Colleen Bianco Bezich, Esq. 38 N. Haddon Avenue Haddonfield, New Jersey 08033 856.580.7008 info@bezichlaw.com Licensed in New Jersey & Pennsylvania November 13, 2015 U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE Room W12-140, West Building, Ground Floor Washington, DC 20590 -0001 Via Online Submission: www.regulations.gov Re: Petition of Ronnie Bruce Photography for Grant of Exemption Pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 To Whom It May Concern: Pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (“FMRA”) and 14 C.F.R. Part 11, Ronnie Bruce Photography (also referred to herein as “Petitioner”), hereby applies for an exemption from the Federal Aviation Regulations (“FAR”) identified below, to operate small unmanned aerial vehicles/systems (“UAS”) for aerial photography and videography. The photographs and video will be used by Petitioner’s clients for promotional and advertising purposes related primarily to the construction and real estate industries. Petitioner respectfully submits that this Petition for Exemption qualifies for approval, as the Federal Aviation Administration (“FAA”) has previously issued grants of exemption in circumstances similar in all material respects to those presented herein. For your convenience, this Petition is organized as follows: I. Background & Description of Petitioner II. Description of Proposed Operation III. Relevant Statutory Authority IV. Regulations From Which Exemption Is Sought V. Requirements of Section 333 Shall Be Met By Petitioner
VI. Public Interest

www.bezichlaw.com 1VII. Conclusion In addition to this Petition for Exemption, Petitioner also submits the following supporting document, which is attached hereto as Exhibit A: Operating Manual for DJI Phantom 3 Advanced. **I. BACKGROUND & DESCRIPTION OF PETITIONER** Petitioner seeks an exemption from the requirements of 14 C.F.R §§ 61.113(a) & (b), 91.7(a), 91.121, 91.151(b), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), and 91.417(a) & (b), to operate the DJI Phantom 3 Advanced (the “Phantom”) pursuant to Section 333 of the FMRA. This exemption will permit Petitioner to operate the UAS for the commercial purpose of conducting aerial video and photography of construction sites, residential and commercial real estate, civil landscapes and events over certain areas of the United States. Petitioner provides its clients with expertise and knowledge in photography and videography. The objective of Petitioner in using the Phantom for aerial operations is to provide affordable, high-quality photos and videos for a variety of governmental, commercial, public, and residential uses, including construction, appraisals, real-estate marketing, economic development, civic landmarks, and special event coverage

. Petitioner operates his business as a sole proprietor. Petitioner has never been involved in any accidents or hazardous situations involving UAS or any small recreational vehicles as a hobbyist. Contact information for Petitioner is as follows:
Ronnie Bruce 909 Main Street, Sewell, New Jersey 08080 Tel.: 609.504.0160 Email: ronniebruce@mac.com **II. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED OPERATIONS** Petitioner seeks an exemption to operate the Phantom for compensation or hire within the National Airspace System (“NAS”). The Phantom is a vertical takeoff and landing (“VTOL”) Unmanned Aircraft (“UA”) with a Ground Control Station (“GCS”) utilizing an electronic tablet or smart phone. ThePhantom has a maximum gross weight of approximately 2.8 lbs (including battery), while having a diagonal dimension of 23.2 inches, a maximum speed of approximately 16.4’m/s and a maximum altitude of 6000 meters. The Phantom is equipped with four main rotors, driven by lithium polymer battery-powered electric motors. The Phantom will be registered in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 44103, Registration of Aircraft, as well as 14 C.F.R Part 47, Aircraft Registration, and marked in accordance with 14 C.F.R. Part 45, Identification and Registration Marking.

www.bezichlaw.com 2**III. RELEVANT STATUTORY AUTHORITY** This Petition for Exemption is submitted pursuant to Section 333(a) through (c) of the FMRA. Congress has directed the FAA “to safely accelerate the integration of civil unmanned aircraft systems into the national airspace system.” Pursuant to Section 333 of the FMRA, the FAA Administrator is to permit UAS’s to operate within the NAS where it is safe to do so based on the following considerations: (1) the size, weight, speed and operational capability of the UAS; (2) operation of the UAS in close proximity to airports and populated areas; and (3) o peration of the UAS within the visual line of sight of the operator. Additionally, the FAA Administrator has general authority to grant exemptions from the agency’s safety regulations and minimum standards when the Administrator decides a requested exemption is in the public interest. See 49 U.S.C. § 106(f) (defining the authority of the Administrator); 49 U.S.C. § 44701(f) (permitting exemptions from §§ 44701(a), (b) and §§ 44702 – 44716, et seq.). A party requesting an exemption must explain the reasons why the exemption: (1) would benefit the public as a whole; and (2) would not adversely affect safety (or how it would provide a level of safety at least equal to the existing rules). See 14 C.F.R. § 11.81. **IV. REGULATIONS FROM WHICH EXEMPTION IS SOUGHT.** Pursuant to the provisions of the FAR (specifically, 14 C.F.R. § 11.61) and FMRA Section 333, Special Rules for Certain Unmanned Aircraft Systems , Petitioner hereby petitions the Administrator to permit its commercial operation of the Phantom within the NAS, and for an exemption from the requirements of 14 C.F.R. §§ 61.113(a) & (b), 91.7(a), 91.121, 91.151(b), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), and 91.417(a) & (b). **A. Petitioner Seeks Exemption From The Requirements Of Section 61.113(a) And (b).**  Section 61.113, entitled Private Pilot Privileges and Limitations: Pilot in Command , subsections (a) and (b), provides in pertinent part: (a) Except as provided in paragraphs (b) through (h) of this section, no person who holds a private pilot certificate may act as a pilot in command (“PIC” ) of an aircraft that is carrying passengers or property for compensation or hire; nor may that person, for compensation or hire, act as PIC of an aircraft. (b) A private pilot may, for compensation or hire, act as PIC of an aircraft in connection with any business or employment if— (1 ) The flight is only incidental to that business or employment; and (2) The aircraft does not carry passengers or property for compensation or hire. Relief is hereby requested by Petitioner to the extent necessary to allow a Pilot in Command (PIC) holding a private pilot or higher level certificate, as well as an airman medical certificate, and who has demonstrated, by meeting minimum flight- hour and currency requirements, that the PIC is able to safely operate the Phantom in a manner consistent with this exemption, including

www.bezichlaw.com 3evasive and emergency maneuvers and maintaining appropriate distances from people, vessels, vehicles and structures. This relief is requested because the limitations set forth in Section 61.113(a) and (b) state that a private pilot may, for compensation or hire, act as PIC of an aircraft in connection with any business or employment only if: (1) the flight is only incidental to that business or employment; and (2) t he aircraft does not carry passengers or property for compensation or hire. Petitioner submits that all flights of the Phantom, conducted by a PIC pursuant to the grant of this exemption: (1) will be incidental to Petitioner’s business; and (2) will not carry passengers or property for compensation or hire. **B. Petitioner Seeks Exemption From The Requirements Of Section 91.7(a).**  Section 91.7, entitled Civil Aircraft Airworthiness , subsection (a), states the following: (a) No person may operate a civil aircraft unless it is in an airworthy condition. Petitioner seeks relief from Section 91.7(a), entitled Civil Aircraft Airworthiness , because the Phantom does not require an airworthiness certificate in accordance with 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H. Petitioner submits that it will ensure that the Phantom is in an airworthy condition prior to every flight. **C. Petitioner Seeks Exemption From The Requirements Of Section 91.121.**  Section 91.121, entitled Altimeter Settings , specifically, subsection (a), states in part: (a) Each person operating an aircraft shall maintain the cruising altitude or flight level of that aircraft, as the case may be, by reference to an altimeter that is set, when operating (1) Below 18,000 feet MSL, to — (i) The current reported altimeter setting of a station along the route and within 100 nautical miles of the aircraft; (ii) If there is no station within the area prescribed in paragraph (a)(1)(i) of this section, the current reported altimeter setting of an appropriate available station; or (iii) In the case of an aircraft not equipped with a radio, the elevation of the departure airport or an appropriate altimeter setting available before departure; or (2) At or above 18,000 feet MSL, to 29.92 ʺ Hg. The Phantom will not have a typical barometric altimeter onboard. However, altitude information will be provided to the PIC via Global Positioning System (“GPS”) equipment and a radio communications telemetry data link, which downlinks from the UAS to the GCS for active

www.bezichlaw.com 4monitoring of the flight path. This altitude information, combined with PIC’s operation of the Phantom within the visual line of sight, at or below 400 feet AGL, will ensure a level of safety equivalent to Section 91.121. The Phantom’s barometric pressure sensor and GPS equipment automatically provide that a ground level pressure setting will be established prior to each flight, and provide the PIC with altitude information.
**D. Petitioner Seeks Exemption From The Requirements Of Section 91.151(b).**  Section 91.151, entitled Fuel Requirements for Flight in VFR Conditions , subsection (b), states in pertinent part : (b) No person may begin a flight in a rotorcraft under VFR conditions unless (considering wind and forecast weather conditions) there is enough fuel to fly to the first point of intended landing and, assuming normal cruising speed, to fly after that for at least 20 minutes. Relief from Section 91.151(b) is requested to allow flights of the Phantom by Petitioner during daylight hours in visual meteorological conditions (“VMC”), under visual flight rules (“VFR”), for a total duration of approximately 25 minutes. Petitioner seeks the requested relief because without an exemption from Section 91.151(b), the flight time duration of the battery-powered Phantom will severely constrain the practicality of any aerial video or still photo flight operations that Petitioner proposes to conduct. **E. Petitioner Seeks Exemption From The Requirements Of Sections 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & 91.409(a)(2) and 91.417(a) &**  **91.417(b).** Section 91.405, entitled Maintenance Required , specifically subsection (a), states the following: Each owner or operator of an aircraft (a) Shall have that 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; Section 91.407, entitled Operation after maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, or alteration, subsection (a)(1), states the following: (a) No person may operate any aircraft that has undergone maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, or alteration unless-- (1) It has been approved for return to service by a person authorized under § 43.7 of this chapter; Section 91.409, entitled Inspections , subsection (a), provides : (a) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, no person may operate an aircraft unless, within the preceding 12 calendar months, it has had —

www.bezichlaw.com 5(1) An annual inspection in accordance with part 43 of this chapter and has been approved for return to service by a person authorized by § 43.7 of this chapter; or (2) An inspection for the issuance of an airworthiness certificate in accordance with part 21 of this chapter. Section 91.417, entitled Maintenance Records , specifically subsections (a) and (b), provides the following: (a) Except for work performed in accordance with §§ 91.411 and 91.413, each registered owner or operator shall keep the following records for the periods specified in paragraph (b) of this section: (1) Records of the maintenance, preventive maintenance, and alteration and records of the 100-hour, annual, progressive, and other required or approved inspections, as appropriate, for each aircraft (including the airframe) and each engine, propeller, rotor, and appliance of an aircraft. The records must include-- (i) A description (or reference to data acceptable to the Administrator) of the work performed; and (ii) The date of completion of the work performed; and (iii) The signature, and certificate number of the person approving the aircraft for return to service. (2) Records containing the following information: (i) The total time in service of the airframe, each engine, each propeller, and each rotor. (ii) The current status of life-limited parts of each airframe, engine, propeller, rotor, and appliance. (iii) The time since last overhaul of all items installed on the aircraft which are required to be overhauled on a specified time basis. (iv) The current inspection status of the aircraft, including the time since the last inspection required by the inspection program under which the aircraft and its appliances are maintained. (v) The current status of applicable airworthiness directives (AD) and safety directives including, for each, the method of compliance, the AD or safety directive number and revision date. If the AD or safety directive involves recurring action, the time and date when the next action is required. (vi) Copies of the forms prescribed by § 43.9(d) of this chapter for each major alteration to the airframe and currently installed engines, rotors, propellers, and appliances.

www.bezichlaw.com 6(b) The owner or operator shall retain the following records for the periods prescribed: (1) The records specified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section shall be retained until the work is repeated or superseded by other work or for 1 year after the work is performed. (2) The records specified in paragraph (a)(2) of this section shall be retained and transferred with the aircraft at the time the aircraft is sold. (3) A list of defects furnished to a registered owner or operator under § 43.11 of this chapter shall be retained until the defects are repaired and the aircraft is approved for return to service. In consideration of the speed, weight, size, and limited operating area associated with the Phantom, operation of same shall meet the conditions of FMRA Section 333; therefore, it will not require an airworthiness certificate in accordance with 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H. Accordingly, Petitioner requests relief from Sections 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a) (2), and 91.417(a) & (b), as these sections set forth requirements for maintenance that only apply to aircraft that require an airworthiness certificate. Petitioner submits that the requested relief is proper since an equivalent level of safety will be maintained. Petitioner will use experienced technicians to perform maintenance or repairs to the Phantom using the methods, techniques, and practices prescribed in Exhibit A and in accordance with industry standards. Furthermore, Petitioner will document and maintain all maintenance records for the Phantom. **V. REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 333 SHALL BE MET BY PETITIONER A. Approval is Warranted Based on the UAS’s Size, Weight, Speed,**  **Operational Capability and/or Operational Restrictions** As set forth above, Petitioner’s operation of the Phantom meets the conditions of FMRA Section 333, and will not require an airworthiness certificate in accordance with 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H. Section 333 provides authority for a UAS to operate without airworthiness certification and sets forth requirements for considering whether a UAS will create a hazard to users of the NAS or the general public; or otherwise pose a threat to national security. Specifically, FMRA Section 333 states the following, in part: (a) In General. Notwithstanding any other requirement of this subtitle, and not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Transportation shall determine if certain unmanned aircraft systems may operate safely in the national airspace system before completion of the plan and rule- making required by section 332 of this Act or the guidance required by section 334 of this Act. (b) Assessment of Unmanned Aircraft Systems. In making the determination under subsection (a), the Secretary shall determine, at a minimum —

www.bezichlaw.com 7(1) which types of unmanned aircraft systems, if any, as a result of their size, weight, speed, operational capability, proximity to airports and populated areas, and operation within visual line of sight do not create a hazard to users of the national airspace system or the public or pose a threat to national security; and (2) whether a certificate of waiver, certificate of authorization, or airworthiness certification under section 44704 of title 49, United States Code, is required for the operation of unmanned aircraft systems identified under paragraph (1). (c) Requirements for Safe Operation. If the Secretary determines under this section that certain unmanned aircraft systems may operate safely in the national airspace system, the Secretary shall establish requirements for the safe operation of such aircraft systems in the national airspace system. In seeking this exemption, Petitioner maintains that the Phantom does not create a hazard to users of the NAS or the general public; nor does it pose a threat to national security considering its size, weight, speed, and operational capabilities. Petitioner submits that the Phantom can operate safely in the NAS pursuant to FMRA Section 333, as demonstrated by: (a) the characteristics of the Phantom; (b) the pilot certification requirement; and (c) the specific operating limitations as set forth below. 1. The Phantom may be operated in both manual and global positioning flight modes. A complete description of the flight and navigational modes of the Phantom is provided at page 11 of Exhibit A. 2. The Phantom is designed for automatic return to home or hovering in the event of loss of control or navigation. A complete description of the Failsafe Functions of the Phantom are set forth at pages 12 through 14 of Exhibit A. For a complete description of the operation and specifications of the GCS and flight control software, see pages 23 through 29 of Exhibit A. 3. Flight operations of the Phantom are limited to the line of sight of the PIC. Additionally, a safety observer (“SO”) will assist during all flights. 4. In seeking this exemption, Petitioner proposes to commercially operate the Phantom for the special purpose of conducting aerial photography and videography pursuant to the following operating limitations:

• Operations authorized by this grant of exemption will be limited to operation of the DJI Phantom 3 Advanced. Proposed operations of any other aircraft will require a new petition or a petition to amend this grant.

• UAS operations under this exemption will be limited to conducting operations for the purpose of aerial photography and videography.

• The UAS may not be flown at an indicated airspeed exceeding 20 knots.

• The UAS must be operated at an altitude of no more than 400 feet AGL

.

www.bezichlaw.com 8• The UAS must be operated within VLOS of the PIC at all times.

• The use of first person view (FPV) by the PIC or SO is not permitted.

• All operations must utilize a SO. The SO may be used to satisfy the VLOS requirement as long as the PIC always maintains VLOS capability. The SO 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 SO must not perform any other duties beyond assisting the PIC with seeing and avoiding other air traffic and other ground based obstacles/obstructions, and is not permitted to operate the camera or other instruments.

• The grant of exemption must be accessible during UAS operations and made available to the Administrator upon request.

• Prior to each flight the PIC must inspect the UAS to ensure that it is in a condition for safe flight. 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. The Ground Control Station must be included in the preflight inspection. All maintenance and alterations must be properly documented in the aircraft records.

• 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. The PIC who conducts the functional test flight must make an entry in the aircraft records.

• The pre-flight inspection must account for all potential discrepancies, e.g. inoperable components, items, or equipment, not already covered in the relevant sections of the operating documents.

• Petitioner, PIC and SO must abide by UAS manufacturer’s aircraft/component, maintenance, overhaul, replacement, inspection, and life limit requirements as set forth in Exhibit A.

• Maintenance, inspection, alterations, and status of replacement/overhaul component parts must be noted in the aircraft records, including total time in service, description of work accomplished, and the signature of the authorized person returning the UAS to service.

• Each UAS operated under this exemption must comply with all manufacturer Safety Bulletins.

• The authorized person must make an entry in the aircraft record of the corrective action taken against discrepancies discovered between inspections.

www.bezichlaw.com 9• Petitioner may not permit any PIC to operate unless the PIC meets the qualification criteria and demonstrates the ability to safely operate the UAS in a manner consistent with how the UAS will be operated under the exemption, including evasive and emergency maneuvers and maintaining appropriate distances from persons, vessels, vehicles and structures.

• UAS operations may not be conducted during the night. All operations must be conducted under VMC. If flight at night is required, a special request will be made at the FAA office closest to proposed area of operations. Flights under special visual flight rules (SVFR) are not authorized.

• The UA may not operate within 5 nautical miles of an airport reference point as denoted on a current FAA-published aeronautical chart unless a letter of agreement with that airport’s management is obtained, and the operation is conducted in accordance with a NOTAM as required by the operator’s COA. The letter of agreement with the airport management must be made available to the Administrator upon request.

• 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 miles from the PIC.

• If the UA loses communications or loses its GPS signal, it must return to a predetermined location within the planned operating area and land or be recovered in accordance with Exhibit A.

• The PIC must abort the flight in the event of unpredicted obstacles or emergencies in accordance with the operating documents.

• The PIC is prohibited from beginning a flight unless (considering wind and forecast weather conditions) there is enough power to fly at normal cruising speed to the intended landing point and land the UA with 25% battery power remaining.

• Petitioner shall obtain an Air Traffic Organization (“ATO”) issued Certificate of Waiver or Authorization (COA) prior to conducting any operations under the grant of exemption. This COA will also require the operator to request a Notice to Airman (NOTAM) not more than 72 hours in advance, but not less than 48 hours prior to the operation. All operations shall be conducted in accordance with airspace requirements in the ATO issued COA including class of airspace, altitude level and potential transponder requirements.

• All aircraft operated in accordance with the exemption must be identified by serialnumber, registered in accordance with 14 C.F.R. part 47, and have identification (NNumber) markings in accordance with 14 C.F.R. part 45, Subpart C. Markings must be as large as practicable.

• Before conducting operations, the radio frequency spectrum used for operation and control of the UA must comply with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) or other appropriate government oversight agency requirements.

www.bezichlaw.com 10• The UAS must remain clear and yield the right of way to all manned aviation operations and activities at all times.

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

• Flight operations must be conducted at least 500 feet from all nonparticipating persons (persons other than the PIC, SO, trainees or essential persons), vessels, vehicles, and structures unless: ✤ 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 UAS, flight operations must cease immediately and/or; ✤ The aircraft is operated near vessels, vehicles or structures where the owner/controller of such vessels, vehicles or structures has granted permission to Petitioner 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; and ✤ Operations nearer to the PIC, SO, trainees or essential persons do not present an undue hazard to those persons.

• All operations shall be conducted over private or controlled-access property with permission from the property owner or his/her authorized representative. Permission from each property owner or his/her authorized representative will be obtained for each flight to be conducted.

• 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 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. **B. Approval is Warranted Because Exemption From The Requirements Would**  **Not Adversely Affect Safety.** 1. Petitioner submits that the equivalent level of safety as established by Section 61.113(a) and (b) will be maintained because no PIC will be allowed to operate the Phantom unless that PIC has demonstrated, by meeting minimum flight-hour and currency requirements, that the PIC is able to safely operate the Phantom in a manner consistent with the exemption, including evasive and emergency maneuvers and maintaining appropriate distances from people, vessels, vehicles and structures. Specifically, the PIC must have accumulated and logged, in a manner consistent with 14 C.F.R. § 61.51(b), 25 hours of total time as a UAS rotorcraft pilot (with a minimum of 5 hours of those hours as a UAS pilot operating the same make and model of UAS to be used for operations under the exemption). In addition to the hour requirements, the PIC must accomplish 3 takeoffs and landings in the preceding 90 days (for currency purposes).

www.bezichlaw.com 11Petitioner submits that the additional manned airmanship experience of a commercially certificated pilot would not correlate to the airmanship skills necessary for Petitioner’s specific proposed flight operations. The FAA has previously granted relief from Section 61.113(a) and (b) in circumstances similar,in all material respects to those presented herein (e.g. Exemption Nos. 11062, 11063, 11064, 11065, 11066, 11067, 11080, 11109, 11110, 11112, 11136, 11138, 11150, 11153, 11156, 11158, 11159, 11160, 11161). 2. The equivalent level of safety established by Section 91.7(a) will be maintained because prior to every flight, Petitioner will ensure that the Phantom is in an airworthy condition based upon the UAS’s compliance with Exhibit A and as stated in the conditions and limitations herein. Additionally, the FAA has previously granted relief from Section 91.7(a) in circumstances similar in all material respects to those presented herein (e.g. Exemption Nos. 11062, 11063, 11064, 11065, 11066, 11067, 11080, 11109, 11110, 11112, 11136, 11138, 11150, 11153, 11156, 11157, 11158, 11159, 11160, 11161). 3. The equivalent level of safety established by Section 91.121 will be maintained because the altitude information of the Phantom will be provided to the PIC via GPS equipment and a radio communications telemetry data link, which downlinks from the UAS to the GCS for active monitoring of the flight path and altitude. This altitude information, combined with operation of the Phantom within visual line of sight, at or below 500 feet AGL, will ensure a level of safety equivalent to Section 91.121. The FAA has previously granted relief from Section 91.121 in circumstances similar in all material respects to those presented herein (e.g. Exemption Nos. 11062, 11063, 11064, 11065, 11066, 11067, 11080, 11109, 11112, 11136, 11138, 11150, 11153, 11156, 11157, 11158, 11159, 11160, 11161). 4. A grant of this exemption would ensure an equivalent level of safety established by 14 C.F.R. Section 91.151(b) as a result of (1) the technical specifications of the Phantom; (2) the limitations on the proposed flight operations; and (3) the location of the proposed flight operations. Accordingly, Petitioner will ensure that it will safely operate the battery-powered Phantom during daylight hours in VFR conditions, with enough battery power to fly for a total duration of 23 minutes. Furthermore, safety will be ensured as the Phantom provides audible and visual warnings to the PIC at the GCS when the UAS experiences low battery voltage. At the critically low battery level, the Phantom will descend and land automatically. Significantly, previous exemptions granted by the FAA concerning Section 91.151 establish that safety is not adversely affected when the technical characteristics and operating limitations of the UAS are considered. Relief has been granted for manned aircraft to operate at less than the minimums prescribed in Section 91.151, including Exemption Nos. 2689, 5745, and 10650. Moreover, the FAA has previously granted relief from Section 91.151 in circumstances similar in all material respects to those presented herein (e.g. Exemption Nos. 8811, 10808, 10673, 11042,

www.bezichlaw.com 1211062, 11063, 11064, 11065, 11066, 11067, 11080, 11109, 11110, 11136, 11138, 11150, 11153, 11156, 11157, 11158, 11159, 11160, 11161). 5. In seeking this exemption, Petitioner submits that the equivalent level of safety with regard to the regulatory maintenance and alteration requirements established by Sections 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), and 91.417(a) & (b) will be met because Petitioner will use trained technicians to perform maintenance, alterations, or preventive maintenance on the UAS. Furthermore, Petitioner will document and maintain all maintenance records for the Phantom. The FAA has previously granted relief in circumstances similar in all material respects to those presented herein (e.g. Exemption Nos. 11062, 11063, 11064, 11065, 11066, 11067, 11080, 11109, 11110, 11112, 11136, 11138, 11150, 11153, 11156, 11157, 11158, 11159, 11160, 11161).
6. The FAA May Prescribe Any Other Conditions For Safe Operation. In accordance with Section 333 of FMRA and 14 C.F.R. § 21.16, entitled Special Conditions , Petitioner requests that the FAA prescribe special conditions for the intended operation of the Phantom, which may contain such safety standards that the Administrator finds necessary to establish a level of safety equivalent to that established by 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H, and 14 C.F.R §§ 61.113(a) & (b), 91.7 (a), 91.121, 91.151(b), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), and 91.417(a) & (b). Such special conditions will permit safe operations for the limited purpose of conducting aerial video and photography. Likewise, the Administrator may prescribe special conditions pursuant to 14 C.F.R. § 21.16, for operation of the Phantom, since the airworthiness regulations of 14 C.F.R. Part 21 do not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards, due to its design features. **VI. P UBLIC INTEREST.**  Granting Petitioner’s requested exemption will further the public interest by allowing Petitioner to safely, efficiently, and economically capture aerial videos and photographs for the construction and real estate industries. Additionally, use of the Phantom will decrease congestion of the NAS, reduce pollution, and provide significant benefits to the economy without implicating privacy concerns
. **A. Decreased Congestion within t he NAS.**  The battery-powered Phantom serves as a safe, efficient, and economical alternative to the manned aircraft traditionally utilized to obtain aerial imagery. An exemption allowing the use of the Phantom to perform aerial photography and videography will reduce the amount of manned aircraft in the NAS, thereby reducing noise and air pollution, while increasing safety for life and property, both in the air and on the ground. Moreover, by reducing the number of manned aircraft within the NAS, congestion around airports will be reduced, and air traffic control stations will have fewer aircraft to manage.

www.bezichlaw.com 13**B. Safety And Efficiency Of The DJI Phantom 3 Advanced**
**.** Conducting aerial photography and videography with the Phantom will benefit the public by drastically reducing the levels of air and noise pollution generated by manned aircraft. Using battery power and electric motors, the Phantom produces no air pollution, and is a viable, environmentally sound alternative to the manned aircraft that were traditionally utilized for aerial video and photography. Moreover, risks to human life and property, both in the air and on the ground, will be substantially reduced because the Phantom presents significantly less potential for collateral damage than the manned aircraft that have traditionally conducted similar operations. **C. Economic Benefit**
**.** In addition to being safe and efficient, the Phantom is also an economical alternative to using manned aircraft to conduct similar aerial operations. As such, operation of the Phantom will allow small, United States-based businesses such as Petitioner, to remain competitive and contribute to the growth of the national and local economy. **D. Privacy** Petitioner’s proposed operation of the Phantom will not implicate any privacy issues. Specifically, Petitioner will only operate it where the property owner or authorized representative has given consent, and where it is in accordance with FAA Regulations, including altitude restrictions, and restrictions related to proximity to populated areas. **VII. CONCLUSION**  As set forth herein, Petitioner seeks an exemption pursuant to 14 C.F.R. § 11.61 and Section 333 of FMRA, in order to permit the safe commercial operation of the DJI Phantom 3 Advanced without an airworthiness certificate, for the limited purpose of aerial video and photography. By granting this Petition, the FAA Administrator will be fulfilling the Congressional mandate of the FMRA, while also advancing the interests of the public by allowing Petitioner to safely, efficiently, and economically operate the Phantom within the NAS. This Petition for Exemption satisfies the criteria articulated in Section 333 of the FMRA regarding weight, speed, operating capabilities, proximity to airports and populated areas, operation within VLOS and maintaining national security. The proposed operations in this Petition for Exemption are similar to those in previously issued grants of exemptions, and they stand to benefit the public as a whole. The following synopsis is provided for ease of reference: **A Summary That Can Be Published In The Federal Register, Stating the Rules From Which Petitioner Seeks Exemption:**  Ronnie Bruce Photography seeks exemption from the requirements of 14 C.F.R Sections 61.113(a)&(b), 91.7(a), 91.121, 91.151(b), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), and 91.417(a) & (b).

www.bezichlaw.com 14**A Brief Description Of The Nature Of The Exemption Petitioner Seeks:** This exemption will permit Ronnie Bruce Photography to commercially operate an Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) for the purpose of performing aerial photography and videography services over certain areas of the United States. Thank you in advance for your prompt consideration. Should you have any questions, or if you need additional information to support the requested exemption, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned. Very truly yours, /s/ Colleen Bianco Bezich

CPB/ pb Cc: Ronnie Bruce (via email) **Enclosure**

www.bezichlaw.com 15