Timothy G. Lamkin - CT Consulting, LLC. – 333 Petition

March 5, 2016

P a g e | 1 of 11

Erick F. Larsen

Consultant to

Timothy G. Lamkin

CT Consulting, LLC

262 W. Linden Ave. # C

Burbank, LA, Ca 91502

818-732-0330

ErickLarsen@Outlook.com

March 5, 2016

 - Via electronic filing -

U. S. Department of Transportation 

Docket Management System

1200 New Jersey Ave., 

SE Washington, DC 20590

Re: Request (Petition) for Exemption from Certain Regulations per Section 333 of the FAA Reform 

Act and Part 11 of the Federal Aviation Regulations

Dear Madam or Sir:

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

C.F.R. Part 11, professional photographer, project manager, and entrepreneur, Timothy 

G. Lamkin d/b/a CT Consulting, LLC (Lamkin, Petitioner, or Operator) hereby applies for an 

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

operation) of his fleet of Unoccupied (unmanned) Aerial Systems (UAS), so long as such operations 

are conducted within and under the conditions outlined herein or as may be established by the FAA 

as required by Section 333.

I. INTRODUCTION

Petitioner, Timothy G. Lamkin, is a United States citizen with a US Passport and a New Mexico 

Driver’s License. CT Consulting, LLC is a New Mexico chartered corporation. Petitioner performs 

expert professional photography, videography, and business consulting services worldwide, with 

the following contact information:

Timothy G. Lamkin

Owner/Pres/CEO 

CT Consulting, LLC

13208 Indian School Road N.E.

Albuquerque, NM 87112-4840

Email: lamkint@comcast.net

Tel: (505) 250-4900
Timothy G. Lamkin - CT Consulting, LLC. – 333 Petition

March 5, 2016

P a g e | 2 of 11

Petitioner has developed diverse clients in need of safe and lawful commercial UAS aerial data 

collection (ADC) and UAS training services. Growth of Petitioner’s UAS business services will 

provide new jobs and an increased level of safety to many who are currently in need. Current FAA 

UAS policy prevents Petitioner from providing civil UAS commercial services in the absence of the 

requested exemption. 

A. Commercial UAS Operations to Be Conducted:

Petitioner seeks to operate his fleet of UAS to conduct UAS training, and aerial data collection

(ADC) which includes any remote sensing and measuring by an instrument(s) aboard the 

unoccupied (unmanned) aircraft (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.

In particular Petitioner seeks authorization to conduct commercial UAS training and remote ADC, 

mapping, surveying, photography, filming, videography, demonstrations, sampling, measuring, and 

inspections of (or for):

1.) Construction, architectural, engineering, website development, insurance, risk 

management, security, real estate, resort, golf, cemetery, entertainment, weddings, 

sports, utility, energy (oil, gas, solar, nuclear, coal, wind, & electric), hydro (water, dams, 

locks), transportation (port, rail, truck, auto, & bus), mining, bridge, 

telecommunications, agriculture (farming, ranching, & growing) flare stack, platform, 

tower, pole, pipeline and all other infrastructure, structures, sites, systems, features and 

operations; and,

2.) Recreational, commercial, non-profit, public, governmental, municipal, public safety, fire, 

Emergency Management Agencies (EMA) and entities; and,

3.) Environmental, scientific, archaeology, conservation, climate change, natural 

resource, wildlife, oceanographic, forestry, weather, search & rescue, emergency 

services, humanitarian relief, public & private entity support, assistance and monitoring 

of infrastructure, structures, sites, systems, features, and operations; and,

4.) Research, education, training, development, testing, certification, and validation of safe 

and lawful civil, commercial, public, experimental, hobby, entertainment, and recreational 

UAS curriculum, education, and safe flight training, demonstrations, and events involving 

UAS design, manufacture, assembly, purchase, sale, maintenance, repair, inspection, safe 

operation, record keeping, and required FAA documentation.

Hereinafter, 1 through 4, above, as well as UAS training are referred to as Petitioner’s “proposed 

operations” or “operations".
Timothy G. Lamkin - CT Consulting, LLC. – 333 Petition

March 5, 2016

P a g e | 3 of 11

Concerning the petitioner’s request for authority to conduct UAS training, the FAA has stated that, 

at this time, the FAA is unable to authorize UAS operations for training until a further assessment is 

completed. Therefore, the petitioner requests that when the FAA completes its review, that the 

FAA proceed accordingly and no further action will be required by the petitioner. However, in the 

interim, the petitioner requests that he be permitted to train his own pilot in commands, visual 

observers, and other UAS crew.

B. Petitioner’s Commercial UAS Aircraft Fleet and Operating Documents:

Petitioner references as his operating documents, this petition, his list of UAS aircraft fleet (below)

and the manufacturer’s model specific aircraft documentation, including Flight Operations 

Manual(s), for each UAS in his aircraft fleet which set forth safety considerations, training, general 

and specific operating procedures, specifications, inspection, maintenance, setup of the UAS, and 

all other required and recommended procedures for the proposed operations. 

Petitioner requests an exemption to operate the following UAS aircraft:

3D Robotics Iris https://store.3dr.com/products/iris

3D Robotics Solo https://3dr.com/solo-drone/

3D Robotics X8-M https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?

q=cache:59a5llTcZ7gJ:https://store.3dr.com/products/x8-m+&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

DJI Inspire 1 http://www.dji.com/product/inspire-1/download

DJI Inspire 1 Pro X5, X5 Black, X5R (raw), and XT (thermal) http://store.dji.com/product/inspire-1-

pro#/spec

DJI Matrice 100 http://www.dji.com/product/matrice100

DJI Phantom 1 http://www.dji.com/product/phantom/download

DJI Phantom 2 Vision, Vision+ http://www.dji.com/product/phantom-2/download?www=v1

DJI Phantom 3 Professional, Advanced, Standard, and 4k http://www.dji.com/product/phantom3/download

DJI Phantom 4 http://www.dji.com/product/phantom-4/download

DJI Spreading Wings S900* http://www.dji.com/product/spreading-wings-s900

DJI Spreading Wings S1000, and S1000+* http://www.dji.com/product/spreading-wings-s1000-plus

Droidworx SkyJib 8* http://www.aerialtechnology.com/shop/skyjib-8-ti-qr-droidworx-aeronavics/
Timothy G. Lamkin - CT Consulting, LLC. – 333 Petition

March 5, 2016

P a g e | 4 of 11

Droidworx SkyJib 8/ X4* http://www.aerialtechnology.com/shop/aeronavics-skyjib-x4-ti-qr/

Freefly Systems Alta* http://freeflysystems.com/alta

Lily Robotics, Inc. Lily https://www.lily.camera/

XCraft PhoneDrone Ethos http://xcraft.io/phone-drone/ and http://store.xcraft.io/xplusone-store-xcraft-vtol-dronesandpoint-id/phonedrone

XCraft X PlusOne http://xcraft.io/x-plusone-drone/

Yuneec Typhoon G, Q500, and Q500 4k https://www.yuneec.com/Typhoon-Specifications-Typhoon-4K

Yuneec Tornado CGO4, and H920 https://www.yuneec.com/Specifications-Tornado-H920

*Using Futuba 14SG RC transmitter ground station http://www.futabarc.com/systems/futk9410-14sg/

Each UAS in Petitioner’s aircraft fleet (above) or similar has previously been granted 333 

exemptions by the FAA. Commercial operations of any other type of aircraft require a new or 

amended 333 petition. Each of Petitioner’s UAS will be duly registered with the FAA which will 

assign registration, “N” numbers, before operations are commenced. 

C.Specific Regulations for which an exemption is sought:

14 CFR 61.113 (a) 

14 CFR 91.7 (a) 

14 CFR 91.119 (b) & (c) 

14 CPR 91. 121

14 CFR 91.151 (a) 

14 CFR 91.405 (a) 

14 CFR 407 (a) (1)

14 CPR 409 (a) (1) & (2)

14 CFR 417 (a) & (b)

II. PETITIONER’S PROPOSED OPERATIONS DO NOT CREATE SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS

Each UAS utilized by Petitioner is an electric multi-rotor craft, weighing less than 55 lbs. including 

ADC payload and has been previously approved by the FAA for commercial operations. Each 

operates at a speed of no more than 100 mph (87 knots) and has the capability to hover, and/or 

move in a vertical and horizontal plane simultaneously. Each will only be operated as visual line of 

sight (VLOS), remain under 400 ft. above ground level (AGL), and will operate only over private or 

controlled access property with permission from the owner/controller of the property or 

authorized representative.

During Petitioner’s proposed operations the site will be secured and non-participants will be kept 

at least 500 feet away from the operation unless barriers or structures are present that sufficiently 

protect non-participants in the event of an accident or loss of control.
Timothy G. Lamkin - CT Consulting, LLC. – 333 Petition

March 5, 2016

P a g e | 5 of 11

III. PETITIONER'S PROPOSED OPERATIONS ARE IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST

The FAA has issued a Grant of Exemptions to FalconSkyCam, Exemption No. 11195, Docket No FAA2014-0884 (March 6, 2015) and to Measure, a 32 Advisors Company, LLC, Exemption No. 12646,

Docket No. FAA–2015–1602 (August 28, 2015), for operations that are substantially similar to those 

proposed herein. In issuing the Grant to FalconSkyCam, the FAA noted that "[t]he enhanced safety 

and reduced environmental impact achieved using a UAS 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."

IV. EQUIVALENT LEVEL OF SAFETY

Petitioner proposes that his fleet of UAS, with the characteristics and as operated with the 

limitations listed below, provide for at least an equivalent or even higher level of safety to 

operations under the current regulatory framework.

These limitations and conditions to which Petitioner agrees to be bound when conducting 

commercial operations under an FAA issued exemption include:

1.) Each UAS utilized by Petitioner will weigh Less than 55 lbs, operate at a speed of no more 

than 100 mph (87 knots), and will remain under 400 ft. (AGL).

2.) Flights will be operated only during daylight hours, only in visual meteorological conditions, 

and only within visual line of sight (VLOS) of the pilot in command (PIC) of the UAS.

3.) All operations will utilize a visual observer (VO) in addition to the pilot in command (PIC).

4.) Maximum total flight time for each operational flight will be less than 45 minutes, or when 

the Low Battery warning activates.

V. EXEMPTIONS REQUESTED

14 C.F.R. § 61.113 (a) and (b): Private, Recreational, or Sport vs. Commercial Pilot Certificates

Sections 61.113 (a) and (b) prohibit private, recreational, or sport certified pilots from operating a 

traditional aircraft for compensation or hire. Petitioner proposes that his PIC will have at least a 

private, recreational, or sport pilot’s certificate, and a current FAA 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. Petitioner’s PIC will 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. 

Petitioner will not permit any PIC to operate unless the PIC demonstratesthe ability to safely 

operate the UAS in a manner consistent with how the UAS will be operated under Petitioner’s 

exemption, including evasive and emergency maneuvers and maintaining appropriate distances 

from persons, vessels, vehicles and structures. PIC qualification flight hours and currency will be 

logged in a manner consistent with 14 CFR § 61.51(b). Dedicated UAS flights for the purposes of 
Timothy G. Lamkin - CT Consulting, LLC. – 333 Petition

March 5, 2016

P a g e | 6 of 11

training the Petitioner’s PICs and VOs (training, proficiency, and experience-building) and for 

determining the PIC’s ability to safely operate the UAS in a manner consistent with how the UAS 

will be operated under Petitioner’s exemption, are requested by Petitioner to be allowed under the 

terms of this exemption. 

PIC and VO training operations will only be conducted during dedicated training sessions. During 

training, proficiency, and experience-building flights, all persons not essential for flight operations 

will be considered nonparticipants, and the PIC will operate the UA with appropriate distance from

nonparticipants in accordance with 14 CFR § 91.119.

Based upon the above and for the reasons set forth in the FAA's grant of an exemption to Astraeus 

Aerial, Petitioner does not believe a commercial pilot certificate is necessary for his proposed

operations. See, e.g., In the matter of the petition of Astraeus Aerial, Exemption No. 11062 (issued 

Sept. 25, 2014). For those reasons, Petitioner requests an exemption from 14 C.F.R. § 61.113 (a) 

and (b).

14 C.F.R. § 91.7 (a): Civil Aircraft Airworthiness

Section 91.7 prohibits operation of an unairworthy aircraft, and places responsibility for 

airworthiness determinations on the PIC. Petitioner’s UAS will not have an airworthiness certificate, 

and there is no FAA regulatory standard for determining airworthiness of the UAS. Additionally, 

Petitioner's operating documents, including FOM, set forth inspection and maintenance procedures 

to ensure airworthiness. For these reasons, and in accordance with the FAA's grant of an 

exemption from section 91.7 to Total Safety U.S., Inc., Petitioner requests an exemption from 14 

CFR. § 91.7(a). See, e.g., In the matter of the petition of Total Safety U.S., Inc., Exemption No. 

11156 (issued Jan. 29, 2015).

14 C.F.R. §91.119 (b) and (c): Minimum Safe Altitudes

Section 91.119 establishes safe altitudes for operation of civil aircraft. Section 91.119 (b) prohibits 

aircraft in congested areas from flying less than 1,000 feet above the highest obstacle within a 

horizontal radius of 2,000 feet of the aircraft. To the extent that Petitioner’s proposed operations 

would be considered to be in "congested areas," Petitioner's operating documents and procedures, 

and the size, weight and speed of each UAS in the Petitioner’s fleet of UAS, provide an equivalent 

level of safety such that the proposed operations at lower safe altitudes should be allowed.

Petitioner will establish a 500' buffer/sterile area for his operations that will exclude personnel not 

associated with the operations. Petitioner will also exercise additional control over the sterile area 

as needed. Consequently, Petitioner believes these procedures will reduce or eliminate any 

potential adverse impacts to safety for operations in congested areas. Petitioner therefore requests 

an exemption from 14 CFR § 91.119(b).

Section 91.119 (c) prohibits operations in other than congested areas below 500 feet above the 

surface, or closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle or structure. Since this exemption is 
Timothy G. Lamkin - CT Consulting, LLC. – 333 Petition

March 5, 2016

P a g e | 7 of 11

for UAS that fly similarly to a helicopter and requests authority to operate at altitudes up to 400 ft. 

AGL, an exemption may be needed to allow such proposed operations.

The equivalent level of safety will be achieved given the size, weight, speed of each of Petitioner’s 

UAS as well as the location where they will be operated. As discussed above, Petitioner will 

establish a sterile area, including safety buffers of 500 feet for personnel not associated with the 

operations. Petitioner therefore requests an exemption from Section 91.119(c) for all necessary 

and authorized personnel associated with the proposed operations.

14 C.F.R. §91.121 Altimeter Settings

This regulation requires each person operating an aircraft to maintain a cruising altitude by 

reference to an altimeter that is set "... to the elevation of the departure airport or an appropriate 

altimeter setting available before departure." As the UAS may not have a barometric altimeter, but 

instead a constant GPS altitude read out, an exemption is requested.

14 C.F.R. § 91.151(a): Fuel Requirements for Flight in VFR Conditions

Section 91.151 (a) prohibits an individual from beginning "a flight in an airplane under VFR 

conditions unless (considering wind and forecast weather conditions) there is enough fuel to fly to 

the first point of intended landing, and, assuming normal cruising speed - (1) During the day, to fly 

after that for at least 30 minutes; or (2) At night, to fly after that for at least 45 minutes."

Maximum total flight time for each of the proposed operations will be no more than approximately 

45 minutes. Flights will be safely landed when the battery falls below its nominal voltage, should 

that occur prior to completion of the operation. Each of Petitioner’s UAS has a constant battery 

voltage display and a Low Voltage LED Warning which alerts when the battery reaches predetermined levels. This battery level would be more than adequate to return the UAS to its 

planned landing zone from anywhere in its limited operating area when the Low Voltage Warning 

alerts.

For these reasons, Petitioner requests an exemption from 14 C.F.R. § 91.151 (a). Similar 

exemptions have been granted to other operations, including Exemptions 2689F, 5745, 10673, and 

10808.

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

These regulations require that an aircraft operator or owner "shall have that aircraft inspected as 

prescribed in subpart E of this part and shall between required inspections, except as provided in 

paragraph (c) of this section, have discrepancies repaired as prescribed in part 43 of this chapter...," 

and others shall inspect or maintain the aircraft in compliance with Part 43.
Timothy G. Lamkin - CT Consulting, LLC. – 333 Petition

March 5, 2016

P a g e | 8 of 11

As provided in Petitioner’s operating documents, the operator and the PIC will ensure that the UAS 

is in safe working order prior to initiating each flight, and the operator will perform required 

maintenance and inspections, and keep a log of any maintenance performed.

VI. REGULATIONS FOR WHICH EXEMPTIONS ARE UNNECESSARY

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has issued numerous prior exemptions for many 

different types of UAS and UAS operations. In those exemptions, the agency noted that exemptions 

from certain regulations were not necessary, due to "the size, weight, speed and limited operating 

area associated with [the UAS] and its operation."

Based upon the FAA's guidance and the fact that each of Petitioner’s UAS is even smaller and 

slower than many of those UAS in previously issued exemptions, Petitioner believes exemptions 

from the following regulations are not necessary:

14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H: Airworthiness Certificates. 

14 C.F.R. § 45.23 (b): Marking of the Aircraft.

14 C.F.R. §91.7(b): Civil aircraft airworthiness. 

14 C.F.R. §91.109: Flight instruction.

Petitioner also believes that an exemption from 14 C.F.R. § 91.103: Preflight Action is not 

necessary. This regulation requires each pilot in command to take certain actions before flight to 

insure the safety of flight. An FAA approved rotorcraft flight manual will not be provided for the 

aircraft. An equivalent level of safety will be provided as set forth in this petition and in Petitioner’s

operating documents duly referenced as part of this request.

The FAA has previously found that adherence to procedures contained in an applicant's operating 

documents demonstrate compliance with § 91.103, and therefore an exemption from the 

regulation was not necessary. See, e.g., In the matter of the petition of Total Safety U.S., Inc., 

Exemption No. 11156 (issued Jan. 29, 2015).

Petitioner's PIC will take all actions including reviewing weather, flight battery requirements, 

landing and takeoff clearance distances and aircraft performance data before initiation of flight to 

ensure the safety of the flight. Consequently, in light of this agency's prior finding in Total Safety 

U.S., Inc., Petitioner does not believe an exemption from 14 C.F.R. § 91.103 is necessary. 

If it is determined that the Petitioner does require exemptions from any of the provisions from 

which petitioner has herein stated that he believes no exemption is required: Petitioner requests 

that such exemptions be granted upon the basis of all that petitioner has stated in this petition and 

in his operating documents.

Good cause exists for not publishing a summary of this 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. Accordingly, Petitioner respectfully requests that the FAA grant the 

requested exemption summarily and without delay.
Timothy G. Lamkin - CT Consulting, LLC. – 333 Petition

March 5, 2016

P a g e | 9 of 11

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

Register, should it be determined that publication is necessary:

Petitioner seeks an exemption from the following rules:

14 C.F.R. § 61.113 (a) and (b); 91.7 (a); 91.119 (b) and (c); 91.121; 91.151 (a); 91.405 (a); 91.407 (a) 

(1); 91.409 (a) (1) & (2) and 91.417 (a) & (b) to conduct UAS training, and aerial data collection 

(ADC) which includes any remote sensing and measuring by an instrument(s) aboard the 

Unoccupied (Unmanned) Aircraft (UA). 

Privacy

All of the proposed operations, UAS flights, will occur only over private or controlled access 

property with permission from the owner/controller of the property or authorized representative. 

Petitioner’s proposed operations will be conducted in accordance with all applicable laws and 

regulations governing privacy at the venue of the flight operation.

VII. CONCLUSION

Petitioner has requested to use his fleet of UAS for UAS training, and aerial data collection (ADC). 

The FAA has issued grants of exemption in circumstances similar in all material respects to those 

presented in this 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), 11213 to Aeryon Labs, Inc. (see Docket No. FAA−2014−0642), 

and 12645 to Allied Drones (see Docket No. FAA-2014-0804), the FAA found that the enhanced 

safety achieved using an 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.

Upon review of Petitioner’s reasons for requesting this exemption, It should be determined that:

1.) Petitioner’s requests, in all material respects, are the same as the relief 

previously requested in Grant of Exemption Nos. 11112, 11213, 12645, 14381, 

and 14578;

2.) The reasons stated by the FAA for granting Exemption Nos. 11062, 11109, 11112, 11213, 

12645, 14381, and 14578 also apply to the situation Petitioner presents; and

3.) A grant of exemption to Petitioner is in the public interest.

Therefore, pursuant to the authority contained in 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 40113, and 44701, Petitioner 

should be 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 Petitioner’s proposed operations. 

Satisfaction of all of the criteria provided in Section 333 of the Reform Act of 2012 - size, weight, 

speed, operating capabilities, proximity to airports and populated areas and daylight UAS 
Timothy G. Lamkin - CT Consulting, LLC. – 333 Petition

March 5, 2016

P a g e | 10 of 11

operations within visual line of sight (VLOS) and national security - provide more than adequate 

justification to grant the requested exemption allowing the proposed operations in the NAS by 

Petitioner, Timothy G. Lamkin d/b/a CT Consulting, LLC.

Respectfully,

/Signed/

Erick F. Larsen

Consultant to

Timothy G. Lamkin

CT Consulting, LLC

262 W. Linden Ave. # C

Burbank, LA, Ca 91502

818-732-0330

ErickLarsen@Outlook.com

~ ~ ~ Please See Next Page ~ ~ ~
Timothy G. Lamkin - CT Consulting, LLC. – 333 Petition

March 5, 2016

P a g e | 11 of 11

Petitioner’s Commercial UAS Aircraft Fleet

Petitioner requests an exemption to operate the following UAS aircraft:

3D Robotics Iris 

3D Robotics Solo 

3D Robotics X8-M 

DJI Inspire 1

DJI Inspire 1 Pro X5, X5 Black, X5R (raw), and XT (thermal)

DJI Matrice 100

DJI Phantom 1 

DJI Phantom 2 Vision, Vision+

DJI Phantom 3 Professional, Advanced, Standard, and 4k 

DJI Phantom 4 

DJI Spreading Wings S900

DJI Spreading Wings S1000, and S1000+

Droidworx SkyJib 8 and 8/ X4

Freefly Systems Alta

Lily Robotics, Inc. Lily

XCraft PhoneDrone Ethos

XCraft X PlusOne

Yuneec Typhoon G, Q500, and Q500 4k

Yuneec Tornado CGO4, and H920