June 2, 2015

Mr. James Williams

Manager, Flight Standards Service

Unmanned Aircraft Systems Integration Office

Federal Aviation Administration

800 Independence Avenue, SW

Washington, DC 20591

Thomas Walter 

450 North Roxbury Dr

8

th Floor HJTH

Beverly Hills, CA 90210

U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operation 

West Building Ground Floor, Room w12-140

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE

Washington, DC 20590

Re: Request for exemption from multiple regulatory provisions to allow the use of small 

unmanned aerial systems on land controlled by clients of Thomas Johann Walter (TJW) 

to assist in aerial photography and the safe evaluation of infrastructure and operations for 

our clients.

Dear Mr. Williams:

Thomas Johann Walter (TJW) respectfully requests an exemption from several provisions 

of Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R.) to permit the use of small 

unmanned aerial systems (UAS) to assist in the evaluation of infrastructure and 

operations for our clients. This request is motivated primarily by the desire to maximize 

safety in infrastructure and operations. While an exemption would not eliminate the 

current need for in-person visual inspection required by various federal regulatory

departments, it would allow TJW to broadly evaluate assets and operations with UAS 

resulting in a safer and more efficient infrastructure network. Accordingly, the grant of an 

exemption is consistent with Congress’ intent, reflected in Section 333 of the FAA 

Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (Modernization Act), 1 that safe systems be 

permitted in the national airspace prior to the issuance of final regulations governing 

general use of these systems.2 A summary of this request suitable for publication in the 

Federal Register is provided as Appendix A.

Appendix B provides the manufacturers information regarding the design, aircraft 

performance, and fail-safe features. We have provided manufacturer information related to

operating limitations, normal and emergency procedures, and maintenance and inspection 

procedures. As we add aircraft designs, we will update this appendix appropriately.

Appendix C provides the Drone Fleet & Aerospace Management Operations Manual for 

flights covered under this Exemption Request.

1 P.L. 112-95, 126 Stat 11, February 14, 2012.

2 Section 333(b) (2) specifically contemplates that the FAA may issue a certificate of waiver upon a finding that a type 

of UAS, as a result of its size, weight, speed, operational capacity, proximity to airports and populated areas, and 

operations within visual line of sight do not create a hazard to users of the NAS or the public or pose a threat to 

national security.
Background Information

TJW is in the business of transportation and providing aerial photography services and 

consulting UAS for our clients. TJW’s Clients look to us for Safe Operations of UAS. 

We have developed specific TJW Safe UAV Operational Procedures. Increasingly, we 

have clients looking to operate UAS for Aerial Photography and Infrastructure 

Inspections.

Areial Photography and Infrastructure Safety Inspection Operations:

Movie Production

Aerial Photography

Utility Inspection Railroad Inspection Pipeline Inspection Oil-Field Inspection 

Petro/Chemical/Manufacturing Inspection

Construction Site Inspection

Agriculture Inspection

As part of this TJW is requesting FAA Exemption for UAS operations for safety, 

inspection and video capture usage.

Regulatory Basis for Exemption Request

In addition to the waiver authority provided in §333 of the Modernization Act, the FAA 

may grant an exemption under 49 U.S.C. §44701(f) if it has determined that such an 

exemption is in the public interest. The FAA has imposed a separate requirement in its

procedural regulations, providing that the petitioner shall explain why granting the 

exemption would not adversely affect safety or how the exemption would provide at least 

an equivalent level of safety as compliance with the underlying regulation. In this case, 

approval of this exemption would advance the public interest by significantly enhancing 

the safety and efficiency of infrastructure operations and by providing the FAA with 

valuable user experience on UAS in a context with appreciable economic and societal 

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

operation of UAS under tightly controlled conditions, thus ensuring that operations will 

not have an adverse impact on safety. To the contrary, as explained below, TJW

anticipates that use of UAS will enhance safety in infrastructure operations. Granting an 

Exemption is in the Public Interest. The safety and efficiency of infrastructure operations 

is heavily dependent upon constant analysis of assets, right-of-way, infrastructure and 

other assets/facilities. There are a wide variety of factors that can affect conditions and 

cause problems for infrastructure. Even relatively small objects or minor failures can lead 

to accidents or other incidents causing downtime of infrastructure. Extreme weather 

events can lead to flooding or overheating infrastructure. For example earthquakes, 

landslides, and abandoned vehicles at grade crossings can block infrastructure. The 

potential for sabotage and terrorism – or even just trespassing – are also among the many 

risks that modern infrastructure faces.

As a result, pursuant to federal regulations and company policy, our client’s maintenance 

employees routinely inspect the infrastructure, such as bridges, tunnels, support structures

and signals. At present, this work is done primarily by company personnel in
motor vehicles, on foot, in specialized equipment. This is often a labor-intensive and 

sometimes arduous job. While our clients do all they can to make these inspections as safe 

as possible, there is an irreducible element of risk involved whenever employees are 

required to go out on structures. Employees may need to climb over or onto structures, 

which can be slippery, rough, and/or exposed to the elements. Some structures, such as 

bridges, are high above the ground. Equipment moving through inspection zones can 

increase risk as well, especially in high-traffic areas. While the use of UAS for 

supplemental infrastructure and general asset evaluation would not eliminate

these risks entirely (as it is an additive safety measure), it would reduce the risks to 

employees by allowing for remote aerial review.

Additionally, the sheer amount of assets and the widely dispersed locations – in many

instances far from sizeable population centers – means that visual inspection in all 

instances by company personnel can be inefficient. Aerial analysis by traditional fixed 

wing aircraft is impractical because the required altitudes for safe flight reduce visibility

below meaningful levels – it is simply not possible to see all asset anomalies from such 

heights. Helicopters present better vantage points; however manned helicopters are much 

more costly, subject to human safety and carry highly explosive jet fuel making them 

impractical for deployment. By using UAS for supplemental asset evaluation, TJW will 

be able to substantially upgrade its capacity to detect and address issues with the right-ofway and other assets before they become a problem for safe operations. Thus, the use of 

UAS has the potential to improve efficiency, resulting in faster and safer delivery of 

goods, energy & natural resources vital to the U.S. economy.
Granting an Exemption will not Adversely Affect Safety

TJW notes that there is no applicable standard for an equivalency determination. Some 

have argued that the appropriate standard is that for model aircraft, noting that their 

operations, if conducted for recreational purposes, would fall completely within the 

allowable operations for model aircraft. We believe it is difficult to argue that there is 

sufficient correlation between model operations controlled by the Academy of Model 

Aeronautics and the ones contemplated by TJW. At the same time, it is clear that 

equivalency cannot be established for traditional, manned civil aircraft because the design 

and use profiles between traditional aircraft and UAS are simply too different. As such, 

we believe it makes more sense to focus on why the contemplated operations would not 

adversely affect safety, which is all that §11.81(e) requires.

Granting an exemption will not adversely affect safety. TJW contemplates conducting 

UAS operations over client owned or controlled land, solely during daylight hours, at 

altitudes well below that which would pose a risk to other aircraft. In general, UAS 

operations are intended to be conducted in areas distant from both congested areas and 

airports. Moreover, because of the inherent risks presented by standard infrastructure 

operations, our clients have already taken steps to secure property against unauthorized 

public access. For example, substantial stretches of pipeline, utilities, railroad track and 

oil production sites are fenced, elevated, or otherwise secured to prevent access. Other 

long stretches of infrastructure are, as noted above, in very remote wilderness areas. The 

nature of operations anticipated by TJW requires that the UAS be flown at relatively low 

altitudes and relatively low speeds. TJW expects that in most instances, the UAS will be 

flown less than 75 feet from the highest structure along the path of the UAS. 

Accordingly, the risk of interference with another aircraft is minimal. TJW also plans to 

conduct UAS operations at least three miles from any public airports (including 

heliports). In the event an operation needs to be conducted closer to an airport, TJW will 

inform the airport operator and airport air traffic control tower of the contemplated 

operation and will comply with any directions issued by air traffic control at that airport.

Approval of exemptions allowing commercial operations of UASs in the infrastructure 

aerial inspection industry will enhance safety by reducing risk. Conventional operations, 

using jet or piston power aircraft, operate at extremely low altitudes just feet from the 

subject being inspected and in extreme proximity to people and structures; and present 

the risks associated with vehicles that weigh in the neighborhood of 4,000lbs., carrying 

large amounts of jet A or other fuel (140 gallons for jet helicopters). Such aircraft must 

fly to and from the inspection site. In contrast, a UAS 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 UAS is carried to the inspection site. The

UAS 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 in the strict 

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

of the exemptions requested herein, including 333 Aircraft Exemption Status exempting 

the applicant from conventional aircraft requirements and allowing commercial
Operations. These lightweight aircraft operate at slow speeds, close to the ground, and in 

a controlled environment and, as a result, are far safer than conventional operations 

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

The safety of those on the ground is protected by the fact that no one will be allowed into 

the area without the permission of the company. Security will be established for the 

flight area as part of the pre-flight control. Each individual within the secure area will be 

briefed prior to flight and will consent to being in the area. All others will be excluded 

from the area.

TJW initially intends to use a dedicated staff for UAS operations. All operations will be 

within visual line-of-sight (i.e., no more than approximately 0.5 miles from the 

manipulator of the controls, or pilot in command (PIC)). Each PIC will conduct at least 

three take-offs and landings with the UAS on which he or she is trained every 90 days. 

PIC’s will establish their qualifications thru a combination	of	aeronautical	knowledge,	

UAS	airmanship	skills,	and	verification	through	testing	of	flight	ability	before	

infrastructures	operations	have	commenced.	Depending on the type of operation, 

additional ground-based visual observers may be employed as well. These observers will 

be within constant visual line of sight and in constant contact with the PIC. The visual 

observers will assist the PIC in avoiding objects near the UAS.

There are no standards for either Private or Commercial UAS pilot certificates. The safe 

operation and control of the UAS as described in this application does not depend on the 

type of FAA license held by the PIC. Given the restricted and controlled airspace within 

which operations will take place, the key factors needed by the PIC are knowledge of the 

airspace within which the operation will take place and how that airspace fits into the 

National Airspace System (NAS). That knowledge can be and is gained primarily

through ground school and not through flight training in fixed wing or rotor aircraft, nor 

is it dependent on the acquisition of a commercial or private pilot’s certificate. Those 

certificates demonstrate knowledge of the factors and skills needed for the safe operation 

of those types of aircraft (fixed wing or rotorcraft). It cannot be assumed that a 

commercial pilot, approved to operate a helicopter or fixed wing aircraft, has the skill or 

ability to safely operate a small unmanned aerial vehicle, operating at 400 AGL or lower, 

within strictly controlled pre-approved airspace. Besides knowledge of airspace 

regulations, dexterity in the control and operation of the UAS acquired from actual 

operation of the aircraft is the most important factor in establishing an equivalent level of 

safety.

If the PIC has acquired the necessary knowledge of airspace requirements, the relevant 

issues are (1) where the aircraft will be flown, (2) the size of the aircraft relative to what 

is being used today to accomplish the same mission, and (3) what precautions will be 

taken to ensure the safety of those in the area of operation. We propose that the PIC has 

at least an FAA Private Pilots Certificate and a Class III medical; the aircraft be operated 

within a secure environment; and that no one be allowed to enter the secure environment 

unless they are part of the operation, have been fully briefed of the risks prior to

operation of the UAS, and have consented to the risks associated with being in the
operating area. Should there be a mishap, the UAS being flown pose significantly less of 

a threat than the helicopters and fixed wing aircraft now being employed because they are 

a fraction of the size, carry no flammable fuel, do not carry crew or passengers, and pose 

an infinitesimal risk to others. This is in stark contrast to conventional aircraft that are 

flown to the site, carry explosive fuel, carry passengers and crew, and operate in a much 

larger area.

From a practical standpoint, there are relatively few licensed full-scale aircraft pilots who 

are also qualified to fly the type of UAS that are utilized for infrastructure image-capture 

operations. There are even fewer commercial pilots that can fly these UAS – to the point 

that to do both is considered rare. Assuming that it is unlikely for a company to find a 

pilot that has both qualifications, that company would either have to source a qualified 

UAS pilot to train and obtain a commercial certificate, or find a commercial certificated 

pilot who would be willing to learn to fly a UAS to the competency level required for 

professional use.

Minimum requirements for the PIC include:

1) A minimum of 200 flight cycles and 25 hours of total time as a UAS rotorcraft 

pilot and at least 10 hours logged as a UAS pilot with a similar UAS type (single 

blade or multirotor);

2) A minimum of 5 hours as UAS pilot with the make and model of UAS to be 

utilized for operations under the exemption and 3 take offs and landings in the 

preceding 90 days;

3) Have undergone a qualification process as specified in the Flight Operations 

& Procedures Manual consisting of a knowledge & skill test of the aircraft to be 

used.

TJW intends to use commercially available UAS Components for UAS. These UAS

systems will be tested for quality & safety in our test facility before being deployed to 

the field. The UAS is less than 55 lbs. fully loaded, carries neither a pilot nor 

passenger, and operates exclusively within a secured area. We have a routine 

maintenance schedule to verify that the UAS will remain in safe and operational 

condition. Please see Appendix B, for Specific Types of UAS.

Notes Regarding: 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H 

In	accordance	with	the	statutory	criteria	provided	in	Section	333	of	PL	112---95	in	

reference	to	49	USC	44704,	and	in	consideration	of	the	size,	weight,	speed,	and	limited	

operating	area	associated	with	the	aircraft	and	its	operation,	we	request	that	this	

aircraft	exemption	meets	the	conditions	of	Section	333.	Therefore,	if	granted	Section	

333	relief	of	14	CFR	part	21,	and	any	associated	noise	certification	and	testing	

requirements	of	part	36,	is	not	necessary.
Notes Regarding: 14 C.F.R. § 45.23 (b). Marking of the Aircraft

Given the size of the sUAV, two-inch lettering will be impossible. UA	will	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	will	be	

as	large	as	practicable.

Notes Regarding: 14 CFR § 91.7(a) Civil Aircraft Airworthiness 

TJW’s request is based on the fact that no airworthiness certificate will be issued for the 

UAS. TJW’s UAS will not require an airworthiness certificate in accordance with 14 

CFR part 21, Subpart H. Based on the fact that an airworthiness certificate will not be 

issued, exemption from § 91.7(a) is not necessary.

Notes Regarding: 14 CFR § 91.9(b)(2) Civil aircraft flight manual, marking & placard 

Certifications required, the original intent of these regulations was to display an aircraft’s 

airworthiness, certification, and registration documents so they would be easily available 

to inspectors and passengers. Based on the FAA Memorandum subject “Interpretation 

regarding whether certain required documents may be kept at an unmanned aircraft’s 

control station,” dated August 8, 2014, the requested relief from 14 CFR §§ 91.9(b)(2) 

and 91.203(a) and (b) is not necessary.

Notes Regarding: §91.109 Flight instruction; Simulated instrument & certain flight tests 

Small UASs, 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. Aircraft being considered for use by TJW allow the UAS 

Instructor to place the aircraft into ‘loiter’ mode (fixed altitude stationary hold). In the 

event of the student losing control, the UAS Instructor can quickly and via alternate 

equipment (equipment not in the hands of the student) place the aircraft into a mode that 

then allows the instructor to bring the aircraft back into control and back to the predetermined and/or safe landing location.

TJW does not describe training scenarios in which a dual set of controls would be 

utilized or required, i.e. dual flight instruction, provided by a flight instructor or other 

company-designated individual, that would require that individual to have fully

functioning dual controls. Rather, TJW evaluates the qualification of its PICs based on 

their experience with the UAS to be operated and verifies through testing, in lieu of 

formalized training. As such, TJW does not seek relief from 14 CFR § 91.109.

Notes Regarding § 14 CFR 91.119(b) 

Relief from § 14 CFR 91.119(b), operation over congested areas, is not applicable,

because the TJW’s operations will only be conducted within the secured area described 

herein.
TJW Safety Operations & Procedures Overview: 

Technology Considerations: 

Best-in-class, tried and proven technologies that are in advanced iterations. Software from 

highly-reputable industry partners will include features -

1. Auto descent (landing) if communication signal were to be severed. If the UAS

loses communications, the UAS will have capability to return to a pre-determined 

location within the Security Perimeter and land.

2. Auto descent (landing) if battery were to drop lower than nominal level.

3. Flights will be terminated at 25% battery power reserve.

4. Live video for operator gives real-time positioning feedback. In other words, 

we can monitor the scene from the vehicle's perspective for collision avoidance, 

and to maintain spatial orientation.

5. The UAS will have the capability to abort a flight in case of unpredicted obstacles 

or emergencies.

6. On-Screen-Display (OSD) contains operating information to ascertain 

vehicle health at all times: speed, altitude, number of GPS satellites (when 

available), heading and voltage.

7. GPS lock supplies for return-to-home (RTH). Should Command and Control 

(C2) link failures occur (highly improbable), vehicle returns automatically to the 

point of launch.

8. Altitude information will be provided to the UAS pilot via a digitally encoded 

telemetric data feed, which downlinks from the aircraft to a ground-based on-screen 

display. This altitude information will be generated by equipment installed on board 

the aircraft, using GPS triangulation, or digitally encoded barometric altimeter, or 

radio altimeter, or any combination thereof. Prior to each flight, a zero altitude 

initiation point will be established and confirmed for accuracy by the pilot.

Mechanical/Physical: 

1. We will fly line-of-sight (LOS) only. The vehicle will always remain in direct 

LOS to the pilot, thus eliminating the concern of signal severance (flying behind 

objects/walls).

2. The UAS will weigh less than 55 lbs and travel at less than 50 knots.

3. Batteries should far exceed the capacity required for actual flight time.

4. Flights will be operated at an altitude of no more than 400 feet AGL.

5. Fireproof bags for storage and charging of high capacity Lipo batteries on-site.

6. UA	operated	under	this	exemption	will	be	marked	in	accordance	with	14	

CFR	part	45	or	as	otherwise	authorized	by	the	FAA.

Personnel: 

1. Spotters ensure safe operation and act as a redundant set of eyes for 

operators (pilot, gimbal op, director)

2. Radio spectrum analysis for interference on the frequencies utilized for 

vehicle control/communication.

3. 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.

4. The operator will obtain the consent of all persons involved in the UAS operations
and ensure that only consenting persons will be allowed within 100 feet of the flight 

operations.

5. Observer and pilot will at all times be able to communicate by voice.

6. Written and/or oral permission from the relevant property holders will be obtained.

7. Pilot and observer will have been trained in operation of UAS generally 

and received up-to-date information on the particular UAS to be operated.

Operations: 

1. The unmanned aircraft (UA) must weigh less than 55 pounds (25 Kg), 

including energy source(s) and equipment. Operations authorized by this petition 

of exemption are limited to the following aircraft described in Appendix B. 

Proposed operations of any other aircraft will require a new petition or a petition 

amendment to this request.

2. The UA may not be flown at a ground speed exceeding 50 knots.

3. Flights 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 PIC at all 

times. This requires the PIC to be able to use human vision unaided by any device 

other than corrective lenses, as specified on the PIC’s FAA-issued medical 

certificate.

5. The operator’s manual included as Appendix C and this petition of 

exemption must be maintained and made available to the Administrator upon 

request. If a discrepancy exists between the conditions and limitations in this 

exemption and the procedures outlined in the operator’s manual, the conditions 

and limitations herein take precedence and must be followed. Otherwise, the 

operator must follow the procedures as outlined in its operator’s manual.

The operator may update or revise its operator’s manual. It is the operator’s 

responsibility to track such revisions and present updated and revised documents 

to the Administrator upon request. The operator must also present updated and 

revised documents if it petitions for extension or amendment. If the operator 

determines that any update or revision would affect the basis for which the FAA 

grants this petition for exemption, then the operator must petition for amendment 

to their exemption. The FAA’s UAS Integration Office (AFS-80) may be 

contacted if questions arise regarding updates or revisions to the operator’s 

manual.

7. Prior to each flight the 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, if utilized, must be included in the 

preflight inspection. All maintenance and alterations must be properly 

documented in the aircraft records.

8. 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 operator’s manual. 

The PIC 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 operator’s manual.

9. The operator must follow the manufacturer’s UAS aircraft/component, 

maintenance, overhaul, replacement, inspection, and life limit requirements. 

When unavailable, aircraft maintenance/component/overhaul, replacement, and 

inspection/maintenance requirements must be established and identified in the 

operator’s manual. At a minimum, requirements for the following must be 

included in the operator’s manual:

a. Actuators / Servos;

b. Transmission (single rotor);

c. Powerplant (motors);

d. Propellers;

e. Electronic speed controller;

f. Batteries;

g. Mechanical dynamic components (single rotor);

h. Remote command and control;

i. Ground control station (if used); and

j. Any other components as determined by the operator;

12. Prior to operations conducted for the purpose of infrastructure inspection, a flight 

demonstration, administered by an operator-approved and -qualified pilot must be 

successfully completed and documented. This documentation must be available for 

review upon request by the Administrator. Because the knowledge and airmanship test 

qualifications have been developed by the operator, and there are no established 

practical test standards that support a jurisdictional FAA FSDO evaluation and 

approval of company designated examiners, the petitioner will conduct these tests in 

accordance with the operator’s manual.

13. The UA may not be operated directly over any person, except authorized and 

consenting personnel, below an altitude that is hazardous to persons or property on 

the surface in the event of a UAS failure or emergency.

14. Regarding the distance from participating persons, the operator’s manual 

has safety mitigations for authorized and consenting personnel. At all times, 

those persons must be essential to the operations.

15. Regarding distance from nonparticipating persons, the operator must ensure 
that no persons are allowed within 500 feet of the area except those consenting to be 

involved and necessary for the infrastructure inspection operations. This provision 

may be reduced to no less than 200 feet if it would not adversely affect safety and 

the Administrator has approved it. For example, an equivalent level of safety may 

be determined by an aviation safety inspector’s evaluation of the infrastructure 

inspection area to note terrain features, obstructions, buildings, safety barriers, etc. 

Such barriers may protect nonparticipating persons (observers, the public, news 

media, etc.) from debris in the event of an accident.
18. If the UAS loses communications or loses its GPS signal, the UA must return to 

a pre-determined location within the security perimeter and land or be recovered in 

accordance with the operator’s manual.

19. The UAS must abort the flight in the event of unpredicted obstacles 

or emergencies in accordance with the operator’s manual.

20. Each UAS operation must be completed with 25% battery power remaining.

21. All aircraft operated in accordance with this 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.

22. The operator must develop procedures to document and maintain a record of 

the UAS maintenance, preventative maintenance, alterations, status of 

replacement/overhaul component parts, and the total time in service of the UAS. 

These procedures must be added to the operator’s manual.

23. Each UAS operated under this exemption must comply with all 

manufacturer Safety Bulletins.

24. The operator must develop UAS technician qualification criteria. These 

criteria must be added to the operator’s manual.

25. The preflight inspection section in the operator’s manual must be amended to 

include the following requirement: The preflight inspection must account for all 

discrepancies, i.e. inoperable components, items, or equipment, not covered in the 

relevant preflight inspection sections of the operator’s manual.

26. Before conducting operations, the radio frequency spectrum used for operation 

and control of the UA must comply with the Federal Communications Commission 

(FCC) or other appropriate government oversight agency requirements.

29. The documents required under 14 CFR §§ 91.9 and 91.203 must be available to 

the PIC 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.

30. 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, ultralight vehicles, 

parachute activities, parasailing activities, hang gliders, etc.).

31. UAS operations may not be conducted during night, as defined in 14 CFR § 1.1. 

All operations must be conducted under visual meteorological conditions (VMC). 

Flights under special visual flight rules (SVFR) are not authorized.

32. The UAS may not be operated by the PIC from any moving device or vehicle.
33. 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 PIC.

34. The UA may not operate in Class B, C, or D airspace without written approval 

from the FAA. The UA may not operate within 5 nautical miles of the geographic 

center of a non-towered 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 as required by the operator’s 

COA. The letter of agreement with the airport management must be made available 

to the Administrator upon request.

35. Any incident, accident, or flight operation that transgresses the lateral or vertical 

boundaries of the operational area as defined by the applicable COA must be reported 

to the FAA’s UAS Integration Office (AFS-80) within 24 hours. Accidents must be 

reported to the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) per instructions 

contained on the NTSB Web site: www.ntsb.gov. Further flight operations may not be 

conducted until the incident, accident, or transgression is reviewed by AFS-80 and 

authorization to resume operations is provided.
Support for Petition for Exemption 

In accordance with the procedural requirements of 14 C.F.R. §11.81, TJW provides the 

following information:

Contact Information: 

Thomas Walter

CEO

Drone Fleet & Aerospace Management, Inc.

606 Venice Blvd, Suite E

Venice, CA 90291

(213) 379-0629

Simon.Nielsen@drone-fleet.com

info@drone-fleet.com

Regulatory Provisions from which TJW seeks an Exemption 

TJW believes it may need an exemption from the following provisions to

conduct the contemplated operations. In some instances, relief is needed because relief

from another provision renders compliance with the regulation at hand infeasible.

333 Aircraft Exemption Status

14 C.F.R. §61.113(a) and (b)

14 C.F.R. §91.119(c)

14 C.F.R. §91.121

14 C.F.R. §91.151

14 C.F.R. §91.405(a)

14 C.F.R. §91.407(a)

14 C.F.R. §91.409(a)(1)&(2)

14 C.F.R. §91.417(a)&(b)

TJW believes an exemption is only needed from the above-listed regulatory

provisions. To the extent that the FAA believes that additional relief is required for

TJW to conduct the operations described here, we request an exemption from any such

regulatory provisions as well.3

3 For example, 14 C.F.R. §91.417(a) imposes certain maintenance record keeping requirements “as 

applicable”. Since none of the underlying requirements (e.g., inspection intervals) can be met and will 

require an exemption, TJW believes a separate exemption should not be required for §91.417(a).
The Extent of Requested Relief and the Reasons Relief is Needed

Section 333 Aircraft Exemption Status: 

Section 333 of the Modernization Act authorizes the FAA to exempt aircraft from the 

requirement for an airworthiness certificate based on a consideration of the size, weight, 

speed, operational capability of the particular UAS, as well as its proximity to airports and 

populated areas. An analysis of these criteria demonstrates that the UAS operated without an 

airworthiness certificate in the areas and under the conditions contemplated by TJW will be 

at least as safe, or safer, than a conventional aircraft (fixed wing or rotorcraft) operating with 

an airworthiness certificate without the conditions proposed in this request.

The UAS is less than 55 lbs. fully loaded, carries neither a pilot nor passenger, and operates 

exclusively within a secured area. Unlike other civil aircraft, operations under this 

exemption will be tightly controlled and monitored by the operator and observer. Operations 

will be conducted in compliance with the FAA and with local public safety requirements to 

provide security for the area of operation as is now done with conventional equipment, 

infrastructure, bridge and out building evaluation. These safety enhancements provide an 

expanded degree of safety to the inspectors over conventional operations. 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 and inability to carry a substantial external load.

Given the size and limited operating area associated with the aircraft to be utilized by the 

Applicant, this meets the requirements of an equivalent level of safety under Part 11 and 

Section 333 of the Reform Act. The Federal Aviation Act (49 U.S.C.¤44701 (f)) and 

Section 333 of the Reform Act 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. 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 aircraft (fixed 

wing or rotorcraft) operating with an airworthiness certificate without the restrictions 

and conditions proposed.
14 C.F.R. §61.113(a) and (b)

§61.113 Private pilot privileges and limitations: Pilot in command.

(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

TJW anticipates initially using a cadre of specially trained staff to conduct the 

UAS operations. While these individuals will not hold commercial pilot licenses. The 

UAS will not carry property for compensation or hire since they will be used solely to 

assist in evaluation of the infrastructure, equipment, right-of-way, assets, bridges, tunnels 

and out-buildings in furtherance of TJW’s client’s primary business, the successful 

operation of a infrastructure; however, the employees’ operation of the UAS will not be 

incidental to their employment with TJW, and they will be compensated for such work. 

Without an exemption, the pilot would be required to hold a commercial pilot certificate 

under §61.133. However, the risk associated with the contemplated operations is less than 

the risk posed by a traditional aircraft. The UAS will fly at altitudes well below the 

permissible limits for other civil aircraft, eliminating the risk to other aircraft, and within 

a geographical envelope under the sole control of TJW clients. Accordingly, the risk 

would be limited to TJW personnel, who will be appropriately outfitted in safety gear, 

and TJW client’s property on the ground. Requiring a commercial pilot certificate would 

provide no appreciable safety benefit and would needlessly impose additional cost on 

TJW. Because the contemplated operations would not comply with §61.113(b)(1) and 

none of the other exceptions to paragraph (a) apply, relief is needed from both paragraphs 

(a) and (b).
14 C.F.R. 91.119(c)

§91.119 Minimum safe altitudes: General.

Except when necessary for takeoff or landing, no person may operate an 

aircraft

below the following altitudes:

***

(c) Over other than congested areas. An altitude of 500 feet above the surface, 

except over open water or sparsely populated areas. In those cases, the aircraft 

may not be operated closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or 

structure.

*****

TJW submits that the only relief it requires from §91.119 is from the minimum 

altitudes listed in paragraph (c). Relief is required from paragraph (c) for fixed wing 

operations because asset evaluation conducted at 500 feet or higher is insufficiently

distinct to be meaningful. Since operations at this altitude also pose a heightened risk of 

collision with another aircraft, safety can only be assured through the grant of an 

exemption. The anticipated rotorcraft operations should be adequately addressed by

paragraph (d) (1). Additionally, relief should not be needed from paragraph (a) because 

an emergency landing of the aircraft due to a power failure will not create an undue 

hazard to persons or property on the surface. As noted in the explanation of why an 

exemption will not adversely affect safety, TJW clients has exclusive use of the land 

over which the UAS will be operated, and public access is restricted. It also has 

exclusive use of significant portions of land adjacent to the infrastructure and structures

that will be the objects of evaluation and analysis. TJW’s Clients tightly control access 

to land and have the ability to assure that no individuals unassociated with the planned 

operations are on the affected land. As such, the risk of injury is minimal. TJW does not 

contemplate conducting operations over congested areas, so relief is not requested from 

paragraph (b).

14 C.F.R. 91.121

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 “Éto the elevation of the departure 

airport or an appropriate altimeter setting available before departure.”

*****

As the UAS may not have a barometric altimeter, but instead a GPS altitude read

out, an exemption may be needed. An equivalent level of safety will be achieved by the 

operator, pursuant to the Manual and Safety Check list, confirming the altitude of the 

launch site shown on the GPS altitude indicator before flight.

Altitude information will be provided to the UAS pilot via a digitally encoded telemetric 

data feed, which downlinks from the aircraft to a ground-based on-screen display. This 

altitude information will be generated by equipment installed on board the aircraft, using 

GPS triangulation, or digitally encoded barometric altimeter, or radio altimeter, or any 

combination thereof. Prior to each flight, a zero altitude initiation point will be established 

and confirmed for accuracy by the pilot.
14 C.F.R. 91.151

§91.151 Fuel requirements for flight in VFR conditions.

(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 –

(1) During the day, to fly after that for at least 30 minutes.

(b) No person may begin a flight in a rotorcraft 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, to 

fly after that for at least 20 minutes.

*****

Operating the UAS in a pre-defined area with less than 30 minutes of reserve fuel 

does not raise the type of risk contemplated by §91.151, i.e., that an aircraft could run out 

of fuel in the event it has to be flown to an alternate airport or circle the planned airport in 

the event of unanticipated conditions. TJW does not intend to use the UAS for point-topoint flights and will not operate the UAS beyond visual line of sight. Nor will the UAS

require an airport in order to land. Rather, TJW will operate the UAS using pre-planned 

flight paths (taking into account weather conditions) designed to allow the UAS to fly to 

the point of intended landing. As such, there is no need for a time-based excess fuel 

requirement. Rather it should be sufficient to require only as much additional excess 

flight capacity as necessary to safely land the UAS. We believe that a 25% battery

reserve is more than sufficient to meet this objective.
14 C.F.R. 91.405(a), 91.407(a) (1), 14 C.F.R. 91.409(a) (1)&(2) and 14 C.F.R. 91.417(a) & 

(b) §91.405 Maintenance required.

Each owner or operator of an aircraft Ð

(a) 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; 

*****

§91.407 Operation after maintenance, preventive maintenance, 

rebuilding, or alteration.

(a) No person may operate any aircraft that has undergone maintenance, 

rebuilding, or alteration unless Ð

(1) It has been approved for return to service by a person authorized under 

§43.7 of this chapter;

*****

§91.409 Inspections.

(a) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, no person may operate 

an aircraft unless, within the preceding 12 calendar months, it has had __

(1) An annual inspection in accordance with part 43 of this chapter and 

has been approved for return to service by a person authorized by §43.7 of 

this chapter; or

(2) An inspection for the issuance of an airworthiness certificate in

accordance with part 21 of this chapter.

*****

§91.417 (a) & (b)

*****

TJW believes that an exemption from these three maintenance requirements is

appropriate because the FAA has not developed maintenance standards that would allow 

an operator to meet the part 91 maintenance requirements. In particular, there are no 

individuals authorized by the FAA to approve a UAS for return to service under 

§91.407(a) or to conduct the initial airworthiness and annual return to service inspections 

required by §91.409(a). TJW will maintain the aircraft as instructed in the owner’s 

manual and ASTM F2909, where applicable, and will not operate the aircraft until it has 

reasonably determined that any needed repairs have been made. However, because of the 

technical impossibility of meeting the requirements of §§91.405(a), 407(a), 409(a) and 

417(a)&(b), we believe an exemption from these provisions is appropriate.

Please do not hesitate to contact me at the phone number or via the e-mail address 

provided above should you have any questions or concerns.

Respectfully submitted,

Thomas Johann Walter
Appendix A

Summary for Federal Register Publication

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

Federal Register should the FAA determine that publication is needed.

Petitioner: Drone Fleet & Aerospace Management, Inc. (TJW)

Sections of 14 C.F.R. Affected:

333 Aircraft Exemption Status

14 C.F.R. §61.113(a) and (b)

14 C.F.R. §91.119(c)

14 C.F.R. §91.121

14 C.F.R. §91.151

14 C.F.R. §91.405(a)

14 C.F.R. §91.407(a)

14 C.F.R. §91.409(a)

14 C.F.R. §91.417(a)&(b)

Description of Relief Sought:

Petitioner seeks relief from the requirements of 333 Aircraft Exemption Status, 14 C.F.R., 

61.113(a)&(b)), 91.119(c), 91.121, 91.151, 91.405(a), 91.407(a), 91.409(a), and 

91.417(a)&(b) to conduct UAS operations over TJW Client’s owned or controlled land, 

solely during daylight hours, to assist in the safe evaluation and analysis of infrastructure 

and operations. In general, UAS operations are intended to be conducted in areas remote 

from both congested areas and airports. The nature of operations anticipated by TJW

requires that the UAS be flown at relatively low altitudes. TJW expects that in most 

instances, the UAS will be flown less than 75 feet from the highest structure along the

path of the UAS and in no instances will be flown higher than 400 feet above the ground. 

Accordingly, the risk of interference with other aircraft is minimal.
Appendix B 

Specific	type(s),	make,	and	model

DJI	Phantom	3

See	Attached	Flight	Manuals:

DJI	Phantom	3	 User	Manual