1

 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA DEPARTMENT 

OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL AVIATION 

ADMINISTRATION WASHINGTON, DC 

Reg. Docket No. ________________ 

 In the Matter of Petition for Exemption of: 

 Adam J Dorn, P.E. 

(Sole Proprietor) 

For an Exemption from the requirements of the 

Code of Federal Regulations Sections Concerning 

Operation of an Unmanned Aircraft System

 Pursuant to Section 333 of the 

 FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 

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. Part 27; 14 C.F.R. 61.113(a)&(b); 91.7(a); 

91.9(b) (2); 91.103; 91.109(a); 91.121; 91.119 91.151(a); 

91.203(a)&(b); 91.405(a)(1); 91.407(a)(1); 91.409(a)(1) (2); 

91.417(a)&(b); 91.9(c) 
2

CONTENTS

I. PETITIONER’S DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................................ 3

II. PROPOSED OPERATIONS ........................................................................................................................ 4

III. RELEVANT AUTHORITY TO PETITIONER’S EXEMPTION REQUEST ........................................ 7

IV. PUBLIC INTEREST ..................................................................................................................................... 8

V. QUALIFICATIONS FOR APPROVAL UNDER SECTION 333 Of THE REFORM ACT .................. 9

VI. REGULATIONS FROM WHICH EXEMPTION IS REQUESTED ........................................................ 10

VII. PRIVACY ..................................................................................................................................................... 20

VIII. FEDERAL REGISTER SUMMARY ......................................................................................................... 21

IX. CONCLUSION ...................................................................................................................... 22
3

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

Act”)1 and 14 C.F.R. 11, Adam J. Dorn, P.E. (“Petitioner”) hereby applies for an exemption from 

Federal Aviation Regulations (“FARs”) identified below, to allow commercial operation of small 

ultralight weight unmanned aerial vehicles (i.e. small unmanned aircraft systems or “UAS”) in 

airspace regulated by the Federal Aviation Administration (“FAA”). 

This exemption is in accordance with protocols outlined in this petition for exemption, the 

enclosed UAS Flight Operations, Maintenance, & Safety Manual (“Manual”)2, the UAS 

manufacturers operations and maintenance manual(s) (Phantom 2 Vision User Manual V1.04, 

Inspire 1 User Manual V1.0, DJI Spreading Wings S900 User Manual V1.2), and any other 

requirements established by the FAA pursuant to Section 333 of the Reform Act. 

I. PETITIONER’S DESCRIPTION 

Petitioner is a multi-state Licensed Professional Engineer (P.E.) located near Syracuse, NY 

that has provided various Environmental, Structural, Civil, Power Delivery, Process Engineering, 

Inspection & Commissioning services to Civilian, Government and large Public Utility customers 

for approximately 10-years. Additionally, the Petitioner is experienced in flying mid to upper level 

hobby grade multi-rotor-copters for recreation purposes. 

The Petitioner’s UAS operational and maintenance experience, in addition to the 

Petitioner’s Professional Engineering Practice makes for a natural, and seamless, transition into 

the environmental, construction, and infrastructure inspection market employing UAS’s to provide 

an economic advantage, and offer a viable, alternative solution where circumstances prevent 

conventional data collection. Along with the Petitioner’s education, experience, and professional 

licensure, the Petitioner demonstrates an intimate knowledge of design, traditional inspection 

techniques, and safety regulations associated environmental, construction, utility, stormwater, and 

infrastructure inspection programs. The Petitioner’s experience and professional licensure will 

ensure that all associated risks to the public and personal/public property shall be minimized while 

conducting relatively simple, low altitude (normally less than 300ft AGL), short duration flights 

for inspection purposes. 

                                                            

1 Codified at 49 U.S.C. § 40101, as amended by Pub. L. 112-95 Feb. 14, 2012, 126 Stat. 11. 2 Petitioner submits this manual as a confidential document under 14 C.F.R. § 11.35(b), as the entire Manual contains 

confidential commercial and proprietary information the Petitioner has not and will not share with others. The Manual contains 

operating conditions and procedures that are not available to the public and are protected from release under the Freedom of 

Information Act 5 U.S.C. § 552. 
4

 Consistent with the requirements of 14 C.F.R. § 11.81(a), Petitioner provides the 

following information in support of its petition of exemption: 

The Name and Address of the Petitioner is: 

Adam J Dorn, P.E. 

Professional Engineer

281 Grannis Rd 

Constantia, NY 13044 

Phone: 315-525-3806 

Email: AdamJDorn@Gmail.com 

II. PROPOSED OPERATIONS 

The Petitioner intends to use the UAS’s to support and perform environmental, 

construction, utility, stormwater management, and general engineering inspections in the greater 

central/upstate, NY area with high definition video and still imagery documentation for client & 

agency regulation(s) compliance throughout various construction project life cycles. Not only will 

the Petitioner’s aerial videography/cinematography serve to assist in the documentation of 

construction progress, asset inventory/inspection and regulation compliance, but will also serve to 

promote community and academic awareness to those individuals and/or companies interested in 

further understanding the engineering and scientific principals associated with such design and 

inspection techniques. All data, aerial imagery, and video shall be made available to local 

academic institutions, and libraries for research and teaching purposes, as allowed by law. 

The Petitioner has operated RC electric hobby grade UAV’s without incident. The 

Petitioner is committed to safety on each flight no matter how short in duration, or how minor the 

perceived risk level may be. Please refer to Appendix A – “Adam J Dorn, P.E. UAS Flight 

Operations, Maintenance, & Safety Manual” for complete operations and safety details. The 

Petitioner’s exemption permits the operation of relatively inexpensive and ultralight weight UAS’s 

in controlled and limited airspace predefined in areas away from the general public, airports, 

heliports, and vehicular traffic for the inspection/engineering operations mentioned above. Insofar 

as UAS operations are relatively new, Petitioner has invested in following current events 

surrounding the evolution of UAS regulations in an effort to improve personal operational safety 

and promote a properly regulated UAS industry. Currently, similar lightweight RC UAS’s are 

being illegally operated by unmonitored “hobbyists” with relatively low levels of experience or 

education. In addition to their lack of basic education and experience requirements, these 
5

individuals are, largely, devoid of any formal safety protocols, operational controls, or risk 

mitigation systems to prevent loss of life or property. The Petitioner has incorporated safety 

protocols and standards to prevent and avoid public, and personal hazard, maintain safe and proper 

flight operations, and to avoid manned aircraft operations. The Petitioner’s self-imposed safety 

protocols and standards shall serve to further develop safety protocols mandated by the FAA as 

they pertain to UAS safety and operations. In addition, the Petitioner shall record any and all 

flight data and other pertinent information gained through permitted UAS flight operations and is 

willing to share with the FAA via required reporting avenues to assist and promote future FAA 

UAS regulation(s) development. 

At current juncture, the petitioner has added, or intends to use three models/types of quadcopters for commercial use following exemption and approval from the FAA. These following 

UAS’s intended to be used by the petitioner are as follows: 

 D.J.I. Phantom Vision 23

 D.J.I. Inspire 14

 DJI Spreading Wings S9005

The enclosed “Manual” describes, in detail, the policies and safety procedures for the 

Petitioner’s proposed UAS operations. To assist the FAA in its safety assessment of the 

Petitioner’s proposed UAS operations, below is a summary of the operational limitations and 

conditions which the Petitioner intends to ensure an equivalent or higher level of safety to 

operations conducted under current regulatory guidelines: 

 The UAV weighs less than 20 pounds including payload. 

 Flights will be operated within line-of-sight of Operator and observer during daylight 

hours only. 

 Maximum total flight time for each operational flight will be 30 minutes. Flights will be 

terminated at 25% battery power reserve should that occur prior to the 30 minute limit. 

 Flights will be operated at an altitude of no more than 400 feet above ground level 

(typically no greater than 300ft AGL shall be required). 

 Minimum crew for each operation will consist of the UAS Operator, and observer/spotter. 

 The UAS will only operate within a confined “Specified Inspection Area” as defined in the 

Manual. 

 A briefing will be conducted in regard to the planned UAS operations prior to each day’s 

activities. It will be mandatory that all personnel who will be performing duties within the 

boundaries of the safety perimeter be present for this briefing. 

                                                            

3

 Appendix B – D.J.I. Phantom 2 Vision – User Manual V1.04 4

 Appendix C – D.J.I. Inspire 1 – User Manual V1.0

5 Appendix D – D.J.I. Spreading Wings S900 Unser Manual V1.2
6

 Operator and Observer will be trained in the operation of UAS and will have received upto date information on the particular UAS to be operated, as required in the Manual. 

 Observer and Operator will at all times be able to communicate by voice and text. 

 Any and all required permission and permits will be obtained from territorial, state, county or city 

jurisdictions, including local law enforcement, fire, or other appropriate governmental agencies and 

persons. 

 The UAS Operator shall have the capability to abort a flight in case of unpredicted obstacles or 

emergencies. 

 The UAS shall only be operated in optimal weather conditions. 

 
7

III. RELEVANT AUTHORITY TO PETITIONER’S EXEMPTION REQUEST 

This petition for exemption is submitted to advance Congress’ goal of integrating UAS’s safely 

into the NAS. In the Reform Act, Congress directed the FAA “to safely accelerate the integration of 

civil unmanned aircraft systems in the national airspace system,” and, under Section 333 of that law, 

directed the Secretary of Transportation (“FAA Administrator”) to consider whether certain unmanned 

aircraft systems may operate safely in the National Airspace System before completion of the rule 

making required under Section 332 of the Reform Act6. 

Granting my, Adam J Dorn, P.E.’s, request comports 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 engineering related commercial applications and inspections. 

Further I, Adam J Dorn, P.E., shall conduct my operations in compliance with the protocols 

described herein or as otherwise established by the FAA. 

The FAA Administrator has general authority to grant exemptions from FAA safety 

regulations and minimum standards when the Administrator decides a requested exemption is in 

the public interest7. A party requesting an exemption must explain the reasons why the 

exemption: 

(1) would benefit the public as a whole and; (2) would not adversely affect safety or how it would 

provide a level of safety at least equal to the existing rules8

 Therefore, the Petitioner will 

demonstrate how implementing the proposed UAS’s for environmental, engineering and 

infrastructure inspection will benefit the public and that the proposed operation will not adversely 

affect safety of the public and to those operating in the NAS. 

                                                            

6 Reform Act, supra note 1. 7 See 49 U.S.C. § 44701(f) (authorizing the grant of exemptions from a requirement of regulations prescribed pursuant to section 

44701 (a) - (b) and sections 44702-44716)

8 See 14 C.F.R. § 11.81; FAA, Petition for Exemptions.
8

IV. Public Interest

For the reasons stated in this petition I, Adam J Dorn, P.E., respectfully request the grant of 

an exemption allowing operations of light weight, remote controlled UAS’s for the operations 

listed in Section II of this petition; all of which will promote environmental regulatory 

compliance, thus a greater protection of the environment, safer construction sites, and a more 

economical, and efficient means to inspect critical infrastructure while providing real-time data 

and engineering analysis to alleviate or eliminate potentially hazardous circumstance generally 

associated with manned inspection operations, among other things. 

First, granting the Petitioner’s exemption helps fulfill Congress' goal in passing Section 

333(a) through (c) of the Reform Act, namely, the FAA Administrator's assessment of whether 

certain UAS may operate safely in the National Airspace System before completion of the rule 

making required under Section 332 of the Reform Act. 

Further, the Petitioner’s proposed operation significantly improves safety and reduces risk 

concerning infrastructure inspection by alleviating human exposure to dangers associated with 

current manned aerial survey and inspection methods. Manned helicopters performing utilitypower lines, generation facilities, general maintenance inspections and patrols have experienced 

an exceedingly high number of accidents and fatalities. The use of UAS’s for these type 

inspections shall dramatically reduce fatalities, and property loss. 

Next, the Petitioner’s proposed operation(s) significantly improves documentation and 

regulatory compliance for environmental, stormwater, and construction site safety concerns by 

providing a low risk, high benefit means to permanently document progress, compliance, and 

potential, regulatory infractions and deviations from regulatory agency decrees. This shall allow 

project owners, the general public, and any affiliated regulatory agency to quickly and effectively 

remedy violations with reduced impact to public waterways, property, and to the general public. 

Additionally, the Petitioner's UASs are battery powered and create no toxic or carbon 

emissions. In the event that Petitioner's UAS crashes; there is no fuel to ignite and explode causing 

additional public safety hazard(s). Any impact of Petitioner's lightweight UASs is far less than a 

full size helicopter, or small scale gas powered helicopters. The public's interest is furthered by 

minimizing ecological impact of an accident and by reducing human exposure to potentially 

harmful emissions associated with manned aircraft. 

Finally, aerial surveys are valuable tools for utility and power generation facility 
9

inspections. However, concerns with safety, cost efficiency to public, and logistics continue to 

impede aerial surveys and inspections from conventional manned aircraft. The use of UASs 

addresses these problems exists as a powerful tool for performing a wide-range of utility-power 

generation, and general engineering inspection and patrol applications. The public as a whole will 

benefit from safer and more cost-effective aerial services that UAS’s operations provide. 

V. Qualifications for Approval Under Section 333 of The Reform Act 

A. The Petitioner’s Proposed Usage Does not Create a Hazard to Users of the NAS or 

the Public Because of the Reduced Size, Weight, Speed, and Operational Capability 

of the UAS. 

The proposed operations in this petition for exemption qualify for expedited approval 

under Section 333 of the Reform Act. Each of the statutory criteria and other potential relevant 

factors are satisfied. 

The proposed operations would permit use of small and relatively inexpensive UAS under 

controlled conditions in airspace that is: (1) limited; (2) predetermined; (3) controlled as to access, 

and; (4) would pose an increased level of safety beyond what exists when climbers/manned crews 

are asked to inspect infrastructure. 

Petitioner’s UAS is a rotorcraft aircraft, weighing less than 20 pounds, including payload. 

It operates, under normal weather conditions, at a speed of no more than 30 knots and has the 

capability to hover, and move in vertical and horizontal planes simultaneously under fully 

stabilized GPS control. 

Petitioner’s UAS will operate in line-of-sight and only in a Specified Inspection Area as 

described in the Proposed Operations section (Section II) outlined here and in the Petitioner’s 

Manual. Such operations will insure that the UAS will “not create a hazard to users of the 

National Airspace System or the public.” 9

Given the small size of the UAS’s involved and the restricted environment within which 

they will operate; this petition for exemption falls squarely within that zone of safety in which 

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

commence immediately. 
10

VI. REGULATIONS FROM WHICH EXEMPTION IS REQUESTED 

The Federal Aviation Act expressly grants the FAA Administrator the authority to issue 

exemptions. By its terms, this statutory authority includes exempting civil aircraft, as the term is 

defined under § 40101 of the Act, including UASs, from its safety regulations and minimum 

standards when the Administrator decides a requested exemption is in the public interest.10

The Petitioner asks an exemption from several interrelated provisions of 14 C.F.R. Parts 21, 45 

and 91 for purposes of conducting aerial surveys and inspections using UASs. Listed below are:

 The specific sections of 14 C.F.R. for which exemption is sought; and 

 The operating procedures and safeguards that Petitioner has established which will ensure 

a level of safety equal to or more stringent than the rules from which exemption is 

sought.11

The Specific Sections of Title 14 of the Code of Federal Aviation Regulations from Which Adam 

J Dorn, P.E. Requests Exemption are: 

A. 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H - Airworthiness Certificates and 14 C.F.R. § 91.203(a)(1). 

B. 14 C.F.R. Part 27: Airworthiness Standards: Normal Category Rotorcraft. 

C. Aircraft Marking and Identification Requirements: 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.9(c), 45.23(b) and 

45.27(a). 

D. 14 C.F.R. § 61.113 (a) and (b): Private Pilot Privileges and Limitations: Pilot in 

Command. 

E. 14 C.F.R. § 91.9(B)(2): Civil Aircraft Flight Manual in the Aircraft. 

F. 14 C.F.R. § 91.7(a): Civil Aircraft Airworthiness. 

G. 14 C.F.R. § 91.103: Preflight Action. 

H. 14 C.F.R. § 91.109(a): Flight Instruction. 

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

J. 14 C.F.R. § 91.121: Altimeter Settings. 

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

L. 14 C.F.R. § 91.203(a) and (b): Carrying Civilian Aircraft Certification and Registration. 

                                                                                                                                                                                                   9 See 14 C.F.R. § 11.81(e) which requires a petition for exemption to include: “the reasons why granting the exemption would not 

adversely affect safety, or how the exemption would provide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by the rule from which 

you seek exemption.”

10 See 49 U.S.C. § 44701(f) authorizing the grant of exemptions from requirements of regulations prescribed pursuant to 

§§ 44710(a) and (b), §§ 44702 – 44716. 

11 See 14 C.F.R. § 11.81(e) which requires a petition for exemption to include: “the reasons why granting the exemption would not 

adversely affect safety, or how the exemption would provide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by the rule from which 

you seek exemption.” 
11

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

Inspections 

A. 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H - Airworthiness Certificates and 14 C.F.R. § 

91.203(a)(1). 

The Petitioner seeks an exemption from 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H, which establishes 

the procedural requirements for the issuance of airworthiness certificates as required by 14 C.F.R 

§ 91.203(a)(1). Given the size and limited operating area associated with the UAS to be utilized by 

the Petitioner, an exemption from Part 21, Subpart H meets the requirements of an equivalent level 

of safety under Part 11 and Section 333 of the Reform Act. 

The Federal Aviation Act12 and Section 333 of the Reform Act13 both authorize the FAA to 

exempt aircraft from the requirement for an airworthiness certificate, upon consideration of the 

size, weight, speed, operational capability, and proximity to airports and populated areas of the 

particular UAS operation. In all cases, an analysis of these criteria demonstrates that the UAS 

operated without an airworthiness certificate, in the restricted environment and under the 

conditions proposed will be at least as safe, or safer, than a conventional rotorcraft operating with 

an airworthiness certificate without the restrictions and conditions of the proposed UAS 

operations. 

Equivalent Level of Safety

The UAS to be operated hereunder is less than 20 lbs. fully loaded, carries neither a pilot 

nor passenger, carries no explosive materials or flammable liquid fuels, and operates exclusively 

within a specified area as set forth in the Manual. Unlike other civil aircraft, the proposed 

operations in this petition for exemption will be controlled and monitored by the operator, 

pursuant to the Manual's requirements. 

These safety enhancements, which already apply to civil aircraft operated in connection 

with existing inspection operations, provide a greater degree of safety to the public and property 

owners than conventional operations conducted with airworthiness certificates issued under 14 

C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H. Lastly, application of these same criteria demonstrates that there is no 

credible threat to national security posed by the UAS, due to its size, speed of operation, location 

of operation, lack of explosive materials or flammable liquid fuels, and inability to carry a 

substantial external load. 
12

B. 14 C.F.R. Part 27: Airworthiness Standards: Normal Category Rotorcraft.

14 C.F.R. Part 27 sets forth the procedural requirements for airworthiness certification of 

Normal Category Rotorcraft. To the extent the Petitioner's UASs would otherwise require 

certification under Part 27, as a rotorcraft, Petitioner requests an exemption from Part 27’s 

airworthiness standards for the same reasons identified in the exemption request from 14 C.F.R. 

Part 21, Subpart H. 

C. Aircraft Marking and Identification Requirements: 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.9(c), 

45.23(b), and 45.27(a). 

This petition seeks an exemption from the aircraft marking and identification requirements

of 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.9(c), 45.23(b), and 45.27(a). 

14 C.F.R. § 91.9(c), Civil aircraft flight manual, marking, and placard requirements, 

provides that: 

No person may operate a U.S.-registered civil aircraft unless that 

aircraft is identified in accordance with part 45 of this chapter.14

14 C.F.R. § 45.23(b), Markings of the Aircraft, states: 

When marks include only the Roman capital letter "N" and the 

registration number is displayed on limited, restricted or light-sport 

category aircraft or experimental or provisionally certificated 

aircraft, the operator must also display on that aircraft near each 

entrance to the cabin, cockpit, or pilot station, in letters not less than 

2 inches nor more than 6 inches high, the words “limited," 

"restricted," "light-sport," "experimental," or "provisional," as 

applicable.15

14 C.F.R. § 45.27(a), Rotorcraft, states: 

Each operator of a rotorcraft must display on that rotorcraft 

horizontally on both surfaces of the cabin, fuselage, boom, or tail the 

marks required by §45.23.16

Exemption from § 45.23(b) is warranted because the UAS has no entrance to the cabin, 

cockpit, or pilot station on which the registration number can be placed. Moreover, given the size 

of the UAS, two-inch lettering would inhibit proper function of the UAS, and be quite difficult to 

                                                                                                                                                                                                   12  See 49 U.S.C. § 44701(f). 13 See Reform Act, supra note 1. 14 14 C.F.R. § 91.9(c). 15 14 C.F.R. § 45.23(b). 16 14 C.F.R. § 45.27(a).
13

adhere to. The aircraft registration, or “N Number’” will be placed on the fuselage in compliance 

with § 45.29(f). 

Given the nature of the specific relief sought by this exemption request, Petitioner requires 

relief from the associated marking and identification requirements of § 45.27(a) and § 91.9(c), 

which would require compliance with § 45.23(b). 

Equivalent Level of Safety

An equivalent level of safety for exemptions to the aircraft marking and identification 

requirements of §§ 91.9(c), 45.23(b), and 45.27(a), will be provided by having the UAS marked 

on its fuselage as required by § 45.29(f) where the Operator, Visual Observer, and others working 

with the UAS will see the identification of the UAS as "Experimental." Additionally, Petitioner 

will ensure compliance with any requests of UAS marking by the FAA. 

The FAA has issued the following exemptions to the aircraft marking requirements of § 

45.23(b): Exemptions Nos. 10700, 8738, 10167 and 10167A. 

D. 14 C.F.R. § 61.113 (a) and (b): Private Pilot Privileges and Limitations: Pilot in 

Command. 

This petition seeks an exemption from the private pilot privileges and limitations of §§ 

61.113 (a) and (b), which states: 

(a) Except as provided in paragraphs (b) through (h) of this section, 

no person who holds a private pilot certificate may act as pilot in 

command of an aircraft that is carrying passengers or property for 

compensation or hire; nor may that person, for compensation or hire, 

act as pilot in command of an aircraft. 

(b) A private pilot may, for compensation or hire, act as pilot in 

command of an aircraft in connection with any business or 

employment if: 

(1) The flight is only incidental to that business or employment; and 

(2) The aircraft does not carry passengers or property for 

compensation or hire.17

14 C.F.R. § 61.113(a) limits private pilots to being in command of non-commercial flights. 14

C.F.R. § 61.113(b)(1) provides an exception that allows a private pilot to command an aircraft without 
14

passengers or property, in connection with business or employment if "[t]the flight is only incidental to 

that business or employment." The stated exception likely does not apply to the proposed operations 

under this petition for exemption, as the flights are not incidental to the proposed aerial surveys and 

inspections but rather essential to it. Accordingly, the Petitioner seeks an exemption to 14 C.F.R. § 

61.113(a)'s commercial limitation and/or 14 C.F.R. § 61.113(b)(1)'s requirement that the flight be 

incidental to the business to benefit from the exception.

Equivalent Level of Safety

As required by the Manual, because the UAS will not carry a pilot or passengers, the 

proposed operations can achieve the equivalent level of safety to 14 C.F.R. §§ 61.113 (a) and (b). 

Unlike a conventional aircraft that carries the pilot and passengers, the UAS is remotely controlled 

with no passengers on board. Moreover, the area of operation is controlled and restricted, and all 

flights are planned, coordinated, and briefed to the appropriate official in advance as set forth in 

the Manual. 

E. 14 C.F.R. § 91.9(B)(2): Civil Aircraft Flight Manual in the Aircraft.

The Petitioner seeks an exemption from the flight manual requirements of 14 C.F.R. § 

91.9(b)(2), which states: 

(b) No person may operate a U.S.-registered civil aircraft 

(2) For which an Airplane or Rotorcraft Flight Manual is not 

required by § 21.5 of this chapter, unless there is available in the 

aircraft a current approved airplane or Rotorcraft Flight Manual, 

approved manual material, markings, and placards, or any 

combination thereof.18

Given its size, configuration, and load capacity, the UAS has no ability to carry such a 

manual on the aircraft, not only because there is no pilot on board, but because there is simply no 

room or capacity to carry such an item on the aircraft. 

Equivalent Level of Safety

The safety related purpose of this manual requirement can be equally satisfied by 

maintaining the UAF flight manual at the ground control point where the Operator flying the UAS 

                                                                                                                                                                                                   17 14 C.F.R. § 61.113 (a) and (b). 18 14 C.F.R. § 91.9(B)(2).
15

shall have immediate access to said manual. Accordingly, Petitioner requests an exemption from 

§ 91.9(b)(2)'s flight manual requirements, on the condition that the UAS flight manual be 

available at the control point during each operation. 

The FAA has issued the following exemptions to this regulation: Exemption Nos. 8607, 

8737, 8738, 9299, 9299A, 9565, 9565B, 10167, 10167A, 10602, 32827, and 10700. 

F. 14 C.F.R. § 91.7(a): Civil Aircraft Airworthiness.

This petition seeks an exemption from 14 C.F.R. § 91.7(a), which requires that a civil 

aircraft be in an airworthy condition to be operated. Inasmuch there will be no airworthiness 

certificate issued for the UAS, should this exemption be granted, no FAA regulatory standard will 

exist for determining airworthiness. 

Equivalent Level of Safety

Given the size of the UAS and the requirements contained in the Petitioner’s Manual for 

maintenance and use of safety checklists prior to each flight, an equivalent level of safety will be 

provided. 

The FAA has issued the following exemptions to this regulation: Exemption Nos. 8607, 

8737, 8738, 9299, 9299A, 9565, 9565B, 10167, 10167A, 10602, 32827, and 10700. 

G. 14 C.F.R. § 91.103: Preflight Action.

This petition seeks an exemption from § 91.103, which requires a PIC to become familiar 

with specific information before each flight, including information contained in the FAA approved 

Flight Manual on board the aircraft.19 Inasmuch as an FAA approved flight manual will not be 

provided for the sUAS, an exemption is requested. 

Equivalent Level of Safety

An equivalent level of safety will be provided by following the Aircraft Operations Manual 

comprehensive preflight checklist. The Operator shall take all actions, including reviewing 

weather, flight battery requirements, landing and takeoff distances, and aircraft performance data, 

before initiation of flight operations. 

                                                            

19 14 C.F.R. § 91.103
16

H. 14 C.F.R. § 91.109(a): Flight Instruction.

The Petitioner seeks an exemption from 14 C.F.R. § 91.109(a), which provides that “no 

person may operate a civil aircraft (except a manned free balloon) that is being used for flight 

instruction unless that aircraft has fully functional dual controls.”20 UASs and remotely piloted 

aircraft, by their design do not have fully functional dual controls. Instead, flight control is 

accomplished through the use of a control box communicating with the UAS via radio 

communications. 

Equivalent Level of Safety

Given the size and speed of the UAS, an equivalent level of safe training can still be 

performed without dual controls because no pilot or passengers are aboard the UAS, and all 

persons will be a safe distance away from the operations area should the UAS experience any 

difficulties during flight instruction. 

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.21

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

This petition seeks an exemption from the minimum safe altitude requirements of 14 

C.F.R. § 91.119. This Section prescribes the minimum safe altitudes under which aircraft may not 

operate, including 500 feet above the surface and away from any person, vessel, vehicle, or 

structure in non-congested areas.22 Section § 91.119(d)(1) allows for a helicopter to operate at less 

than those minimum altitudes when it can be operated “without hazard to persons or property on 

the surface,” provided that “each person operating the helicopter complies with any routes or 

altitudes specifically prescribed for helicopters by the FAA. 

To provide the intended inspections, the UAS will normally need to be operated within a 

range of approximately 50 feet from the infrastructure being inspected. Accordingly, due to the 

nature of the proposed operations, the Operator and the designated observer may at times be less 

than 500 feet away from structures during the operation, and an exemption is therefore required. 

                                                            

20 14 C.F.R. § 91.109(a). 21 See Exemption Nos. 5778K and 9862A 22 See 14 C.F.R. § 91.119(c)
17

Equivalent Level of Safety

Compared to flight operations with rotorcraft weighting far more than the maximum 20 

pounds proposed herein, and the lack of flammable fuel, any risk associated with these operations 

is far less than those presently presented with conventional aircraft. An equivalent level of safety 

will be achieved given the size, weight, speed of the UAS as well as the location where it is 

operated. As set forth in the Manual, the UAS will be operated in a restricted area, where 

buildings and people will not be exposed to unnecessary and unplanned operations. Because of the 

advance notice, all affected individuals will be aware of the planned flight operations as set forth 

in the Manual. Furthermore, by operating at such lower altitudes, the UAS will not interfere with 

other aircraft that are subject to the minimum safe altitude regulations. 

J. 14 C.F.R. § 91.121: Altimeter Settings.

The Petitioner seeks an exemption from 14 C.F.R. § 91.121, which requires a person 

operating an aircraft to maintain cruising altitude or flight level by reference to an altimeter that is 

set to the elevation of the departure airport or barometric pressure.23 An exemption is required 

because the UAS does not have a barometric altimeter, but rather a GPS altitude read out. 

Equivalent Level of Safety

An equivalent level of safety will be achieved by following the procedures set forth in the 

Manual. As prescribed in the Manual, the operator will confirm the altitude of the launch site shown 

on the GPS altitude indicator before flight. Prior to each flight, the Operator shall reset the altimeter to 

zero and will fly the UAS below 400 feet AGL. Moreover, the Operator will use the GPS altitude 

indicator to constantly monitor the UASs height, thus ensuring operation at safe altitudes.

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

The Petitioner seeks an exemption from 14 C.F.R. § 91.151(a)'s fuel requirements for 

flight in VFR conditions. Section 91.151(a) states: 

(a) No person may begin 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 

                                                            

23 See 14 C.F.R. § 91.121
18

(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.24

The battery powering the UAS provides approximately 25 minutes of powered flight. An 

exemption from the 30 minute reserve requirement in 14 CFR § 91.151 is therefore required. 

Equivalent Level of Safety

An equivalent level of safety can be achieved by limiting flights to 25 minutes or 75% of 

battery power, whichever happens first. This restriction would be more than adequate to return the 

UAS to its planned landing zone from anywhere within its Specific Area of Inspection. Operation 

of the UAS 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. Moreover, 

operations will be limited to controlled areas where only inspectors or official representatives or 

waivers who have signed waivers will be allowed. 

This request for exemption falls within the scope of prior exemptions.25

L. 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.203(a) and (b): Carrying Civilian Aircraft Certification and 

Registration. 

This petition seeks an exemption from civil aircraft certification and registration 

requirements of 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.203 (a) and (b). The regulations provide in pertinent part: 

(a) Except as provided in § 91.715, no person may operate a civil 

aircraft unless it has within it the following: 

(1) An appropriate and current airworthiness certificate 

(b) No person may operate a civil aircraft unless the airworthiness 

certificate required by paragraph (a) of this section or a special flight 

authorization issued under § 91.715 is displayed at the cabin or 

cockpit entrance so that it is legible to passengers or crew.26

In addition to the fact that Petitioner is seeking an exemption from the 

airworthiness certificate requirements, an exemption to this regulation is necessary 

because: (1) the UAS’s load capacity and size does not allow it to carry 

certification and registration documents; (2) the UAS does not have a cabin or 

                                                            

24 14 C.F.R. § 91.151(a) 25 See e.g. Exemption 10673 (allowing Lockheed Martin Corporation to operate without compliance with § 91.151 (a)); see also

FAA Exemptions 2689F, 5745, 10673, and 10808. 
19

cockpit entrance at which the documents could be displayed; and (3) there are no 

passengers or crew for whom the certificates need be displayed. 

Equivalent Level of Safety

To the extent these regulations are applicable to the proposed UAS operations, an equivalent level 

of safety will be achieved by keeping these documents at the ground control point where the 

Operator flying the UAS shall have immediate access to them. 

The FAA has issued numerous exemptions to this regulation. A representative sample of other 

exceptions includes Exemption Nos. 9565, 9665, 9789, 9789A, 9797, 9797A, 9816A, and 10700. 

M. 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.405(a)(1); 91.407(a)(1); 91.409(a)(1); 91.417(a) and (b): 

Maintenance Inspections 

The Petitioner seeks an exemption from the maintenance inspection requirements of 14 

C.F.R. §§ 91.405(a); 91.407(a)(1); 91.409(a)(2); 91.417 (a) and (b). These regulations specify 

maintenance and inspection standards in reference to 14 C.F.R. Part 43.27 An exemption to these 

regulations is needed because Part 43 and the stated sections apply only to aircraft with an 

airworthiness certificate, which the UAS shall not possess. 

Equivalent Level of Safety

An equivalent level of safety will be achieved because maintenance and inspections will be 

performed in accordance with the Aircraft Operations Manual. As provided in the Manual, the 

Operator will ensure that the UAS is in working order prior to initiating flight, oversee and assist 

in performance of required maintenance, and keep a log of any maintenance performed. The 

Operator is the person most familiar with the aircraft and best suited to maintain the aircraft in an 

airworthy condition to provide the equivalent level of safety. 

If mechanical issues arise, the UAS shall land immediately and will be operating from no 

higher than 400 feet AGL. Moreover, the UAS's small size, carrying capacity, and the fact that 

flight operations will only take place in restricted areas for limited periods of time, create less risk 

than the same factors associated with conventional fixed-wing aircraft and rotorcraft performing 

                                                                                                                                                                                                   26 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.203 (a) and (b)

27 See e.g. 14 C.F.R. § 91.405(a) (stating that each owner or operator of an aircraft inspected as prescribed in subpart E of 

this part and shall between required inspections . . . . have discrepancies repaired as prescribed in part 43 of this chapter”). 
20

the same operation. 

VII. PRIVACY

All flights will occur over Operations to be conducted over public or controlled access 

property. Additionally, all flight operations will be conducted in a “Specified Inspection Area” as 

described by the Manual, in which all permissions will be gained by all official personnel and 

organizations present in the Specified Inspection Area. 

Additionally, the U.S. Supreme Court has held that “‘[a] person traveling in an automobile 

on public thoroughfares has no reasonable expectation of privacy . . . .’” Therefore, Petitioners 

use of UAS does not pose a privacy threat to motorists traveling on the roadway inadvertently 

captured on video because they have no reasonable expectation of privacy. However, to further 

protect individuals who have had their image captured during an inspection, the Petitioner will 

sanitize the likenesses of individuals from the final product provided to the customer. 

                                                                                                                                                                                                  
21

VIII. FEDERAL REGISTER SUMMARY

A. 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H - Airworthiness Certificates and 14 C.F.R. § 91.203(a)(1). 

B. 14 C.F.R. Part 27: Airworthiness Standards: Normal Category Rotorcraft. 

C. Aircraft Marking and Identification Requirements: 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.9(c), 45.23(b) and 

45.27(a). 

D. 14 C.F.R. § 61.113 (a) and (b): Private Pilot Privileges and Limitations: Pilot in 

Command. 

E. 14 C.F.R. § 91.9(B)(2): Civil Aircraft Flight Manual in the Aircraft. 

F. 14 C.F.R. § 91.7(a): Civil Aircraft Airworthiness. 

G. 14 C.F.R. § 91.103: Preflight Action. 

H. 14 C.F.R. § 91.109(a): Flight Instruction. 

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

J. 14 C.F.R. § 91.121: Altimeter Settings. 

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

` L. 14 C.F.R. § 91.203(a) and (b): Carrying Civilian Aircraft Certification and Registration. 

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

Inspections 
22

IX. CONCLUSION

The Petitioner moves the FAA Administrator to grant this exemption. Given the foregoing, the 

Petitioner’s proposed usage does not pose a hazard to the NAS or to the public. Considering the clear 

statutory language in Section 333 of the Reform Act, the authority contained in the Federal Aviation 

Act, as amended, the equivalent level of safety to the public and to the men and women conducting 

engineering & infrastructure inspections, and the reduction in environmental effects, the grant of the 

requested exemptions is in the public interest. 

Accordingly, Petitioner respectfully requests that the FAA grant the requested exemption 

without delay.

Submitted on March, 2015 by: 

/s/ Adam J Dorn, P.E. 

_______________________________ 

Adam J. Dorn, P.E. 

281 Grannis Road 

Constantia, NY 13044 

Petitioner