July 6, 2015

Exemption No. 11978

Regulatory Docket No. FAA–2015–1476

Mr. Matthew Q. Bellamy, Jr.

Owner

Aerial 360 Imaging

135 Jenkins Street

Suite 105B - #201

St. Augustine, FL 32086

Dear Mr. Bellamy:

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your request for exemption. It transmits our 

decision, explains its basis, and gives you the conditions and limitations of the exemption, 

including the date it ends.

By letter dated April 21, 2015, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on 

behalf of Aerial 360 Imaging (hereinafter petitioner or operator) for an exemption. The 

petitioner requested to operate an unmanned aircraft system (UAS) to conduct aerial 

videography and cinematography.

See Appendix A for the petition submitted to the FAA describing the proposed operations and 

the regulations that the petitioner seeks an exemption.

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition 

in the Federal Register because the requested exemption would not set a precedent, and any 

delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to the petitioner.

Airworthiness Certification

The UAS proposed by the petitioner is a DJI Phantom 2 Vision+.

The petitioner requested relief from 14 CFR part 21, Certification procedures for products 

and parts, Subpart H—Airworthiness Certificates. In accordance with the statutory criteria 
2

provided in Section 333 of Public Law 112−95 in reference to 49 U.S.C. § 44704, and in 

consideration of the size, weight, speed, and limited operating area associated with the 

aircraft and its operation, the Secretary of Transportation has determined that this aircraft 

meets the conditions of Section 333. Therefore, the FAA finds that the requested relief from 

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

Certificates, and any associated noise certification and testing requirements of part 36, is 

not necessary.

The Basis for Our Decision

You have requested to use a UAS for aerial data collection1. The FAA has issued grants of 

exemption in circumstances similar in all material respects to those presented in your petition. 

In Grants of Exemption Nos. 11062 to Astraeus Aerial (see Docket No. FAA−2014−0352), 

11109 to Clayco, Inc. (see Docket No. FAA−2014−0507), 11112 to VDOS Global, LLC (see

Docket No. FAA−2014−0382), and 11213 to Aeryon Labs, Inc. (see Docket No. 

FAA−2014−0642), the FAA found that the enhanced safety achieved using an unmanned 

aircraft (UA) with the specifications described by the petitioner and carrying no passengers or 

crew, rather than a manned aircraft of significantly greater proportions, carrying crew in 

addition to flammable fuel, gives the FAA good cause to find that the UAS operation enabled 

by this exemption is in the public interest.

Having reviewed your reasons for requesting an exemption, I find that—

 They are similar in all material respects to relief previously requested in Grant of 

Exemption Nos. 11062, 11109, 11112, and 11213;

 The reasons stated by the FAA for granting Exemption Nos. 11062, 11109, 11112, and 

11213 also apply to the situation you present; and 

 A grant of exemption is in the public interest.

Our Decision

In consideration of the foregoing, I find that a grant of exemption is in the public interest. 

Therefore, pursuant to the authority contained in 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 40113, and 44701, 

delegated to me by the Administrator, Aerial 360 Imaging is granted an exemption from 

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, 91.151(a)(1), 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 data collection.

This exemption is subject to the conditions and limitations listed below.

 

1 Aerial data collection includes any remote sensing and measuring by an instrument(s) aboard the UA. 

Examples include imagery (photography, video, infrared, etc.), electronic measurement (precision surveying, RF 

analysis, etc.), chemical measurement (particulate measurement, etc.), or any other gathering of data by 

instruments aboard the UA.
3

Conditions and Limitations

In this grant of exemption, Aerial 360 Imaging is hereafter referred to as the operator.

Failure to comply with any of the conditions and limitations of this grant of exemption will be 

grounds for the immediate suspension or rescission of this exemption.

1. Operations authorized by this grant of exemption are limited to the DJI Phantom 2 

Vision+ when weighing less than 55 pounds including payload. Proposed operations 

of any other aircraft will require a new petition or a petition to amend this exemption.

2. Operations for the purpose of closed-set motion picture and television filming are 

not permitted. 

3. The UA may not be operated at a speed exceeding 87 knots (100 miles per hour). The 

exemption holder may use either groundspeed or calibrated airspeed to determine 

compliance with the 87 knot speed restriction. In no case will the UA be operated at 

airspeeds greater than the maximum UA operating airspeed recommended by the 

aircraft manufacturer.

4. The UA must be operated at an altitude of no more than 400 feet above ground level 

(AGL). Altitude must be reported in feet AGL.

5. The UA must be operated within visual line of sight (VLOS) of the PIC at all times. 

This requires the PIC to be able to use human vision unaided by any device other than 

corrective lenses, as specified on the PIC’s FAA-issued airman medical certificate or 

U.S. driver’s license.

6. All operations must utilize a visual observer (VO). The UA must be operated within 

the visual line of sight (VLOS) of the PIC and VO at all times. The VO may be used 

to satisfy the VLOS requirement as long as the PIC always maintains VLOS 

capability. The VO and PIC must be able to communicate verbally at all times; 

electronic messaging or texting is not permitted during flight operations. The PIC 

must be designated before the flight and cannot transfer his or her designation for the 

duration of the flight. The PIC must ensure that the VO can perform the duties 

required of the VO.

7. This exemption and all documents needed to operate the UAS and conduct its 

operations in accordance with the conditions and limitations stated in this grant of 

exemption, are hereinafter referred to as the operating documents. The operating 

documents must be accessible during UAS operations and made available to the 

Administrator upon request. If a discrepancy exists between the conditions and 

limitations in this exemption and the procedures outlined in the operating documents, 

the conditions and limitations herein take precedence and must be followed. 
4

Otherwise, the operator must follow the procedures as outlined in its operating 

documents. The operator may update or revise its operating documents. It is the 

operator’s responsibility to track such revisions and present updated and revised 

documents to the Administrator or any law enforcement official upon request. The 

operator must also present updated and revised documents if it petitions for extension 

or amendment to this grant of exemption. If the operator determines that any update 

or revision would affect the basis upon which the FAA granted this exemption, then 

the operator must petition for an amendment to its grant of exemption. The FAA’s 

UAS Integration Office (AFS−80) may be contacted if questions arise regarding 

updates or revisions to the operating documents.

8. Any UAS that has undergone maintenance or alterations that affect the UAS operation 

or flight characteristics, e.g., replacement of a flight critical component, must undergo 

a functional test flight prior to conducting further operations under this exemption. 

Functional test flights may only be conducted by a PIC with a VO and must remain at 

least 500 feet from other people. The functional test flight must be conducted in such 

a manner so as to not pose an undue hazard to persons and property.

9. The operator is responsible for maintaining and inspecting the UAS to ensure that it is 

in a condition for safe operation.

10. Prior to each flight, the PIC must conduct a pre-flight inspection and determine the 

UAS is in a condition for safe flight. The pre-flight inspection must account for all 

potential discrepancies, e.g., inoperable components, items, or equipment. If the 

inspection reveals a condition that affects the safe operation of the UAS, the aircraft is 

prohibited from operating until the necessary maintenance has been performed and the 

UAS is found to be in a condition for safe flight.

11. The operator must follow the UAS manufacturer’s maintenance, overhaul, 

replacement, inspection, and life limit requirements for the aircraft and 

aircraft components.

12. Each UAS operated under this exemption must comply with all manufacturer 

safety bulletins.

13. Under this grant of exemption, a PIC must hold either an airline transport, 

commercial, private, recreational, or sport pilot certificate. The PIC must also hold a 

current FAA airman 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 must also meet the flight review requirements specified in 

14 CFR § 61.56 in an aircraft in which the PIC is rated on his or her pilot certificate.

14. The operator may not permit any PIC to operate unless the PIC demonstrates the 

ability to safely operate the UAS in a manner consistent with how the UAS will be 
5

operated under this exemption, including evasive and emergency maneuvers and 

maintaining appropriate distances from persons, vessels, vehicles and structures. PIC 

qualification flight hours and currency must be logged in a manner consistent with 

14 CFR § 61.51(b). Flights for the purposes of training the operator’s PICs and VOs 

(training, proficiency, and experience-building) and determining the PIC’s ability to 

safely operate the UAS in a manner consistent with how the UAS will be operated 

under this exemption are permitted under the terms of this exemption. However, 

training operations may only be conducted during dedicated training sessions. During 

training, proficiency, and experience-building flights, all persons not essential for 

flight operations are considered nonparticipants, and the PIC must operate the UA 

with appropriate distance from nonparticipants in accordance with 14 CFR § 91.119.

15. UAS operations may not be conducted during night, as defined in 14 CFR § 1.1. All 

operations must be conducted under visual meteorological conditions (VMC). Flights 

under special visual flight rules (SVFR) are not authorized.

16. The UA may not operate within 5 nautical miles of an airport reference point (ARP) as 

denoted in the current FAA Airport/Facility Directory (AFD) or for airports not 

denoted with an ARP, the center of the airport symbol as denoted on the current 

FAA-published aeronautical chart, unless a letter of agreement with that airport’s 

management is obtained or otherwise permitted by a COA issued to the exemption 

holder. The letter of agreement with the airport management must be made available 

to the Administrator or any law enforcement official upon request.

17. The UA 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.

18. If the UAS loses communications or loses its GPS signal, the UA must return to a 

pre-determined location within the private or controlled-access property.

19. The PIC must abort the flight in the event of unpredicted obstacles or emergencies.

20. The PIC is prohibited from beginning a flight unless (considering wind and forecast 

weather conditions) there is enough available power for the UA to conduct the 

intended operation and to operate after that for at least five minutes or with the reserve 

power recommended by the manufacturer if greater.

21. Air Traffic Organization (ATO) Certificate of Waiver or Authorization (COA). All 

operations shall be conducted in accordance with an ATO-issued COA. The 

exemption holder may apply for a new or amended COA if it intends to conduct 

operations that cannot be conducted under the terms of the attached COA.

22. All aircraft operated in accordance with this exemption must be identified by serial 

number, registered in accordance with 14 CFR part 47, and have identification 
6

(N−Number) markings in accordance with 14 CFR part 45, Subpart C. Markings must 

be as large as practicable.

23. Documents used by the operator to ensure the safe operation and flight of the UAS and 

any documents required under 14 CFR §§ 91.9 and 91.203 must be available to the 

PIC at the Ground Control Station of the UAS any time the aircraft is operating. 

These documents must be made available to the Administrator or any law enforcement 

official upon request.

24. The UA must remain clear and give way to all manned aviation operations and 

activities at all times. 

25. The UAS may not be operated by the PIC from any moving device or vehicle. 

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

persons, vessels, vehicles, and structures unless:

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 in a manner ensuring the safety 

of nonparticipating persons; and

b. The owner/controller of any vessels, vehicles or structures has granted permission 

for operating closer to those objects 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.

The PIC, VO, operator trainees or essential persons are not considered 

nonparticipating persons under this exemption.

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

permission from the property owner/controller or authorized representative. 

Permission from property owner/controller or authorized representative will be 

obtained for each flight to be conducted.

28. Any incident, accident, or flight operation that transgresses the lateral or vertical 

boundaries of the operational area as defined by the applicable COA must be reported 

to the FAA's UAS Integration Office (AFS−80) within 24 hours. Accidents must be 

reported to the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) per instructions 

contained on the NTSB Web site: www.ntsb.gov.

If this exemption permits operations for the purpose of closed-set motion picture and 

television filming and production, the following additional conditions and limitations apply.
7

29. The operator must have a motion picture and television operations manual (MPTOM) 

as documented in this grant of exemption.

30. At least 3 days before aerial filming, the operator of the UAS affected by this 

exemption must submit a written Plan of Activities to the local Flight Standards 

District Office (FSDO) with jurisdiction over the area of proposed filming. The 3-day 

notification may be waived with the concurrence of the FSDO. The plan of activities 

must include at least the following:

a. Dates and times for all flights;

b. Name and phone number of the operator for the UAS aerial filming conducted 

under this grant of exemption;

c. Name and phone number of the person responsible for the on-scene operation of 

the UAS;

d. Make, model, and serial or N−Number of UAS to be used;

e. Name and certificate number of UAS PICs involved in the aerial filming;

f. A statement that the operator has obtained permission from property owners 

and/or local officials to conduct the filming production event; the list of those 

who gave permission must be made available to the inspector upon request;

g. Signature of exemption holder or representative; and

h. A description of the flight activity, including maps or diagrams of any area, city, 

town, county, and/or state over which filming will be conducted and the altitudes 

essential to accomplish the operation.

31. Flight operations may be conducted closer than 500 feet from participating persons 

consenting to be involved and necessary for the filming production, as specified in the 

exemption holder’s MPTOM.

Unless otherwise specified in this grant of exemption, the UAS, the UAS PIC, and the UAS 

operations must comply with all applicable parts of 14 CFR including, but not limited to, 

parts 45, 47, 61, and 91.
8

This exemption terminates on July 31, 2017, unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

Sincerely,

/s/

John S. Duncan

Director, Flight Standards Service

Enclosures
Aerial	360	Imaging,	St.	Augustine,	FL	– Section	333	Exemption	Petition 1

April 21, 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,

I, Matthew Q. Bellamy, Jr., am writing pursuant to the FAA Modernization and Reform Act 

of 2012 and the procedures contained within 14 C.F.R. 11, to request that I, Matthew Q. 

Bellamy, Jr., an owner and operator of small unmanned aircraft, be exempted from the 

Federal Aviation Regulations (“FARs”) listed below so that I, Matthew Q. Bellamy, Jr., may 

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

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

As described herein I, Matthew Q. Bellamy, Jr., am a small business owner within the State 

of Florida; experienced in flying hobby type helicopters for recreational purposes and 

certificated airplane and helicopter pilot. I have added a hobby grade quad-copter UAS

(Phantom 2 Vision+) to my inventory equipped with an attached camera with intent for aerial 

videography/cinematography to augment real estate listings, land development, events, 

promotional videos; following exemption and approval by the FAA. 

My, Matthew Q. Bellamy, Jr's, exemption request would permit operation of ultra 

lightweight, unmanned (piloted by remote control) and comparatively inexpensive UAS(s) in 

tightly controlled and limited airspace. 

Predetermined in 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. Currently, unmonitored amateur hobbyists with no safety plan or 

controls in place to prevent catastrophe legally operate similar lightweight, remote controlled 

UAS’s in the National Airspace System. 

I, Matthew Q. Bellamy, Jr., have personally instilled safety protocols and controls to avoid 

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

further safety protocols exclusive to lightweight UAS's specific to real estate video and 

photography usage as I, Matthew Q. Bellamy, Jr., 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 regulations.

Granting my, Matthew Q. Bellamy, Jr’s, request comports with the Secretary of 

Transportation’s (FAA Administrator’s) responsibilities and authority to not only integrate

UAS's into the, but to “...establish requirements for the safe operation of such aircraft systems 

[UAS's] in the ” under Section 333(c) of the Reform Act specific to the use of UAS's for real 
Aerial	360	Imaging,	St.	Augustine,	FL	– Section	333	Exemption	Petition 2

estate, photography and videography purposes. Further I, Matthew Q. Bellamy, Jr., will 

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

established by the FAA.

For the reasons stated below I, Matthew Q. Bellamy, Jr., respectfully request the grant of an 

exemption allowing me to operate ultra lightweight, remote controlled UAS’s to enhance real 

estate listing videos for homeowners who cannot afford expensive manned aircraft. This will 

promote local economic growth through increased employment and increased tax base. This 

will keep public safety in mind by keeping heavier manned aircraft containing combustible 

fuel that poses potential public hazard.

I. Contact Information:

Matthew Q. Bellamy, Jr., Owner

Aerial 360 Imaging

135 Jenkins Street

Suite 105B - #201

St. Augustine, FL 32086

Office: (904) 910-5309

Email: mbellamy@aerial360imaging.com or aerial360imaging@gmail.com

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

Which Matthew Q. Bellamy, Jr Requests Exemption are:

14 CFR 21;

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

14 CFR 61.113 (a) & (b);

14 C.F.R. 91, et seq.;

14 CFR 407 (a) (1);

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

14 CFR 417 (a) & (b).

III. The Extent of relief Matthew Q. Bellamy, Jr seeks and the Reason He Seeks Such

Relief:

I, Matthew Q. Bellamy, Jr., submit this application in accordance with the Reform Act, 112 

P.L. 95 §§ 331-334, seeking relief from any currently applicable FARs operating to prevent 

me, Matthew Q. Bellamy, Jr., 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, Matthew Q. Bellamy, Jr’s, ultra lightweight 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 
Aerial	360	Imaging,	St.	Augustine,	FL	– Section	333	Exemption	Petition 3

be administered uniformly to all real estate related UAS aerial video and photography. The 

Reform Act guides the Secretary in determining the types of UAS's 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. Each of these items 

reflects in favor of an exemption for me, Matthew Q. Bellamy, Jr. My UAS utilizes four (4) 

counter-rotating propellers for balance, control and stability. My UAS is equipped with GPS 

and auto return safety technology. Weighing less than five (5) pounds (far below the 

maximum 55-pound limit); including camera with gimbal.

I, Matthew Q. Bellamy, Jr., 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 24-knot (15 mph) 

wind. For safety, stability and fear of financial loss I will not fly in winds exceeding 16 kph 

(10 mph). Built in safety systems include a GPS mode that allows my UAS to hover in place 

when radio controls are released. With three modes to choose from, I utilize the Smart Mode 

for aerial 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 take off. 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 

(50-100) yards depending on location, conditions and weather. I am constantly on alert for 

any manned aircraft 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 (LOS) of me, as the remote control pilot. Utilizing battery power rather than 

combustible fuels, flights generally last between three (3) to seven (7) minutes, with an 

altitude under one hundred fifty (150) feet. I, Matthew Q. Bellamy, Jr., utilize a fresh fully 

charged battery with each flight as a safety precaution; full flight time limit for each battery is 

up to twenty-five (25) minutes. 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, which 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, Matthew Q. Bellamy, Jr’s, 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 Airspace System. 

Matthew Q. Bellamy, Jr’s UAS, used in hobby flight, has a demonstrable safety record and 

does not pose any threat to the general public or national security.
Aerial	360	Imaging,	St.	Augustine,	FL	– Section	333	Exemption	Petition 4

IV. How Matthew Q. Bellamy, Jr’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 non-luxury homeowners and lower budget Realtors from a 

valuable marketing tool. My, Matthew Q. Bellamy, Jr's, UAS pose no threat since size and 

lack of combustible fuel alleviates any potential threat to the public.

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

flown UAS's into the National Airspace System, hence the passing of the Reform Act. 

Granting my, Matthew Q. Bellamy, Jr’s, exemption request furthers the public interest 

through academic/visual awareness of the geographical benefits in and around St. Augustine, 

Florida, the Nations Oldest City. My ultra lightweight UAS is battery powered and creates no

emissions that can harm the environment. The consequence of my ultra lightweight 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.

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

aerial video/photo capture through my battery operated ultra lightweight UAS's. Permitting 

me, Matthew Q. Bellamy, Jr., to immediately fly within national air space furthers economic 

growth. Granting my exemption request substantially furthers the economic impact for the St. 

Augustine community for companies looking to relocate or build in the Northeast Florida

area 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 Matthew Q. Bellamy, Jr’s Exemption Will Not Adversely Affect Safety

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

Rule:

My, Matthew Q. Bellamy, Jr’s, exemption will not adversely affect safety. Quite the 

contrary, for the reasons stated permitting me, Matthew Q. Bellamy, Jr., 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 other individuals and development in cooperation with the FAA. In 

addition I, Matthew Q. Bellamy, Jr., submit the following representations of enhancements to 

current aerial videography and photography for real estate and other opportunities, which 

may present itself:

My UAS weighs less than 5 pounds complete with a small ultra lightweight high quality 

built-in camera; I only operate my UAS below 200 feet (well within the 400 foot permissible 

ceiling set by the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012); my UAS only operate for 3-

7 minutes per flight; I will land my UAS prior to manufacturer recommended minimum level 

of battery power; I pilot my UAS through remote control only by visual line of sight (VLOS); 

My UAS has GPS a flight safety feature whereby it hovers and then slowly lands if 

communication with the remote control pilot is lost; I actively analyze flight data and other 

sources of information to constantly update and enhance safety protocols; I only operate in 

reasonably safe environment that are strictly controlled, are away from power lines, elevated 
Aerial	360	Imaging,	St.	Augustine,	FL	– Section	333	Exemption	Petition 5

lights, airports and actively populated areas; I conduct extensive pre-flight inspections and 

protocol, during which safety carries primary importance; I always obtain all necessary 

permissions prior to operation; and, I have procedures in place to abort flights in the event of 

safety breaches or potential danger.

My, Matthew Q. Bellamy, Jr’s, safety protocols provide a level of safety equal to or 

exceeding existing rules. It is important to note that absent the integration of commercial 

UAS into our, helicopters are the primary means of aerial video and photography for 

community awareness and real estate. 

First, the potential loss of life is diminished because UAS's carry no people on board and I 

only operate my UAS in specific areas away from mass populations. Second, there is no fuel 

on board a UAS and thus the potential for fire or explosions is greatly diminished. Third, the 

small size and extreme maneuverability of my UAS allow me to remotely pilot away from 

and avoid hazards quickly and safely. Lastly, given its small size and weight, even when 

close enough to capture amazing images, my UAS need not be so close to the objects they are 

focused on through the technology and use of post editing software allowing pan and zoom.

Accordingly, my UAS has been experimentally operated for familiarization/competency and 

will continue to operate at and above current safety levels. 

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, Matthew Q. Bellamy, Jr’s, 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, Matthew Q. Bellamy, Jr’s, current and projected UAS's meet or exceed each of the 

elements. 14 C.F.R. 91.7(a) prohibits the operation of an aircraft without an airworthiness 

certificate. As no such certificate will be applicable in the form contemplated by the FARs, 

this Regulation is inapplicable.

14 C.F.R. § 91.9 (b) (2) requires an aircraft flight manual in the aircraft. As there are no on 

board pilots or passengers, and given the size of the UAS's, this Regulation is inapplicable. 

An equivalent level of safety will be achieved by maintaining a safety/flight manual 

delineating areas of where safety can be defined. 

The FAA has previously issued exemptions to this regulation in Exemption Nos. 8607, 8737, 

8738, 9299, 9299A, 9565, 9565B, 10167, 10167A, 10602, 10700, 32827 and many others.
Aerial	360	Imaging,	St.	Augustine,	FL	– Section	333	Exemption	Petition 6

14 C.F.R. § 91.121 regarding altimeter settings are 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, Matthew Q. Bellamy, Jr.

B. 14 C.F.R. § 45.23: Marking of The Aircraft. Applicable Codes of Federal Regulation 

require aircraft to be marked according to certain specifications. My 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, two-inch lettering is difficult to place on such small aircraft 

with dimensions smaller that minimal lettering requirement. Regardless, I will mark its UASs 

in the largest possible lettering by placing the word “EXPERIMENTAL” on its fuselage as 

required by 14 C.F.R. §45.29 (f) so that I the pilot, or anyone assisting me as a spotter with 

the UAV will see the markings. 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 non-commercial operations. I, Matthew Q. 

Bellamy, Jr., can achieve an equivalent level of safety as achieved by current Regulations 

because my UAS does not carry any pilots or passengers. Further, while helpful, a pilot

license will not ensure remote control piloting skills. 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, Matthew Q. Bellamy, Jr., to operate my UAS meet 

and exceed current safety levels in relation to 14 C.F.R. §61.113 (a) & (b).

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 200 AGL, safely 

below the standard of 400 AGL. 

I, Matthew Q. Bellamy, Jr., 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 above-cited Regulations require, amongst other things, aircraft owners and operators to 

“have [the] aircraft inspected as prescribed in subpart E of this part and shall between 

required inspections, except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, have discrepancies 

repaired as prescribed in part 43 of this chapter . . . .”

These Regulations only apply to aircraft with an airworthiness certificate. They will not, 

therefore, apply to my, Matthew Q. Bellamy, Jr's, UAS. However, as a safety precaution I 

inspect my UAS before and after each flight.

A Summary The FAA May Publish in the Federal Register: A. 14 C.F.R. 21 and 14 C.F.R. 
Aerial	360	Imaging,	St.	Augustine,	FL	– Section	333	Exemption	Petition 7

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, Matthew Q. 

Bellamy, Jr’s, UAS meets an equivalent level of safety pursuant to Section 333 of the Reform 

Act. The FAA is authorized to exempt aircraft from the airworthiness certificate requirement 

under both the Act (49 U.S.C. § 44701 (f)) and Section 333 of the Reform Act. Both pieces 

of legislation permit the FAA to exempt 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 UAS meets or exceeds each of the elements. 14 C.F.R. 

91.7(a) prohibits the operation of an aircraft without an airworthiness certificate. As no such 

certificate will be applicable in the form contemplated by the FARs, this Regulation is 

inapplicable. 14 C.F.R. § 91.9 (b) (2) requires an aircraft flight manual in the aircraft. As 

there are no pilots or passengers, and given the size of the UAS's, this Regulation is 

inapplicable. An equivalent level of safety will be achieved by maintaining a manual. The 

FAA has previously issued exemptions to this regulation in Exemption Nos. 8607, 8737, 

8738, 9299, 9299A, 9565, 9565B, 10167, maintenance program that involves regular 

software updates and curative measures for any damaged hardware. Therefore, an equivalent

level of safety will be achieved.

In summary, Matthew Q. Bellamy, Jr., 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, Matthew Q. 

Bellamy, Jr’s, small unmanned vehicle/lightweight unmanned aircraft vehicle in community 

awareness, real estate operations and other opportunities which may present itself. 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, Matthew Q. Bellamy, Jr’s, request for exemption will reduce current risk levels

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

smaller, lighter and more maneuverable than conventional real estate video and photographic 

aircraft with much less flight time. Further, I operate at lower altitudes and in controlled 

airspace eliminating potential public risk flying to and from established airfields. 

I, Matthew Q. Bellamy, Jr., have been informally analyzing flight information and will 

compile safety protocols and the implementation of a flight operations manual for real estate 

usage that exceeds currently accepted means and methods for safe flight. Formal collection of 

information shared with the FAA will enhance the FAA's internal efforts to establish 

protocols for complying with the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012. 

There are no personnel on board my, Matthew Q. Bellamy, Jr’s, UAS and therefore the 

likelihood of death or serious bodily injury is significantly diminished. My, Matthew Q. 

Bellamy, Jr’s, operation of my UAS, weighing less than 5 pounds and travelling at lower 

speeds within limited areas will provide an equivalent level of safety as that achieved under 

current FARs. Accordingly 
Aerial	360	Imaging,	St.	Augustine,	FL	– Section	333	Exemption	Petition 8

I, Matthew Q. Bellamy, Jr., 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 large.

Respectfully submitted,

Matthew Q. Bellamy, Jr., Owner

Low Altitude Aerial Solutions, LLC

d.b.a. Aerial 360 Imaging

135 Jenkins Street

Suite 105B-#205

St. Augustine, Florida 32086

Attached: Preflight Form and Checklist