June	18 th,	2015

Flying	Eye	Exemption	Request	Letter

Mr. Nicholas Miller, Owner of Flying Eye 1321 Newbridge Drive, Lockport, IL 60441 petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for an exemption from part 21, subpart H; and Sections 45.23(b), 61.113(a) and (b), 91.7(a), 91.9(b)(2), 91.103(b), 91.109, 91.119, 91.121, 91.151(a), 91.203(a) and (b), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409( a)(2), and 91.417(a) and (b) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). The proposed exemption would allow Nicholas Miller to operate the PHANTOM 2 Vision+ quad
-copter unmanned aircraft system (UAS) to conduct aerial videography and cinematography to enhance academic community awareness for those individuals and companies unfamiliar with the geographical layout of the metro Chicago area and augment real estate listing videos. The petitioner would also like to take part in construction planning as we ll as collecting date for agricultural uses. Nicholas Miller states that he plans to operate a UAS, the PHANTOM 2 Vision+, which is comprised of an unmanned aircraft (UA or PHANTOM) and a transportable ground station. The PHANTOM is referred to as a quad
-copter with a maximum gross weight of about 3 pounds. It is equipped with four rotors tha t are driven by electric motors powered by batteries. The UA has a maximum airspeed of 30 knots. Nicholas plans to attach a small and lightweight GoPro 3+ camera to his UA and operate the UA over various areas near Chicago, Illinois to enhance academic community awareness and augment real estate listing videos. Nicholas Miller makes the following representationsof operational enhancements, which he proposes to abide by to ensure this exemption

will provide a level of safety at least equal to existing rules: • He will only operate in reasonably safe environments that are strictly controlled,
are away from power lines, elevated lights, airports and actively populated areas; and • He will conduct extensive preflight inspections and protocols, during which safety carries primary importance. The petitioner states that given the size, weight, speed, and limited operating area associated with the aircraft to be utilized by him, an exemption from 14 CFR part 21, Subpart H (Airworthiness Certificates) and § 91.203 (a) and (b) (Certifications required), subject to certain conditions and limitations, is warranted and meets the requirements for an equivalent level of safety under 14 C FR part 11 and Section 333 of P.L. 112
-95 (Section 333). Petitioner requests an exemption from § 45.23 Marking of the aircraft because his UA will not have a cabin, cockpit or pilot station on which to mark certain words or phrases. Further, he states that two- inch lettering is difficult to place on such a small aircraft with dimensions smaller than the minimal lettering requirement. Regardless of this, petitioner states that he will mark his UAS in the largest possible lettering by placing the word “Experi mental” on its fuselage as required by § 45.29(f) so that he or anyone assisting him as a spotter will see the markings. The petitioner states that an exemption from §§ 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(2) and 91.417(a) and (b) Maintenance inspections may be required and should be granted since they only apply to aircraft with an airworthiness certificate. However, the petitioner states as a safety precaution he will perform a preflight inspection of his UAS before each flight as outlined in his operating documents.UAS Pilot in Command (PIC)
. The petitioner asserts that under § 61.113 (a) and (b)

pr ivate pilots are limited to non
-commercial operations, however he can achieve an equivalent level of safety as achieved by current regulations because his UAS d oes not carry any pilots or passengers. Further, he states that, while helpful, a pilot license will not ensure remote control piloting skills. He further indicates that the risks of operating a UAS are far less than the risk levels inherent in the commerc ial activities outlined in 14 CFR part 61, et seq., thus he requests an exemption from § 61.113 Private Pilot Privileges and Limitations: Pilot in command. Regarding UAS operational training, the petitioner states he has flown numerous practice flights in remote areas as a hobbyist simulating flights for future commercial use to gain familiarization with the characteristics of his UAS’ performance under different temperature and weather conditions. He further states that he practices computerized simulated flights to maintain adequate skills and response reflex time.