www. ep lawllc.com 

# ESPOSITO PARTNERS

275 Madison Avenue 1 28 Main Street

14th Floor Cold Spring Harbor

New York, NY 10016 New York, 11724

(212) 537

- 3896 (888) 533

- 9995

June 16

, 2014

VIA FDMS AND OVERNIGHT COURIER

U nited States Department of Transportation

Docket Management System

1200 New Jersey Ave., SE

West Building Ground Floor Room W12

- 140

Washington, DC 20590

Re: Exemption Request Pursuant To Section 333 of the FAA Reform Act of 2012

Dear Sir or Madam:

We represent Aero Cine

, LLC, a New York Limited Liability Company doing business as

AeroCine (“ AeroCine ”). We are writing p ursuant to the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 1

(the “ Reform Act ” ) and the procedures contained in 14 C.F.R. 11

, to request that AeroCine , an owner

and operator of small unmanned aircraft, be exempted from the Federal Aviation Regulations (“FARs”)

listed below so that AeroCine may operate its small unmanned aircraft / lightweight unmanned aircraft

systems (“UAS”) commercially in airspace regulated by the Federal Aviation Administration (“FAA”).

As described herein, AeroCine is the leader in capturing high definition feature film quality aerial

cinematography with small

, unmanned aircraft and lightweight UAS s . It is the only company that has

publicly shown its ability to carry feature film quality camera systems, like the Arri Alexa , on a stable

UAS platform. AeroCine has equipped each of its small unmanned aircraft for aerial photography and

cinematography , primarily for use in the motion pi cture industry , though given their stability and

maneuverability, they may be used for other cinematography , by law enforcement personnel and by other

first responders

. AeroCine’s UASs are the most advanced remote control air cr aft being used for th ese

purpose s and they are already highly regarded by noteworthy experts in the field of unmanned rotorcraft

, as well as feature film directors.

Founded by three innovative film school graduates from New York University’s Tisch School of

the Arts, AeroCine has been operating its lightweight UASs outside the United States on cinematic

productions with out incident . For example, AeroCine has obtained research driven footage of the

Chernobyl nuclear reactor site in Russia , culturally important footage of locat ions within Dubai , Sweden

and Slovenia, and is in discussions to acquire feature film footage in such countries as Egypt and Mexico.

Based primarily in New York City, wi th operations in Los Angeles, AeroCine would now like permission

to fly its UASs comme rcially in the United States to capture aerial cinematography , conduct research on

UAS safety protocols and to develop an enhanced platform for first responder use.

1 112 P.L. 95 (2012).U.S. Dep’t of Transp.

June 16, 2014

Page 2 of 7

www. ep lawllc.com To date, AeroCine has rejected all offers to work with feature film directors on locations with in

the United States

, to ensure it is in compliance with any applicable FARs. It has done so despite Judge

Patrick G. Geraghty’s decision in the Raphael Pirker matter and his reasoning that no F ARs prohibit the

use of small unmanned aircraft or lightweight UASs like those flown by AeroCine.

AeroCine’s exemption request would permit its operation o f lightweight, unmanned (piloted by

remote control) and comparatively inexpensive UAS s in t ightly controlled and l imited airspace.

Predetermined, specifically marked areas of operation, cordoned off locations and corresponding

enhancements to current safety controls will allow AeroCine to operate within current safety parameters

while innovating new ones. Currently, similar lightweight, remote controlled UASs are legally operated

by amateurs with no flight experience, safety plan or controls in place to prevent cata strophe. It is only

logical to allow AeroCine ’s experienced remote control pilots, technicians and safety crew to operate

similar lightweight UASs. This will act to further safety protocols specific to lightweight UASs as

AeroCine researches flight data and other information gained through permitted flight operations.

Granting AeroCine’s request comports with the Secretary of Transportation’s ( FAA

Administrator’s) responsibilities to not only integrate UASs into the national airspace system, but to

“...e stablish requirements for the safe operation of such aircraft systems [UASs] in the national airspace

system” under Section 333(c) of the Reform Act. Further, AeroCine will conduct its operations in

compliance with the protocols described herein or as otherwise established by the FAA

.

For the reasons stated below, AeroCine respectfully requests the grant of an exemption allowing

it to operate lightweight, remote controlled UAS’s.

1. AeroCine’s Contact Information :

Aero Cine , LLC d/b/a AeroCine

c/o Esposito Partners

275 Madison Avenue, 14 th Floor

New York, NY 10016

Tel.: (212) 537

- 3896

E

- Mail: fesposito@eplawllc.com

2. The S pecific S ections of Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations F rom W hich AeroCine

Requests Exemption are :

14 CFR 21 ;

14 C.F.R. 45.23(b) ;

14 CFR 61.113 (a) & (b) ;

14 C.F.R. 91

, et seq.;

14 CFR 407 (a) (1) ;

14 CFR 409 (a) (2) ; and,

14 CFR 417 (a) & (b)

.U.S. Dep’t of Transp.

June 16, 2014

Page 3 of 7

www. ep lawllc.com 3. The E xtent of R elief AeroCine S eeks and the R eason I t S eeks S uch R elief : 2

AeroCine submits this application in accordance with the Reform Act, 112 P.L. 95 §§ 331

- 334

, seeking relief from any currently applicable FARs operating to prevent AeroCine’s contemplated

commercial cinematic

, research and other flight operations within the national airspace system. The

Reform Act in Section 332 provides for such integration of civil unmanned aircraft systems into our

national airspace system as it is in the public’s interest to do so . AeroCin e’s lightweight UASs meet the

definition of “small unman ned aircraft” as defined in Section 331 and therefore the integration of

AeroCine’s lightweight UASs are expressly contemplated by the Reform Act. AeroCine would like to

operate its lightweight UASs prior to the time period by which the Reform Act requires the FAA to

promulgate rules governing such craft.

The Reform Act guides the Secretary in determining the types of UASs that may operate safely

in our national airspace system. Considerations inc lude :

• The weight, size, speed and overall capabilities of the UAS ;

• Whether the UAS will be operated near airports or populated areas ; and

,

• Whether the UAS will be operated by line of sight

.

112 P.L. 95 § 333 (a). Each of these items militates in favor of an exemption for AeroCine.

AeroCine’s UASs utilize twelve counter

- rotating propellers for extreme balance, control and

stability. They each weigh less than 55 pounds, including cinemat ic or other equipment. Each of

AeroCine’s small unmanned aircraft are designed to primarily hover in place and operate at less th an a

50 knot maximum speed. They are capable of vertical and horizontal operations but operate only within

the line of sight of the remote control pilot. In addition to the remote control pil ot, AeroCine uses a

spotter and a technician, such that , at minimum, three AeroCine personnel govern the safe flight of an

AeroCine aircraft at all times

.

Utilizing battery power and not combustible fuels, flights generally last between five and twenty

minutes

. AeroCine does not operate its UASs with less than twenty five percent battery capacity. Safety

systems in place include a GPS mode that allows AeroCine’s UASs to hover in place if communication

with the radio control pilot is lost and then slow ly descend the UAS at twenty five percent battery

capacity. Further, AeroCine’s fleet is programmed, in some instances, to slowly follow a predetermined

set of waypoints to return to a safety point if communications are lost.

AeroCine does not operate it s UASs near airports and generally does not operate them near

populated areas. To date, AeroCine has only operated its fleet on private sets , cordoned off areas and

areas under the control of AeroCine clients . Aero C ine only operates its UASs in predeterm ined areas

and only in compliance with well regarded safety protocols such as those contained within the well

established and commonly known Motion Picture and Television Operations Manual.

AeroCine’s operation of its fleet of small unmanned aircraft will not “create a hazard to users of

the national airspace system or the public. ” 112 P.L. 95 § 333 (b). Given the small size and weight of

AeroCine’s UASs, combined with their operation in cordoned off and well

- controlled areas, AeroCine’s

fleet falls within Congress’s contemplated safety zone when it promulgated the Reform Act and the

corresponding directive to integrate UASs into the national airspace system. Indeed, AeroCine’s UASs

have a demonstrable safety record and do not pose any threat to the general public or national security.

2 The FAA has the authority to issue the exemption sought by AeroCine pursuant to the Federal Aviation

Act, 85 P.L. 726 (1958) , as amended (the “Act”).U.S. Dep’t of Transp.

June 16, 2014

Page 4 of 7

www. ep lawllc.com 4. How AeroCine’s Request Will Benefit the Public As A Whole :

Granting AeroCine’s exemption request furthers the public interest. First, Congress has already

pronounced that it is in the public’s interest to integrate commercially flown UASs into the national

airspace system , hence the passing of the Reform Act . Second, AeroCine conducts research into safe

UAS operation s every time it flies one of its UASs. Flight data, visual inspections, recorded observations

and f light analyses are compiled to further enhance current safety protocols. Allowing AeroCine to log

more flight time directly relates to its research and its ability to further enhance current safety measures.

Third, the public has an interest in reducing the danger and emission associated with current aerial

cinematic capture methods, namely, full size helicopters. AeroCine’s UASs are battery powered and

create no emissions. If an AeroCine UAS crashes there is no fuel to ignite and explode. The impact o f

AeroCine’s lightweight UASs is far less than a full size helicopter

, notwithstanding the statistically

noteworthy safety record of full size helicopters used in motion picture capture

. T he public’s interest is

furthered by minimizing ecological and cras h impacts by permitting motion picture capture through

AeroCine’s lightweight UASs.

Progression of the arts and sciences has been fundamental to our society since its inclusion in the

United States Constitution. Indeed, Congress mandated the integration of UASs into our national

airspace system, in part, to achieve progression in this noteworthy, and inevitable, field. Permitting

AeroCine to immediately fly within the United States furthers these goals. Whether it is the amalgam of

scientific discoverie s applicable to feature film making (including those drawing upon architecture,

physics, engineering and cultural inclusiveness) to advancements in publicly usable technologies or

advancements in equipment available to law enforcement personnel / first res ponders that does not cost

millions of dollars, granting AeroCine's exemption request substantially furthers the public's interest in

ways known and currently unknown.

5. Reasons Why AeroCine’s Exemption Will Not Adversely Affect Safety Or How The

Exemption Will Provide a Level of Safety At Least Equal To Existing Rule:

AeroCine’s exemption will not adversely affect safety. Quite the contrary, for the reasons stated,

supra , permitting AeroCine to log more flight time in FAA controlled airspace will allow AeroCine to

innovate and implement new and novel, as of yet undiscovered safety protocols. In addition, AeroCine

submits the following representations of enhancements to c urrent aerial motion picture capture

techniques:

• AeroCine’s UASs weigh less than 55 pounds complete with feature length motion

picture quality cameras like the Arri Alexa ;

• AeroCine only operates its UASs below 400 feet;

• AeroCine’s UASs only operate for 5

- 2 0 minutes per flight;

• AeroCine l ands its UASs when they reach 25 % battery power;

• AeroCine’s remote control pilots operate AeroCine’s UASs by line of sight;

• AeroCine’s remote control pilots have video backup should they somehow lose sight of

the UAS;

• AeroCi ne staffs each flight with a remote control pilot, technician and spotter with

communication systems enabling real time communication between them ;

• AeroCine’s UASs have GPS flight modes whereby they hover and then slowly land ifU.S. Dep’t of Transp.

June 16, 2014

Page 5 of 7

www. ep lawllc.com communication with the remo te control pilot is lost or battery power is below 25% ;

• AeroCine actively analyses electronic flight data and other sources of information to

constantly update and enhance safety protocols;

• AeroCine employs FAA licensed helicopter pilot ( s ) and conducts a r egimented training

program;

• AeroCine only operates in quarantined areas that are strictly controlled, are away from

airports and populated areas ;

• AeroCine conducts extensive briefings prior to flight, during which safety carries

primary importance;

• AeroCin e always obtains all necessary permissions and permits prior to operation; and,

• AeroCine has procedures in place to abort flights in the event of safety breaches or

potential danger.

AeroCine’s safety protocols provide a level of safety at least equal to existing rules

, and in nearly

every instance

, greater than existing rules. It is important to note that absent the integration of

commercial UASs into our national airspace system, helicopters are the primary means of aerial motion

picture capture. Wh ile the safety record of such helicopters is remarkably astounding, it is far safer to

operate a battery powered lightweight UAS. First, the potential loss of life is diminished because UASs

carry no people on board and AeroCine only operates them in spec ific areas away from mass populations.

Second, there is no fuel on board a UAS and thus the potential for fire or explosions is greatly diminished.

Third, the small size and extreme maneuverability of AeroCine’s UASs allow our remote control pilots to

av oid hazards. Lastly, given their small size and weight, even when close enough to capture amazing

images, AeroCine’s UASs need not be so close to the objects they are focused on. Accordingly,

AeroCine’s UASs have operated and will continue to operate at and above current safety levels.

6. A Summary The FAA May Publish in the Federal Register :

A. 14 C.F.R. 21 and 14 C.F.R. 91 : Airworthiness Certificates , Manuals and The Like.

14 C.F.R. 21, Subpart H, entitled Airworthiness Certificates , sets forth requirements for

procurement of necessary airworthiness certificates in relation to FAR § 91.203(a)(1). The size, weight

and enclosed operational area of AeroCine’s UASs permits exemption from Part 21 beca u se AeroCine’s

UASs meet an equivalent level of safety pursuant to Section 333 of the Reform Act. The FAA is

authorized to exempt aircraft from the air worthiness certificate requirement under both t he Act (49 U.S.C.

§ 44701 (f)) and Section 333 of the Reform Act . Both pieces of legislation permit the FAA to exempt

UASs from the airworthiness certificate requirement in consideration of the weight, size

, speed,

maneuverability and proximity to areas such as airports and dense populations

. AeroCine ’s UASs meet or

exceed each of the elements.

14 C.F.R. 91.7(a) prohibits the operation of an aircraft without an airworthiness certificate. As no

such certificate will be applicable in the form contemplated by the FARs , this Regulation is inapplicable.

14 C.F.R. § 91.9 (b) (2) requires an aircraft flight manual in the aircraft. As there are no pilots or

passengers, and given the size of the UASs, this Regulation is inapplicable. An equivalent level of safety

will be achieved by maintaining a manual at the flight operat ions center. The FAA has previously issued

exemptions to this regulation in Exemption Nos. 8607, 8737, 8738, 9299, 9299A, 9565, 9565B, 10167,U.S. Dep’t of Transp.

June 16, 2014

Page 6 of 7

www. ep lawllc.com 10167A, 10602, 10700 and 32827

.

14 C.F.R. § 91.121 regarding a ltimeter s ettings is inapplicable insofar as AeroCine’s UASs utilize

electronic global positioning systems and six internal gyroscopes to provide spatial coordination.

14 C.F.R. § 91.203 (a) and (b) provides for the carrying of civil aircraft certifications and

registrati ons. They are inapplicable for the same reasons described above. The equivalent level of safety

will be achieved by maintaining such certifications and registrations at the AeroCine’s flight operations

center.

B. 14 C.F.R. § 45.23 : Marking of T he Aircraft

.

Applicable Codes of Fede ral Regulation require aircraft to be marked according to certain

specifications. AeroCine’s UASs are, by definition, unmanned. They therefore do not have a cabin,

cockpit or pilot station on which to mark certain words or phrases. Further, two

- inch lettering is difficult to

place on such small aircraft. Regardless, AeroCine will ma rk its UASs in the largest possible lettering by

placing the word “EXPERIMENTAL” on its fuselage as required by 14 C.F.R. §45.29 (f) so that the the

pilot, technician, spotter and others working with the UAV will see the markings. The FAA has

previously issued exemptions to this regulation through Exemptions Nos. 8738

, 10167

, 10167A and 10700.

C. 14 C.F.R. § 61.113: Private Pilot Privileges and Limitations: P IC

.

Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. §§ 61.113 (a) & (b)

, private pilots are limited to non

- commercial

operations. AeroCine can achieve an equivalent level of safety as achieved by current Regulations

because AeroCine’s UASs do not carry any pilots or passengers. Further, while helpful, a pilot license

will not ensure remote control pilot ing skills , though AeroCine’s pilot vetting and training programs will.

Further, private pilot licensees will operate AeroCine’s UASs with the same skill. Further, t he risks

attendant to the operation of AeroCine’s UASs is far less than the risk levels i nherent in the commercial

activities outlined in 14 C.F.R. § 61

, et seq

. Thus, allowing AeroCine to operate its UASs with a private

pilot as the pilot in control will exceed current safety levels in relation to 14 C.F.R. §61.113 (a) & (b).

D. 14 C.F.R. 91.119: Minimum S afe A ltitudes

.

14 C.F.R. § 91.119 prescribes safe altitudes for the operation of civil aircraft. It allows

helicopters to be operated at lower altitudes in certain conditions. AeroCine’s UAS s will never operate at

an altitude greater than 400 AGL. AeroCine will, however, operate its UASs in cordoned off areas with

security perimeters, providing a level of safety at least equivalent to those in relation to minimum safe

altitudes. Given the size, weight, maneuverabil ity and speed of AeroCine’s UASs, an equivalent level of

safety will be achieved.

E. 14 C.F.R. 91.405 (a); 407 (a) (1); 409 (a) (2); 417(a) & (b): Maintenance Inspections

.

The above

- cited Regulations require , amongst other things, aircraft owners and operator s to

“ have [the] 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

. . . . ”

These Regulations only apply to aircraft with an airworthiness certificate . They will not,

therefore, apply to AeroCine should its requested exemption be granted. AeroCine conducts an extensiveU.S. Dep’t of Transp.

June 16, 2014

Page 7 of 7

www. ep lawllc.com maintenance program that involves regular software updates an d curative measures for any damaged

hardware. Therefore, an equivalent level of safety will be achieved. This is particularly true insofar as

AeroCine has researched and developed its own designs.

F. Summary

AeroCine seeks an exemption from the following Regulations : 14 C.F.R. 21, subpart H; 14 C.F.R

. 45.23(b); 14 C.F.R. §§ 61.113 (a) & (b); 14 C.F.R. § 91.7 (a); 14 C.F.R. § 91.9 (b) (2); 14 C.F.R. §

91.103(b); 14 C.F.R. § 91.109; 14 C.F.R. § 91.119; 14 C.F.R. § 91.121; 14 C.F.R. § 91.151(a); 14 C.F.R.

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

C.F.R. § 91.409 (a) (2) ; and , 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.417 (a) & (b) to commercially operate its fleet of small

unmanned vehicle s and lightweight unmanned aircraft vehicles in motion picture or television operations

, to conduct its own research and to develop economic platforms for law enforcement / first responders

.

Granting AeroCine’s request for exemption will reduce current risk levels and thereby enhance

safety. Currently, motion picture image capture relies primarily on the use of larger aircraft running on

combustible fuel. AeroCine’s craft do not contain pote ntially explosive fuel, are smaller, lighter and

more maneuverable than conventional motion picture aircraft. Further, AeroCine operates at lower

altitudes and in controlled airspace. AeroCine has been analyzing flight data and other information in

compi ling novel safety protocols and the implementation of a flight operations manual that exceeds

currently accepted means and methods of safe flight.

There are no people on board AeroCine’s UASs and therefore the likelihood of death or serious

bodily injury i s significantly limited. AeroCine’s operation of its UASs, weighting less than 55 pounds

and travelling at speeds lower than 50 knots in cordoned off areas will provide at least an equivalent level

of safety as that ac hieved under current FARs

.

Accordingly, AeroCine respectfully requests that the FAA grant its exemption request without

delay.

Respectfully submitted

,

Frank M. Esposito , Esq.

Esposito Partners , PLLC

275 Madison Avenue

14 th Floor

New York, NY 10016

Counsel for AeroCine

cc (via e

- mail) : Brian Streem

Managing Member

AeroCine

Jason Goodman

Chief Executive Officer

AeroCine

Jeffrey Brink

Director of Flight Operations

AeroCine