April 20, 2015

Exemption No. 11385 Regulatory Docket No. FAA–2015–0129

Mr. James T. Marsh Owner/Operator

HeliTek NW

3812 SW 195 th Terrace Beaverton, OR 97078

Dear Mr. Marsh:

This letter is to inform you that we have gran ted your request for exemption. It transmits our decision, explains its basis, and gives you th e conditions and limitations of the exemption, including the date it ends.

The Basis for Our Decision

By letter dated January 7, 2015, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on behalf of HeliTek NW (hereinafter petitioner or operator) for an exemption. The exemption would allow the petitioner to operate an unma nned aircraft system (UAS) to conduct aerial videography and cinematography to enhance academic community awareness.

See Appendix A for the petition submitted to the FAA describing the proposed operations and the regulations that the petitioner seeks an exemption.

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition in the Federal Register because the requested exemption would not set a precedent, and any delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to the petitioner.

Airworthiness Certification

The UAS proposed by the petiti oner is a DJI Inspire 1.2

The petitioner requested relief from 14 CFR part 21, Certification procedures for products and parts, Subpart H—Airworthiness Certificates . In accordance with the statutory criteria provided in Section 333 of Public Law 112

− 95 in reference to 49 U.S.C. § 44704, and in consideration of the size, weight, speed, a nd limited operating area associated with the aircraft and its operation, the S ecretary of Transportation has de termined that this aircraft meets the conditions of Section 333. Therefore, the FAA finds that the requested relief from 14 CFR part 21, Certification procedures for products and parts, Subpart H—Airworthiness Certificates , and any associated noise certification and testing requirements of part 36, is
not necessary.

The Basis for Our Decision

You have requested to use a UAS for aerial data collection. The FAA has issued grants of exemption in circumstances similar in all materi al respects to those pres ented in your petition. In Grants of Exemption No s. 11062 to Astraeus Aerial ( see Docket No. FAA

− 2014

− 0352), 11109 to Clayco, Inc. ( see Docket No. FAA

− 2014

− 0507), 11112 to VDOS Global, LLC ( see Docket No. FAA

− 2014

− 0382), and 11213 to Aeryon Labs, Inc. ( see Docket No.

FAA

− 2014

− 0642), the FAA found that the enhanced safety achieved using an unmanned aircraft (UA) with the specifica tions described by the petition er and carrying no passengers or crew, rather than a manned aircraft of signi ficantly greater proporti ons, carrying crew in addition to flammable fuel, gi ves the FAA good cause to find th at the UAS operation enabled by this exemption is in the public interest.

Having reviewed your reasons for re questing an exemption, I find that—

 They are similar in all material respects to relief previously re quested in Grant of Exemption Nos. 11062, 11109, 11112, and 11213;

 The reasons stated by the FAA for granting Exemption Nos. 11062, 11109, 11112, and 11213 also apply to the situ ation you present; and

 A grant of exemption is in the public interest.

Our Decision

In consideration of the foregoing, I find that a gr ant of exemption is in the public interest. Therefore, pursuant to the authority contained in 49 U.S. C. 106(f), 40113, and 44701, delegated to me by the Administrator, HeliTek NW is granted an exemption from 14 CFR §§ 61.23(a) and (c), 61.101(e)(4) and (5 ), 61.113(a), 61.315(a), 91.7(a), 91.119(c), 91.121, 91.151(a)(1), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) a nd (2), and 91.417(a) and (b), to the extent necessary to allow the petitioner to opera te a UAS to perform aerial data collection. This exemption is subject to the conditions and limitations listed below.3

Conditions and Limitations

In this grant of exemption, HeliTek NW is hereafter referred to as the operator.

Failure to comply with any of the conditions an d limitations of this grant of exemption will be grounds for the immediate suspension or rescission of this exemption.

1. Operations authorized by this grant of ex emption are limited to the DJI Inspire 1 when weighing less than 55 pounds including payload. Proposed operations of any other aircraft will require a new petition or a petition to amend this exemption.

2. Operations for the purpose of closed-set motion picture and television filming are not permitted.

3. The UA may not be operated at a speed exceeding 87 knots (100 miles per hour). The exemption holder may use either groundspeed or calibrated airspeed to determine compliance with the 87 knot speed restricti on. In no case will the UA be operated at airspeeds greater than the maximum UA operating airspeed recommended by the

aircraft manufacturer.

4. The UA must be operated at an altitude of no more than 400 feet above ground level (AGL). Altitude must be reported in feet AGL.

5. The UA must be operated within visual line of sight (VLOS) of th e PIC at all times. This requires the PIC to be able to use human vision unaided by any device other than corrective lenses, as specified on the PIC’s FAA-issued airman medical certificate or

U.S. driver’s license.

6. All operations must utilize a visual observer (VO). The UA must be operated within the visual line of sight (VLOS) of the PI C and VO at all times. The VO may be used to satisfy the VLOS requirement as long as the PIC always maintains VLOS capability. The VO and PIC must be able to communicate verbally at all times; electronic messaging or texting is not pe rmitted during flight operations. The PIC must be designated before the flight and ca nnot transfer his or her designation for the duration of the flight. The PIC must en sure that the VO can perform the duties required of the VO.

7. This exemption and all documents needed to operate the UAS and conduct its operations in accordance with the conditions and limitations stated in this grant of exemption, are hereinafter referred to as the operating documents. The operating documents must be accessible during UAS operations and made available to the Administrator upon request. If a discre pancy exists between the conditions and limitations in this exemption and the pro cedures outlined in the operating documents,

the conditions and limitations herein ta ke precedence and must be followed.4

Otherwise, the operator must follow the pr ocedures as outlined in its operating documents. The operator may update or revi se its operating documents. It is the operator’s responsibility to track such revisions and pr esent updated and revised documents to the Administrator or any la w enforcement official upon request. The operator must also present updated and revise d documents if it petitions for extension or amendment to this grant of exemption. If the operator determines that any update or revision would affect the basis upon wh ich the FAA granted this exemption, then the operator must petition for an amendmen t 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.

8. Any UAS that has undergone maintenance or alterations that aff ect the UAS operation or flight characteristics, e .g., replacement of a flight cr itical component, must undergo a functional test flight prio r to conducting further opera tions under this exemption. Functional test flights may only be conducted by a PIC with a VO and must remain at least 500 feet from other people. The functi onal test flight must be conducted in such a manner so as to not pose an undue hazard to persons and property.

9. The operator is responsible for maintaining and inspecting the UAS to ensure that it is in a condition for safe operation.

10. Prior to each flight, the PIC must conduct a pre-flight inspection and determine the UAS is in a condition for safe flight. Th e pre-flight inspection must account for all potential discrepancies, e.g., inoperable components, items, or equipment. 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.

11. The operator must follow the UAS manu facturer’s maintenance, overhaul, replacement, inspection, and life limit requirements for the aircraft and aircraft components.

12. Each UAS operated under this exempti on must comply with all manufacturer safety bulletins.

13. Under this grant of exemption, a PIC mu st hold either an airline transport, commercial, private, recreational, or sport pi lot certificate. The PIC must also hold 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. The PIC must also meet the f light review requirements specified in 14 CFR § 61.56 in an aircraft in which the PI C is rated on his or her pilot certificate.

14. The operator may not permit any PIC to ope rate unless the PIC demonstrates the ability to safely operate the UAS in a ma nner consistent with how the UAS will be5

operated under this exemption, including evasive and emergency maneuvers and maintaining appropriate distan ces from persons, vessels, vehi cles and structures. PIC qualification flight hours and currency must be logged in a manner consistent with 14 CFR § 61.51(b). Flights for the purposes of training the operator’s PICs and VOs (training, proficiency, and e xperience-building) and determining the PIC’s ability to safely operate the UAS in a manner consistent with how the UAS will be operated under this exemption are permitted under the terms of this exemption. However, training operations may only be conducted dur ing dedicated training sessions. During training, proficiency, and expe rience-building flights, al l persons not essential for flight operations are considered nonpartic ipants, and the PIC must operate the UA with appropriate distance from nonparti cipants in accordance with 14 CFR § 91.119.

15. UAS operations may not be conducted during night, as defined in 14 CFR § 1.1. All operations must be conducted under visual me teorological conditions (VMC). Flights under special visual flight rule s (SVFR) are not authorized.

16. The UA may not operate within 5 nautical mile s of an airport reference point (ARP) as denoted in the current FAA Airport/Facil ity Directory (AFD) or for airports not denoted with an ARP, the center of the airport symbol as denoted on the current FAA-published aeronautical chart, unless a letter of agreement with that airport’s management is obtained or otherwise permitted by a COA issued to the exemption holder. The letter of agreement with the ai rport management must be made available to the Administrator or any law enforcement official upon request.

17. The UA 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.

18. If the UAS loses communications or loses its GPS signal, the UA must return to a pre-determined location within the pr ivate or controlled-access property.

19. The PIC must abort the flight in the even t of unpredicted obstacles or emergencies.

20. The PIC is prohibited from beginning a f light unless (considering wind and forecast weather conditions) there is enough available power for the UA to conduct the intended operation and to operate after that fo r at least five minutes or with the reserve power recommended by the manufacturer if greater.

21. Air Traffic Organization (ATO) Certificate of Waiver or Author ization (COA). All operations shall be conducted in accorda nce with an ATO-issued COA. The exemption holder may apply for a new or amended COA if it intends to conduct operations that cannot be conducted unde r the terms of the attached COA.

22. All aircraft operated in accord ance with this exemption must be identified by serial number, registered in accordance with 14 CFR part 47, and have identification6

(N

− Number) markings in accordance with 14 CFR part 45, Subpart C. Markings must be as large as practicable.

23. Documents used by the operator to ensure th e safe operation and flight of the UAS and any documents required under 14 CFR §§ 91.9 and 91.203 must be available to the

PIC at the Ground Control Station of the UAS any time the aircraft is operating.

These documents must be made available to the Administrator or any law enforcement official upon request.

24. The UA must remain clear and give wa y to all manned aviation operations and

activities at all times.

25. The UAS may not be operated by the PIC from any moving device or vehicle.

26. All Flight operations must be conducted at least 500 feet from all nonparticipating persons, vessels, vehicles, and structures unless:

a. Barriers or structures are present that sufficiently pr otect nonparticipating persons from the UA and/or debris in the event of an accident. The operator must ensure that nonparticipating persons remain under su ch protection. If a situation arises where nonparticipating persons leave such protection and are within 500 feet of the UA, flight operations must cease immediately in a manner ensuring the safety of nonparticipating persons; and

b. The owner/controller of any vessels, vehicles or struct ures has granted permission for operating closer to those objects 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.

The PIC, VO, operator trainees or es sential persons are not considered nonparticipating persons under this exemption.

27. All operations shall be conducted over priv ate or controlled-access property with permission from the property owner/contro ller or authorized representative. Permission from property owner/controller or authorized representative will be obtained for each flight to be conducted.

28. 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. Accidents must be reported to the National Transportation Sa fety Board (NTSB) per instructions

contained on the NTSB Web site: www.ntsb.gov

.

If this exemption permits operations for th e purpose of closed-set motion picture and television filming and production, the following additional conditions and limitations apply.7

29. The operator must have a motion picture and television operations manual (MPTOM)

as documented in this grant of exemption.

30. At least 3 days before aerial filming, the operator of the UAS affected by this exemption must submit a written Plan of Activities to the local Flight Standards District Office (FSDO) with jurisdiction ove r the area of proposed filming. The 3-day notification may be waived w ith the concurrence of the FSDO. The plan of activities must include at least the following:

a. Dates and times for all flights;

b. Name and phone number of the operator for the UAS aerial filming conducted under this grant of exemption;

c. Name and phone number of the person res ponsible for the on-s cene operation of the UAS;

d. Make, model, and serial or N

− Number of UAS to be used;

e. Name and certificate number of UAS PI Cs involved in the aerial filming;

f. A statement that the operator has obtain ed permission from property owners

and/or local officials to conduct the filming production event; the list of those who gave permission must be made av ailable to the inspector upon request;

g. Signature of exemption holde r or representative; and

h. A description of the flight activity, includi ng maps or diagrams of any area, city, town, county, and/or state over which film ing will be conducted and the altitudes essential to accomplish the operation.

31. Flight operations may be conducted closer th an 500 feet from pa rticipating persons consenting to be involved and necessary for the filming production, as specified in the exemption holder’s MPTOM.

Unless otherwise specified in this grant of exemption, the UAS, the UAS PIC, and the UAS operations must comply with al l applicable parts of 14 CFR including, but not limited to, parts 45, 47, 61, and 91.8

This exemption terminates on April 30, 2017, unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

Sincerely,

/s/

John S. Duncan Director, Flight St andards Service

### James T Marsh, Owner/Operator HeliTek NW, Beaverton, OR

- Section 333 Exemption Petition



## January 7, 2015

U. S. Department of Transportation Docket Management System 1200 New Jersey Ave, SE Washington, DC 20590

Re: Exemption Request Section 333 of the FAA Reform Act of the Federal Aviation Regulations from 14 C.F.R. 45.23(b); 14 C.F.R. Part 21; 14 C.F.R. 61.113(a)&(b); 91.7(a); 91.9(b) (2); 91.103(b); 91.109; 119.121; 91.151(a); 91.203(a)&(b); 91.405(a); 91.407(a) (1); 91.409(a) (2); 91.417(a)&(b)



## Dear Si r or Madam,

I, James T Marsh, am writing pursuant to the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 and the procedures contained within 14 C.F.R. 11, to request that I, James Marsh, owner and operator of HeliTek NW, a small unmanned aircraft, be exempted fr om the Federal Aviation Regulations (“FARs”) listed below so that I, James Marsh, may operate my small ultra light weight unmanned aircraft system (“UAS”) commercially in airspace regulated by the Federal Aviation Administration (“FAA”).

As described here in I, James Marsh, am a licensed and

instrument rated pilot (certificate #3363580) with over 120 hours of manned aircraft flight time and current 3 rd 

## class

medical ; experience d in flying hobby helicopters and fixed wind aircraft for recreational purposes. I have added a commercially insured hobby grade quad

- copter UAS to my inventory with intent for aerial videography/cinematography to enhance academic community awareness for those individuals and companies unfamiliar with the geographical layou t of the met ro Portland area, augment ed real estate listing videos, construction tracking photos and TV commercial videos; following exemption and approval by the

## FAA. Thereby enhancing

- their academic research experie nce for the metro Portland area, and assisting in tracking progress of construction projects.

I have flown small RC electric airplanes and helicopters for over twenty (20) years without incident. Committed to safety with each flight. My, James Marsh ’s , exemption request would permit operation of ultra li ghtweight , unmanned (piloted by remote control) and comparatively inexpensive UAS(s) in tightly controlled and limited airspace. Predetermined in areas away from general public, airports, heliports and vehicular traffic for community videos, and within pro perty boundaries for individual homeowner real estate listing videos/photos, construction sites and other

closed and controlled locations. Currently, similar lightweight, remote controlled UAS's are legally operated by unmonitored amateur hobbyists with no safety plan or controls in place to prevent catastrophe. I, James T Marsh, have personally instilled safety

Please see:

Appendix A

– DJI Inspire 1 quad

- copter Operation /Owner Manual , Safety Guidelines, Intelligent Flight Battery Safety Guidelines (se parately submitted)

Appendix B

– Portland metro area 5

- mile airport /no

- fly

- zone radius map

Appendix C

– Personal Protocol/Safety

Appendix D

– Flight Operations/ Safety Manual



## protocols and controls 4 

## to avoid and prevent public hazard,

as well as manned aircraft hazards/catastrophe. This will act to further safety protocols exclusive to lightweight UAS's specific to real estate/construction/TV commercial video and photography usage as I, James Marsh, record flight data and other information gained through permitted flight operations to share with the FAA through any required FAA reports to

## assist with future protocol and safety regulation.

James T Marsh, Owner/Operator, Beaverton, OR

- Section 333 Exemption Petition



## Granting my, James Marsh’s, request c omports with the Secretary of Transportation’s (FAA Administrator’s) responsibilities and authority to not only integrate UAS's into the national airspace system, but to “...establish requirements for the safe operation of such aircraft systems [UAS's] in the national airspace system” under Section 333(c) of the Reform Act specific to the use of UAS's for real estate/construction purposes. Further I, James Marsh, will conduct my operations in compliance with the protocols

described herein or as otherwise es tablished by the FAA.

For the reasons stated below I, James Marsh, respectfully request the grant of an exemption allowing me to operate ultra light weight, remote controlled UAS’s for academic community awareness to benefit/stimulate attraction to the

me tro Portland area and to enhance real estate listing videos for homeowners who cannot afford expensive manned aircraft for the same purpose, and for land developers that would require expensive and noisy manned aircraft to document construction progress , a nd finally small local businesses with limited budgets for marketing media. All of which will promote local economic growth through increased employment and increased tax base. Both with public safety in mind by keeping heavier manned aircraft containing

c ombustible fuel that that poses potential public hazard.

I. Contact Information:

James T Marsh, Owner/Operator, HeliTek NW

3812 SW 195 th Ter, Beaverton, OR 97078Mobile: (503) 593

- 4990 Email: heliteknw@gmail.com



## II

. The Specific Sections of Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations From Which HeliTek NW Requests Exemption are:

14 CFR 21; 14 C.F.R. 45.23(b); 14 CFR 61.113 (a) & (b); 14 C.F.R. 91, et seq.; 14 CF R 407 (a) (1); 14 CFR 409 (a) (2); and, 14 CFR 417 (a) & (b).

Appendix C

- Personal Protocols and Controls



## III. The Extent of relief James Marsh seeks and the

Reason He Seeks Such Relief:

I, James Marsh , submit this application in accordance with

the Re form Act, 112 P.L. 95 §§ 331

- 334, seeking relief from any currently applicable FARs operating to prevent me,

James Marsh , contemplated commercial cinematic, academic and other flight operations within the national airspace system. The Reform Act in Section 332 provides for such integration of civil unmanned aircraft systems into our national airspace system as it is in the public’s interest to do so. My, James Marsh’s , ultra light weight UAS meets the

definition of “small unmanned aircraft” as defined in Se ction 331 and therefore the integration of my ultra light weight UAS is expressly contemplated by the Reform Act. I would like to operate my ultra lightweight UAS prior to the time period by which the Reform Act requires the FAA to promulgate rules governi ng such craft. Thereby, providing direct experience and valuable information for formal regulation that can be administered uniformly to all real

estate and construction related UAS aerial video and photography. The Reform Act guides the Secretary in

deter mining the types of UAS's that may operate safely in our national airspace system. Considerations include: The

## weight, size, speed and overall capabilities of the UAS's; Whether the UAS will be operated near airports or heavily populated areas; and, Whethe r the UAS will be operated by line of sight. 112 P.L. 95 § 333 (a). Each of these items

reflects in favor of an exemption for me, James Marsh . My UAS utilizes four (4) counter

- rotating propellers for balance, control and stability. My UAS is equipped with GPS and auto return safety techno logy. Weighing less than seven (7 ) pounds (far below the maximum 55

- pound limit); including camera with gimbal.

I, James Marsh , consider safety as foremost with each flight. My small

- unmanned aircraft is designed to hover in place via GPS and operate in less than a 24

- knot (15 mph) wind. For safety, stability and fear of financial loss I will not fly in winds exceeding 16 kph (10 mph). Built in safety systems include a GPS mode that allows my UAS to hover in place when radi o controls are released. With three modes to choose from, I

utilize the Smart Mode 5 

## for aerial videography/photography. This is the safest, most reliable and stable mode to prevent accident and hazard. When pilot communication is lost UAS is designed slowl y descend to point of take off , or near the control transmitter when utilizing Dynamic Mode . I do not operate my UAS near airports, Hospitals nor Police heliports, and do not operate near areas where general public is within fifty to one hundred (50

- 100) y ards depending on location, conditions and weather. I am constantly on alert for any manned aircraft (Police/Medical helicopters, etc.) and prepared to land/abort immediately to the nearest and safest ground point should a manned aircraft approach my locat ion or I suspect manned aircraft may approach near my location. I study aeronautical charts prior to each flight so that I may be fully aware of the airspace in which I will be operating. My UAS is capable of vertical and horizontal operations, and are

flo wn only within my line of sight of me, as the remote control

## pilot. Utilizing battery power rather than combustible fuels, flights generally last between eight (8) to twelve (12 ) minutes, with an altitude u nder four hundred (400 ) feet.

5 Smart Mode includ es safe circle for operation, position hold, self

- leveling, altitude command, GPS, return home and dynamic return to home feature, and safety control to return home or land in the event of communication interruption between RC transmitter and UAS. See Appe ndix A

- Operator Manual.

James Marsh, Owner/Operator, Beaverton, OR

- Section 333 Exemption Petition



### James Marsh, Owner/Operator, Beaverton, OR

- Section 333 Exemption Petition



## I, James Marsh , utilize a fresh fully charged battery with each flight as a safety precaution; full flight time limit for ea ch battery is fifteen (15 ) to twe nty (20 ) minutes as tested. I do not operate my UAS at or below manufacture recommend minimum charge levels for operation; preferring to remain well within a safe operating range to insure adequate
communication between radio control and UAS to eliminate potential for crash, loss of control or hazard. Our standard reserve levels are 25% and monitored through digital on

screen data

- link display. Reserve batteries are at hand with each exercise to insure replacement for sufficient safe level of operation. I do not believe in taking risk that may cause a

crash that could create hazard to the public/property/manned aircraft, and have no desire to lose an investment. I have

clocke d numerous practice flights in remote areas as a hobbyist simulating flights for future commercial use to gain familiarization with the characteristics of this specific UAS's performance under different temperature and weather conditions. I also practice c omputerized simulated flights to maintain adequate skills and response reflex time. All for the sake of safety.

I, James Marsh , am extremely cautious when operating of my UAS/ultra light weight unmanned aircraft and will not

## “create a hazard to users of t he national airspace system or the public.” 112 P.L. 95 § 333 (b). Given the small size and weight of my UAS it falls well within Congress’s contemplated safety zone when it promulgated the Reform Act and the corresponding directive to integrate UAS's into

the national airspace system. James Marsh’s UAS, used in hobby flight, has a demonstrable safety record and does not pose any threat to the general public or national security.

IV. How James Marsh’s Request Will Benefit the Public

As A Whole:

Aerial vi deography for geographical awareness and for real estate marketing has been around for a long time through manned fixed wing aircraft and helicopters. For small budget real estate companies and average homeowners the expense of such aerial videography is c ost prohibitive. Only large companies and high end Realtors or luxury homeowners can afford to absorb such expense. Depriving

non

- luxury homeowners and lower budget Realtors from a valuable marketing tool. Manned aircraft pose a threat to the public throug h pot ential catastrophic crash. Many of them resulting in loss of life to both flight crew and public on the ground . Each with combustible fuel that exploded and burned on impact. Police helicopters have made emergency hard landings within city limits. My, James Marsh’s , UAS pose no such threat since size and lack of combustible fuel alleviates any potential threat to the public.

Congress has already proclaimed that it is in the public’s interest to integrate commercially flown UAS's into the

national airs pace system, hence the passing of the Reform Act. Granting my, James Marsh’s , exemption request furthers the public interest through academic/visual awareness of the geographical benefits in and around the

metro Portland area. My ultra lightweight UAS is b attery

## powered and creates no emissions that can harm the environment. The consequence of my ultra lightweight UAS crashing is far less than a full size helicopter or fixed wing aircraft; which are heavy, contain combustible fuel and can

cause catastrophi c devastation to the public.

James Marsh, Owner/Operator, Beaverton, OR

- Section 333 Exemption Petition


### James Marsh, Owner/Operator, Beaverton, OR

- Section 333 Exemption Petition



## The public’s interest is furthered by minimizing ecological

and crash th reat by permitting aerial video/photo capture through my battery operated ultra light weight UAS's. Permitting me, James Marsh , to immediately fly within national air space furthers economic growth. Granting my exemption request substantially furthers the economic impact for the metro Portland community for companies looking to relocate or build in the Portland metro area as well as individuals looking to relocate for career advancement through academic and geographical awareness. Both of

which serve as a s timulus to the community.

V. Reasons Why James Marsh’s Exemption Will Not Adversely Affect Safety Or How The Exemption Will Provide a Level of Safety At Least Equal To Existing

Rule:

My, James Marsh’s , exemption will not adversely affect safety. Quite th e contrary, for the reasons stated permitting

me, James Marsh , to log more flight time in FAA controlled airspace, with communication with the FAA, will allow me to contribute to the innovation and implementation of new and novel, as of yet undiscovered sa fety protocols for Realtors that can be embraced by the NAR, AAR, and TAR for development in cooperation with the FAA. In addition I,

James Marsh , submit the following representations of

## enhancements to current aerial videography and photography for real e state and construction :

My UAS weighs less than 7 pounds complete with a small ultra light weight high quality camera; I only operate my UAS

below 4 00 feet ( within the 400 foot permissible ceiling set by the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012);

M y UAS only operate for 8

- 12 minutes per flight; I land my UAS prior to manufacturer recommended minimum level of battery power; I pilot my UAS through remote control only by line of sight; My UAS has GPS a flight safety feature whereby it hovers and then slo wly lands if communication with the remote control pilot is lost; I actively analyze flight data and other sources of information to constantly update and enhance safety protocols; I only operate in reasonably safe environment that are strictly controlled, are away from power lines, elevated lights, airports and actively populated areas; I conduct extensive pre

- flight inspections and protocol, during which safety carries primary importance; I always obtains all necessary permissions prior to operation; and, I have procedures in place to abort flights in the event of safety breaches or potential danger.

James Marsh, Owner/Operator, Beaverton, OR

- Section 333 Exemption Petition



## My, James Marsh’s , safety protocols provide a level of safety equal to or exceeding existing rules. It is important to note that absent the integration of commercial UAS into our national airspace system, helicopters are the primary means of aerial video and photogr aphy for community awareness,

real estate , c onstruction and TV commercials . While the safety record of such helicopters is remarkably astounding, there has been local incident involving loss of life as well as

## extensive property damage; it is far safer to operate a battery powered ultra light weight UAS.

First, the potential loss of life is diminished because UAS's carry no people on board and I only operate my UAS in specific areas away from mass populations. Second, there is no fuel on board a UAS and thus the potential for fire or explosions is g reatly diminished.

Third, the small size and extreme maneuverability of my UAS allow me to remotely pilot away from and avoid hazards quickly and safely

. Lastly, given its small size and weight, even when close enough to capture amazing images, my UAS need not be so close to the objects they are focused on through the technology and use of post editing software allowing pan and zoom.

Accordingly, my UAS has been experimentally operated for familiarization/competency and will continue to operate at and above current safety levels.

VI. A Summary The FAA May Publish in the Federal Register:

A. 14 C.F.R. 21 and 14 C.F.R. 91: Airworthiness Certificates,

Man uals and The Like.

14 C.F.R. 21, Subpart H, entitled Airworthiness Certificates, sets forth requirements for procurement of necessary airworthiness certificates in relation to FAR § 91.203(a)(1). The size, weight and enclosed operational area of my, Dougl as Trudeau’s, UAS permits exemption from Part 21 because my UAS meets (and exceeds) an equivalent level of safety pursuant to Section 333 of the Reform Act. The FAA is authorized to exempt aircraft from the airworthiness certificate requirement under both the Act (49 U.S.C. § 44701 (f)) and Section 333 of the Reform Act. Both pieces of

## legislation permit the FAA to exempt UAS's from the airworthiness certificate requirement in consideration of the weight, size, speed, maneuverability and proximity to areas such as airports and dense populations. My, James Marsh’s

, current and projected UAS's meet or exceed each of the

elements.

14 C.F.R. 91.7(a) prohibits the operation of an aircraft

without an airworthiness certificate. As no such certificate will be appli cable in the form contemplated by the FARs, this Regulation is inapplicable.

14 C.F.R. § 91.9 (b) (2) requires an aircraft flight manual in the aircraft. As there are no on board pilots or passengers, and given the size of the UAS's, this Regulation is

in applicable. An equivalent level of safety will be achieved by maintaining a safety /flight manual delineating areas of where
safety can be defined. 10 

## The FAA has previously issued exemptions to this regulation in Exemption Nos. 8607, 8737, 8738, 9299, 9299A , 9565, 9565B, 10167, 10167A, 10602,

10700 and 32827.

14 C.F.R. § 91.121 regarding altimeter settings is inapplicable insofar as my UAS utilizes electronic global positioning systems

with a barometric sensor.

14 C.F.R. § 91.203 (a) and (b) provides for t he carrying of civil aircraft certifications and registrations. They are inapplicable for the same reasons described above. The equivalent level of safety will be achieved by maintaining any such required certifications and registrations by me, James Marsh

.
14 C.F.R. § 45.23: Marking of The Aircraft.

Applicable Codes of Federal Regulation require aircraft to be marked according to certain specifications. My UAS are, by definition, unmanned. They therefore do not have a cabin,

### cockpit or pilot station on w hich to mark certain words or phrases. Further, two

- inch lettering is difficult to place on such small aircraft with dimensions smaller that minimal lettering requirement. Regardless, I will mark its UASs in the largest possible lettering by placing the wo rd “EXPERIMENTAL” on its fuselage as required by 14 C.F.R. §45.29 (f) so that I the pilot, or anyone assisting me as a spotter with the UAV will see the markings. The FAA has previously issued exemptions to this regulation through Exemptions Nos. 8738, 101 67, 10167A and

10700.

14 C.F.R. § 61.113: Private Pilot Privileges and Limitations: PIC.

Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. §§ 61.113 (a) & (b), private pilots are

limited to non

- commercial operations. I, James Marsh , can achieve an equivalent level of safety as achi eved by current Regulations because my UAS does not carry any pilots or passengers. Further, while helpful, a pilot license will not ensure remote control piloting skills. The risks attended to the operation of my UAS is far less than the risk levels inher ent in the commercial activities outlined in 14 C.F.R. § 61, et seq. Thus, allowing me, James Marsh , to operate my UAS meet and exceed current safety levels in relation to 14 C.F.R. §61.113 (a) & (b).

14 C.F.R. 91.119: Minimum Safe Altitudes.

14 C.F.R. § 91.119 prescribes safe altitudes for the operation of civil aircraft. It allows helicopters to be operated at lower altitudes in certain conditions. My UAS will never opera te at an altitude greater than 4 00 AGL; safely below the standard of 400 AGL. I,

Ja mes Marsh , will however operate my UAS in safe areas away from public and traffic, providing a level of safety at least equivalent to or below those in relation to minimum safe altitudes. Given the size, weight, maneuverability and speed of

- my UAS, an equ ivalent or higher level of safety will be achieved.

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

### C.

D.

E.

Appendix C

- Safety/Flight Manual

James Marsh, Owner/Operator, Beaverton, OR

- Section 333 Exemptio n Petition


### James Marsh, Owner/Operator, Beaverton, OR

- Section 333 Exemption Petition

The above

- cited Regulations require, amongst other things, aircraft owners and operators to “have [the] 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. . . .”

These Regulations only apply to aircraft with an airworthiness certificate. They will not , therefore, apply to my, James Marsh’s

, UAS. However, as a safety precaution I inspect my UAS before and after each flight.



## A Summary The FAA May Publish in the Federal Register: A. 14 C.F.R. 21 and 14 C.F.R. 91: Airworthiness Certificates,

Manuals and T he Like. 14 C.F.R. 21, Subpart H, entitled Airworthiness Certificates, sets forth requirements for procurement of necessary airworthiness certificates in relation to FAR § 91.203(a)(1). The size, weight and enclosed operational area of my UAS permits exemp tion from Part 21 because my, James Marsh’s , UAS meets an equivalent level of safety pursuant to Section 333 of the Reform Act. The FAA is authorized to exempt aircraft from

the airworthiness certificate requirement under both the Act (49 U.S.C. § 44701 ( f)) and Section 333 of the Reform Act. Both pieces of legislation permit the FAA to exempt UAS's from the airworthiness certificate requirement in

## consideration of the weight, size, speed, maneuverability and proximity to areas such as airports and dense

p opulations. My UAS meets or exceeds each of the elements. 14 C.F.R. 91.7(a) prohibits the operation of an

aircraft without an airworthiness certificate. As no such certificate will be applicable in the form contemplated by the FARs, this Regulation is inap plicable. 14 C.F.R. § 91.9 (b) (2) requires an aircraft flight manual in the aircraft. As there are no pilots or passengers, and given the size of the UAS's, this Regulation is inapplicable. An equivalent level of safety will be achieved by maintaining a m anual. The FAA has previously issued exemptions to this regulation in Exemption Nos. 8607, 8737, 8738, 9299, 9299A, 9565, 9565B, 10167, maintenance program that involves regular software updates and curative measures for any damaged hardware. Therefore, an equivalent level of safety will be achieved.

In summary, James Marsh seeks an exemption from the following Regulations:

14 C.F.R. 21, subpart H; 14 C.F.R. 45.23(b); 14 C.F.R. §§ 61.113 (a) & (b); 14 C.F.R. § 91.7 (a); 14 C.F.R. § 91.9 (b)(2); 14 C.F.R. § 91.103(b); 14 C.F.R. § 91.109; 14 C.F.R. § 91.119; 14 C.F.R. § 91.121; 14 C.F.R. § 91.151(a); 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.203(a) and (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. § 91.409 ( a) (2); and, 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.4 17 (a) & (b) to commercially operate my, James Marsh’s , small unmanned vehicle/lightweight unmanned aircraft vehicle in community awareness and real estate operations, and to develop economic platforms for real estate to enhance the

experience of those se eking to relocate to the metro

Portland area. Currently, area awareness and real estate aerial videography/photography relies primarily on the use of larger aircraft running on combustible fuel. Posing potential

## risk to the public. Granting my, James Marsh ’s , request for exemption will reduce current risk levels and thereby enhance safety. My UAS craft do not contain potentially

e xplosive fuel, is smaller, lighter and more maneuverable than conventional real estate video and photographic aircraft

with much less flight time. Further, I operate at lower altitudes and in controlled airspace eliminating potential public risk flying to and from established airfields . I, James

Marsh , have been informally analyzing flight information and will compile safety protoco ls and the implementation of a flight operations manual for real estate usage that exceeds currently accepted means and methods for safe flight.

Formal collection of information shared with the FAA will enhance the FAA's internal efforts to establish proto cols for complying with the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012. There are no personnel on board my, James Marsh’s

, UAS and therefore the likelihood of death or serious bodily injury is significantly diminished. My, James Marsh

, operation of my UAS, w eighing less than 7 pounds and travelling at lower speeds within limited areas will provide an equivalent level of safety as that achieved under current FARs. Accordingly I, James Marsh , respectfully request that the FAA grant my exemption request and am w illing to cooperate in sharing information to benefit the FAA, safety of manned aircraft, and the general public at large.

Respectfully submitted,

James T Marsh, Owner Operator, HeliTek NW

3812 SW 195 th 

## Ter, Beaverton, OR 97078

# Appendix A

DJI Inspire 1 Manual s
- Submitted Separately 

# Appendix B

Five Mile Radius Restricted Flight Areas Portland, Oregon Metro

AreaNo FLY Zones List

CCaatteeggoorryy ZZoonnee CCiittyy AAiirrppoorrtt

Category A Australia Adelaide Airport Adelaide Airport

Category A Australia Aeroglen Cairns International Airport

Category A Australia Bilinga Gold Coast Airport

Category A Australia Brisbane Airport Brisbane Airport

Category A Australia Darwin International Airport Darwin International Airport

Category A Australia Garbutt Townsville Airport Support (

Home ( http://www.dji.com/ ) / Fly Safe (

No FLY Zones

All unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) operators should abide by all regulations from such organizations as the ICAO (International

Civil Aviation Organization) and their own national airspace regulations. In order to increase fl ight safety and prevent accidental

fl ights in restricted areas, the Phantom 2 series includes a No Fly Zones feature to help users use this product safely and legally.

These zones include airports worldwide and have been divided into two types, A and B. For a full explanation of the di ff erence

between the categories, see the following video. You can also view a full list of places included in each category in the list below.

! WATCH THE INTRODUCTION VIDEO ( //www.youtube.com

/embed/YoXAMRQoIAA ) ( //www.youtube.com/embed/YoXAMRQoIAA )

Map data ©2015 Google Report a map error ( https://www.google.com/maps/@45.5532135,-122.5916204,11z/data=!10m1!1e1!12b1?source=apiv3 ) ( http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=45.553213,-122.59162&z=11&t=m&hl=en-US&gl=US&mapclient=apiv3 )

Category A Category B

Search: United States (English) ( /select-country ) ( Http://www.dji.com/ ) Store ( Https://store.dji.com/ ) " Products ( Http://www.dji.com/products ) ∠

Http://www.dji.com/support ) Community ∠

$

/ fl y-safe ) Search dji.com... % No FLY Zones | DJI http://www.dji.com/fly-safe/category-mc

1 of 2 1/7/15, 11:00 AMJames Marsh, Owner/Operator, Beaverton, OR

- Section 333 Exemption Petition 

# Appendix D

James Marsh Personal
Protocols and Controls

P rotocols and Controls

Aerial Construction and	Real	Estate	Videos /Photos

Safety	for	public	on	the	ground	as	well	as	manned	aircraft	above	is	an
essential	and	utmost	consideration	for	aerial	videos	and	photography.
As	such,	safety	protocols	and	controls	mu st	be	implemented	through

pre

- flight	preparation	and	during	flight.

Pre

- Flight	Protocol:

Check	batteries	with	voltage	meter	to	insure	fully	charged	and	ready

for	use

. Inspect	batteries	for	damage	or	leakage	that	may	affect
proper	operation.	Inspect	propellers	for	cracks,	chips	or	damage	that may	cause	sudden	loss	of	propulsion	or	unmanageable/uncontrolled
flight.	Check	weather	forecasts	for	wind	advisory	or	other	con ditions that	my	impact	flight.	Consult	five	(5)	mile	radius	map	for	airport
vicinity. Consult	aeronautical	charts	for	airspace	identification	and
other	flight	considerations.

o Contact	respective	airport	to	advise	of	estimated	flight	time,
estimated	flight duration,	estimated	elevation	of	flight,	and	any	other
pertinent	information.

Inspect	flight	area	for o vicinity	of	public	safety	helipads/heliports o vicinity	of	medical	helipads/heliports o vicinity	of	light	poles

### o vicinity	or	utility	wires o vicinit y	of	trees o flocks	of	birds	that	may
cause	interference	and	potential	flight	impact o vicinity	of	any
elevated	obstructions	that	may	pose	potential	flight	hazard o vicinity
of	roadways	with	moderate	to	heavy	traffic	that	can	be	distracted o public	gatheri ngs	that	may	attract	viewers o optional	point	of	control
for	best	visual	site	of	UAS	while	in	flight

Takeoff	and	landing o inspect	area	for	best	and	safest	point	of	takeoff
and	landing o if	in	a	subdivision	or	area	that	is	within	150	feet	of	a

residential street,	post	warning	sign(s)/stand(s)	"Attention	Aerial
Photography	In	Progress

- Remain	Back	150	Feet	"

UAS	SYSTEMS	CHECK:

o VERIFY	AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS STATUS CHECKLIST	PRIOR	TO

TAKEOFF

o VERIFY	IMU	AND	COMPASS	CALIBRATION	STATUS	PRIOR	TO

TAKEOFF.	RECALIBRATE IF	NEEDED

Flight	Protocol:

Takeoff and	land	from	same	location	remain	alert	to	birds,	sound	or
aircraft,	curious	public,	and	approaching	vehicles	do	not	allow	anyone
to	engage	in	conversation	or	distract	the	remote	control	pilot	restrict
flight	to	minimal	elevation	sufficient	to	acquire	de sired
results	remained	prepared	for	emergency	landing	at	all	times	pay
attention	to	flight	time and	25%	battery	reserve

o if	possible	set	a	timer	as	a	safety	alert	land	UAS	and	shut	down
propulsion	immediately	following	landingJam es Marsh, Owner/Operator, HeliTek NW, Beaverton Oregon

Page 

### 1

Protocols and Controls

Aerial Construction and	Real	Estate	Videos /Photos

Post	flight:

Emergency	or	Suspected	Hazard:

Immediate	land	UAS	at	safest	and	closet	ground	location	in	the

event o m anned	aircraft	is	heard	or	seen	in	vicinity	of	flight o there
is	a	public	gathering	within	established	safety	boundary	wanting	to
observe	flight o pilot	is	being	distracted	from	focusing	on	flight	and
safety o sudden	change	in	weather	(wind	bursts) o sudde n	increase
in	vehicular	traffic	in	vicinity	of	flight o birds	enter	into	proximity	of
flight o any	sudden	unsafe	event	that	can	cause	collision,	distraction
or	interruption	of	control

a. D isconnect	battery	to	prevent	acci dental	activation	of
propulsion syst em

b. S ecure	UAS	in	a	safe	location

c. R emove	all	warning	signs	from	public	access	areas

d. Complete	flight	log	items	as	needed.	Document	any	squawksJames Marsh, Owner/Operator HeliTek NW Page 

### 2

James Marsh, Owner/Operator, Beaverton, OR

- Secti on 333 Exemption Petition 

# Appendix D

James Marsh /HeliTek NW Safety/Flight Manual

Safety Flight Manual

Aerial	C onstruction and	Real	Estate	Videos /Photos

Safety	for	public	on	the	ground	as	well	as	manned	aircraft	above	is	an	essential	and	utmost

conside ration	for	aerial	videos	and	photography.	Maintaining	a	record	of	safe	flight	for	FAA
request	and	for	determining	future	UAS	safety	protocols	is	imperative.



### Date:____________________

Location:

___________________________________________________

Pre

- flight	Inspection and	Systems	Check : Yes No	Comment:

_________________________________________________

Elements (circle) (circle) 

### Comment

Weather Good Fair

### Visibility Good Fair

Wind	Speed |	Direction Low Medium

Proximity	to	airport:	_________________	(see	attached	map pinpointing	approximate	location	of	flight)	Airport	notified Yes No
Date:_______________	Time:	______________ Phone	Number:	_______________________
Contact	Name:	___________________________________
Nearest	major	intersection:

_______________________________ __________________________ Proximity	to	medium	traffic	road:

_ ________________________________________________________ Proximity	to	heavily	traveled	roadway	road:

_________________________________________________

Proximity	to	congested	population:

________________________________________________________

Approx.	T akeoff	Time

Approx.	Landing

Time

Estimated	Elevation

Safety	Concerns:

### Additional	Comments:

Post	Flight	Maintenance	Items	or	Squawks:

Aircraft	Status	After	Flight:	(circle)						Safe	For	Flight Grounded

Pilot’s	Initials	and	Signature__________________________________________

Unedited	flight	video/photos	available	for	FAA	upon	written	request	within	180
days	of	flight: Yes No

James Marsh, Owner/Operator HeliTek NW, Beaverton, OR