KELLY8 HART 

HOWARD L. ROSENTHAL 

howard. rosenthal@ke//yhart. com 

TELEPHONE: (817) 878-3527 

FAX: (817) 878-970 I 

November 2, 2015 

Certified Mail No. 7013-0600-0002-0765-7455, 

Return Receipt Requested 

U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations 

West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

Subject: In the Matter of the Petition of Exemption of Freese and Nichols, Inc. for 

an Exemption Seeking Relief from the Requirements of Title 14 of the 

Code of Federal Regulations Sections in regard to Commercial Operation 

of an Unmanned Aircraft System pursuant to Section 333 of The FAA 

Modernization and Reform Act of 2012. 

To whom it may concern: 

Enclosed please find original and one copy of the subject Petition being filed on behalf of 

Freese and Nichols, Inc. I would ask that if at all possible the copy be date stamped upon receipt 

and returned to the undersigned in the self-addressed stamped envelope. 

Please direct any questions concerning this Petition to the undersigned as counsel for the 

Petitioner. 

Sincerely, 

Kelly, Hart & Hallman LLP 

HLR/mp 

Enclosures 

cc: Freese and Nichols, Inc. 

Attention: Will Allanach w/enc. 
iO 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION OF EXEMPTION OF: FREESE AND 

NICHOLS, INC. 

FOR AN EXEMPTION SEEKING RELIEF FROM THE REQUIREMENTS OF TITLE 

14 OF THE CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS SECTIONS: 

CONCERNING COMMERCIAL OPERATION OF THE "PHANTOM2 VISION+" 

UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEM PURSUANT TO SECTION 333 OF 

THE FAA MODERNIZATION AND REFORM ACT OF 2012 

(PUBLIC LAW 112-95) 

Submitted: October~' 2015 

By: 

KELLY HART & HALLMAN LLP 

201 Main Street 

Ft. Worth, Texas 76102 

On Behalf of 

FREESE AND NICHOLS, INC. 

4055 International Plaza, Suite 200 

Fort Worth, TX 76109 
"' 

Table of Contents 

Page 

SUMMARY ......................................................................................................................................................... I 

PROPOSED OPERATIONS ............................................................................................................................. I 

THE PHANTOM 2 VISION+ UA and UAS ................................................................................................. 2 

THE OPERA TOR .......................................................................................................................................... 2 

OPERATING PARAMETERS ..................................................................................................................... 3 

REGULA TORY STATEMENT ....................................................................................................................... 4 

PETITIONER'S CONTACT INFORMATION (14 C.F.R. § 11.8l(a)) ........................................................ 4 

SECTIONS OF TITLE 14 CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS FOR WHICH RELIEF IS SOUGHT 

(14 C.F.R. § 11.81(b)) .................................................................................................................................... 4 

EXTENT OF RELIEF SOUGHT (14 C.F.R. § 11.8l(c)) .............................................................................. 9 

STATEMENTOFPUBLICINTEREST(l4C.F.R. § 11.81(d)) ................................................................ ll 

REASONS WHY A GRANT OF THIS EXEMPTION WILL NOT AFFECT PUBLIC SAFETY (14 

C.F.R. § 11.81(e)) ........................................................................................................................................ 12 

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IN SUPPORT (14 C.F.R. § 11.81 (g)) ................................................... 17 

Documents and Manuals ......................................................................................................................... 17 

Proposed specific operating limitations .................................................................................................. 17 

CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................................................. 23 

ii 
" 

SUMMARY 

Petitioner, Freese and Nichols, Inc., a Texas corporation (""FNI" or "Petitioner"), is seeking 

exemption from the requirements of Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R.) Part 

61 Sections 61.113(a) and (b), Part 91 Sections 91.7(a), 91.119(c), 91.121, 91.151(a), 

91.405(a), 91.407(a)(l), 91.409(a)(l) and (2), and 91.417(a) and (b) in order to commercially 

operate the Phantom 2 Vision+ Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) for the purpose of aerial 

survey and photography in support of consulting services performed in the areas of civil 

engineering, architecture, environmental science, construction and other planning services. 

This Petition is submitted in accordance with the authority found in Section 333 of The FAA 

Modernization and Reform Act of the 2012 and Title 14 C.F.R. Section 11 Subpart A. In this 

Petition, Petitioner shall provide reasons why the granting of exemption (i) would be within 

the public interest, and (ii) would not adversely affect safety (or how it would provide a level 

of safety at least equal to the existing rules of operation). 

PROPOSED OPERATIONS 

Petitioner is seeking an exemption that will permit it to perform aerial photography services 

for property owners, municipalities, counties, river authorities, and clients requesting certain 

consulting services that can safely and efficiently be performed by Petitioner's use of the 

UAS. The documents and manuals for the Phantom 2 Vision+ UAS ("Manual(s)") describe in 

detail the policies and procedures for Petitioner's UAS operations and are further described 

hereafter in the section of this Petition entitled "Additional Information in Support". These 

services would be used to provide efficiencies and enhance decision-making ability through 

aerial based survey and photography. This would be done using conventional imaging 

technology to study and document public property conditions, construction progress of 

various infrastructure projects, and completed infrastructure projects. Low-level oblique 

photos from several angles are far more effective than ground-based or top-down aerial 

imagery for displaying the characteristics of large infrastructure projects. An alternative 

would be to charter a full-sized helicopter for this purpose, but the cost of such operations 

makes this option unfeasible for nearly all of Petitioner's clients. The use of the UAS, as 
.. 

described in more detail hereafter, is a safer and less expensive way to photograph these 

projects. 

THE PHANTOM 2 VISION+ UA and UAS 

The Phantom 2 Vision+ UAS (Unmanned Aircraft System or simply the "System") is 

comprised of a small (approximately three pounds) quad-copter unmanned aircraft ("UA" or 

"PHANTOM") and a transportable ground station. While capable of carrying small digital 

photography equipment during flight, the electrically powered PHANTOM has an 

approximate maximum speed of 30 knots and is operated, using the transportable ground 

station, by a minimum required flight crew of one, the Operator. The UA has an approximate 

length of 13.2 inches, width of 8.3 inches and height of 14.6 inches. The UA has a maximum 

altitude of 300 feet as will be hereafter further described. 

With the process we understand the FAA to be using to grant exemptions, reviewing and 

adopting requests from previously granted exemptions is to be a favored methodology. The 

proposed operational profile of Petitioner's request here aligns with a previously granted 

exemption. That is, the same system which is the subject system in Exemption No. 1113 8 

granted to Douglas Trudeau, Realtor® on January 5, 2015. Regulatory Docket No. FAA2014- 0481 is the subject of this Petition. 

THE OPERA TOR 

The proposed Operator, defined as the person who manipulates the controls ofthe System, 

would hold, at minimum, a Private Pilot Certificate. 

To the extent the particular operation would dictate it, the Petitioner proposes that the Operator 

would have the ability to augment the crew with a visual observer (Observer) to assist with 

scanning for collision hazards and maintaining awareness of the PHANTOM's precise 

location. As noted in proposed Part 107, the Observer would not be a required crewmember, 

and therefore the Petitioner believes that this Petition need not require the Observer to hold any 

airman certificate. Despite any use of an Observer, the Operator will maintain visual line of 

sight with the UA. 

2 
·-

Operator and any Observer will have been trained in operation of the UAS and will have 

received up-to-date information on the UAS to be operated, as provided for in the Manual. 

In addition to the Observer, the Petitioner further proposes that Operator may (as an operation 

dictates) augment the crew with an Equipment Operator (EO), who would be responsible for 

operation of photographic equipment carried on board the PHANTOM. The EO would not be 

permitted to manipulate the flight or navigation controls of the PHANTOM. Because the 

Equipment Operator would be analogous to a cameraman, the Petitioner does not believe that 

it is necessary for the EO to hold any airman certificate. 

Operational control would rest in the Operator at all times, i.e. the UAS pilot will be Pilot in 

Command (PIC). If a pilot certificate holder other than the UAS pilot is present and possesses 

the necessary PIC qualifications, that person can also be designated as PIC. The roles of the 

Observer and EO would be supplementary to the actions of the Operator who would at all 

times be charged with handling the controls and assuring the safe operation of the UA. 

OPERATING PARAMETERS 

FNI is committed to the safe and compliant operation of this System at all times. 

Because the PHANTOM does not carry crew or passengers on-board, and is so much 

smaller, lighter, and slower than manned aircraft, Petitioner seeks relief from several 

aspects of 14 C.F.R. 

Before each operation, the Operator will inspect the System to ensure that flight operations 

can be conducted safely and in accordance with instructions provided by the manufacturer, 

including without limitation the checking of communication links and equipment. Safety 

checklists will be adopted from the Manual(s) applicable to the entire System. All operations 

will be conducted in Class G airspace, or in compliance with Certificate of Waiver or 

Authorization (COA) obtained through the Air Traffic Organization (ATO). Operations will 

not be flown in areas under Terminal Flight Restriction and will be kept away from airport 

flight paths and other restricted airspace areas. Due to the light nature of the PHANTOM, 

Petitioner feels that in situations where it is not possible to operate the PHANTOM more 

than 500 feet from non-essential persons, the PHANTOM can still be safely operated so long 

3 
as those persons are shielded by barriers or structures that are of sufficient strength to protect 

those non-essential persons. Should a non-essential person leave the protection of such a 0 

barrier or structure, the Operator would cease operations as quickly as safety permits a safe 

landing of the UA. Likewise, the Operator will always discontinue flight when continuing 

would pose a hazard to other aircraft, people or property. 

REGULATORY STATEMENT 

In accordance with the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of2012, Section 333, entitled 

Special Rules for Certain Unmanned Aircraft Systems, and 14 C.F .R. § § 11.61 (b) and 11.81, 

the Petitioner, through Counsel, submits the following: 

PETITIONER'S CONTACT INFORMATION (14 C.F.R. § 11.81(a)) 

The name and address of the Petitioner is: 

Freese and Nichols, Inc. 

4055 International Plaza, Suite 200 

Fort Worth, TX 76109 

The point of contact for purposes of this Petition is: 

Spencer B. Maxwell, P.E., PTOE 

Freese and Nichols, Inc. 

4055 International Plaza, Suite 200 

Fort Worth, TX 76109 

817-735-7523 office 

sbm@freese.com 

SECTIONS OF TITLE 14 CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS FOR WHICH 

RELIEF IS SOUGHT (14 C.F.R. § 11.81(b)) 

Petitioner hereby seeks an exemption from several interrelated provisions of 14 C.F.R. Parts 

61 and 91 for purposes of conducting the work described above. Relief is sought from the 

following provisions of Title 14 ofthe Code of Federal Regulations: 

Part 61 

§ 61.113 (a) and (b), which state: 

Private pilot privileges and limitations: Pilot in command. 

4 
(a) Except as provided in paragraphs (b) through (h) ofthis 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. 

Part 91 

§ 91.7(a), which states: 

Civil aircraft airworthiness. 

(a) No person may operate a civil aircraft unless it is in an airworthy 

condition. 

§ 91.119, which states: 

Minimum safe altitudes: General. 

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

below the following altitudes: 

(a) Anywhere. An altitude allowing, if a power unit fails, an emergency landing 

without undue hazard to persons or property on the surface. 

(b) Over congested areas. Over any congested area of a city, town, or settlement, or 

over any open air assembly of persons, an altitude of 1,000 feet above the highest 

obstacle within a horizontal radius of 2,000 feet of the aircraft. 

(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. 

(d) Helicopters, powered parachutes, and weight-shift-control aircraft. lfthe 

operation is conducted without hazard to persons or property on the surface-

( 1) A helicopter may be operated at less than the minimums prescribed in 

paragraph (b) or (c) of this section, provided each person operating the 

5 
helicopter complies with any routes or altitudes specifically prescribed for 

helicopters by the FAA; and 

(2) A powered parachute or weight-shift-control aircraft may be operated at 

less than the minimums prescribed in paragraph (c) of this section. 

§ 91.121(a), which states: 

Altimeter settings. 

a) Each person operating an aircraft shall maintain the cruising altitude or flight level 

of that aircraft, as the case may be, by reference to an altimeter that is set, when 

operating 

(1) Below 18,000 feet MSL, to-

(i) The current reported altimeter setting of a station along the 

route and within 1 00 nautical miles of the aircraft; 

(ii) If there is no station within the area prescribed in paragraph 

(a)( 1 )(i) of this section, the current reported altimeter setting of an 

appropriate available station; or 

(iii) In the case of an aircraft not equipped with a radio, the elevation of 

the departure airport or an appropriate altimeter setting available before 

departure; or 

(2) At or above 18,000 feet MSL, to 29.92" Hg. 

§ 91.151, which states: 

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; or 

(2) At night, to fly after that for at least 45 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 

6 
first point of intended landing and, assuming normal cruising speed, to fly after that 

for at least 20 minutes. 

§ 91.405(a), which states: 

Maintenance required. 

Each owner or operator of an aircraft-

(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(a)(l), which states: 

Operation after maintenance, preventative maintenance, rebuilding, or alteration. 

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

preventive maintenance, rebuilding, or alteration unless-

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

§43.7 of this chapter; and ... 

§ 91.409(a)(1) and (2) which state: 

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. 

7 
§ 91.417(a) and (b) which state: 

Maintenance records. 

(a) Except for work performed in accordance with §§91.411 and 91.413, each 

registered owner or operator shall keep the following records for the periods 

specified in paragraph (b) of this section: 

(1) Records ofthe maintenance, preventive maintenance, and alteration and 

records of the 1 00-hour, annual, progressive, and other required or approved 

inspections, as appropriate, for each aircraft (including the airframe) and 

each engine, propeller, rotor, and appliance of an aircraft. The records must 

include-

(i) A description (or reference to data acceptable to the 

Administrator) of the work performed; and 

(ii) The date of completion ofthe work performed; and 

(iii) The signature, and certificate number of the person approving the 

aircraft for return to service. 

(2) Records containing the following information: 

(i) The total time in service ofthe airframe, each engine, each 

propeller, and each rotor. 

(ii) The current status oflife-limited parts of each airframe, engine, 

propeller, rotor, and appliance. 

(iii) The time since last overhaul of all items installed on the aircraft which 

are required to be overhauled on a specified time basis. 

(iv) The current inspection status of the aircraft, including the time 

since the last inspection required by the inspection program under 

which the aircraft and its appliances are maintained. 

(v) The current status of applicable airworthiness directives (AD) and 

safety directives including, for each, the method of compliance, the AD 

or safety directive number and revision date. If the AD or safety 

directive involves recurring action, the time and date when the next 

action is required. 

8 
(vi) Copies of the forms prescribed by §43.9(d) of this chapter for each 

major alteration to the airframe and currently installed engines, rotors, 

propellers, and appliances. 

(b) The owner or operator shall retain the following records for the periods 

prescribed: 

( 1) The records specified in paragraph (a)( 1) of this section shall be retained 

until the work is repeated or superseded by other work or for 1 year after the 

work is performed. 

(2) The records specified in paragraph (a)(2) of this section shall be 

retained and transferred with the aircraft at the time the aircraft is sold. 

(3) A list of defects furnished to a registered owner or operator under 

§43.11 of this chapter shall be retained until the defects are repaired and the 

aircraft is approved for return to service. 

EXTENT OF RELIEF SOUGHT (14 C.F.R. § 11.81(c)) 

61.113(a) and (b). Relief is requested to the extent necessary to permit the holder of a private 

pilot certificate, with at least a current third-class medical certificate, to conduct the proposed 

flight operations for compensation or hire. 

Section 61.113( a) limits private pilots to being in command of non-commercial flights. Section 

61.113(b )(1) provides an exception that allows a private pilot to command an aircraft without 

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

incidental to that business or employment." Should the exception not apply to the proposed 

operations under this petition for exemption, i.e. if the flights are not deemed incidental to the 

proposed aerial surveys and photography but rather essential to it, this Petition seeks an 

exemption to§ 61.113(a)'s commercial limitation and/or§ 61.113(b)(l)'s requirement that the 

flight be incidental to the business to benefit from the exception. In specific reference to the 

business of Petitioner, this subject will be hereafter further discussed. 

91.7(a). FNI seeks relief from 91.7(a) to the extent that the Phantom 2 Vision+ system is not 

eligible for an airworthiness certificate under 14 C.F.R. Part 21 and therefore cannot be 

airworthy in the context of this regulation. Petitioner's pilots that will be flying the UAS 

9 
have significant flight hours and a fine safety record. Additionally, given the size of the 

UAS and the requirements contained in the Manual(s) for maintenance and use of safety 

checklists and inspection prior to each flight, an equivalent level of safety will exist. 

91.119. Relief is sought from 91.119 due to the unique nature of the proposed operations and the 

limited capabilities of the System. Petitioner can ensure that each operation is conducted within 

the requirements of 91.119( a) and is therefore not seeking exemption from that section of the 

regulation. With respect to 91.119 (b) and (c) Petitioner seeks relief for two reasons. First, the 

diminutive size and flight envelope of the UA, and the limited range ofthe System necessarily 

restrict operations to that of low level, low speed, line of sight (with the Operator) operations. 

Combined with the intent of the operations primarily being the survey and photography of 

property; commercial operation simply could not be done without exemption. Second, while not 

a manned helicopter, the PHANTOM is more analogous to a helicopter than other aircraft, which 

a private pilot is permitted to operate at less than the minimums prescribed in paragraph (b) or 

(c) of section 91.119 so long as the operation is conducted without hazard to persons or property 

on the surface. 14. C.F .R. § 91.119( d). Compared to flight operations with rotorcraft weighting 

far more than the maximum 55 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. Furthermore, by operating at such lower altitudes, 

the UAS will not interfere with other aircraft that are subject to the minimum safe altitude 

regulations. 

91.121. Relief is sought from 91.121 due to the design of the system. While not possessing an 

altimeter that can be set in compliance with the regulation, however the System contains 

barometric altimeter and GPS derived altitude capabilities. That being said, Petitioner is not 

proposing relief in as much as the Operator is expected to check the System settings prior to 

each flight, i.e. the Operator will confirm altitude of the launch site shown on the GPS altitude 

indicator before each flight. The PIC will use the GPS altitude indicator to monitor the UAS's 

height to ensure safe altitude operation. 

10 
91.151. FNI requests relief from 91.151 due to the limited design range and associated battery 

storage capacity. The single flight range and battery capacity are: approximately (i) 800 feet and 

(ii) 12 minutes. Operation ofthe 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 ofthe small UAS. 

91.405(a), 91.407(a)(l ), 91.409(a)(l) & (a)(2), and 91.417(a) & (b). Due to the fact that the 

PHANTOM aircraft and the larger System are not certificated pursuant to 14 CFR Part 21, nor 

issued airworthiness certificates, and due to the fact that the technology of the System is so 

different from traditional manned aircraft, the System does not fit well into the regulatory 

scheme of Part 91 Subpart E. As such Petitioner seeks relief from the above noted regulations. 

However, Petitioner will maintain all maintenance records related to the system. Petitioner does 

not intend to document each battery replacement or charge, however, because the battery is 

analogous to fuel in manned aircraft, and documenting each charge would be as laborious as 

documenting each fueling of a certificated aircraft in that aircraft's maintenance records. While 

the UAS does not fit neatly into the regulatory scheme, Petitioner will follow the manufacturer 

Manual(s) for the System as well as the pre-flight inspection protocol developed to best ensure 

the unit is safe for flight. In other words, the Operator will ensure that the UAS is in working 

order prior to initiating flight, perform 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. 

STATEMENT OF PUBLIC INTEREST (14 C.F.R. § 11.81(d)) 

The public benefits commensurate with the commercial operation of the Phantom 2 Vision+ 

UAS by FNI are numerous. By implementing this technology into the National Airspace 

System in a deliberate and limited way, the public's interest will be served in that 

environmental impacts will be lessened, economies will be more efficient and relative public 

safety will increase. 

This technology will serve to reduce present environmental impacts, and prevent future 

negative impacts. Being an incredibly small, electrically powered System, environmental 

impacts are mitigated when this system is used in place of present approved manned aircraft 

11 
operations. Because neither leaded avgas nor jet fuel is burned, the System itself has low 

impact and further, there is no fuel to ignite and potentially explode. The low weight and tiny 

motors not only reduce fuel consumption, but reduce noise in the environment and reduce the 

likely hood of other negative environmental impacts such as bird strikes and fuel spills. 

The operation of this UAS significantly improves safety and reduces risk by alleviating human 

exposure to danger associated with current aerial survey and inspection methods, namely, full 

size helicopters. Manned helicopters performing similar services have experienced offer more of 

a safety risk. The public's interest is furthered by reducing human exposure to death or serious 

injury associated with manned aircraft performing these services. 

Because the ·system is so small, cheap and quick to deploy, yet retains the ability to return 

incredibly detailed information, infrastructure projects can be monitored more closely for less 

cost. Infrastructure such as roads, bridges, dams, and treatment plants can be quickly assessed 

without the need for heavy equipment such as trucks, cranes, hoists and aircraft that run on 

fossil fuels. 

Additionally, with this technology deployed, studies regarding all aspects ofland use, soil, 

and topography, become possible where they previously were not due to economic reasons. 

The information collected by FNI for their clients will have a broader environmental impact 

that will benefit everyone, not just the client. 

When this System is used in support of commercial operations, the public at large will benefit 

from the efficiencies that this system brings into the aerial survey market. UAS services in 

infrastructure design will allow public agencies to have access to aerial based images 

performed on a more timely basis. 

REASONS WHY A GRANT OF THIS EXEMPTION WILL NOT AFFECT PUBLIC 

SAFETY (14 C.F.R. § 11.81(e)) 

FNI is firmly convinced that this product will not affect public safety in any adverse way, but 

will in fact enhance it. 

12 
With respect to the safe operation of the aircraft, the Administrator, in exemption No. 11138 

has already evaluated the technical specifications of the aircraft. In noting its small size, 

limited speed and numerous safety features (such as low battery autonomous landing, lost-link 

event autonomous procedures, auto-pilot and stability control, to name a few), FNI believes 

that the Administrator's finding that this System can be safely operated in the National 

Airspace System ("NAS") was correct. 

In order to ensure that safety, FNI would utilize a certificated pilot as the Operator, and abide 

by common sense operating limitations to ensure that the safety of the public is ensured. A list 

of proposed specific operating limitations is included in the additional information section, 

below. The Petitioner is only seeking relief from very specific regulations that relate to the 

operation of this System, and is suggesting specific alternative procedures to ensure safety in 

lieu of those regulations from which Petitioner is seeking relief. 

FNI further notes that by replacing certain manned operations with operations conducted by 

this small System, public safety will actually be enhanced. In those operations where traditional 

manned aircraft are presently used, the public bears the risk of the crash of a much larger, 

heavier vehicle travelling at a much higher rate of speed. Furthermore, many of those manned 

operations contribute to congestion in the NAS, and as such an increased risk of collision with 

other aircraft. Because the PHANTOM will be operated away from the airport environment, the 

airport environment being the location of the highest risk of collision, using this aircraft in place 

of a manned aircraft reduces the risk of collision. 

With respect to each particular regulation for which relief is sought, FNI believes safety is 

insured: 

61.113(a) and (b). Relief is requested to the extent necessary to permit the holder of a private 

pilot certificate, with at least a current third-class medical certificate holder to conduct the 

proposed flight operations for compensation or hire. 

FNI notes that private pilots are allowed to operate aircraft for compensation or hire so long as 

doing so is incidental to their business and they do not carry passengers. This is done in much 

heavier, faster aircraft, which pose a greater risk to persons or property on the ground. In the 

case of PHANTOM, the aircraft, through its limited speed and weight poses much less risk of 

13 
harm to those on the surface. The fact that the very small UA will be operated in accordance 

with the manufacturer's instructions and over limited parcels ofland, combined with its limited 

range, negates the long cross-country flying experience sometimes required of an individual 

possessing a commercial pilot certificate. Therefore Petitioner believes that an equivalent level 

of safety with respect to manned aircraft is met with a minimum certification level of private 

pilot. 

In addition to the foregoing, Petitioner respectfully submits that operation of the UA is in no 

way a substantive aspect of its business. The company's business includes consulting services 

related to engineering, architecture, environmental science, energy, construction services, 

program management and other planning services. Aerial surveying and photography using a 

drone are not significant parts of the Petitioner's business, whether standing alone or otherwise. 

Put differently, such activities are not foreseeable and normal parts of the business. 

Additionally, the individual expected to be the initial PIC is an employee of Petitioner, however 

this person was in no way employed as a pilot, rather his primary responsibility is as a 

transportation project manager, a person who oversees the design of roadway projects, 

including managing bridge and drainage work. Neither he nor any other PIC are or will be 

compensated for piloting the UA, i.e. there is no additional compensation over and above their 

usual compensation, nor is operating the UA part of the job description of the PIC or a 

condition of employment or advancement. The amount of time spent operating the UA is small 

in comparison to normal work responsibilities. 

91.7(a). FNI seeks relief from 91.7(a) to the extent that the Phantom 2 Vision+ system is not 

eligible for an airworthiness certificate under 14 C.F.R. 21 and therefore cannot be airworthy in 

the context of the regulation. The Operator can, before each flight, determine whether or not the 

aircraft is capable of safe flight by visually inspecting the System, accomplishing 

appropriate pre-flight inspections, and ensuring compliance with the manufacturers operating 

Manual(s) and therefore an equivalent level of safety will be met. 

91.119. Relief is sought from 91.119 due to the unique nature of the proposed operations and 

the limited capabilities of the System. FNI can ensure that each operation is conducted within 

the requirements of 91.119( a) and is therefore not seeking exemption from that section of the 

14 
regulation. With respect to 91.119(b) and (c) FNI seeks relief for two reasons. First, the 

diminutive size and flight envelope of the UA, and the limited range ofthe System necessarily 

restrict operations to that of low level, low speed, line of sight (with the Operator) operations. 

Combined with the intent of the operations primarily being the survey and photography of 

property; commercial operation simply could not be done without exemption. Second, while not 

a manned helicopter, the PHANTOM is more analogous to a helicopter than other aircraft, 

which a private pilot is permitted to operate at less than the minimums prescribed in 

subparagraphs (b) or (c) of section 91.119 so long as the operation is conducted without hazard 

to persons or property on the surface. 14. C.F.R. § 91.119(c). 

With respect to operating the PHANTOM over or near a structure, FNI submits that it is often 

more dangerous for those involved if a person were to, for example, fall off of a roof or a 

ladder, or drop a heavy tool such as a hammer, than it would be for this three pound 

PHANTOM to fall, so long as the Operator ensures that he has permission from the owner and 

requires that any structure the PHANTOM is operated over or near is not occupied, nor are 

people in the immediate vicinity. With those precautions being taken, a high level of safety can 

be achieved. 

Due to the Systems limitations with respect to speed and altitude, it's light weight, and ability 

to maneuver like a helicopter (with an equally trained Private Pilot Operator), and a with the 

restriction than any structure flown over be with permission and only when unoccupied, FNI 

respectfully submits that an equivalent level of safety is assured if relief is granted from 91.119 

(b) and (c). 

91.121. Relief is sought from 91.121 due to the design of the system. While not possessing an 

altimeter that can be set in compliance with the regulation, an equivalent level of safety can be 

met due to the fact that the System contains barometric altimeter and GPS derived altitude 

capabilities, thus ensuring an equivalent level of safety. That being said, FNI is not proposing 

relief to the extent that the Operator is not expected to check the System settings prior to each 

flight. 

91.151. FNI requests relief from 91.151 due to the limited battery storage capacity. Petitioner 

feels that a good balance of safety and utility can be met if the Operator is permitted to plan and 

15 
initiate a daytime VFR flight to the first intended point of landing, at normal cruising speed 

which would require no more than 70% battery power. This System possesses several safety 

features with respect to power, including a low battery warning that first alerts at 30% 

remaining, and an automated landing function when a low battery is detected by the System. 

Should conditions change during the flight, this will leave 30% battery capacity to fly to a safe 

alternative landing zone. Operation of the UAS with 30% of power remaining 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. 

91.405(a), 91.407(a)(l), 91.409(a)(l) & (a)(2), and 91.417(a) & (b). Due to the fact that the 

PHANTOM aircraft and the larger System are not certificated pursuant to Part 21, nor issued 

airworthiness certificates, and due to the fact that the size and limited operating area associated 

with the UAS and the fact that the technology of the System is so different from traditional 

manned aircraft, the System does not fit well into the regulatory scheme of Part 91 Subpart E. 

The FAA is authorized to exempt aircraft from the requirement of an airworthiness certificate 

upon due consideration of the size, weight, sppe, operational capability, and proximity to 

airports and populated areas ofthe particular UAS in question. As such, FNI seeks relief from 

the above noted regulations. It is submitted that an analysis of these criteria demonstrates that 

the UAS that would here be operated without an airworthiness certificate, 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. 

In order to ensure an equivalent level of safety, FNI will use trained technicians to perform 

maintenance, alterations, or preventive maintenance on the UAS using the methods, techniques, 

and practices prescribed in the manufacturer's Manual(s). 

FNI will maintain all maintenance records related to the system. FNI does not intend to 

document each battery replacement or charge, however, because the battery operated systems 

are analogous to fuel in manned aircraft, and documenting each charge would be as laborious 

as documenting each fueling of a certificated aircraft in that aircraft's maintenance records. 

16 
The UAS to be operated hereunder is less than 55 lbs. fully loaded, carries neither a pilot nor 

passenger, and carries no explosive materials or flammable liquid fuels. 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. 

FEDERAL REGISTRY SUMMARY (14 C.F.R. § 11.81(f)) 

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

FEDERAL REGISTER, should it be determined that publication is needed: 

FNI seeks exemption from the requirements of 14 C.F.R Sections 45.23(b), 61.113(a) and 

(b), 91.7(a), 91.119, 91.121, 91.151, 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(l), 91.409(a)(1) and (a)(2), and 

91 .41 7 (a) and (b). 

The operation of small UASs, weighting less than 55 lbs., provides an equivalent level of safety 

and thus supports the grant of the exemptions requested herein, including exempting the 

Petitioner from the requirements of the described regulations and allowing commercial 

operations. These lightweight UASs operate at slow speeds, close to the ground, and in a sterile 

environment. As a result, they are far safer than conventional aerial survey and inspection 

operations conducted with fixed-wing aircraft or helicopters. 

This exemption will permit FNI to commercially operate an Unmanned Aircraft System 

(UAS) for the purpose of conducting aerial survey and photography within the United 

States. 

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IN SUPPORT (14 C.F.R. § 11.81(g)) 

Documents and Manuals 

The documents and manuals for the Phantom 2 Vision+ UAS can be found at: 

http://\vw\v.dji.com/product/phantom-2-vision-plus/download. These documents are 

incorporated into this Petition by reference. However, du·e to file size limitations they are 

not being attached. 

Proposed specific operating limitations 

17 
1. Operations authorized by this grant of exemption are limited to the following aircraft 

described in the operating documents which is a quad-rotor aircraft weighing less than 3 

pounds: PHANTOM 2 Vision+ Unmanned Aircraft System. Proposed operations of any 

other aircraft will require a new petition or a petition to amend this grant. 

2. The UA may not be flown at an indicated airspeed exceeding 30 knots. 

3. The UAmust be operated at an altitude ofno more than 300 feet above ground level 

(AGL); as indicated by the procedures specified in the operating documents. 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 airman medical certificate. 

5. All operations must utilize a visual observer (VO). The UA must be operated within the 

visual line of sight (VLOS) of the VO at all times. The VO may be used to satisfy the 

VLOS requirement as long as the PIC always maintains VLOS capability. The VO and PIC 

must be able to communicate verbally at all times. Such communications may be 

augmented through the use of radios or other technology so long as not to interfere with the 

operation of the UAS. The PIC must be designated before the flight and cannot transfer his 

or her designation for the duration of the flight. The PIC must ensure that the VO can 

perform the functions prescribed in the operating documents. Under the proposed rules for 

commercial operation of units like the UA, use of aVO would be optional. Petitioner will 

adhere to the rules as finalized and if aVO is required, Petitioner will comply with such a 

requirement. 

6. The operating documents and this grant of exemption must be accessible during UAS 

operations 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 

operating documents, the conditions and limitations herein take precedence and must be 

followed. Othenvise, the Operator must follow the procedures as outlined in its operating 

documents. The Operator may update or revise its operating documents. It is the Operator's 

18 
" 

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 he petitions for extension or amendment to a grant of exemption. If the Operator 

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

this exemption, then the Operator must petition for amendment to its grant of exemption. 

The FAA's UAS Integration Office (AFS-80) may be contacted if questions arise regarding 

updates or revisions to the operating documents. 

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 

UAS 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 must be 

included in the preflight inspection. All maintenance and alterations must be properly 

documented in the aircraft records. 

8. Any UAS 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. The PIC who conducts the functional test flight must make an entry in the 

aircraft records. 

9. The pre-flight inspection section in the operating documents must account for all 

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

relevant sections of the operating documents. 

10. The Operator must follow the UAS manufacturer's aircraft/component, maintenance, 

overhaul, replacement, inspection, and life limit requirements. 

11. The Operator must carry out its maintenance, inspections, and record keeping 

requirements, in accordance with the operating documents. Maintenance, inspection, and 

alterations must be noted in the aircraft records, including total flight hours, description of 

work accomplished, and the signature of the authorized person returning the UAS to 

service. 

19 
12. Each UAS operated under an exemption that may be granted to this Petition must 

comply with all manufacturer Safety Bulletins. 

13. The authorized person must make an entry in the aircraft record of the corrective action 

taken against discrepancies discovered between inspections. 

14. UAS operations must be conducted by a PIC possessing at least a private pilot certificate 

and at least a current third-class medical certificate. The PIC must also meet the flight 

review requirements specified in 14 CFR 61.56 in an aircraft in which the PIC is rated on 

his or her pilot certificate. 

15. Prior to operations conducted for the purpose of aerial survey or photography (or similar 

operations), the PIC must have accumulated and logged, in a manner consistent with 14 

CFR 61.51 (b), a minimum of 25 hours of total time as a UAS rotorcraft pilot including at 

least 10 hours logged as a UAS pilot with a multi- rotor UAS. Prior documented flight 

experience that was obtained in compliance with applicable regulations may satisfy this 

requirement. Training, proficiency, and experience-building flights can also be conducted 

under this grant of exemption to accomplish the required flight time. However, said 

training operations may only be conducted during dedicated training sessions. During 

training, proficiency, and experience-building flights the PIC is required to operate the UA 

with appropriate distances in accordance with 14 CFR 91.119. 

16. Prior to operations conducted for the purpose of aerial survey or photography (or similar 

operations), the PIC must have accumulated and logged, in a manner consistent with 14 

CFR 61.51(b), a minimum of 5 hours as UAS pilot operating the make and model of the 

UAS to be used in operations under the exemption; 5 hours make and model time may be 

included in the 10 hours of multi-rotor time prescribed above. The PIC must accomplish 3 

take-offs and landings in the preceding 90 days (for currency purposes). Training, 

proficiency, experience- building, and take-off and landing currency flights can be 

conducted under this grant of exemption to accomplish the required flight time and 90 day 

currency. However, said training operations may only be conducted during dedicated 

training sessions. During training, proficiency, and experience-building flights the PIC is 

required to operate the U A with appropriate distances in accordance with 14 CFR 91.119. 

20 
• 

} 7. The Operator may not permit the PIC to operate the UAS for the purpose aerial survey or 

photography (or similar operations), unless the PIC has demonstrated and logged in a 

manner consistent with 14 CFR 61.51(b), the ability to safely operate the UAS in a manner 

consistent with how the UAS will be operated under this exemption, including evasive and 

emergency maneuvers and maintaining appropriate distances from people, vessels, vehicles 

and structures. 

18. 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). 

19. 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. 

20. If the UA loses communications or loses its GPS signal, it must return to a pre- determined 

location within the planned operating area and land or be recovered in accordance with the 

operating documents. 

21. The PIC must abort the flight in the event ofunpredicted obstacles or emergencies in 

accordance with the operating documents. 

22. The PIC is prohibited from beginning a flight unless (considering wind and forecast 

weather conditions) there is enough power to fly at normal cruising speed to the intended 

landing point and land the UA with 30% battery power remaining. The operator must 

obtain an Air Traffic Organization (A TO) issued Certificate of Waiver or Authorization 

(COA) prior to conducting any operations in Class E airspace. This COA will also require 

the operator to request a Notice to Airman (NOT AM) not more than 72 hours in advance, 

but not less than 48 hours prior to that operation. 

23. It is anticipated that new rules may be promulgated by the Department of Transportation 

related to the registration of unmanned aircraft systems. Petitioner will comply with any 

such applicable rules prior to their effective date. In this same regard, this Petition should 

be understood to seek exemption from the aircraft marking and identification requirements 

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

because the UA V has no entrance to the cabin, cockpit, or pilot station on which any 

21 
#: -... 

marking can be placed. Moreover, given the size ofthe UAV, two-inch lettering would be 

impossible. Any registration/wording be placed on the fuselage in compliance with § 

45.29(f). 

24. 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). 

25. 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. 

26. 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 UAS is operating. These documents 

must be made available to the Administrator or any law enforcement official upon request. 

27. The UA must remain clear and yield the right of way to all manned aviation 

operations and activities at all times. 

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

29. Flight operations must be conducted at least 500 feet from all nonparticipating persons, 

vessels, vehicles, and structures unless: 

a. Barriers or structures are present that sufficiently protect nonparticipating persons 

from the UA and/or debris in the event of an accident. The Operator must ensure 

that nonparticipating persons remain under such protection. If a situation arises 

where nonparticipating persons leave such protection and are within 500 feet of 

the UA, flight operations must cease immediately and/or; 

b. The aircraft is operated near vessels, vehicles or structures where the 

owner/controller of such vessels, vehicles or structures has granted permission and 

the PIC has made a safety assessment of the risk of operating closer to those 

objects and determined that it does not present an undue hazard, and; 

22 
• 

c. Operations nearer to the PIC, VO, operator trainees or essential persons do not 

present an undue hazard to those persons p.er § 91.119( a). 

30. All operations shall be conducted over private or controlled-access property with 

permission from the land owner/controller or authorized representative. Permission from 

land owner/controller or authorized representative will be obtained for each flight to be 

conducted. 

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

boundaries of the operational area as defined by an 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. 

Unless otherwise specified in a grant of exemption related to this Petition, the UAS, the UAS 

PIC, and the UAS operations must comply with all applicable parts of 14 CFR including, but 

not limited to, parts 45, 47, 61, and 91. 

CONCLUSION 

As set forth above, FNI seeks an exemption from certain parts of the Federal Aviation 

Regulations to permit FNI to operate a Phantom 2 Vision+ UAS, for compensation or hire, 

commercially in the United States for the purposes of conducting aerial photography and 

survey. FNI believes that a grant of exemption is in the public interest and that public safety 

will not be negatively affected. By use of an unmanned system in scenarios where manned 

aircraft are traditionally operated, FNI believes that public safety will actually be enhanced. 

Satisfaction ofthe criteria provided in Section 333 of FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 

20 12--size, weight, speed, operating capabilities, proximity to airports and populated areas, and 

operation within visual line of sight provides more than adequate justification for the grant of the 

requested exemptions allowing commercial operation of Petitioner's UAS for the conduct of 

aerial surveying and photography. 

23 
. .., ~ 

PETITIONER, FNI, in accordance with the Federal Aviation Regulations and the Reform 

Act of 2012, Section 333, respectfully requests that the Administrator grant this Petition for 

an exemption from the requirements of 14 C.F.R Sections 45.23(b), 61.113(a) and (b), 

91.7(a), 91.119(b) and (c), 91.121, 91.151, 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) and (a)(2), 

and 91.417(a) and (b), and permit FNI to operate the Phantom 2 Vision+ UAS 

commercially for the purpose of conducting aerial survey and photography over certain 

areas ofthe United States. 

24 
"' .. ,.. -~ 

Respectfully Submitted, 

KELLY, H;)RT & HALLMAN LLP 

/i .~ f ~/-., ' / _,/' · ... By: .t~ff~~~ Name: oward L. Rosenthal · 

201 Main Street, Suite 2500 

Fort Worth, Texas 76102 

Office: (817) 878-3527 

Counsel for Petitioner 

Approved: 

FREESE AND NICHOLS, INC. 

By:~e"J""""". 

Name: Ron . emons, Sr. Vice President/COO 

4055 International Plaza, Suite 200 

Fort Worth, TX 76109 

Office: 817-735-7523 

25