June 16, 2015

From Heaven’s Eye, LLC’s Petition for Exemption to Operate

Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) for Aerial Photography and Video Production

FAA Regulatory Docket

NAME AND ADDRESS OF PETITIONER

From Heaven’s Eye, LLC.

Attn: Loyd D. Foster

2364 VZCR 2128

Wills Point, TX. 75169

903.802.9400

lfoster0752@gmail.com
June 16, 2015

Page 2

I. PETITION SUMMARY

Pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, 

Pub. L. No. 112-95 (2012), 126 Stat.11 (“Section 333”) and the Federal Aviation 

Administration’s (“FAA”) general exemption authority under 49 U.S.C.§ 44701(f), 

Through Heaven’s Eyes, LLC (“Petitioner”) hereby petitions for exemptions from 14 

C.F.R. Part 21, 14 C.F.R. §§ 61.113(a) and (b), 61,133(a), 91.7(a), 91.9(b)(2), 

91.103(b)(1), 91.119(c), 91.121, 91.151, 91.203(a) and (b), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 

91.409(a)(2), 91.417(a)-(b). The proposed exemptions, if granted, would allow Petitioner 

to operate small, (less than 55 pounds) unmanned camera-mounted aircraft systems 

(“UAS”) for the purpose of filming residential real estate properties for sale or lease. 

Based on the small size of Petitioner’s UAS and the qualifications and experience 

of Petitioner’s UAS operators, the requested exemptions should be within the safety 

margins envisioned by Congress and set forth in Section 333. Additionally, the enhanced 

safety achieved by replacing larger aircraft (carrying crew and flammable fuel) with a

small UAS carrying no passengers or crew and operated only in daylight hours and 

operated under the specific guidelines and procedures proposed by Petitioner gives the 

FAA good cause to find that the UAS operations enabled by the instant Petition are in the 

public interest. Thus, the requested exemptions should be granted.
June 16, 2015

Page 3

II. BACKGROUND

In 1966, at the age of 14, Petitioner began working towards earning a Private 

Pilot’s certificate, training in a Piper Cub. In the summer of 1970, after graduating from 

high school in Wills Point, TX, at the age of 18, he passed his FAA written exam and 

immediately scheduled his check-ride in a Cessna 150 at a small airport in Rockwall TX. 

He was awarded a Private Pilot’s License #2129231 at that time. In the following years, 

his love of aviation related activities has led him to acquire his “Instrument Rating” with 

over 1500 hours of flight time in single and twin engine aircraft. Throughout the years, he 

has owned and/or flown aircraft including motorized ultra-lights, hang-gliders, sailplanes, 

single and twin engine aircraft, as well as helicopters. His love of aviation also extends to 

RC aircraft of almost every variety. The Petitioner, over the years, has built and sold 

several successful businesses. At this time, nearing retirement age, he recently acquired a 

Texas Real Estate license with the intent to buy and sell residential properties. He wishes 

to utilize small drone aircraft (<55#) with video/still recording equipment on board to 

capture hi-definition aerial footage of farm and ranch type properties. Usage of the UAS

will provide the highest level of service to his customers, while promoting safety by 

eliminating the need for large manned aircraft while filming. Petitioner seeks regulatory

exemptions that will allow Petitioner to employ camera-mounted UAS technology in the 

filming and production process. 
June 16, 2015

Page 4

III. STATUTORY AUTHORITY

A. Section 333

Section 333, titled “Special Rules for Certain Unmanned Aircraft Systems,” provides 

a mechanism for seeking expedited FAA authorization of safe civil UAS operations in 

the National Airspace System (“NAS”). Section 333(a) states that the FAA “shall 

determine if certain unmanned aircraft systems may operate safely in the national 

airspace system before completion of the (comprehensive) plan and rulemaking required 

by section 332(b)(1) of this Act or the guidance required by section 334 of this Act.” In 

Section 332(b)(1), Congress made it clear that Section 333 provides a mechanism for 

“expedited operational authorization.”. The FAA has committed to complying with this 

mandate by granting several petitions almost identical to the one at hand. Section 333(b) 

identifies several factors that the FAA should consider in determining whether 

commercial UAS operations should be approved. These include UAS that, “as a result of 

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

and operating within visual line of sight do not create a hazard to users of the (NAS), or 

the public, or pose a threat to national security,” See Section 333(b).

B. SECTION 44701(f)

In addition to the specific authority conferred by Section 333, the FAA Administrator 

has general authority to grant exemptions from the FAA’s safety regulations and 

minimum standards when the Administrator decides a requested exemption is in the 

public interest. See U.S.C.§ 44701(f).
June 16, 2015

Page 5

IV REQUESTED EXEMPTIONS

 Petitioner requests relief from the following regulations:

 Part 21 prescribes in pertinent part, the procedural requirements for issuing and 

changing design approvals, production approvals, airworthiness certificates, and 

airworthiness approvals.

Section 61.113 prescribes that “no person who holds a private pilot certificate may act 

as a pilot in command of an aircraft that is carrying passengers or property for 

compensation or hire; nor may that person, for compensation or hire, act as pilot in 

command of an aircraft,” (see Section 61.113(a)), and that “a private pilot may, for 

compensation or hire, act as pilot in command 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,” (see Section 61.113(b)).

Section 61.133(a) sets forth privileges for persons holding commercial pilot 

certificates, including a provision implied, limited to persons holding a commercial pilot 

certificate, the ability to act as pilot in command of an aircraft “for compensation or 

hire.”

Section 91.7(a) prescribes, in pertinent part, that no person may operate a civil aircraft 

unless it is in an airworthy condition.
June 16, 2015

Page 6

Section 91.9(b)(2) prohibits operation of U.S. registered civil aircraft unless there is 

available in the aircraft a current approved Airplane or Rotorcraft Flight Manual, 

approved manual material, markings, and placards, or any combination thereof.

Section 91.103(b)(1) prescribes, in pertinent part, that each pilot in command shall, 

before beginning a flight, become familiar with all available information concerning that 

flight, to include, “For a flight, runway lengths at airports of intended use, and the 

following takeoff and landing distance information:...For civil aircraft for which an 

approved Airplane or Rotorcraft Flight Manual containing takeoff and landing distance 

data is required, the takeoff and landing distance data contained therein.”

Section 91.119(c) prescribes that, except when necessary for takeoff or landing, no 

person may operate an aircraft below the following altitudes: “Over other than congested 

areas. In those cases, the aircraft may not be operated closer than 500 feet to any person, 

vessel, vehicle, or structure.”

Section 91.121 requires, in pertinent part, each person operation an aircraft to 

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

departure airport or an appropriate altimeter setting available before departure.”

Section 91.151(a) prescribes that no person may begin a flight in an airplane under 

VFR conditions unless (considering wind and forecast weather conditions) there is 

enough fuel to fly to the first point of intended landing and, assuming normal cruising 

speed, (1) during the day, to fly after that for at least 30 minutes; or (2) at night, to fly 

after that for at least 45 minutes.
June 16, 2015

Page 7

Section 91.203 prohibits, in subpart (a), any person from operating a civil aircraft 

unless it has within it (1) an appropriate and current airworthiness certificate; and (2) an 

effective U.S. registration certificate issued to it’s owner or, for operation within the

United States, the second copy of the Aircraft Registration Application as provided 

for in §47.31(c) Section 91.203 prescribes, in subpart (b), that no person may operate a 

civil aircraft unless the airworthiness certificate or a special flight authorization issued 

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

passengers or crew.

Section 91.405(a) requires, in pertinent part, that an aircraft operator or owner shall 

have the aircraft inspected as prescribed in subpart E of the same part and shall, between 

required inspections, except as provided in paragraph (c) of the same section, have 

discrepancies repaired as prescribed in Part 43 of the chapter.

Section 91.407(a)(1) prohibits, in pertinent part, any person from operating an aircraft 

that has undergone maintenance, preventative maintenance, rebuilding, or alteration 

unless it has been approved for return to service by a person authorized under §43.7 of 

the same chapter.

Section 91.409(a)(2) prescribes, in pertinent part, that no person may operate an 

aircraft unless, within the preceding 12 calendar months, it has had an inspection for the 

issuance of an airworthiness certificate in accordance with part 21 of this chapter.

Section 91.417(a) and (b) prescribes, in pertinent part, that-

(a) Each registered owner or operator shall keep the following records
June 16, 2015

Page 8

for the periods specified in paragraph (b) of this section:

(1) Records of the maintenance, preventative 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,

propeller and each rotor.

(ii) The current status of life-limited parts of the

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.
June 16, 2015

Page 9

(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 

revisions 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.
June 16, 2015

Page 10

(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.

V. PETITIONER’S PROPOSED OPERATIONS TO SATISFY SECTION 333.

A. Unmanned Aircraft System-(UAS)

The UAS to be operated under this request are less than 55 lbs. fully loaded, will 

be operated at a speed of no more than 50 knots airspeed, carry neither a pilot nor 

passenger, will carry no explosive materials or flammable liquids and will operate within 

a confined placarded area warning potential onlookers that the UAS is being operated for 

real estate video retrieval purposes. Petitioner’s UAS will use a radio frequency spectrum 

for operation and control that complies with Federal Communications Commission 

(“FCC”) requirements. Petitioner’s UAS are equipped with redundant safety mechanisms 

allowing them to operate safely after experiencing certain in-flight failures. If a lost-link 

event occurs, including the loss of ground communications and/or the loss of a quality

GPS signal, sufficient to obtain exact coordinates for navigation, Petitioner’s UAS have 

the ability to perform a pre-programmed, predictable, automated flight maneuver 

returning to a predetermined location within a designated secured perimeter for an 

automated controlled landing “Fully Autonomous Flight”. All flights conducted by 

Petitioner will be terminated after 25 minutes of flight time or with >25% battery life 

remaining, whichever occurs first. Additionally, all flights conducted by Petitioner will 
June 16, 2015

Page 11

be conducted within line of sight (LOS) operator reference of the UAS. Therefore, good 

cause exist for granting Petitioner’s requested relief from 14 C.F.R. §91.151(a) (setting 

forth fuel requirements for flight in VFR conditions).

Petitioner’s UAS will 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 will be as large as practicable.

Regarding Petitioner’s requested relief from 14 C.F.R. §91.121 (Altimeter 

Settings), Petitioner seeks relief because Petitioner will not have a typical barometric 

altimeter onboard the UAS. Instead, altitude information will be provided to the UAS 

PIC (Pilot in Command) via a digitally encoded telemetric data feed, which downlinks 

from the aircraft to a ground-based on-screen display. The altitude information will be 

generated by equipment installed onboard the UAS, using GPS triangulation, digitally 

encoded barometric altimeter, radio altimeter, or any combination thereof. Prior to each 

flight, a zero altitude initiation point will be established and confirmed for accuracy by

the UAS PIC. Thus, good cause exists for granting the requested relief from 14 C.F.R. 

§91.121.

Given the size, weight, speed and limited operating area associated with the 

aircraft to be utilized by the Petitioner, and exemption from 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H 

(Airworthiness Certificates), subject to certain conditions and limitations is warranted (if 

necessary) and meets the requirements for an equivalent level of safety under
June 16, 2015

Page 12

14 C.F.R. Part 11 and Section 333. The UAS operated without an airworthiness 

certificate in the restricted environment and under the conditions and limitations

proposed by Petitioner will be at least as safe, or safer than a conventional aircraft (fixed 

wing or rotorcraft) operating with an airworthiness certificate issued under 14 C.F.R. Part 

21, Subpart H, and not subject to the proposed limitations and conditions stated herein.

Petitioner will strictly comply with safety and maintenance procedures included in 

all applicable UAS manufacturer’s instructions and operating manuals. To the extent 

such information is not included in the guidelines developed by the manufacturers, 

Petitioner will develop and document maintenance, overhaul, replacement, and inspection 

requirements, procedures to document and maintain maintenance records with regard to 

Petitioner’s UAS, and UAS technician qualification criteria. Petitioner’s operations 

manuals will include maintenance requirements for Petitioner’s UAS, including “oncondition” maintenance. In light of these mitigating factors, exemptions from 14 C.F.R. 

§§ 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) and (2) and 91.,417(a) and (b) are warranted.

B. UAS Pilot in Command (PIC)

Petitioner’s UAS PIC shall have passed the required FAA ground school 

Examination and possess at least a third class medical certificate and will be required to 

hold a current pilot’s license issued by the FAA until planned rulemaking eliminates one 

or all of these requirements. Petitioner feels that knowledge of airspace regulations 

acquired from FAA ground school and dexterity in the control and operations of the UAS
June 16, 2015

Page 13

acquired from actual operation of the aircraft will be the most important factors in 

establishing an equivalent level of safety. According to the FAA, “the FAA considers the 

overriding safety factor for the limited operations proposed by the Petitioner to be the 

airmanship skills acquired through UAS-specific flight cycles, flight time, and specific 

make and model experience, culminating in verification through testing.”

See Exemption No.11062, Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2014-0352, at page 18. With 

those factors in mind, Petitioner’s UAS PIC shall be required to meet several conditions 

and limitations as outlined below: 

● The UAS PIC will have accumulated a minimum of 200 flight 

cycles and 25 hours of total time as a UAS PIC and at least 10 

hours time logged as a UAS PIC with a similar UAS type (single 

blade or multi-rotor).

● The UAS PIC will have accumulated a minimum of five hours of flight 

time with the specific make and model of the UAS to be utilized for 

operations under the exemption and three take-offs and landings in the 

preceding 90 days.

● The UAS PIC will have successfully completed the qualification 

process as specified in the operations manuals, to include a knowledge 

and skills test.

Regarding Petitioner’s requested relief from 14 C.F.R. §91.7(a), it is Petitioner’s 

understanding that Petitioner’s UAS will not require an airworthiness certificate in 
June 16, 2015

Page 14

accordance with 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H, and that exemption from 14 C.F.R.

§91.7(a) is therefore unnecessary. To the extent such an exemption is deemed necessary, 

Petitioner asserts that it should be granted in light of the safety procedures proposed 

herein. In accordance with the pertinent part of 14 C.F.R. §91.7(b), the operator in 

command of Petitioner’s UAS shall be responsible for determining whether the aircraft is 

in a safe condition for flight. Petitioner’s manuals for maintenance and operations shall 

include safety checklists to be used by the operator in command prior to each flight.

Regarding Petitioner’s requested relief from 14 C.F.R.§91.7(a), it is Petitioner’s 

understanding that Petitioner’s UAS will not require an airworthiness certificate in 

accordance with 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H, and that exemption from 14 

C.F.R.§91.7(a) is therefore unnecessary. To the extent such an exemption is deemed 

necessary, Petitioner asserts that it should be granted in light of the safety procedures 

proposed herein. In accordance with the pertinent part of 14 C.F.R. §91.7(b), the 

operator in command of Petitioner’s UAS shall be responsible for determining whether 

the aircraft is in a safe condition for flight.

Petitioner’s manuals for maintenance and operations shall include safety 

checklists to be used by the operator in command prior to each flight.

Regarding Petitioner’s requested relief from 14 C.F.R. 91.9(b)(2) (Civil aircraft flight 

manual, marking, and placard requirements) and §91.203(a) and (b), (Civil aircraft: 

certifications required), it is Petitioner’s understanding that relief from these regulations 
June 16, 2015

Page 15

are no longer necessary in light of the FAA Memorandum “Interpretation regarding 

whether certain required documents may be kept at an unmanned aircraft’s control

station,” dated August 8, 2014. To the extent the FAA deems an exemption from this 

section necessary for Petitioner’s proposed operations, such exemption should be granted 

in light of the mitigating fact that Petitioner will maintain the documents required under 

14 C.F.R. §91.9 and §91.203 at the UAS ground control station during all flights.

Additionally, 100% of Petitioner’s operations will utilize a visual observer 

(“VO”). The VO may be used to satisfy the VLOS requirement as long as the PIC 

always maintains VLOS capability. The VO and the PIC will be able to communicate 

verbally at all times during operational flights.

Regarding Petitioner’s requested relief from 14 C.F.R. §91.103(b)(1), Petitioner 

will comply with the other applicable procedures and requirements stated in §91.103(a) 

and (b). Specifically, the PIC will take all actions including reviewing weather, flight 

battery requirements, and aircraft performance data before initiation of a flight. The PIC 

and VO will also account for all relevant site-specific conditions in their preflight 

procedures. Risks presented by sun glare will be mitigated by the PIC’s and VO’s 

individual ability to see other air traffic and communicate with the other by electronic 

wireless devices to initiate a return-to-home sequence or other appropriate action if 

needed.
June 16, 2015

Page 16

The PIC’s UAS operation will be limited to a unique and placarded environment. 

Given the (1) placarded area of operation to alert all in the area that aerial filming is 

ongoing. (2) aeronautical knowledge requirements incumbent in the FAA ground school 

exam, and (3) the proposed UAS airmanship skills of Petitioner’s PICs, the additional 

manned airmanship experience of a private pilot would not correlate to the airmanship 

skills necessary for Petitioner’s unmanned operations. Thus, Petitioner’s request for 

relief from 14 C.F.R. §61.113(a) and (b) and §61.133(a) should be granted.

C. Operating Parameters of Petitioner’s UAS

Petitioner’s UAS operations will be conducted within a placarded area. In this 

area, Petitioner’s operations will remain within VLOS of the PIC and/or the VO, below 

400 feet and at speeds at or below 50 knots.

Consistent with the relief typically provided to manned operations under FAA 

Order 8900.1, Volume 3, Chapter 8, Section 1, Petitioner requests relief from 14 C.F.R. 

§91.119(c) with respect to those participating persons, vehicles, and equipment directly

involved in the performance of the actual filming. Regarding distance from nonparticipating persons, Petitioner will ensure that no persons are allowed within 500 feet of 

the operating area except those consenting to be involved and necessary for the filming 

production, with the possibility of reducing this distance to no less than 200 feet if it 

would not adversely affect safety and Administrator has approved it. This is consistent

with FAA Order 8900.1,V3,C8,S1
June 16, 2015

Page 17

Petitioner will not conduct UAS operations within 5 nautical miles of the 

geographic center of a non-towered airport unless a letter of agreement with the airport’s 

management is obtained and the operation is conducted in accordance with a Notice to 

Airmen (“NOTAM”). Additionally, Petitioner will not operate in Class B, C, or D 

airspace without written approval from the FAA, nor will Petitioner operate the UAS less 

than 500 feet below or less than 2,000 feet horizontally from cloud or when visibility is 

less than 3 statute miles.

D. The Requested Exemption Promotes the Public Interests

The enhanced safety achieved by replacing significantly larger manned aircraft 

carrying crew along with flammable fuel and flying at dangerously low altitudes with 

small unmanned UAS weighing less than 55 pounds and being operated under the 

specific guidelines and procedures suggested by Petitioner gives the FAA good cause to 

find that the UAS operations enabled by the approval and acceptance of Petitioner’s 

request herein gives the FAA good cause to find that the UAS operations enabled by the 

instant Petition are in the public interest. As the FAA has already recognized, UAS 

provide an additional tool for the real estate industry, adding a valuable tool to increase 

commerce and thereby adding new jobs to our economy.
June 16, 2015

Page 18

VI. CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, the regulatory exemptions requested herein should be 

granted and Petitioner should be permitted to conduct small UAS operations for the 

purposes contained herein.

Respectfully submitted,

Lloyd D. Foster 

From Heaven’s Eye, LLC