Charles J. Setaro PETITION FOR 333 Exemption 

Page 1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

DOCKET MANAGEMENT SYSTEM 

1200 NEW JERSEY AVE., SE 

WASHINGTON, DC 20590 

IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION FOR EXEMPTION OF: 

Charles J. Setaro

FOR AN EXEMPTION SEEKING RELIEF FROM 

THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE FAA REFORM ACT AND 

PART 11 OF THE FEDERAL AVIATION REGULATIONS FROM 

TITLE 14 OF THE CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS 

SECTIONS C.F.R. §§ 61.113 (a) & (b); 91.7(a); 91.119 (c); 91.121; 91.151(a); 

91.405 (a); 91.407(a) (1); 91.409 (a) (2); 91.417 (a) & (b). 

CONCERNING COMMERCIAL OPERATION OF UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS

PURSUANT TO SECTION 333 OF THE FAA MODERNIZATION 

AND REFORM ACT OF 2012 (PUBLIC LAW 112-95) 

Submitted on November 23, 2015 by petitioner: 

Charles J. Setaro 

27 Deer Hill Avenue 

Danbury, CT 06810 

cjset@att.net 
Charles J. Setaro PETITION FOR 333 Exemption 

Page 2

Table of Contents 

GLOSSARY OF ABBREVIATIONS ...........................................................................................3

INTRODUCTION AND INTERESTS OF THE PETITIONER..............................................4

Opening Summary....................................................................................................................4

Description of Type, Make and Models of sUAV/UAS Requested/Proposed:.......................4

Commercial (Mission, Operation) Purpose:........................................................................................5

Regulations from which the Exemption Relief is requested:.......................................................6

The name and address of the Petitioner: .............................................................................................6

Background and Commitment to Safety...............................................................................................6

The Exemption Request .........................................................................................................8

Operator Requirements.....................................................................................................................................8

Aircraft and Equivalent Level of Safety..................................................................................................... 10

How This Exemption Will Benefit Public as a Whole: Specific Uses Public Benefits................ 14

Discussion: Specific Sections of 14 CFR from Which Petitioner Seeks an Exemption & 

Equivalent Level of Safety .............................................................................................................................. 15

Subpart H—Airworthiness Certificates, and any associated noise certification and 

testing requirements of part 36, is not necessary. ........................................................................16

14 C.F.R. § 91.7(a): Civil aircraft airworthiness..............................................................................16

14 C.F.R. § 91.109: Flight Instruction..................................................................................................16

14 C.F.R. §91.119: Minimum safe altitudes ......................................................................................17

14 C.F.R. §91.121 Altimeter Settings...................................................................................................17

14 C.F.R. § 91.151(a): Fuel Requirements for Flight in VFR Conditions ..............................18

14 C.F.R. §91.405 (a); 91.407 (a) (1); 91.409(a) (2); 91.417(a) & (b): Maintenance 

Inspections.....................................................................................................................................................18

Federal Register Publication ............................................................................................. 19

Privacy and National Security ........................................................................................... 20

Summary................................................................................................................................... 20
Charles J. Setaro PETITION FOR 333 Exemption 

Page 3

GLOSSARY OF ABBREVIATIONS 

AGL Above Ground Level 

AOI Area of Interest 

ATC Air Traffic Control  

ATO Air Traffic Organization 

AV Aerial Vehicle 

CFR Code of Federal Regulations 

COA Certificate of Authorization 

FAA Federal Aviation Administration 

FAR Federal Aviation Regulation 

GCS  Ground Control Station 

GPS   Global Positioning System 

LOL  Loss of Link 

NAS National Airspace System 

NOTAM Notice To Airman 

PIC Pilot In Command 

Section 333 FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (FMRA) Section 333 

SO Safety Observer  

SOP Standard Operating Procedures 

sUAS Small Unmanned Aircraft System 

sUAV Small Unmanned Aircraft Vehicle 

UA Unmanned Aircraft 

UAS Unmanned Aircraft System 

UAV Unmanned Aircraft Vehicle 

VFR Visual Flight Rules 

VLOS Visual Line of Site 

VMC Visual Meteorological Conditions 

VTOL Vertical Take-Off and Landing 

 

 

 

 

 
Charles J. Setaro PETITION FOR 333 Exemption 

Page 4

INTRODUCTION AND INTERESTS OF THE PETITIONER 

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, I, Charles J. Setaro, hereafter referred to as 

“petitioner” /operator of small unmanned aircraft systems (“sUASs”) equipped to 

offer on-demand commercial UAS operations for a host of industries and 

applications and to perform the purposes listed below, hereby applies for an 

exemption from the listed Federal Aviation Regulations (“FARs”) to allow 

commercial operation of sUAV’s/UAS, so long as such operations are conducted 

within and under the conditions outlined herein or as may be established by the 

FAA in an exemption granted under either Section 333 or Section 49 U.S.C. 

§44701(f) 

As described more fully below, the requested exemption would permit the 

operation of a sUASs under controlled conditions in airspace that is 1) limited; 2) 

predetermined; and 3) would provide safety enhancements in the fields in which it 

will operate, which now depend upon conventional aircraft or humans climbing 

high on dangerous structures, and working adjacent to treacherous infrastructure 

etc.. Approval of this exemption would thereby enhance safety and fulfill the 

Secretary of Transportation’s (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.1

Opening Summary 

Description of Type, Make and Models of sUAV/UAS Requested/Proposed: 

The petitioner is seeking an exemption to commercially operate the proposed 

rotorcraft sUAV’s makes and models as follows: 

DJI- Phantom 3 Standard, DJI- Phantom 3 Advanced, DJI- Phantom 3 Professional, 

DJI- Phantom 2 Vision + and DJI -Inspire 1. 2

 

1 Petitioner relies upon the following exemptions where specific reference to an 

exemption is not provided: Exemptions 11062 thru 11067, 11080, 11109 through 

11112, 11114, 11213, 11062 and as recent as 11857. 

2 All the listed models of sUAVs have been previously approved by the FAA for 

commercial operations in various exemptions. 
Charles J. Setaro PETITION FOR 333 Exemption 

Page 5

Each separately weighs less than 55 lbs., with imaging payload and applicable 

equipment. Equipment operation manuals for each sUAV are included for your 

reference as separate attachments. 

Note: Owner’s manuals will be submitted as an electronic attachment to this 

document Should the attachment size be too large due limited upload space, the 

manuals are also located at the following internet url’s: 

• https://dl.djicdn.com/downloads/phantom_3_standard/en/Phantom_3_Stan

dard_User_Manual__V1.4.pdf 

• https://dl.djicdn.com/downloads/phantom_3/en/Phantom_3_Professional_

User_Manual__V1.6.pdf 

• https://dl.djicdn.com/downloads/phantom_3/en/Phantom_3_Advanced_Use

r_Manual__V1.6.pdf 

• http://dl.djicdn.com/downloads/phantom-2-

vision/en/Phantom_2_Vision_User_Manual_v1.8_en.pdf 

• https://dl.djicdn.com/downloads/inspire_1/en/Inspire%20_1_User_Manual

__V1.8.pdf 

The petitioner feels that requests for relief from 14 CFR part 21, Certification 

procedures for products and parts, Subpart H—Airworthiness Certificates is 

unnecessary since prior rulings have found the aforementioned sUAVs 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, and 

limited operating area associated with the aircraft and its operation, the Secretary of 

Transportation has determined that these aircrafts meet 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. 

Commercial (Mission, Operation) Purpose: 

This exemption request, once granted would allow the petitioner to operate small 

unmanned aerial vehicle (sUAV), unmanned aircraft system (UAS) to conduct a 

myriad of services categorized as “aerial data collection”.3 Amongst those proposed: 

conduct bridge Inspections, flare stack inspection, utility-power generation system 

inspections and patrolling, aerial inspection, photography and videography of 

residential and commercial real estate, weddings, aerial inspection, photography 

and videography of utility infrastructure including but not limited to electrical 

power lines, wind turbines and cell towers, pipeline inspection and patrolling, 

cinematography, and videography, precision agriculture with on board sensors, 

 

3 FAA classifies “aerial data collection” to includes any remote sensing and measuring by an 

instrument(s) aboard the UA. Examples include imagery (photography, video, infrared, etc.), electronic 

measurement (precision surveying, RF analysis, etc.), chemical measurement (particulate 

measurement, etc.), or any other gathering of data by instruments aboard the UA. 
Charles J. Setaro PETITION FOR 333 Exemption 

Page 6

aerial surveying, construction site inspection and monitoring, public entity support 

operations, Aerial imaging for safety, monitoring and comparing work efforts and 

completion percentages, and security of controlled environment of various sites, 

aerial video and live video feed to assist with search and rescue operations under 

the authority and support of local authority officials, aerial video and photography 

for public and private use including television, public events, and cinematography 

live feed and live newsgathering, training to persons individually or belonging to 

both private and public organizations to increase awareness and improve safety for 

current and future UAS operations within the NAS, special events: including high 

schools. colleges, professional sports, open air events and fairs, research, risk 

management and assessment, disaster and catastrophe events. 

Regulations from which the Exemption Relief is requested: 

14 C.F.R. § 61.113 (a) & (b) 

14 C.F.R. § 61.133(a) 

14 C.F.R. § 91.7(a) 

14 C.F. R.§ 91.119 

14 C.F.R. § 91.121 

14 C.F.R. § 91.151 (a) 

14 C.F.R. § 91.405 (a) 

14 C.F.R. § 407 (a) (1) 

14 C.F.R. § 409 (a) (2) 

14 C.F.R. § 417 (a) & (b) 

The name and address of the Petitioner: 

Charles J. Setaro 

27 Deer Hill Ave 

Danbury, CT 06810 

cjset@att.net 

Background and Commitment to Safety 

The petitioner is a highly accomplished, capable, experienced and trusted 

professional; serving nearly four decades in U.S. Government employment. 

Throughout those years petitioner has illustrated deep concern and due regard for 

all safety aspects and actively co-authored EEP/EAP (Emergency Evacuation Plans/ 

Emergency Action Plans) for a medium sized government facility. 

Additionally, petitioner has safely operated as a hobbyist operating sUAV’s in a safe 

lawful manner and provided guidance to friends on safety tips and procedures that 

the FAA web links that explain safety procedures. Through approval of this 
Charles J. Setaro PETITION FOR 333 Exemption 

Page 7

exemption I can forward my plans to operate sUAV(s) for commercial purposes with 

the same continued priority to safety. 
Charles J. Setaro PETITION FOR 333 Exemption 

Page 8

The Exemption Request 

Petitioner proposes the use of the sUAV’s will be for capture of high resolution 

imagery and video of residential or commercial applications and purposes to a level 

of quality that allows the Petitioner to use the imagery to identify, record, 

memorialize events and objects according to the purposes noted. 

 The UAS will be operated by PIC and or contracting operators on occasion to 

capture high-resolution imagery/video of large structures (wide and tall) such as 

warehouses, high rise buildings, bridges, and construction sites, as well as “birds 

eye” views of fire and explosion sites. Given the small size of the sUAV’s involved, no 

more than 55 lbs., majority of the speed of operation be between 5-15 mph and the 

restricted environment within which they will operate, the Petitioner falls squarely 

within that zone of safety (an equivalent level of safety) in which Congress 

envisioned that the FAA must, by exemption, allow commercial operations of UASs 

to commence immediately. 

Operator Requirements 

While I am aware that the FAA feels it is not authorized to exempt the PIC 

qualifications regarding being a pilot.4 I nonetheless do wish to voice my opinion 

for the record. 

Given the sUAV proposed by Petitioner, Operators should not be required to hold a 

private pilot license. Petitioner believes that 1) the operator, instead of 

understanding how to operate a passenger carrying aircraft, should have knowledge 

and experience that enables the safe operation of a small, remotely piloted sUAV 

should understand airspace restrictions and know how to ensure separation from 

other aircraft as well as non-participants and property; 2) the sUAV has built-in 

technical capabilities that limit the potential for unsafe operation and 3) there are 

other security screening mechanisms already in existence that Petitioner will utilize 

to ensure the operators are acting consistently with national security interests. 

Given the sUAV safety features outlined below, Petitioner proposes that its 

operations under this Exemption request should not be required to hold a 

commercial or private pilot certification. Instead, Operators should be required to: 

have successfully completed, at a minimum, FAA private pilot ground instruction 

and/or passed the FAA Private Pilot written examination or FAA-recognized 

equivalents; have completed Petitioner’ appropriate training program for operation 

of the UAS. 

 

4 PIC must hold either an airline transport, commercial, private, recreational, or sport pilot 

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 flight review requirements specified in 14 CFR § 

61.56 in an aircraft in which the PIC is rated on his or her pilot certificate. 
Charles J. Setaro PETITION FOR 333 Exemption 

Page 9

Petitioner notes that 1) the FAA has found that safety factors permitted operation of 

sUAV’s by Operators with these proximal qualifications in the case of operations 

pursuant to public COAs when the mandatory operating conditions specified above 

were present; and 2) that the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking entitled Operation and 

Certification of Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems, 80 F.R. 9544 (February 23, 2015) 

(“NPRM”), does not require the operator to hold a private pilot license or a third 

class medical. 

 

Advanced sUAV’s has a navigation and control system and auto-pilot that allows it to 

execute very accurate pre-programed flights. Flights are pre-programmed with GPS 

waypoint to establish perimeters beyond which the aircraft will not operate. Flights 

under auto-pilot are not directed by positive manual input, but through preprogrammed flight parameters that are executed by the auto-pilot. In the case of 

unplanned events, the Operator inputs preprogrammed evasive maneuvers from the 

control unit, and the autopilot executes those maneuvers. Pre-programmed 

Operator interventions include: initiation of holding at present position; suspension 

of mission; fly back to launch point; abort mission and land immediately; and 

emergency power cut off and land (flight termination system). Additional 

automated safety functions and safety enhancing features of the Advanced sUAV’s 

may include the following: 

1) Auto-pilot detection of lost GPS or of insufficient satellites initiates an 

immediate landing, 

2) Low power on the aircraft triggers escalating alarms well in advance. Low 

power below 10% triggers an immediate landing, 

3) If the auto-pilot detects a lost-link to the ground controller, the UAS will hold 

position at its current location for 5 seconds and if the signal is not restored, 

execute a return to home and land, 

4) Redundant “kill switches” that enable completely shutting the aircraft down 

in flight in the event of a loss of control or un-commanded deviation from the 

flight path, 

5) The aircraft, weighs less than 55 lbs., fully loaded, 

6) The aircraft will operate for the Purposes at no more than 30 mph (while 

imaging) nor above 200 feet above the structure (imaging altitude) or a 

maximum of 400 feet AGL. 

See Federal Aviation Administration, Notice N-8900.227, Unmanned Aircraft 

Systems (UAS) Operational Approval, at 20-21 (July 30, 2013); As the FAA has 

determined in Exemptions 11062 thru 11067,11080 and 11110 (the “Exemptions”), 

in comparing the requirements for private pilot knowledge and the knowledge 

required for a commercial pilot, that knowledge associated with a private pilot 

license, and therefore private pilot ground school, was sufficient to allow private 

pilots to operate sUAV’s under those exemptions. 
Charles J. Setaro PETITION FOR 333 Exemption 

Page 10

A handheld radio controller controls the sUAV and the vehicle is operated within the 

line of sight. The requirements of Part 61.127 (commercial flight proficiency) and 

§61.107 (private flight proficiency), to the extent they are relevant to UAS 

operations, can be taught in the training proposed herein. As a review of the 

requirements of part 61.127 and 107 demonstrate, the issues presented as they 

relate to a 55 pound aircraft, operating at less than 30 mph during filming 

operations are those taught in ground school and in flight training with the 

particular UAS and not gained from accumulating flight hours in a fixed wing or 

rotorcraft gas or jet A powered aircraft completing cross country flights and take 

offs and landings at controlled and uncontrolled airports. 

 

The Operator will be operating the aircraft, always within line of sight. He or she will 

walk and follow the aircraft around the inspection area so that while it is flying its 

pre-programed and at times, manual flight path, the UAS will always be directly in 

his or her line of sight. The Operator will not be distracted by viewing the pictures 

taken during the flight. Rather, once the sUAV is launched, the Operator’s only duty 

will be to watch the flight of the UAS over any structure and intervene to address 

flight path deviations or other issues that arise during the flight. The functions that 

an observer performs where the aircraft is flown at long distances from the launch 

area will not be necessary as the Operator will always have the aircraft in his or her 

direct sight. The observer also will not be necessary because the Operator will 

conduct a pre-flight inspection of the area, will and if needed, cordon off the area 

and will perform frequent visual scans of the area while the vehicle is operating. 

Petitioner again notes that the NPRM does not require the use of a visual observer. 

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, reduction in environmental impacts, including reduced emissions 

associated with allowing battery powered sUAV’s for these functions instead of 

turbine or gas power aircraft/rotorcraft and operations with pilots having at least a 

private pilot license, the grant of the requested exemptions is in the public interest. 5

Aircraft and Equivalent Level of Safety 

The Petitioner proposes that the exemption requested herein apply to civil aircraft 

that have the characteristics and that operate with the limitations listed herein. 

 

5 Should the FAA determine that it cannot grant such an exemption for operations 

without a FAA licensed private pilot, despite the showing made herein, under the 

statutory authority the FAA already has, Petitioner will operate its aircraft with 

pilots holding at least a private pilot certificate issued by the FAA. In that event, 

Petitioner requests that the exemption be granted with conditions similar to those 

contained in numbered paragraphs 14-15 in Exemption 11136 
Charles J. Setaro PETITION FOR 333 Exemption 

Page 11

These limitations provide for at least an equivalent or even higher level of safety to 

operations under the current regulatory structure because the proposed operations 

represent a safety enhancement to the operations conducted with conventional 

aircraft or with humans climbing up and around structures. These conditions are 

drawn from Exemptions 11136, 11138, 11172, 11174 and 11177, 11062, 11109, 

11112, and 11213 and as recent as 11857. 

These limitations and conditions to which petitioner (referred to as “Operator”) 

agrees to be bound when conducting commercial operations under an FAA issued 

exemption include: 

1) Operations authorized by this grant of exemption are limited to 

the aircraft herein described, which are all a multi-rotor crafts 

weighing less than 55 pounds: Proposed operations of any other 

aircraft will require a new petition or a petition to amend this 

grant. 

2) The UA may not be flown at an indicated airspeed exceeding 30 

mph (10 mph during inspections). 

3) The UA must be operated at an altitude of no more than 400 feet 

above ground level (AGL), as indicated by the procedures 

specified in the Operator’s manual. All altitudes reported to ATC 

must be in feet AGL. 

4) The UA must be operated within visual line of sight (VLOS) of the 

Aircraft Operator at all times. This requires the Aircraft Operator 

to be able to use human vision unaided by any device other than 

corrective lenses.. 

5) The Exemption Holder’s Manuals must be amended to include all 

conditions and limitations required by the FAA. The Manuals 

must be maintained and made available to the Administrator 

upon request. If a discrepancy exists between the conditions and 

limitations in the exemption and the procedures outlined in the 

Exemption Holder’s Operator’s manual, the conditions and 

limitations in the exemption take precedence and must be 

followed. Otherwise, the Aircraft Operator must follow the 

procedures as outlined in its Aircraft’s manual. The Exemption 

Holder may update or revise its Manuals. It is the Exemption 

Holder’s responsibility to track such revisions and present 

updated and revised documents to the Administrator upon 

request. The Exemption Holder must also present updated and 

revised documents if it petitions for an extension or amendment 

of this exemption. If the Exemption Holder determines that any 

update or revision would affect the basis upon which the FAA 
Charles J. Setaro PETITION FOR 333 Exemption 

Page 12

granted this exemption, then the Exemption Holder must 

petition for amendment to its exemption. 

6) Prior to each flight, the Aircraft Operator/PIC must inspect the 

UAS to ensure it is in a condition for safe flight. 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. The Ground Control Station must be 

included in the preflight inspection. All maintenance and 

alterations must be properly documented in the aircraft records. 

7) Any UAS that has undergone maintenance or alterations that 

affect the UAS operation or flight characteristics, e.g., 

replacement of a flight critical component, must undergo a 

functional test flight in accordance with the Exemption holder’s 

Manuals. The Aircraft Operator who conducts the functional test 

flight must make an entry in the UAS aircraft records of the 

flight. The requirements and procedures for a functional test 

flight and aircraft record entry must be added to the Exemption 

Holder’s Operator’s manual. 

8) The Exemption Holder must follow the manufacturer’s UAS 

aircraft/component, maintenance, overhaul, replacement, 

inspection, and life limit requirements, with particular attention 

to flight critical components that may not be addressed in the 

manufacturer’s manuals. 

9) The Exemption Holder must carry out its maintenance, 

inspections, and record keeping requirements in accordance 

with the Operator’s Manuals. Maintenance, inspection, and 

alterations must be noted in the aircraft logbook, including total 

flight hours, description of work accomplished, and the signature 

of the authorized technician returning the UAS to service. 

10) Each UAS operated under this exemption must comply with all 

manufacturer System and Safety Bulletins. 

11) If the UAS loses communications or loses its GPS signal, the UA 

must return to a pre-determined location within the private or 

controlled-access property and land or be recovered in 

accordance with the Exemption Holder’s Manuals. 

12) The Aircraft Operator must abort the flight in the event of 

unpredicted obstacles or emergencies, including unauthorized 

people entering the flight area, in accordance with the 

Exemption Holder’s Manuals. 
Charles J. Setaro PETITION FOR 333 Exemption 

Page 13

13) The Aircraft Operator is prohibited from beginning a UAS flight 

unless (considering wind and forecast weather conditions) there 

is enough power to fly to the first point of intended landing and, 

assuming normal cruising speed, 

14) All aircraft operated in accordance with the exemption must be 

identified by serial number, registered in accordance with 14 

CFR part 47, and have identification (N- Number) markings in 

accordance with 14 CFR part 45, Subpart C. Markings must be as 

large as practicable. 

15) The documents required under 14 CFR 91.9 and 91.203 must be 

available to the Operator 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. 

16) The UA must remain clear and yield the right of way to all other 

manned operations and activities at all times (including, but not 

limited to, ultra-light vehicles, parachute activities, parasailing 

activities, hang gliders, etc.). 

17) The UA may not be operated by the Aircraft Operator from any 

moving device or vehicle. 

18) UAS operations may not be conducted during night, as defined in 

14 CFR 1.1. 

19) All operations must be conducted under visual meteorological 

conditions (VMC). 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 Operator. 

20) During operations the UA may not operate within 5 nautical 

miles of the geographic center of an airport as denoted on a 

current FAA-published aeronautical chart unless a letter of 

agreement with that airport’s management is obtained, and the 

operation is conducted in accordance with a NOTAM, if as 

required by the Operator’s COA. The letter of agreement with the 

airport management must be made available to the 

Administrator upon request. 

21) Flight operations must be conducted at least 500 feet from all 

nonparticipating persons, vessels, vehicles, and structures 

unless: 
Charles J. Setaro PETITION FOR 333 Exemption 

Page 14

a. Barriers or structures are present that sufficiently protect 

nonparticipating persons from debris in the event of an 

accident. The Aircraft Operator must ensure that 

nonparticipating persons remain under such protection. If a 

situation arises where nonparticipating persons leave such 

protection and are within 30 feet of the UA, flight

operations must cease immediately and/or; 

b. The aircraft is operated near vessels, vehicles or structures 

where the land owner/controller has granted permission 

and/or the Aircraft Operator has made a safety assessment 

of the risk of operating closer to those objects and; 

c. Operations near the Aircraft Operator do not present an 

undue hazard to the Operator per § 91.119(a). 

How This Exemption Will Benefit Public as a Whole: Specific Uses Public 

Benefits 

Petitioner proposes use of its sUAV provided equivalent or augmented levels of 

safety for each of the uses proposed herein: 

The present systems of photography and videography and mapping of inspecting 

the roofs, agriculture land, buildings and large structures site surveys, are now 

conducted by climbing on the roofs and structures that are steep, tall, slippery, 

weakened or otherwise hazardous or by the use of conventional aircraft. 

The current procedures can result in significant injuries to the people who must 

climb on the roofs or require the use of aircraft that are orders of magnitude greater 

in size than the sUAV. Either method, manual inspection or large conventional 

aircraft, results in increased risk of injury due to personnel falling off roofs or 

ladders, carrying heavy ladders and dealing with confined and dangerous spaces, or 

increased risk from low altitude flyovers with helicopters or fixed wing aircraft 

inspecting buildings after damage from storms or other disasters, such as 

earthquakes or fires. Such flights are, of course, significantly more expensive than 

those undertaken with a sUAV. 

The present system exposes those not only in the immediate area of inspection, but 

those who are along the path of flight associated with the arrival and departure of 

the conventional aircraft at the inspection site because the aircraft must be flown to 

and from the site. By contrast, the sUAV is carried to the site and transits no other 

property. Conventional aircraft carry flammable fuels that are not carried by the 

UAS and emit pollutants associated with internal combustion engines. The sUAV’s 

proposed herein are battery powered and have no emissions. Manned aircraft carry 

highly flammable fuel a high risk potential for fire/explosion.
Charles J. Setaro PETITION FOR 333 Exemption 

Page 15

Discussion: Specific Sections of 14 CFR from Which Petitioner Seeks an 

Exemption & Equivalent Level of Safety 

14 C.F.R. § 61.113(a) & (b); Private Pilot Privileges and Limitations; Pilot in Command; 

Section 61.113(a) & (b) limit private pilots to non-commercial operations. Unlike a 

conventional aircraft that carries a pilot, passengers, and cargo, the Petitioner’ sUAV 

is remotely controlled with no passengers or property of others on board. Section 

61.133(a) requires an individual with a commercial pilot’s license to be pilot in 

command of an aircraft for compensation or hire. 

Petitioner respectfully proposes that Operator requirements should take into 

account the characteristics of the particular UAS. Petitioner’ sUAV has a high degree 

of pre-programmed control and various built-in technical capabilities that strictly 

limit the potential for operation outside of the operating conditions set forth in the 

exemption application. The Petitioner’ sUAV has navigation and control system 

comprised of a Ground Control Station (GCS) and auto-pilot system that can be preprogrammed to set operational boundaries. All flights are pre-programmed with 

precision GPS guidance.. In the case of unplanned events, the Operator may input 

pre-programmed evasive maneuvers from the control unit, and the onboard 

autopilot executes those maneuvers. Pre-programmed Operator interventions 

include initiation of holding at present position; suspension of mission; fly back to 

launch point; abort mission and land immediately; and emergency power cut off and 

land (Flight Termination System). 

Additional automated safety functions and safety enhancing features of the cited 

sUAV’s may include the following: 

1. Auto-pilot detection of lost GPS or of insufficient satellites initiates an 

immediate landing. 

2. Low power on the aircraft triggers escalating alarms and an immediate 

landing. 

3. If the auto-pilot detects a lost-link to the ground controller, the UAS will 

hold position at its current location for 5 seconds and if the signal is not 

restored, execute a return to home and land. 

4. Redundant “kill switches” that enable completely shutting the aircraft 

down in flight in the event of a loss of control or un-commanded 

deviation from the flight path. 

5. The aircraft, weighs less than 55 lbs., fully loaded. 

Petitioner notes that the FAA has found that safety factors permitted operation of 

UASs by Operators with these qualifications in the case of operations pursuant to 

public COAs where the mandatory operating conditions specified above were 

present. See, Federal Aviation Administration, Notice N-8900.227, Unmanned 
Charles J. Setaro PETITION FOR 333 Exemption 

Page 16

Aircraft Systems (UAS) Operational Approval, at 20-21 (July 30, 2013). Likewise, 

Petitioner notes that the NPRM does not require that the Operator hold a private 

pilot license issued by the FAA. 

Given these conditions and restrictions, an equivalent level of safety will be 

provided by allowing operation of the petitioner’s sUAV without a private pilot’s 

certificate or a commercial pilot’s certificate, under the conditions set forth herein. 

The risks associated with the operation of the petitioner’s sUAV (given its size, 

speed, operational capabilities, and lack of combustible fuel) are so diminished from 

the level of risk associated with private pilot operations or commercial operations 

contemplated by Part 61 with conventional aircraft (fixed wing or rotorcraft), that 

allowing operations of the UAS as set forth above meets or exceeds the present level 

of safety provided under 14 C.F.R. § 61.113(a) & (b) and does not rise to the level of 

requiring a commercial pilot to operate the aircraft under § 61.133(a). 

Subpart H—Airworthiness Certificates, and any associated noise certification and testing 

requirements of part 36, is not necessary.

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

This regulation requires that no person may operate a civil aircraft 

unless it is in airworthy condition. 

Should the exemption be granted allowing commercial operation of the UAS without 

an airworthiness certificate, no standard will exist for airworthiness of the UA. 

Given the size of the aircraft and the requirements that the Operator has agreed to 

as it relates to airworthiness, as contained in the manual, an equivalent level of 

safety will be achieved by insuring compliance with the manuals prior to each flight. 

The FAA has granted exemptions to conduct similar operations in Exemptions 

11062 through 11067, 11080 and 11110.6

14 C.F.R. § 91.109: Flight Instruction 

14 CFR 91.109 Flight Instruction; Simulated instrument flight and certain flight tests. 

The regulation states, "No person may operate a civil aircraft that is 

being used for flight instruction unless that aircraft has fully functioning 

dual controls." 

 

6 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, and limited operating area 

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

the listed aircrafts meets the conditions of Section 333. Therefore, the FAA finds that relief from 14

CFR part 21, Certification procedures for products and parts, 
Charles J. Setaro PETITION FOR 333 Exemption 

Page 17

sUASs and remotely piloted aircraft, by their design do not have fully functional dual 

controls. Flight control is accomplished through the use of a control box that 

communicates with the aircraft via radio communications. The FAA has approved 

exemptions for flight training without fully functional dual controls for a number of 

aircraft and for flight instruction in experimental aircraft. The equivalent level of 

safety provided by the fact that neither a pilot nor passengers will be carried in the 

aircraft and by the size and speed of the aircraft.

14 C.F.R. §91.119: Minimum safe altitudes 

Section 91.119 establishes safe altitudes for operation of civil aircraft. 

Section 91.119 (d) allows helicopters to be operated at less than the 

minimums prescribed, provided the person operating the helicopter 

complies with any route or altitudes prescribed for helicopters by the 

FAA. 

As this exemption is for a sUAS that is a helicopter and the exemption requests 

authority to operate at altitudes up to 400 AGL, an exemption may be needed to 

allow such operations. 

Compared to flight operations with aircraft or rotorcraft weighing far more than the 

maximum 55 lbs. and the lack of flammable fuel, any risk associated with these 

operations is far less than those presently presented by conventional aircraft 

operating at or below 500 AGL in the aerial photography industry. In addition, the 

low-altitude operations of the sUAS will ensure separation between these small-UAS 

operations and the operations of conventional aircraft that must comply with 

Section 91.119. The FAA has granted exemptions to conduct similar operations in 

Exemptions 11062 through 11067, 11080 and 11110. 

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.” 

As the Petitioner’ sUAV, in manual or emergency mode, will not have a barometric 

altimeter display, but instead a GPS altitude display, an exemption will be needed. 

The Operator, pursuant to the procedures set forth in the Manuals as indicated 

before flight, will achieve an equivalent level of safety. The PIC will also verify 

altimeter reading of zero at ground level before takeoff. The FAA has granted 

exemptions to conduct similar operations in Exemptions 11062 through 11067, 

11080 and 11110. 
Charles J. Setaro PETITION FOR 333 Exemption 

Page 18

14 C.F.R. § 91.151(a): 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; or (2) At night, 

to fly after that for at least 45 minutes.” 

The battery powering the sUAS provides approximately 25 minutes of powered 

flight. It would be impossible for the sUAV to meet the 30-minute reserve 

requirement in 14 CFR §91.151, sUAS flights would be unachievable. Given the 

limitations on the UAS’ proposed flight area and the location of its proposed 

operations within a predetermined area, a longer time frame for flight is reasonable. 

Petitioner believes that an exemption from 14 CFR §91.151(a) falls within the scope 

of prior exemptions. See Exemption 10673 (allowing Lockheed Martin Corporation 

to operate without compliance with FAR 91.151 (a)). Operating with less than 30 

minutes of reserve fuel, does not engender the type of risks that Section 91.151(a) 

was intended to alleviate given the size and speed of the small UAS. 

Petitioner believes that an equivalent level of safety can be achieved by limiting 

flights to ~15 minutes or 25% of remaining battery power whichever happens first. 

This restriction would be more than adequate to return the sUAS to its planned 

landing zone from anywhere in its limited operating area. Similar exemptions have 

been granted to other operations, including Exemptions 2689F, 5745, 10673, 10808 

and Exemptions 11062, through11067, 11080 and 11110. 

Since the aircraft will never fly more than 1/2 nm from the point of intended landing, a 

full battery charge at launch will ensure that we easily meet the reserve energy 

requirement of this paragraph

14 C.F.R. §91.405 (a); 91.407 (a) (1); 91.409(a) (2); 91.417(a) & (b): Maintenance 

Inspections 

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. Maintenance will be 
Charles J. Setaro PETITION FOR 333 Exemption 

Page 19

accomplished by the Operator or manufacturer pursuant to the flight manual and 

operating handbook as referenced in the Manuals attached. An equivalent level of 

safety will be achieved because these small UASs are very limited in size and will 

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

If mechanical issues arise, the UAS can land immediately and will be operating from 

no higher than 400 feet AGL. 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 and manufacturer are most 

familiar with the aircraft and best suited to maintain the aircraft in an airworthy 

condition to provide the equivalent level of safety. The FAA has granted exemptions 

for similar operations in Exemptions 11062 through 11067, 11080 and 11110. The 

PIC will ensure that the aircraft is in an airworthy condition prior to flight and conduct 

detailed. Petitioner additionally feels that due to the size, construction, and simplicity 

of the aircraft, the PIC can ensure an equivalent level of safety

********* 

Federal Register Publication 

Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. Part 11, the following summary is provided for publication in 

the Federal Register, should it be determined that publication is needed: 

Petitioner, Charles J. Setaro seeks an exemption from the following rules: 

14 C.F.R. §§ 61.113(a) & (b); 91.7(a); 91.119; 91.121; 91.151(a); 91.405(a); 

91.407(a)(1); 91.409(a)(2) and 91.417 (a) & (b) to operate commercially a small 

unmanned vehicle (55 lbs. or less) for the following purposes: to conduct bridge 

inspections, flare stack inspection, utility-power generation system inspections and 

patrolling, aerial inspection and photography of residential and commercial utility 

infrastructure including but not limited to electrical power lines, wind turbines and 

cell towers, pipeline inspection and patrolling, filmmaking, cinematography, and 

videography, precision agriculture with on board sensors, wildlife and forestry 

monitoring and mosquito and insect control, aerial surveying, construction site 

inspection and monitoring, public entity support operations, aerial video and live 

video feed to assist with search and rescue operations under the authority and 

support of local authority officials, aerial video and photography for public and 

private use including television, public events, and cinematography live feed and 

live newsgathering, training to persons individually or belonging to both private and 

public organizations to increase awareness and improve safety for current and 

future UAS operations within the NAS, special events: including high schools. 

colleges, professional sports, open air events and fairs, research, risk management 

and assessment, motion picture production, surface mining, closed set filming, 

disaster and catastrophe events. 
Charles J. Setaro PETITION FOR 333 Exemption 

Page 20

Privacy and National Security 

All flights will occur over private or controlled access property with the property 

owner’s prior consent and knowledge. Inspection will be of inanimate objects in 

areas where the owners will have consented to the inspections or otherwise have 

agreed to allow the UAS and the Operator to be in the area where operations will 

take place. 

The size of the UAS, its speed, payload capacity, short flight time (~22minutes or 

less) and restricted area of operation do not raise national security issues. 

Summary 

Approval of exemptions allowing commercial operations of sUAV’s for petitioner to 

operate an unmanned aircraft system (UAS) to conduct “data collection” activities 

previously described will enhance safety by reducing risk. 

Conventional operations, using jet or piston powered aircraft, ladders or placing 

people in swamps, on roofs or tall, hazardous or weakened structures, exposes them 

to higher risks than those created by use of a sUAV’S. Conventional aircraft that 

operate at extremely low altitudes just feet from the subject being inspected and in 

extreme proximity to people and structures present the risks associated with 

vehicles that weigh in excess of 6,000 lbs., carrying large amounts of jet A or other 

fuel (140 gallons for jet helicopters). Such aircraft must fly to and from the project 

location. In contrast, a sUAV weighing fewer than 55 lbs. and powered by batteries 

eliminates virtually all of that risk given the reduced mass and lack of combustible 

fuel carried on board. The sUAV is carried to the target area and not flown. The 

sUAV will carry no passengers or crew and, therefore, will not expose them to the 

risks associated with manned aircraft flights. 

The operation of small UASs, weighing less than 55 lbs., conducted under the strict 

conditions outlined above, will provide an equivalent level of safety supporting the 

grant of the exemptions requested herein. These lightweight aircraft operate at slow 

speeds, close to the ground, and in areas that are under the control of the customer 

for the operations and, as a result, are far safer than conventional operations 

conducted with turbine helicopters operating in close proximity to the ground and 

people or the use of individuals to climb the structures to conduct the operations. 

 

Satisfaction of the criteria provided in Section 333 of the Reform Act of 2012 –size, 

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

operation within visual line of sight and national security – provide more than 

adequate justification for the grant of the requested exemptions allowing 

commercial operation of Petitioner’s UAS for the Purposes outlined herein and are 

consistent with exemptions already granted, including Exemptions number 11171 
Charles J. Setaro PETITION FOR 333 Exemption 

Page 21

through 11174, 11176, 11177, 11062, 11109, 11112, and 11213 and as recent as 

11857. 

Respectfully Submitted: 

 

 /s/ 

Charles J. Setaro (petitioner) 

Attachments: Manuals- DJI Phantom 3 Standard, DJI Phantom Advanced DJI 

Phantom Professional, Phantom 2 Vision+, DJI Inspire 1 
Charles J. Setaro PETITION FOR 333 Exemption 

Page 22