equivalent level of safety as compliance with the underlying regulation. In this case,

approval of this exemption would advance the public interest by significantly enhancing

the safety and efficiency of operations and by providing the FAA with

valuable user experience on UA in a context with appreciable economic and societal

benefits. As described more fully below, the requested exemption would permit the

operation of UA under tightly controlled conditions, thus ensuring that operations will
not have an adverse impact on safety. 

Additionally, the sheer amount of assets and the widely dispersed locations – in many

instances far from sizeable population centers – means that visual inspection in all

instances by company personnel can be inefficient. Aerial analysis 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

heights. Helicopters present better vantage points; however manned helicopters are much

more costly, subject to human safety and carry highly explosive jet fuel making them

impractical for deployment. By using UA for supplemental asset evaluation, I Victor H. 

Rojas

will be able to substantially upgrade its capacity to detect and address issues with the

right-of-way and other assets before they become a problem for safe operations. Thus, the

use of UA has the potential to improve efficiency, resulting in faster and safer delivery

of goods, energy & natural resources vital to the U.S. economy.

Granting an Exemption will not Adversely Affect Safety

I Victor H. Rojas note 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 conducted for recreational purposes, would fall completely within the

allowable operations for model aircraft. We believe it is difficult to argue that there is

sufficient correlation between model operations controlled by the Academy of Model

Aeronautics and the ones contemplated by Me. At the same time, it is clear that

equivalency cannot be established for traditional, manned civil aircraft because the design

and use profiles between traditional aircraft and UA are simply too different. As such,

we believe 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 not adversely affect safety. Victor H. Rojas contemplate

conducting

UA operations over client owned or controlled land, solely during daylight hours, at

altitudes well below that which would pose a risk to other aircraft. In general, UA

operations are intended to be conducted in areas distant from both congested areas and

airports. Moreover, because of the inherent risks presented by standard infrastructure

operations, our clients have already taken steps to secure property against unauthorized

public access. For example, substantial stretches of pipeline, utilities, railroad track and

oil production sites are fenced, elevated, or otherwise secured to prevent access. Other

long stretches of infrastructure are, as noted above, in very remote wilderness areas. The

nature of operations anticipated by Victor H. Rojas requires that the UA be flown at 

relatively

low altitudes and relatively low speeds. Victor H. Rojas expect that in most instances, the 

UA

will be flown less than 75 feet from the highest structure along the path of the UA.

Accordingly, the risk of interference with another aircraft is minimal. Victor H. Rojas also 

plans

to conduct UA operations at least three miles from any public airports (including
heliports). In the event an operation needs to be conducted closer to an airport, Victor H. 

Rojas

will inform the airport operator and airport air traffic control tower of the contemplated

operation and will comply with any directions issued by air traffic control at that airport.

Approval of exemptions allowing commercial operations of UA in the infrastructure

aerial inspection industry will enhance safety by reducing risk. Conventional operations,

using jet or piston power aircraft, operate at extremely low altitudes 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 4,000lbs., carrying

large amounts of jet A or other fuel (140 gallons for jet helicopters). Such aircraft must

fly to and from the inspection site. In contrast, a sUAS weighing fewer than 55 lbs. and

powered by 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 safety supporting the grant

of the exemptions requested herein, including 333 Aircraft Exemption Status exempting

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 safety of those on the ground is protected by the fact that no one will be allowed into

the area without the permission of the company. Security will be 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.

Victor H. Rojas(PIC) will operate the UA within visual line-of-sight (i.e., no more than 

approximately

0.5 miles from the manipulator of the controls, or pilot in command (PIC)). PIC will 

conduct at least

three take-offs and landings with the UA on which he or she is trained every 90 days.

PIC’s will establish their qualifications thru a combination of aeronautical knowledge,

UAS airmanship skills, and verification through testing of flight ability before any 

operations have commenced.

Depending on the type of operation, additional ground-based visual observers may be 

employed as well. 

These observers will be within constant visual line of sight and in constant contact with the 

PIC.

The visual

observers will assist the PIC in avoiding objects near the UA

There are no standards for either Private or Commercial UA pilot certificates. The safe

operation and control of the UA as described in this application does not depend on the

type of FAA license held by the PIC. Given the restricted and controlled airspace within
which operations will take place, the key factors needed by the PIC are knowledge of the

airspace within which the operation will take place and how that airspace fits into the

National Airspace System (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 certificate. Those

certificates demonstrate knowledge of the factors and skills needed for the safe operation

of those types of aircraft (fixed wing or rotorcraft). It cannot be assumed that a

commercial pilot, approved to operate a helicopter or fixed wing aircraft, has the skill or

ability to safely 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 UA acquired from actual

operation of the aircraft is the most important factor in establishing an equivalent level of

safety.

If the PIC 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 PIC has

at least an FAA Private Pilots Certificate; 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 the UA, and have consented to the risks associated with being in the

operating area. Should there be a mishap, the UA being flown pose significantly less of

a threat than the helicopters and fixed wing aircraft now being employed because they are

a fraction 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 operate in a much

larger area.

From a practical standpoint, there are relatively few licensed full-scale aircraft pilots who

are also qualified to fly the type of UA that are utilized for infrastructure image-capture

operations. There are even fewer commercial pilots that can fly these UA – 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 company would either have to source a qualified

UA pilot to train and obtain a commercial certificate, or find a commercial certificated

pilot who would be willing to learn to fly a UA to the competency level required for

professional use.

Minimum requirements for the PIC include:

1) Private Pilot’s license;

2) A minimum of 200 flight cycles 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 type

(single blade or 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 days;

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 security screening by the Department of Homeland

Security. This requirement should ameliorate security concerns over UAS operations

under this exemption.

Victor H. Rojas intends to use commercially available UA Components for UA. These

UA systems will be tested for quality & safety in our test facility before being

deployed to the field. The UA is less than 55 lbs. fully loaded, carries neither a pilot

nor passenger, and operates exclusively within a secured area. We have a routine

maintenance schedule to verify that the UA will remain in safe and operational

condition.

Please see Appendix B, for Specific Types of UA.

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 reference to 49 USC 44704, and in consideration of

the size, weight, speed, and limited operating area associated with the aircraft and its

operation, we request that this aircraft exemption meets the conditions of Section 333.

Therefore, if granted Section 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 impossible. UA

Will 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 will be as large as practicable.

Notes Regarding: 14 CFR § 91.7(a) Civil Aircraft Airworthiness

Victor H. Rojas request is based on the fact that no airworthiness certificate will be issued 

for

the UA. Victor H. Rojas’s UA 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 original 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 certain 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 instrument & certain flight tests

Small UA, 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 for use by Victor H. Rojas allow the UA

Instructor to place the aircraft into ‘loiter’ mode (fixed altitude stationary hold). In the
event of the student losing control, the UA Instructor can quickly and via alternate

equipment (equipment not in the hands of the 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.

Victor H. Rojas 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

company-designated individual, that would require that individual to have fully

functioning dual controls. Rather, Victor H. Rojas evaluates the qualification of its PICs 

based on

their experience with the UA to be operated and verifies through testing, in lieu of

formalized training. As such, Victor H. Rojas 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 the Victor H. Rojas operations will only be conducted within the secured area 

described

herein.

DFAM 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 (landing) if communication signal were to be severed. If the UA

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 nominal level.

3. Flights will be terminated at 25% battery power reserve.

4. Live video for operator gives real-time positioning feedback. In other words, we

can monitor the scene from the vehicle's perspective for collision avoidance, and to

maintain spatial orientation.

5. The UA 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 satellites (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 provided to the UA 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. We 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 UA will weigh less than 55 lbs and travel at less than 50 knots.

3. Batteries 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 and charging of high capacity Lipo batteries on-site.

6. UA

Operated under this exemption will 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, director)

2. Radio spectrum analysis for interference on the frequencies utilized for vehicle

control/communication.

3. A briefing will be conducted in regard to the planned UAS 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 UA operations

and ensure that only consenting persons will be allowed within 100 feet of the flight

operations.

5. Observer and pilot will at all times be able to communicate by voice.

6. Written and/or oral permission from the relevant property holders 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 any other aircraft 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 procedures 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 any device

other than corrective lenses, as specified on the PIC’s FAA-issued medical

certificate.

5. All operations must utilize a visual observer (VO). The VO may be used to

satisfy the VLOS requirement as long as the PIC always maintains VLOS

capability. The VO and PIC must be able to communicate verbally at all times.

6. The operator’s manual included as Appendix 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 conditions 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. It is the operator’s

responsibility to track 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 operator

determines that any 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 UA to ensure it is in a condition

for safe flight. If the inspection reveals a condition that affects the safe operation

of the UA, the aircraft is prohibited from operating until the necessary

maintenance has been performed and the UA 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 properly

documented in the aircraft records.

8. Any UA that has undergone maintenance or alterations that affect the UA

operation or flight characteristics, e.g. replacement of a flight critical component,

must undergo a functional test flight in accordance with the operator’s manual.

The PIC who conducts the functional test flight must make an entry in the UA

aircraft records of the flight. The requirements and procedures for a functional test

flight and aircraft record entry must be added to the operator’s manual.

9. The operator must follow the manufacturer’s UA aircraft/component,

maintenance, overhaul, replacement, inspection, and life limit requirements.

When unavailable, aircraft maintenance/component/overhaul, replacement, and

inspection/maintenance 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. Electronic speed controller;

f. Batteries;

g. Mechanical dynamic components (single rotor);

h. Remote command and control;

i. Ground control station (if used); and

j. Any other components as determined by the operator;

10. The Pilot In Command (PIC) must possess at least a private pilot 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 operations conducted for the purpose of infrastructure inspections, the

PIC must have accumulated and logged, in a manner consistent with 14 CFR §

61.51(b), a minimum of 200 flight cycles 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
type (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 cycles and flight

time. During training, proficiency, and experience-building flights, all persons not

essential for flight operations are considered nonparticipants, and the PIC 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 infrastructure inspection, the

PIC 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 days. Training, proficiency, experiencebuilding,

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 PIC 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 developed 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 -qualified pilot must be

successfully completed and documented. This documentation must be available for

review upon request by the Administrator. 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, the 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 in 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. Regarding 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 UA loses communications or loses its GPS signal, 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 UA must abort the flight in the event of unpredicted obstacles or

emergencies in accordance with the operator’s manual.

20. Each UA 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 this 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 as practicable.

23. The operator must develop procedures to document and maintain a record of the

UA maintenance, preventative maintenance, alterations, status of

replacement/overhaul component parts, and the total time in service of the UA.

These procedures must be added to the operator’s manual.

24. Each UA operated under this exemption must comply with all manufacturer

Safety Bulletins.

25. The operator must develop UA 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 inspection 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

UA 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 activities

must include at least the following:

a. Dates and times for all flights;

b. Name and phone number of the operator for the UA 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 UA;

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 the 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 representative; 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 documents 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. UA 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 UA may not be operated by the PIC from 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 letter 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

authorization to resume operations is provided.

Support for Petition for Exemption

In accordance with the procedural requirements of 14 C.F.R. §11.81, DFAM provides the

following information:

Contact Information:

Victor H. Rojas

854 Harbor Inn Terrace

Coral Springs, FL 33071

(754) 245-7117

Vhrojas2009@hotmail.com
Regulatory Provisions from which DFAM seeks an Exemption

Victor H. Rojas believes it 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)

Victor H. Rojas believes an exemption is only needed from the above-listed regulatory

provisions. To the extent that the FAA believes that additional relief is required for

Victor H. Rojas to conduct the operations described here, we request 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 will

require an exemption, Victor H. Rojas believes a separate exemption 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 UA operated without 

an

airworthiness certificate in the areas and under the conditions contemplated by Victor H. 

Rojas will

be at least as safe, or safer, than a conventional aircraft (fixed wing or rotorcraft) operating

with an airworthiness certificate without the conditions proposed in this request.

The UA 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. Operations 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 enhancements 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 UA,

due to its size, speed of operation, 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 equivalent level of safety 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 consideration of the size, weight,

speed, operational capability, and proximity to airports and populated areas of the

particular sUAS. In all cases, an analysis of these criteria demonstrates that the UAS

operated 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 carrying passengers or property 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 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.

*****

Victor H. Rojas will conduct the UA operations. The UA will fly at altitudes well below the

permissible limits for other civil aircraft, eliminating the risk to other aircraft.

§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 areas. An altitude of 500 feet above the surface,

except over open water or sparsely populated areas. In those cases, the aircraft

may not be operated closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or

structure.

*****

Victor H. Rojas submits that the only relief it 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 altitude also pose a heightened risk of

collision with another aircraft, safety can only be assured through the grant of an
exemption. 

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 exemption may be needed. An equivalent level of safety 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 provided to the UA 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.

14 C.F.R. 91.151

§91.151 Fuel requirements for 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 fly

to the first point of intended landing and, assuming normal cruising speed, to

fly after that for at least 20 minutes.

*****

Operating the UA in a pre-defined area with less than 30 minutes of reserve

fuel does not raise the type of risk contemplated by §91.151, i.e., that an aircraft could

run out of fuel in the event it has to be flown to an alternate airport or circle the planned

airport in the event of unanticipated conditions. 

We believe that a 25% battery reserve is more than 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 prescribed 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 maintenance,

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 by 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 by 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)

*****

Victor H. Rojas believes that an exemption from these three maintenance requirements is

appropriate because the FAA has not developed maintenance standards that would allow

an operator to meet the part 91 maintenance requirements. In particular, there are no

individuals authorized by the FAA to approve a UA for return to service under

§91.407(a) or to conduct the initial airworthiness and annual return to service inspections

required by §91.409(a). Victor H. Rojas will maintain the aircraft as instructed in the 

owner’s

manual 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) and

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 any questions or concerns.

Respectfully submitted,

Victor H. Rojas

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.

Petitioner: Victor H. Rojas

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:

Petitioner 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 conduct UA operations over Victor H. Rojas Client’s owned or controlled

land, solely during daylight hours. UA operations are intended to be conducted

in areas remote from both congested areas and airports. The nature of operations

anticipated by Victor H. Rojas requires that the sUAS be flown at relatively low altitudes. 

Appendix B

Specific type(s), make, and model

---

DJI Phantom 2 Vision +(owned)

See Attached document with Manual and specs

DJI Phantom 3

Ordered and expected to be delivered by May 2015 

Please see the attached documents

Thank You for your help

Victor H. Rojas