UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

WASHINGTON, DC 20591 

In the matter of the petition of 

JEREMY SALO, 

for an exemption from part 21 , Subpart H; part 

61 ; §§ 91.103(b)(2), 91.105, 91.109, 91.119, 

91.121 , 91.151 , 91.405, 91.407, 91.409, 

91.417 ofTitle 14, Code ofFederal 

Regulations. 

Exemption No. 17279 

Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2015-8448 

DENIAL OF EXEMPTION 

By letter dated October 29, 2015,

1 Mr. Jeremy Salo, 26652 Wilton Court, New Hudson, MI 

48165 petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for an exemption from part 21 , 

Subpart H; §§ 45.23 , 61.113(a) and (b), 91.7(a), 91.9(b)(2), 91.103(b)(2), 91.109, 91.119(c), 

91.121 , 91.151 , 91.203(a) and (b), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(l), 91.409(a)(1)(2), 91.417(a) and 

(b) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations. The petitioner requested to operate DJI 

Phantom 2 for the purpose of capturing photography and video for commercial purposes. 

The petitioner additionally requested to be granted allowance for operations outside the 

United States for the above reasons. 

The petitioner supports its request with the following information: 

The original petition for exemption describing the proposed operation and the regulations 

from which the petitioner seeks exemption is posted to the docket. To view the petition, visit 

http://www.regulations.gov, enter the regulatory docket number found on the first page of this 

document into the search box and click "Search," then click on the "Open Docket Folder" link 

next to a result associated with the docket number. 

The petitioner requested authorization to conduct photography and videography operations 

within the United States. The petitioner also requested to operate a UAS outside the United 

States. 

1 The FAA sent Mr. Salo a Request for Information (RFI) on August 2, 2016. The RFI noted 

the petitioner's request to conduct operations outside of the United States. The FAA 

requested confirmation of intent to pursue operations outside of the United States as a 

comment to the docket at www.regulations. gov. On August 10, 2016 the petitioner posted 

confirmation of his request to operate outside ofthe United States. 
2 

The FAA's analysis is as follows: 

Article 8 of the Convention on International Civil Aviation specifies no unmanned aircraft 

''shall be flown without a pilot over the territory of a contracting State without special 

authorization by that State and in accordance with the terms of such authorization. '' Article 8 

also calls on States to undertake ''to insure that the flight of such aircraft without a pilot in 

regions open to civil aircraft shall be so controlled as to obviate danger to civil aircraft.' ' 

The FAA has considered fully the petitioner's information and determined: 

1. Per the FAA August 8, 2016, notice to Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform 

Act of 2012, the petitioner is authorized to operate as requested within the United States 

under the provisions of 14 CFR, part 107: Operation and Certification of Small Unmanned 

Aircraft Systems without further relief (Tier 1 ). 

2. The FAA cannot authorize operations in another country's sovereign, lower-level 

airspace. Therefore, the petitioner's request for relief is denied. To conduct operations 

outside the United States, the petitioner must review specific statutes, regulations, and 

guidance for clarification for operations in another country's airspace and follow the 

processes necessary to gain the required special authorization from the relevant foreign civil 

aviation authority. Refer to the International Civil Aviation Organization Depository Library 

http://www.icao.int/publications/Pages/depository-libraries.aspx for a list of contact 

information for foreign aviation authorities. 

Additionally, U.S. international trade obligations, including the North American Free Trade 

Agreement, cover certain kinds of operations known as specialty air services. Specialty air 

services are generally defined as any specialized commercial operation using an aircraft 

whose primary purpose is not the transportation of goods or passengers. The petitioner should 

consult such agreements prior to approaching foreign civil aviation authorities. 

The FAA's decision: 

In consideration of the foregoing, I find that a grant of exemption is not in the public interest. 

Therefore, pursuant to the authority contained in 49 U.S.C. §§ 106(f), 40113, and 44701 , 

delegated to me by the Administrator, the petition of Jeremy Salois hereby denied. The 

petitioner is expected to conduct operations within the United States in accordance with the 

operating documents, conditions and limitations specified in 14 CFR, part 107: Operation 

and Certification of Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems. 

Issued in Washington, DC on FE 8 0 ·2 2 0 17 

rf'ld 

John S. Duncan 

Director, Flight Standards Service