12/31/2014

Michael Harvey

Unmanned Aerial Assessment & Video LLC

5218 S Malaya Way, Centennial CO 80015

Hon. Michael Huerta 

Administrator 

Federal Aviation Administration 

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 from certain parts of the FARs.

Dear Administrator Huerta: 

Pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (the Reform Act) and 14 

C.F.R. Part 11, Unmanned Aerial Assessment & Video, LLC, a Colorado limited liability company, hereby 

applies for an exemption from the listed Federal Aviation Regulations (“FARs”) to allow it to operate a 

small Unmanned Aircraft System (“sUAS”) under the conditions and limitations set forth in this Petition.

The requested exemption would permit the operation of small, unmanned and relatively inexpensive 

sUAS under controlled conditions in airspace that (1) is limited, (2) is predetermined, and (3) would 

provide safety enhancements to First Responders on the front lines in our communities. Approval of this 

exemption would thereby enhance safety and fulfill the FAA Administrator’s responsibilities to 

“...establish requirements for the safe operation of such aircraft systems in the national airspace 

system.” Section 333(c) of the Reform Act. 

The name and address of the applicant is: 

Unmanned Aerial Assessment & Video, LLC 

Attn: Michael Harvey 

Telephone: (720) 243-2775 

Email: MichaelHarvey100@yahoo.com 

Address: 5218 S Malaya Way, Centennial CO. 80015
Regulations from which the exemption is requested: 

14 CFR Part 21 

14 C.F.R. § 45.23(b) 

14 CFR § 61.3 

14 C.F.R. § 91.7 (a) 

14 CFR § 91.9 (b) (2) 

14 C.F.R. § 91.103 

14 C.F.R. § 91.109 

14 C.F. R. § 91.119 

14 C.F.R. § 91.121 

14 CFR § 91.151 (a) 

14 CFR § 91.203 (a) & (b) 

14 CFR § 91.205(b) 

14 CFR § 91.215 

14 CFR § 91.405 (a) 

14 CFR § 407 (a) (1) 

14 CFR § 409 (a) (2) 

14 CFR § 417 (a) & (b) 3 

Appendix 1 describes the FARs from which an exemption is requested and summarizes the justification 

for each requested exemption. 

The Petition is submitted to fulfill Congress’ goal under Section 333(a) through (c) of the Reform Act, 

which directs the Secretary of Transportation to consider whether certain unmanned aircraft systems 

may operate safely in the national airspace system (NAS) before completion of the rulemaking required 

under Section 332 of the Reform Act. In making this determination, the Administrator must determine 

which types of UASs do not create a hazard to users of the NAS or 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).

If the Administrator 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).

The Secretary has delegated his aviation authority to the Administrator of the FAA.

The Federal Aviation Act expressly grants the FAA the authority to grant exemptions from its regulatory 

requirements for civil aircraft, a term defined under §40101 of the Act, which includes sUASs. The 

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

(a) or (b) of this section or any sections 44702-44716 of the Federal Aviation Act if Administrator finds 

the exemption in the public interest. 49 U.S.C. § 44701(f) See also 49 USC § 44711(a); 49 USC § 44704; 

14 CFR §91.203 (a) (1).
The Petitioner is a startup company, Unmanned Aerial Assessment & Video, LLC, The founder of the 

company is a retired Military Veteran with training, both academically and militarily in Emergency 

Management. Prior to starting Unmanned Aerial Assessment & Video, LLC, the founder worked as an 

Emergency Manager in both the Civilian and Military Contractor venues. He is also a certified Hazmat 

Specialist with over 15 years of experience with CBRN, (Chemical, Biological, Radiation & Nuclear) 

activities. Additionally, the founder has a strong interest in UASs and has been recreationally flying them 

for approximately 2 years, amassing over 120 hours of flight time.

The Petitioner has formulated a business plan to provide Emergency Management assistance to Local, 

State and Federal entities. The plan is to use small drones for SAR (Search & Rescue), Hazmat/CBRN 

Management and Emergency & Disaster Response. When responding to an emergency, one of the 

priorities is to understand how the most critical areas are affected and where they are situated - before 

putting any more human lives in danger. The unmanned Drone platform puts the power of aerial 

intelligence directly into the hands of the first responders. Real-time video streaming can show not only 

the extent of the damage but may also warn responders of additional hazards. Geo-tagged digital 

photographs provide an aerial record of the on-ground situation completely untouched. It is very 

improbable for First Responders to acquire, stay trained up on and be on the leading edge of technology 

with regards to UASs due to turnover and other training requirements that take priority.

Under the plan, the Drones will be DJI Inspires, DJI Phantom 2s or DJI Phantom 2 Visions, flying below

400 feet above ground level and never within 5 miles from an airport. They will operate only within the 

line of sight of the operator and will only operate in populated areas for life and safety reasons and 

under the control of the on-scene Incident Commander. Flights will be remote from noise sensitive areas 

such as parks, schools, hospitals, and churches. Flights will be only conducted in permissible weather –

rain, snow, or winds above 12 mph will terminate the flights. The Drones will only be operated by the 

Petitioner who has considerable experience flying UA Drones. Prior to operating the drones all pre-flight 

checks will be conducted as per the Petitioners SOP (Standard Operating Procedures). Safety will be the 

paramount concern in defining flight profiles. 

I am aware that this business plan is only permissible if it obtains special permission from the FAA. Many 

potential competitors of Petitioner are actively flying sUAS, notwithstanding the FAA’s stated 

prohibition. Petitioner also notes and has read the congressional mandate in sections 332 and 333 of the 

FAA Revitalization and Reform Act of 2012 that the FAA move quickly to accommodate the economic 

and societal benefits that can result from widespread deployment of sUAS technology. Accordingly, 

Petitioner applies for authorization under the Federal Aviation Act and the FARs to undertake the 

following activities for commercial purposes. Unless the Petition is granted, Petitioner will be at a 

significant competitive advantage if it, as it prefers, complies with FAA policy. 

Vehicle 

The Petitioner will fly one or more DJI Phantom 2s, DJI Phantom 2 Visions equipped with a three-axis 

gimbal and camera, small oxygen and radiation sensors and eventually a thermal FLIR for better 

situational awareness during SAR and Wild land Fire mapping missions. 

These vehicles have the built in capability to limit the height they fly above the ground, to limit the 

radius of the distance they fly from the operator, and to exclude them from class B, C, and D airspace as 

well any TFR’s (Temporary Flight Restricted) areas. The vehicles also have the built-in capability to return 

to the launching point if the wireless control link is interrupted or if the operator attempts to exceed any 

of the height, radius, or airspace limitations programmed into them.
The vehicle weighs about five pounds and has a maximum gross weight of approximately twenty 

pounds. It has a top speed of about 30 knots. It has four fixed-pitch rotors, thrust from which is varied by 

changing RPM. It is powered by a lithium polymer smart battery.

Flight profiles 

The petitioner will program the Phantom so that it will not fly more than 400 feet above ground level, or 

more than 1500 feet away from its operator. The PIC (Person in Control) will carefully preflight the 

vehicle before each mission to assure that its compass and GPS system are properly calibrated and that 

the return-to-home feature, altitude, and radius limitations work. 

It will not operate in controlled airspace. In the unlikely event that a manned aircraft flies below 400 

feet AGL where the Petitioner is operating its Phantom, the operator will keep both the vehicle and 

manned aircraft in sight and avoid the manned aircraft. 

More particularly, the Petitioner will fly the Phantom only over the hazard areas that are in control of an 

on-scene Incident Commander, most likely being a Fire Chief, SAR rep or Police rep, etc.

Public interest 

Granting the petition would be in the public interest because: 

1. The Congress of the United States has determined that early accommodation of sUAS into the 

National Airspace System advances the public interest. The Committee Report leading the House to 

adopt H.R. 658 said: 

"The successful integration of unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) into the National Airspace System (NAS) 

can support more than 23,000 high-paying jobs in the United States. . . . The absence of a plan to 

integrate UASs into the NAS is a barrier to such job creation . . . ."1

Granting the Petition represents a step toward such integration, in the absence of a comprehensive 

regulatory regime for sUAS, and thus would serve the Congressional goal and the public interest. 

2. Granting the Petition will facilitate a new era in Emergency Response activities, one in which the 

responders themselves have a tool to safely, quickly and remotely assess a situation without placing 

lives in harm’s way. In comparison, the EOD robots have saved countless lives since their inception, a 

feat that will become common place for aerial assessments.

3. Granting the Petition will enable Petitioner to demonstrate the commercial viability of creating new 

safety techniques and tactics with new aeronautical technology, thereby improving the efficiency of 

Emergency Responders around the world and making for a safer society. 

The rules from which Petitioner seeks exemption artificially and irrationally limit the effective use of 

new technologies to expand Emergency Response safety and improve the efficiency of markets, thereby 

subverting the public interest. 

_____________________________________________

1. H. R. Rep. 112-29 on H.R. 658, 112th Cong., 1st Sess. at 116. The House-Senate Conference Committee on the FAA Modernization and 

Reform Act of 2012 recommended amendments to H.R. 658 in lieu of amendments adopted by the Senate. Conference Report to Accompany 

H.R. 658, H.R. Rep. 112-381, 112th Cong., 2d Sess., at p. 1 (Feb. 1, 2012). 
4. Granting the Petition will enable the Petitioner to demonstrate that Wounded War Veterans, as I am,

can still thrive and be a part of the business community, regardless of any setbacks they may endure. 

This alone is in keeping with the Presidents stated ideology as well as the Veterans Administrations 

vision and in the public’s interest.

5. Granting the Petition will fulfill the FAA’s own declaration that encouraging new aviation technologies 

advances the public interest. The FAA itself has recognized the public interest in its role of "Encouraging 

and developing civil aeronautics, including new aviation technology."2 Granting the Petition will 

enhance FAA fulfillment of that commitment, thereby serving the public interest. Air commerce 

flourishes in the United States because of the rapid pace of innovation in aeronautical and associated 

technologies, followed by their commercialization and their introduction into the marketplace. The 

drone technology that the Petitioner uses exemplifies the latest innovative leap forward in aeronautical 

technology. Preventing it from using this in air commerce subverts achievement of the goal. 

6. Granting the Petition will fulfill the Congressional determination that integrating sUAS technology into 

the NAS serves the public interest. Section 330 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, 

specifically recognizes the advantages to air commerce obtainable from the deployment of sUAS 

technologies. It mandated several steps by the FAA to accelerate the availability of these technologies in 

the National Airspace System, thereby representing a congressional determination that the public 

interest is served by making these technologies more widely available at the earliest practicable date. 

The Petition represents a way for the FAA to move incrementally, while still satisfying its congressional 

mandate and meeting its obligation to enhance the public interest by making new technologies available 

by allowing the use of sUAS technologies in a manner that protects the public and the rest of the 

aviation community from significant risk. 

The commercial activities by Petitioner proposed in the Petition represent contributions to new forms of 

air commerce, thereby fulfilling the FAA’s statutory mandate under the 2012 Act. 

7. Granting the Petition will enhance aviation safety, thereby advancing the public interest. The 

Petitioner has committed itself in the Petition to safety practices that reduce or eliminate hazards to 

aircraft in the National Airspace System and to persons and property on the ground. Many others are 

flying sUAS without regard to these hazards. Granting the Petition will offer the Petitioner up as an 

example of how the FAA is willing to accommodate the new technology when it is constrained by 

appropriate limitations to enhance safety. It will also allow the Petitioner to be a role model for safe 

commercial sUAS operations. 

Users of the National Airspace System are confronted by mushrooming threats from sUAS flown in 

defiance of the FAA’s ban. Unless the FAA shows some flexibility to accommodate lawful and safe 

operation of sUAS for legitimate commercial purposes, the level of defiance will increase, intensifying 

the hazards to manned aircraft and to persons and property on the ground.

The Petitioner's proposed operations satisfy the criteria provided in Section 333 of the Reform Act 

relating to size, weight, speed, operating capabilities, proximity to airports and populated areas and 

operation within visual line of sight, and national security. The Petition justifies grant of the requested 

exemptions to allow the Petitioner to engage in Emergency Response procedures using small Drones. 

_____________________________________________

2 FAA, Safety: The Foundation of Everything We Do, 

http://www.faa.gov/about/safety_efficiency/. 
Respectfully submitted, 

Michael Harvey

Unmanned Aerial Assessment & Video LLC 

Appendix 1
FAR section Subject Justification 

14 CFR § 45.23(b) Requirement to display 

registration number on vehicle 

Insufficient space on vehicle 

14 CFR Part 21 Aircraft certification 

requirements and procedures 

Designed for manned aircraft; 

not suitable for off-the-shelf 

sUAS 

14 CFR § 61.3 Requirement for pilot 

certificate 

Part 61 requirements designed 

for manned aircraft, not sUAS; 

petition describes training for 

sUAS operator 

14 CFR § 91.7 (a) Airworthiness requirement Designed for manned aircraft; 

not suitable for off-the-shelf 

sUAS 

14 CFR § 91.9 (b) (2) Requirement for manual to be 

available in the cockpit 

No one aboard to read manual 

14 CFR § 91.103(b) Requirement for crew 

members to be onboard 

Unmanned vehicle 

14 CFR § 91.109 Requirement for dual controls 

during flight instruction 

No one aboard to operate 

controls 

14 CFR § 91.119 Minimum altitudes for safe 

flight 

Safety requires operation 

below these altitudes 

14 CFR § 91.121 Altimeter settings No one aboard to read 

altimeter 

14 CFR § 91.151(a) Fuel requirements Vehicle does not use fuel 

14 CFR § 91.203 (a) & (b) Requirement for registration 

and airworthiness certificates 

to be onboard 

No one aboard to read 

certificates 

14 CFR § 91.205(b) Cockpit instruments No one aboard to read 

FAR section Subject Justification 

14 CFR § 45.23(b) Requirement to display 

registration number on vehicle 

Insufficient space on vehicle 

14 CFR Part 21 Aircraft certification 

requirements and procedures 

Designed for manned aircraft; 

not suitable for off-the-shelf 

sUAS 

14 CFR § 61.3 Requirement for pilot 

certificate 

Part 61 requirements designed 

for manned aircraft, not sUAS; 

petition describes training for 

sUAS operator 

14 CFR § 91.7 (a) Airworthiness requirement Designed for manned aircraft; 

not suitable for off-the-shelf 

sUAS 
14 CFR § 91.9 (b) (2) Requirement for manual to be 

available in the cockpit 

No one aboard to read manual 

14 CFR § 91.103(b) Requirement for crew 

members to be onboard 

Unmanned vehicle 

14 CFR § 91.109 Requirement for dual controls 

during flight instruction 

No one aboard to operate 

controls 

14 CFR § 91.119 Minimum altitudes for safe 

flight 

Safety requires operation 

below these altitudes 

14 CFR § 91.121 Altimeter settings No one aboard to read 

altimeter 

14 CFR § 91.151(a) Fuel requirements Vehicle does not use fuel 

14 CFR § 91.203 (a) & (b) Requirement for registration 

and airworthiness certificates 

to be onboard 

No one aboard to read 

certificates 

14 CFR § 91.205(b) Cockpit instruments No one aboard to read