January 14, 2015

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Docket Management System

1200 New Jersey Ave.

Washington, DC 20590

Dear Sir or Madam:

Pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (Reform Act) and 14 C.F.R. 

Part 11, Orchard, Hiltz & McCliment, Inc. (hereinafter OHM) requests for an exemption from the listed 

Federal Aviation Regulations to allow commercial operation of its Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (“UAV”) for 

aerial imagery to provide a safe and ergonomic means of obtaining imagery needed to advance the 

communities OHM Services. The use of this UAV will greatly increase the safety associated with the 

general public as well as provide a safe means for professionals to obtain aerial imagery. This exemption 

request is exclusively for the Phantom 2 Vision Plus.

Attached to this deliverable is the Phantom 2 User Manual Version 1.4, provided by the manufacturer. 

This outlines the operating requirements, limitations, and technical specifications related to our specific 

equipment. OHM has reviewed this manual and found it to be acceptable for our specific projects.

We would like to personally thank you for your time and consideration. If any questions should arise, 

please feel free to contact us directly.

Sincerely,

__________________________

Orchard, Hiltz & McCliment, Inc.

Christopher S. Lamus, P.S.
Director of Field Services

January 14, 2016

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Docket Management System

1200 New Jersey Ave.

Washington, DC 20590

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

Regulations from 14 CFR Part 21; 14 CFR 45.23 (b); 14 CFR 61.113 (a) & (b); 14 CFR 91.7 (a); 14 CFR 91.9 

(b) (2); 14 CFR 91.103; 14 CFR 91.109; 14 CFR 91.119; 14 CFR 91.121; 14 CFR 91.151 (a); 14 CFR 

91.203(a) & (b); 14 CFR 91.205; 14 CFR 91.215; 14 CFR 91.405, 14 CFR 407 (a) (1) (2), 14 CFR 409 (a) (2), 

14 CFR 417 (a) & (b). 

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, Orchard, Hiltz & McCliment, Inc (OHM), a fully functioning Architecture, Engineering 

and Planning firm, hereby applies for an exemption from the listed Federal Aviation Regulations to allow 

commercial operation of its Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) for aerial imaging to be used to provide a 

safe and ergonomic means of obtaining imagery needed to advance the communities OHM Services. 

This operation to be conducted within and under the conditions outlined herein or as may be 

established by the FAA as required by Section 333.

As described within this document, the requested exemption would permit the operation of a 

UAV under controlled conditions in airspace that is has been predetermined to be easily accessed by use 

of a UAV, Safety planned and executed, and found to be within regulations determined by the FAA. 

Approval of this exemption would greatly increase the amount safety associated with various projects 

completed by OHM. The use of an Unmanned Aerial vehicle will allow OHM to obtain high quality 

images in an environment where safety is imperative. 

The name and address of applicant is: 

Orchard, Hiltz & McCliment, Inc.

Christopher S. Lamus, P.S.

(734) 637-3406

chris.lamus@ohm-advisors.com

34000 Plymouth Road Livonia, MI 48150
Introduction

The sUAS that OHM plans to use Phantom 2 DJI, weighing less than 55lbs including payload, 

operating only during day time in clear conditions, an altitude 200 feet or less without the use of a 

Certificates of Waiver or Authorization (COA), while maintaining visual line of sight at all times will fit all 

FAA Requirements for unmanned aerial vehicles. With the technology advancement of multirotor 

copers, the ability to control and predetermine a flight path allows for the operator to safely introduce 

our equipment into situations reducing the amount of human contact.

The areas to which OHM Plans to use this technology will have minimal public interaction and 

the owner will be notified in advance of our potential operations. OHM will be conscious of the air traffic 

in the area and will be at least 5 nautical miles of an airport reference point. The use of this equipment 

falls right within the zone of safety (an equivalent level of safety) in which Congress envisioned that the 

FAA must, by exemption, allow commercial operations of sUASs to commence immediately. No national 

security risk associated with the approval of this application presents itself given the nature of the work, 

small size of the equipment and low altitudes planned for these projects. 

Given the clear direction in Section 333 of the Reform Act, the authority contained 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, the grant of the requested 

exemptions is in the public interest. 

Public Interest

This exemption application is expressly submitted to fulfill Congress’ goal in passing Section 333 

(a) through (c) of the Reform Act. This law directs the Secretary of Transportation to consider whether 

certain unmanned aircraft systems may operate safely in the NAS before completion of the rulemaking 

required under Section 332 of the Reform Act. By granting an exemption the FAA with fulfill Congress’s 

intent of allowing UAS to operate with significant safety precautions in low risk environments. 

The introductions of sUASs into the various projects OHM is currently completing will not only 

increase the amount of safety for our staff and the general public but would greatly expedite our work 

and allow of us to obtain images in a manner that is much more cost effective. The operation of this 

technology would reduce the risk to workers susceptible to falling hazards while on site, along with 

providing us the opportunity to access hard to reach areas that would otherwise require manual human 

inspection. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) reported that in 2014, the 

leading causes of worker deaths on construction sites were falls, followed by electrocutions, struck by 

objects, and caught-in/between. These “Fatal Four” were responsible for more than half (58.1%) of the 

construction worker deaths in 20141. Depending on the specific uses of the sUASs, the probability of 

these statistics could be greatly reduced. 

1

”Commonly used statistics”, Occupational Safety and Health Administation:https://www.osha.gov/oshstats/commonstats.html
The need for conventional aerial photography using known photogrammetric techniques, pilot and crew 

would go to the wayside allowing for the guaranteed safe flight for all persons involved. A small craft 

without occupants could allow for OHM to obtain the same level of accuracy while not putting anyone in 

a potential life threatening situation as well as reducing its dependency on fossil fuels. The sUAV OHM 

plans to use will run purely on a Lithium ion battery. 

Equivalent Level of Safety

OHM proposes that the exemption requested herein apply to civil aircraft that have the 

characteristics and that operate with the limitations described below. These limitations will provide for 

at least an equivalent or higher level of safety to operations under the current regulatory structure 

because the proposed operation represent a safety enhancement to the already safe protocols followed 

on project sites where human contact is required as well as conventional means of aerial photography 

using aircraft. 

OHM will be bound by the following limitations when conducting sUAS operations under an FAA issued 

exemption:

 The sUAS will be no more than 55 lbs including payload.

 Flights will be executed within visual line of sight of a pilot at all times.

 Maximum flight times for each operation will be no more than 30 minutes. Flights will be bound 

by battery life of equipment and returned to base station with adequate battery life remaining. 

 Flights will be operated at an altitude never exceeding 200 feet above ground level

 Crew for each operation will be provided as well as a person in charge (sUAS pilot) who shall 

have visual line of sight to the sUAS at all times.

 The sUAS pilot will be trained in flight, operations, and safety procedures.

 The sUAS will be operated in a controlled site where all bystanders will have knowledge of the 

operation. 

 A discussion will be conducted in regard to the planned sUAS operations prior to any activity on 

site. All members of the crew, and anyone affected will be in attendance. 

 Verbal or written consent will be obtained from anyone affected by sUAS operations.

 All required permissions and permits will be obtained from territorial, state, county, or city 

jurisdictions as well as local law enforcement, fire or other appropriate government agencies. 

 If the sUAS loses connection to ground control or operator at any time, a predetermined landing 

zone will be programmed and it will return for further examination of problem. 

 If any unforeseen obstacles occur, the crew would be required to safely land the craft and 

address the problem before any more work commences.
Petitioner requests relief from the following: 

14 CFR Part 21 The aircraft certification requirements and procedures is designed for manned aircraft 

and is not suitable for manufactured sUASs.

14 CFR 45.23 (b) Due to the size of sUAS OHM plans to use, requiring aircraft to be marked in 2” to 6” 

lettering would be hard to accomplish, there is not sufficient space on the equipment.

14 CFR 61.113 (a) & (b) limiting pilots to non-commercial operations, referring to the PIC. The sUASs will 

not carry a pilot, a passenger, or cargo for compensation or hire. The operators training from the 

manufacturers manual creates a higher level of safety for the public as a Commercial Pilot’s certificate in 

no way provides specific safe operational training of a remote controlled sUAS tethered to the operator 

on the ground.

14 CFR 91.7 (a) Civil Aircraft Airworthiness requirements. No airworthiness certificate is available for this 

aircraft. The sUASs will not be modified and will be inspected prior to any flight as outlined in this 

petition.

14 CFR 91.9 (b) (2) requires that the flight manual be available in the aircraft. Due to the overall size of 

this sUAS, the flight manual will be in the possession of the operator during any flight.

14 CFR 91.103 preflight action requirements for crew on board aircraft. While this is important to the 

safe flying of the sUAS it does not apply given its current language. PIC will become familiar with all 

available information concerning the flight as well as brief anyone involved preceding any operations. 

14 CFR 91.109 requiring that no person shall operate a civil aircraft for flight instruction unless the 

aircraft has fully functioning dual controls. SUASs and Remote controlled aircraft by design do not have 

dual controls. Having dual controls would provide more things to malfunction and thus reduce safety. 

This section cannot reasonably apply.

14 CFR 91.119 designating minimum safe altitudes. The sUASs operated by OHM will not exceed an 

altitude of 200 feet. This is below the altitude designated in this section. Also given the size, weight, and 

speed of the sUAS, the line of sight rule when operating, and the overall safeguards and restrictions in 

flight outlined in this petition maintain a higher level of safety to the public.

14 CFR 91.121 regarding altimeter settings. A barometric altimeter is not provided on any sUAS. 

However, a GPS altitude indicator is displayed to the operator at all times during flight. While an 

exemption to this regulation is requested, a modification to meet the current technology of the sUASs 

would be acceptable.

14 CFR 91.151 (a) Fuel requirements for flight. The maximum flight time under ideal conditions is 30 

minutes with the current manufacturers battery pack. The proposed rule under the Operation and 

Safety guidelines in this petition requiring the sUAS to return to its point of launch if its battery reaches 

less than 25% provides a higher standard of safety when applied to sUASs.
14 CFR 91.203(a) & (b) requiring that a civil aircraft certificate and registration be displayed at the 

cockpit entrance cannot apply to sUASs, there is no cockpit and the size limitations prevent this.

14 CFR 91.205 refers to cockpit instruments and cannot reasonably apply to sUASs as there is no cockpit. 

14 CFR 91.215 requiring a transponder cannot reasonably apply to sUAVs operated by OHM because

they will be operated below ATC radar capabilities as outlined in this exemption request.

14 CFR 91.405, 14 CFR 407 (a) (1) (2), 14 CFR 409 (a) (2), 14 CFR 417 (a) & (b) referring to maintenance,

preventive maintenance, and alterations to the sUAV. The operator will provide minor maintenance and 

inspection to the sUAV, documented as outlined in the operational and safety guidelines. Given the size 

and simplicity of the sUAV combined with the operational and safety guidelines outlined in this petition 

the operator can maintain or exceed the required level of safety

As described within this document, the requested exemption would permit the operation of a UAV 

under controlled conditions in airspace that is has been predetermined to be easily accessed by use of a 

UAV, Safety planned and executed, and found to be within regulations determined by the FAA. Approval 

of this exemption would greatly increase the amount safety associated with various projects completed 

by OHM. The use of an Unmanned Aerial vehicle will allow OHM to obtain high quality images in an 

environment where safety is imperative.

Sincerely,

Orchard, Hiltz & McCliment, Inc.

Christopher S. Lamus, P.S.

(734) 637-3406

chris.lamus@ohm-advisors.com

34000 Plymouth Road Livonia, MI 48150