September 14, 2015

U.S. Department of Transportation

Docket Management System

1200 New Jersey Ave., SE

Washington, DC 20590

Re: Petition of Frank J. Polievka for an Exemption Pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA 

Modernization and Reform Act of 2012

Director: Flight Standards Service:

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

14 C.F.R. Part 11, Frank J. Polievka (“Polievka”) hereby applies for an exemption from the 

Federal Aviation Regulations ("FARs") identified below to allow commercial operation of small 

unmanned aerial vehicles (i.e., "small unmanned aircraft" or "UAS") for the purpose of 

conducting aerial videography and photography for the film and television industry as well as the 

real estate industry.

This petition for exemption is made based on information outlined in this Petition for Exemption, 

as well as the accompanying documents;

1. PIC Flight Operations Manual and;

2. Operations Manuals 

(Collectively 2 and 3 are referred to as Documents and Manuals)

3. User Guide and;

4. Flight Manual1 

(Collectively 3 and 4 are referred to as "Manufacturer's Manuals").

Polievka submits these supporting materials as confidential documents pursuant to 14 C.F.R. § 

11.35(b), as the materials contain confidential commercial and/or proprietary information that

Polievka has not and will not share with other requesting parties. Additionally, these documents 

contain operating conditions and procedures that are not generally available to the public and are 

protected from release under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552 et. seq.

For your convenience, this Petition is organized as follows:

I. Description of Petitioner

 

1

. The term "Manufacturer's Manual" also includes all relevant manufacturer publications, including, but not limited 

to: operations and flight manuals, user guides, component maintenance manuals, pilot training manuals, service 

information letters and, safety/service bulletins.
U.S Department of Transportation

September 14, 2015

Page 2

II. Description of Proposed Operations

A. Aerial videography, photography and cinematography

III. Relevant Statutory Authority

IV. Proposed UAS Operations Meet the Requirements of Section 333 of the

Reform Act

A. Approval is Warranted Based on the UAS's Size, Weight, Speed, and Operational 

Capability

B. Approval is Warranted Based on the Operational Restrictions Set Forth in the 

Operations Manuals

V. Regulations From Which Exemption is Requested

A. 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H – Airworthiness Certificates and 14 C.F.R. § 

91.203(a)(1)

B. 14 C.F.R. Part 27 Airworthiness Standards: Normal Category Rotorcraft

C. 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.9(c), 45.23(b) and 45.27(a): Aircraft Marking and Identification 

Requirements

D. 14 C.F.R. § 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) and (2); 91.417(a) and (b): 

Maintenance Inspections

E. 14 C.F.R. Part 61, 14 C.F.R. § 61.3, 14 C.F.R. § 61.113: Private Pilot Privileges and 

Limitations

F. 14 C.F.R. § 91.7(a): Civil Aircraft Airworthiness

G. 14 C.F.R. § 91.9(b)(2): Civil Aircraft Flight Manual in the Aircraft and 14 C.F.R. § 

91.203(a) and (b): Carrying Civil Aircraft Certification and Registration

H. 14 C.F.R. § 91.103: Preflight Action

I. 14 C.F.R. § 91.109(a): Flight Instruction

J. 14 C.F.R. § 91.119(c): Minimum Safe Altitudes

K. 14 C.F.R. § 91.121: Altimeter Settings

L. 14 C.F.R. § 91.151(a): Fuel Requirements for Flight in VFR Conditions

V1. Drug and Alcohol Program

VII. Public Interest

VIII. Privacy

IX. Federal Register Summary

X. Conclusion

I. DESCRIPTION OF PETITIONER

Polievka, based in Waldorf, MD provides aerial videography, photography and cinematography 

for the movie and TV industry as well as the real estate industry utilizing the latest UAV 
U.S Department of Transportation

September 14, 2015

Page 3

technology. Polievka aims to provide high quality aerial video, using the latest UAS 

technologies, to every client in a safe and professional manners. Polievka works to produce 

videography and photography via controlled flights for the promotional purposes, commercial art 

and stock footage. The Company’s Principal and Chief Pilot Frank J. Polievka has been flying 

UAV Quadcopters as a hobby for more than three years without incident, spending thousands of 

hours flying. Upon the grant of the 333 Exemption the Company’s business will specialize in

production of videography and photography for their client base.

Polievka’s staff are well trained and experienced in providing support as visual observers (“VO”) 

for the pilot in command (“PIC”) in addition to any other needed on site assistance.

All of the equipment owned by Polievka is of the highest quality gear and has been able to 

provide these services safely and without any claims or incident. Polievka’s goal is to advise the 

perspective client that Polievka is following all the applicable state and federal rules to ensure 

the safety of the public while providing the client with a competitive and cost effective product.

Polievka seeks an exemption to allow for aerial filmmaking as well as photography, videography 

services and other related media products.

The contact information for Petitioner is as follows:

Frank J. Polievka

3412 Milstead Ct

Waldorf, MD 20602

Phone: (240) 832-1971

Email: Fpolievka@gmail.com

II. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED OPERATION

Polievka seeks an exemption pursuant to Section 333 of the Reform Act to operate the

DJI Phantom (all under 55lbs) also known as (FP-UAS) for the proposed operations discussed 

herein below. All UAS operations will occur under tightly controlled conditions on private 

property where Polievka has received verifiable permission to operate from the landowner, 

controller or authorized representative. The proposed UAS operations will be conducted in 

accordance with the conditions and limitations of this Petition for Exemption and Polievka's

Operations Manuals. As detailed in Polievka's Operations Manuals, all UAS operations will be 

limited to daytime VFR conditions, within visual line-of-sight ("VLOS") of the operator, in

uncontrolled airspace, and will occur at least 5 mm away from an airport reference point. 

Moreover, Polievka’s Operations Manuals incorporate redundant safeguards to assure the aircraft 

does not travel outside the controlled area of UAS operations, including GPS "geo-fencing" 

technologies.

A. Aerial Closed-Set Videography, Photography and Cinematography

Polievka seeks to use small FP-UAS for the purpose of conducting aerial videography and 

photography creating cinematic vignettes for their client base. Polievka has purposefully tailored 

its operations to meet the requirements established by the FAA in prior grants of exemption 
U.S Department of Transportation

September 14, 2015

Page 4

authorizing commercial use of UAS in the motion picture and television filmmaking industry, 

including:

 Astraeus Aerial (Exemption No. 11062)

 Aerial MOB, LLC (Exemption No. 11066)

 Pictorvision, Inc. (Exemption No. 11067)

 HeliVideo Productions, LLC (Exemption No. 11065)

 Snaproll Media, LLC (Exemption No. 11063)

 RC Pro Productions Consulting, LLC d/b/a Vortex Aerial (Exemption No. 11064)

 Flying-Cam, LLC (Exemption No. 11080)

 Aerocine, LLC (Exemption No. 11150)

 Team 5, LLC (Exemption No. 11158)

 Alan D. Purwin (Exemption No. 11161)

 Helinet Aviation Services, LLC (Exemption No. 11160)

 Picture Factory, Inc. (Exemption No. 11178)

All UAS recording operations will occur on private property in a controlled area away from 

spectators and persons not involved in the filmmaking process. In addition, the filming will be 

conducted between dawn and dusk to ensure maximum safety for the public and those involved 

in the manipulation and operation of the UAS; VFR conditions, at altitudes below 400' above 

ground level (“AGL”). 

As set forth below, Polievka’s operations provide an equivalent level of safety which is superior 

to performing the same work using conventional fixed-wing aircraft or helicopters.

Small UAS recording operations is also safer than traditional manned aircraft performing the 

same function. Conventional operations using rotorcraft and fixed-wing aircraft in low level 

operations present risks associated with vehicles weighing tens of thousands of pounds 

(including payload) and carrying large amounts of fuel which inherently presents significant fire 

hazards as well as exposure to other chemical contaminates. It is important to note the use of 

small UAS in this area will not only be safer and more cost effective to the perspective user or 

purchaser of the service, but the quality and expanse of acquired information will be far more 

robust given the low cost associated with its acquisition and other potential consumers an 

inexpensive product.

UAS recording is more reliable, and allows for the collection, dissemination, and storage of 

visual and other sensory data with greater precision and duration at a very low cost. Small UAS 

will also be capable of accessing and inspecting areas that would otherwise be inaccessible or 

highly dangerous using conventional aircraft or other inspection methods.

III. RELEVANT STATUTORY AUTHORITY

This Petition for Exemption is submitted pursuant to Section 333(a) through (c) of the

FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 ("Reform Act"). Congress has directed the FAA

"to safely accelerate the integration of civil unmanned aircraft systems into the national airspace 

system." Pursuant to Section 333 of the Reform Act, the FAA Administrator is to permit 
U.S Department of Transportation

September 14, 2015

Page 5

unmanned aircraft systems to operate in the National Air Space ("NAS") where it is safe to do so 

based on the following considerations:

● The UAS's size, weight, speed and operational capability;

● Operation of the UAS in close proximity to airports and populated areas; and

● Operation of the UAS within the visual line of sight of the operator.

Additionally, the FAA Administrator has general authority to grant exemptions from the agency's 

safety regulations and minimum standards when the Administrator decides a requested 

exemption is in the public interest. See 49 U.S.C. § 106(f) (defining the authority of the

Administrator); 49 U.S.C. § 44701(f) (permitting exemptions from §§ 44701(a), (b) and

§§ 44702 – 44716, et seq.). A party requesting an exemption must explain the reasons why the 

exemption: (1) would benefit the public as a whole, and (2) would not adversely affect safety (or 

how it would provide a level of safety at least equal to the existing rules). See 14 C.F.R. § 11.81 

(petitions for exemption).

IV. POLIEVKA’s PROPOSED FP-UAS OPERATIONS MEET THE 

REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 333 OF THE REFORM ACT

The small FP-UAS operations proposed by Polievka as noted above in this Petition for 

Exemption qualify for expedited approval pursuant to Section 333 of the Reform Act as each of 

the statutory criteria and relevant factors are satisfied.

A. Approval is Warranted Based on the UAS's Size, Weight, Speed, and

Operational Capability

A Grant of Exemption is appropriate for operations conducted using the UASs due to their size 

weight, speed, and operational capability.

 The FP-UAS’s utilized by Polievka have been approved for use in prior Section

333 Grants of Exemption from the FAA.2

 The FP-UASs weigh less than 55 pounds, including payload

 The FP-UASs will not be flown at a ground speed in excess of 50 knots.

 Altitude information will be generated by equipment onboard the UAS as

specified using GPS triangulation, digitally encoded barometric altimeter, radio 

altimeter, or any combination thereof. This information will be transmitted to the 

pilot via telemetric data feed.

 

2See e.g., Grant of Exemption to Shotover Camera Systems L.P. (Exemption No. 11159); Grant of Exemption to 

VDOS Global, LLC (Exemption No. 11112); Grant of Exemption to LowCountryRC, Corp. (Exemption No. 11184); 

Grant of Exemption to Alan Purwin (Exemption No. 11161); Grant of Exemption to Helinet Aviation Services 

(Exemption No. 11160); Grant of Exemption to Total Safety U.S., Inc. (Exemption No. 11156).
U.S Department of Transportation

September 14, 2015

Page 6

 The FP-UASs will have system redundancies and independent functionality to 

ensure the overall safety and predictability of the system. If connection to the remote 

control or ground control station is lost, failsafe systems will permit the UASs to 

return to a predetermined location and safely land without injury or damage.

 The radio frequencies used for operations and control of the FP-UAS comply with 

the Federal Communications Commission ("FCC") and other appropriate government 

oversight agency requirements. The operating frequency for the FP-UAS is 2.4 GHz 

frequency bands.

If the same operations were conducted using a helicopter, the aircraft's take-off weight would 

likely exceed 6,000 pounds depending on payload. The difference in weight between the FPUAS and a helicopter significantly reduces the potential harm to the participating and nonparticipating individuals and/or surrounding property in the event of an unintended accident or 

incident. In addition, the risk to the onboard pilot and camera operator is eliminated.

B. Approval is Warranted Based on the Operational Restrictions Set Forth in

Polievka’s Operations Manuals

Polievka’s Operations Manuals and the Manufacturer's Manual for the selected FP-UAS will 

contain all the procedures and limitations necessary to safely and successfully perform the 

operations specified in this Petition for Exemption. To assist the FAA in making a safety 

assessment of Polievka’ proposed operations, below is a summary of operational limitations and 

conditions that Polievka will adhere to, and which will ensure an equivalent or higher level of 

safety to operations conducted under current regulatory guidelines:

1. The FP-UASs weighs less than 55 pounds, with payload.

2. All operations shall be conducted over private or controlled-access property with 

verifiable permission from the land owner/controller or authorized representative.

Permission from land owner/controller or authorized representative will be obtained 

for each scheduled flight prior to operation.

3. All UASs operated under the Grant of Exemption 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.

4. Minimum crew for each flight operation will consist of a pilot, who will be Pilot-in 

Command ("PIC") of the FP-UAS, and one or more Visual Observers ("Observer") as 

necessary to safely conduct the mission.

5. PICs shall possess either a private, recreational, or sport pilot certificate. The PIC 

must also hold a current Class III medical certificate or a valid U.S. driver’s license 

issued by a state, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, a territory, a possession, or 

the Federal government. The PIC will also meet the flight review requirements 

specified in 14 C.F.R 61.56 in an aircraft in which the PIC is rated on his or her pilot 

certificate. 
U.S Department of Transportation

September 14, 2015

Page 7

6. The FP-UASs shall be operated within VLOS of the PIC and Observer at all times. 

The PIC must use human vision unaided by any device other than corrective lenses, 

as specified on the PIC's FAA-issued medical certificate.

7. The PIC and Observer designated for any operation will be able to communicate 

verbally at all times.

8. Electronic messaging or texting will not be permitted during flight operations.

9. The additional requirements identified in the Grant of Exemption shall be added to 

the Polievka’s Operations Manuals. The Operations Manuals will be maintained and 

made available to the Administrator upon request. If a discrepancy exists between the 

conditions and limitations in the Grant of Exemption and Polievka’s Operations 

Manuals, the conditions and limitations in the Grant of Exemption shall take 

precedence and must be followed. Otherwise, Polievka shall follow the procedures 

outlined in their Operations Manuals.

10. Polievka may update or revise its Operations Manuals. Revisions will be tracked and 

a revised copy of the Manual will be provided to the Administrator upon request. Polievka will also present an updated and revised Operations Manuals if it petitions for 

extension or amendment to its Grant of Exemption. If an update or revision would affect the basis upon which the FAA grants the exemption, Polievka will seek an 

amendment to its Grant of Exemption. Polievka will contact the FAA’s UAS Integration Office (AFS-80) if questions arise regarding updates or revisions to the operating 

documents.

11. Polievka Operations Manuals and its Grant of Exemption will be available to the PIC 

at the ground control station anytime the FP-UAS is operating.

12. The PIC is prohibited from beginning a FP-UAS flight unless (considering wind and 

forecast weather conditions) there is enough power to fly to the first intended point of 

landing, and assuming normal cruising speed, to fly after that for at least 10 minutes.

13. Maximum total flight time for each operational flight using the FP-UAS will be 

limited to 40 minutes or the amount of time the UAS can be flown and still maintain a 

reserve battery power of no less than 25%, whichever occurs first.

14. Flights will be operated at an altitude of no more than 400 feet AGL and will never 

enter navigable controlled airspace without timely prior written authorization and 

approval from the FAA. In the event the structure being inspected exceeds 400 feet 

AGL, the UAS will not be operated more than 100 feet above the highest point on the 

structure, and no more than 50 feet horizontally from the structure.

15. Flight operations must be conducted at least 500 feet from all nonparticipating 

persons. (persons other than the PIC, VO, operator trainees or essential persons), 

vessels, vehicles, and structures unless:
U.S Department of Transportation

September 14, 2015

Page 8

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 and/or;

b. The aircraft is operated near vessels, vehicles or structures where the 

owner/controller of such vessels, vehicles or structures has granted permission 

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, and;

c. Operations nearer to the PIC, VO, operator trainees or essential persons do not 

present an undue hazard to those persons per § 91.119(a).

16. The FP-UAS 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.

17. The FP-UAS may not operate within 5 nm 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 NOTAM as required by the Polievka COA. The letter of agreement with the airport 

management will be made available to the Administrator upon request.

18. Prior to each flight the PIC shall inspect the FP-UAS to confirm that it is in a 

condition safe for flight. The pre-flight inspection will account for all discrepancies, 

e.g. inoperable components, items, or equipment, not already covered in the relevant 

sections of the operating documents as well as equipment updates. The PIC shall not 

operate any FP-UAS if the inspection reveals a condition that affects the safe 

operation of the FP-UAS until the necessary maintenance has been performed and the

FP-UAS is found to be in a condition for safe flight. The ground control station shall 

be included in the preflight inspection. All maintenance and alternations must be 

properly documented in the UAS’s records as required by Polievka’s Operations 

Manuals.

19. Polievka will timely carry out its maintenance, inspections, and record keeping 

requirements in accordance with the Operations Manuals. Maintenance, inspection, 

and alterations will be fully noted in the FP-UAS records, including total time in 

service, description of work accomplished, date completed and the signature of the 

authorized person returning the FP-UAS to service.

20. Any FP-UAS that has undergone maintenance or alterations that affect the UAS 

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

must timely undergo a functional test flight in accordance with Polievka’ Operations 

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

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

test flight and FP-UAS record entry shall be included in the Polievka’s Operations 

Manuals.
U.S Department of Transportation

September 14, 2015

Page 9

21. The FP-UAS will be operated and maintained according to the Manufacturer's 

Manuals and any required manufacturer Safety/Service Bulletins and product updates.

22. Prior to the operation, a Mission Packet will be created in accordance with the 

requirements on Polievka’ Operations Manuals.

23. Polievka will obtain an Air Traffic Organization ("ATO") issued Certificate of Waiver 

or Authorization, otherwise known as a COA, prior to conducting any operations 

under this Grant of Exemption. A NOTAM will be issued as required by the COA. All 

operations will be conducted in accordance with airspace requirements in the ATO 

issued COA including class of airspace, altitude level and potential transponder 

requirements.

24. All required permissions and permits will be obtained from territorial, state, county or 

city jurisdictions, including local law enforcement, fire or other appropriate 

governmental agencies.

25. If the FP-UAS loses communication with the PIC, it will have the capability to safely

return to a pre-determined location within the operational area and land safely.

26. Contingency plans will be in place to safely terminate flight if there is a loss of 

communication between the PIC and the Observer.

27. The FP-UAS will have the capability to safely abort flight in the case of unpredicted 

obstacles or emergencies.

28. PICs and Observers will have at least a current Class III Medical Certificate or a valid

and current state driver’s license issued within the United States. 

29. Prior to conducting operations for filming, the PIC will have accumulated and logged, 

in a manner consistent with 14 CFR § 61.51(b), a minimum of 200 flight cycles and 

25 hours total time as a UAS rotorcraft pilot and at least 10 hours logged as a UAS pilot with a similar FP-UAS type platform. This requirement can be achieved by flights 

conducted and logged as a hobbyist.

30. Prior to conducting operations for filming, the PIC will have accumulated and logged, 

in a manner consistent with 14 CFR § 61.51(b), a minimum of hours pursuant to 54 

CFR § 61.51(b) as UAS pilot operating the make and model of FP-UAS to be utilized 

for operations under the exemption and three take-offs and three landing in the 

preceding 90 days.

31. Operations shall occur during daytime VFR Meteorological Conditions; flights under 

special visual flight rules ("SVFR") shall not be conducted.

32. The FP-UAS shall 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.).
U.S Department of Transportation

September 14, 2015

Page 10

33. FP-UAS Operations under Instrument Flight Rules, at night, or beyond VLOS are 

prohibited.

34. The FP-UAS will not be operated from an elevated platform or moving 

device/vehicle.

35. Before conducting operations, the radio frequency spectrum used for operation and 

control of the FP-UAS will comply with the Federal Communications Commission 

(FCC) or other appropriate government oversight agency requirements.

V. REGULATIONS FROM WHICH EXEMPTION IS REQUESTED

The Federal Aviation Act expressly grants the FAA the authority to issue exemptions. This 

statutory authority, by its terms, includes exempting civil aircraft, as the term is defined under § 

40101 of the Act, including UAS, from its safety regulations and minimum standards when the 

Administrator decides a requested exemption is in the public interest.3

Polievka seeks an exemption from several interrelated provisions of Title 14 of the Code of 

Federal Regulations ("14 C.F.R") Parts 21, 45, 61 and 91 for purposes of conducting the 

requested operations using FP-UAS platforms noted above. Listed below are: (1) the specific 

sections of 14 C.F.R for which exemption is sought, and (2) the operating procedures and 

safeguards that Petitioner has established which will ensure a level of safety better than or equal 

to the rules from which exemption is sought.4

UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEM

A. 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H – Airworthiness Certificates and 14 C.F.R. 

§91.203(a)(1)

The FAA has stated that no exemption is needed from this section if a finding is made under the 

Reform Act that the UAS selected provides an equivalent level of safety when compared to 

aircraft normally used for the same application. These criteria are met and in point of fact 

exceeded, and therefore no exemption is needed. 5 If, however, the FAA determines that there 

are some characteristics of the chosen UAS that fail to meet the requirements of the Reform Act, 

an exemption is requested.

Equivalent Level of Safety

 

349 U.S.C. § 44701(f) (authorizing the grant of exemptions from requirements of regulations prescribed pursuant to 

Sections 44701(a) and (b) and Sections 44702 - 44716).

4 14 C.F.R § 11.81(e), which requires a petition for exemption to include: The reasons why granting the exemption 

would not adversely affect safety, or how the exemption would provide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by the rule from which you seek exemption.

5See Grant of Exemption No. 11062 to Astraeus Aerial (FAA-2014-0352 at pgs. 13-14, 22).
U.S Department of Transportation

September 14, 2015

Page 11

Polievka’s use of the FP-UAS are safe when taking into account their size, weight, speed, and 

operational capability. As set forth in the description of proposed operations in Section IV (A), 

the FP-UAS weigh less than 55 pounds, including payload and will not be flown at a ground 

speed in excess of 50 knots. The FP-UAS are also equipped with safety features which will 

allow Petitioner to operate the FP-UAS safely after experiencing certain in-flight contingencies 

or failures as noted below.

6 7

Additionally, the FP-UAS carry neither pilots nor passengers, carry no explosive materials or 

flammable liquid fuels, or other elements identified by Homeland Security as being prohibitive 

and operate exclusively within the parameters stated in Polievka’s Operations Manuals.

Operations conducted under this exemption will be closely controlled and monitored by the PIC 

operator and will be conducted in compliance with local public safety requirements, to provide 

security for the area of operation. Polievka will also provide the FAA with advance notice of all 

operations via NOTAMs as required by the applicable COA. In all cases, operation of the FPUAS under the proposed conditions will be at least as safe as, or safer than, conventional 

rotorcraft operating with an airworthiness certificate. Lastly, the FP-UAS do not need a means to 

communicate with other aircraft or ATC, because those capabilities will be solely possessed by 

the PIC and Observer, who are not onboard the FP-UAS.

8

In addition, no sense-and-avoid 

technology is necessary for the FP-UAS because they will be operated at all times in VFR 

conditions and within VLOS of the PIC and Operator.

9

B. 14 C.F.R. Part 27 Airworthiness Standards: Normal Category Rotorcraft

 

6See e.g., Grant of Exemption No. 11184 to LowCountryRC, Corp. (FAA-2014-0803 at pg. 3): "The [DJI S1000] 

has the capability to operate safely after experiencing certain in-flight contingencies or failures and uses an autopilot system to maintain UAS stability and control. The UAS is also able to respond to a loss of global positioning 

system (GPS) or a lost-link event with a pre-coordinated, predictable, automated flight maneuver, and manual flight 

control functionality as a backup. These safety features provide an equivalent level of safety compared to a manned 

aircraft performing a similar operation."

7See e.g., Grant of Exemption No. 11184 to VDOS Global, LLC. (FAA-2014-0382 at pgs. 4-5): The FP-UAS can be 

operated entirely by a touch-screen, map-based interface. This means the operator only needs to command the system where to go, and the system does all the flying for the operator. The FP-UAS can be operated in both semi and 

fully autonomous flight modes, with the operator simply clicking on a map to create a pre-planned flight path for a 

flight. In addition, the operator can create no fly zones or maximum flight ranges and altitudes so the system cannot 

enter areas deemed unsafe or unnecessary to fly over. The petitioner states further that the UAS has built-in intelligent fault handling which allows the FP-UAS to detect a system fault while in the air and automatically fly back to 

its takeoff location and land. Faults that can be detected include: loss of communication; exceeding pre-set wind 

thresholds; and low battery levels.

All flight operations are global positioning system (GPS) controlled, making the system easy to navigate. At any 

point if the operator is not explicitly commanding the system to move, the system automatically holds its GPS position. The flight control system employs not only GPS positioning but a variety of sensors including sonar, barometric pressure, temperature, wind speed and others to ensure stability so long as wind thresholds are not exceeded. 

Also a flight termination link – to prevent a 'fly away' or other potentially dangerous situation – is available to the 

operator."

8See Grant of Exemption No. 11062 to Astraeus Aerial (FAA-2014-0352 at pg. 13).

9

. Id
U.S Department of Transportation

September 14, 2015

Page 12

Title 14 C.F.R. Part 27 sets forth the procedural requirements for airworthiness certification of 

normal category rotorcraft. To the extent that Polievka’s small FP-UAS would otherwise require 

certification under Part 27, Petitioner seeks an exemption from Part 27's airworthiness standards 

for the same reasons identified in the request for exemption from 14 C.F.R. R. Part 21, Subpart 

H, supra.

C. 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.9(c), 45.23(b) and 45.27(a): Aircraft Marking and Identification 

Requirements

Polievka seeks an exemption from the aircraft marking and identification requirements contained 

in 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.9(c), 45.23(b) and 45.27(a).

● 14 C.F.R. § 91.9(c), Civil Aircraft Flight Manual, Marking and Placard 

requirements, provides that:

No person may operate a U.S.-registered civil aircraft unless that aircraft 

is identified in accordance with Part 45 of this chapter.

● 14 C.F.R. § 45.23(b), Markings of the Aircraft, states:

When marks include only the Roman capital letter "N" and the registration 

number is displayed on limited, restricted or light-sport category aircraft 

or experimental or provisionally certificated aircraft, the operator must 

also display on that aircraft near each entrance to the cabin, cockpit, or 

pilot station, in letters not less than 2 inches nor more than 6 inches high, 

the words "limited," "restricted," "light-sport, "experimental," or 

"provisional," as applicable.

● 14 C.F.R. § 45.27(a), Rotorcraft, states:

Each operator of a rotorcraft must display on that rotorcraft horizontally 

on both surfaces of the cabin, fuselage, boom, or tail the marks required by

§ 45.23.

In a previous Grant of Exemption, the FAA determined that exemption from these requirements 

was warranted provided that the aircraft "have identification (N-Number) markings in 

accordance with 14 C.F.R Part 45, Subpart C if the markings are as large as practicable."10

Equivalent Level of Safety

All FP-UAS flown by Polievka will bear N-number markings that are as large as practicable in 

accordance with 14 C.F.R. Part 45, Subpart C.11

 

10FAA Docket No. FAA-2014-0352.

11See, e.g., FAA Docket No. FAA-2014-0352, at 14.
U.S Department of Transportation

September 14, 2015

Page 13

D. 14 C.F.R. § 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) and (2); 91.417(a) and (b): 

Maintenance Inspections

Polievka seeks an exemption from the maintenance inspection requirements contained in 14 

C.F.R. § 91.405(a), 91.407(a) (1), 91.409(a) (2); 91.417(a) and (b). These regulations specify 

maintenance and inspection standards in reference to 14 C.F.R. Part 43. See, e.g., 14 C.F.R. § 

91.405(a) (stating that each owner or operator of an aircraft "[s]hall have the aircraft inspected as 

prescribed in subpart E of this part and shall between required inspections ...have discrepancies 

repaired as prescribed in part 43 of this chapter"). An exemption from these regulations is needed 

because Part 43 and these sections only apply to aircraft with an airworthiness certificate, which 

the UAS platforms to be operated under this grant of exemption will not have. (Emphasis added)

Equivalent Level of Safety

An equivalent level of safety will be achieved or exceeded because maintenance and inspections 

will be timely performed in accordance with the Manufacturer's Manual and any required 

manufacturer Safety or Service Bulletins. Further, as required by Polievka’s Operations Manuals, 

the PIC will conduct a pre-flight inspection of the FP-UAS and all associated equipment to 

account for all discrepancies and/or inoperable components. Maintenance will be performed and 

verified to address any conditions potentially affecting safe operation of the FP-UAS and no 

flights will occur unless, and until, all flight critical components of the FP-UAS have been found 

to be airworthy and in a condition safe for operation. A functional test flight will be conducted 

following the replacement of any flight-critical components. As required by Polievka’s

Operations Manuals, the PIC who conducts the functional test flight will make an entry in the

FP-UAS aircraft records of the flight.

Polievka’s Operations Manual also includes requirements to follow the manufacturer’s UAS 

aircraft/component, maintenance, overhaul, replacement, inspection, and life limit requirements

for the following applicable components: powertrain system (powerplant), propellers, avionics 

and control surfaces (including ailerons/elevons), structures & airframe, camera system, 

electrical systems (including batteries), ground control station, hazard accessories, and spare 

parts. Further, Polievka’s Operations Manuals also include procedures to document and maintain 

a record of the FP-UAS’s maintenance, preventative maintenance, alterations, status of 

replacement /overhaul component parts, and the total time in service of the FP-UAS used under 

this Grant of Exemption. As a whole, the maintenance and inspection procedures required in

Polievka’s Operations Manuals ensure that an equivalent or higher level of safety will be 

achieved.

PILOT-IN-COMMAND OF THE UAS

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

Polievka seeks exemption from 14 CFR § 61.113, which restricts private pilot certificate holders 

from flying aircraft for compensation or hire, and would also require a second class medical 

certificate. The purpose of Part 61 is to ensure that the skill and competency of any PIC matches 

the airspace in which the PIC will be operating, as well as requiring certifications if the private 

pilot is carrying passengers or cargo for hire. In this case, while the FP-UAS will be operated as 

part of a commercial operation, they carry neither passengers nor cargo. In the Grant of 
U.S Department of Transportation

September 14, 2015

Page 14

Exemption to Astraeus Aerial, the FAA determined that the unique characteristics of UAS 

operation outside of controlled airspace did not warrant the additional cost and restrictions 

attendant with requiring the PIC to have a Commercial Pilot Certificate and Class II Medical

Certificate.12 The fulfillment of the additional requirements for a private pilot to become 

qualified as a commercial pilot would not lead to any additional safety benefits when UAS 

operations are involved. 

Equivalent Level of Safety

The restrictions Polievka has placed on its FP-UAS operations meet or exceed the restrictions 

similarly imposed on Astraeus Aerial. Polievka will operate on private property away from 

persons and property not involved in the operation. Polievka will also obtain an ATO issued 

COA prior to conducting any operations under this Grant of Exemption. All operations will be 

conducted in accordance with airspace requirements in the ATO issued COA including class of 

airspace, altitude level and potential transponder requirements. A NOTAM will also be issued as 

required by the applicable COA.

In addition to these flight restrictions, Polievka will further ensure safe operation by requiring 

that any PIC be thoroughly versed not only in airspace and communication issues pertaining to 

all aircraft operators but also in the unique aspects of FP-UAS flight. As set forth in the 

Operations Manuals, pilots will have experience not only in FP-UAS operations generally but 

have logged flight time in the specific make and model used for the operations before they are 

permitted to participate in commercial flights on behalf of Polievka. The pilot qualification, 

training, and currency requirements in the Operations Manuals ensure that Polievka pilots are 

competent and proficient in the FP-UAS they are operating. Polievka’s training and qualification 

requirements are consistent with those contained in prior FAA Section 333 Grants of Exemption, 

and will provide a higher level of competency and proficiency for its pilots and will ensure at 

least an equivalent level of safety to the public.

OPERATING PARAMETERS OF THE UAS

F. 14 C.F.R. § 91.7(a): Civil Aircraft Airworthiness

Inasmuch as there will be no airworthiness certificate issued for the UAS, Polievka seeks an 

exemption from 14 C.F.R. § 91.7(a), which requires that a civil aircraft be in airworthy condition 

to be operated. The FAA has stated that no exemption is required for 14 C.F.R. § 91.7(a) to the 

extent that the requirements of Part 21 are waived or found inapplicable.13

Accordingly, Petitioner requests that the requirements for § 91.7(a) be treated in accordance with

Section V (A), supra.

G. 14 C.F.R. § 91.9(b)(2): Civil Aircraft Flight Manual in the Aircraft and 14 C.F.R. 

§ 91.203(a) and (b): Carrying Civil Aircraft Certification and Registration

 

12Exemption No. 11062 (FAA Docket No. FAA-2014-0352).

13See Id. at 13-14, 22.
U.S Department of Transportation

September 14, 2015

Page 15

Title 14 C.F.R. § 91.9(b) (2) and § 91.203(a) and (b) require the operator to carry airworthiness 

documents and other aircraft manuals onboard the aircraft. Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. § 91.9(b) (2):

(b) No person may operate a U.S.-registered civil aircraft –

...

(2) For which an Airplane or Rotorcraft Flight Manual is required by § 21.5 of this 

chapter, unless there is available in the aircraft a current approved Airplane or Rotorcraft 

Flight Manual, approved manual material, markings, and placards, or any combination 

thereof.

Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. § 91.203(a) and (b):

(a) Except as provided in § 91.715, no person may operate a civil aircraft unless it has 

within it the following:

(1) An appropriate and current airworthiness certificate...

(b) No person may operate a civil aircraft unless the airworthiness certificate required by 

paragraph (a) of this section or a special flight authorization issued under § 91.715 is 

displayed at the cabin or cockpit entrance so that it is legible to passengers or crew.

Given the small size and configuration of the FP-UAS, it would be impossible to keep 

airworthiness documents and other aircraft manuals on board the FP-UAS because there is 

simply no room and the FP-UAS has no cabin or cockpit. As a way to comply with the code

Polievka will maintain the documents with the PIC and make them available for inspection.

Equivalent Level of Safety

In an FAA Office of Chief Counsel's Opinion dated August 8, 2014, and prepared by Dean E. 

Griffith, Attorney, AGC-220, it was acknowledged that the intent of 14 C.F.R. 91.9(b) and 

91.203(a) and (b) is met if the pilot of the unmanned aircraft has access to the UAS flight 

manual, registration certificate, and other required documents from the ground control station 

from which he or she is operating the aircraft.14 As this FAA Office of Chief Counsel Opinion 

clarifies, the intent of the rule is to ensure the pilot has access to these key documents during 

flight. Therefore, an equivalent level of safety will be achieved by ensuring that the pilot has 

access to the documents at the ground control station from which he or she is piloting the UAS.

H. 14 C.F.R. § 91.103: Preflight Action

Polievka seeks an exemption from 14 C.F.R. § 91.103, which requires a PIC to become familiar 

with specific information before each flight, including information contained in the FAAapproved Flight Manual on board the aircraft. While the PIC will be familiar with all information 

 

14Memorandum from Mark Bury, FAA Assistant Chief Counsel for International Law, Legislation and Regulation, to 

John Duncan, FAA Flight Standards Service (Aug. 8, 2014); see also Docket No. FAA-2014-0352 at 16-18.
U.S Department of Transportation

September 14, 2015

Page 16

necessary to safely conduct the flight, an exemption is requested to the extent that an FAAapproved Flight Manual is required.

Equivalent Level of Safety

An equivalent level of safety will be provided by following the Polievka’s Operations Manuals 

and the Manufacturer's Manual. The PIC will perform a series of checklists designed to identify 

any defects or inoperable components in accordance with the Polievka’s Operations Manuals, 

including checklists covering Pre-Flight, Launch, Landing, and Post-Flight procedures. The PIC 

will also be required to review weather, flight requirements, battery charge, landing and takeoff 

distance, UA performance data, and contingency landing areas—before initiation of flight.

Polievka’s Operations Manuals and the Manufacturer's Manual will be kept at the ground control 

station and will be accessible to the PIC at all times while operating the UAS.

I. 14 C.F.R. § 91.109(a): Flight Instruction

Polievka seeks an exemption from 14 C.F.R. § 91.109(a), which provides in pertinent part that 

"[n]o person may operate a civil aircraft (except a manned free balloon) that is being used for 

flight instruction unless that aircraft has fully functioning dual controls." UAS and remotely 

piloted aircraft, by their design, do not have functional dual controls. Instead, flight control is 

accomplished through the use of a device that communicates with the aircraft via radio 

communications. Accordingly, an exemption will be required for the flight instruction 

requirements of 14 C.F.R. § 91.109(a).

Equivalent Level of Safety

Given the size and speed of the UAS that Polievka intends to use, an equivalent level of safe 

training can still be performed without dual controls because no pilot or passengers are aboard 

the UAS, and as required by the Polievka’s Operations Manuals, all persons will be a safe 

distance away in the event that the UAS experiences any difficulties during flight instruction. 

Moreover, as required by the Polievka’s Operations Manuals, all flight training will be conducted 

in controlled and sterile environment. As a whole, the safety procedures provided for in

Polievka’s Operations Manuals ensure that the proposed UAS operations provide an equivalent 

or higher level of safety than that provided by the flight instruction regulations.

J. 14 C.F.R. § 91.119(c): Minimum Safe Altitudes

Polievka requests an exemption from the minimum safe altitude requirements of 14 C.F.R. § 

91.119(c).15 Section 91.119 prescribes the minimum safe altitudes under which aircraft may not 

operate, including 500 feet above the surface and away from any person, vessel, vehicle, or 

structure in non-congested areas. See 14 C.F.R. § 91.119(c). Section 91.119(d) allows for a 

helicopter to operate at less than those minimum altitudes when it can be operated "without 

 

15Relief from § 91.119(a) will not be necessary because Petitioner will be able to perform an emergency landing 

without undue hazard to persons or property on the ground in the event of a failure. Petitioner's proposed UAS 

operations will not occur over congested areas, and therefore an exemption from § 91.119(b) will not be necessary. 

See e.g., Grant of Exemption No. 11157 to Slugwear, Inc., dba Likeonatree Aerial (FAA-2014-0534 at 15).
U.S Department of Transportation

September 14, 2015

Page 17

hazard to persons or property on the surface," provided that "each person operating the helicopter 

complies with any routes or altitudes specifically prescribed for helicopters by the FAA."

An exemption is required because the proposed FP-UAS operations will normally need to occur 

below 400 feet AGL. In circumstances where the FP-UAS is used to inspect a structure whose 

height exceeds 400 feet AGL, the FP-UAS will not be operated more than 100 feet above the 

highest point on the structure, and within 50 feet horizontally of the structure. Additionally, due 

the nature of the proposed operations, the Pilot and/or Observers(s) may need to be less than 500 

feet away from the FP-UAS.

Equivalent Level of Safety

Compared to flight operations with rotorcraft weighing far more than the maximum weights proposed herein, and given the lack of flammable fuel with the above noted UAS, any risk associated with these operations is far less than those which presently exist with conventional aircraft. 

An equivalent level of safety will be achieved given the size, weight, and speed of the FP-UAS, 

as well as the controlled location where the operations will occur. In order to avoid any risk to 

manned aircraft, flight operations will be restricted to 400 feet AGL or below, or when inspecting a U.S. structure whose height exceeds 400 feet AGL, within 100 feet above the highest point 

on that structure and 50 feet horizontally of the structure.

As set forth in the Operations Manuals, the FP-UAS will be operated in a restricted area, and all 

flights will be operated at a lateral distance of at least 500 feet from any nonparticipating 

persons, unless that person is in a position where he or she is shielded from the FP-UAS and any 

possible debris resulting from its failure. As required by the Operations Manuals, flights will be 

terminated if a nonparticipating person within 500 feet of the FP-UAS leaves a shielded position. 

Further, its operations will occur at least 500 feet away from vehicles or structures unless the 

property owner/controller timely has granted permission and the PIC has made a safety 

assessment of the risk of operating closer to those objects and, operations near the PIC or 

Observer will not present an undue hazard per § 91.119(a). Adherence to these restrictions in

Polievka’s Operations Manuals will ensure operations can be conducted without compromising 

public safety.16

K. 14 C.F.R. § 91.121: Altimeter Settings

Polievka seeks an exemption from 14 C.F.R. § 91.121, which requires a person operating an 

aircraft to maintain cruising altitude or flight level by reference to an altimeter that is set to the 

 

16See e.g., Grant of Exemption No. 11138 to Douglas Trudeau (FAA-2014-0481 at 19): "If barriers or structures 

are present that can sufficiently protect nonparticipating persons from the UA or debris in the event of an accident, 

then the UA may operate closer than 500 feet to persons afforded such protection. The operator must also 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. When considering how to immediately cease operations, the primary concern is the safety of those nonparticipating persons. In 

addition, the FAA finds that operations may be conducted closer than 500 feet to vessels, vehicles and structures 

when the owner/controller of any such vessels, vehicles or structures grants permission for the operation and the 

PIC makes a safety assessment of the risk of operating closer to those objects and determines that it does not present an undue hazard."
U.S Department of Transportation

September 14, 2015

Page 18

elevation of the departure airport or barometric pressure. An exemption is required to the extent 

that the UAS do not have a barometric altimeter, but rather a GPS altitude read out.

Equivalent Level of Safety

The FAA has stated that an equivalent level of safety to the requirements of 14 C.F.R. §91.121 

can be achieved in circumstances where: (1) the UAS will be operated below 400 feet AGL or 

below17, (2) within VLOS, (3) where GPS based altitude information is relayed in real time to the 

operator at a ground-based on-screen display and, (4) where prior to each flight, a zero altitude 

initiation point is established for the PIC to confirm accuracy of the onboard GPS.18

The FP-UAS that Polievka intends to use for the proposed operations will meet all these 

operational characteristics. Moreover, as required by Polievka’s Operations Manuals, the PIC 

will be required to calibrate the aircraft's GPS compass prior to each flight operation. Like prior 

FAA Section 333 Grants of Exemption, the FP-UASs Polievka intends to use, and the safety 

mitigation procedures contained in the Operations Manuals, both ensure that an equivalent level 

of safety or greater level will be achieved, and a Grant of Exemption to the requirements of § 

191.121 is therefore appropriate.

L. 14 C.F.R. § 91.151(a): Fuel Requirements for Flight in VFR Conditions

Polievka requests an exemption from 14 C.F.R. § 91.151(a)'s fuel requirements for flight in VFR 

conditions. Section 91.151 states:

(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; or

(2) At night, to fly after that for at least 45 minutes.

Here, the technological limitations on UAS battery power means that no meaningful flight 

operations can be conducted while still maintaining a 30-minute battery reserve. An exemption 

from the fuel requirements of 14 C.F.R. § 91.151(a) is therefore required. Moreover, it is not

Polievka’s intention to fly the FP-UASs at night.

Equivalent Level of Safety

In the Grant of Exemption to VDOS (Exemption No. 11112), the FAA determined that an 

equivalent level of safety to the fuel requirements for flight in VFR conditions could be achieved 

by prohibiting the PIC from beginning a FP-UAS flight unless (considering wind and forecast 

weather conditions) there was enough power to fly to the first intended point of landing and, 

 

17If the height of the structure being inspected exceeds 400 feet AGL, the UAS will not be operated more than 100 

feet above the highest point on the structure.

18See Grant of Exemption No. 11062 to Astraeus Aerial (FAA-2014-0352 at 21).
U.S Department of Transportation

September 14, 2015

Page 19

assuming normal cruising speed, to fly after that for at least 10 minutes. In reaching this 

conclusion, the FAA considered that the UAS batteries for the FP-UAS provide approximately 

50 minutes of powered flight (with payload) and provided battery level and battery time 

remaining in minutes and seconds to the PIC.19 The FAA also considered the fact the FP-UAS

operating manual states: “start every flight with a fully charged battery in the aerial vehicle”, and 

that in the event that the FP-UAS should run low on power, the PIC will be alerted and can

safely land the- FP-UAS as soon as possible. Like the VDOS Grant of Exemption, Polievka’s use 

of the FP-UAS, combined with the requirements of Petitioner's Operations Manuals, ensure that 

an equivalent level of safety can be achieved and in fact exceeded.

Similarly, in the Grant of Exemption to Alan Purwin (Exemption No. 11161), the FAA 

determined that an equivalent level of safety to the fuel requirements for flight in VFR conditions 

could be achieved by prohibiting the PIC from beginning a flight with the UA unless 

(considering wind and forecast weather conditions), there was enough power to safely fly at 

normal cruising speed to the intended landing point and land the UA with 25% battery power 

remaining. Polievka will adhere to this limitation for its FP-UAS flights.

The FP-UAS includes a low battery warning system and the amount of battery reserve power 

remaining is continuously transmitted to the PIC via telemetric data feed, which downlinks from 

the FP-UAS to a ground-based-on-screen display.20 As required by Polievka’s Operations

Manuals, the PIC will promptly fly the FP-UAS back to the home launch location or predetermined abort location where it may safely land, while still maintaining a minimum of 25% 

reserve battery power. Polievka submits that the procedures requiring flights to be safely

terminated once the batteries fall below 25% capacity, combined with the requirement that flights 

only be conducted within a secure, isolated area, using a UAS weighing less than 55 pounds, and 

within VLOS of the PIC and Observer(s), ensure that the proposed operation will provide an 

equivalent or higher level of safety to the public to that provided by the regulations from which 

exemption is sought.

VI. DRUG AND ALCOHOL PROGRAM

Polievka will have policies in place to ensure that no person may participate in FP-UAS flight 

operations if they are under the influence of alcohol or any drug.

VII. PUBLIC INTEREST

The public interest will be served by granting Polievka’s Petition for Exemption. Congress has 

established a national policy that favors early integration of UAS into the NAS in controlled, safe 

working environments such as those proposed in this Petition. Granting this Petition for 

Exemption helps fulfill Congress' goal in passing Section 333(a) through (c) of the Reform 

 

19Grant of Exemption No. 11112 to VDOS Global, LLC (FAA-2014-0382 at 10).

20The FP-UAS ground control station displays, the UASs position, navigation route, tail number, altitude, heading, 

north seeking arrow, range to targets, calculated target position, date/time, and sensor heading and orientation relative to the UAS.
U.S Department of Transportation

September 14, 2015

Page 20

Act—the FAA Administrator's assessment of whether certain UAS may operate safely in the 

NAS before completion of the statutorily required rulemaking.

The proposed FP-UAS operations in this Petition for Exemption significantly improves the 

safety and reduces risk of harm, physical injury and property damage to the public at large, the 

property owners from whom permission was granted for use by Petitioner and abutting 

properties, staff of Petitioner, unsuspecting passersby, inspecting engineers from relevant 

organizations and all those who may be in the local vicinity. Traditional methods of inspecting 

and monitoring potential filming locations and relevant sites and facilities requires location 

personnel to climb towers, trees, venture onto precarious roofs and other dangerous scenarios, 

perform elevated work for which the individual is neither trained nor equipped to perform, which 

exposes them to unnecessary risk of serious physical injury from dangerous falls or other 

physical mishaps. Moreover, inspectors/surveyors are often unnecessarily exposed to hazardous 

conditions, unsafe environments, culturally tense situations and other hazards associated with 

identifying specific locations for potential recording sites to be used in film or TV production. 

The use of small UASs can eliminate these hazards and ultimately creating a much safer method 

of performing these types of inspections creating a safer environment for the public as well as

Polievka employees.

The use of small UAS also enhances safety and reduces risk to the surrounding public because, 

unlike manned aircraft weighing thousands of pounds, carrying crew in addition to flammable 

fuel, the UAS carry no passengers, crew or explosive fuel. Furthermore, in the unlikely event of 

an accident, Polievka’s small battery powered FP-UAS presents significantly less danger to 

persons on the ground when compared to operations by conventional manned aircraft.21 As

Petitioner's FP-UAS are battery powered, the public will also benefit from a reduction in harmful

petroleum emissions associated with conventional aircraft performing in the same functions 

proposed herein. Air quality will naturally be improved with the reduction of fuel powered 

vehicles. 

Lastly, as recognized by the FAA in prior Section 333 Grants of Exemption to filmmakers, UAS 

provide an additional economic tool for the aerial filming notwithstanding the industry, adding a 

greater degree of flexibility, which supplements the current capabilities offered by manned 

aircraft.22 The quality of the finished product is enhanced and provides a greater finished product 

demand which will aid the current UAS industry and provide additional jobs as the cost of 

providing the needed product is greatly reduced while reducing the difficulty with which the 

finished product is created. The demand for the current industrial product is increasing and will 

continue to increase given the enhanced flexibility of production; therefore, given the lower cost, 

 

21See Grant of Exemption No. 11158 to Team 5, LLC (FAA-2014-0783 at 12): "Manned helicopters conducting 

aerial filming can weigh 6,000 pounds or more and are operated by an onboard pilot, in addition to other onboard 

crewmembers, as necessary. The petitioner’s UAs will weigh less than 55 pounds with no onboard pilot or crew. 

The pilot and crew will be remotely located from the aircraft. The limited weight significantly reduces the potential 

for harm to participating and nonparticipating individuals or property in the event of an incident or accident. 

Risk to an onboard pilot and crew during an incident or accident is eliminated with the use of a UA for the aerial 

filming operation."

22See e.g., Grant of Exemption No. 11178 to Picture Factory, Inc. (FAA-2014-0794 at 18).
U.S Department of Transportation

September 14, 2015

Page 21

owner/operators and others in the relevant industry will be more inclined to utilize the services of 

commercial UAS along with an appropriate licensed PIC’s. 

VIII. PRIVACY

All FP-UAS operations will be conducted in accordance with applicable federal, state, and local 

laws regarding privacy. All operations shall be conducted over private or controlled-access 

property with permission from the land owner/controller or authorized representative. Permission 

from land owner/controller or authorized representative will be obtained for each flight to be 

conducted.

IX. FEDERAL REGISTER SUMMARY

Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. Part 11, the following summary is provided for publication in the 

FEDERAL REGISTER, should it be determined that publication is needed: Petitioner seeks an 

exemption from the following rules in Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations:

Part 21, Subpart H; Part 27; 45.23(b); 45.27(a); 61.113; 91.7(a); 91.9(b)(2); 91.9(c);

91.103; 91.109(a); 91.119(c); 91.121; 91.151(a); 91.203 (a) & (b); 91.405(a); 91.407(a) (1);

91.409(a) (1) & (2); 91.417 (a) & (b).

The exemption will enhance safety by reducing risk to the aircraft crew, production crew, general 

public, property owners and city structures from the substantial hazards associated with 

performing equivalent film work and aerial video production with conventional fixed-wing 

aircraft, rotorcraft, or other methods.

X. CONCLUSION

Polievka’ Petition for Exemption satisfies the criteria articulated in Section 333 of the Reform 

Act of 2012 including weight, speed, operating capabilities, proximity to airports and populated 

areas, operation within VLOS and national security. The proposed FP-UAS operations will 

benefit the public as a whole by improving safety and reducing risk by alleviating human 

exposure to danger while lowering the attendant related costs thereby increasing the demand for 

the finished product. In consideration of the foregoing, this Petition for Exemption provides the

FAA with more than adequate justification for granting the requested exemptions allowing

Polievka to use small FP-UAS in the recorded production of its product.
U.S Department of Transportation

September 14, 2015

Page 22

We thank you for your prompt consideration of our requested exemptions.

Respectfully Submitted,

Frank J. Polievka

3412 Milstead Ct

Waldorf, MD 20602

Phone: (240) 832-1971

Email: Fpolievka@gmail.com

(The following attached items contain proprietary and commercial information exempt from 

disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 522 et seq., and should be held in a

separate file pursuant to 14 C.F.R. § 11.35(b)).

Attachments:

1. General Operations Manual

2. PIC Operating Manual

3. Showcase Protocols

4. Location Protocols

5. Flight Communications Protocols

6. Departing Location Protocols

7. Transmitter Protocols

8. Preflight Checklist

9. Post Flight Checklist

10. Equipment Checklist

11. UAS Manufacturer’s Manuals

a. User Manuals

b. UAS Maintenance Manuals