Trenton Van Vickle – Section 333 Exemption Petition

Page 1 of 7 September 6, 2015

U. S. Department of Transportation Docket Management System 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE Washington, DC 20590

Re: Exemption Request Section 333 of the FAA Reform Act.

Dear Sir or Madam:

Pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (the Reform Act), I, Trenton A. Van Vickle (the applicant), planned operator of Small unmanned Aircraft Systems (sUAS) equipped to conduct aerial photography and survey for various industries hereby applies for an exemption from Federal Aviation Regulations (FARs) to allow commercial operation of their sUAS, so long as such operations are conducted within and under the conditions outlined herein or as may be established by the FAA as required by Section 333.

Contact information

Trenton A. Van Vickle 1454 Hensley Rd Mineral, Virginia 23117 Phone: (703) 608-1862 Email: Trenton@VanVickle.biz

The specific section or sections of 14 CFR from which I seek and exemption:

Exemption Request Pursuant to Section 333 of the FMRA and Part 11 of the Federal Aviation Regulations, Seeking Exemption from:

14 CFR Part 21 Subpart H; 14 CFR § 45.23{b); 14 CFR 61.113(a) and (b) 14 CFR 91.119(c); 14 CFR 91.121; 14 CFR 91.151 14 CFR 91.405; 14 CFR 91.407(a)(1); 14 CFR 91.409(a)(1) and (2) 14 CFR 91.417(a) and (b)

The extent of relief and the reason I seek the relief:

I, Trenton A. Van Vickle, a private pilot, submit this application in accordance with the Reform Act, 112 P

. L. 95 §§ 331-334, seeking relief from any currently applicable FARs operating to prevent me, Trenton A. Van Vickle, contemplated commercial cinematic, academic 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. My, Trenton A. Van Vickle's, sUAS 1 meets the definition of "small unmanned aircraft" as defined in Section 331 and therefore the integration of my sUAS i s expressly contemplated by the Reform Act. I would like to operate my sUAS prior to the time period by which the Reform Act

1 Appendix ATrenton Van Vickle – Section 333 Exemption Petition

Page 2 of 7 requires the FAA to promulgate rules governing such craft. Thereby, providing direct experience and valuable information for formal regulation that can be administered uniformly to all related sUAS aerial video and photography. The Reform Act guides the Secretary in determining the types of sUAS that may operate safely in our national airspace system

. Considerations include: The weight, size, speed and overall capabilities of the sUAS's; whether the sUAS will be operated near airports or heavily populated areas; and, Whether the sUAS will be operated by line of sight. 112 P.L. 95 § 333 (a). Each of these items reflect in favor of an exemption for me, Trenton A. Van Vickle. My sUAS utilizes four (4) counter-rotating propellers for balance, control and stability. My sUAS is equipped with GPS and auto return safety technology. Weighing less than six (6) pounds (far below the maximum 55 pound limit); including payload.

I, Trenton A. Van Vickle, considers safety as foremost with each flight. Built in safety systems include a GPS mode that allows my sUAS to hover in place when radio controls are released. When pilot communication is lost sUAS is designed slowly descend to point of takeoff

. I do not operate my sUAS near Hospitals nor Police heliports, and do not operate near areas where general public is within fifty to one hundred (50-100) yards depending on location, conditions and weather. I am constantly on alert for any manned aircraft (Police/Medical helicopters, etc.) and prepared to land/abort immediately to the nearest and safest ground point should a manned aircraft approach my location or I suspect manned aircraft may approach near my location. My sUAS is capable of vertical and horizontal operations, and are flown only within my line of sight and my visual observer (VO), as the remote control pilot. Utilizing battery power rather than combustible fuels, flights generally last between five (5) to fifteen (15) minutes, with an alt i tude generally under two hundred fifty (250) feet. I, Trenton A. Van Vickle, utilize a fresh fully charged battery with each flight as a safety precaution; full flight time limit for each battery is (25) minutes as tested. I do not operate my sUAS at or below manufacture recommend minimum charge levels for operation 2 ; preferring to remain well within a safe operating range to insure adequate communication between radio control and sUAS to eliminate potential for crash, loss of control or hazard. Reserve batteries are at hand with each exercise to insure replacement for sufficient safe level of operation. I do not believe in taking risk that may cause a crash that could create hazard to the public, property, or other manned aircraft. I have logged 3 numerous practice flights in remote areas as a hobbyist simulating flights for future commercial use to gain familiarization with the characteristics of this specific sUAS's performance under different temperature and weather conditions. I also practice computerized simulated flights to maintain adequate skills and response reflex time. All for the sake of safety.

I, Trenton A. Van Vickle, am extremely cautious when operating of my sUAS 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 my sUAS's it falls well within Congress ' s contemplated safety zone when it promulgated the Reform Act and the corresponding directive to integrate sUAS's into the national airspace system. Trenton A. Van Vickle's

2 Appendix B – Phantom Smart Battery Guidelines

3 Appendix B – Forms – Pilot Master LogTrenton Van Vickle – Section 333 Exemption Petition

Page 3 of 7 sUAS, used in hobby flight, has a demonstrable safety record and does not pose any threat to the general public or national security.

How the request would benefit the public as a whole:

Aerial videography for geographical awareness has been around for a long time through manned fixed wing aircraft and helicopters. For small budget companies the expense of such aerial videography is cost prohibit i ve. Only large companies can afford to absorb such expense. Depriving lower budget business from a valuable marketing tool. Manned aircraft pose a threat to the public through potential catastrophic crash that this area has experienced in the past with military aircraft and medical helicopter crashes. Each resulting in loss of life. Each with combustible fuel that exploded and burned on impact. My, Trenton A. Van Vickle, sUAS pose no such threat since size and lack of combustible fuel alleviates any potential threat to the public. Congress has already proclaimed that it is in the public's interest to integrate commercially flown sUAS's into the national airspace system, hence the passing of the Reform Act. Granting my, Trenton A. Van Vickle, exemption request furthers the public interest through academic/visual awareness of the geographical benefits. My sUAS is battery powered and creates no emissions that can harm the environment. The consequence of my sUAS crashing is far less than a full size helicopter or fixed wing aircraft; which are heavy, contain combustible fuel and can cause catastrophic devastation to the public

.

The public's interest is furthered by minimizing ecological and crash threat by permitting aerial video/photo capture through my battery operated sUAS

. Permitting me, Trenton A. Van Vickle, to immediately fly within national air space furthers economic growth. Granting my exemption request substantially furthers the economic impact for the companies looking to relocate or build as well as individuals looking to relocate for career advancement through academic and geographical awareness. Both of which serve as a stimulus to the community.

Reasons why the exemption would not adversely affect safety, or how the exemption would provide a level of safety at least equal to the existing rule:

My, Trenton A. Van Vickle's, exemption will not adversely affect safety. Quite the contrary, for the reasons stated permitting me, Trenton A. Van Vickle, to log more flight time in FAA controlled airspace, with communication with the FAA, will allow me to contribute to the innovation and implementation of new and novel, as of yet undiscovered safety protocols development in cooperation with the FAA. In addition I, Trenton A. Van Vickle, submit the following representations of enhancements to current aerial videography and photography:

 My sUAS weighs 5.7 pounds including payload.

 My sUAS will not exceed 16 m/s (31 Knots).

 My sUAS will only be operated by a person that is at a minimum a licensed private pilot, with at least a third class medical.

 I only operate my sUAS well within the 400 foot permissible ceiling set by the

FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012

.  My sUAS will only operate for 5

- 15 minutes per flight.Trenton Van Vickle – Section 333 Exemption Petition

Page 4 of 7  My sUAS meets or exceeds all FCC requirements 4

.  I land my UAS prior to manufacturer recommended minimum level of battery

power.
 I pilot my UAS through remote control only by line of sight of the PIC and the

visual observer.

 My UAS has GPS a flight safety feature whereby it hovers and then slowly lands if communication with the remote control pilot is lost.

 I actively analyze flight data and other sources of information to constantly update and enhance safety protocols.

 I only operate in reasonably safe environment that are strictly controlled, are away from power lines, elevated lights and actively populated areas.

 I conduct pre-flight inspections 5 and protocol 6 , during which safety carries primary importance.

 I always obtains all necessary permissions prior to operation 7

.

My, Trenton A. Van Vickle's, safety protocols provide a level of safety equal to or exceeding existing rules. It is important to note that absent the integration of commercial UAS into our national airspace system, helicopters are the primary means of aerial video and photography for community awareness and real estate. While the safety record of such helicopters is remarkably astounding, there has been a local incident involving loss of life; it is far safer to operate a battery powered sUAS.

First, the potential loss of life is diminished because UAS's carry no people on board and I only operates my UAS in specific 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 my UAS allow me to remotely pilot away from and avoid hazards quickly and safely. Lastly, given its small size and weight, even when close enough to capture amazing images, my UAS need not be so close to the objects they are focused on through the technology and use of post editing software allowing pan and zoom.

Accordingly, my UAS has been experimentally operated for familiarization/competency and will continue to operate at and above current safety levels.

A summary that can be published in the Federal Register

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 my, Trenton A. Van Vickle's, sUAS permits exemption from Part 21 because my UAS meets (and exceeds) an equivalent

4 Appendix B Forms – Pilot Master Log

5 Appendix B Forms – Flight Safety

6 Appendix B Forms – Preflight Check List

7 Appendix B Forms – Flight Request/ReleaseTrenton Van Vickle – Section 333 Exemption Petition

Page 5 of 7 level of safety pursuant to Section 333 of the Reform Act. The FAA Is authorized to exempt aircraft: from the airworthiness certificate requirement under both the Act (49 U.S.C. § 44701 (f)) and Section 333 of the Reform Act. Both pieces of legislation permit the FAA to exempt UAS's from the airworthiness certificate requirement in consideration of the weight, size, speed, maneuverability and proximity to areas such as airports and dense populations. My, Trenton A. Van Vickle's, current and projected UAS's 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 on board pilots or passengers, and given the size of the UAS's, this Regulation is inapplicable. An equivalent level of safety will be achieved by maintaining a safety/flight manual delineating areas of where safety can be defined. The FAA has previously issued exemptions to this regulation in Exemption Nos. 8607, 8737, 8738, 9299, 9299A, 9565, 95658, 10167, 10167A, 10602, 10700 and 32827.

14 C.F.R. § 91.121 regarding altimeter settings.

This is inapplicable insofar as my UAS utilizes electronic global positioning systems with

a barometric sensor

.

14 C.F

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

They are inapplicable for the same reasons described above. The equivalent level of safety will be achieved by maintaining any such required certifications and registrations by me, Trenton A. Van Vickle.

14 C.F

. R

. § 45.23: Marking of the Aircraft.

Applicable Codes of Federal Regulation require aircraft to be marked according to certain specifications. My sUAS 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 impossible to place on such small aircraft with dimensions smaller that minimal lettering requirement. The FAA has previously issued exemptions to this regulation through Exemptions Nos. 8738, 10167, 10167A and 10700.

14 C.F

. R. 91.119: Minimum Safe Altitudes.

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.Trenton Van Vickle – Section 333 Exemption Petition

Page 6 of 7 My sUAS will never operate at an altitude greater than the standard of 400 AGL. I, Trenton A. Van Vickle, will however operate my sUAS in safe areas away from public and traffic, providing a level of safety at least equivalent to or below those in relation to minimum safe altitudes. Given the size, weight, maneuverability and speed of my sUAS, an equivalent or higher level of safety will be achieved. The UA may not operate within 5 nautical miles of an airport reference point 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 NOT AM as required by the operator's COA

. The letter of agreement with the airport management must be made available to the Administrator upon request. The FAA has previously issued exemptions to this regulation in exemptions No. 11067, 11158, 11161, 11166, 11167,

11170 and 11172.

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 operators 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 my, Trenton A. Van Vickle's, UAS. However, as a safety precaution I inspect my UAS before and after each flight. Log any discrepancies and repairs in the maintenance log 8

.

A Summary The FAA May Publish in the Federal Register:

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)(l). The size, weight and enclosed operational area of my UAS permits exemption from Part 21 because my, Trenton A. Van Vickle's, sUAS meets an equivalent level of safety pursuant to Section 333 of the Reform Act. The FAA is authorized to exempt aircraft from the airworthiness certificate requirement under both the Act (49 U.S.C. § 44701 (f)) and Section 333 of the Reform Act. Both pieces of legislation permit the FAA to exempt sUAS's from the airworthiness certificate requirement in consideration of the weight, size, speed, maneuverability and proximity to areas such as airports and dense populations. My UAS's meets or exceeds 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 UAS's, this Regulation is inapplicable. An equivalent level of safety will be achieved by maintaining a manual. The FAA has previously issued exemptions to this regulation in Exemption Nos. 8607,

8 Appendix B Forms – Maintenance LogTrenton Van Vickle – Section 333 Exemption Petition

Page 7 of 7 8737, 8738, 9299, 9299A, 9565, 95658, 10167, maintenance program that involves regular software updates and curative measures for any damaged hardware. Therefore, an equivalent level of safety will be achieved.

Any additional Information, views or argument available to support your request.

Currently, area awareness and aerial videography/photography relies primarily on the use of larger aircraft running on combustible fuel. Posing potential risk to the public. Granting my, Trenton A. Van Vickle's, request for exemption will reduce current risk levels and thereby enhance safety. My sUAS craft does not contain potentially explosive fuel, is smaller, lighter and more maneuverable than conventional video and photographic aircraft with much less flight time. Further, I operate at lower altitudes and in controlled airspace eliminating potential public risk flying to and from established air fields. I, Trenton A. Van Vickle, have been informally analyzing flight information and will compile safety protocols and the implementation of a flight operations manual for usage that exceeds currently accepted means and methods for safe flight. Formal collection of

information shared with the FAA will enhance the FAA's internal efforts to establish protocols for complying with the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012

. There are no personnel on board my, Trenton A. Van Vickle's, sUAS and therefore the likelihood of death or serious bodily injury is sign i ficantly diminished. My, Trenton A. Van Vickle's, operation of my sUAS, weighing less than 20 pounds and travelling at lower speeds within limited areas will provide an equivalent level of safety as that achieved under current FARs. Accordingly I, Trenton A. Van Vickle, respectfully request that the FAA grant my exemption request and am willing to cooperate in sharing information to benefit the FAA, safety of manned a i rcraft, and the general public at large

.

I do not wish to exercise the privileges of my exemption outside the U.S.

Respectfully submitted,

Trenton A. Van Vickle 1454 Hensley Rd Mineral, Virginia 23117 Phone: (703) 608-1862

Email: Trenton@VanVickle.Biz