Jonathan Bain, Real Estate Inspector, Lexington, KY—Section 333 Exemption Petition 

1 

Jonathan Bain 

Bain Property Inspection, Inc. 

611 Kastle Road 

Lexington, KY 40502 

(859) 268-0262 

bainpropertyinspection@gmail.com 

Kentucky Licensed Home Inspector No. 2058 

Federal Aviation Administration Small UAS Certificate of Registration No. FA33MFLPHW 

January 2nd, 2016 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Docket Management System 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, 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. § § 61.23(a) and (c); 61.101(e)(4) and (5); 61.315(a); C.F.R. Part 

21; 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, Jonathan Bain, have been the owner of Bain Property Inspection, Inc. since 1998, and I have been 

licensed to perform home inspections in the State of Kentucky since 2003, when licensing became 

required by law. My company performs inspections of houses and buildings for both potential 

buyers, and current owners. I 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, Jonathan Bain, an owner 

of small, unmanned aircraft, be exempted from the Federal Aviation Regulations ("FARs") listed 

below so that I, Jonathan Bain, may operate my lightweight, unmanned-aircraft-systems ("UASs") 

commercially in airspace regulated by the Federal Aviation Administration ("FAA"). As described 

herein I, Jonathan Bain, am a licensed home inspector within the state of Kentucky. My license 

number is HI-2058. I am experienced in flying hobby helicopters for recreational purposes. I 

currently own a DJI Phantom-3 Professional quadcopter, as well as a DJI Phantom 2 Vision, and a 

3DR Solo. I intend to use the quadcopters to photograph and videograph roofs, and other features 

of buildings and houses, to provide my clients with enhanced knowledge about the conditions of the 

buildings and houses, typically prior to purchase, that could not be provided otherwise, following 

exemption and approval by the FAA. Depending upon sizes and configurations, roofs can be 

exceedingly expensive to repair or replace. I am seeking an FAA Exemption so that I can provide 

information about roofs, and other high portions of houses and buildings, that could otherwise only 

be observed utilizing tall ladders that would place myself in danger, or by utilizing a manned aircraft, 

which would prove cost prohibitive. Should the FAA grant my exemption, I could provide better 

service to my clients, and potentially save them thousands, or even tens of thousands, of dollars by 

providing a greater degree of information about the conditions of houses and buildings they either 

own, or plan to purchase. 
Jonathan Bain, Real Estate Inspector, Lexington, KY—Section 333 Exemption Petition 

2 

I have flown small, radio-controlled helicopters for approximately five years without any adverse 

incidents. I am committed to safety and the well-being of the public on each and every flight. My, 

Jonathan Bain’s, exemption request would permit the operation of unmanned, but piloted by a 

remote-control receiver, UAS(s) in tightly controlled and limited airspace. These flights would occur 

predominantly in areas away from the general public, airports, heliports, and vehicular traffic, to 

provide photos of roofs and other aspects of houses and buildings that otherwise could not be 

observed, for inspection clients of mine. At present, similar lightweight, remote-controlled UASs are 

legally operated by unmonitored, amateur hobbyists with no safety plans or controls in place to 

prevent catastrophe. I, Jonathan Bain, will operate any UAS with the utmost regard for the safety 

and maintenance procedures included in all applicable UAS manufacturer's instructions and 

operating manuals to avoid and prevent public hazards, as well as manned-aircraft hazards and 

catastrophes. This will serve to enhance safety protocols exclusive to UASs specific to real-estate 

inspection videography-and-photography usage as I, Jonathan Bain, record flight data and other 

information gained through permitted flight-operations to share with the FAA through any required 

FAA reports to assist with any and all future protocol and safety regulations. 

Granting my, Jonathan Bain's, request comports with the Secretary of Transportation's (FAA 

Administrator's) responsibilities and authority to not only integrate UASs into the national airspace 

system, but to " . . . establish requirements for the safe operation of such aircraft systems (UASs) in 

the national airspace system," under Section 333(c) of the Reform Act specific to the use of UASs 

for real-estate/realtor purposes. Further I, Jonathan Bain, will conduct my operations in compliance 

with the protocols described herein, or as otherwise established by the FAA. 

For the reasons stated below, I, Jonathan Bain, respectfully request the grant of an exemption 

allowing me to operate remote-controlled UASs to provide community awareness regarding UASs, 

and to provide my clients with higher levels of information about the houses or buildings they either 

own, or have under consideration to purchase. These houses and buildings typically are valued from 

between fifty-thousand dollars ($50,000.00) to over one million dollars ($1,000,000.00). I will be 

providing a valuable service by operating a UAS to provide a higher degree of information about the 

houses or buildings. Another benefit is, I will be able to provide aerial views of the houses and 

buildings that would not be possible without hiring a much more expensive, manned aircraft. 

Because this petition is similar in all material aspects to previously-granted Section 333 petitions, I 

request expedited approval pursuant to the FAA’s summary grant process. 

I. Applicant Information: 

Jonathan Bain 

611 Kastle Road 

Lexington, KY 40502 

(859) 268-0262 

bainpropertyinspection@gmail.com 

II. The Specific Sections of Title 14 of the Federal Regulations From Which Jonathan Bain 

Requests Exemptions are: 

14 C.F.R. 21; 
Jonathan Bain, Real Estate Inspector, Lexington, KY—Section 333 Exemption Petition 

3 

14 C.F.R. 61.23 (a) and (c); 

14 C.F.R. 61.101(e)(4); 

14 C.F.R. 61.315(a): 

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

14 C.F.R. 61.113 (a) & (b); 

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

14 C.F.R. 407 (a) (1); 

14 C.F.R. 409 (a) (2); and, 

14 C.F.R. 417 (a) & (b). 

I also ask the FAA to exempt me from any other rules the FAA deems necessary, to operate 

unmanned aircraft systems for aerial inspections and data collection. 

III. The Extent of Relief Jonathan Bain seeks and the Reason He Seeks Such Relief: 

I, Jonathan Bain, 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, Jonathan Bain, from 

performing commercial, 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, Jonathan Bain’s, UAS

meets the definition of “small unmanned aircraft” as defined in Section 331, and therefore the 

integration of my UAS is expressly contemplated by the Reform Act. I would like to operate my 

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 real-estate-related UAS aerial photography and 

videography. 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 UASs, 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, Jonathan Bain. My UASs utilize 

four (4) counter-rotating propellers for balance, control, and stability. My UAS is equipped with 

GPS and auto-return safety technology, and it weighs less than five (5) pounds (far below the 

maximum fifty-five (55) pound limit); including the cameras and gimbals. 

I, Jonathan Bain, practice safety first and foremost on every flight. My unmanned aircraft is designed

to hover in place with the assistance of GPS satellites, and operate in less than a twenty-four (24) 

knot, or fifteen (15) mile-per-hour wind. In the interest of safety, stability, and cognizance of 

financial loss, I do not fly in winds exceeding sixteen (16) knots-per-hour, or ten (10) miles-perhour. My UASs have inherent safety systems in place that include a GPS mode that allows my UAS 

to hover in place when radio controls are not manipulated. I would only use the GPS mode while 

photographing or videographing houses and buildings. This GPS mode provides the maximum 
Jonathan Bain, Real Estate Inspector, Lexington, KY—Section 333 Exemption Petition 

4 

degree of safety, reliability, and stability for a UAS, and it significantly reduces the possibility of 

accident or hazard. Should the UAS ever lose its signal between itself and its controller, the UAS is 

designed and programmed to slowly descend to the precise location from which it ascended off the 

ground. I do not operate my UAS near airports, hospitals, or heliports, and I don’t operate my UAS 

when the general public is within fifty to one-hundred (50-100) yards depending upon location, 

governing instances and conditions, and weather. I continually monitor the sky around me for any 

and all manned aircraft—police, medical, and other helicopters—and prepare to immediately abort 

my flight and land at the nearest and safest ground-point should a manned aircraft approach my 

location, or if I suspect a manned aircraft may approach my location. My UAS is capable of vertical 

and horizontal movement, and it is only flown within the line of sight of me, the remote-control 

pilot, and my visual observer. Utilizing battery power, rather than combustible fuels, flights typically 

last between four (4) and ten (10) minutes, and I unfailingly land when the battery is at or above 

thirty percent (30%) of its capacity. My flights would normally be at altitudes of one hundred (100) 

feet or less. I, Jonathan Bain, utilize a fresh, fully-charged battery for every flight as a safety 

precaution, despite each battery’s ability to provide fifteen (15) to twenty (20) minutes of flight time. 

I do not operate my UAS at or below the manufacturer-recommended minimum-charge levels for 

operation. Rather, I remain well within a safe operating range to insure adequate communication 

between the radio-controller and the UAS to eliminate the potentials for crashes, loss of control, and

any other potential hazards. I maintain reserve batteries at all times should replacement be necessary

for safe operation of the UAS. I do not take risks that could result in crashes, or that would create a 

hazard for public property, people, or manned aircraft. I have logged hundreds (100s) of hours of 

practice flights in remote areas as a hobbyist, simulating flights for future commercial use. This has

provided me with familiarity with the characteristics of my specific UAS’s performance when 

operated under disparate temperature- and weather conditions. I also have logged, and continue to 

do so, computerized flight-simulations to make certain my skills and response-reflex time remain 

well honed. All of this has been performed in the interest of safety. 

I, Jonathan Bain, am exceedingly cautious when operating my UAS, which is a lightweight, 

unmanned aircraft. I 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 UASs into the national airspace system. Jonathan Bain’s UAS, used during hobby flights, 

has a demonstrable safety record, and does not pose any threat to the general public or national 

security. 

IV. How Jonathan Bain’s Request Will Benefit the Public As A Whole: 

Aerial videography and photography for real-estate inspections have been available for years by 

using manned, fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters. For most people who are purchasing a home or 

commercial building, however, the cost of hiring a manned aircraft is prohibitive. Very few people, 

and very few businesses, could afford to absorb such expenses. This deprives typical buyers of 

houses and commercial buildings of the benefit to learn more about the conditions of the properties 

they have under consideration to purchase. It also deprives current owners of a house or building 

from knowing as much as is possible regarding the conditions of their houses or buildings. Utilizing 

manned aircraft to perform house or building inspections poses a threat to the public due to the 

potential of catastrophic crashes, which have occurred in the past. The crashes of manned aircraft 

have resulted in losses of life and damage to property. When the manned aircraft crashed, they 

contained combustible fuel that exploded and created fires on impact. People have been injured, and 
Jonathan Bain, Real Estate Inspector, Lexington, KY—Section 333 Exemption Petition 

5 

property has been damaged. My, Jonathan Bain’s, UAS poses no such threat since its small size, and 

lack of combustible fuel, alleviate any potential threat to the public. 

Congress has proclaimed that it is in the public’s interest to integrate commercially-flown UASs into 

the national airspace system, hence the passage of the Reform Act. Granting my, Jonathan Bain’s, 

exemption-request furthers the public interest through knowledge and visual awareness of properties 

that are either owned, or under consideration to purchase, by my clients. My lightweight UAS is 

battery powered, and it creates no emissions that can harm the environment. The possibility of my 

lightweight UAS crashing is far less than that of a full-size helicopter or fixed-wing aircraft, both of 

which are heavy, and contain combustible fuel, and which can cause catastrophic devastation to the 

public. 

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

aerial photographic and videographic inspections using my battery-operated UAS. Permitting me, 

Jonathan Bain, to immediately fly within national airspace furthers economic growth through the 

purchases of houses and buildings. This will stimulate my community’s economy, as well as the 

national community when I provide services for clients who do not reside in my home state of 

Kentucky. 

V. Reasons Why Jonathan Bain’s Exemption Will Not Adversely Affect Safety Or How The 

Exemption Will Provide a Level of Safety At Least Equal to the Existing Rule: 

My, Jonathan Bain’s, exemption will not adversely affect safety. Quite the contrary, for the reasons 

stated permitting me, Jonathan Bain, to log more flight time in FAA controlled airspace will allow 

me to contribute to the innovation and implementation of new and novel safety protocols for 

Property Inspectors and Home Inspectors that can be developed in cooperation with the FAA. In 

addition, I, Jonathan Bain, submit the following representations of enhancements to current aerial 

videography and photography for property inspections and home inspections: 

a) My UAS weighs less than five (5) pounds. 

b) I only operate my UAS below two hundred (200) feet, which is well within the four hundred 

(400) foot permissible ceiling established by the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 

2012. 

c) My UAS only operates for twenty minutes per flight. I land my UAS prior to the 

manufacturer’s recommended minimum-level of battery power. I pilot my UAS with a 

remote controller, and always keep the UAS within my line of sight. 

d) My UAS has a GPS flight-safety feature which allows it to hover in place, and then slowly 

land if communication with the remote-control pilot is lost. 

e) I actively analyze flight data and other sources of information to constantly review and 

improve safety protocols. 

f) I only operate my UAS in reasonably-safe environments that are strictly controlled, that are 

safe distances from electrical power-lines and data antennae, elevated light fixtures, airports, 

and actively-populated areas. I conduct extensive pre-flight inspections and protocols, during 

which the safety of individuals and property are held to utmost importance. 

g) I always obtain all necessary permissions prior to operation, and I have procedures in place 

to abort flights should safety breaches or potential dangers occur. 
Jonathan Bain, Real Estate Inspector, Lexington, KY—Section 333 Exemption Petition 

6 

My, Jonathan Bain’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 UASs into our national airspace 

system, helicopters are the primary means by which to provide aerial photography and videography 

for knowledge regarding house and building inspections. While the safety records of these 

helicopters is remarkable, there have been incidents in which loss of life and extensive property 

damage have occurred. It is far safer to operate a battery-powered, lightweight UAS to inspect 

buildings and houses. 

First, the potential loss of life is greatly diminished because UASs carry no people on board, 

and I can only operate my UAS in specific areas, away from mass populations. 

Second, there is no combustible fuel onboard a UAS, and because of this, the potential for 

fires or explosions is greatly diminished. 

Third, the small size and extreme maneuverability of my UAS allows me to remotely pilot 

the UAS away from, and avoid, hazards quickly and safely. 

Lastly, given its small size and weight, even when close enough to capture images and 

videos, my UAS does not need to be terribly close to the objects they are focused on due to 

technology, and the ability to utilize post-editing software that allows for panning and 

zooming. 

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

continue to operate at, and above, current safety levels and standards. 

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 Similar Issues 

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, Jonathan Bain’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 UASs from the airworthiness certificate requirement 

in consideration of the weight, size, speed, maneuverability, and proximity to areas such as airports 

and dense populations. My, Jonathan Bain’s, current and projected UASs meet or exceed each of 

these 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 UASs, this Regulation is inapplicable. An equivalent 

level of safety will be achieved by maintaining a safety/flight manual delineating areas of where 
Jonathan Bain, Real Estate Inspector, Lexington, KY—Section 333 Exemption Petition 

7 

safety can be defined. The FAA has previously issued exemptions to this regulation in Exemption 

Nos. 8607, 8737, 8738, 9299, 9299A, 9565, 9565B, 10167, 0167A, 10602, 10700, and 32827. 

14 C.F.R. § 91.121 regarding altimeter settings is inapplicable insofar as my UAS utilizes electronic 

global-positioning-systems with a barometric sensor. 

14 C.F.R § 91.203 (a) and (b) provide for the carrying of civil aircraft certifications and registrations. 

They are inapplicable for the same reasons outlined above. The equivalent level of safety will be 

achieved by maintaining any such required certifications and registrations by me, Jonathan Bain. 

B. 14 C.F.R § 45.23: Marking the aircraft. Applicable Codes of Federal Regulation require 

aircraft to be marked according to certain specifications. 

My UASs are, by definition, unmanned. They therefore do not have a cabin, cockpit, or pilot station 

on which to mark certain words or phrases. Furthermore, two-inch lettering is difficult to place on 

such small aircrafts with dimensions smaller than the minimal lettering requirement. I, Jonathan 

Bain, will mark on my UASs, my FAA Small UAS Registration Certificate Number, which is 

FA33MFLPHW on my UASs fuselages, as required by 14 C.F.R. §45.29 (f) so that I, the pilot, or 

anyone assisting me as a spotter with the UAS will see the markings. 

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

Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. §§ 61.113 (a) and (b), private pilots are limited to non-commercial operations. 

I, Jonathan Bain, can achieve an equivalent level of safety as achieved by current Regulations 

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

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, Jonathan Bain, to operate my UAS to meet and exceed current safety levels in 

relation to 14 C.F.R. §61.113 (a) and (b). 

D. 14 C.F.R. 91.119: Minimum Safe Altitudes. 

14 C.F.R. § 91.119 prescribes safe altitudes for the operation of a 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 feet above ground level; which is safely below the standard of 400 feet above 

ground level. I, Jonathan Bain, will however operate my UAS in safe areas away from the 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. 

10 Appendix E—Safety/Flight Manual 

The above-cited Regulations require, among other things, aircraft owners and operators to “have 

(the) aircraft inspected as prescribed in sub-part 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 ....” 
Jonathan Bain, Real Estate Inspector, Lexington, KY—Section 333 Exemption Petition 

8 

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

apply to my, Jonathan Bain’s, UAS. However, as a safety precaution, I inspect my UAS before and 

after each and every flight. 

VII. Request for Summary Grant 

Because this petition is similar in material respects to previous petitions the FAA has granted, I, 

Jonathan Bain, request that the FAA issue a summary grant of exemption pursuant to the agency’s 

expedited summary grant process. Specifically, the public and safety benefits my operations will 

achieve are materially similar to Grants of Exemption the FAA has already issued. I, Jonathan Bain, 

will adhere to a series of operating parameters that will offer the same level of safety as the 

conditions the FAA currently requires in its summary grants. 

VIII Operating Parameters 

I, Jonathan Bain, will adhere to the following operating parameters when operating UASs pursuant 

to a grant of the requested exemption. 

1) Operations will be conducted using the DJI Phantom 2 Vision, 3DR Solo, and the DJI 

Phantom 3 Professional. 

2) The UAS will not be operated at a speed exceeding 87 knots (100 miles per hour), at an 

altitude greater than 400 feet above ground level, or, when visibility is less than 3 statute 

miles, less than 500 feet below or 2,000 feet horizontally from a cloud. All operations will be 

conducted during the day under visual meteorological conditions. 

3) All operations will be conducted in accordance with a Certificate of Waiver or Authorization 

(COA). 

4) All operations will use a pilot in command and a visual observer, and the UAS will remain 

within the visual line of sight of the pilot and the observer at all times. The pilot will 

maintain visual line-of-sight capability and the ability to communicate verbally with the visual 

observer at all times. 

5) I, Jonathan Bain’s, operating documents will be accessible during UAS operations and made 

available to the Administrator upon request. 

6) Prior to each flight, the pilot in command will conduct a pre-flight inspection and determine 

the UAS is in a condition for safe flight. If the inspection reveals a condition that affects the 

safe operation of the UAS, the UAS will not be operated until the necessary maintenance has 

been performed and the UAS is found to be in a condition for safe flight. 

7) I, Jonathan Bain, will follow the UAS manufacturer’s maintenance, overhaul, replacement, 

inspection, and life-limit requirements, as well as safety bulletins, for the aircraft and aircraft 

components. 

8) The pilot in command will abort the flight in the event of unpredicted obstacles or 

emergencies, and will yield to all manned aviation activities. 

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 
Jonathan Bain, Real Estate Inspector, Lexington, KY—Section 333 Exemption Petition 

9 

Part 21 because my, Jonathan Bain’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 UASs 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 these 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 UASs, this Regulation is inapplicable. An equivalent level of safety will be 

achieved by maintaining. The FAA has previously issued exemptions to this regulation in 

Exemption Nos. 8607, 8737, 8738, 9299, 9299A, 9565, 9565B, 10167. Furthermore, I maintain a 

maintenance schedule that includes regular firmware updates and curative measures for any damaged 

hardware. Therefore, an equivalent level of safety will be achieved. 

In Summary, Jonathan Bain 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, Jonathan Bain’s, small, unmanned aircraft for community awareness 

and real estate operations, and to develop economic platforms for real estate inspections to enhance 

the experiences of people and businesses buying houses and commercial buildings. Currently, real 

estate videography and photography rely primarily on the use of larger aircraft that burn combustible 

fuels, which pose potential risks to the public. Granting my, Jonathan Bain’s, request for exemption 

will reduce current risk levels and thereby enhance and further safety. My UAS crafts do not contain 

potentially-explosive fuel. They are smaller, lighter, and more maneuverable than conventional realestate videographic and photographic aircraft with much shorter flight times. Furthermore, I operate 

at lower altitudes, and in controlled airspace, eliminating potential public risks flying to and from 

established air fields. I, Jonathan Bain, 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 my, Jonathan 

Bain’s, UAS, and therefore the likelihood of death or seriously bodily-injury is significantly 

diminished. My, Jonathan Bain’s, operation of my UAS, weighing less than five pounds, and 

travelling at lower speeds within limited areas, will provide an equivalent level of safety as that 

achieved under current FARs. Accordingly I, Jonathan Bain, respectfully request that the FAA grant 

my exemption request. I am willing to cooperate in sharing information to benefit the FAA, safety 

of manned aircraft, and the general public at large, 
Jonathan Bain, Real Estate Inspector, Lexington, KY—Section 333 Exemption Petition 

10 

Respectfully Submitted, 

Jonathan Bain 

Bain Property Inspection, Inc. 

611 Kastle Road 

Lexington, KY 40502 

(859) 268-0262 

bainpropertyinspection@gmail.com 

Kentucky Licensed Home Inspector No. 2058 

Federal Aviation Administration Small UAS Certificate of Registration No. FA33MFLPHW