Leland C., “Zeke”, Hurd, II

249 Lyell Ave; PO Bx #4

Spencerport, NY 14559

U. S. Department of Transportation Jan 20, 2016

Docket Management System

1200 New Jersey Ave.

SE Washington, DC 20590

Subject: Exemption Request Section 333 of the FAA Reform Act and Part 11 of the Federal Aviation 

Regulations form 14 C.F.R. Part 21, 45.27(a), 45.29(3) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h), 61.113 (a) & (b), 91.103, 91.119, 

91,121, 91.203, 91.151.

Following the format of FAA Exemption No. 11138-Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2014-0481, information I 

have included:

1) Supplemental Response for Petition

2) Phantom 3 Operator Manual link; www.dji.com/product/phantom-3/downloads

3) Personal protocols and controls-Safety/Flight concern

4) “Private Pilot Airplane Single Engine Land” Certificate #2206884/ with Instrument Airplane 

Rating, issued 01-24-78.

Pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 and 14 C.F.R. Part 11, I, 

Leland C., “Zeke”, Hurd, II, a licensed instrument rated pilot, (4000+ hours) and sole-proprietor of 

Pegasus Environmental Company, preparing this exemption request myself, would like to apply for an 

exemption from the following Code of Federal Regulations, (C.F.R.), to be allowed commercial operation 
of lightweight Unmanned Aircraft Systems, (UAS) for aerial imaging, data collection, mapping, 

agriculture crop inspection, building inspection, photography and aerial videos.

During the past 3 years I have flown “hobby quads” for recreational purposes without incident. I have 

added the DJI Phantom 3 quad-copter, (maximum gross weight, 3 pounds), equipped with four motor 

driven rotors powered via batteries; the UAS has a maximum speed of 30 knots and is equipped with a 

“Go-Pro Gimbal” for aerial imaging and remote sensing

The requested exemption would permit operation of the ultra-light UAS in predetermined areas 

sanctioned by the FAA as “safe to fly” areas under 400 feet AGL. This would allow for video and remote 

sensing imaging within designated boundaries. All flights to be conducted under the rules and guidelines 

established via ATC and the FAA.

Given the size, weight, speed and physical limited operating area associated with the UAS to be utilized, 

I am requesting exemption from 14CFRpart21, Subpart H,( Airworthiness Certificates) and #91.203 (a) 

and (b), (Certification required), subject to certain conditions and limitations, as is warranted and meets 

the requirements for an equivalent level of safety under 14CFR part 11 and Section 333 of P.L. 112-95, 

(Section 333).

Furthermore I request an exemption from #45.23, (marking of the aircraft) because the UAS does not 

have cabin, cockpit or pilot station on which to mark certain words and, or phrases. Additionally, due to 

the very small size of the UAS, there is not sufficient surface space for the two inch lettering 

requirement. The need for markings is understood. Thus every attempt will be made to place the word 

“Experimental” or assign various numbers deemed appropriate by the FAA, (#45.29(f)), to be visible to 

anyone assigned as a “spotter”. I also request an exemption from ##91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 

91.409(a)(2) and 91417(a)and (b). Maintenance inspections may be required and should be granted 

since they only apply to Aircraft with an “Airworthiness Certificate”. Yet, as a safety precaution, a 

“preflight inspection” will be performed of the UAS before each and every flight operation, as outlined 

in the UAS’ “operations manual”.

Regarding UAS operational training, as stated previously, I have 3+ years of experience performing 

numerous flights as a “hobbyist” simulating flights for future commercial use to gain familiarization of 

the UAS and it’s performance envelope under various weather and altitude conditions. In so doing, I 

have built several small versions of this UAS and am an active member of the Academy of Model 

Aeronautics, (AMA).

If granted this requested exemption, I agree to adhere to any and all additional safety procedures 

including but not limited to:

1) While airborne, keeping the UAS within a 1000 foot radius from the controller to aid in 

direct line of sight visual observation while constantly maintaining all VFR flight rules.

2) Operate the UAS within the flight time limitations as per the manufacturer’s recommended 

minimal level of battery power.

3) Operate the UAS within “visual line of sight”, (VLOS).

4) Use the global positioning system, (GPS) flight safety feature which enables the UAS to 

hover, then slowly land if communication is lost with the controller.
5) Conduct all flight operations under my personal safety protocol including posting warning 

sign ; “Attention: Aerial Photography in Progress – Remain Back 150 Feet”.

6) During all flight operations, analyzation of all data and other resources of information will 

constantly be observed to enhance and update all safety protocol

7) Be in contact with ALL respective airports and ATC for any operations within 5 miles of the 

FAA facilities for permission based on our estimated flight time, elevation and duration.

8) In the event of unforeseen safety breaches or dangers, have an immediate plan to abort the 

mission.

Aerial imaging for agricultural and environmental data collection via manned fixed wing and full scale 

helicopter platforms has been utilized for many years. Yet for many small business owners the ability to 

obtain the vast benefits gleaned from this scenario has been cost prohibitive. Granting the Petitioner’s 

exemptions will further the Public interest by allowing Pegasus Environmental to safely, efficiently and

economically conduct aerial surveys and data collection. In addition, the use of UAS’s for these purposes 

will replace the older, conventional, expensive methods of aerial surveying and substantially reduce 

pollution and costs within the land and environmental management industries.

In conclusion; over the past several years, my extensive flight time, 4000+ hours, PIC, within the FAA 

regulatory guidelines has yielded the experience necessary for safe, legal, and prudent UAV commercial 

operations.

Your timely consideration for granting the “333 exemption” is very most appreciated.

Thank you.

Sincerely,

Leland C., “Zeke”, Hurd,II