UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

WASHINGTON, DC

Regulatory Docket No. 

IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION FOR EXEMPTION OF: 

David Michael Robinson

FOR AN EXEMPTION SEEKING RELIEF FROM THE REQUIREMENTS OF

TITLE 14 OF THE CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS

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) CONCERNING COMMERCIAL OPERATION 

OF A DJI Phantom 2 Vision+

UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS. 

PURSUANT TO SECTION 333 OF

THEFAAMODERNIZATIONANDREFORMACTOF2012

(PUBLICLAW112-95)

Submitted on October 16, 2015

David Michael Robinson

8086 Summer Bay Ct.

Jacksonville Fl. 32256

904-708-3168

Organicsplus1@gmail.com
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

GLOSSARY OF ABBREVIATIONS....................................................................................................................3

SUMMARY.............................................................................................................................4

INTRODUCTION AND INTERESTS OF PETITIONER...................................................................4

BACKGROUND.........................................................................................................................4

BASIS FOR PETITION.................................................................................................................5

NAME AND ADDRESS OF PETITIONER......................................................................................7

THE SPECIFIC SECTIONS OF 14 C.F.R. FROM WHICH DAVID M. ROBINSON SEEKS 

EXEMPTION..........................................................................................8

THE EXTENT OF RELIEF DAVID M. ROBINSON SEEKS AND THE REASON DAVID 

M. ROBINSON SEEKS THE RELIEF.............................................................11

THE REASONS WHY GRANTING DAVID M. ROBINSON REQUEST WOULD BE IN THE

PUBLIC INTEREST...............................................................................................15

THE REASONS WHY GRANTING THE EXEMPTION WOULD NOT ADVERSELY

AFFECT SAFETY......................................................................................................19

SUMMARY THAT CAN BE PUBLISHED IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER............32

ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, VIEWS, OR ARGUMENTS AVAILABLE TO 

SUPPORT DAVID MICHAEL ROBINSON 

REQUEST..............................................32CONCLUSION.....................................................

...................................................................33

Attachments explanation................................................................................................................34
GLOSSARYOFABBREVIATIONS

AGL Above Ground Level

AOI Area of Interest

ATC Air Traffic Control

ATO Air Traffic Organization

AV Aerial Vehicle

CFR Code of Federal Regulations

COA Certificate of Authorization

FAA Federal Aviation Administration

FAR Federal Aviation Regulation

GCS Ground Control Station 

GPS Global Positioning System 

LOL Loss of Link

NAS National Airspace System

NOTAM Notice to Airman

PIC Pilot In Command

Section 333 FAA Mod and Reform Act of 2012 (FMRA) Section 333

SO Safety Observer

SOP Standard Operating Procedures

UAV Unmanned Aircraft Vehicle 

UAS Unmanned Aircraft System 

VFR Visual Flight Rules

VLOS Visual Line of Site

VMC Visual Meteorological Conditions

VTOL Vertical Takeoff and Landing

SUMMARY

DAVID M. ROBINSON seeks 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 an Unmanned Aircraft System pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA 

Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (FMRA). This exemption will permit DAVID M. 

ROBINSON to operate an Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) for the commercial purpose of

conducting aerial video and photography of construction sites, real estate, and landscape 

over certain areas of the United States.
INTRODUCTION AND INTERESTS OF THE PETITIONER

DAVID M. ROBINSON provides his clients with expertise and knowledge in advanced 

aerial technologies. DAVID M. ROBINSON has 85 hours flying experience. He has over 2

years of recreational/hobby experience and aerial video and photography. In addition to 

his experience with UAS DAVID M. ROBINSON is also a licensed landscape contractor in 

the state of Florida. The objective of DAVID M. ROBINSON and his aerial operations is to 

provide high quality imaging for a variety of commercial, public, and residential uses, 

specifically targeting:

• Real-estate marketing

• Construction sites before and after

• Appraisals

• Motion Picture Filming

• Aerial acquisitions for inspections of public and private structures.

• Building Inspection operations

BACKGROUND

UnmannedAircraftSystems:DJI Phantom 2 Vision+

DAVID M. ROBINSON seeks an exemption to operate DJI systems for compensation or 

hire within the NAS. The DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ are vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL)

Unmanned Aircraft (UA) with a Ground Control Station (GCS) utilizing electronic tablet or 

smart phone systems.

The DJI Phantom2 has a maximum gross weight of approximately 7 pounds, with a length 

of 17 inches and a width of 18 inches and a height of 10 inches and a maximum speed of 

approximately 30 knots.

The DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ are equipped with four main rotors; driven by Lithium

Polymer battery powered electric motors.

The DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ will be operated by DAVID M. ROBINSON and 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.
BASISFORPETITION

Petitioner, DAVID M. ROBINSON , pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Aviation

Regulations (14 C.F.R. § 11.61) and the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012

(FMRA), Section 333, Special Rules for Certain Unmanned Aircraft Systems, hereby petitions 

the Administrator to commercially operate the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UASs in the 

National Airspace System (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).

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

unmanned aircraft and its operation, DAVID M. ROBINSON operation DJI Phantom 2 

Vision+ UASs meets the conditions of FMRA Section 333 and therefore, will not require an 

airworthiness certificate in accordance with 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H.

Accordingly, DAVID M. ROBINSON 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 with an airworthiness certificate.

DAVID M. ROBINSON submits that the requested relief is proper since an equivalent level

of safety will be ensured. DAVID M. ROBINSON will use experienced personnel or 

technicians to perform maintenance, alterations, or preventive maintenance on the UASs 

using the methods, techniques, and practices prescribed in the operating documents (i.e., 

Monthly Maintenance Log, and DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UASs Instruction Manual). 

Furthermore, DAVID M. ROBINSON will document and maintain all maintenance records 

for the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UASs.

Relief from certain requirements of Section 61.113(a) and (b), entitled Private pilot 

privileges and limitations: Pilot in command, is requested by DAVID M. ROBINSON to the

extent necessary to allow a Pilot in Command (PIC) with significant experience in the field 

of UAV’s and who has demonstrated, by meeting minimum flight- hour and currency 

requirements, that the PIC is able to safely operate the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UASs in a

manner consistent with this exemption, including evasive and emergency maneuvers and 

maintaining appropriate distances from people, vessels, vehicles and structures.

DAVID M. ROBINSON seeks relief from Section 91.7(a), entitled Civil aircraft 

airworthiness, because the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UASs do not require an 

airworthiness certificate in accordance with 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H. As such, 

DAVID M. ROBINSON submits that he will ensure the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UASs are 

in an airworthy condition, prior to every flight, by determining that the UASs are in 

compliance with the operating documents (i.e., Monthly Maintenance Log, and DJI 

Phantom 2 Vision+ UASs Instruction Manual), and that the aircraft are in a condition 

for safe flight.
DAVID M. ROBINSON also seeks an exemption from the requirements of Section 91.121, 

entitled Altimeter Settings, as the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UAS will not have a typical

barometric altimeter onboard. However, altitude information of the DJI Phantom 2 

Vision+ UASs will be provided to the PIC via Global Positioning System (GPS) equipment

and radio communications telemetry data link, which downlinks from the UA to the GCS 

for active monitoring of the flight path. This altitude information, combined with David M. 

Robinson’s operation of the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UASs within visual line of sight, at or 

below 400 feet AGL, will ensure a level of safety equivalent to Section 91.121.

Additionally, DAVID M. ROBINSON seeks an exemption from the requirements of Section

91.151(b), entitled Fuel requirements for flight in VFR conditions. DAVID M. ROBINSON

submits that safety will not be affected by operation of the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UASs 

during daylight hours in visual meteorological conditions (VMC) under visual flight rules 

(VFR), with enough battery power to fly for a total duration of approximately 15 minutes to 

the first point of intended landing and, assuming normal cruising speed, to fly after that for 

at least 5minutes.

In accordance with 14 C.F.R. § 11.81, DAVID M. ROBINSON provides the following 

information in support of its petition for exemption:

A. Name and Address of the Petitioner.

The name and address of the Petitioner and point of contact is:

David M. Robinson 

 8086 Summer Bay Ct.

Jacksonville Fl. 32256

Organicsplus1@gmail.com

904-708-3168

B. The Specific Sections of 14 C.F.R. From Which DAVID M. ROBINSON Seeks

Exemption.

1. DAVID M. ROBINSON 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) prescribe the following, in relevant part:

(a) 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.

2. DAVID M. ROBINSON 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.

3. DAVID M. ROBINSON Seeks Exemption From The Requirements Of

Section 91.121.

Section 91.121, entitled Altimeter settings, subsection (a), states the following, 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.

4. DAVID M. ROBINSON Seeks Exemption From The Requirements Of

Section 91.151(b).

Section 91.151, entitled Fuel requirements for flight in VFR conditions, subsection

(b), states the following:

(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.
5. DAVID M. ROBINSON Seeks Exemption From The Requirement Of

Section 91.405(a).

Section 91.405, entitled Maintenance required, 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[.]

6. DAVID M. ROBINSON Seeks Exemption from the Requirements of

Section 91.407(a)(1)

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.

7. DAVID M. ROBINSON Seeks Exemption from the Requirements of

Sections 91.409(a)(1) and 91.409(a)(2).

Section 91.409, entitled Inspections, subsection (a), states the following:

(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 --

(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.

8. DAVID M. ROBINSON Seeks Exemption from the Requirements of

Sections 91.417(a) and 91.417(b).

Section 91.417, entitled Maintenance records, subsections (a) and (b), state 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.
(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.

C. The Extent Of Relief DAVID M. ROBINSON Seeks And The Reason DAVID M. 

ROBINSON Seeks The Relief.

1. Extent Of Relief DAVID M. ROBINSON Seeks And The Reason

DAVID M. ROBINSON Seeks Relief From Section 61.113(a) And (b).

Relief from Section 61.113(a) and (b) entitled Private pilot privileges and limitations: Pilot in 

command, is requested to the extent necessary to allow a PIC holding a private pilot or 

higher level certificate, as well as a current and valid airman medical certificate, and who 

has met certain flight-hour and currency requirements, to conduct the proposed UAS

flight operations for compensation or hire.

This relief is requested since 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 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.

As set forth more fully below, DAVID M. ROBINSON submits that an equivalent level of 

safety will be maintained because no PIC will be allowed to operate the DJI Phantom 2 

Vision+ UAS unless that PIC has met certain flight-hour and currency requirements, 

demonstrating that the PIC is able to safely operate either the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+

UAS in a manner consistent with the operations specifications as described in this 

exemption, including evasive and emergency maneuvers, as well as maintaining 

appropriate distances from people, vessels, vehicles and structures.

Further, DAVID M. ROBINSON submits that all flights of DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UASs, 

conducted by the PIC pursuant to the grant of this Petition: (1) will be incidental to DAVID 

M. ROBINSON business; and (2) will not carry passengers or property for compensation or 

hire.
2. Extent Of Relief DAVID M. ROBINSON Seeks And The Reason

DAVID M. ROBINSON Seeks Relief From Section 91.7(a).

Relief from Section 91.7(a) entitled Civil aircraft airworthiness, is requested to the extent 

required to allow DAVID M. ROBINSON to determine that the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+

UASs are in airworthy condition prior to every flight by ensuring that the UAS is in 

compliance with the operating documents (i.e., the DAVID M. ROBINSON Aerial 

Operations Manual, Monthly Maintenance Log, and DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UASs 

Instruction Manual).

DAVID M. ROBINSON seeks the requested relief because the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UASs 

do not require an airworthiness certificate in accordance with 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H. 

Therefore, DAVID M. ROBINSON will ensure that the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UASs are in 

airworthy condition based upon its compliance with the operating documents (i.e., 

Monthly Maintenance Log, and DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UASs Instruction Manual) prior to 

every flight, and further, determine that the aircraft are in condition for safe flight, as 

stated in the conditions and limitations below.

3. Extent Of Relief DAVID M. ROBINSON Seeks And The Reason

DAVID M. ROBINSON Seeks Relief From Section 91.121.

Relief from Section 91.121, entitled Altimeter settings, may be required to allow flight 

operations of the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UASs, which utilize a barometric pressure sensor, 

GPS equipment, and a radio communications telemetry data link to downlink altitude 

information from the UA to the PIC at the ground control station (GCS). Since the FAA 

requires that any altitude information concerning UAS operations be reported to air traffic

control (ATC) in feet above ground level (AGL), DAVID M. ROBINSON seeks the requested 

relief because the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UASs altimeter may be set on the ground to 

zero feet AGL, rather than the local barometric pressure or field altitude, before each 

flight.

Considering the limited altitude of the proposed operations, relief from 14 CFR 91.121 is 

sought to the extent necessary to comply with the applicable conditions and limitations 

stated below. As more fully set forth herein, an equivalent level of safety will be 

maintained since the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UASs are equipped with a barometric

pressure sensor and GPS equipment, which automatically ensures that a ground level

pressure setting will be established prior to each flight, and provides the PIC with 

altitude information of the UA on the heads-up display of the GCS.
4. Extent Of Relief DAVID M. ROBINSON Seeks And The Reason

DAVID M. ROBINSON Seeks Relief From Section 91.151(b).

Relief from Section 91.151(b) entitled Fuel requirements for flight in VFR conditions, is 

requested to the extent required to allow flights of the battery powered DJI Phantom 2 

Vision+ UASs during daylight hours in visual meteorological conditions (VMC), under visual

flight rules (VFR), for a total duration of 15 minutes to the first point of intended landing 

and, assuming normal cruising speed, to fly after that for at least 5 minutes. DAVID M. 

ROBINSON seeks the requested relief because without an exemption from Section 

91.151(b), the flight time duration of the battery powered DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UASs will

severely constrain the practicality of any aerial video or still photo flight operations that

DAVID M. ROBINSON proposes to conduct pursuant to this Petition.

Significantly, as set forth below, the technical specifications of the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+

UASs operating documents, and DAVID M. ROBINSON proposed operating limitations, 

ensure that DAVID M. ROBINSON will safely operate the battery powered DJI Phantom 2 

Vision+ UASs during daylight hours in visual meteorological conditions (VMC), under

visual flight rules (VFR), with enough battery power to fly for a total duration of 15 minutes 

to the first point of intended landing and, assuming normal cruising speed, to fly after that 

for at least 5 minutes.

5. Extent Of Relief DAVID M. ROBINSON Seeks And The Reason

DAVID M. ROBINSON Seeks Relief From Sections 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1),

91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), And 91.417(a) & (b).

Since Sections 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), and 91.417(a) & (b) only apply 

to aircraft with an airworthiness certificate, DAVID M. ROBINSON requests relief from 

these Sections because the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UASs do not require airworthiness 

certificates. As set forth more fully below, DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UASs meet the 

conditions of FMRA Section 333 for operation without an airworthiness certificate. 

Accordingly, DAVID M. ROBINSON will use trained technicians to perform maintenance, 

alterations, or preventive maintenance on the UASs using the methods, techniques, and 

practices prescribed in the UAS operating documents (i.e., the David M. Robinson Aerial

Operations Manual, Monthly Maintenance Log, and DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UASs 

Instruction Manual). Furthermore, DAVID M. ROBINSON will document and maintain all

maintenance records for the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UASs.
D. The Reasons Why Granting DAVID M. ROBINSON Request Would Be In The

Public Interest; That Is, How It Would Benefit The Public As A Whole.

Granting the present Petition will further the public interest by allowing DAVID M. 

ROBINSON to safely, efficiently, and economically perform aerial video and photography

of construction sites, real estate, and landscape over certain areas of the United States.

Additionally, use of the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UASs will decrease congestion of the NAS, 

reduce pollution, and provide significant benefits to the economy. Notably, the benefits 

of DAVID M. ROBINSON proposed operation of the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UASs will be 

realized without implicating any privacy issues.

1. The Public Will Benefit From Decreased Congestion Of The NAS.

DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UASs are battery powered and serve as a safe, efficient, and 

economical alternative to the manned aircraft traditionally utilized to obtain aerial 

imagery. By reducing the amount of manned aircraft needed to perform aerial 

acquisitions, an exemption allowing the use of a DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UASs would 

reduce the amount of manned aircraft in the NAS, reduce noise and air pollution, as

well as increase the safety of life and property in the air and on the ground.

Furthermore, by reducing the number of manned aircraft operating in the NAS, 

congestion around airports caused by arriving and departing aircraft will be reduced. The 

DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UASs do not require an airport to takeoff or land. Likewise, a

reduction of manned aircraft conducting aerial video and photography missions would 

result in fewer aircraft that must be handled by air traffic control during the ground, 

takeoff, departure, arrival, and landing phases of flight operations.

2. The Public Will Benefit From The Safety And Efficiency Of The DJI 

Phantom 2 Vision+ UASs

Conducting aerial acquisitions with the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UASs, instead of manned 

aircraft, will greatly benefit the public by drastically reducing the levels of air and noise 

pollution generated during traditional aerial video and still photography flight operations.

By using battery power and electric motors, the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UAS produce no 

air pollution, and is the most viable environmentally conscious alternative to the cabin 

class, six cylinder internal combustion engine aircraft that are typically utilized for aerial

video and photography, while burning approximately 20-30 gallons per hour of leaded 

aviation fuel. The DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UAS, while reducing the carbon footprint of 

aerial acquisitions, also eliminates noise pollution, as the UAs are propelled by battery

powered electric motors, rather than an internal combustion engine.
By using the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UAS to perform aerial acquisitions, the substantial risk

to life and property in the air and on the ground, which is usually associated with 

traditional manned aircraft flight operations, will be substantially reduced or completely

eliminated. Aside from the lack of flight crew members located onboard the aircraft, the 

DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UASs(weighing approximately 6 pounds 7.5 ounces and 2 pounds 

11 ounces respectively, at their maximum gross weights with lengths of 16 inches and 17.3

inches respectively, widths of 16 inches and 17.7 inches respectively, and with no fuel on 

board), has less physical potential for collateral damage to life and property on the ground, 

and in the air, compared to the manned aircraft that typically conduct similar operations

(weighing approximately 6,000 pounds with a wingspan of approximately 42 feet, a length 

of 34 feet, and a fuel capacity of 180 gallons).

3. Performing Aerial Video and Photography Operations With The DJI 

Phantom 2 Vision+ UAS will Benefit The Economy.

In addition to being safe and efficient, the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UASs are also an 

economical alternative to using manned aircraft to conduct similar aerial operations. As 

such, operation of the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UAS will allow United States based 

companies, like DAVID M. ROBINSON, to remain competitive and contribute to growth of 

the U.S. economy. Specifically, with the rising cost of aviation fuel and the Environmental

Protection Agency (“EPA”) regulatory actions phasing out leaded aviation fuels, U.S. owned 

and operated companies must adopt new and alternative technology in order to remain 

competitive. Operating the battery powered DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UAS is one such 

technology that not only allows companies greater operational flexibility compared to 

manned aircraft, but provides such flexibility without the high operational cost of a

traditional manned aircraft.

By operating the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UASs, companies such as DAVID M. ROBINSON

can remain competitive and profitable, and therefore, provide greater job stability to 

employees and contractors, which will ultimately contribute to growth of the U.S. 

economy. Improved financial performance of U.S. companies, through commercial use of 

the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UAS, provides a stable workforce that increases consumer 

spending; improves local, state, and federal tax revenues; and allows companies to invest 

in research and development in order to remain competitive both in the United States 

and abroad.

4. There Are No Privacy Issues.

Similar to the manned aerial acquisition flight operations that have been conducted for 

decades, DAVID M. ROBINSON proposed operation of the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UASs 

will not implicate any privacy issues. Specifically, the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UAS will be 

operated only in compliance with operating documents (i.e., the DAVID M. ROBINSON
Aerial Operations Manual, Monthly Maintenance Log, and Instruction Manual) which 

requires property owner involvement as well as local law enforcement notification, and in 

accordance with the Federal Aviation Regulations, including the minimum altitude 

requirements of 14 C.F.R. § 91.119.

E. The Reasons Why Granting The Exemption Would Not Adversely Affect Safety, 

Or How The Exemption Would Provide A Level Of Safety At Least Equal To That 

Provided By The Rule From Which DAVID M. ROBINSON Seeks Exemption.

1. Reasons Why The DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UAS Meet The Conditions

Of The FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (FMRA) Section

333.

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

unmanned aircraft and its operation, DAVID M. ROBINSON operation of the DJI Phantom 

2 Vision+ UAS meet 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 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

operatesafely in the national airspace system before completion of the plan and 

rulemaking 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--

(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, DAVID M. ROBINSON submits that the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+

UAS can operate safely in the NAS pursuant to FMRA Section 333, as demonstrated by: 

(a) the characteristics of the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UASs; (b) the pilot certification 

requirement; and (c) the specific operating limitations.

a. The Specifications Of The DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UAS 

Demonstrate Its Safe Characteristics.

The DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UAS do not create a hazard to users of the NAS or the 

public, or otherwise pose a threat to national security considering its size, weight, speed, 

and operational capability.

i. Technical Specifications of DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UAS.

The technical specifications of the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UAS are set forth by the User 

Manuals, attached hereto as Appendix A and B.

ii. The DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UAS Autonomous Flight And 

Navigation Modes Enable The UASs To Remain Within A Defined 

Operational Area.

The DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UAS may be operated in both manual and fully autonomous 

flight modes. A complete description of the flight and navigational modes of the DJI 

Phantom 2 Vision+ UAS provided in the User Manuals, attached hereto as Appendix A and 

B.

iii. The DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UAS are Designed For Automatic

Return To Home Point Or Hover In The Event Of Loss Of The 

Control Link Or Navigation.
When the Control Link is lost, the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UAS will remain stationary, in 

flight, for 3 seconds or more. If, after 3 seconds, the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UAS do not 

reacquire control link data from the GCS, the UAs will assume that the Control Link is lost 

and the UAs will return to the home position (i.e., failsafe mode) via GPS, and will descend 

to the takeoff position and shutdown.

A complete description of the Failsafe Functions of the UAS are set forth in pages 27 

through 29 and for the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ in pages 13 through 15. The DJI 

Phantom 2 Vision+ User Manual, is attached here as Appendix A and B.

iv. DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UAS GCS Operation.

A complete description of the operation and specifications of the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+

GCS and flight control software is provided in the “Flight Test” portion of their respective 

user manuals.

b. Flight Operations Of DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UAS are Limited To The Line Of Sight 

Of A Certificated Pilot in Command With A Safety Observer.

DAVID M. ROBINSON will be the only person to act as a pilot in command (PIC) of DJI 

Phantom 2 Vision+ UAS. Additionally, a safety observer will assist him during flight 

time.

c. Flights Of DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UASs will Be Conducted Pursuant To

Specific Operating Limitations.

In seeking this exemption, DAVID M. ROBINSON proposes to commercially operate DJI 

Phantom 2 Vision+ UAS for the special purpose of conducting aerial video and 

photography over certain areas of United States, pursuant to the following specific 

operating limitations:

1. Operations authorized by this grant of exemption will be limited to the 

following aircraft described in the operating documents, rotorcraft UASs 

weighing less than 55 pounds maximum gross weight: DJI Phantom 2 

Vision+ UAS. Proposed operations of any other aircraft will require a new 

petition or a petition to amend this grant.

2. UAS operations under this exemption will be limited to conducting operations 

for the purpose of aerial video and photography.
3. The UAs may not be flown at an indicated airspeed exceeding 45 knots.

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

ground level (AGL), as indicated by the procedures specified in the operating 

documents unless a special request is made and approved by ATC. All altitudes 

reported to ATC must be in feet AGL.5. The UAs 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.

6. The use of first person view (FPV) by the PIC or safety observer (SO) is not 

permitted.

7. All operations must utilize a safety observer (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 PIC must ensure that the SO can 

perform the functions prescribed in the operating documents.

8. 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.

9. The operating documents and the grant of exemption must be accessible 

during UAS operations and made available to the Administrator upon request. If a

discrepancy exists between the conditions and limitations contained in the grant 

of exemption and the procedures outlined in the operating documents,

the conditions and limitations contained in the grant of exemption 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 documents to the Administrator upon 

request. The operator must also present updated and revised documents

if it petitions for extension or amendment to the grant of exemption. If the
operator determines that any update or revision would affect the basis upon

which the FAA granted the exemption, then the operator must petition for 

amendment to its grant of exemption. The FAA’s UAS Integration Office (AFS80) may be contacted if questions arise regarding updates or revisions to the 

operating documents.

10. 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.

11. 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.

12. 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.

13. The operator must follow the UAS manufacturer’s aircraft/component, 

maintenance, overhaul, replacement, inspection, and life limit requirements.

14. The operator must carry out its maintenance, inspections, and record 

keeping requirements, in accordance with the operating documents. 

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.

15. Each UASs operated under this exemption must comply with all 

manufacturer Safety Bulletins.
16. The authorized person must make an entry in the aircraft record of the 

corrective action taken against discrepancies discovered between inspections.

17. The PIC must possess at least a private pilot certificate and at least a current 

third- class medical certificate.

18. The operator may not permit any PIC to operate unless the PIC meets the 

operator’s 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. PIC 

qualification flight hours must be logged in a manner consistent with 14 C.F.R.

§ 61.51(b). Flights for the purposes of training the operator’s PICs are permitted

under the terms of the 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 C.F.R. § 91.119.

19. UAS operations may not be conducted during night, as defined in 14 C.F.R.

§ 1.1. All operations must be conducted under visual meteorological conditions 

(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.

20. The UAV 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.

21. The UAV 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.
22. If the UAV loses communications or loses its GPS signal, it must return to a 

pre- determined location within the planned operating area and land or be 

recovered in accordance with the operating documents.

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

emergencies in accordance with the operating documents.

24. 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 UAV with 25% battery power 

remaining.

25. The operator must 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.

26. All aircraft operated in accordance with the exemption must be identified 

by serial number, registered in accordance with 14 C.F.R. part 47, and have 

identification (N- Number) markings in accordance with 14 C.F.R. part 45, 

Subpart C. Markings must be as large as practicable.

27. Before conducting operations, the radio frequency spectrum used for 

operation and control of the UAV must comply with the Federal 

Communications Commission (FCC) or other appropriate government 

oversight agency requirements.

28. The documents required fewer than 14 C.F.R. 91.9 and 91.203 must be 

available to the PIC at the Ground Control Station of the UAS any time the UAS is 

operating. These documents must be made available to the Administrator or any

law enforcement official upon request.
29. The UAV must remain clear and yield the right of way to all manned 

aviation operations and activities at all times.

30. The UAV may not be operated by the PIC from any moving device or vehicle.

31. Flight operations must be conducted at least 500 feet from all 

nonparticipating persons (persons other than the PIC, SO, operator trainees or 

essential persons), vessels, vehicles, and structures unless:

a. Barriers or structures are present that sufficiently protect nonparticipating 

persons from the UAV 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 and/or;

b. The aircraft is operated near vessels, vehicles or structures where the 

owner/controller of such vessels, vehicles or structures has granted 

permission 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;

c. Operations nearer to the PIC, SO, operator trainees or essential 

persons do not present an undue hazard to those persons per §

91.119(a).

32. All operations shall be conducted over private or controlled-access 

property with permission from the land owner/controller or authorized 

representative. Permission from land owner/controller or authorized 

representative will be obtained for each flight to be conducted.

33. 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.
2. Reasons Why An Exemption From The Requirements Of Section

61.113(a) And (b) Would Not Adversely Affect Safety.

DAVID M. ROBINSON submits that the equivalent level of safety established by Section

61.113(a) and (b) will be maintained because no PIC will be allowed to operate the DJI 

Phantom 2 Vision+ UAS unless that PIC has demonstrated, by meeting minimum flighthour and currency requirements, that the PIC is able to safely operate the DJI Phantom 2 

Vision+ UASs in a manner consistent with the exemption, including evasive and 

emergency maneuvers and maintaining appropriate distances from people, vessels, 

vehicles and structures.

Considering DAVID M. ROBINSON proposed area of operations, and the operating 

limitations set forth-above; the parallel nature of private pilot aeronautical knowledge 

requirements to those of commercial pilot requirements (See Exemption No. 11062); and 

the airmanship skills necessary to safely operate the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UASs, DAVID 

M. ROBINSON submits that the additional manned airmanship experience of a 

commercially certificated pilot would not correlate to the airmanship skills necessary 

specific proposed flight operations.

The FAA has previously granted relief from Section 61.113(a) and (b) specific to UAS, 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).

DAVID M. ROBINSON will not allow any PIC to operate the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UASs 

unless the PIC has demonstrated, by meeting minimum flight-hour requirements or the DJI 

Phantom 2 Vision+ UASs training and currency requirements, that the PIC is able to safely

operate the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UASs in a manner consistent with this 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).

As in Exemption Nos. 11062, 11138, and 11153, prior documented flight experience that 

was obtained in compliance with applicable regulations will ensure an equivalent level of 

safety during DAVID M. ROBINSON proposed operations. The Administrator has held 

that prior documented flight experience that was obtained in compliance with applicable 

regulations would ensure safe operations, stating as follows:
In Exemption No. 11062, the FAA required that prior to conducting operations for 

the purpose of motion picture filming (or similar operations), the PIC must have 

accumulated and logged, in a manner consistent with 14 CFR 61.51(b), 25 hours of 

total time as a UAS rotorcraft pilot including at least 10 hours logged as a UAS 

pilot with a multi-rotor UAS. Prior to operations under Exemption No. 11062, the 

PIC must also have accumulated and logged a minimum of 5 hours as a UAS pilot 

operating the same make and model of UAS to be used for operations under the 

exemption. For clarification, the FAA considers these minimum hour requirements 

to be inclusive rather than additive; i.e. 5 hours make and model time may be 

included in the 10 hours of multi-rotor time and the 10 hours may be included in

the total 25 hours of UAS rotorcraft time. In addition to the hour requirements, the

PIC must accomplish 3 takeoffs and landings in the preceding 90 days (for currency

purposes). The FAA finds that at a minimum, the flight-hour requirements in

Exemption No. 11062 are appropriate to practice and build proficiency in the skills 

necessary to safely conduct the petitioner’s proposed operations. The FAA also finds 

that prior documented flight experience that was obtained in compliance with 

applicable regulations would satisfy this requirement. Training, proficiency, and 

experience-building flights can also be conducted under the grant of

exemption to accomplish the required flight time. During training, proficiency, and

experience-building flights the PIC is required to operate the UAS with appropriate 

distances in accordance with 14 C.F.R 91.119.

Exemption No. 11138 at page 15.

Accordingly, DAVID M. ROBINSON will ensure safe operations by not allowing any PIC to 

operate DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UASs unless that PIC has demonstrated, by meeting 

minimum flight-hour and currency requirements, that the PIC is able to safely operate the

DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UASs in a manner consistent with the exemption, including evasive 

and emergency maneuvers and maintaining appropriate distances from people, vessels, 

vehicles and structures.

3. Reasons Why An Exemption From The Requirements Of Section 91.7(a) 

Would Not Adversely Affect Safety.

The equivalent level of safety established by Section 91.7(a) will be maintained because 

prior to every flight, DAVID M. ROBINSON will ensure that DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UASs is 

in an airworthy condition based upon the UAS’s compliance with its operating documents 

and as stated in the conditions and limitations herein.
Additionally, the FAA has previously granted relief from Section 91.7(a) specific to UAS, 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).

4. Reasons Why An Exemption From The Requirements Of Section 91.121

Would Not Adversely Affect Safety.

The equivalent level of safety established by Section 91.121 will be maintained because the 

altitude information of the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UAS will be provided to the PIC via GPS 

equipment and a radio communications telemetry data link, which downlinks from the UA 

to the GCS for active monitoring of the flight path and altitude. This altitude information,

combined with DAVID M. ROBINSON operation of the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UAS within 

visual line of sight, at or below 400 feet AGL, will ensure a level of safety equivalent to 

Section 91.121. The altitude information will be generated by GPS equipment installed 

onboard the aircraft. Prior to each flight, a zero altitude initiation point is automatically

established by the UASs at ground level.

The FAA has previously granted relief from Section 91.121 specific to UAS, 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).

5. Reasons Why An Exemption From The Requirements Of Section

91.151(b) Would Not Adversely Affect Safety.

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 DJI Phantom 2 

Vision+ UASs; (2) the limitations on the proposed flight operations; and (3) the location of 

the proposed flight operations. Accordingly, DAVID M. ROBINSON will ensure that it will

safely operate the battery powered DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UAS during daylight hours in 

VFR conditions, with enough battery power to fly for a total duration of 15 minutes to the

first point of intended landing and, assuming normal cruising speed, to fly after that for at 

least 5 minutes.

Here, as in Exemption No. 11109, the technical specifications of the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+

UASs; the limitations on the proposed flight operations; and the location of the proposed 

operations, will ensure an equivalent level of safety established by 14 C.F.R. Section 

91.151(b). Furthermore, safety will be ensured as the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UAS provide 
audible and visual warnings to the PIC at the GCS when the UAs experiences low battery

voltage, the first warning occurring at approximately 33% remaining battery power, and 

again at approximately 10% remaining battery power. At the critically low battery level, the 

DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UASs 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 specific to UAS, in circumstances similar, in all material respects, to those presented 

herein (e.g. Exemption Nos. 8811, 10808, 10673, 11042, 11062, 11063, 11064, 11065,

11066, 11067, 11080, 11109, 11110, 11136, 11138, 11150, 11153, 11156, 11157, 11158,

11159, 11160, 11161).

6. Reasons Why An Exemption From The Requirements Of Sections

91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), And 91.417(a) & (b) Would

Not Adversely Affect Safety.

In seeking this exemption, DAVID M. ROBINSON 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 DAVID M. ROBINSON will use trained technicians to perform maintenance, 

alterations, or preventive maintenance on the UASs using the methods, techniques, and 

practices prescribed in the operating documents (i.e., the DAVID M. ROBINSON Aerial 

Operations Manual, Monthly Maintenance Log, and DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ Instruction 

Manual). Furthermore, DAVID M. ROBINSON will document and maintain all maintenance 

records for the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UASs.

Since the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UAS will be inspected as prescribed by the operating 

documents, DAVID M. ROBINSON will maintain the equivalent level of safety established by

Sections 91.405(a), 91.409(a)(1), and 91.409(a)(2). A copy of the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+

User Manuals are attached here as Appendix A and B.

Likewise, the exemption sought will not adversely affect safety because DAVID M. 

ROBINSON will use trained technicians to perform maintenance, alterations or preventive 

maintenance on the UAS using the methods, techniques, and practices prescribed by the 

operating documents.

Furthermore, the exemption sought would maintain an equivalent level of safety 

established by Sections 91.407, 91.417(a) and 91.417(b), because all maintenance of the 
DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UAS will be performed by trained technicians. Maintenance will

be documented and maintained utilizing the monthly maintenance log.

Significantly, previous exemptions granted by the FAA concerning Sections 91.405(a),

91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), and 91.417(a) & (b) establish that safety is not adversely

affected when the technical characteristics and operating limitations of the UAS are 

considered.

In consideration of DAVID M. ROBINSON proposed operating limitations, the operating 

documents, and the technical aspects of the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UASs, DAVID M. 

ROBINSON submits that safety will not be adversely affected by granting exemption from 

14 C.F.R. Sections 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1) and (a)(2), 91.409(a)(2), and

91.417(a) and (b). The FAA has previously granted relief specific to UAS 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).

7. The FAA May Prescribe Any Other Conditions For Safe Operation.

In accordance with Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (FMRA) 

and 14 C.F.R. § 21.16 entitled Special Conditions, DAVID M. ROBINSON requests that the 

FAA prescribe special conditions for the intended operation of the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+

UASs, which 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 

operation of the UAs for the limited purpose of conducting aerial video and photography

over certain areas of the United States for compensation or hire. FMRA Section 333 sets 

forth the requirements for considering whether a UAS will create a hazard to users of the 

NAS or the public, or otherwise pose a threat to national security; and further, provides the

authority for such UAS to operate without airworthiness certification in accordance with 

any requirements that must be established for the safe operation of the UAS in the NAS.

Likewise, the Administrator may prescribe special conditions pursuant to 14 C.F.R. 21.16, for 

operation of the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UASs, since the airworthiness regulations of 14

C.F.R. Part 21 do not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards, due to the novel or 

unusual design features of the aircraft. Section 21.16, entitled Special Conditions, states the 

following:

If the FAA finds that the airworthiness regulations of this subchapter do not 

contain adequate or appropriate safety standards for an aircraft, aircraft engine, or 

propeller because of a novel or unusual design feature of the aircraft, aircraft 

engine or propeller, he prescribes special conditions and amendments thereto for 

the product. The special conditions are issued in accordance with Part 11 of this

chapter and contain such safety standards for the aircraft, aircraft engine or 
propeller as the FAA finds necessary to establish a level of safety equivalent to that 

established in the regulations.

See 14 C.F.R. § 21.16.

Therefore, in accordance with FMRA Section 333 and 14 C.F.R. § 21.16, the FAA may 

prescribe special conditions for Leading Edge’s intended operation of the DJI Phantom 2 

Vision+ UASs, which 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 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).

• A Summary That Can Be Published In The Federal Register, 

stating: The Rules From Which DAVID M. ROBINSON Seeks Exemption:

DAVID M. ROBINSON 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).

A Brief Description Of The Nature Of The Exemption DAVID M. ROBINSON

Seeks:

This exemption will permit DAVID M. ROBINSON to commercially operate an 

Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) for the purpose of conducting aerial video and 

photography over certain areas of the United States.

• Any Additional Information, Views, Or Arguments Available To

Support DAVID M. ROBINSON Request.

This Petition is made pursuant to the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 

2012(FMRA) Section 333, which directs the Secretary of Transportation to determine 

if certain UAS may operate safely in the NAS. As such, DAVID M. ROBINSON

request for exemption may be granted pursuant to the authority of FMRA Section 

333 and 14 C.F.R. Part 11, as set forth above.

FMRA Section 333 sets forth the requirements for considering whether a UAS will create a 

hazard to users of the NAS or the public, or otherwise poses a threat to national security; 

and further, provides the authority for such UAS to operate without airworthiness 

certification. As discussed in detail above, DAVID M. ROBINSON will operate the DJI 

Phantom 2 Vision+ UAS safely in the NAS, without creating a hazard to users of the NAS, 

or the public, or otherwise pose a threat to national security.
CONCLUSION

As set forth herein, DAVID M. ROBINSON seeks an exemption pursuant to 14 C.F.R. §

11.61 and Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (FMRA), which 

will permit safe operation of the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UAS commercially, without an 

airworthiness certificate, for the limited purpose of conducting aerial video and 

photography over certain areas of the United States. By granting this Petition, the FAA 

Administrator will be fulfilling the Congressional mandate of the FAA Modernization and 

Reform Act of 2012, while also advancing the interests of the public, by allowing DAVID M. 

ROBINSON to safely, efficiently, and economically operate the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UAS

commercially within the NAS.

WHEREFORE, in accordance with the Federal Aviation Regulations and the FAA 

Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, Section 333, DAVID M. ROBINSON respectfully 

requests that the Administrator grant this Petition for an 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), and permit Leading Edge to operate

the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UAS commercially for the purpose of conducting aerial

video and photography over certain areas of the United States.

Dated: October 16, 2015
Attachmentstothissubmission:

1. DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ Manual

2. Maintenance Log

DAVID M. ROBINSON only utilizes safe and reliable UASs. DJI is an industry leader in 

small UAS production. DJI UASs are loaded with ground breaking software enabling the 

user to set parameters which will not allow flight into controlled airspace. Parameters can 

also be set to limit flight to no higher than a predetermined and set altitude as well as 

limit flight to a predetermined and set distance. In addition, DJI software provides realtime altitude and location information to the PIC via the linked monitor (smart 

phone/tablet devices)

Very respectfully, 

David M. Robinson

 8086 Summer Bay Ct.

 Jacksonville, Fl. 32256

 Organicsplus1@gmail.com

 904-708-3168

Maximum upload to this site would not support my attachments: 

I've added the following links instead:

1. DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ Manual

http://download.djiinnovations.com/downloads/phantom_2_vision_plus/en/Phantom_2_Vision_Plus_User_Ma

nual_v1.8_en.pdf