# RAYMOND V. JOBE ATTORNEYAND COUNSELORATLAW
December 9, 2014 ViaElectronic Filing Attn: Docket Operations U.S. Department ofTransportation (DOT) 1200 NewJerseyAvenue SE, RoomW12-140 West Building Ground Floor Washington, DC 20590-0001
Re: Exemption Request ofReplicopy, Inc. d/b/a! RDM Productions under Section 333 ofthe FAA Reform Act; Part 11 ofthe Federal Aviation Regulations; 14 CFR 45.23(b); 14 CFR Part 21; 14 CFR 61.113(a) & (b); 91.7(a); 91.9(b)(2); 91. 1 03(b); 91.109: 91.119; 91.121; 91.151(a); 91.203(a) & (b); 91.405(a); 91.407(a)(1); 91.409(a)(2); 91.417(a) & (b). Dear Sir orMadame: This application is sought on behalf of Replicopy, Inc. d/b/a! RDM Productions ("Replicopy" or "RDM") pursuant to the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of2012 and 14 C.F.R. 11. RDM is a broadcasting and media production company based out ofthe DallaslFort Worth area, Texas SOS File No. 0149067900. RDM seeks exemption from the Federal Aviation Regulations (FARs) contained herein so that RDM be permitted to operate its small unmanned aircrafts ("SUAs"), or unmanned aircraft systems ("UASs"), commercially in airspace regulated by the Federal Aviation Administration ("FAA") wherein such operations are conducted within and under the requirements set out and established by the FAA in Section 333 of the FAA ReformAct. RDM specializes in standard and aerial videography and film production for thepurposes ofdocumentation, experimentation, demonstration and education. RDM seeks the use ofSUAs or UASs to assist in RDM's documentation, experimentation, demonstration and education. RDM's opportunities for growth in the media production market are limited because of the current FAA restrictions as it pertains to the operations ofUASs. RDM submits this proposed Petition for Exemption to the FAAto demonstrate its commitmentincomplyingwiththe Federal Aviation Regulations and the National Airspace System ("NAS") in their safe, responsible and limited commercial use ofUASs. Daniel L. Redd is the Owner and President ofReplicopy, Inc., d/b/a RDM Productions. Robert L. Redd is the Vice President and Manager at Replicopy, Inc., Director at RDM Productions and Manager ofMemories Films. As Daniel Redd is an experienced, licensed pilot, and RobertRedd holds a studentpilot license and has flying experience, bothDaniel and Robert
·8150N. CentralExpressway· Suite 747
.Dallas,Texas·75206
. Telephone (214) 522-4111
.

. Facsimile (214) 522-3550
. rayjobe@gmail.com
.

## RAYMOND V. JOBE ATTORNEYAND COUNSELORAT LAW
Redd are familiar with commercial aviation and are aware and familiar with the dangers that unregulated UASs operation presents to persons and property on the ground. RDM has aptly equipped each oftheir UASs for aerial photography and cinematography. RDM applies for an exemption from the FARs to allow operation ofits UASs on motion picture sets, within and under the conditions outlined herein, and under such other limitations as maybe established by the FAA as required by Section 333 ofthe FAA Modernization andReformAct of2012, Pub. Law 112-95, 126 Stat. 11 (2012). Section 333 ofthe FAA Modernization andReformActof 2012 ("FAAMRA") grants the authority to the Secretary to establish a policy outlining guidelines until the Unmanned Aircraft Systems rule is finalized. As the FAAMRA found that because UASs do not pose a threat to national airspace users or national security, operations of UASs do not need an FAA-issued certificate ofairworthiness. This Petition for Exemption wouldpermit the operation ofsmall, lightweight, unmanned UASs under controlled conditions in airspace, inthe UASs pilot's line ofsight, that is further in limited and predetermined and marked areas of operation. RDM would allow for controlled access and would further provide safety enhancements to the already safe operations inthe film and television industry presentlyusing conventional aircraft. RDM acknowledges how essential safety is when operating UASs. The specifications regarding operating procedures a.l1d safety controls listed in UASs manuals are attached hereto. The operating specifications and safety procedures ofthe UASs, which RDM commits to uphold, ensures that they do notpose a hazard orthreatto other aircraft, national securityorpublic safety. Granting RDM's Petition for Exemption coheres with the Secretary ofTransportation's responsibility to integrate UASs into the NAS and to "establish requirements for the safe operation ofsuch aircraft systems inthe national airspace system" pursuant to the FAA Reform Act §333(c). Consideringthe foregoing and RDM's commitmentto safety andregulations ofthe FAA, the specific regulations from which exemptions under Title 14 of the Federal Code of Regulations are herein requested are as follows: 14 CFR 45.23(b); 14 CFR Part 21; 14 CFR 61.113(a) & (b). ExemptionRequest Section 333 ofthe FAAReformAct; Part 11 ofthe Federal Aviation Regulations; 14 CFR 45.23(b); 14 CFR Part 21; 14 CFR 61.113(a) & (b); 91.7(a); 91.9(b)(2); 91.103(b); 91.109; 91.119; 91.121; 91.151(a); 91.203(a) & (b); 91.405(a); 91.407(a)(l); 91.409(a)(2); 91.417(a) & (b). RDM Productions submits this Petition in accordance with the FAA Reform Act, 112 P.L. 95 §§ 331-334, seeking relief from any currently applicable FARs operating to prevent RDM contemplated commercial photography and cinematography, research and other flight operations within the NAS. The Reform Act in Section 332 provides for suchintegration ofcivil UASs into ourNAS as it is inthe public's interest to do so. RDM's lightweight UASs meet the definition of"smallunmanned aircraft" as defined in Section 331and therefore the integration of

2

# RAYMOND V. JOBE ATTORNEYAND COUNSELORATLAW
RDM's lightweight UASs are expressly contemplated by the Reform Act. RDM would like to operate its lightweight UASs prior to the time period bywhich the Reform Actrequires the FAA to promulgaterules governing such craft. The size, weight, speed and operational capabilities ofthe UASs at issue, which RDM would use, with authorization from the FAA, showthattheydo notpose athreatto other aircraft, national security nor public safety. The term "small unmanned aircraft," as defined by the U.S. Congress in Section 331, 112 Pub. Law 95, 2014, means "an unmanned aircraft weighing less than 55 pounds." RDM's UASs are small, lightweight devices containing counter-rotating propellers for optimum balance, control and stability. They are capable ofvertical and horizontal operations but operate onlywithintheline ofsight ofthepilot (UAS operator). Each device weighs no more than 55 pounds, including anyphotography orcinematic equipment. TheUASs operate at speeds at 50 knots (57 mph) speeds or less and are capable ofhovering less than 400 feet altitude. In addition to the UAS pilot, RDM uses a spotter and a technician, such that, at minimum, three RDM personnel govern the safe flight ofan RDM smallunmanned aircraft at all times. RDM does not operate its UASs near airports and generally does not operate them near populated areas. The UAS operating software and GPS navigation systems do not allow any of the RDM UAS devices to operate near airports orrestricted fly zones. The failsafe software will disable the UAS devices from taking offand also limit the UAS systems from operating within specific GPS preset no-fly zones. To date, RDM has only operated its UAS on cordoned off areas and areas under the complete control ofRDM or RDM clients. RDM only operates its UASs inpredetermined areas and onlyin compliance withwell regarded safetyprotocols such as those contained withinthewell established and commonlyknown MotionPicture and Television Operations Manual. Applicant further and specifically seeks authorization to use UASs, which are equipped with cameras and sensors, in order to perform photography, audio and video filming by air for public and privateuses, including: television, cinematography, advertising, promotions, orpublic events. RDM's operation ofits UASs will not "create a hazard to users ofthe national airspace system or the public." 112 P.L. 95 § 333(b). Given the small size and weight ofRDM's UASs, combined withtheir operationin cordoned offand well-controlled areas, RDMs fleet falls within Congress's contemplated safety zone when it promulgated the FAA Reform Act and the corresponding directive to integrate UASs into the NAS. RDM's UASs have a solid safety record and do notpose anythreatto the general public ornational security. Maintenance of the UASs will be performed by the operator, in accordance with the aircraft's flight and operating manual. The operator agrees to ensure the each UASs is inspected before each flight, to perform all required maintenance and to maintain a log ofall maintenance and repairsperformed on all umnanned aircraft systems.

3

## RAYMOND V. JOBE ATTORNEYAND COUNSELORATLAW Granting RDM's exemption request furthers the public interest. First, Congress has already pronounced that it is in the public's interest to integrate commercially flown UASs into the NAS, hence passing the FAA Reform Act. Second, RDM has conducted research into safe UAS operation each time it flies one oftheir UASs. Flight data, visual inspections, recorded observations and flight analyses are compiled to further enhance current safety protocols in place. Allowing RDM to log more flight time directly relates to its research and its ability to further enhance current safety measures. Third, the public has an interest inreducing the danger and emission associated with current aerial cinematic capture methods, namely, full size helicopters. RDM's UASs are all battery powered and create no emissions. If an RDM UAS crashes there is no fuel to ignite and explode. Theimpact ofRDM'slightweight UASs is far less than a full size helicopter, notwithstanding the statistically noteworthy safety record offull size helicopters used in motion picture capture. The public's interest is furthered by minimizing ecological and crash impacts by permitting motion picture capture through RDM's lightweight UASs. Progression of the arts and sciences has been fundamental to our society since its inclusion in the u.S. Constitution. Indeed, Congress mandated the integration ofUASs into our NAS, inpart, to achieveprogressioninthis noteworthy, and inevitable, field. PermittingRDM to immediately fly within the United States furthers these goals. Whether it is the amalgam of scientific discoveries applicable to feature film making (including those drawing upon architecture, physics, engineering and cultural inclusiveness) to advancements inpubliclyusable technologies or advancements in equipment available to law enforcement personnel and first responders that does not cost millions of dollars, granting RDM's exemption request substantiallyfurthers the public'sinterestinways known and currentlyunknown. To further explain why RDM's exemption will not adversely affect safety or how grantingRDM's exemptionrequest willprovide a level ofsafety at least equal to existingrule: RDM's exemption will not adversely affect safety. Permitting RDM to log more flight time in FAA controlled airspace will allow RDM to innovate and implement new and as ofyet undiscovered safetyprotocols. Additionally, RDM proposes the following safetyprocedures and restrictions ifgranted an exemption:
• RDM's UASs weight not more than 55 pounds, including anyphotography or cinematic equipment;
• RDM onlyoperatingits UASs at an altitude of400 feet orless;
• RDM shall limit the UAS operation to thirty (30) minute flights, or ceasing operation at 25% battery;
• RDM's lands its UASs whentheyreach 25% battery;
• The operator(s) oftheunmanned aircraft system willholdprivatepilot certificates;

4

# RAYMOND V. JOBE ATTORNEYAND COUNSELORATLAW

• RDM'sremote control pilots operate RDM UASs onlywithin line ofsight;
• RDM's remote control pilots have video backup should they somehow lose sight ofits UASs;
• RDM staffs each flight with a remote control pilot, technician and a spotter with communication system enablingreal-time communicationsbetweenthem;
• RDM employs a GPS system within each UAS allowing the UAS to hover in place if communications between the device and the remote control pilot is lost and then slowly descend at twenty-five (25) percentbattery;
• RDM actively analyzes electronic flight data and other sources of information to constantlyupdate and enhance safetyprotocols;
• RDM only operates its UASs in secured areas that are strictly controlled, are away from airports and populated areas;
• RDM shall not operativeits UASs at night;
• RDM shall conduct aninspection ofits UASs before eachflight;
• RDM shall operate its UASs onlyon closed sets;
• All RDM flights shall occur only in private or controlled access property, having the propertyowner'spriorconsent and knowledge;
• RDMhas procedures inplaceto abort flights inthe event ofa safetybreach or apotential danger; and
• RDM shall obtain all necessary consent and permissions priorto operation ofthosebeing filmed or an agreementto bein the designated filming areapriorto filming takingplace. A summarythe FAAmaypublishinthe 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, entitledAirworthiness Certificates, sets forth requirements for procurement of necessary airworthiness certificates in relation to FAR § 91.203(a)(1). The size, weight and enclosed operations area ofRDM's UASs permits exemption from Part 21 because RDM'S UASs meet an equivalent level of safety pursuant to Section 333 ofthe FAA 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 ofthe Reform Act. Bothpieces oflegislationpennitthe FAA to exemptUASs from the airworthiness certificaterequirement in consideration 5

## RAYMOND V. JOBE ATTORNEYAND COUNSELORATLAW
ofthe weight, size, speed, maneuverabilityandproximityto areas such as airports and densepopulations. RDM's UASs meet orexceed each oftheelements. 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 bythe FARs, this Regulationis inapplicable. 14 C.F.R. § 91.9(b)(2) requires an aircraft flight manual in the aircraft. As there are no pilots or passengers, and given the size of the UASs, this Regulation is inapplicable. An equivalent level ofsafetywill be achieved bymaintaining a manual at the flight operations center with the remote control pilot ofthe RDM UAS. The FAA has previously issued exemptions to this regulation in Exemptions 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 insofar as RDM's UASs utilize electronic global positioning systems (GPS) and internal gyroscopes to provide spatial coordination. 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.203 (a) and (b) provides for the carryingofcivil aircraft certifications and registrations. They are inapplicable for the same reasons described above, The equivalent level of safety will be achieved by maintaining such certifications and registrations at theRDM flight operations center. B. 14 C.F.R. §45.23: MarkingoftheAircraft. Applicable Codes ofFederal Regulation require aircraft to be marked according to certain specifications. RDM's UASs are, bydefinition, unmanned. Theytherefore do not have a cabin, cockpit or pilot station on which to mark designated words or phrases. Further, two-inch lettering is difficult to place on such a small aircraft. Regardless, RDM will mark its UASs in the largest possible letting by placing the word "EXPERIMENTAL" onits fuselage as requiredby 14 C.F.R. § 45.29(f) so that the pilot, technician, spotter and others working withthe UA V will see the markings. The FAA has previously issued exemptions to this regulation through Exemption Nos. 8738,10167, 10167A and 10700. C. 14 C.F.R. § 61.113: PrivatePilotPrivileges and Limitations: Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. §§ 61.113 (a) and (b), private pilots are limited to noncommercial operations. RDM can achieve an equivalent level of safety as achieved by current regulations because RDM's UASs do not carry any pilots or passengers. Further, while helpful, a pilot license will not ensure remote control piloting skills, though RDM pilot vetting and training programs will. Further, private pilot licensees will operate RDM's UASs withthe same skill. The risks attendant to the operation of RDM's UASs is far less than the risk levels inherent in the commercial activities outlined in 14 C.F.R. § 61 et seq. Thus, allowing RDM to operate its UASs with a
6

# RAYMOND V. JOBE ATTORNEYAND COUNSELORATLAW private pilot as the pilot in control will exceed current safety levels in relation to 14 C.F.R. §§ 61.113 (a) and (b). D. 14 C.F.R. § 91.119: Minimum SafeAltitudes. 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. RDM's UASs will never operate at an altitude greater than 400 AGL. RDM will, however, operate its UASs in cordoned offareas with securityperimeters, providing a level of safety at least equivalent to those in relation to minimum safe altitudes. Given the size, weight, maneuverability and speed of RDM's UASs, an equivalent level of safetywill be achieved. E. 14 C.F.R. § 91.405(a); 91.407(a)(1); 91.409(a)(2); 91.417 (a) and (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 ofthis part and shall between required inspections, except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, have discrepancies repaired as prescribedinpart43 ofthjs chapter." These Regulations only apply to aircraft with an airworthiness certificate. They will not, therefore, apply to RDM should its requested exemption be granted. RDM conducts an extensive maintenance program that involves regular software updates and constant inspection for assessment of any damaged hardware. Therefore, an equivalent level of safety will be achieved. RDM has researched and developed its owndesigns. F. Summary RDM 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) and (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)(I); 14 C.F.R. § 91.409(a)(2); 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.417 (a) and (b) to commercially operate its fleet of small unmanned vehicles and lightweight unmanned aircraft vehicles in motionpicture or television operations and to conducts its ownresearch. Granting RDM's request for exemption will reduce current risk levels and thereby enhance safety. Currently, motionpictureimage capturerelies primarily ontheuse of larger aircraft running on combustible fuel. RDM's UASs do not contain potentially explosive fuel, are smaller, lighter and more maneuverable than conventional motion picture aircraft. Further, RDM UASs operates at lower altitudes and in controlled airspace. RDM has been analyzing flight data and other information in compiling

7

## RAYMOND V. JOBE ATTORNEYAND COUNSELORAT LAW
novel safety protocols and the implementation of a flight operations manual that exceeds currently acceptedmeans and methods ofsafe flight. There are no people on board RDM UASs and therefore the likelihood ofdeath or serious bodilyinjury is significantly limited. RDM's operation ofits UASs, weighing less than 55 pounds and traveling at speeds no more than 50 knots in cordoned off areas will provide at least an equivalent level ofsafety as that achieved under current FARs. Therefore, RDM respectfully respects that the FAA grant its exemption request without delay. The FAA has the authority to issue the exemption sought by RDM pursuantto the Federal AviationAct, 85 P.L. 726, as amended (the "Act").
Respectfully submitted,

RAYMONf{V. JOBE Counsel forReplicopy, Inc. d/b/a/RDMProductions

cc: Daniel L. Redd

8