1 

Executive Offices 

300 Galleria Officentre, Suite 200 

Southfield, Michigan 48034 

November 5, 2015 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Docket Management System 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

 Re: Motors Insurance Corporation Petition for Exemption Pursuant to 

 Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 and Part 11 

 of the Federal Aviation Regulations 

 

Dear Sir or Madam,

Pursuant to Section 333 of the Federal Aviation Administration (“FAA”) Modernization and 

Reform Act of 2012 (the “Reform Act”) and Part 11 of the Federal Aviation Regulations 

(“FAR”), Motors Insurance Corporation (“Petitioner”) hereby petitions the FAA for authority to 

operate the small Unmanned Aircraft System (“UAS”) as described herein for aerial photography 

and videography. Specifically, Petitioner intends to use UAS to inspect dealer inventory 

vehicles after a natural disaster has caused damage to the area where dealer vehicles are stored. 

As this petition is similar in all material respects to other petitions the FAA has granted, 

Petitioner requests summary approval of this petition. 

I. BACKGROUND OF PETITIONER 

Ally Financial Inc. is a leading automotive financial services company, and wholly owns Motors 

Insurance Corporation which is domiciled in Michigan. Petitioner, through its insurance and noninsurance companies, offers a full spectrum of financial products and services, including vehicle 

service contracts, inventory insurance, insurance consultative services for dealers and other 

ancillary products. Additional information about the company is available at the Ally media site 

at http://media.ally.com. 

II. DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS 

Petitioner requests an exemption to permit use of UAS for aerial photography and videography. 

The UAS will be used to survey damage to insured dealer inventories after casualty events. The 

data collected will assist Petitioner in determining the scope and severity of insurance claims. 

Such operations may occur, subject to notice to and approval of proper federal, state and local 

officials, over areas that have suffered a natural disaster such as a hurricane, tornado, flood or 

wildfire. The purpose of these operations will be to develop procedures that will improve the 

speed of Petitioner’s response to policyholders. Petitioner will develop operating procedures that 

will integrate UAS into its response strategy to ensure safety to persons and property. 
2 

Operation of the UAS will occur under safe and controlled conditions pursuant to the terms of 

the FAA’s grant. Specifically, 

 Operations will be conducted by a Pilot in Command (“PIC”) holding either an airline 

transport, commercial, private, recreational, or sport pilot certificate, and a current FAA 

airman medical certificate or a valid U.S. driver’s license. 

 The UAS will be operated in visual line of site (“VLOS”) of the PIC at all times and 

operations will only occur during daytime. 

 All UAS operations will utilize a visual observer (“VO”), who can communicate with the 

PIC verbally at all times. 

 Prior to each flight, pilot will inspect the UAS to ensure it is in condition for safe flight. 

 The airspace used for inspection will be predetermined, limited, and controlled. 

 The UAS will remain clear and yield the right of way to all other manned operations and 

activities at all times. 

 All operations will be conducted over private or controlled-access property. Petitioner 

will limit operations to property whose owners/controllers have given permission for 

UAS operations 

 Flights will be conducted under 400 feet above ground level (“AGL”) and only when 5 

miles or greater from an airport, thereby avoiding interference with users of the NAS. 

In short, Petitioner will take measures to ensure that UAS operations will not create a hazard to 

aviation or to the public. Given the size and speed of the UAS, the controlled nature of the 

locations being used and the lack of explosive materials or flammable jet fuels, the operations 

will not pose a threat to national security. 

III. PUBLIC INTEREST BENEFITS 

Grant of Petitioner’s request to operate the UAS for commercial aerial photography and 

videography is in the public interest for several reasons. First, use of UAS in this manner will 

make conditions for insurance claim representatives much safer. Today, claim representatives 

need to enter into the impacted area soon after the occurrence in order to obtain a preliminary 

scope of damage. Such activities are inherently dangerous. Second, quick assessment of 

damage sustained to dealer inventory allows Petitioner to determine required staffing and logistic 

issues for inspection of vehicles and potentially movement of vehicles that are located in areas 

dangerous to reach by foot. Third, use of small, light, UAS offers countless benefits over use of 

full-sized manned aircraft. Replacing significantly larger manned aircraft carrying flight crews 

and flammable fuel with UAS that do not carry people creates a greater margin of safety for 

UAS operators and visual observers as well as the public on the ground. The lower acquisition, 

operational, and personnel costs of using UAS, in addition to reduced environmental impacts 

such as reduced noise and emissions and the use of batteries for power, also benefit the public. 

IV. AIRCRAFT SPECIFICATIONS 

Petitioner requests authority to use the DJI Phantom 3 Professional model. This UAS is a 

quadcopter weighing 1280 g including battery and propellers and having a diagonal size of 590 
3 

mm including propellers. The FAA has previously granted Section 333 exemptions to operators 

using this UAS, noting that in consideration of the size, weight, speed, and limited operating area 

associated with the aircraft and its operation, the Secretary of Transportation has determined that 

this aircraft meets the conditions of Section 333.1

 Petitioner also requests authority to use a 

model of aircraft comparable in size, weight, and safety capabilities to the DJI Phantom 3 

Professional and any updated model of the same DJI aircraft. 

V. STATUTORY AUTHORITY FOR REQUESTED EXEMPTION 

This petition for exemption is submitted in accordance with Section 333 of the Reform Act and 

Section 44701 of the Federal Aviation Act. The Federal Aviation Act grants the Administrator 

of the FAA general authority to grant exemptions from the agency's safety regulations and 

minimum standards when the Administrator decides such a requested exemption is in the public 

interest.2

 In addition, the Reform Act directs the Secretary of Transportation to determine which 

UAS “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.”3

 The FAA’s 

regulations require that a party requesting an exemption include (i) the reasons why granting the 

request would be in the public interest, and (ii) the reasons why granting the exemption would 

not adversely affect safety or how it would provide a level of safety at least equal to the existing 

rules.4

VI. APPLICATION INFORMATION 

The name and address of the applicant are: 

Hasan Ozel 

1000 Abernathy Road, 

400 NorthPark, Suite 275 

Atlanta, GA 30328 

Phone: (770) 677-5349 

hasan.ozel@ally.com 

Regulations from which the exemption is requested: 

14 C.F.R. § 61.23(a) and (c) - Medical Certificates: Requirement and duration. 

14 C.F.R. § 61.101(e)(4) and (5) - Recreational pilot privileges and limitations. 

14 C.F.R. § 61.113(a) - Private pilot privileges and limitations: Pilot in command. 

14 C.F.R. § 61.315(a) - What are the privileges and limits of my sport pilot certificate 

14 C.F.R. § 91.7(a) - Civil aircraft airworthiness. 

14 C.F.R. § 91.119(c) - Minimum safe altitudes: General. 

 

1

 See Grant of Exemption No. 11801, Regulatory Docket No. FAA–2015–1019 (Donan Solutions LLC); 

Grant of Exemption No. 11944, Regulatory Docket No. FAA–2015–1034 (Adam Szaruga); Grant of Exemption No. 

11824, Regulatory Docket No. FAA–2015–1078 (Axis Surveying, LLC). 

2

 See 49 U.S.C. § 44701(f). 3

 Pub. L. No. 112-95, 126 Stat. 75-76 (codified as a Note to 49 U.S.C. § 40101). 

4

 14 C.F.R. § 11.81. 
4 

14 C.F.R. § 91.121- Altimeter settings. 

14 C.F.R. § 91.151(a)(1) - Fuel requirements for flight in VFR conditions. 

14 C.F.R. § 91.405(a) - Maintenance required. 

14 C.F.R. § 91.407(a)(1) - Operation after maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, or 

alteration. 

14 C.F.R. § 91.409(a)(1) and (2) - Inspections 

14 C.F.R. § 91.417(a) and (b) - Maintenance records 

VII. REQUEST FOR SUMMARY GRANT 

The FAA can issue a summary grant when it finds it has already granted a previous exemption 

similar to the new request. As described in detail herein, Petitioner request authority to use a 

small UAS for aerial photography and videography. Given that this exemption is similar to those 

that have already been granted,5

 Petitioner requests that, if possible, this request for exemption 

be considered on an expedited basis. 

VIII. JUSTIFICATIONS FOR EACH EXEMPTION REQUEST 

A. 14 C.F.R. §§ 61.23(a) and (c) Medical Certificates: Requirement and duration; 

61.101(e)(4) and (5) Recreational pilot privileges and limitations; 61.113(a) 

Private pilot privileges and limitations: Pilot in command; 61.315(a) What are the 

privileges and limits of my sport pilot certificate. 

Petitioner notes that FAA has required previous Section 333 grantees to use a PIC holding either 

an airline transport, commercial, private, recreational or sport certificate pilot license and either a 

current FAA airman medical certificate or a valid U.S. driver’s license issued by a state, the 

District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, a territory, a possession, or the Federal government. 

Petitioner will ensure that its PICs will satisfy each of these requirements. Since Petitioner’s 

PICs will be operating UAS under the same conditions as those previously granted by the FAA, 

an equivalent level of safety will be met by granting these exemptions. 

B. 14 C.F.R. § 91.7(a) Civil aircraft worthiness. 

Section 91.7(a) prohibits operation of a civil aircraft unless it is in airworthy condition for safe 

flight. The FAA has stated that no exemption is required to the extent that the requirements of 

Part 21 are waived or found inapplicable. Petitioner requests an exemption from this regulation 

because the UAS would not operate with an airworthiness certificate under the proposal set forth 

in this filing. Given the size of the aircraft and the operational parameters, an equivalent level of 

safety will be provided. Petitioner notes that the Administrator has granted relief from this 

section in previous exemptions. 

C. 14 C.F.R. § 91.119(c) Minimum safe altitudes over congested and other areas. 

Section 91.119(c) establishes safe altitudes for operation of civil aircraft over areas other than 

congested areas. The Petitioner requests relief from this section with respect to those 

 

5

 See Grant of Exemption No. 11676, Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2015-0568 (DPR Construction); Grant of 

Exemption No. 12116, Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2015-1059 (Unmanned Ad-Hoc Industries, Inc.). 
5 

participating persons, vehicles, and structures directly involved with operations. The UAS will 

never operate at higher than 400 AGL. Relief from this section is warranted as operations will 

be conducted with adequate safety provisions as outlined in this document. As a result, an 

equivalent level of safety will be met by granting this exemption. Petitioner notes that the 

Administrator has granted relief from this section in previous exemptions. 

D. 14 C.F.R. § 91.121 Altimeter Settings. 

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

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

altimeter setting available before departure. An exemption from this section may be needed if 

the UAS does not have a barometric altimeter, but instead has a GPS altitude read out. An 

equivalent level of safety will be achieved by the operator confirming the altitude of the launch 

site shown on the GPS altitude indicator before flight. As a result, an equivalent level of safety 

will be met by granting this exemption. Petitioner notes that the Administrator has granted relief 

from this section in previous exemptions. 

E. 14 C.F.R. § 91.151(a)(l) Fuel requirements for flight in VFR conditions. 

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

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

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

to fly after that for at least 30 minutes.” Complying with the 30 minute reserve would severely 

limit the length of the Petitioner’s UAS flights and hamper operations. Given the limitations on 

the UAS’s proposed flight area, a longer time frame for flight in daylight conditions is 

reasonable. Operating the UAS in a tightly controlled area does not raise the type of risks that 

this section was intended to address, particularly given the size and speed of the UAS. Petitioner 

notes that the Administrator has granted relief from this section in previous exemptions. 

F. 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.405(a) Maintenance required; 91.407(a)(l) Operation after 

maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding or alteration; 91.409(a)(l) and 

(2) Inspections; 91.417(a) and (b) Maintenance records. 

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

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

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

chapter...,” and others shall inspect or maintain the aircraft in compliance with Part 43. 

Given that these sections and Part 43 apply only to aircraft with an airworthiness certificate, 

these sections will not apply to the Petitioner. The UAS will be maintained by the petitioner. An 

equivalent level of safety will be achieved because the UAS are very limited in size and will 

carry a small payload and operate only in restricted areas for limited periods of time and only 

during daylight hours. If mechanical issues arise, the UAS will be operating from no higher than 

400 feet AGL and can immediately land. The operator will ensure that the UAS is in working 

order prior to initiating flight, perform required maintenance, and keep a log of any maintenance 

performed. Moreover, the operator is the person most familiar with the aircraft and best suited to 

maintain the aircraft in an airworthy condition to provide the equivalent level of safety. As a 
6 

result, an equivalent level of safety will be met by granting this exemption. Petitioner notes that 

the Administrator has granted relief from this section in previous exemptions. 

G. Additional Relief. 

In addition to the exemptions listed above, the Petitioner requests exemption from such other 

rules and regulations as the FAA deems appropriate to enable the operations described. If, 

during the effective date of any Grant of Exemption issued pursuant to this Petition, the FAA 

issues interim or final rules applicable to the operation of any UAS included herein, any 

conditions and limitations required in such Grant that are more burdensome than the new 

regulation be appropriately modified or removed.

IX. SUMMARY TO BE PUBLISHED IN FEDERAL REGISTER 

If the FAA determines that summary grant is not appropriate in this case, below is a summary of 

the petition for publication in the Federal Register. 

Petitioner: Motors Insurance Corporation 

Sections of 14 C.F.R. Affected: 14 C.F.R. §§ 61.23(a) and (c); 14 C.F.R. §§ 61.101(e)(4) and (5); 

14 C.F.R. § 61.113(a); 14 C.F.R. § 61.315(a); 14 C.F.R. § 91.7(a); 14 C.F.R. § 91.119(c); 14 

C.F.R. § 91.121; 14 C.F.R. § 91.151(a)(1); 14 C.F.R. § 91.405(a); 14 C.F.R. § 91.407(a)(1); 14 

C.F.R. §§ 91.409(a)(1) and (2); 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.417(a) and (b). 

Description of Relief Sought: Petitioner seeks relief from the requirements of 14 C.F.R. Part 21 

Subpart H; 14 C.F.R. § 21.191(a); 14 C.F.R. § 45.23(b); 14 C.F.R. § 45.27; 14 C.F.R. §§ 

61.23(a) and (c); 14 C.F.R. §§ 61.101(e)(4) and (5); 14 C.F.R. § 61.113(a); 14 C.F.R. § 

61.315(a); 14 C.F.R. § 91.7(a); 14 C.F.R. § 91.119(c); 14 C.F.R. § 91.121; 14 C.F.R. § 

91.151(a)(1); 14 C.F.R. § 91.405(a); 14 C.F.R. § 91.407(a)(1); 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.409(a)(1) and 

(2); 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.417(a) and (b) to operate an unmanned aerial system for aerial photography 

and videography. 

X. CONCLUSION 

This petition satisfies the criteria provided in Section 333 of the Reform Act regarding size, 

weight, speed, operating capabilities, proximity to airports and populated areas, operation within 

visual line of sight, and national security, and provides more than adequate justification for the 

grant. Please do not hesitate to contact Petitioner’s outside counsel Katy Ross at 202-719-7410 

or kmross@wileyrein.com with any questions about this filing. 

Sincerely, 

 /s/ 

Deborah L. Rhodes 

General Counsel, Motors Insurance Corporation