October 27, 2015

U.S. Department of Transportation

Docket Management System

1200 New Jersey Ave., SE

Washington, DC 20590

Re: Exemption Request Under Section 333 of the FAA Reform Act and Part 11 of the

Federal Aviation Regulations

Dear Sir or Madam:

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

14 C.F.R. Part 11, R.A. McClure Inc. (hereafter “Petitioner”), an experienced operator of Unmanned 

Aircraft System (“UAS”), seeks exemption from the Federal Aviation Regulations (“FARs”) as 

described below.

The exemption request will permit Petitioner to operate UASs commercially for the purpose of aerial 

data collection. 

Petitioner will provide a service that is beneficial to an industry that is already using, and seeking to 

use, UASs for these purposes with a legal and safe option while providing relevant experience and

information to the FAA and the UAS community. This will benefit the public with the controlled

operation of UASs by Petitioner and increased integration into the National Airspace

System (“NAS”).

All operations by Petitioner will strictly adhere to safety guidelines and any UAS in operation by 

Petitioner will not exceed 55 lbs. weight.

Petitioner will have a Pilot in Command (“PIC”) responsible to properly train and maintain safe 

operations. During operations, the PIC will hold a Sport Pilot’s license as long as that is required by 

the FAA.

Petitioner has a thorough understanding of the importance of safety guidelines in the NAS, and a 

desire to promote the appropriate integration of UASs for the furtherance of aviation as a whole is the 

foundation upon which this business will operate.

The name and address of the applicant are:

R.A. McClure Inc.

Attn: Robert McClure

(740)363-6976

Address: 2116 Hardin Ln.

Powell, Ohio 43065
The regulations from which the exemption is requested are as follows:

14 C.F.R. Part 21;

14 C.F.R. 91.7(a);

14 C.F.R. 91.9(b)(2);

14 C.F.R. 91.109(a);

14 C.F.R. 91.119;

14 C.F.R. 91.105

14 C.F.R. 91.151(a);

14 C.F.R. 91.203(a) & (b);

14 C.F.R. 91.405(a);

14 C.F.R. 91.407(a)(1);

14 C.F.R. 91.409(a)(2);

14 C.F.R. 91.417(a).

Appendix A discusses each rule listed above and explains why exemptions pursuant to the proposal 

set forth in this letter are appropriate, provide an equivalent level of safety, and are in the public 

interest.

The Applicable Legal Standard Under Section 333

Petitioner submits that grant of this exemption application advances the Congressional mandate in 

Section 333 of the Reform Act to accelerate the introduction of UASs into the NAS if it can be 

accomplished safely. This law directs the Secretary of Transportation to consider whether certain 

UASs may operate safely in the NAS before completion of the rulemaking required under Section 

332 of the Reform Act. In making this determination, the Secretary is required to determine which 

types of UASs do not create a hazard to users of the NAS, the public, or pose a threat to national 

security in light of the following:

 The UAS’s size, weight, speed, and operational capability;

 Operation of the UAS in close proximity to airports and populated areas; and

 Operation of the UAS within visual line of sight of the operator.

Reform Act § 333(a)(1). If the Secretary determines that such vehicles “may operate safely in the 

national airspace system, the Secretary shall establish requirements for the safe operation of such 

aircraft in the national airspace system.” Id. §333(c) (emphasis added).1

The Federal Aviation Act expressly grants the FAA the authority to issue exemptions. This statutory

authority, by its terms, includes exempting civil aircraft, as the term is defined under §40101 of the 

Act, from the requirement that all civil aircraft must have current airworthiness certificate and those 

regulations requiring commercial pilots to operate aircraft in commercial service:

The Administrator may grant an exemption from a requirement of a regulation prescribed under 

subsection (a) or (b) of this section or any of sections 44702-44716 of this title if the Administrator 

finds the exemption is in the public interest.

The grant of the requested exemption is in the public interest based on the clear direction in

Section 333 of the Reform Act; the additional authority in the Federal Aviation Act, as
amended; the strong equivalent level of safety surrounding the proposed operations; and the

significant public benefit, including enhanced safety and cost savings associated with use of

UASs for aerial data collection, the reduction or elimination of unregulated operators, and the safe 

integration of UASs. Accordingly, the applicant respectfully requests that the FAA grant the 

requested exemption without delay.

Airworthiness

Grant of the exemption to Petitioner will be subject to the following mandatory airworthiness 

conditions:

 The UAS will never exceed a gross takeoff weight (GTOW) of 55 lbs., or in excess of the 

Operator Handbook/Manufacturer recommendations.

 A preflight checklist will be followed prior to each flight.

1 Applicant submits that this provision places a duty on the Administrator to not only process applicants for

exemptions under Section 333, but for the Administrator, if he deems the conditions proposed herein require

modification in order to allow approval, to supply conditions for the safe operation of the UAS. Petitioner 

respectfully requests the opportunity to consult with FAA staff in order to address any issues or concerns that this 

proposal may raise that they believe may require modification.

 The aircraft registration number will be displayed on the aircraft in accordance with current 

regulations.

 The POH, registration, copy of exemption, checklist, and copy of maintenance records will 

be mandatory documents for operation and must be located with or in the base station and 

accessible to the PIC at all times.

 Any FAA or manufacturer required placards are placed and clearly visible on the base station 

or controlling device.

 All equipment installed on the UAS will be operational for flight.

 PIC will be the determining authority on the airworthiness of the UAS prior, during, and after 

each flight, and will cease operations upon deeming the UAS not airworthy until proper 

maintenance or action has been taken.

Operator Requirements

Petitioner understands and upholds the stance that necessary precautions are required to protect 

aircraft already operating in the NAS, and the safety and security of the flight crew members, 

passengers as well as the public and property. For this reason, R.A. McClure Inc. will require all 

pilots of the UAS to hold at least the minimum certification or license required by the FAA at the 

time of the flight.

Furthermore Petitioner will use an appropriately certified pilot for the type of operation being 

conducted as it would fall under 14 C.F.R. if it were a manned aircraft.

The PIC and the Visual Observer will, at all times, be aware that UASs currently cannot adhere to the 

standard “see and avoid” requirements due to the size of the UAS impacting the distance at which it 

can be identified by pilots of manned aircraft. Petitioner maintains a zero tolerance policy for any 

pilot that fails to give complete right of way, and wide berth to any aircraft that comes within 1 

statute mile horizontally or 2000 feet vertically of operations.
In the interest of safety, and the furtherance of aviation, Petitioner requires it’s operators to adhere to 

its “See and Hear” policy. This policy requires that any aircraft that can be both observed and heard 

(excluding large turbine, turboprop, and other aircraft that are heard and seen but are clearly 2000 

feet above the highest permitted altitude of the UAS) by the PIC or the VO will require UAS 

operations to cease until the aircraft has passed.

The PIC will adhere to appropriate FARs. The PIC will, while the exemption is in place, log all 

flights conducted for Petitioner, or any flight to meet the training requirements.

UAS Models for Exemption

Petitioner seeks exemption for the following models of UAS proven for their safety and excellent 

design. Please see attachments for Operating Manuals.

DJI Phantom 2

DJI Phantom 3

DJI Inspire 1

DJI Spreading Wings S1000

Privacy

All flights will launch from private or controlled access property with the property owner or owner’s 

representative or controlling authority’s prior consent and knowledge.

* * *

In summary, applicant seeks an exemption from the FARs set forth above and in Appendix A to 

allow commercial operations of UASs conducting aerial flights as described.

Approval of the exemption allowing commercial operations of Petitioner’s UASs will increase safety

by permitting an operator to conduct a service safely that is already occurring without FAA 

knowledge, exemption, or adhering to prescribed safety guidelines. The exemption will also 

encourage the education of UAS operators and the adoption of FAA guidelines and approval for 

commercial UAS operations. It benefits the public through a higher level of safety of UAS operations 

and a service that benefits the local public and business. It also benefits the public through a smooth 

and well approached integration of UASs into the NAS, and continual communication with the FAA 

and the information gained.

Having a pilot owned business aids in bridging the gap between the advancement of UAS technology

and the current practices and operations in the NAS and with the FAA. This assists the FAA with its 

mission of promoting aviation while preserving safety of aviators, the public, and property.

The UASs operated by Petitioner satisfies the criteria set forth in Section 333 of the

Reform Act–size, weight, speed, operating capabilities, operation within visual line of sight, and 

national security–and showing an equivalent level of safety to manned aircraft flights through 

appropriate pilot certification and safety focused standards of operation, providing more than 

adequate justification for the grant of the requested exemptions allowing commercial operations.

Sincerely,
Robert McClure

Owner & Chief Pilot

R.A. McClure Inc.

APPENDIX A

EXEMPTION REQUEST AND EQUIVALENT LEVEL OF SAFETY SHOWINGS UNDER

APPLICABLE RULES SUBJECT TO EXEMPTION

Due to the flight characteristics, such as the ability to hover, vertical takeoff and landing, and the 

type of operations performed by the UASs operated by Petitioner, Petitioner respectfully request that 

where a regulation differentiates according to class that it be permitted to operate under those 

regulations pertaining to helicopters.

Petitioner requests an exemption from the following regulations as well as any additional regulations 

that may technically apply to the operation of its UASs:

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

14 CFR § 91.203(a)(1)

Section 91.203(a)(1) requires all civil aircraft to have a certificate of airworthiness. 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). Given the size of the

aircraft and the limited operating area associated with its utilization, it is unnecessary to go 

through the certificate of airworthiness process under Part 21 Subpart H to achieve or exceed 

current safety levels.

Such an exemption meets the requirements of an equivalent level of safety under Part 11 and

Section 333 of the Reform Act. The Federal Aviation Act 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 UAS involved.

In this case, an analysis of these criteria demonstrates that the Petitioner UASs operated without

an airworthiness certificate, under the conditions proposed herein, will be at least as safe, or 

safer, than a conventional aircraft (fixed wing or rotorcraft) with an airworthiness certificate.

The UASs will remain less than 55 lbs. GTOW. Will not carry a pilot or passenger, will not carry

flammable fuel, and will operate exclusively within an area pre-disclosed and in compliance with

conditions set forth herein. Operations under this exemption will be tightly controlled and

monitored by both the operator, pursuant to the conditions set forth above, and by local public

safety requirements. Receipt of the prior permission of the land owner, or controlling authority, 

the size of the aircraft, the lack of flammable fuel, and the fact that the aircraft is carried to the 

location and not flown there all establish the equivalent level of safety. The UASs construction 

with absorbent material provides at least an equivalent level of safety to that of such operations 

being conducted with conventional aircraft that would be orders of magnitude larger and would 

be carrying passengers, cargo, and flammable fuel.
14 C.F.R. § 91.7(a): Civil aircraft airworthiness.

This regulation requires that no person may operate a civil aircraft unless it is in airworthy

condition. Should the exemption be granted allowing commercial operation of the UASs without

an airworthiness certificate, no standard will exist for airworthiness of the UASs. Given the size

of the aircraft and the requirements that have presumably already been met in the approved

standard operating procedures (for instance, the Maintenance & Inspection Manual and Safety

Checklist), an equivalent level of safety will be achieved by ensuring compliance with the

operating manuals prior to each flight.

14 C.F.R. § 91.9(b)(2): Civil Aircraft Flight Manual in the Aircraft.

The regulation 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.

The equivalent level of safety will be achieved by keeping the flight manual at the ground

control point where the pilot flying the UAS will have immediate access to it. The FAA has

issued to others the following exemptions to this regulation: Exemption Nos. 8607, 8737, 8738,

9299, 9299A, 9565, 9565B, 10167, 10167A, 10602, 32827, and 10700.

14 C.F.R. § 91.109(2)

This regulation provides that flight crewmembers must keep a safety belt fastened while at a

crewmember station. Petitioner’s UASs are by definition not manned and therefore maintain an

equivalent level of safety without the use of safety belt since no danger is posed due to no 

persons being aboard the aircraft.

14 C.F.R. § 91.121(a)

This regulation requires that aircraft be operated at altitude in reference to an altimeter set to

applicable barometric pressure. According to the Flight Manuals and information included with

this exemption request the UASs operated by Petitioner uses GPS positioning

This, in addition to all flights being conducted by VLOS, assures altitude restrictions will be 

maintained by the pilot. Given the nature of the flight being limited to an upper altitude limit, the 

limited area of operations, the See and Avoid procedures set forth by Petitioner, and in light of 

the UASs not being operated at VFR or IFR cruising altitudes an equivalent level of safety will 

be achieved.

14 C.F.R. § 91.109(a) & 91.319(a)(1): Flight Instruction

These regulations provide that no person may operate a civil aircraft (except a manned free

balloon) that is being used for flight instruction unless that aircraft has fully functioning dual

controls. UASs are a remotely piloted aircraft and by design, do not have fully functional dual

controls. Flight control is accomplished through the use of a control box that communicates with

the aircraft via radio communications. If instruction is accomplished through a training program,

as set forth in an equivalent level of safety will be assured. The FAA has approved exemptions

for flight training without fully functional dual controls for a number of aircraft and for flight
instruction in experimental aircraft. See Exemption Nos. 5778K & 9862A. The equivalent level

of safety will be achieved by the Petitioner providing the training as outlined.

14 CFR § 91.119: Minimum Safe Altitudes

Section 91.119 establishes safe altitudes for operation of civil aircraft. Due to the flight

characteristics of Petitioner’s UASs (vertical takeoff and landing, and ability to hover) as well as 

the nature of the type of flights conducted by UASs and the similarity to helicopters Petitioner

requests to operate in accordance with section 91.119(d). The equivalent level of safety will be 

achieved given the size, weight, speed, and material with which the UASs are built. Furthermore;

no flight will be taken without the permission of the land owner or those who control the land. 

Because of the advance notice to the landowner, all affected individuals will be notified of the 

flights. Compared to aerial photography or videography operations conducted with aircraft or 

rotorcraft weighing far more than the UAS and carrying flammable fuel, any risk associated with 

these operations will be far less than those currently allowed with conventional aircraft operating 

at or below 500 feet AGL. Indeed, the low altitude operations of the UAS will maintain 

separation between these small UAS operations and the operations of conventional aircraft that 

must comply with Section 91.119, give right of way to all manned aircraft, and adhere to 

Petitioner’s See and Hear policy.

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

This regulation prohibits an individual from beginning “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 – (1) During the day,

to fly after that for at least 30 minutes; or (2) At night, to fly after that for at least 20 minutes.”

Given the limitations on its proposed operations and the location of those proposed operations, a 

longer time frame for flight in daylight VFR conditions is reasonable. Petitioner believes that an 

exemption from 14 CFR § 91.151(b) is safe and within the scope of a prior exemption. See 

Exemption 10673 (allowing Lockheed Martin Corporation to operate without compliance with 

91.151(a)). Operating the small UAS, without 20 minutes of reserve fuel does not engender the 

type of risks that Section 91.151(b) was meant to prevent given the size and speed at which the 

UAS operates. The fact that it carries no pilot, passenger, or cargo also enhances its safety. 

Additionally, limiting flights to a 20 minute reserve would greatly reduce their utility. In the 

unlikely event that the UAS should run out of fuel, it would simply land. Given its weight and 

construction material, the risks are less than contemplated by the current regulation.

Petitioner believes that an equivalent level of safety can be achieved by maintaining 25% battery

power, or 10% of time (whichever is longer) would be more than adequate to return the

UAS to its planned landing zone from anywhere in its operating area.

14 C.F.R. § 91.203 (a) & (b): Carrying Civil Aircraft Certification and Registration

This regulation provides as follows:

(a) . . . no person may operate a civil aircraft unless it has . . . an appropriate and current 

airworthiness certificate.
(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.

Petitioner’s UASs have no cockpit or cabin to place or carry certification. As such, the exemption 

and any other certifying document from the FAA will be maintained with the ground station, and 

placed in a manner as to be clearly visible to any government official or person authorized in the 

controlled operations environment.

An equivalent level of safety will be achieved by keeping these documents at the ground control

point where the pilot flying the UAS will have immediate access to them. The FAA has issued

numerous exemptions to this regulation. A representative sample of other exceptions includes

Exemption Nos. 9565, 9665, 9789, 9789A, 9797, 9797A, 9816A, and 10700.

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

Section 91.405(a) requires 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 . 

. . .” Section 91.407 similarly makes reference to requirements in Part 43; Section 91.409(a)(2) 

requires an annual inspection for the issuance of an airworthiness certificate. Section 91.417(a) 

requires the owner or operator to keep records showing certain maintenance work that has been 

accomplished by certificated mechanics, under Part 43, or licensed pilots and records of approval 

of the aircraft for return to service.

Maintenance on Petitioner’s aircraft will be accomplished by the owner/operator pursuant to the 

manuals, provided by Petitioner, and the manufacturer. An equivalent level of safety will be 

achieved because the UAS is small in size, will operate only in restricted predetermined areas 

and is not a complex mechanical device. As provided in the attached Maintenance Manual and 

the Safety Checklist, which were reviewed as part of the application, the operator of the UAS 

will ensure that it is in working order prior to initiating flight, perform required maintenance, and 

keep a log of any maintenance that is performed. Moreover, the Petitioner’s Chief Pilot is 

familiar with the aircraft, has extensive experience with maintenance, and is best suited to 

maintain the aircraft in an airworthy condition and to ensure an equivalent level of safety.

The Petitioner’s Maintenance Manual provides for a 30 day/100 hour and Annual inspection of 

the airframe and components similar in scope to inspections on manned aircraft.

This will ensure an equivalent level of safety to the maintenance requirements in Part 91.

In addition, between such inspections, should a mechanical issue arise, the aircraft will either 

return to its launch site or immediately land.

APPENDIX B

SUMMARY OF IMPACT BROTHERS, LLC SECTION 333 EXEMPTION REQUEST

Petitioner hereby provides pursuant to Part 11 a summary of its exemption application to allow 

commercial operation of its UASs in aerial photography/videography. An exemption is requested 

from the following regulations:

14 C.F.R. Part 21;

14 C.F.R. 91.7(a);
14 C.F.R. 91.9(b)(2);

14 C.F.R. 91.109(a);

14 C.F.R. 91.119;

14 C.F.R. 91.105

14 C.F.R. 91.151(a);

14 C.F.R. 91.203(a) & (b);

14 C.F.R. 91.405(a);

14 C.F.R. 91.407(a)(1);

14 C.F.R. 91.409(a)(2);

14 C.F.R. 91.417(a).