June 16, 2015

Exemption No. 11826

Regulatory Docket No. FAA–2015-1181

Mr. Joseph D. Renda

9971 SW. 182nd Circle

Dunnellon, FL 34432

Dear Mr. Renda:

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 22, 2015, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for 

an exemption. The petitioner requested to operate an unmanned aircraft system (UAS) to 

conduct aerial photography and videography.

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 

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 
2

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, Joseph D. Renda 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.

Conditions and Limitations

In this grant of exemption, Joseph D. Renda is hereafter referred to as the operator.

 

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

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. 

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 
4

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 

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 
5

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 

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

be as large as practicable.
6

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.

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

as documented in this grant of exemption.
7

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 June 30, 2017, unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

Sincerely,

/s/

John S. Duncan

Director, Flight Standards Service

Enclosures
April, 22 2015

U. S. Department of Transportation Docket Management System

1200 New Jersey Ave,

SE Washington, DC 20590

Joseph D. Renda is a FAA licensed Commercial, Multi­Engine, Instrument Rated Pilot

Certificate ​# 3618085

Florida Real Estate Licensed Agent # SL3270953

Re:Section 333 ​Exemption Request Pursuant To Section 333 of the FAA Reform Act of 2012

Dear Sir or Madam,

Pursuant to §333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (the Reform Act) and 14

C.F.R. Part 11,

Joseph D. Renda, operator of Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems (sUAS) equipped to conduct

aerial photography for the Real Estate advertising in controlled areas, hereby applies for an

exemption from the listed Federal Aviation Regulations (FARs) to allow commercial operation

of its sUASs, so long as such operations are conducted within and under the conditions outlined

herein or as may be established by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) as required by §

333. Joseph D. Renda current operation of sUASs for commercial purposes has been halted to

comply with recently enacted federal aviation regulations pertaining to sUASs.

As described more fully below, the requested exemption would permit the operation of small,

unmanned and relatively inexpensive multi­rotor aircraft under controlled conditions in airspace

that is 1) contained 2) predetermined 3) has on­site safety personnel controlling access, and 4)

would provide increased safety and enhancements to clients' business operations.

The name and address of the applicant is:

Joseph D.Renda ​commercial multi engine instrument rated pilot certificate # 3618085

Realtor license # ​SL3270953

Address: 9971 S.W. 182nd Circle Dunnellon Florida 34432

Joseph Renda Ph:​+​l​­(352) 470­0563​Emai​l: joerenda1@gmail.com​​Address:

I, Joseph D. Renda respectfully requests a grant of an exemption of the following sections of

Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations: ​14 CFR 21; ​14 CFR 91, et seq.;14 CFR 45.23 (b);

Re: Exemption Request Pursuant To Section 333 of the FAA Reform Act of 2012 • 14 CFR

61.113 (a) & (b);

14 CFR 407 (a)(l);

14 CFR 409 (a)(2); • 14CFR417(a)&(b).

I, Joseph D. Renda also respectfully requests an Exemption from Section 333 of the FAA

Reform Act and Part 11 of the Federal Aviation Regulations from:
14 CFR 45.23(b); 14 CFR Part 21; 14 CFR 61.1 13 (a) & (b); 91.7 (a); 91.9(b)(2); 91.103(b);

• 91.109; 91.119; • 91.121; 91.151(a); 91.203(a) & (b); 91.405 (a);

• 91.407 (a) (1); 91.409 (a) (2); 91.417 (a) & (b).

The Extent of Relief Joseph D. Renda Seeks and the Reason It Seeks Such Relief:

Joseph D. Renda submits this application in accordance with the Reform Act, 112 P.L. 95

§§331­334, seeking relief from any currently applicable federal aviation regulations PARs

pertaining to UASs (unmanned aircraft systems) and operating to prevent Joseph D. Renda

contemplated commercial photography, videography and other flight operations within the U.S.

national airspace system.

The Reform Act in §332 provides for such integration of civil UASs into our national airspace

system as it is in the public's interest to do so. Joseph D. Renda lightweight UASs meet the

definition of "small unmanned aircraft" as set forth in §331 and combined with a sterling safety

record in similar industries, Joseph D. Renda light duty UASs are ideal recipients of exemption

by the intent of the Reform Act.

Considerations for relief include a combination of sUAS physical characteristics, safety features,

and safe practices identified in §333:

• sUAS weight, • sUAS overall size, • sUAS speed over ground,

• sUAS flight zone characteristics,

­ Non­operation near airports (civilian or military),

­ Tightly controlled operation in populated areas,

Joseph D. Renda, Commercial, Multi­Engine, Instrument Rated Pilot, certificate ​# 3618085

Florida­ Licensed Realtor #SL3270953

the client. Specific consideration is outline below.

Re: Exemption Request Pursuant To Section 333 of the FAA Reform Act of 2012

Operation of the UAS by VLOS by

14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H: Airworthiness Certificates 14 C.F.R. §91.203 (a) (1) Subpart H,

entitled Airworthiness Certificates, establishes the procedural requirements for the issuance of

airworthiness certificates as required by FAR §91.203 (a) (1). Given the size and limited

operating area associated sUASs, an exemption from Part 21 Subpart H meets the requirements

of an equivalent level of safety under Part 11 and §333 of the Reform Act. 1l1e Federal Aviation

Act (49 U.S.C.§4470 1 (f)) and §333 of the Reform Act both authorize the FAA to exempt

aircraft from the requirement for an airworthiness certificate, upon consideration of the size,

weight, speed, operational capability, and proximity to airports and populated areas of the

particular sUAS. In all cases, an analysis of these criteria demonstrates that the UAS operated

without an airworthiness certificate, in the restricted environment and under the conditions

proposed will be at least as safe, or safer, than a conventional aircraft (fixed wing or rotorcraft)

operating with an airworthiness certificate without the restrictions and conditions proposed.

The sUAS to be operated by Joseph D. Renda is less than 11 kg. with maximal payload
consisting of remote sensing instrumentation, carries neither no persons, carries no explosive or

flammable materials including combustible fuels, and operates exclusively within a secured area.

Unlike other civil aircraft, operations under this exemption will be tightly controlled and

monitored by the pilot (PIC), whose role is designated to act as both the remote sensing

controller and secondary monitor for safety issues, and a technician, which assists in matters

related to maintaining the sUAS and also monitors for safety concerns and liaisons to

the on­site safety officials. These enhancements to current safety practices and regulations, which

already apply to civil aircraft, provide a greater degree of safety to the public and property

owners than conventional aircraft operations conducted with airworthiness certificates issued

under 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H. Lastly, application of these same criteria demonstrates that

there is no intrinsic credible threat to national security posed by the UAS, due to its size, speed of

operation, location of operation, lack of intrinsic explosive materials or flammable liquid fuels,

and inability to carry a substantial external load.

14 C.F.R. §45.23 (b). Marking of the Aircraft The regulation requires: When marks include

only the Roman capital letter "N" and the registration number is displayed on limited, restricted

or light­sport category aircraft or experimental or provisionally certificated aircraft, the operator

must also display on that aircraft near each entrance to the cabin, cockpit, or pilot station, in

letters not less than 2 inches nor more than 6 inches high, the words "limited;' "restricted;'

"lightsport;' "experimental;' or "provisional;' as applicable.

Even though the sUAS will have no airworthiness certificate, an exemption may be needed as the

sUAS will have no entrance to the cabin, cockpit or pilot station on which the word

"Experimental" can be placed. Given the size of the sUAS, two­inch lettering will be impossible.

The word "Experimental" will be placed on the frame in compliance with §45.29 (f) at a size

suitable for the available space.

The equivalent level of safety will be provided by having the sUAS marked on its fuselage as

required by §45.29 (f) where the pilot, observer and others working with the sUAV will see the

identification of the UAS as "Experimental." The FAA has issued the following exemptions to

this regulation to Exemptions Nos. 10700, 8738, 10167 and 10167A.

Further markings include the use of flashing green LED illumination on the underside of the

sUAS frame which stands at contrast against a blue or white sky.

Joseph D. Renda, Commercial, Multi­Engine, Instrument Pilot, certificate ​# 3618085

Florida Licensed Realtor #SL3270953

Re: Exemption Request Pursuant To Section 333 of the FAA Reform Act of 2012

14 C.P.R. §61.113 (a) & (b): Private Pilot Privileges and Limitations: Pilot in

Command. §61.113 (a) & (b) limit private pilots to non­commercial operations. Because the

sUAS will not carry a pilot or passengers, the proposed operations can achieve the equivalent

level of safety of current operations by requiring a ground crew member to have a private pilot's

license rather than a commercial pilot's license to operate this sUAS. Unlike a conventional

aircraft that carries the pilot and passengers, the sUAS is remotely controlled with no persons on

board. The area of operation is controlled and restricted, and all flights are planned and

coordinated in advance. The risks associated with the operation of the sUAS are so diminished
from the level of risk associated with commercial operations contemplated by Part 61 when

drafted, that allowing operations as requested with a private pilot in the ground crew exceeds the

present level of safety achieved by 14 C.P.R. §61.1 13 (a) & (b).

14 C.P.R. §91.7(a): Civil aircraft airworthiness. The regulation requires that no person may

operate a civil aircraft unless it is in airworthy condition. As there will be no airworthiness

certificate issued for the aircraft, should this exemption be granted, no

FAA regulatory standard will exist for determining airworthiness. Given the size of the aircraft

and the requirements contained in the Manual for maintenance and use of safety check lists prior

to each flight, a subset of which are provided in enclosed Supplemental material, an equivalent

level of safety will be provided.

14 C.F.R. §91.9 (b) (2): Civil Aircraft Flight Manual in the Aircraft. §91.9 (b) (2) provides: No

person may operate a U.S.­registered civil aircraft ... (2) For which an Airplane or Rotorcraft

Flight Manual is not required by §21.5 of this chapter, unless there is available in the aircraft a

current approved airplane or Rotorcraft Flight Manual, approved manual material, markings, and

placards, or any combination thereof.

The sUAS, given its size and configuration has no ability to carry a physical flight manual on the

aircraft. The equivalent level of safety will be maintained by keeping the flight manual at the

ground control point where the pilot flying the sUAS will have immediate access to it. The FAA

has issued the following exemptions to

this regulation: Exemption Nos. 8607,8737,8738,9299, 9299A, 9565,95658, 10167, 10167A,

10602,32827, and 10700.

14 C.F.R. §91.103: Preflight action This regulation requires each PIC to take certain actions

before flight to insure the safety of flight. As FAA approved rotorcraft flight manuals will not be

provided for the aircraft an exemption will be needed. The PIC will take all actions including

reviewing weather, flight battery requirements, landing and takeoff distances and aircraft

performance data before initiation of flight. Further, we have proprietary manuals created

with the help of sUAS experts, the manufacturer, the regional sUAS vendor and policy holding

insurer and continue to work with these organizations to ensure best safe practices are adhered to.

14 C.P.R. §91.109: Flight instruction §91.103 provides that no person may operate a civil

aircraft (except a manned free balloon) that is being used for flight instruction unless that aircraft

has fully functioning dual controls. sUASs and remotely piloted aircraft, by their design do not

have fully functional dual controls. Flight control is accomplished through the use of a control

box that communicates with the aircraft via radio communications. The FAA has approved

exemptions for flight training without fully functional dual controls for a number of aircraft and

for flight

instruction in experimental aircraft. See Exemption Nos.5778K & 9862A. The equivalent level of

safety provided by the fact that neither a pilot nor passengers will be carried in the aircraft and by

the size and

Joseph D. Renda, Commercial, Multi­Engine, Instrument Rated Pilot,

Florida Licensed Realtor #SL3270953
Section 333 Exemption Petition

Re: Exemption ​R​equest ​Pursuant To ​Section 333 of the ​FAA ​Ref​o​rm ​Act ​of 2012

speed of the aircraft. Enhancing this safety is the technology inherent in the remote controls

utilizing digital communications which is paired to the sUAS making it nearly impossible to

unintentionally or intentionally have the control communications interrupted.

14 C.F.R. §91.119: Minimum safe altitudes §91.119 establishes safe altitudes for operation of

civil aircraft. §91.119 (d) allows helicopters to be operated at less than the minimums prescribed,

provided the person operating the helicopter complies with any route or altitudes prescribed for

helicopters by the FAA. As this exemption is for a sUAS that closely mimics the behavior of a

helicopter, and the exemption requests authority to operate at altitudes up to 400 AGL, an

exemption may be needed to allow such operations. As set forth herein, the UAS will never

operate at higher than 400 AGL or beyond unaided visual line of sight, whichever is closer. It

will however be operated in a restricted area with security officials tasked with ensuring public

safety, and where buildings and people will not be exposed to operations without their

pre­obtained consent and training.

The equivalent level of safety will be achieved given the size, weight, speed of the UAS as well

as the location where it is operated. No flight operation will be taken without the permission of

the property owner in the case of private property or local officials In the case of public property

or private property with public interests. Because of the advance notice to the property owner and

participants in the remote sensing activity, all affected individuals will be aware of the planned

flight operations. Compared to flight operations with aircraft or rotorcraft weighting far more

than the maximum 11kg of Joseph D. Renda sUASs proposed herein and the lack of flammable

fuel, any risk associated with these operations is far less than those presently presented with

conventional aircraft operating at or below 500 AGL. In addition, the low­altitude operations of

the sUAS will ensure separation between these small­ UAS operations and the operations of

conventional aircraft that must comply with §91.119.

14 C.F.R. §91. 121 Altimeter Settings §91.121 requires each person operating an aircraft to

maintain cruising altitude by reference to an altimeter that is set "...to the elevation of the

departure airport or an appropriate altimeter setting available before departure." As the sUAS

may not have a barometric altimeter, but instead a GPS altitude read out. An equivalent level of

safety will be achieved by the operator, confirming the altitude of the launch site shown on the

GPS altitude indicator before flight. The operator will also ensure effective pairing with multiple

GPS sources to guarantee accurate detection of height.

14 C.F.R. §9 1.15l (a): Fuel Requirements for Flight in VFR Conditions §91.151 (a) prohibits an

individual from beginning "a flight in an airplane 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 (1) During the day, to fly after that for at least 30

minutes; or (2) At night, to fly after that for at least 45 minutes:' The battery powering the sUAS

provides approximately

15 minutes of powered flight in hover mode without payload. Joseph D. Renda sUAS will not be

able to meet the 30 minute reserve requirement in 14 CPR §91.151. Operating the small UAS, in

a tightly controlled area where only people and property owners or official representatives who
have signed waivers will be allowed, with less than 30 minutes of reserve power, does not

engender the type of risks that Section 9l.l51(a) was intended to alleviate given the size and

speed of the small UAS. Joseph D. Renda believes that an equivalent level of safety can be

achieved by limiting flights to » 10 minutes or less that 50% of battery power whichever

happens first. This restriction would be more than adequate to return the sUAS to it’s planned

landing zone from anywhere in its limited operating area. Similar exemptions have been granted

to other operations, including Exemptions 2689F, 5745, 10673, and 10808

Joseph D. Renda, Commercial, Multi­Engine, Instrument Rated Pilot,Florida Licensed

Realtor # SL3270953

Section 333 Exemption Petition

Re: Exemption Request Pursuant To Section 333 of the FAA Reform Act of 2012

14 C.P.R. §91.203 (a) & (b): Carrying Civil Aircraft Certification and Registration The

regulation provides in pertinent part:

(a) Except as provided in §91.715, no person may operate a civil aircraft unless it

has within it the following: (1) An appropriate and current airworthiness certificate...

(b) No person may operate a civil aircraft unless the airworthiness certificate

required by paragraph (a) of this section or a special flight authorization issued under

§91.715 is displayed at the cabin or cockpit entrance so that it is legible to passengers or

crew.

The sUAS fully loaded weighs no more than llkg and is operated without an onboard pilot. As

such, there is no ability or place to carry certification and registration documents or to display

them on the sUAS. An equivalent level of safety will be achieved by keeping these documents at

the ground control point where the pilot flying the sUAS will have immediate access to them, to

the extent they are applicable to the sUAS. The FAA has issued numerous exemptions to this

regulation. A representative sample of other exceptions includes Exemption Nos.

9565,9665,9789, 9789A, 9797, 9797A, 9816A, and 10700.

14 C.P.R. §91.405 (a); 407 (a) (1); 409 (a) (2); 417(a) & (b): Maintenance Inspections These

regulations require that an aircraft operator or owner "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...;' and others shall inspect or maintain the aircraft in compliance with Part 43. Given that

these section and Part 43 apply only to aircraft with an airworthiness certificate, these sections

will not apply to the applicant. Maintenance will be accomplished by the operator pursuant to the

flight manual. An equivalent level of safety will be achieved because these small UASs are very

limited in size and will carry a small payload and operate only in restricted areas for limited

periods of time. If mechanical issues arise the UAS can land immediately and will be operating

from no higher than 400 feet AGL. The operator will ensure that the UAS is in working order

prior to initiating flight, perform required maintenance, and keep a log of any maintenance

performed. Moreover, the operator is the person most familiar with the aircraft and best suited to

maintain the aircraft in an airworthy condition to provide the equivalent level of safety.

An exemption granted to Joseph D. Renda would permit its operation of lightweight, unmanned,
remotely controlled, sUASs in a tightly controlled environment with limited airspace. Joseph D.

Renda utilizes local business' safety officers in specifically determined areas (designed flight

zone) to mitigate injury and property damage while fulfilling clients' goals. Technical

enhancements to current safety controls will allow Joseph D. Renda to operate exceeding current

safety specifications, and stay ahead of, or meet, new ones being implemented by the FAA and

Department of Transportation. Further, Joseph D. Renda conducts its operations in compliance

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

II. Commercial and Public Benefits;

I Joseph D. Renda believe that granting this exemption request furthers the public

interest by providing safe (by way of an unmanned system) and efficient means to

Joseph D. Renda’s client base are typically small to medium sized business' looking to

increase their awareness of respective properties. Aerial videography and photography

for real estate marketing has been around for a long time through manned fixed wing

aircraft and helicopters, but for small business owners and homeowners its expense has

been cost­prohibitive. Granting this exemption to the petitioner would allow him to

provide this service at a much lower cost. Further, the petitioner indicates his small

UAS will pose no threat to the public given its small size and lack of combustible fuel

when compared to larger manned aircraft. The petitioner also states that the operation

of his UAS will minimize ecological damage and promote economic growth by

providing information to small businesses and individuals looking to relocate or build

in the Ocala Florida area.

Joseph D. Renda, Commercial, Multi­Engine, Instrument Rated Pilot, Florida Licensed realtor

# SL3270953

Section 333 Exemption Petition

Re: Exemption Request Pursuant To Section 333 of the FAA Reform Act of 2012

By photographic or videography. By moving these functions onto sUAS based aircraft, the

potential for loss of life or property is diminished due to the greater control in a smaller and safer

aircraft that holds no persons. Second, there are no reactive or combustible materials on board

the sUAS and thus the potential for fire or explosions is greatly diminished. Third, the small size

and extreme maneuverability of Joseph D. Renda’s UASs allow the PIC to avoid hazards.

Accordingly, Joseph D. Renda UASs have operated and will continue to operate at and above

current safety levels.

A. The costs and benefits of your proposed action to society in general and specific groups

within society

As described above, Joseph D. Renda past customers have been small to medium business

seeking 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 non­luxury homeowners and lower budget Realtors from a

valuable marketing tool. Manned aircraft pose a threat to the public through potential

catastrophic rash that the various communities have experienced in the past with military

aircraft and medical helicopter crashes within a even cities. Each resulting in loss of life, each

with combustible fuel that exploded and burned on impact.

My, Joseph D. Renda's, UAS pose no such 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, Joseph D. Renda’s, exemption request furthers the public interest

through academic/visual awareness of the geographical benefits in and around the NW

Florida area. My ultra light weight UAS is battery powered and creates no emissions that can

harm the environment. The consequence of my ultra light weight 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.

Utilizing sUASs minimizes the requirement for conventional aircraft. This eliminates the need

for an onboard pilot, time consuming adherence to regulations surrounding bookkeeping and

submission of flight paths to local civilian or military airports, and detrimental effects to the

environment caused by operating a combustible fuel based, large scale aircraft, with restrictions

on the proximity to the target for remote sensing.

Flight Capabilities and Characteristics of Joseph D. Renda UASs Pursuant to 112 P.L. 95

§333 (a), concerns for public safety are mitigated by the overall capabilities and

characteristics of the sUAS. Joseph D. Renda UASs utilizes four (4) rotating 9 inch plastic

propellers paired oppositely to each other for balance,control and stability. The total span of the

sUAS is less than ""'1.2m allowing for stable flight or landing even with the sudden onset of

detrimental environmental conditions. The sUAS's have a maximal unit+ payload mass of 11kg,

including cinematic/photographic or other surveying equipment. Joseph D. Renda sUAS is

designed to primarily hover in place to capture photographic data and then operate at less than a

35 knot maximum speed to the next point of interest. They are capable of vertical and horizontal

operations but, in practice, is operated only within VLOS by the PIC. In ​addition ​the ​PIC,

Joseph D. Renda​is a licensed commercial multi engine instrument rated pilot with a current

medical and with current flight hours having an impeccable safety record.

Joseph D. Renda, Commercial, Multi­Engine, Instrument Rated Pilot, Florida Licensed

Realtor # SL3270953

Section 333 Exemption Petition

Re: Exemption Request Pursuant To Section 333 of the FAA Reform Act of 2012

off and otherwise minimize pedestrian access in the flight zone of the client's grounds. In the

event of loss of visual of the UAS, the PIC can change flight controls from cartesian (X,Y,Z)

based controls to radial (r,a ,h) based controls which allows the PIC to utilize one controller axis
to recall the UAS to the PIC's position without concern to the current heading of the sUAS. In the

event of loss of sight of the sUAS into an area containing hazards or possible hazards, the spotter

has a heads­up­display containing a live video feed which can be used to locate the UAS while it

maintains it's position in hover mode. The sUAS has demonstrated

it's ability to maintain it's position by GPS coordinates in hover mode in 25 kts or greater wind

gusts at rvr less than 25 feet representing an extreme environmental condition beyond the range

of conditions within the scope for sUAS operation.

All of Joseph D. Renda sUASs utilize LiPo (lithium polymer) battery based power sources,

decreasing safety risks from more easily combustible, fuel based, power sources. Flight times

generally last between eight (8) to ten (10) minutes allowing the staff to work with small flight

areas per phase. The maximum flight time without payload is 25 minutes, however practical safe

operation limits this to 10 to give ample time to control the sUAS to a safe landing zone. Joseph

D. Renda further restricts flight time by not operating its sUASs with less than twenty five

percent battery capacity. Further safety management systems in place include a GPS mode that

allows Joseph D. Renda’s sUAS to hover in place if communication with the PIC is lost and

optionally follow a set of waypoints at a set speed and height to a 'home base' pre­designated safe

landing zone. In the event of UNforeseen motor(s) failure, the system will enter into a controlled

descent while allowing full use of all UAS flight controls by the PIC. All commands sent via

remote controller received during a controlled descent are

translated to an 'as meant' paradigm meaning the flight control package will use it's real time 3

dimensional position and compensate rotors control the sUAS regardless of spin velocity.

This assures that if one system is compensated a safe and successful landing can still occur.

IV. Reasons Why an Exemption to Joseph D. Renda Will Not Adversely Affect Safety

Standards

Joseph D. Renda contends that operation of it's sUASs will not "create a hazard to users of the

national airspace system or the public:' as stated in 112 P.L. 95 §333 (b). Given the diminutive

size and weight of Joseph D. Renda sUASs, combined with their operation in cordoned off and

well­controlled areas, Joseph D. Renda sUASs falls within Congress's contemplated safety zone.

Joseph D. Rendas UASs have an established safety record bolstered by multi­point preflight

checklist, awareness of their surroundings and intimate knowledge of the behavior of the sUAS

platform in many weather conditions. This safety record and implemented operational practices

demonstrate an awareness of public safety. Joseph D. Renda’s operations routinely provide a

level of safety at least equal to existing rules, and in nearly every instance, exceeds existing rules.

Joseph D. Renda has worked very closely with the regional vendors and support for this unit to

create a tightly integrated and highly tolerant platform that has been tested thoroughly by a

vendor with a proven record for safety and solid designs.

Joseph D. Renda also continues to work closely with organization to identify and mitigate sUAS

platform risk due to their expertise in several industries closely related to the aviation and

transportation. Joseph D. Renda does not operate its UASs on or near airports and generally has

only operated its fleet on private grounds with cordoned off areas or areas under the control of

the property owner I client with assistance by safety officials. Joseph D. Renda determines the

areas needed to fulfill the clients' goals and only operates its UASs in these flight zones and only
in compliance with well regarded safety protocols set forth initially by the RC UAS trade and

hobby groups and recently codified by relevant FARs.

Joseph D. Renda, Commercial, Multi­Engine, Instrument Rated Pilot, Florida Licensed

Realtor # SL3270953

Section 333 Exemption Petition

Re: Exemption Request Pursuant To Section 333 of the FAA Reform Act of 2012 Joseph D.

Renda standardized on the following practices to ensure safe operation of it's UASs:

• Work with on­site personnel to plan the flight goals, • Work with on­site personnel to restrict

access to non­essential persons, • Operation by unaided VLOS operation only,

● Operation in phases 10 minutes in length

● Operation to minimal 25% battery power

● Operation of device to GPS aided readout to 300 ft at maximum, Numerous

pre­programmed fail­safes that ensure specific behavior per issue

● Preform a site check day(s) before flight to identify potential issues, Subscribe to relevant

local weather and safety alerts,

● Expertly choose data collection instruments and accessories to minimize flight

requirements or expertise,

● Joseph D. Renda has experience in similar fields and has adapted this experience in it's

use of UASs to increase safety. In combination to the ever expanding knowledge

repositories from hobbyists and experts alike, Joseph D. Renda is constantly evolving it's

practices when there is a clear benefit to operations or increased safety element.

A. Summary

Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. Part 11, the following summary is provided for publication in the Federal

Register, should it be determined that publication is needed:

Joseph D. Renda{applicant) seeks an exemption from the following rules: 14 C.P.R. §21, subpart

H; 14 C.F.R 45.23(b); 14 C.P.R. §§61.113( a) & (b); 91.7 (a); 91.9 (b) (2); 91.103{b); 91.109;

91.119; 91.121; 91.151(a); 91.203(a) & (b); 91.405 (a); 91.407 (a) (1); 91.409 (a) (2); 91.409 (a)

{2) and 91.417 (a) & (b) to operate commercially a small unmanned vehicle (11 kg or less) in

elevated photographic and remote sensing operations.

Approval of exemptions allowing commercial operations of sUASs in the the media industry will

enhance safety by reducing risk associated with conventional aircraft operations and other means

of elevated remote sensing involving persons. The public benefit served by approval of this

petition is increased awareness of characteristics of difficult imaging targets. A sUAS weighing

fewer than 11 kg and powered by sealed batteries eliminates virtually all associated risk inherent

in operating conventional aircraft in close proximity to buildings or persons or otherwise

elevating persons to a position they would be able to collect needed data.

The operation of small UASs, weighing less than 55 lbs., conducted in the strict conditions

outlined above, will provide an equivalent level of safety supporting the grant of the exemptions

requested herein, including exempting the applicant from the requirements of Part 21 and

allowing commercial operations.
Joseph D. Renda Commercial Multi­engine instrument Rated pilot ​certificate # 3618085

9971 S.W. 182nd Circle Dunnellon Florida 34432

PIC VLOS Best,

Re: Exemption ​Request ​Pursuant To Section 333 of the FAA ​Reform Act ​of 2012

As identified and described herein, Joseph D. Renda is an experienced licensed commercial

multi engine instrument rated pilot certificate # 3618085 for over 20 years living in Florida;

Also experienced in flying Unmanned Aircraft Systems(U.A.S) for recreational purposes.

Recognized by the community as a top professional realtor experienced in the various

photographic industries. Mr. Renda has been producing and delivering media and technical

solutions for videography and photography for the Aviation and real estate service industry for

over 20 years with a spotless safety record.

The FAA has been given the authority to issue the exemption to Joseph D. Renda pursuant to the

Federal Aviation Act, 85 P.L. 726 (1958), and as such, we humbly seek your consideration and

approval of this petition.

encl: Supplement A: Physical characteristics of UAS encl: Supplement B: Flight Operation and

Procedures Manual (FOPM) related to operation encl: Supplement C: Flight maps in Joseph D.

Renda’s regional base.

VI.

Supplement B :Summary Sections of Flight Operations and Procedure Manual (FOPM) • All

regular and irregular operations are noted with timestamps, relevant UAS metrics and corrective

action procedures (CAP) that are performed. ­ Note: All irregular behavior have root cause

analysis performed before UAS operation is resumed.

Emergency ​Pr​oce​du​r​es ​• Loss of Remote Signal

­ The flight package features an optional enhanced fail­safe which returns the

UAS to the home base waypoint via the same path taken to point of lost signal.

­ The UAS will then perform a hover over this waypoint and then a controlled

landing. • Loss of GPS signal

­ The system will operate in GPS assisted mode with three (3) satellites. ­ At loss of three (3)

GPS satellites, manual mode can be activated or the flight package can be

programmed to perform a controlled landing to the home base waypoint. ­ Ground based height

ranging is performed by a separate system and so loss of GPS will not impact

controlled landing in a safe manner. • Loss of Engine Power

­ In the event of one (1) (or to two oppositely positioned) rotor or motor failure the

system will enter into controlled spin where all controls are translated based on current

orientation and will behave as normal operation to the PIC to ensure a safe landing,

­ In the event of multiple rotor or motor failures the flight package can be

configured to perform a safe landing or attempt operation to home base waypoint. ­ Note

: Behavior of the landing location is highly dependent on the position and number of
rotors/motors that are affected.

• Loss of Ground Control Software ­ This will not affect operation of the flight. The unit will be

piloted to a safe landing area and then landed so that examination of the link can be made.

DJI Phantom Info

http://www.dji.com/product/phantom­2­vision­plus/spec

Phantom 2 Vision+ User Manual (EN) v1.8

Phantom 2 Vision+ Pilot Training Guide (EN) v1.1

Smart Flight Battery Safety Guidelines (EN, FR, DE and JP)

Phantom 2 Vision+ Quick Start Guide (EN)

http://download.dji-innovations.com/downloads/nazam-v2/en/NAZA-M_Quick_Start_Guide_v1.26_

en.pdf