1 

## Henry H. Perritt , Jr. Attorney at Law
1131 Carol Lane Glencoe, IL 60022 hperritt@gmail.com (312) 504

- 5001 12 August 2014

Hon. Michael Huerta Administrator Federal Aviation Administration U. S. Department of Transportation Docket Management System 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE Washington, DC 20590
Re: Exemption Request under Section 333 of the FAA Reform Act and Part 11 of the Federal Aviation Regulations from certain parts of the FARs

.

Dear Administrator Huerta :
Pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (the Reform Act) and 14 C.F.R. Part 11, Colin Hinkle
, a professional photographer, hereby applies for an exemption from the listed Federal Aviation Regulations (“FARs”) to allow him to
opera te a small Unmanned Aircraft Sy stem (“sUAS”) under the conditions and limitations set forth in this Petition.

T he requested exemption would permit the operati on of small, unmanned and relatively inexpensive sUAS under controlled conditions in airspace that is ( 1) limited
, ( 2) predetermined
, and (3 ) would provide safety enhancements to the already safe news gathering operations presently us ing manned helicopter s and airplanes in Chicagoland

. Approval of this exemption would thereby enhance safety and fulfill the FAA Administrator’s responsibilities to “...establish requirements for the safe operation of such aircraft systems in the national airspace system.” Section 333(c) of the Reform Act.
The name and address of the applicant is:2

Colin Hinkle Attn: Henry H. Perritt, Jr. Telephone : (312) 504

- 5001 Email: hperritt@gmail.com Address: 1131 Carol Lane, Glencoe, IL 60022
Regulations from which the exemption is req uested:

14 CFR Part 21

14 C.F.R. § 45.23(b)

14 CFR § 61. 3

14 C.F.R. § 91.7 (a)

14 CFR § 91.9 (b) (2)

14 C.F.R. § 91.103

14 C.F.R. § 91.109

14 C.F. R. § 91.119

14 C.F.R. § 91.121

14 CFR § 91.151 (a)

14 CFR § 91.203 (a) & (b)

14 CFR § 91.205(b)

14 CFR § 91.215

14 CFR § 91.405 (a)

14 CFR § 407 (a) (1)

14 CFR § 409 (a) (2)

14 CFR § 417 (a) & (b)3

The Appendix describes the FARs from which an exemption is requested and summarizes the justification for each requested exemption.

Th e Petition is submitted to fulfill Congress’ goal under Section 333(a) through (c) of the Reform Act , which directs the Secretary of Transportation to consider whether certain unmanned aircraft systems may operate safely in the national airspace system (NAS) before completion of the rulemaking required under Section 332 of the Reform Act. In making this determination, the Administrator must determine which types of UASs do not create a hazard to users of the NAS or the public or pose a threat to national security in light of the followin g: • The UAS’s size, weight, speed, and operational capability;
• Operation of the UAS in close proximity to airports and populated areas; and
• Operation of the UAS within visual line of sight of the operator.

Reform Act § 333 (a).

I f the Adminstrator determ ines that such vehicles “may operate safely in the national airspace system, the Secretary shall establish requirements for the safe operation of such aircraft in the national airspace system.” Id. § 333(c) (emphasis added).
The Secretary has delegated his aviation authority to the Administrator of the FAA.
The Federal Aviation Act expressly grants the FAA th e authority to grant exemptions from its regulatory requirements for civil aircraft, a term defined under §40101 of the Act, which includes sUASs

. The Administrator may grant an exemption from a requirement of a regulation prescribed under subsection (a) or (b) of this section or any
sections 44702

- 44716 of th e Federal Aviation Act if Administrator finds the exemption in the public interest. 49 U.S.C. § 44701(f) See also 49 USC § 44711(a); 49 USC § 44704; 14 CFR §91.203 (a) (1).
The petitioner is a professional photojournalist, who earns his living as a contract photographer for several Chicago television stations. His regular assignments involve his goin g out with electronic news gathering (" ENG" ) vans to cover breaking news as assigned by the TV station news desk. He also works as a relief photo journalist for the helicopter contractor that serves Chicago TV stations. He has thus become familiar with both ground

- based and aerial news photography over the course of several years.4

The wide availability of small Unmanned Aircraft Systems, also known as “microdrones,” capable of car rying high

- quality video cameras and priced at affordable levels intrigued the pet itioner. His entire professional career has involved exploring new technologies and adapting them to capture good imagery to inform the public. In July 2014 , he bought a DJI Phantom 2 Vision , installed a three axis gimbal and a GoPro

c amera and has flown i t for total of 30 hours over remote areas of the Chicago metropolitan area , over remote locations in downstate Illinois, and in the Ozark Mountains in Missouri for recreational purposes, exploring the potential and the limitations of its video subsystem.

H e is pleased with the quality of the imagery captured and has edited it into a number of photographic vignettes that meet his high standards for technical quality and artistic
merit.

N ow, a number of people, some professional colleagues and some strangers
, have heard about Petitioner ’ s activities and have seen the results and are pressing Petitioner to undertake additional microdrone photography for compensation.

He has been advised by counsel that this is not now permissible unless he obtain s special permission from the FAA. Many competitors of Petitioner are actively flying sUAS to conduct aerial photography for commercial purposes, notwithstanding the FAA’s stated prohibition. H e also notes and has read the congressional mandate in
section s 332 and 333 of the FA A Revitalization and Reform Act of 2012 that the FA A move quickly to accommodate the economic and societal benefits that can result from widespread deployment of sUAS technology. A ccordingly, Petitioner applies for authorization under the Federal Aviation Act , and the FAR s rules to undertake the following activities for commercial purposes. Unless the Petition is granted, Petitioner will be at a significant competitive advantage if he, as he prefers, complies with FAA policy.

Vehicle The Petitioner will fly a DJI Phantom 2 Vision equipped with a three

- axis gimbal and
GoPro camera.
This vehicle has built in capability to limit the height it flies above the ground, to limit the radius of the distance it flies from the operator, and to ex clude it from class B, C,5

and D airspace. T he vehicle also has the built

- in capability to return to the launching point if the wireless control link is interrupted or if t he operator attempts to exceed any of the height, radius, or airspace limitations pro grammed into it

.
The vehicle weighs about five pounds empty and has a maximum gross weight of approximately twenty pounds . It has a top speed of about 30 kn ots . It has four fixed

pitch rotors , thrust from which is varied by changing RPM

. It is powered by a lithium polymer battery.

Flight profiles

The petitioner will program the Phantom so that it will not fly abo ve 400 feet above ground level, or more than 1500 feet away from him

. He will carefully preflight the vehicle before each mission to assure t hat its c ompass and GPS system are properly calibrated and that the return

- to

- home feature, altitude, and radius limitations work.
He will operate it on aerial photography missions only in the early morning hours and other times when few people are out and about. He will operate it only over largely unpopulated areas where the potential of uncontrolled descent to cause injury or damage i s low
He will not operate it in controlled airspace . I n the unlikely event that a manned aircraft flies below 400 feet AGL where the petitioners operating his Phantom , he will keep both the vehicle and manned aircraft in sight and avoid the manned aircraft.
More particularly, the Petitioner will fly the Phantom only over the following types of

areas in Metropolitan Chicago:

 O ver Lake Michigan
, outward of the shoreline

 Over open water in marinas, anchorages, and rivers appurtenant to Lake Michigan

 Over lines of railroad and rail classification yards

 O ver expressways

 O ver nonresidential and noncommercial large

- scale industrial areas

 Over private property when he has been commissioned by the person in legal possession of the property to do so6

 Over breaking news events subject to the following special limitations :

H e will retain a prof essional news helicopter pilot a s a special co nsultant and undertake a period of ground training with that special consultant to understand the rules of thumb that ENG helicopter pilots follow to coexist safely with
, and to provide occasional help to
, law

- enforcement and other public safety agencies.
He will undertake a period of at least six hours fli ght training with the ENG pilot

consultant to ensure that the Petitioner is proficient in anticipating and responding to situations over breaking news events that might interfere with the safe f light of
p olice and other public safety h elicopters, with ground operations, or with manned aircraft.
The Petitioner's proposed operations satisfy the criteria provided in Section 333 of the Reform Act relating to size, weight, speed, operating capabilities, proximi ty to airports and populated areas and operation within visual line of sight and national security. The Petition justifies grant of the requested exemptions allow the Petitioner to obtain aerial photography with his microdrone.
Respectfully submitted,

Henr y H. Perritt, Jr. Counsel for Petitioner7 

## Appendix

FAR section Subject Justification 14 CFR § 45.23(b) Requirement to display registration number on vehicle Insufficient space on vehicle

14 CFR Part 21 Aircraft certification requirements and procedures Designed for manned aircraft; not suitable for off

- the

- shelf sUAS 14 CFR § 61. 3 Requirement for pilot certificate Part 61 requirements designed for manned aircraft, not sUAS; petition describes training for sUAS operator 14 CFR § 91.7 (a) A irworthiness requirement Designed for manned aircraft; not suitable for off

- the

- shelf sUAS 14 CFR § 91.9 (b) (2) Requirement for manual to be available in the cockpit No one aboard to read manual

14 CFR § 91.103(b) Requirement for crew members to be onboard Unmanned vehicle

14 CFR § 91.109 Requirement for dual controls during flight instruction No one aboard to operate controls

14 CFR § 91.119 Minimum altitudes for safe flight Safety requires operation below these altitudes 14 CFR § 91.121 Al timeter settings No one aboard to read altimeter 14 CFR § 91.151(a) Fuel requirements Vehicle does not use fuel 14 CFR § 91.203 (a) & (b) Requirement for registration and airworthiness certificates to be onboard No one aboard to read certificates

14 CFR § 91.205(b) Cockpit instrument s No one aboard to read8 requirement instruments 14 CFR § 91.215 Transponder requirement Vehicle has insufficient useful load; will be operated below ATC radar coverage 14 CFR § 91.405 (a) Inspection requirements Designed for manned aircraft; not suitable for off

- the

- shelf sUAS 14 CFR § 91.407(a) (1) Inspection approval requirements Designed for manned aircraft; not suitable for off

- the

- shelf sUAS 14 CFR § 91.409 (a) (2) Airworthiness inspection Designed for manned aircraft; not suitable for off

- the

- shelf sUAS 14 CFR § 91.417 (a) & (b) Maintenance records requirements Designed for manned aircraft; not suitable for off

- the

- shelf sUAS