Christopher Gardner, Gainesville FL ­ Section 333 Exemption Petition

January 23, 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 of the Federal Aviation Regulations from

14 C.F.R. 45.23(b); 14 C.F.R. Part 21; 14 C.F.R. 61.113(a)&(b); 91.7(a); 91.9(b) (2); 91.103(b); 91.109;

119.121; 91.151(a); 91.203(a)&(b); 91.405(a); 91.407(a) (1); 91.409(a) (2); 91.417(a)&(b)

Dear Sir or Madam,

Christopher Gardner hereby petitions the Secretary of Transportation and Federal

Aviation Administration for exemption to the above referenced and below more fully

described Federal Aviation Regulations (“FARs”), that currently may or may not apply

to the recreational/business operations of model aircraft including small unmanned

aerial systems (“UASs).

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

procedures contained within 14 C.F.R. 11, Petition that I, Christopher Gardner, an

owner and operator of small unmanned aircraft, be exempted from the Federal

Aviation Regulations (“FARs”) listed below so that I, Christopher Gardner, may operate

my small ultra lightweight unmanned aircraft system (“UAS”) commercially in airspace

regulated by the Federal Aviation Administration (“FAA”).

As described herein I, Christopher Gardner, am a licensed Private Pilot (Certificate #

3197378) with current Third Class Medical Certificate; experienced in flying hobby

helicopters and fixed wing aircraft for recreational purposes. I have added a hobby

grade DJI Inspire 1 quadcopter UAS to my inventory with intent to conduct aerial

1

photography/Inspection/ included but not limited to the following; Business Operations:

over land, waterways, and oceans; operation over/in non­restricted National Parks,

National Forests, flight in non­navigable airspace, using non­intrusive recording

devices, operation in otherwise unrestricted U.S. States/Territories for aerial

videography/cinematography for commercial operation and to enhance academic

community awareness for those individuals and companies unfamiliar with the

geographical layout of such areas.

As described more fully below, the requested exemption would permit the operation of

UAS under controlled conditions in airspace that is 1) limited; 2) predetermined in

1 Serial Number ­ W13DCA13020568
Christopher Gardner, Gainesville FL ­ Section 333 Exemption Petition

areas away from general public, airports, heliports and vehicular traffic for community

videos, and within property boundaries for individual homeowner real estate listing

videos/photos; and 3) controlled as to access. The exemption would also provide

safety enhancements to the already safe operations within the aerial photography, film

and television industry presently using conventional aircraft and small, unmanned and

relatively inexpensive UASs.

Currently, similar lightweight, remote controlled UAS's are legally operated by

unmonitored amateur hobbyists with no safety plan or controls in place to prevent

catastrophe. I operate my UAS within all safety protocols and controls to avoid and

2

prevent public hazard, as well as manned aircraft hazards/catastrophe. This will act to

further safety protocols exclusive

to lightweight UAS's specific to aerial video and photography usage as I record flight

data and other information gained through permitted flight operations to share with the

FAA through any required FAA reports to assist with future protocol and safety

regulation.

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

Administrator’s) responsibilities and authority to not only integrate UAS's into the

national airspace system, but to “...establish requirements for the safe operation of

such aircraft systems [UAS's] in the national airspace system” under Section 333(c) of

the Reform Act specific to the use of UAS's for commercial purposes. Further I will

conduct my operations in compliance with the protocols described herein or as

otherwise established by the FAA.

For the reasons stated below I respectfully request the grant of an exemption allowing

me to operate ultra lightweight, remote controlled UAS’s for academic community

awareness, benefit/stimulate tourism within Florida, general aerial photography, and to

enhance real estate listing videos for homeowners who cannot afford expensive

manned aircraft for the same purpose, all of which will promote local economic growth

through increased employment and increased tax base. Both with public safety in mind

by keeping heavier manned aircraft containing combustible fuel that that poses

potential public hazard.

I. Contact Information:

Christopher Gardner

1236 NW 50 Dr.

Gainesville, FL 32605

Mobile: (352) 226­1832

Email: chris@jumpem.com

II. The Specific Sections of Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations From

Which Christopher Gardner Requests Exemption are:

2Safety Protocols & Controls ­ Inspire One User Manual in addition to Minimum VFR regulations
Christopher Gardner, Gainesville FL ­ Section 333 Exemption Petition

14 CFR 21;

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

14 CFR 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;

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) & (b);

14 C.F.R. 91.405 (a);

14 CFR 407 (a) (1);

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

14 CFR 417 (a) & (b).

III. The Extent of relief Christopher Gardner seeks and the Reason He Seeks

Such Relief:

I, Christopher Gardner, submit this application in accordance with the Reform

Act, 112 P.L. 95 §§ 331­334, seeking relief from any currently applicable FARs

operating to prevent me, Christopher Gardner, 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 ultra light weight UAS meets the definition of “small

unmanned aircraft” as defined in Section 331 and therefore the integration of my

ultra light weight UAS is expressly contemplated by the Reform Act. I would like

to operate my ultra lightweight UAS prior to the time period by which the Reform

Act 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 UAS aerial video and photography. The

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

operate safely in our national airspace system. Considerations include: The

weight, size, speed and overall capabilities of the UAS's; Whether the UAS will

be operated near airports or heavily populated areas; and, Whether the UAS 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, Christopher Gardner. My UAS utilizes four (4)

counter­rotating propellers for balance, control and stability. My UAS is

equipped with GPS and auto return safety technology. Weighing less than

seven (7) pounds (far below the maximum 55 pound limit); including camera

with gimbal.
Christopher Gardner, Gainesville FL ­ Section 333 Exemption Petition

I consider safety as foremost with each flight. My small unmanned aircraft is

designed to hover in place via GPS and operate in less than a 10 m/s wind knot

(approx 22 mph) wind. For safety, stability and fear of financial loss I will not fly

in winds exceeding 7 m/s (15 mph). Built in safety systems include a GPS mode

that allows my UAS to hover in place when radio controls are lost. With three

modes to choose from, I utilize the Positioning Mode for aerial

3

videography/photography. This is the safest, most reliable and stable mode to

prevent accident and hazard. When pilot communication is lost UAS is designed

slowly descend to point of takeoff , or near the control transmitter when utilizing

Dynamic Mode. I do not operate my UAS near airports, Hospitals nor Police

heliports, and do not operate near areas where general public is within fifty to

one hundred (50­100) 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 UAS is capable of vertical and horizontal

operations, and are flown only within my line of sight, as the remote control pilot.

Utilizing battery power rather than combustible fuels, flights generally last

between eight (8) to twelve (12) minutes, with an altitude under two hundred fifty

(250) feet.

I utilize a fresh fully charged battery with each flight as a safety precaution; full

flight time limit for each battery is eighteen (18) to twenty­two (22) minutes as

tested. I do not operate my UAS at or below manufacture recommend minimum

charge levels for operation; preferring to remain well within a safe operating

range to insure adequate communication between radio control and UAS 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/manned aircraft, and have no desire to lose

an investment. I have clocked numerous practice flights in remote areas as a

hobbyist simulating flights for future commercial use to gain familiarization with

the characteristics of this specific UAS'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 am extremely cautious when operating of my UAS/ultra lightweight unmanned

aircraft and 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 UAS it

falls well within Congress’s contemplated safety zone when it promulgated the

Reform Act and the corresponding directive to integrate UAS's into the national

3 Positing Mode includes GPS, Vision Positioning Sensors, and Barometer for position hold, self­leveling, altitude command,

GPS, return home and dynamic return to home feature, and safety control to return home or land in the event of communication

interruption between RC transmitter and UAS. ­ See “Flight Mode” in Inspire 1 User Manual
Christopher Gardner, Gainesville FL ­ Section 333 Exemption Petition

airspace system. My UAS, the DJI Inspire 1, used in hobby flight, has a

demonstrable safety record and does not pose any threat to the general public

or national security.

IV. How Christopher Gardner’s Request Will Benefit the Public As A Whole:

Aerial videography for geographical awareness and for real estate marketing

has been around for a long time through manned fixed wing aircraft and

helicopters. For small budget real estate companies and average homeowners

the expense of such aerial videography is cost prohibitive. Only large

companies and high end Realtors or luxury homeowners can afford to absorb

such expense, depriving non­luxury homeowners and lower budget Realtors

from a valuable marketing tool.

The public’s interest is additionally furthered by allowing small businesses in the

tourism industry to afford the currently cost prohibitive aerial photography used

by large international corporations. As a part owner of a small veteran owned

snorkeling business in Key West, I can attest to the unaffordability of such

videography and photography used by such companies to draw

business/revenue outside the economic benefit of the United States. An

example would be the ability of International Cruise Lines to draw business to

their privately owned operations in the Caribbean away from local Floridian

attraction providers. Additionally, smaller private hotels/resorts are harmed by

international resorts and their ability to market using such aerial videography

drawing business outside the economic benefit of the United States.

Congress has already proclaimed that it is in the public’s interest to integrate

commercially flown UAS's into the national airspace system, hence the passing

of the Reform Act. Granting my exemption request furthers the public interest

through academic/visual awareness of the geographical benefits in and around

the State of Florida. My ultra light weight UAS is battery powered and creates

no emissions that can harm the environment. The consequence of my ultra light

weight UAS 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.

Manned aircraft can pose a threat to the public through potential catastrophic

crash that many local communities have experienced in the past with military

aircraft and medical/police helicopter crashes. These have resulted in a loss of

life and endangered the public with combustible fuel that burned on impact. My

UAS poses no such threat since size and lack of combustible fuel alleviates any

potential threat to the public. Additionally, this actually furthers the public’s

interest by making it safer for business to conduct aerial photography and
Christopher Gardner, Gainesville FL ­ Section 333 Exemption Petition

videography without such risks.

The public’s interest is furthered by minimizing ecological and crash threat by

permitting aerial video/photo capture through my battery operated ultra light

weight UAS's. Permitting me to immediately fly within national air space furthers

economic growth. Granting my exemption request substantially furthers the

economic impact within the State of Florida for companies looking to relocate or

build in Florida 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.

V. Reasons Why Christopher Gardner’s Exemption Will Not Adversely Affect

Safety Or How The Exemption Will Provide a Level of Safety At Least

Equal To Existing Rule:

My exemption will not adversely affect safety. Quite the contrary, for the

reasons stated permitting me 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

for development in cooperation with the FAA. In addition I submit the following

representations of enhancements to current aerial videography and

photography:

A. My UAS weighs less than 7 pounds complete with a small ultra light

weight high quality camera;

B. I only operate my UAS below 300 feet (well within the 400 foot

permissible ceiling set by the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of

2012);

C. My UAS only operates for 18­22 minutes per flight;

D. I land my UAS prior to 20% Battery Remaining;

E. I pilot my UAS through remote control only by line of sight;

F. I pilot my UAS only with a visual observer;

G. My UAS has Failsafe RTH , a flight safety feature whereby it hovers and

4

then slowly lands if communication with the remote control pilot is lost for

3 seconds;

H. My UAS has GPS and a Vision Positioning System utilizing two sonar

sensors and one monocular camera for positioning and to identify the

current aircraft’s position;

I. My UAS has a flight recorder and I actively analyze flight data and other

sources of information to constantly update and enhance safety

4 Page 15 Inspire 1 User Manual
Christopher Gardner, Gainesville FL ­ Section 333 Exemption Petition

protocols;

J. I only operate in reasonably safe environment that are strictly controlled,

are away from power lines, elevated lights, airports and actively

populated areas;

K. I conduct extensive preflight inspections and protocol per the Inspire 1

User Manual;

L. I always obtains all necessary permissions prior to operation;

M. I immediately abort flights in the event of potential danger;

N. I only operate my UAS well within “flight environment requirements ” &

5

visual meteorological conditions (VMC)

O. I will not operate my UAS 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.

P. Only I, Christopher Gardner, a licensed Private Pilot (Certificate #

3197378) with current Third Class Medical Certificate, act as Pilot in

Command during flights;

Q. I follow the UAS manufacturer’s aircraft/component, maintenance,

overhaul, replacement, inspection, and life limit requirements.

R. The operating documents/manual will be accessible during UAS

operations and made available upon request.

My safety protocols provide a level of safety equal to or exceeding existing

6

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, real estate, and marketing

purposes. While the safety record of such helicopters is remarkably astounding,

there have been incidents involving loss of life as well as extensive property

damage; it is far safer to operate a battery powered ultra light weight UAS.

● 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.

● Fourth, 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 and

5 Flight Environment Requirements ­ Page 45 ­ Inspire 1 User Manual

6 Operating within Flight Limitations & Procedures outlined in User Manual, A­R listed above, visual meteorological conditions (or VMC), & any Applicable FARs
Christopher Gardner, Gainesville FL ­ Section 333 Exemption Petition

competency and will continue to operate at and above current safety levels.

VI. 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 my UAS permits exemption from Part 21 because my

UAS meets (and exceeds) 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 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 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. 10 The FAA has previously issued

exemptions to this regulation in Exemption Nos. 8607, 8737, 8738, 9299,

9299A, 9565, 9565B, 10167, 10167A, 10602, 10700 and 32827.

14 C.F.R. § 91.121 regarding altimeter settings is inapplicable in so far

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,

Christopher Gardner.

B. 14 C.F.R. § 45.23: Marking of The Aircraft
Christopher Gardner, Gainesville FL ­ Section 333 Exemption Petition

Applicable Codes of Federal Regulation require aircraft to be marked

according to certain specifications. My UAS are, by definition, unmanned.

They therefore do not have a cabin, cockpit or pilot station on which to

mark certain words or phrases. Further, two­inch lettering is difficult 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.

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

Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. §§ 61.113 (a) & (b), private pilots are limited to

non­commercial operations. I, Christopher Gardner, can achieve an

equivalent level of safety as achieved by current Regulations because

my UAS does not carry any pilots or passengers. The risks attended to

the operation of my UAS is far less than the risk levels inherent in the

commercial activities outlined in 14 C.F.R. § 61, et seq. Thus, allowing

me to operate my UAS meet and exceed current safety levels in relation

to 14 C.F.R. §61.113 (a) & (b). In addition, Grant of Exemption No.

11062 to Astraeus Aerial (Astraeus), the FAA determined that a PIC with

a private pilot certificate operating the Astraeus UAS would not adversely

affect operations in the NAS or present a hazard to persons or property

on the ground.

D. 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. My UAS will never operate at an altitude greater than 300

AGL; safely below the standard of 400 AGL. I will however operate my

UAS 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 UAS, an

equivalent or higher 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 above­cited 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.
Christopher Gardner, Gainesville FL ­ Section 333 Exemption Petition

They will not, therefore, apply to my UAS. However, as a safety

precaution I inspect my UAS before and after each flight and maintained

per the manufacturer’s aircraft/component, maintenance, overhaul,

replacement, inspection, and life limit requirements.

In summary, Christopher Gardner 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 my

lightweight unmanned aircraft system for aerial photography/Inspection/

included but not limited to the following; Business Operations: over land,

water­ways, and oceans; operation over/in non­restricted National Parks,

National Forests, flight in non­navigable airspace, using non­intrusive

recording devices, operation in otherwise unrestricted U.S.

States/Territories for aerial videography/cinematography for commercial

operation and to enhance academic community awareness for those

individuals and companies unfamiliar with the geographical layout of

such areas. Currently, area awareness and real estate aerial

videography/photography relies primarily on the use of larger aircraft

running on combustible fuel, posing potential risk to the public. Granting

my request for exemption will reduce current risk levels and thereby

enhance safety. My UAS does not contain potentially explosive fuel, is

smaller, lighter and more maneuverable than conventional 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 airfields. I have been analyzing flight information and will

compile safety protocols and the implementation of a flight operations

manual 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 UAS and therefore the likelihood of death or serious bodily

injury is significantly diminished. The operation of my UAS, weighing less

than 7 pounds and travelling at lower speeds within limited areas will

provide an equivalent level of safety as that achieved under current

FARs. Accordingly I respectfully request that the FAA grant my

exemption request and am willing to cooperate in sharing information to

benefit the FAA, safety of manned aircraft, and the general public at
Christopher Gardner, Gainesville FL ­ Section 333 Exemption Petition

large.

Respectfully Submitted,

Christopher Gardner

1236 NW 50 Dr.

Gainesville, FL 32605