D. SCOTT RANKIN 

Telephone: (740) 452-5403 

Fax: (740) 452-8473 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Docket Management System 

1200 New Jersey Ave. 

Washington DC 205950 

Re: Exemption Request Section 333 

Attorney at Law 

45 North Fourth Street 

Zanesville, Ohio 43701 

February 2, 2016 

Operator's Name: Richard A. Davis /date of birth 06/09/1955 

Operator's Address: 1305 Ellen Drive, Zanesville, Ohio 43701 

Make and Model: DJI Phantom 3 Professional 

To Whom It May Concern: 

Pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of2012 and 14 

C.F.R. Part 11, Richard A Davis, hereafter referred to as "Petitioner", would like to apply for an 

exemption from the following Code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R.) to be allowed commercial 

operation of lightweight Unmanned Aircraft Systems (VAS) for aerial imaging and video in the 

Central Ohio area. 

Proposed Operations: 

The operator is seeking to start a small part-time business of aerial 

photography/videography/cinematography for geographical awareness and for real estate 

marketing and inspections. Videos and photos will be taken within property boundaries for 

individual homeowner real estate listings. Operations will only be performed at the request of 

and with authorization of clients. The Operator is a retired sheriffs deputy with over thirty years 

experience in law enforcement and is also a retired juvenile court administrator. 

Why Granting Exemptions is in the Public Interest 

Aerial photography and videography has been around for a long time through manned fixed wing 

aircraft and helicopters. But for small business owners, its expense has been cost-prohibitive. 

Granting this exemption would allow the Petitioner to provide this service at a much lower cost. 

Further, the small VAS's being utilized in this application will pose no threat to the public given 

its small size and lack of combustible fuel when compared to larger manned aircraft. The 

operation of the VAS's will minimize ecological damage and promote economic growth by 

providing information to businesses and individuals in the Central Ohio area. 
No Adverse Impact to Safety 

Petitioner will abide by all FAA requirements to ensure this exemption will provide a 

level of safety at least equal to existing rules and will only operate in a safe environment that is 

strictly controlled. My exemption request would permit operation of ultra-light weight, 

unmanned (Piloted by remote control) in predetermined areas away from general public, airports, 

heliports and vehicular traffic, under 400 feet, during daylight hours and after carefully 

reviewing, inspecting and examining the area of aerial observation. Petitioner will conduct 

extensive preflight inspections and protocols, during which safety carries primary importance. 

This would allow for videos and photos within property boundaries for individual homeowner 

real estate listings. 

If granted an exemption the Petitioner agrees to additional safety procedures including 

but not limited to: 

• Keeping my UAS within a radius distance of 1000 feet from the controller to both aid in 

direct line of sight visual observation. 

• Operate my UAS for ten minutes per flight; land my UAS according to the 

manufacturer's recommended minimum level of battery power. 

• Operate my UAS only within visual line of sight (VLOS) with the assistance of a 

spotter. 

• Use the UAS's global positioning system (GPS) flight safety feature; it hovers and then 

slowly lands if communication with the remote control. 

• Conduct all operations under our flight safety protocols. 

• We will log each flight and battery use to and actively analyze flight data and other 

sources of information to constantly update and enhance my safety protocols. 

• Contact respective airports if operations will be within 5 miles to advise them of the 

estimated flight time, flight duration, elevation of slight and other pertinent information. 

• Always obtain all necessary permissions prior to operation. 

• Have procedures in place to abort flights in the event of safety breaches or potential 

danger. 

Specific Regulations from which relief is requested 

14 CFR part 21, Certification procedures for products and parts, Subpart H -Airworthiness 

Certificates, 14 CFR 61.23 (a) and (c), 61.101 (e) (4) and(5), 61.113 (a), 61.315 (a), 91.7 (a), 

91.119 (c), 91.121,91.405 (a), 91.407 (a) (1), 91:409 (a) (1)and (2), and 91.417 (a) and (b), to 

the extent necessary to allow the petitioner to operate a UAS to perform aerial photography, 

videography, and data collection. 

The petitioner also states that given the size, weight, speed, and limited operating area 

associated with the aircraft to be utilized by him, an exemption from 14 CFR part 21, Subpart H 

(airworthiness Certificates) and §91.203(a) and (b) (Certifications required), subject to certain 

conditions and limitations is warranted and meets the requirements for an equivalent level of 

safety under 14 CFR part 11 and Section 333 ofP.L. 112-95 (Section 333). Petitioner requests 

and exemption from §45.23 Marking of the aircraft because the UA will not have a cabin, 

cockpit or pilot station on which to mark certain words or phrases. Further he states that two-inch 

lettering is difficult to place on such a small aircraft with dimensions smaller than the minimal 

lettering requirement. Regardless of this, petitioner states that he will mark his UAs in the largest 
possible lettering by placing the word "Experimental" on it fuselage as required by §45.29(f) so 

that he or anyone assisting him as a spotter will see the markings. The petitioner states that an 

exemption from §91.405(a), 91.407(a)(l), 91.409 (a)(2) and 91.417 (a) and (b) maintenance 

inspections may be required and should be granted since they only apply to aircraft with an 

airworthiness certificate. However, the petitioner states as a safety precaution he will perform a 

preflight inspection of his UAS before each flight as outlines in his operating documents. UAS 

Pilot in Command (PIC) The petitioner asserts that under §61.113(a) and (b) private pilots are 

limited to non commercial operations, however he can achieve an equivalent level of safety as 

achieved by current regulations because his UAs does not carry any pilots or passengers. Further 

he states that, while helpful, a pilot license will not ensure remote control piloting skills. He 

further indicates that the risks of operating a UAs are far less than the risk levels inherent in the 

commercial activities outlines in 14 CFR part 61, et seq., thus he request an exemption from 

§61.113 Private Pilot Privileges and Limitations: Pilot in Command. 

In closing, the petitioner believes that exemption from the above listed Title 14 CFR' s is 

warranted given the nature of the type ofUAS flights that will be undertaken, the size and weight 

to the UAS being deployed, the safety precautions to the general public and the NAS the 

Petitioner intends to adhere to, the positive environmental impact the flight operations would 

have compared to manned fuel consuming missions and the economic benefit the Petitioner's 

business would have in this new area of aviation. 

Respectfully, 

{)ft~ D. Scott Rankin, 

Attorney for Richard A. Davis