December 23, 2015

Via Electronic Filing

Attn: Docket Operations

U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT)

1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W12-140

West Building Ground Floor Washington, DC 20590-0001

Re: Eligibility for “Summary Grant” Process

Exemption Petition of Common Giant, Inc.

pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012

To the Flight Standards Service:

This letter shall serve as a petition for a Section 333 Exemption for my client Common

Giant, Inc. (“CGI” or the “Petitioner”) pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and

Reform Act of 2012, Pub. L. No. 112-95, 126 Stat. 11 (2012) (“Section 333”), and certain sections

of Part 11 of Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations. As discussed below, this Petition

qualifies for the FAA’s “summary grant” procedures, and to the extent necessary, Petitioner

respectfully requests that the FAA process the instant Petition using the summary grant

procedures.

1

Introduction, Justification, Public Interest

CGI is an advertising and marketing firm based in Winston Salem, North Carolina. CGI

offers brand development, advertising, marketing, and digital platform solutions to clients, which

include, for purposes of the instant Petition, a variety of aerial videography, photography, and

marketing services. In order to ensure that CGI does not fall behind other competing businesses

that have begun incorporating the use of small unmanned aircraft systems (“sUAS”) into their

operations, Petitioner wishes to begin to incorporate sUAS into its own operations and services.

In so doing, Petitioner will remain competitive and have the opportunity to employ current

technologies into its business model and serve clients more efficiently and effectively. As the

FAA is aware, sUAS operations possess tremendous potential for aerial data collection, and the

use of sUAS technology for these types of services is already well underway.

While aerial data collection—including the type of videography, photography, and

marketing activities contemplated by Petitioner—often involves persons who are essential or

1 Because the instant Petition qualifies for “summary treatment,” a summary of Petitioner’s

request is not being provided for publication in the Federal Register, as the FAA’s summary

process for Section 333 obviates the need to publish any summary of the Petition in the Federal

Register.
Common Giant, Inc.

Petition for Exemption Pursuant to Section 333

December 23, 2015

Page 2

ancillary to a project or jobsite, Petitioner understands and acknowledges that the FAA’s practice

in issuing Section 333 Exemption grants has been to limit UAS flight operations to

be conducted at least 500 feet from all nonparticipating persons, vessels,

vehicles, and structures unless:

a. Barriers or structures are present that sufficiently protect

nonparticipating persons from the UA and/or debris in the event of an

accident. The operator must ensure that nonparticipating persons remain

under such protection. If a situation arises where nonparticipating persons

leave such protection and are within 500 feet of the UA, flight operations

must cease immediately in a manner ensuring the safety of nonparticipating

persons; and

b. The owner/controller of any vessels, vehicles or structures has granted

permission for operating closer to those objects and the PIC has made a

safety assessment of the risk of operating closer to those objects and

determined that it does not present an undue hazard.

Petitioner agrees to abide by these limitations unless and until the FAA makes a determination in

any similar Section 333 Exemption case that UAS flight operations may vary from these

restrictions and operate in closer proximity to persons and objects. Petitioner’s proposed sUAS

operations will allow for aerial data collection activities where use of manned aircraft is infeasible,

impossible, or unsafe. Petitioners’ proposed use of sUAS will, thus, serve as both a safer

alternative to the use of manned aircraft and also as a tool for enhancement of CGI’s aerial data

collection services.

Petitioner uses a variety of tools for its aerial data collection services, and by this Petition

wishes to add sUAS devices to its “toolbox” in furtherance of those services. Without a grant of

the instant Petition, Petitioner’s ability to grow and compete in the growing market for UAS aerial

data collection services will be limited and suffer from competitive imbalance. Without a grant of

the instant Petition, Petitioner will be forced to wait until the FAA’s current sUAS rulemaking

proceeding concludes with the adoption of new, final rules, which, upon information and belief,

could take upwards of 1-2 more years. In addition to the other reasons discussed in this Petition,

grant of the instant Petition would serve the public interest by allowing for economic growth and

the safe introduction by Petitioner of sUAS operations into the marketplace prior to the conclusion

of the sUAS rulemaking proceeding.

Accordingly, Petitioner seeks authority to use UAS to engage in operations with the

following functions (and any other similar functions not specifically catalogued below)—each of

which falls under the general umbrella category of “aerial data collection”:

- aerial photography/videography

- precision photography (including for real estate and other purposes)

- marketing

- training for UAS operations
Common Giant, Inc.

Petition for Exemption Pursuant to Section 333

December 23, 2015

Page 3

As noted, the above activities may be generally classified as multiple variations of aerial

data collection, which fall squarely within the categories of use that have been granted in more

than 2,000 Section 333 Exemption cases. Petitioner seeks authority to use the following UAS for

the above-referenced purposes: the DJI Spreading Wings S1000; the DJI Phantom Series

(including DJI Phantom 3, DJI Vision+); and the DJI Inspire Series (including DJI Inspire, DJI

Inspire 2). The FAA has used its summary process to grant dozens of Section 333 Exemption

petitions for all of the aforementioned UAS devices, including Exemption Nos. 12767 & 12646

(DJI Spreading Wings S1000); 11845 (multiple DJI series); 11804 (multiple DJI series); 11823

(same); 11837 (same).

In light of the background above, pursuant to Section 333, Petitioner seeks exemption from

those certain Federal Aviation Regulations (“FARs”) discussed below. Petitioner believes that the

instant Petition is substantially similar to other Section 333 Exemption Petitions previously filed

with and granted by the FAA—including, for example, the Petitions in Grant of Exemption Nos.

11109, 11112, and 11213—such that this Petition qualifies for “summary grant” treatment under

the FAA’s policy announced and implemented in early April 2015 and without need for the FAA

to solicit public comment on this proposal. Moreover, each of the specific unmanned aircraft

systems proposed to be used by Petitioner pursuant to a grant of the instant Petition—the Spreading

Wings S1000, the DJI Inspire Series and the DJI Phantom Series—has been the subject of multiple

Section 333 Exemption Petition previously granted by the FAA as set forth above.

In support of this Petition, as a commitment to air safety, Petitioner shows the following:

Proposed Conditions and Limitations

This Petition seeks authority to operate each of Petitioner’s UAS subject to the following

conditions (and any other conditions and restrictions imposed on Petitioner by the FAA):

* Each of Petitioner’s operators will be familiar with the respective manufacturer’s

user manual and will maintain a copy of the user manual at the location of all flights.

* None of Petitioner’s unmanned aircraft (“UA”), including payload, camera, gimbal,

etc. will exceed 55 lbs.

* Petitioner will not operate any UA at a speed exceeding 100 mph (87 knots).

* Petitioner will operate its UAs only at altitudes that will not exceed 400 feet AGL.

To the extent that Petitioner’s operations at any time and any location rely on the FAA’s “blanket

COA” for Section 333 sUAS operations, Petitioner will operate its respective UA only at altitudes

that do not exceed 200 feet AGL.

* Petitioner’s operations of its UA will be such that each UA remains within the

VLOS of the pilot-in-command (“PIC”) at all times.
Common Giant, Inc.

Petition for Exemption Pursuant to Section 333

December 23, 2015

Page 4

* Petitioner’s sUAS will be operated only by a PIC who holds at least a sport pilot,

recreational pilot, or private pilot airman certificate and either a corresponding airman medical

certificate or U.S. driver’s license.

* Petitioner’s sUAS operations will employ a visual observer (“VO”), who will be

able to communicate orally with the PIC at all times during operations.

* Petitioner’s sUAS will be maintained and inspected to ensure its condition furthers

safe operation. Petitioner’s inspection process will include a pre-flight inspection.

* Petitioner will not operate at night.

* Petitioner will operate within 5 nautical miles of an airport only with specific

authority to do so.

* Petitioner’s sUAS are designed to return to a pre-determined location if a device

loses communications or its GPS signal.

* Petitioner’s sUAS operations will be conducted only over private or controlledaccess property (including public property) with permission from the property owner or other

authorized representative.

Petitioner respectfully submits that their operation of sUAS under these conditions will be

at least as safe and controlled as the operations authorized in prior Section 333 Exemption grants,

and Petitioner is committed to safety and to not posing a hazard or threat to other aircraft (manned

or unmanned), public safety, or national security.

Discussion of Specific FARs

Consistent with the growing number of Section 333 Exemption grants for aerial data

collection and other sUAS activities similar to those requested by Petitioner, here is a list of the

FAR sections from which Petitioner seeks exemption:

14 C.F.R. § 61.23(a) & (c) 14 C.F.R. § 91.9(b)(2) 14 C.F.R. § 91.405(a)

14 C.F.R. § 61.101(e)(4) & (5) 14 C.F.R. § 91.119(c) 14 C.F.R. § 91.407(a)(1)

14 C.F.R. § 61.113(a) 14 C.F.R. § 91.121 14 C.F.R. § 91.409(a)(1) & (2)

14 C.F.R. § 61.315(a) 14 C.F.R. § 91.151(a)(1) 14 C.F.R. § 91.417(a) & (b)

14 C.F.R. § 91.7(a)

In addition to the above-referenced FAR provisions, Petitioner understands that the FAA is likely

to impose additional conditions, limitations, restrictions, and requirements on Petitioner’s sUAS

operations pursuant to several other FARs, including, for example, certain of Parts 212and 27 of

2 With respect to the airworthiness requirements of Part 21 of the FAR, the FAA has

previously acknowledged that relief is not necessary for the sUAS referenced in this Petition. As
Common Giant, Inc.

Petition for Exemption Pursuant to Section 333

December 23, 2015

Page 5

Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations; FAR Section 45.23(b); FAR Section 27(a); FAR

Section 91.103(b)(2); FAR Section 91.109; and FAR Section 91.203(a) & (b). However, because

none of the Section 333 Exemption grants previously issued by the FAA appear to have “waived,”

as a legal matter, these additional FAR provisions, the instant Petition does not seek waiver of and

does not discuss these additional FARs. Because the instant Petition seeks to invoke the FAA’s

“summary process” for Section 333 Exemption grants based on the fact that it is substantially

similar to hundreds of previously-issued Section 333 Exemption grants, discussion of these

additional provisions should not be necessary. Nevertheless, should the FAA Staff determine that

an exposition by Petitioner is necessary with respect to these additional FARs, Petitioner

respectfully requests that the FAA Staff contact the undersigned as soon as possible so that

Petitioner has an opportunity to promptly provide such further information.

14 C.F.R. § 61.23(a) and (c)

This FAR requires that persons holding certain airman certificates also hold a certain class of

medical certificate. Consistent with other Section 333 Exemption grants, Petitioner requests that

the person operating Petitioner’s sUAS be permitted to hold a valid driver’s license issued by one

of the fifty United States or the District of Columbia or the corresponding medical certificate

required by the airman certificate held by such operator.

14 C.F.R. §§ 61.101(e)(4) & (5), 61.113(a), 61.315(a)

These FARs, respectively, limit holders of recreational pilot certificates, private pilot certificates,

and sport pilot certificates to noncommercial operations. The prohibition on commercial activities

for operators holding these airman certificates are logical for manned aircraft. For unmanned

aircraft, however, the safety issues inherent in commercial activities are vastly different, as there

are no passengers, there is no cargo, and the environment is controlled in an appropriate manner.

Thus, consistent with other Section 333 Exemption grants, Petitioner requests that persons

operating Petitioner’s sUAS be permitted to use the sUAS for the purpose of engaging in activities

that either are noncommercial or are not noncommercial.

set forth above, all of the sUAS proposed for use by Petitioner has been the subject of prior Section

333 Exemption grants, with respect to which the FAA has consistently stated as follows:

In accordance with the statutory criteria provided in Section 333 of Public

Law 112-95 in reference to 49 U.S.C. § 44704, and in consideration of the

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

and its operation, the Secretary of Transportation has determined that this

aircraft meets the conditions of Section 333. Therefore, the FAA finds that

relief from 14 CFR part 21, Certification procedures for products and parts,

Subpart H—Airworthiness Certificates, and any associated noise

certification and testing requirements of part 36, is not necessary.

See, e.g., Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2014-036, Exemption No. 11110A (Trimble Navigation

Ltd.).
Common Giant, Inc.

Petition for Exemption Pursuant to Section 333

December 23, 2015

Page 6

14 C.F.R. § 91.7(a)

This FAR prohibits the operation of an aircraft “unless it is in an airworthy condition.” Consistent

with other Section 333 Exemption grants, Petitioner seeks permission to operate its unmanned

aircraft without an airworthiness certificate, and Petitioner will continue to engage in pre-flight

inspections to ensure safe operation is possible each time Petitioner wishes to engage in UAS

operations.

14 C.F.R. § 91.9(b)(2)

This FAR requires that a flight manual be maintained in the aircraft. Compliance with this FAR

is impracticable in the context of sUAS as there is no “cabin” or cockpit. Consistent with other

Section 333 Exemption grants, Petitioner seeks permission to maintain the manufacturer’s manual

on the ground with the operator.

14 C.F.R. § 91.119(c)

This FAR prohibits the operation of aircraft below altitudes of 500 feet above the surface (except

over open water or sparsely populated areas) other than during takeoff or landing. Petitioner

proposes to operate sUAS at altitudes of less than 400 feet above the surface, and requests

permission to so, consistent with other Section 333 Exemption grants. Moreover, as indicated

above, Petitioner envisions that many, if not most, of its operations will occur pursuant to the

blanket COA at altitudes not to exceed 200 feet above the surface. (Should the Petitioner

determine that it will have a need to operate at altitudes higher than 200 feet above the surface and,

thus, outside of the blanket COA, Petitioner will file for a COA after receiving grant of the instant

Petition.)

14 C.F.R. § 91.121

This FAR requires the use of an altimeter during flight for purposes of maintaining the cruising

altitude or flight level of the aircraft. Petitioner will not make use of an altimeter in connection

with its sUAS operations. Instead, Petitioner’s sUAS will either rely on the use of GPS, internal

gyroscope, or operator adjustments to maintain the unmanned aircraft’s altitude or flight level.

Consistent with other Section 333 Exemption grants, Petitioner seeks a waiver of the requirement

relating to altimeter use or, in the alternative, a declaration that use of GPS would satisfy the

altimeter requirements.

14 C.F.R. § 151(a)(1)

This FAR restricts persons from beginning a flight in an airplane under VFR conditions unless

there is a certain amount of fuel in the aircraft. This FAR is inapplicable to Petitioner’s proposed

operations insofar as Petitioner’s sUAS will not use “fuel” per se but instead rely on electrical

power generated by small, protected batteries or battery packs. Accordingly, Petitioner proposes

to deviate from this FAR insofar as Petitioner, consistent with other Section 333 Exemption grants,

will not begin a flight unless there is sufficient power available for the sUAS operation to continue

at least 5 minutes beyond the intended duration of the flight.

14 C.F.R. §§ 91.405(a); 91.407(a)(1); 91.409(a)(1) & (2); 91.417(a) & (b)

These FARs govern, inter alia, certain aircraft inspections, the return of aircraft to service after

maintenance, and certain maintenance record keeping and retention. Consistent with other Section

333 Exemption grants, Petitioner proposes to achieve an equivalent level of safety by engaging in
Common Giant, Inc.

Petition for Exemption Pursuant to Section 333

December 23, 2015

Page 7

pre-flight inspections of sUAS and any maintenance that is recommended by the manufacturer of

the sUAS.

Conclusion

Through this Petition, filed pursuant to Section 333, Petitioner seeks an exemption from

the following FARs: 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. § 91.9(b)(2); 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).

Grant of this Petition and Section 333 Exemption, including waiver of the above-referenced

FARs, will permit Petitioner to operate sUAS in furtherance of its aerial data collection missions

and goals, including aerial photography, inspections, monitoring, surveying, mapping, and other

related activities. The grant will result in a reduction of risk and concomitant enhancement of

safety as compared to the use of manned aircraft (such as a helicopter) for such activities;

moreover, for many such activities, use of manned aircraft is not possible or practicable. Unlike

manned aircraft, Petitioner’s UAS operations will not use combustible fuel, and Petitioner’s

unmanned aircraft are smaller, quieter, lighter, safer, and more cost-effective than manned aircraft

employed for similar purposes. Moreover, Petitioner’s sUAS operations will be in controlled

airspace and at least 500 feet away from nonparticipating people. Accordingly, it is believed that

such sUAS operations will be at least as safe (and likely safer) than manned aircraft operations

used for the same purposes.

We respectfully request that the FAA grant this Section 333 Exemption Petition using the

“summary grant” procedure.

Should any questions arise during the course of your consideration of this Petition, kindly

contact the undersigned.

Respectfully submitted,

Stephen Hartzell

Counsel to Common Giant, Inc.