1. Appendix A Custom Build Specifications and User Man ual for UAS #1

2. Appendix B 3DR Solo User Manual for UAS #2

3. Appendix C Personal Protocols, Controls Checklist, & Flight Log 1 of 7 David C. Eichman – Section 333 Petition for Exempti on / Rulemaking

November 11, 2015

U.S. Department of Transportation Docket Management System 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Washington, DC 20590

Re: Exemption Request Section 333 of the FAA Reform Act and Part 11 of the Federal Aviation Regulations

Dear Sir or Madam,

I, David C. Eichman, am writing pursuant to the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 and the proce dures contained within 14 C.F.R. 11, to request that I, D avid C. Eichman, an owner and operator of small unm anned aircraft, be exempted from the Federal Aviation Reg ulations (“FARs”) listed below so that I, David C. Eichman, may operate unmanned aircraft system (“UAS”) commer cially in airspace regulated by the Federal Aviatio n Administration (“FAA”).

I, David C. Eichman, have been flying a custom buil d quadcopter 1 (known as UAS #1 herein) and a 3DR Solo 2

(known as UAS #2 herein). As described herein I, Da vid C. Eichman, am a Freelance Photographer & Videographer within the state of Kansas; experience d in flying hobby planes & multirotor aircraft for recreational purposes. I, David C. Eichman, am an A MA (Academy of Model Aeronautics) open member in go od standing (#1081370). I have flown small RC electric planes & multirotor aircraft for over two (2) year s without

incident.

Anticipated applications would include aerial photo graphy, videography, inspection, and mapping for commercial purposes initially including:

1. Corporate events: I.E banquets, conventions, awards ceremonies, expositions.

2. Design & construction professional services: I.E. c onstruction site monitoring, progress monitoring, marketing materials.

3. Commercial photos & video production for businesses

. 4. Thermal video for the building insulation industrie s.
5. Real estate video showcasing of residential and com mercial grade properties for the purpose of resale.

6. Aerial mapping and plotting of commercial and resid ential land. I.E. Topography for

new construction & remodel.

7. Agricultural planning and inspection of new and exi sting crops.

The UAS applications listed above are closed to the general public, providing the opportunity to opera te only in an area where informed, consenting participants and personnel are present. Use of the UAS(s) for aeria l photography, videography, inspection, and mapping r educe the need to utilize conventional manned aircr aft, manned lifting devices or manned climbing for the s ame purpose and provides very high quality imagery at a fraction of the cost. These savings result in enhan ced safety, efficiency and productivity for the aff ected activities, as well as environmental benefits.

I, David C. Eichman, am committed to safety with ea ch flight. My exemption request would permit operat ion of ultra-light weight, UAS(s) in tightly controlled an d limited airspace. Predetermined in areas away fro m general1. Appendix A Custom Build Specifications and User Man ual for UAS #1

2. Appendix B 3DR Solo User Manual for UAS #2

3. Appendix C Personal Protocols, Controls Checklist, & Flight Log 2 of 7 David C. Eichman – Section 333 Petition for Exempti on / Rulemaking

public, airports, heliports and vehicular traffic. Currently, similar lightweight, remote controlled U AS(s) are legally operated by unmonitored amateur hobbyists w ith no safety plan or controls in place to prevent catastrophe. I, David C. Eichman, have personally i nstilled safety protocols and controls 3 to avoid and prevent public hazard, as well as manned aircraft hazards/c atastrophe. This will act to further safety protoco ls exclusive to lightweight UAS(s) specific to aerial photograph y, videography, inspection, and mapping application s as I, David C. Eichman, record flight data and other info rmation gained through permitted flight operations to share with the FAA through any required FAA reports to as sist with future protocol and safety regulation.

Granting my request comports with the Secretary of Transportation’s (FAA Administrator’s) responsibili ties and authority to not only integrate UAS(s) into the nat ional airspace system, but to “...establish require ments for the safe operation of such aircraft systems in the nati onal airspace system” under Section 333(c) of the R eform Act specific to the use of UAS(s) for Cinematography/Ph oto purposes. Further I, David C. Eichman, will con duct my operations in compliance with the protocols describ ed herein or as otherwise established by the FAA.

For the reasons stated below I, David C. Eichman, r espectfully request the grant of an exemption allow ing myself to operate ultra-lightweight, remote controlled UAS (s) for aerial photography, videography, inspection s, and mapping operations that are now conducted with fixe d wing and rotary conventional aircraft or other ma nned means of inspections. All of which will promote lo cal economic growth through increased employment an d increased tax base. Both with public safety in mind by keeping heavier manned aircraft containing comb ustible fuel that poses potential public hazard.

I. Contact Information

David C. Eichman 3609 N High Point St. Wichita, KS 67205 (903) 312-5054 David.C.Eichman@gmail.com

II. Regulations Petitioner Petitions for Exemption, If Such Regulations Apply to UAS(s)

14 CFR Part 21 14 CFR 91.103 14 CFR 91.405 (a)

14 C.F.R. 45.23(b) 14 CFR 91.109(a) 14 CFR 407 (a) (1) 14 CFR 61.113 (a) & (b) 14 CFR 91.119 14 CFR 409 (a) (2)

14 CFR 61.133 (a) 14 CFR 91.121 14 CFR 417 (a) & (b) 14 CFR 91.7 (a) and (b) 14 CFR 91.151 (a) 14 CFR 91.9 (b) (2) 14 CFR 91.203 (a) & (b)

III. The Extent of Relief Sought and the Reason I Seek S uch Relief

I, David C. Eichman, submit this application in acc ordance with the Reform Act, 112 P.L. 95 §§ 331- 33 4, seeking relief from any currently applicable FARs o perating to prevent I, David C. Eichman, to pursue aerial photography, videography, inspections, mapping and other flight operations within the national airspac e system. The Reform Act in Section 332 provides for such integration of civil unmanned aircraft systems into our national airspace system as it is in the public ’s interest to do so. My, David C. Eichman’s, ultra lightweight UAS meets the definition of “small unma nned aircraft” as defined in Section 331 and theref ore the integration of my ultra-lightweight UAS is expr essly contemplated by the Reform Act. I would like to operate my ultra-lightweight UAS prior to the time period by which the Reform Act requires the FAA to promulgate rules governing such craft.1. Appendix A Custom Build Specifications and User Man ual for UAS #1

2. Appendix B 3DR Solo User Manual for UAS #2

3. Appendix C Personal Protocols, Controls Checklist, & Flight Log 3 of 7 David C. Eichman – Section 333 Petition for Exempti on / Rulemaking

Thereby, providing direct experience and valuable i nformation for formal regulation that can be admini stered uniformly to all related UAS aerial photography, vi deography, inspections, and mapping. The Reform Act guides the Secretary in determining the types of UA S(s) that may operate safely in our national airspa ce system. Considerations include: The weight, size, s peed and overall capabilities of the UAS(s); whethe r the UAS(s) will be operated near airports or heavily po pulated areas; and, whether the UAS(s) will be oper ated by line of sight. 112 P.L. 95 § 333 (a). Each of these items reflect in favor of an exemption for I, Davi d C. Eichman. My UAS utilizes four (4) counter-rotating propellers for balance, control and stability. My U AS(s) are equipped with GPS and Return to Launch safety t echnology. Weighing less than ten (10) pounds (far below the maximum 55 pound limit); including camera with gimbal.

I, David C. Eichman, consider safety as foremost wi th each flight. My small unmanned aircraft is desig ned to hover in place via GPS and operate in less than a 2 2 knot (25 mph) wind. For safety, stability and fea r of financial loss I will not fly in winds exceeding 13 knot (15 mph). Built in safety systems include a P osition Hold Mode that allows my UAS to hover in place when radi o control inputs are released. With thirteen (13) modes to choose from (8 GPS assisted modes and 5 un assisted), I utilize the Position Hold Mode for aer ial photography. This is the safest, most reliable, and stable mode to prevent accident and hazard. When p ilot communication is lost, my UAS is designed to slowly descend to point of take-off. I do not operate my UAS near airports, hospitals nor police heliports, and do not operate near areas where general public is w ithin fifty to one hundred (50-100) yards depending on lo cation, conditions and weather.

I, David C. Eichman, am constantly on alert for any manned aircraft (Police/medical helicopters, etc.) and I, David C. Eichman, am prepared to land/abort immedia tely to the nearest and safest ground point should a manned aircraft approach my location or I, David C. Eichman, suspect manned aircraft may approach near my location. My UAS is capable of vertical and hori zontal operations, and is flown only within line of sight of the pilot & visual observer.

I, David C. Eichman, utilize a fresh fully charged battery with each flight as a safety precaution; fu ll flight time limit for each battery is five (5) to eight (8) min utes for UAS #1 1 and eighteen (18) to twenty (20) minutes for

UAS #2 2 as tested. I do not operate my UAS at or below manu facturer recommended minimum charge levels for operation; preferring to remain well within a s afe operating range to insure adequate communicatio n between radio control and UAS to eliminate potentia l for crash, loss of control or hazard. Reserve bat teries are at hand with each exercise to insure replacemen t for sufficient safe level of operation.

I, David C. Eichman, do not believe in taking risk that may cause a crash that could create hazard to the public/property/manned aircraft. I have clocked ove r 50+ hours of hobby level flights for future comme rcial use to gain familiarization with the characteristic s of each UAS(s) performance under different temper ature and weather conditions. I also practice computerize d simulated flights to maintain adequate skills and response reflex time.

I, David C. Eichman, am extremely cautious when ope rating my UAS/ultra-lightweight unmanned aircraft a nd

will not “create a hazard to users of the national airspace system or the public.” 112 P.L. 95 § 333 ( b). Given the small size and weight of my UAS(s), falls well within Congress’s contemplated safety zone when it promulgated the Reform Act and the corresponding di rective to integrate UAS into the national airspace system. The UAS(s), used in hobby flight, has a dem onstrable safety record and does not pose any threa t to the general public or national security.1. Appendix A Custom Build Specifications and User Man ual for UAS #1

2. Appendix B 3DR Solo User Manual for UAS #2

3. Appendix C Personal Protocols, Controls Checklist, & Flight Log 4 of 7 David C. Eichman – Section 333 Petition for Exempti on / Rulemaking

IV. How David C. Eichman’s Request Will Benefit the Gen eral Public

Aerial photography, videography, surveying, inspect ions, and mapping for the Architectural, Engineerin g and Construction market has been around for a long time through manned fixed wing aircraft and helicopters

. However, for small budget companies and average des ign professionals, the expense of such aerial servi ces is cost prohibitive. Only large companies can afford t o absorb such expenses, depriving smaller companies from a valuable marketing and construction observat ion tool. There are many industries, in the state o f Kansas,

in which manned aircraft are used where a UAS can s ave them time, money, and the safety of the pilot a nd passengers. Manned aircraft can pose a threat to t he public through potential catastrophic crashes wh ich may result in possible loss of life. My UAS(s) poses no such threat since size and lack of combustible fue l alleviates any potential threat to the public.

Congress has already proclaimed that it is in the p ublic’s interest to integrate commercially flown UA S(s) into the national airspace system, hence the passing of the Reform Act. Granting my, David C. Eichman’s, exemption request furthers the public interest thro ugh academic/visual awareness of the geographical benefits in and around the state of Kansas. My, Dav id C. Eichman’s, ultra-lightweight UAS(s) are batte ry powered and creates no emissions that can harm the environment. The consequence of my ultralightweight UAS(s) crashing is far less than a full size helicopter or fixed wing aircraft; which are heavy, contain combustible fuel and can cause catastrophic devastation to the public.

The public’s interest is furthered by minimizing ec ological and crash threat by permitting aerial phot ography, videography, inspection, and mapping through my bat tery operated ultra lightweight UAS(s).

Permitting me, David C. Eichman, to immediately fly within national air space furthers economic growth

. Granting my exemption request substantially further s the economic impact for the state of Kansas community for companies looking to benefit from aer ial photography, videography, surveying, inspection s, and mapping. Both of which serve as a stimulus to the community.

V. Reasons Why David C. Eichman’s Exemption Will Not A dversely Affect Safety and How The Exemption Will Provide a Level of Safety At Least Equal To Existin g Rule

My, David C. Eichman’s, exemption will not adversel y affect safety. Quite the contrary, for the reason s stated permitting me, David C. Eichman, to log more flight time in FAA controlled airspace, with communicatio n with the FAA, will allow me to contribute to the in novation and implementation of new and novel, as of yet undiscovered safety protocols for UAS Pilots that c an be embraced for development in cooperation with the FAA. In addition I, David C. Eichman, submit the fo llowing representations of enhancements to current aerial videography and photography:

a. My UAS weighs less than 10 pounds complete with gim bal & camera.

b. I only operate my UAS below 300 feet (well within t he 400 foot permissible ceiling set by the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012);

c. My UAS only operates for 5-8 minutes for UAS #1 & 1 8-20 minutes for UAS #2 per flight;

d. I land my UAS prior to manufacturer recommended min imum level of battery power;

e. I pilot my UAS through remote control only by line of sight;

f. I will have a visual observer, a fellow pilot obser ver, on site to maintain visual line of sight (VLOS) of the UAS at all times;

g. My UAS has GPS, a flight safety feature whereby it hovers and then slowly lands if communication with the remote control pilot is lost ; h. I actively analyze flight data and other sources of information to constantly update and enhance1. Appendix A Custom Build Specifications and User Man ual for UAS #1

2. Appendix B 3DR Solo User Manual for UAS #2

3. Appendix C Personal Protocols, Controls Checklist, & Flight Log 5 of 7 David C. Eichman – Section 333 Petition for Exempti on / Rulemaking

my safety protocols;

i. I only operate in reasonably safe environment that are strictly controlled, are away from power lines, elevated lights, airports and actively populated areas; j. I conduct extensive pre-flight inspections and prot ocol, during which safety carries primary importance;

k. I always obtain all necessary permissions prior to operation; and,

l. I have procedures in place to abort flights in the event of safety breaches or potential danger.

My, David C. Eichman’s, safety protocols provide a level of safety equal to or exceeding existing rule s. It is important to note that absent the integration of co mmercial UAS(s) into our national airspace system, traditional helicopters and fixed wing aircraft are the primary means of aerial photography, videograp hy, inspection, and mapping. While the safety record of such helicopters is remarkably astounding, it is f ar safer to operate a battery powered ultra-lightweight UAS.

a. First, the potential loss of life is diminished bec ause UAS(s) carry no people on board and only opera te in specific areas away from mass populations.

b. Second, there is no fuel on board a UAS and thus th e potential for fire or explosions is greatly dimin ished.

c. Third, the small size and extreme maneuverability o f my UAS(s) allow me to remotely pilot away from and avoid hazards quickly and safely.

d. Lastly, given its small size and weight, even when close enough to capture amazing images, my UAS need not be so close to the objects they are focused on through the technology and use of post editing soft ware allowing pan and zoom.

Accordingly, my UAS(s) has been experimentally oper ated for familiarization/competency and will contin ue to operate at and above current safety levels.

VI. A Summary - The FAA May Publish in the Federal Regi ster

A. 14 C.F.R. 21 & 14 C.F.R. 91: Airworthiness Certific ates, Manuals and the Like

14 C.F.R. 21, Subpart H, entitled Airworthiness Cer tificates, sets forth requirements for procurement of necessary airworthiness certificates in relation to FAR § 91.203(a)(1). The size, weight and enclosed operational area of My, David C. Eichman’s, UAS(s) permits exemption from Part 21 because my UAS meets (and exceeds) an equivalent level of safety pursuan t to Section 333 of the Reform Act. The FAA is auth orized to exempt aircraft from the airworthiness certifica te requirement under both the Act (49 U.S.C. § 4470 1 (f)) and Section 333 of the Reform Act. Both pieces of l egislation permit the FAA to exempt UAS(s) from the airworthiness certificate requirement in considerat ion of the weight, size, speed, maneuverability and proximity to areas such as airports and dense popul ations. My, David C. Eichman’s, current UAS(s) meet or exceed each of the elements.

14 C.F.R. 91.7(a) prohibits the operation of an air craft without an airworthiness certificate. As no s uch certificate will be applicable in the form contempl ated by the FARs, this Regulation is inapplicable.

14 C.F.R. § 91.9 (b) (2) requires an aircraft fligh t manual in the aircraft. As there are no on board pilots or passengers, and given the size of the UAS(s), this Regulation is inapplicable. An equivalent level of safety will
be achieved by maintaining a safety/flight manual d elineating areas of where safety can be defined. 3 The FAA has previously issued exemptions to this regula tion in Exemption Nos. 8607, 8737, 8738, 9299, 9299 A, 9565, 9565B, 10167, 10167A,10602, 10700 and 32827.1. Appendix A Custom Build Specifications and User Man ual for UAS #1

2. Appendix B 3DR Solo User Manual for UAS #2

3. Appendix C Personal Protocols, Controls Checklist, & Flight Log 6 of 7 David C. Eichman – Section 333 Petition for Exempti on / Rulemaking

14 C.F.R. § 91.121 regarding altimeter settings is inapplicable insofar as my UAS utilizes electronic global positioning systems with a barometric sensor.

14 C.F.R. § 91.203 (a) and (b) provides for the car rying of civil aircraft certifications and registra tions. They are inapplicable for the same reasons described above. The equivalent level of safety will be achieved by maintaining any such required certifications and re gistrations by David C. Eichman.

B. 14 C.F.R. § 45.23: Marking of The Aircraft

Applicable Codes of Federal Regulation require airc raft to be marked according to certain specificatio ns. My UAS(s) are, by definition, unmanned. They therefore do not have a cabin, cockpit or pilot station on w hich to mark certain words or phrases.

Further, two-inch lettering is difficult to place o n such small aircraft with dimensions smaller that minimal lettering requirement. Regardless, I will mark my U AS(s) in the largest possible lettering by placing the word “EXPERIMENTAL” on its fuselage as required by 14 C. F.R. §45.29 (f) so that the pilot, or anyone assist ing as a spotter with the UAS will see the markings. The FAA has previously issued exemptions to this regulatio n through Exemptions Nos. 8738, 10167, 10167A and 107 00.

C. 14 C.F.R. § 61.113: Private Pilot Privileges and Li mitations: PIC

Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. §§ 61.113 (a) & (b), private pilots are limited to non-commercial operations. I, David C. Eichman, can achieve an equivalent level of safety as achieved by current Regulations because my UAS(s ) does not carry any pilots or passengers. Further, while helpful, a pilot license will not ensure remote con trol piloting skills. The risks attended to the operatio n of my UAS are far less than the risk levels inher ent in the commercial activities outlined in 14 C.F.R. § 61, e t seq. Thus, allowing me, David C. Eichman, to oper ate my UAS(s) meeting and exceeding current safety levels in relation to 14 C.F.R. §61.113 (a) & (b).

D. 14 C.F.R. 91.119: Minimum Safe Altitudes

14 C.F.R. § 91.119 prescribes safe altitudes for th e operation of civil aircraft. It allows helicopter s to be operated at lower altitudes in certain conditions. My UAS will never operate at an altitude greater th an 300 AGL; safely below the standard of 400 AGL. I, David C. Eichman, will however operate my UAS in safe ar eas away from public and traffic, providing a level of safety at least equivalent to or below those in rel ation to minimum safe altitudes. Given the size, weight, man euverability and speed of my UAS, an equivalent or higher level of safety will be achieved.

E. 14 C.F.R. 91.405 (a); 407 (a) (1); 409 (a) (2) ; 417(a) & (b): Maintenance Inspections

The above-cited Regulations require, amongst other things, aircraft owners and operators to “have [the ] aircraft inspected as prescribed in subpart E of th is part and shall between required inspections, exc ept as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, have dis crepancies repaired as prescribed in part 43 of thi s chapter.

. . .”

These Regulations only apply to aircraft with an ai rworthiness certificate. They will not, therefore, apply to My, David C. Eichman’s, UAS. However, as a safety p recaution I, David C. Eichman, inspect my UAS befor e and after each flight.1. Appendix A Custom Build Specifications and User Man ual for UAS #1

2. Appendix B 3DR Solo User Manual for UAS #2

3. Appendix C Personal Protocols, Controls Checklist, & Flight Log 7 of 7 David C. Eichman – Section 333 Petition for Exempti on / Rulemaking

A Summary: The FAA May Publish in the Federal Regis ter: A. 14 C.F.R. 21 and 14 C.F.R. 91: Airworthines s Certificates, Manuals and the Like. 14 C.F.R. 21, S ubpart H, entitled Airworthiness Certificates, sets forth requirements for procurement of necessary airworthi ness certificates in relation to FAR § 91.203(a)(1) . The size, weight and enclosed operational area of my UA S permits exemption from Part 21 because My, David C. Eichman’s, UAS(s) meets an equivalent level of safe ty pursuant to Section 333 of the Reform Act. The F AA is authorized to exempt aircraft from the airworthines s certificate requirement under both the Act (49 U. S.C. § 44701 (f)) and Section 333 of the Reform Act. Both pieces of legislation permit the FAA to exempt UAS( s) from the airworthiness certificate requirement in c onsideration of the weight, size, speed, maneuverab ility and proximity to areas such as airports and dense p opulations. My, David C. Eichman’s, UAS(s) meet or exceed each of the elements. 14 C.F.R. 91.7(a) proh ibits the operation of an aircraft without an

airworthiness certificate. As no such certificate w ill be applicable in the form contemplated by the F ARs, this Regulation is inapplicable. 14 C.F.R. § 91.9 (b) (2 ) requires an aircraft flight manual in the aircraf t. As there are no pilots or passengers, and given the size of the UAS(s), this Regulation is inapplicable. An equ ivalent level of safety will be achieved by maintaining a m anual. The FAA has previously issued exemptions to this regulation in Exemption Nos. 8607, 8737, 8738, 9299 , 9299A, 9565, 9565B, 10167, maintenance program that involves regular software updates and curative measures for any damaged hardware. Therefore, an equivalent level of safety will be achieved.

F. In summary, David C. Eichman seeks an exemption fro m the following Regulations

14 CFR Part 21 14 CFR 91.103 14 CFR 91.405 (a)

14 C.F.R. 45.23(b) 14 CFR 91.109(a) 14 CFR 407 (a) (1) 14 CFR 61.113 (a) & (b) 14 CFR 91.119 14 CFR 409 (a) (2)

14 CFR 61.133 (a) 14 CFR 91.121 14 CFR 417 (a) & (b) 14 CFR 91.7 (a) and (b) 14 CFR 91.151 (a) 14 CFR 91.9 (b) (2) 14 CFR 91.203 (a) & (b)

Granting my request for exemption will reduce curre nt risk levels and thereby enhance safety. My, Davi d C. Eichman’s, UAS(s) does not contain potentially expl osive fuel, is smaller, lighter and more maneuverab le than conventional video and photographic aircraft with m uch less flight time. Further, I operate at lower a ltitudes and in controlled airspace eliminating potential pu blic risk flying to and from established air fields . I, David C. Eichman, have been informally analyzing flight info rmation and have compiled safety protocols and the implementation of a flight operations manual for UA S usage 3 that exceeds currently accepted means and methods for safe flight. Formal collection of infor mation shared with the FAA will enhance the FAA's i nternal efforts to establish protocols for complying with t he FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012. There are no personnel on board my UAS and therefore the like lihood of death or serious bodily injury is signifi cantly

diminished.

Operation of my UAS, weighing less than 10 pounds, and travelling at lower speeds within limited areas will provide an equivalent level of safety as that achie ved under current FARs. Accordingly, I, David C. Ei chman, respectfully request that the FAA grant my exemptio n request and am willing to cooperate in sharing information to benefit the FAA, safety of manned ai rcraft, and the general public at large.

Sincerely,

David C. Eichman