June 26, 2015

Exemption No. 11924

Regulatory Docket No. FAA–2015–1274

Mr. Michael Todd Hacker

2366 Sunburst Road

Evington, VA 24550

Dear Mr. Hacker:

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 3, 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, videography, and cinematography.

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

the regulations that the petitioner seeks an exemption.

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

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

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

Airworthiness Certification

The UAS proposed by the petitioner are the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ and DJI Inspire 1.

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 meets the conditions of Section 333. Therefore, the FAA 

finds that relief from 14 CFR part 21, Certification procedures for products and parts, 
2

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, Mr. Michael Todd Hacker 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, Mr. Michael Todd Hacker 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+ and DJI Inspire 1 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
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

WASHINGTON, DC

Regulatory Docket No. _______________

IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION FOR EXEMPTION OF:

Michael Todd Hacker

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 DJI

Phantom 2 Vision+ AND DJI INSPIRE 1 UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS

PURSUANT TO SECTION 333 OF

THE FAA MODERNIZATION AND REFORM ACT OF 2012

(PUBLIC LAW 112-95)

Submitted on April 3, 2015

Michael Todd Hacker

2366 Sunburst Rd

Evington VA, 24550

434-426-6037

toddhacker@gmail.com
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

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

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

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

BACKGROUND................................................................................................................5

BASIS FOR

PETITION...........................................................................................................................6

NAME AND ADDRESS OF PETITIONER...........................................................8

THE SPECIFIC SECTIONS OF 14 C.F.R. FROM WHICH MICHAEL TODD

HACKER SEEKS EXEMPTION.................................................................................8

THE EXTENT OF RELIEF MICHAEL TODD HACKER SEEKS AND THE REASON

MICHAEL TODD HACKER SEEKS THE RELIEF..........................11

THE REASONS WHY GRANTING MICHAEL TODD HACKER’S REQUEST

WOULD BE IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST .../...................................................14

THE REASONS WHY GRANTING THE EXEMPTION WOULD NOT ADVERSELY

AFFECT SAFETY.........................................................................17

CONCLUSION.................................................................................................................32
GLOSSARY OF ABBREVIATIONS

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 Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (FMRA) Section 333

SO Safety Observer

SOP Standard Operating Procedures

UA Unmanned Aircraft

UAS Unmanned Aircraft System

VFR Visual Flight Rules

VLOS Visual Line of Site

VMC Visual Meteorological Conditions

VTOL Vertical Takeoff and Landing
SUMMARY

Michael Todd Hacker 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 Michael Todd Hacker to operate an

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

photography of landscapes, commercial shoot sets, scenery, construction sites, real estate, and

privately owned historical sites over certain areas of the United States.

INTRODUCTION AND INTERESTS OF THE PETITIONER

My name is Michael Todd Hacker, I am 35 years old. I am a director of video and

cinematography at Prototype Advertising in Forest Virginia. I lead a team of creative people

who develop various video and photography projects for clients all over the United States. I

have been with Prototype for 9 years and have seen several evolutions of camera technology 

change over the years. To remain commercially viable and relevant I like to stay current with

many of those technologies. Many clients look to us to provide timely solutions and unique

ideas for their products and campaigns. My interests include videography, photography,

computers, electronics and new technologies that provide creative outputs.

The objective for my petition is to provide high quality video and images for commercial

clients ranging from hospitality, healthcare, not for profit, and private industries with a specific

focus on:

• Aerial photography and videography of client projects, ranging from housing

developments, construction, corporate headquarters overviews
• Privately owned historical site surveys.

• Motion picture filming.

• Local television commercials.

BACKGROUND

Unmanned Aircraft Systems: DJI Phantom 2, DJI Inspire 1 UASs

Michael Todd Hacker seeks an exemption to operate DJI systems for compensation or hire

within the NAS. The DJI Phantom 2 and DJI Inspire 1 are vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL)

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

smart phone systems. The DJI Phantom 2 has a maximum gross weight of approximately 2

pounds 11 ounces, while having a length of 16 inches width of 16 inches, height of 8 inches, and

a maximum speed of approximately 29 knots. The DJI Inspire 1 has a maximum gross weight of

6 pounds 7.5 ounces, a length of 17.3 inches, width of 17.7 inches, height of 11.8 inches, and a

maximum speed of approximately 42 knots. The DJI Phantom 2 and DJI Inspire 1UAs are

equipped with four main rotors; driven by Lithium Polymer battery powered electric motors.

The DJI Phantom 2 and DJI Inspire 1 UAs that will be operated by Michael Todd Hacker 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.

BASIS FOR PETITION
Petitioner, Michael Todd Hacker, 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+, DJI Inspire 1 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, Michael Todd Hacker operation of DJI Phantom 2 Vision+

and DJI Inspire 1 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, Michael Todd Hacker 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.

Michael Todd Hacker submits that the requested relief is proper since an equivalent level

of safety will be ensured. Michael Todd Hacker 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+ and DJI Inspire 1 Instruction Manual). Furthermore, Michael Todd

Hacker will document and maintain all maintenance records for the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ and

DJI Inspire 1 UASs.

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

privileges and limitations: Pilot in command, is requested by Michael Todd Hacker to the extent

necessary to allow a Pilot in Command (PIC) holding a private pilot or higher level certificate, as

well as an airman medical certificate, and who has demonstrated, by meeting minimum flighthour and currency requirements, that the PIC is able to safely operate the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+

and DJI Inspire 1 UASs in a manner consistent with this exemption, including evasive and
emergency maneuvers and maintaining appropriate distances from people, vessels, vehicles and

structures.

Michael Todd Hacker seeks relief from Section 91.7(a), entitled Civil aircraft

airworthiness, because the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ and DJI Inspire 1 UASs do not require an

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

Todd Hacker submits that he will ensure that the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ and DJI Inspire 1UASs

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

compliance with the operating documents (i.e., Maintenance Log, and DJI Phantom 2 Vision+

and DJI Inspire 1 Instruction Manual), and that the aircraft are in a condition safe for flight.

Michael Todd Hacker also seeks an exemption from the requirements of Section 91.121,

entitled Altimeter Settings, as the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ and DJI Inspire 1 UAs will not have a

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

Vision+ and DJI Inspire 1UAs 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 Michael

Todd Hacker’s operation of the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ and DJI Inspire 1 UASs within visual

line of sight, at or below 500 feet AGL, will ensure an appropriate level of safety equivalent to

Section 91.121.

Additionally, Michael Todd Hacker seeks an exemption from the requirements of Section

91.151(b), entitled Fuel requirements for flight in VFR conditions. Michael Todd Hacker submits

that safety will not be affected by operation of the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ and DJI Inspire 1 UAs

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 13.5 minutes to the

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

4.5 minutes.

In accordance with 14 C.F.R. § 11.81, Michael Todd Hacker 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:

Michael Todd Hacker

2366 Sunburst Rd

Evington VA, 24550

434-426-6037

Email: Toddhacker@gmail.com

B. The Specific Sections Of 14 C.F.R. From Which Michael Todd Hacker Seeks Exemption.

1. Michael Todd Hacker 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. Michael Todd Hacker 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. Michael Todd Hacker 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. Michael Todd Hacker 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. Michael Todd Hacker 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. Michael Todd Hacker 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. Michael Todd Hacker 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. Michael Todd Hacker 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 Michael Todd Hacker Seeks And The Reason Michael Todd

Hacker Seeks The Relief.

1. Extent Of Relief Michael Todd Hacker Seeks And The Reason Michael Todd

Hacker 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, Michael Todd Hacker submits that an equivalent level of

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

UAS or DJI Inspire 1 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+ or DJI Inspire 1 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, Michael Todd Hacker submits that all flights of the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ and

DJI Inspire 1 UASs, conducted by the PIC pursuant to the grant of this Petition: (1) will be

incidental to Michael Todd Hacker's business; and (2) will not carry passengers or property for

compensation or hire.

2. Extent Of Relief Michael Todd Hacker Seeks And The Reason Michael Todd

Hacker 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 Michael Todd Hacker to determine that the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ and DJI

Inspire 1 UASs are in airworthy condition prior to every flight by ensuring that the UAS is in

compliance with the operating documents (i.e., the Michael Todd Hacker Aerial Operations

Manual, Monthly Maintenance Log, and DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ and DJI Inspire 1 Instruction

Manual).
Michael Todd Hacker seeks the requested relief because the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ and

DJI Inspire 1 UASs do not require an airworthiness certificate in accordance with 14 C.F.R. Part

21, Subpart H. Therefore, Michael Todd Hacker will ensure that the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ and

DJI Inspire 1 UASs are in airworthy condition based upon its compliance with the operating

documents (i.e., Monthly Maintenance Log, and DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ and DJI Inspire 1

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 Michael Todd Hacker Seeks And The Reason Michael Todd

Hacker 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+ and DJI Inspire 1 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), Michael Todd Hacker seeks the requested

relief because the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ and DJI Inspire 1 UA’s 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+ and DJI Inspire 1 UAs 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 Michael Todd Hacker Seeks And The Reason Michael Todd

Hacker 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+

and DJI Inspire 1 UAs during daylight hours in visual meteorological conditions (VMC), under

visual flight rules (VFR), for a total duration of 13.5 minutes to the first point of intended

landing and, assuming normal cruising speed, to fly after that for at least 4.5 minutes. Michael

Todd Hacker 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+ and DJI Inspire 1 UAs

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

Michael Todd Hacker proposes to conduct pursuant to this Petition.

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

Vision+ and DJI Inspire 1 UASs, the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ and DJI Inspire 1 operating

documents, and Michael Todd Hacker’s proposed operating limitations, ensure that Michael

Todd Hacker will safely operate the battery powered DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ and DJI Inspire 1

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

(VFR), with enough battery power to fly for a total duration of 13.5 minutes to the first point of

intended landing and, assuming normal cruising speed, to fly after that for at least 4.5 minutes.

5. Extent Of Relief Michael Todd Hacker Seeks And The Reason Michael Todd

Hacker 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, Michael Todd Hacker requests relief from

these Sections because the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ and DJI Inspire 1 UASs do not require

airworthiness certificates. As set forth more fully below, the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ and DJI

Inspire 1 UASs meet the conditions of FMRA Section 333 for operation without an airworthiness

certificate. Accordingly, Michael Todd Hacker 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 Michael Todd Hacker Aerial

Operations Manual, Monthly Maintenance Log, and DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ and DJI Inspire 1

Instruction Manual). Furthermore, Michael Todd Hacker will document and maintain all
maintenance records for the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ and DJI Inspire 1 UASs.

D. The Reasons Why Granting Michael Todd Hacker 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 Michael Todd

Hacker 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+ and DJI Inspire 1 UASs will decrease

congestion of the NAS, reduce pollution, and provide significant benefits to the economy.

Notably, the benefits of Michael Todd Hacker’s proposed operation of the DJI Phantom 2

Vision+ and DJI Inspire 1 UASs will be realized without implicating any privacy issues.

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

The DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ and DJI Inspire 1 UAs 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+ or DJI Inspire 1 UAS 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+ and DJI Inspire 1 UAs 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+ and DJI Inspire 1 UASs.

Conducting aerial acquisitions with the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ and DJI Inspire 1 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+ and DJI

Inspire 1 UASs 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+ and DJI Inspire 1 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+ and DJI Inspire 1 UASs 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+ and DJI Inspire 1 UAs (weighing approximately 2 pounds

11 ounces and 6 pounds 7.5 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+ and DJI Inspire 1 UASs Will Benefit The Economy.

In addition to being safe and efficient, the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ and DJI Inspire 1

UASs are also an economical alternative to using manned aircraft to conduct similar aerial

operations. As such, operation of the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ and DJI Inspire 1 UASs will allow

United States based companies, like Michael Todd Hacker, 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+ and DJI Inspire 1

UASs 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+ and DJI Inspire 1 UASs, companies such as

Michael Todd Hacker, 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+ and DJI Inspire 1 UASs, 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,

Michael Todd Hacker’s proposed operation of the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ and DJI Inspire 1

UASs will not implicate any privacy issues. Specifically, the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ and DJI

Inspire 1 UASs will be operated only in compliance with operating documents (i.e., the Michael

Todd Hacker Aerial Operations Manual, Monthly Maintenance Log, and DJI Phantom 2 Vision+

and DJI Inspire 1 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 Michael Todd Hacker Seeks Exemption.

1. Reasons Why The DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ and DJI Inspire 1 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, Michael Todd Hacker’s operation of the DJI Phantom 2

Vision+ and DJI Inspire 1 UASs 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 operate safely 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, Michael Todd Hacker submits that the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+

and DJI Inspire 1 UASs can operate safely in the NAS pursuant to FMRA Section 333, as

demonstrated by: (a) the characteristics of the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ and DJI Inspire 1 UASs;

(b) the pilot certification requirement; and (c) the specific operating limitations.

a. The Specifications Of The DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ and DJI Inspire 1 UASs

Demonstrate Its Safe Characteristics.

The DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ and DJI Inspire 1 UASs 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 The DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ and DJI Inspire 1

UASs.

The technical specifications of the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ and DJI Inspire 1 UASs are

set forth by the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ and DJI Inspire 1 Specifications and Data Sheet, attached

hereto as Exhibit A and B.

ii. The DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ and DJI Inspire 1 UASs Autonomous Flight

And Navigation Modes Enable The UASs To Remain Within A Defined

Operational Area.

The DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ and DJI Inspire 1 UASs 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+ and DJI Inspire 1 UASs is provided at pages 25-35 of the DJI

Phantom 2 Vision+ and pages 12-16 and 45-50 of the DJI Inspire 1 User Manuals, attached

hereto as Exhibit C and D.

iii. The DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ and DJI Inspire 1 UASs 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+ and DJI Inspire 1 UAs will

remain stationary, in flight, for 3 seconds or more. If, after 3 seconds, the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+

and DJI Inspire 1 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 DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ UAS are

set forth at pages 27 through 29 and for the DJI Inspire 1 at pages 13 through 15 of the DJI

Phantom 2 Vision+ and DJI Inspire 1 User Manuals, attached hereto as Exhibit C and D.

iv. The DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ and DJI Inspire 1 GCS And Its Operation.

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

and DJI Inspire 1 GCS and flight control software is provided at pages 32 through 43 of the DJI
Phantom 2 Vision+ User Manual and pages 40 through 47 of the DJI Inspire 1 User Manual. DJI

Phantom 2 Vision+ and DJI Inspire 1 User Manuals are attached hereto as Exhibits C and D.

b. Flight Operations Of DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ and DJI Inspire 1 UASs Are

Limited To The Line Of Sight Of A Certificated Pilot in Command With A

Safety Observer.

Michael Todd Hacker will only utilize certificated pilots who possess a current and valid

airman medical certificate to act as a pilot in command (PIC) of the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ and

DJI Inspire 1 UASs. Additionally, a safety observer will assist all pilots during flight time.

c. Flights Of DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ and DJI Inspire 1 UASs Will Be Conducted

Pursuant To Specific Operating Limitations.

In seeking this exemption, Michael Todd Hacker proposes to commercially operate DJI

Phantom 2 Vision+ and DJI Inspire 1 UASs 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+ and DJI Inspire 1 Unmanned

Aircraft Systems. 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 20 knots.

4. The UA must be operated at an altitude of no more than 500 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 (AFS-80) 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 thirdclass 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 UA may not operate within 5 nautical miles of an airport reference point as

denoted on a current FAA-published aeronautical chart unless a letter of agreement

with that airport’s management is obtained, and the operation is conducted in

accordance with a NOTAM as required by the operator’s COA. The letter of

agreement with the airport management must be made available to the Administrator

upon request.

21. 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.

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

accordance with 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 UA 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 (NNumber) 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 UA 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 UA must remain clear and yield the right of way to all manned aviation

operations and activities at all times.

30. The UAS 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 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 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.

Michael Todd Hacker 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+ and DJI Inspire 1 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+ or DJI Inspire 1 UAS in a manner consistent with the exemption, including evasive and

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

structures.

Considering Michael Todd Hacker’s 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+ or DJI Inspire 1 UAS,

Michael Todd Hacker submits that the additional manned airmanship experience of a

commercially certificated pilot would not correlate to the airmanship skills necessary for Michael

Todd Hacker’s 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).

Michael Todd Hacker will not allow any PIC to operate the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ or

DJI Inspire 1 UAS unless that PIC has demonstrated, by meeting minimum flight-hour

requirements or the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ or DJI Inspire 1 UAS training and currency

requirements, that the PIC is able to safely operate the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ or DJI Inspire 1

UAS 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 Michael Todd Hacker’s 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 UA with appropriate distances in accordance

with 14 C.F.R 91.119.

Exemption No. 11138 at page 15.

Accordingly, Michael Todd Hacker will ensure safe operations by not allowing any PIC

to operate the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ or DJI Inspire 1 UAS 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+ or DJI Inspire 1 UAS 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, Michael Todd Hacker will ensure that the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ or DJI

Inspire 1 UAS 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+ and DJI Inspire 1 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 Michael Todd Hacker’s operation of the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ and

DJI Inspire 1 UAs within visual line of sight, at or below 500 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+ and DJI Inspire 1 UASs; (2) the limitations on the proposed flight operations; and (3)

the location of the proposed flight operations. Accordingly, Michael Todd Hacker will ensure

that it will safely operate the battery powered DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ and DJI Inspire 1 UAs

during daylight hours in VFR conditions, with enough battery power to fly for a total duration of

13.5 minutes to the first point of intended landing and, assuming normal cruising speed, to fly

after that for at least 4.5 minutes.
Here, as in Exemption No. 11109, the technical specifications of the DJI Phantom 2

Vision+ and DJI Inspire 1 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+ and

DJI Inspire 1 UASs 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 Vision+ and DJI Inspire 1 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, Michael Todd Hacker 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

Michael Todd Hacker 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 Michael Todd Hacker Aerial Operations Manual, Monthly

Maintenance Log, and DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ and DJI Inspire 1 Instruction Manual).

Furthermore, Michael Todd Hacker will document and maintain all maintenance records for the
DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ and DJI Inspire 1 UASs.

Since the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ and DJI Inspire 1 UASs will be inspected as prescribed

by the operating documents, Michael Todd Hacker 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+ and DJI Inspire 1 User Manuals are attached hereto as Exhibit C and D; a copy of the

DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ and DJI Inspire 1 UAS Maintenance LOG is attached hereto as Exhibit

E.

Likewise, the exemption sought will not adversely affect safety because Michael Todd

Hacker 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+ and DJI Inspire 1 UASs 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 Michael Todd Hacker’s proposed operating limitations, the operating

documents, and the technical aspects of the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ and DJI Inspire 1 UASs,

Michael Todd Hacker 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, Michael Todd Hacker requests that

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

and DJI Inspire 1 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+ and DJI Inspire 1 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+ and DJI Inspire 1 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).

1. A Summary That Can Be Published In The Federal Register, stating: The Rules

From Which Michael Todd Hacker Seeks Exemption:

Michael Todd Hacker 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 Michael Todd Hacker Seeks:

This exemption will permit Michael Todd Hacker to commercially operate an Unmanned

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

certain areas of the United States.

1. Any Additional Information, Views, Or Arguments Available To Support Michael

Todd Hacker’s 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, Michael Todd Hacker’s 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 pose a threat to national security; and

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

As discussed in detail above, Michael Todd Hacker will operate the DJI Phantom 2

Vision+ and DJI Inspire 1 UASs 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, Michael Todd Hacker 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+ and DJI Inspire 1 UASs 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 Michael Todd

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

Inspire 1 UASs commercially within the NAS.

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

Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, Section 333, Michael Todd Hacker 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+ and
DJI Inspire 1 UASs commercially for the purpose of conducting aerial video and photography

over certain areas of the United States.

Dated: April 3, 2015

Thank you,

Michael Todd Hacker

Michael Todd Hacker

2366 Sunburst Rd

Evington VA, 24550

434-426-6037