Mark J. Rosenthal

2439 Elrod Ct

Yuma, AZ 85356

January 5, 2016

U.S. Department of Transportation

Docket Management System 

1200 New Jersey Ave., SE Washington DC 20590 

Re: Mark J. Rosenthal Petition for Exemption to Operate Unmanned Aircraft Systems Pursuant to Section 333 of 

the FAA Reform Act and Part 11 of the Federal Aviation Regulations.

To whom it may concern: 

Pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 and 14 CFR Part 11, Mark J. Rosenthal, 

operator of small Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS), hereby applies for an exemption from the following Federal 

Aviation Regulations: 14 CFR Part 21 subpart H, 14 CFR Part 45.23 (b), 14 CFR 61.113(a) & (b), 14 CFR 91.7(a), 

14 CFR 91.121, 14 CFR 91.151(b), 14 CFR 91.405(a), 14 CFR 91.407(a)(1), 14 CFR 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), and 14 

CFR 91.417(a) & (b), to allow commercial operation of a small 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. 

Petitioner:

MARK J. ROSENTHAL 

2439 Elrod Ct

Yuma AZ 85365

856-981-4596

markjrosenthal@gmail.com
TABLE OF CONTENTS

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

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

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

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

BASIS FOR PETITION .................................................................................................................................... 6

NAME AND ADDRESS OF THE PETITIONER. ............................................................................ 6

THE SPECIFIC SECTIONS OF 14 C.F.R. FROM WHICH MARK J. ROSENTHAL SEEKS 

EXEMPTION.......................................................................................................... 7

THE EXTENT OF RELIEF MARK J. ROSENTHAL SEEKS AND THE REASON MARK J. 

ROSENTHAL SEEKS THE RELIEF..................................................................................................10

REASONS WHY GRANTING MARK J. ROSENTHAL’S REQUEST WOULD BE IN THE 

PUBLIC INTEREST; HOW IT WOULD BENEFIT THE PUBLIC AS A WHOLE. .........13

REASONS WHY GRANTING THIS EXEMPTION WOULD NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT

SAFETY................................................................................................................................ 15

REASONS WHY THE UAS AIRCRAFT MEET THE CONDITIONS OF THE FAA

MODERNIZATION AND REFORM ACT OF 2012 (FMRA) SECTION 333. .................15

CONCLUSION ......................................................................................................................................... 21
GLOSSARY OF ABBREVIATIONS

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)

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

DJI UAV manufacturer

ESC Electronic speed control

FPV First Person View

LI-PO Lithium Polymer battery

RCV Radio Controlled vehicle
SUMMARY

Pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 and 14 CFR Part 11 MARK J. 

ROSENTHAL seeks exemption from the below requirements in order to operate an Unmanned Aircraft System 

(UAS). This exemption will permit MARK J. ROSENTHAL to operate a UAS for the commercial purpose of 

conducting aerial video and photography in support of small business, community and charitable activities. 

Regulations from which the exemption is requested:

14 CFR Part 21 subpart H

14 CFR 45.23 (b)

14 CFR 61.113(a) & (b)

14 CFR 91.7 (a)

14 CFR 91.9 (b)(2)

14 CFR 91.121

14 CFR 91.151 (b)

14 CFR 91.203 (a) & (b)

14 CFR 91.405 (a)

14 CFR 91.407 (a)(1)

14 CFR 91.409 (a)(1) & (a)(2)

14 CFR 91.417 (a) & (b)

INTRODUCTION AND INTERESTS OF THE PETITIONER

MARK J. ROSENTHAL’s primary occupation is an Aviation Command and Control Officer with the United States 

Marine Corps. He began his career as an Air Traffic Control Specialist, and received a certification from the FAA. 

Since that time, he has been an Air Traffic Control Facility Officer and has considerable experience working with 

the FAA and various air traffic control agencies on matters pertaining to air space management and control. MARK 

J. ROSENTHAL has worked in the field of airspace management for approximately 10 years. This experience 

makes him uniquely qualified for the exemptions listed below, as he has extensive knowledge of the National 

Airspace System and measures needed to ensure the safety of flight of aircraft operating within it. Additionally, 

MARK J. ROSENTHAL is proficient in the operation of commercial UAS platforms and possesses the ability to 

ensure such aircraft stay within safety restrictions. The objective of MARK J. ROSENTHAL and his aerial 

operations is to provide high quality imaging for a variety of commercial, public, and residential uses that are 

incidental to his primary occupation, specifically targeting:

• Marketing

• Construction sites before and after 

• Appraisals

• Aerial photography for private events

• Motion Picture Filming

• Aerial acquisitions for inspections of public and private structures.

• Building Inspection operations
BACKGROUND

Unmanned Aircraft Systems: DJI Inspire 1, DJI Phantom 2, DJI Phantom 3 and a blanket exemption for 

other similar UAS (Hereafter “the UAS”).

MARK J. ROSENTHAL seeks an exemption to operate above named UAS and comparable systems weighing less 

than 55 pounds for compensation or hire within the NAS. The DJI family of UAS and similar systems are vertical 

takeoff and landing (VTOL) Unmanned Aircraft (UA) with a Ground Control Station (GCS) utilizing electronic 

tablet or smart phone systems. The UAS 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 30 knots. 

The UAS is equipped with four main rotors; driven by Lithium Polymer battery powered electric motors. The DJI 

family of UAS and other comparable systems will be operated by MARK J. ROSENTHAL and will be registered in 

accordance with 49 U.S.C. 44103, Registration of Aircraft, as well as 14 C.F.R Part 47, Aircraft Registration, and 

marked in accordance with 14 C.F.R. Part 45, Identification and Registration Marking.
BASIS FOR PETITION

Petitioner, MARK J. ROSENTHAL, 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 UAS Aircraft and 

other similar models of UAS in the National Airspace System (NAS), and for an exemption from the requirements 

of 14 CFR Part 21 subpart H, 14 CFR Part 45.23 (b), 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, MARK J. ROSENTHAL’s operation of the DJI UAS Aircraft and other similar UAS 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, MARK J. ROSENTHAL 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.

MARK J. ROSENTHAL submits that the requested relief is proper since an equivalent level of safety will be 

ensured. MARK J. ROSENTHAL will use experienced personnel or technicians to perform maintenance, 

alterations, or preventive maintenance on the UAS using the methods, techniques, and practices prescribed in the 

operating documents.

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

in command, is requested by MARK J. ROSENTHAL to the extent necessary to allow a Pilot in Command (PIC) 

with significant experience in the field of UAS’s, and who has demonstrated, by meeting minimum flight-hour and 

currency requirements, that the PIC is able to safely operate the UAS Aircraft in a manner consistent with this 

exemption, including evasive and emergency maneuvers and maintaining appropriate distances from people, vessels, 

vehicles and structures.

MARK J. ROSENTHAL seeks relief from Section 91.7(a), entitled Civil aircraft airworthiness, because the DJI 

UAS Aircraft and similar UAS do not require an airworthiness certificate in accordance with 14 C.F.R. Part 21, 

Subpart H. As such, MARK J. ROSENTHAL submits that he will ensure the UAS Aircraft are in an airworthy 

condition, prior to every flight, by determining that the UAS are in compliance with the operating documents and 

that the aircraft are in a condition for safe flight.

MARK J. ROSENTHAL also seeks an exemption from the requirements of Section 91.121, entitled Altimeter 

Settings, as UAS aircraft will not have a typical barometric altimeter onboard. However, altitude information of the 

UAS Aircraft will be provided to the PIC via Global Positioning System (GPS) equipment and radio 

communications telemetry data link, which downlinks from the UAS to the GCS for active monitoring of the flight 

path. This altitude information, combined with MARK J. ROSENTHAL’S operation of the UAS Aircraft within 

visual line of sight, at or below 200 feet AGL, will ensure a level of safety equivalent to Section 91.121.

Additionally, MARK J. ROSENTHAL seeks an exemption from the requirements of Section 91.151(b), entitled 

Fuel requirements for flight in VFR conditions. MARK J. ROSENTHAL submits that safety will not be affected by 

operation of the UAS Aircraft during daylight hours in visual meteorological conditions (VMC) under visual flight 

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

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

In accordance with 14 C.F.R. part 11.81, MARK J. ROSENTHAL provides the following information in support of 

its petition for exemption:

Name and Address of The Petitioner

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

MARK J. ROSENTHAL, 2439 Elrod Ct, Yuma AZ 85365. 856-981-4596 (Mobile) markjrosenthal@gmail.com
The Specific Sections of 14 C.F.R. From Which Mark J. Rosenthal Seeks Exemption

MARK J. ROSENTHAL Seeks Exemption From The Requirements Of Section 21 subpart H

14 CFR Part 21 Subpart H, entitled Airworthiness Certificates, establishes the procedural requirements for the 

issuance of airworthiness certificates as required by FAR §91.203 (a) (1). 

MARK J. ROSENTHAL Seeks Exemption From The Requirements Of Section 45.23 (b)

Section 45.23 Display of marks; general.

(a) Each operator of an aircraft must display on that aircraft marks consisting of the Roman capital letter 

“N” (denoting United States registration) followed by the registration number of the aircraft. Each suffix 

letter used in the marks displayed must also be a Roman capital letter.

(b) When marks include only the Roman capital letter “N” and the registration number is displayed on 

limited, restricted or light-sport category aircraft or experimental or provisionally certificated aircraft, the 

operator must also display on that aircraft near each entrance to the cabin, cockpit, or pilot station, in letters 

not less than 2 inches nor more than 6 inches high, the words “limited,” “restricted,” “light-sport,” 

“experimental,” or “provisional,” as applicable.

MARK J. ROSENTHAL 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:

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. A private pilot may, for compensation or hire, act as PIC of an aircraft in connection with any business or 

employment if—

The flight is only incidental to that business or employment; and the aircraft does not carry passengers or property 

for compensation or hire.

MARK J. ROSENTHAL 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.

MARK J. ROSENTHAL Seeks Exemption From The Requirements Of Section 91.9 (b)(2)

Section 91.9 (b) (2) provides: No person may operate a U.S.-registered civil aircraft ... (2) For which an Airplane or 

Rotorcraft Flight Manual is not required by §21.5 of this chapter, 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. 

MARK J. ROSENTHAL Seeks Exemption From The Requirements Of Section 91.121.

Section 91.121, entitled Altimeter settings, subsection (a), states the following, in part:

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—Below 18,000 feet MSL, to--

The current reported altimeter setting of a station along the route and within 100 nautical miles of the aircraft: 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

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.
MARK J. ROSENTHAL 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.

MARK J. ROSENTHAL Seeks Exemption From The Requirement Of Section 91.203 (a) & (b)

Section 91.203, 

(a) Except as provided in§ 91.715, no person may operate a civil aircraft unless it has within it the following:

(1) An appropriate and current airworthiness certificate. Each U.S. airworthiness certificate used to comply

with this subparagraph (except a special flight permit, a copy of the applicable operations specifications 

issued under§ 21.197(c) of this chapter, appropriate sections of the air carrier manual required by parts 121

and 135 of this chapter containing that portion of the operations specifications issued under § 21.197(c), or 

an authorization under § 91.611) must have on it the registration number assigned to the aircraft under part 

47 of this chapter. However, the airworthiness certificate need not have on it an assigned special 

identification number before 10 days after that number is first affixed to the aircraft. A revised 

airworthiness certificate having on it an assigned special identification number, that has been affixed to an 

aircraft, may only be obtained upon application to an FAA Flight Standards district office.

(2) An effective U.S. registration certificate issued to its owner or, for operation within the United States, 

the second copy of the Aircraft registration Application as provided for in§ 47.31(c), or a registration 

certification issued under the laws of a foreign country.

(b) No person may operate a civil aircraft unless the airworthiness certificate required by paragraph (a) of this 

section 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.

MARK J. ROSENTHAL 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—

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[.]

MARK J. ROSENTHAL 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:

No person may operate any aircraft that has undergone maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, 

or alteration unless-- It has been approved for return to service by a person authorized under § 43.7 of this 

chapter [.]

MARK J. ROSENTHAL 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:

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 -- 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 An 

inspection for the issuance of an airworthiness certificate in accordance with part 21 of this chapter.
MARK J. ROSENTHAL Seeks Exemption From The Requirements Of Sections 91.417(a) And 91.417(b).

Section 91.417, entitled Maintenance records, subsections (a) and (b), states the following:

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:

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--

• A description (or reference to data acceptable to the Administrator) of the work performed; and

• The date of completion of the work performed; and

• The signature and certificate number of the person approving the aircraft for return to service.

• Records containing the following information:

• The total time in service of the airframe, each engine, each propeller, and each rotor.

• The current status of life-limited parts of each airframe, engine, propeller, rotor, and appliance.

• The time since last overhaul of all items installed on the aircraft which are required to be overhauled on a 

specified time basis.

• 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.

• 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.

• 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. The owner or operator shall retain the 

following records for the periods prescribed: 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.

• 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. 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.
Extent of Relief MARK J. ROSENTHAL Seeks and The Reason MARK J. ROSENTHAL Seeks the Relief.

Extent of Relief MARK J. ROSENTHAL Seeks and The Reason MARK J. ROSENTHAL Seeks Relief from 

Section 14 CFR Part 21 subpart H.

Subpart H, entitled Airworthiness Certificates, establishes the procedural requirements for the issuance of 

airworthiness certificates as required by FAR §91.203 (a) (1). Given the size and limited operating area associated 

with the aircraft to be utilized by the Applicant, an exemption from Part 21 Subpart H meets the requirements of an 

equivalent level of safety under Part 11 and Section 333 of the Reform Act. The Federal Aviation Act (49 

U.S.C.§44701 (f)) and Section 333 of the Reform Act both authorize the FAA to exempt aircraft from the 

requirement for an airworthiness certificate, upon consideration of the size, weight, speed, operational capability, 

and proximity to airports and populated areas of the particular small UAS. In all cases, an analysis of these criteria 

demonstrates that the small UAS operated without an airworthiness certificate, in the restricted environment and 

under the conditions proposed will be at least as safe, or safer, than a conventional aircraft (fixed wing or rotorcraft) 

operating with an airworthiness certificate without the restrictions and conditions proposed. 

The small UAS to be operated hereunder is less than 55 lbs. fully loaded, carries neither a pilot nor passenger, 

carries no explosive materials or flammable liquid fuels, and operates exclusively within a secured and designated 

area. Unlike other civil aircraft, operations under this exemption will be tightly controlled and monitored by both the 

operator and under the requirements and in compliance with local public safety requirements. These safety 

enhancements provide a greater degree of safety to the public and property owners than conventional operations 

conducted with airworthiness certificates issued under 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H. Lastly, application of these 

same criteria demonstrates that there is no credible threat to national security posed by the small UAS, due to its 

size, speed of operation, location of operation, lack of explosive materials or flammable liquid fuels, and inability to 

carry a substantial external load. 

Extent of Relief MARK J. ROSENTHAL Seeks and The Reason MARK J. ROSENTHAL Seeks Relief from 

Section 45.23 (b).

Even though the small UAS will have no airworthiness certificate, an exemption may be needed as the small UAS 

will have no entrance to the cabin, cockpit or pilot station on which the word “Experimental” can be placed. Given 

the size of the small UAS, two-inch lettering will be impossible. The word “Experimental” will be placed on the 

fuselage in compliance with §45.29 (f). The equivalent level of safety will be provided by having the small UAS 

marked on its fuselage as required by §45.29 (f) where the pilot, observer and others working with the small UAS 

will see the identification of the small UAS as “Experimental.” 

Extent of Relief MARK J. ROSENTHAL Seeks and The Reason MARK J. ROSENTHAL 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, MARK J. ROSENTHAL submits that an equivalent level of safety will be maintained 

because no PIC will be allowed to operate the UAS unless that PIC has met certain flight hour and currency 

requirements, demonstrating that the PIC is able to safely operate either the 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, MARK J. ROSENTHAL submits that all flights of the UAS, conducted by the PIC pursuant to the grant of 

this Petition: (1) will be incidental to MARK J. ROSENTHAL business; and (2) will not carry passengers or 

property for compensation or hire.
Extent of Relief MARK J. ROSENTHAL Seeks and The Reason MARK J. ROSENTHAL 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 MARK 

J. ROSENTHAL to determine that the UAS Aircraft are in airworthy condition prior to every flight by ensuring that 

the UAS is in compliance with the operating documents (i.e., the MARK J. ROSENTHAL Aerial Operations 

Manual, Monthly Maintenance Log, and the UAS Aircraft Instruction Manual).

MARK J. ROSENTHAL seeks the requested relief because the UAS Aircraft do not require an airworthiness 

certificate in accordance with 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H. Therefore, MARK J. ROSENTHAL will ensure that the 

UAS Aircraft are in airworthy condition based upon its compliance with the operating documents (i.e., Monthly 

Maintenance Log, and the UAS Aircraft 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.

Extent of Relief MARK J. ROSENTHAL Seeks and The Reason MARK J. ROSENTHAL Seeks Relief from 

Section 91.9 (b)(2).

The small UAS, given its size and configuration has no ability or place to carry such a flight manual on the aircraft, 

not only because there is no pilot on board, but because there is no room or capacity to carry such an item on the 

aircraft. The equivalent level of safety will be maintained by keeping the flight manual at the ground control point 

where the pilot flying the small UAS will have immediate access to it. 

Extent of Relief MARK J. ROSENTHAL Seeks and The Reason MARK J. ROSENTHAL Seeks Relief from 

Section 91.121.

Relief from Section 91.121, entitled Altimeter settings, may be required to allow flight operations of the UAS 

Aircraft, which utilize a barometric pressure sensor, GPS equipment, and a radio communications telemetry data 

link to downlink altitude information from the UAS 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), MARK J. ROSENTHAL seeks the requested relief because the UAS Aircraft 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 UAS Aircraft 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 UAS on the heads-up display of the GCS.

Extent of Relief MARK J. ROSENTHAL Seeks and The Reason MARK J. ROSENTHAL 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 UAS Aircraft during daylight hours in visual meteorological 

conditions (VMC), under visual flight rules (VFR), for a total duration of 15 minutes to the first point of intended 

landing and, assuming normal cruising speed, to fly after that for at least 5 minutes. MARK J. ROSENTHAL seeks 

the requested relief because without an exemption from Section 91.151(b), the flight time duration of the battery 

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

MARK J. ROSENTHAL proposes to conduct pursuant to this petition. 

Significantly, as set forth below, the technical specifications of the UAS Aircraft operating documents, and MARK 

J. ROSENTHAL’s proposed operating limitations, ensure that MARK J. ROSENTHAL will safely operate the 

battery powered UAS Aircraft during daylight hours in visual meteorological conditions (VMC), under visual flight 

rules (VFR), with enough battery power to fly for a total duration of 15 minutes to the first point of intended landing 

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

Extent of Relief MARK J. ROSENTHAL Seeks and The Reason MARK J. ROSENTHAL Seeks Relief from 

Section 91.203 (a) & (b).

The small UAS fully loaded weighs no more than 55 lbs. and is operated without an onboard pilot. As such, there is 

no ability or place to carry certification and registration documents or to display them on the small UAS.
An equivalent level of safety will be achieved by keeping these documents at the ground control point where the 

pilot flying the small UAS will have immediate access to them; to the extent they are applicable to the small UAS. 

Extent of Relief MARK J. ROSENTHAL Seeks and The Reason MARK J. ROSENTHAL 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, MARK J. ROSENTHAL requests relief from these Sections because the UAS Aircraft 

does not require airworthiness certificates. As set forth more fully below, the UAS Aircraft meet the conditions of 

FMRA Section 333 for operation without an airworthiness certificate.

Accordingly, MARK J. ROSENTHAL will use trained technicians to perform maintenance, alterations, or 

preventive maintenance on the UAS using the methods, techniques, and practices prescribed in the UAS operating 

documents (i.e., the MARK J. ROSENTHAL Aerial Operations Manual, Monthly Maintenance Log, and the UAS 

Aircraft Instruction Manual). Furthermore, MARK J. ROSENTHAL will document and maintain all maintenance 

records for the UAS Aircraft.
Reasons Why Granting MARK J. ROSENTHAL’S Request Would Be in The Public Interest; How It Would 

Benefit the Public as A Whole.

Granting the present Petition will further the public interest by allowing MARK J. ROSENTHAL to safely, 

efficiently, and economically perform aerial video and photography of construction sites, real estate, and landscapes

over certain areas of the United States.

Additionally, use of the UAS Aircraft will decrease congestion of the NAS, reduce pollution, and provide significant 

benefits to the economy. Notably, the benefits of MARK J. ROSENTHAL’s proposed operation of the UAS Aircraft 

will be realized without implicating any privacy issues.

The Public Will Benefit from Decreased Congestion of The NAS.

UAS Aircraft 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 UAS Aircraft 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 UAS Aircraft 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.

The Public Will Benefit from The Safety and Efficiency of The UAS Aircraft

Conducting aerial acquisitions with UAS Aircraft, 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 UAS Aircraft 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 UAS aircraft, 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 UAS Aircraft 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 

UAS Aircraft (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).

Performing Aerial Video and Photography Operations with the UAS Aircraft Will Benefit the Economy.

In addition to being safe and efficient, the UAS Aircraft is also an economical alternative to using manned aircraft to 

conduct similar aerial operations. As such, operation of the UAS Aircraft will allow United States based companies, 

like MARK J. ROSENTHAL, 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 UAS Aircraft 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 UAS aircraft, petitioners such as MARK J. ROSENTHAL 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 UAS 

Aircraft, 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.

There Are No Privacy Issues.

Similar to the manned aerial acquisition flight operations that have been conducted for decades, MARK J. 

ROSENTHAL’s proposed operation of the UAS Aircraft will not create any privacy issues. Specifically, the UAS 

Aircraft will be operated only in compliance with operating documents (i.e., the MARK J. ROSENTHAL Aerial 

Operations Manual, Monthly Maintenance Log, and the UAS Aircraft 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.
Reasons Why Granting the Exemption Would Not Adversely Affect Safety, How the Exemption Would 

Provide a Level of Safety at Least Equal to That Provided by The Rule from Which MARK J. ROSENTHAL

Seeks Exemption.

Reasons Why The UAS Aircraft 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, MARK J. ROSENTHAL’s operation of the UAS Aircraft meets 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:

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. 

Assessment of Unmanned Aircraft Systems. --In making the determination under subsection (Secretary shall 

determine, at a minimum—

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

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).

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, MARK J. ROSENTHAL submits that the UAS Aircraft can operate safely in the NAS 

pursuant to FMRA Section 333, as demonstrated by: (a) the characteristics of the UAS aircraft; (b) the pilot 

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

The Specifications of The UAS Aircraft Demonstrate Its Safe Characteristics.

The UAS Aircraft 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.

Technical Specifications of the UAS Aircraft.

The UAS Aircraft Autonomous Flight and Navigation Modes Enable The UASs to Remain Within a Defined 

Operational Area.

The UAS Aircraft may be operated in both manual and fully autonomous flight modes.

The UAS Aircraft 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 UAS Aircraft will remain stationary, in flight, for 3 seconds or more. If, after 3 

seconds, the UAS Aircraft does 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.
Flights of the UAS Aircraft Will Be Conducted Pursuant to Specific Operating Limitations.

In seeking this exemption, MARK J. ROSENTHAL proposes to commercially operate the UAS Aircraft 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 Inspire 1, 

DJI Phantom 2, DJI Phantom 3 and a blanket exemption for other similar UAS.

2. UAS operations under this exemption will be limited to conducting operations for the purpose of aerial 

video and photography.

3. The UAS may not be flown at an indicated airspeed exceeding 45 knots

4. The UA must be operated at an altitude of no more than 400 feet above ground level (AGL), as indicated 

by the procedures specified in the operating documents unless a special request is made and approved by 

ATC. All altitudes reported to ATC must be in feet AGL.

5. The UAS must be operated within visual line of sight (VLOS) of the PIC at all times. This requires the PIC 

to be able to use human vision unaided by any device other than corrective lenses as prescribed by 

competent medical authority.

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 UAS 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. 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.

17. UAS operations may not be conducted during night, as defined in 14 C.F.R. § 1.1

18. 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.

19. The UAV may not operate within 5 nautical miles of an airport reference point as denoted on a current 

FAA-published aeronautical chart unless a letter of agreement with that airport’s management is obtained, 

and the operation is conducted in accordance with a NOTAM as required by the operator’s COA. The letter 

of agreement with the airport management must be made available to the Administrator upon request.

20. The UAV may not be operated less than 500 feet below or less than 2,000 feet horizontally from a cloud or 

when visibility is less than 3 statute miles from the PIC

21. If the UAV loses communications or loses its GPS signal, it must return to a pre- determined location

within the planned operating area and land or be recovered in accordance with the operating documents.

22. The PIC must abort the flight in the event of unpredicted obstacles or emergencies in accordance with the 

operating documents.

23. The PIC is prohibited from beginning a flight unless (considering wind and forecast weather conditions) 

there is enough power to fly at normal cruising speed to the intended landing point and land the UAV with 

25% battery power remaining.

24. All aircraft operated in accordance with the exemption must be identified by serial number, registered in 

accordance with 14 C.F.R. part 47, and have identification (N- Number) markings in accordance with 14 

C.F.R. part 45, Subpart C. Markings must be as large as practicable.

25. Before conducting operations, the radio frequency spectrum used for operation and control of the UAV 

must comply with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) or other appropriate government 

oversight agency requirements.

26. The documents required by 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.

27. The UAV must remain clear and yield the right of way to all manned aviation operations and activities at 

all times.

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

29. Flight operations must be conducted at least 500 feet from all nonparticipating persons (persons other than 

the PIC, SO, operator trainees or essential persons), vessels, vehicles, and structures unless:

a. Barriers or structures are present that sufficiently protect nonparticipating persons from the UAV 

and/or debris in the event of an accident. The operator must ensure that nonparticipating persons 

remain under such protection. If a situation arises where nonparticipating persons leave such 

protection and are within 500 feet of the UA, flight operations must cease immediately and/or;

b. The aircraft is operated near vessels, vehicles or structures where the owner/controller of such 

vessels, vehicles or structures has granted permission and the PIC has made a safety assessment of 

the risk of operating closer to those objects and determined that it does not present an undue 

hazard, and;

c. Operations nearer to the PIC, SO, operator trainees or essential persons do not present an undue 

hazard to those persons per § 91.119(a).

30. 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.

31. 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.

32. Accidents must be reported to the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) per instructions contained 

on the NTSB Web site: www.ntsb.gov.
Reasons Why an Exemption from The Requirements of Section 61.113(a) And (b) Would Not Adversely 

Affect Safety. 

MARK J. ROSENTHAL 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 UAS Aircraft unless that PIC has demonstrated, by 

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

a manner consistent with the exemption, including evasive and emergency maneuvers and maintaining appropriate 

distances from people, vessels, vehicles and structures. 

Considering MARK J. ROSENTHAL’s proposed area of operations, and the operating limitations set forth-above; 

the parallel nature of aeronautical knowledge requirements for an air traffic control specialist and aviation command 

and control officer; and the airmanship skills necessary to safely operate the UAS aircraft, MARK J. ROSENTHAL

submits that the training, preparation, practice, and experience of the Petitioner is sufficient to meet the requirements 

of the proposed use. 

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). 

MARK J. ROSENTHAL will not allow any PIC to operate the UAS Aircraft unless the PIC has demonstrated, by 

meeting minimum flight-hour requirements or the UAS Aircraft training and currency requirements, that the PIC is 

able to safely operate the UAS Aircraft 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 MARK J. ROSENTHAL

proposed operations. The Administrator has held that prior documented flight experience that was obtained in 

compliance with applicable regulations would ensure safe operations, stating as follows: 

In Exemption No. 11062, the FAA required that prior to conducting operations for the purpose of motion picture 

filming (or similar operations), the PIC must have accumulated and logged, in a manner consistent with 14 CFR 

61.51(b), 25 hours of total time as a UAS rotorcraft pilot including at least 10 hours logged as a UAS pilot with a 

multi-rotor UAS. Prior to operations under Exemption No. 11062, the PIC must also have accumulated and logged a 

minimum of 5 hours as a UAS pilot operating the same make and model of UAS to be used for operations under the 

exemption. For clarification, the FAA considers these minimum hour requirements to be inclusive rather than 

additive; i.e. 5 hours make and model time may be included in the 10 hours of multi-rotor time and the 10 hours may 

be included in the total 25 hours of UAS rotorcraft time. In addition to the hour requirements, the PIC must 

accomplish 3 takeoffs and landings in the preceding 90 days (for currency purposes). The FAA finds that at a 

minimum, the flight-hour requirements in Exemption No. 11062 are appropriate to practice and build proficiency in 

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

documented flight experience that was obtained in compliance with applicable regulations would satisfy this 

requirement. Training, proficiency, and experience-building flights can also be conducted under the grant of 

exemption to accomplish the required flight time. During training, proficiency, and experience- building flights the 

PIC is required to operate the UAS with appropriate distances in accordance with 14 C.F.R 91.119. 

Accordingly, MARK J. ROSENTHAL will ensure safe operations by not allowing any PIC to operate the UAS 

Aircraft unless that PIC has demonstrated, by meeting minimum flight-hour and currency requirements, that the PIC 

is able to safely operate the UAS Aircraft in a manner consistent with the exemption, including evasive and 

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

Reasons Why an Exemption from The Requirements of 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H; Section 45.23 (b); 

Section 91.9 (b)(2); Section 91.7(a); and 91.203 (a) & (b) Would Not Adversely Affect Safety. 

The equivalent level of safety established by 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H; Section 45.23 (b); Section 91.9 (b)(2); 

Section 91.7(a); and 91.203 (a) & (b) will be maintained because prior to every flight, MARK J. ROSENTHAL will 

ensure that the UAS Aircraft 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). 

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 UAS Aircraft will be provided to the PIC via GPS equipment and a radio communications telemetry data link, 

which downlinks from the UAS to the GCS for active monitoring of the flight path and altitude. This altitude 

information, combined with MARK J. ROSENTHAL operation of the UAS Aircraft within visual line of sight, at or 

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

generated by GPS equipment installed onboard the aircraft. Prior to each flight, a zero altitude initiation point is 

automatically established by the UAS at ground level. 

The FAA has previously granted relief from Section 91.121 specific to UAS, in 23 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). 

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 UAS Aircraft; (2) the limitations on the proposed flight operations; 

and (3) the location of the proposed flight operations. Accordingly, MARK J. ROSENTHAL will ensure that he will 

safely operate the battery powered UAS Aircraft during daylight hours in VFR conditions, with enough battery 

power to fly for a total duration of 15 minutes to the first point of intended landing and, assuming normal cruising 

speed, to fly after that for at least 5 minutes. 

Here, as in Exemption No. 11109, the technical specifications of the UAS Aircraft; 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 UAS Aircraft 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 UAS 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). 

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, MARK J. ROSENTHAL 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 MARK J. ROSENTHAL will use trained technicians to perform 

maintenance, alterations, or preventive maintenance on the UAS using the methods, techniques, and practices 

prescribed in the operating documents (i.e., the MARK J. ROSENTHAL Aerial Operations Manual, Monthly 

Maintenance Log, and the UAS Aircraft Instruction Manual). 

Furthermore, MARK J. ROSENTHAL will document and maintain all maintenance records for the UAS Aircraft. 

Since the UAS Aircraft will be inspected as prescribed by the operating documents, MARK J. ROSENTHAL will 

maintain the equivalent level of safety established by Sections 91.405(a), 91.409(a)(1), and 91.409(a)(2). 

Likewise, the exemption sought will not adversely affect safety because MARK J. ROSENTHAL 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 UAS Aircraft 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 MARK J. ROSENTHAL proposed operating limitations, the operating documents, and the 

technical aspects of the UAS Aircraft, MARK J. ROSENTHAL 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). 

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, MARK J. ROSENTHAL requests that the FAA prescribe special conditions for the 

intended operation of the UAS Aircraft, 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 

UAS Aircraft 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 UAS Aircraft, which contain such safety standards that the 

Administrator finds necessary to establish a level of safety equivalent to that established by 14 C.F.R. Part 21, 

Subpart H, and 14 C.F.R Sections 61.113(a) & (b), 91.7(a), 91.121, 91.151(b), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) 

& (a)(2), and 91.417(a) & (b). 

A Summary That Can Be Published in The Federal Register, stating: The Rules from Which MARK J. 

ROSENTHAL Seeks Exemption: 

MARK J. ROSENTHAL seeks exemption from the requirements of 14 CFR Part 21 subpart H, 14 CFR Part 45.23 

(b), 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 MARK J. ROSENTHAL Seeks: 

This exemption will permit MARK J. ROSENTHAL to commercially operate an Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) 
for the purpose of conducting aerial video and photography over certain areas of the United States. 

Any Additional Information, Views, Or Arguments Available to Support MARK J. ROSENTHAL 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, MARK J. ROSENTHAL 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, MARK J. ROSENTHAL will operate the UAS safely in the NAS, without creating a 

hazard to users of the NAS, or the public, or otherwise pose a threat to national security. 

CONCLUSION

As set forth herein, MARK J. ROSENTHAL 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 UAS Aircraft 

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 MARK J. ROSENTHAL to safely, efficiently, and economically operate the DJI 

UAS Aircraft commercially within the NAS. 

WHEREFORE, in accordance with the Federal Aviation Regulations and the FAA Modernization and Reform Act 

of 2012, Section 333, MARK J. ROSENTHAL respectfully requests that the Administrator grant this Petition for an 

exemption from the requirements of 14 CFR Part 21 subpart H, 14 CFR Part 45.23 (b), 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 MARK J. 

ROSENTHAL to operate the UAS Aircraft commercially for the purpose of conducting aerial video and 

photography over certain areas of the United States. 

Dated: January 5, 2016

Very respectfully,

Mark J. Rosenthal 

2439 Elrod Ct

Yuma AZ 85365. 

856 981 4596

markjrosenthal@gmail.com