UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

WASHINGTON, DC

Regulatory Docket No. _______________

IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION FOR EXEMPTION OF: ERIC L. CLARK

FOR AN EXEMPTION SEEKING RELIEF FROM THE REQUIRMENTS OF TITLE 14 OF THE CODE OF FEDERAL 

REGULATIONS SECTIONS 61.113(a) & (b), 91.7(a), 91.121, 91.151(b), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 

91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), AND 91.417(a) & (b) CONCERNING COMMERCIAL OPERATION OF THE BLADE 

CHROMA, DJI PHANTOM 3 PROFESSIONAL, DJI INSPIRE 1 PRO, YUNCEE Q500 PRO - UNMANNED 

AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS PURSUANT TO SECTION 333 OF THE FAA MODERNIZATION AND REFORM ACT OF 

2012 (PUBLIC LAW 112-95) 

Submitted on December 16, 2015

Eric L. Clark

1707 N. Madison St.

Rome, NY 13440

315-240-3222

Eclark699@gmail.com
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Page 

GLOSSARY OF ABBREVIATIONS 3 

SUMMARY 4 

INTRODUCTION AND INTERESTS OF PETITIONER 4 

BACKGROUND 5 

BASIS FOR PETITION 5 

NAME AND ADDRESS OF PETITIONER 7 

THE SPECIFIC SECTIONS OF 14 C.F.R. FROM WHICH ERIC L. CLARK SEEKS EXEMPTION 8 

THE EXTENT OF RELIEF ERIC L. CLARK SEEKS AND THE REASON ERIC L. CLARK SEEKS THE RELIEF 11 

THE REASONS WHY GRANTING ERIC L. CLARK’S REQUEST WOULD BE IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST 12(D) 

THE REASONS WHY GRANTING THE EXEMPTION WOULD NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT SAFETY 14(E) 

CONCLUSION 25
GLOSSARY OF ABBREVIATIONS 

AGL Above Ground Level 

AOI Area of Interest 

ATC Air Traffic Control 

ATO Air Traffic Organization 

AV Aerial Vehicle 

CFR Code of Federal Regulations 

COA Certificate of Authorization 

FAA Federal Aviation Administration 

FAR Federal Aviation Regulation 

GCS Ground Control Station 

GPS Global Positioning System 

LOL Loss of Link 

NAS National Airspace System 

NOTAM Notice to Airman 

PIC Pilot In Command 

Section 333 FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (FMRA) Section 333 

SO Safety Observer 

SOP Standard Operating Procedures 

UA Unmanned Aircraft 

UAS Unmanned Aircraft System 

VFR Visual Flight Rules 

VLOS Visual Line of Site 

VMC Visual Meteorological Conditions 

VTOL Vertical Takeoff and Landing 
SUMMARY 

Eric L. Clark seeks exemption from the requirements of 14 C.F.R §§ 61.113(a) & (b), 91.7(a), 

91.121, 91.151(b), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), and 91.417(a) & (b), to operate an 

Unmanned Aircraft System pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 

(FMRA). This exemption will permit Eric L. Clark to operate an Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) for the 

commercial purpose of conducting aerial video and photography for film sets, real estate photography, 

special events to include but not limited to weddings, private or public parties, sporting events, 

corporate, commercial and private marketing, cinematography, building/structural inspections, 

insurance claims, natural disaster and catastrophe assessment, search & rescue, site surveys, aerial 

mapping, geological surveying, environmental studies, crop observation & monitoring, wildlife and 

landscape photography/videography, over certain areas of the United States. 

INTRODUCTION AND INTERESTS OF THE PETITIONER:

My name is Eric L. Clark. I am a disabled American Veteran who has been a hobbyist RC 

operator for several years. I was formally an Air Traffic Controller in the United States Air Force and I 

have a detailed understanding of the Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) and the National Airspace 

System (NAS). I am a college graduate from Hahnemann University school of medicine with experience 

in Urgent Care and Occupational health. My hobbies include RC aircraft, photography / videography and 

my objective is to use my skills and experience in a commercial setting for conducting aerial video and 

photography for film sets, real estate photography, special events to include but not limited to 

weddings, private or public parties, sporting events, corporate, commercial and private marketing, 

cinematography, building/structural inspections, insurance claims, natural disaster and catastrophe 

assessment, search & rescue, site surveys, aerial mapping, geological surveying, environmental studies, 

crop observation & monitoring, wildlife and landscape photography/videography, Increase public 

knowledge of UAS and promote safe UAS operation.
BACKGROUND 

Unmanned Aircraft Systems: Blade Chroma, DJI Phantom 3 Professional, DJI Inspire 1 Pro, Yuneec Q500

Typhoon 4K

Eric L. Clark seeks an exemption to operate all the above named UAS quadcopter systems (Blade 

Chroma, DJI Phantom 3 Professional, DJI Inspire 1 Pro, Yuncee Q500 Typhoon 4K) for compensation or 

hire within the NAS. The above named UAS are vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) Unmanned Aircraft 

(UA).

Blade Chroma – Is a Vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) Unmanned Aircraft (UA) that utilizes the Yuneec 

ST10+ Ground Control System (GCS) with incorporated 5.5” touch screen display. Blade Chroma weight 

is 2.87 lbs (45.9 oz) and has a maximum air speed of 34.7 knots with approximate flight time of 30min 

(average of 21 minutes) using 11.1V 3s 6300mAh Li-Po battery. Motor type is 4 × 780Kv Brushless 

Outrunner. Rotor Type is Quadcopter with a wingspan of 15.7”. Prop Diameter is 10.0” and Height is 

9.50”. Length is 12.8” and width is 12.8” Blade Chroma is equipped with Satellite Navigation System 

(GPS, GLONASS)

DJI Phantom 3 Professional – Is a vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) Unmanned Aircraft (UA) that utilize 

a Ground Control Station (GCS) utilizing electronic tablet or smart phone systems. DJI Phantom 3 

professional weight is 2.8 lbs (44.8 oz) and has a maximum airspeed of 31.28 knots with an approximate 

flight time of 23 minutes using a 3s 4480mAh Li-Po battery. Rotor Type is Quadcopter with a wingspan 

of 23.2”. Prop diameter is 9.0”. UAS Diagonal size (including Propellers) is 23.23” DJI Phantom 3 

Professional is equipped with Satellite Navigation System (GPS, GLONASS)

DJI Inspire 1 Pro - Is a vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) Unmanned Aircraft (UA) that utilize a Ground 

Control Station (GCS) utilizing electronic tablet or smart phone systems. DJI Inspire 1 weight is DJI 7.5 

lbs (120 oz) with battery and camera and has a maximum airspeed of 42.58 knots with an approximate 

flight time of 18 minutes using a 6s 4500mAh Li-Po battery . Rotor Type is Quadcopter with a wingspan 

of 22.0”. UAS overall dimensions are 17.24” x 17.76” x 11.85” DJI Inspire 1 is equipped with Satellite 

Navigation System (GPS, GLONASS)

Yuneec Q500 Typhoon 4K - Is a vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) Unmanned Aircraft (UA) that utilizes 

the Yuneec ST10+ Ground Control System (GCS) with incorporated 5.5” touch screen display. Yuncee 

Q500 Typhoon weight is 2.4 lbs (38.4 oz) and has a maximum air speed of 15.64 knots with an 

approximate flight time of 25 minutes using a 11.1V 3s 5400mAh Li-Po battery. Rotor Type is 

Quadcopter with a wingspan of 22.2”. Prop Diameter is 13” and the height is 8.30”. Length is 9.54” and 

width is 16.54” Yuncee Q500 Typhoon 4k is equipped with Satellite Navigation System (GPS, GLONASS)

The above 4 UAS are equipped with four main rotors; driven by Lithium Polymer battery powered 

electric motors.

The UAs named above will be operated by Eric L. Clark, will be registered in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 

44103, Registration of Aircraft, as well as 14 C.F.R Part 47, Aircraft Registration, and marked in 

accordance with 14 C.F.R. Part 45, Identification and Registration Marking. 
BASIS FOR PETITION

Petitioner, Eric L. Clark, pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 C.F.R. 

§ 11.61) and the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (FMRA), Section 333, Special Rules for 

Certain Unmanned Aircraft Systems, hereby petitions the Administrator to commercially operate the 

Blade Chroma, DJI Phantom 3 Professional, DJI Inspire 1 Pro, Yuneec Q500 Typhoon 4K UAS in the 

National Airspace System (NAS), and for an exemption from the requirements of 14 C.F.R §§ 61.113(a) & 

(b), 91.7(a), 91.121, 91.151(b), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), and 91.417(a) & (b). In 

consideration of the speed, weight, size, and limited operating area associated with the unmanned 

aircraft and its operation, Eric L. Clark operation of Blade Chroma, DJI Phantom 3 Professional, DJI 

Inspire 1 Pro, Yuneec Q500 Typhoon 4K UAS meets the conditions of FMRA Section 333 and therefore, 

will not require an airworthiness certificate in accordance with 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H. 

Accordingly, Eric L. Clark requests relief from Sections 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & 

(a)(2), and 91.417(a) & (b), as these sections set forth requirements for maintenance that only apply to 

aircraft with an airworthiness certificate. Eric L. Clark submits that the requested relief is proper since 

an equivalent level of safety will be ensured. Eric L. Clark will use experienced personnel or technicians 

to perform maintenance, alterations, or preventive maintenance on the UAS using the methods, 

techniques, and practices prescribed in the operating documents (i.e., Monthly Maintenance Log, and 

Instruction Manual). Furthermore, Eric L. Clark will document and maintain all maintenance records for 

the above mentioned UAS. 

Relief from certain requirements of Section 61.113(a) and (b), entitled Private pilot privileges 

and limitations: Pilot in command, is requested by Eric L. Clark to the extent necessary to allow a Pilot in 

Command (PIC) holding a private pilot or higher level certificate, as well as an airman medical certificate, 

and who has demonstrated, by meeting minimum flight- hour and currency requirements, that the PIC is 

able to safely operate the Blade Chroma, DJI Phantom 3 Professional, DJI Inspire 1 Pro, Yuneec Q500 

Typhoon 4K UASs in a manner consistent with this exemption, including evasive and emergency 

maneuvers and maintaining appropriate distances from people, vessels, vehicles and structures. 

Eric L. Clark seeks relief from Section 91.7(a), entitled Civil aircraft airworthiness, because the 

Blade Chroma, DJI Phantom 3 Professional, DJI Inspire 1 Pro, Yuneec Q500 Typhoon 4K UAS do not 

require an airworthiness certificate in accordance with 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H. As such, Eric L. Clark

submits that he will ensure that the Blade Chroma, DJI Phantom 3 Professional, DJI Inspire 1 Pro, Yuneec 

Q500 Typhoon 4K UAS are in an airworthy condition, prior to every flight, by determining that the UASs 

are in compliance with the operating documents (i.e., Monthly Maintenance Log, and Instruction 

Manuals), and that the aircraft are in a condition for safe flight. 

Eric L. Clark also seeks an exemption from the requirements of Section 91.121, entitled 

Altimeter Settings, as the Blade Chroma, DJI Phantom 3 Professional, DJI Inspire 1 Pro, Yuneec Q500 

Typhoon 4K UAS will not have a typical barometric altimeter onboard. However, altitude information of 

the above mentioned UAS will be provided to the PIC via Global Positioning System (GPS) equipment 

and radio communications telemetry data link, which downlinks from the UA to the GCS for active 

monitoring of the flight path. This latitude information, combined with Eric L. Clarks operation of the 

above mentioned UAS within visual line of sight, at or below 400 feet AGL, will ensure a level of safety 

equivalent to Section 91.121. 

Additionally, Eric L. Clark seeks an exemption from the requirements of Section 91.151(b), 

entitled Fuel requirements for flight in VFR conditions. Eric L. Clark submits that safety will not be 
affected by operation of the above mentioned UAS during daylight hours in visual meteorological

conditions (VMC) under visual flight rules (VFR), with enough battery power to fly for a total duration of 

approximately 15 minutes to the first point of intended landing and, assuming normal cruising speed, to 

fly after that for at least 3 minutes. In accordance with 14 C.F.R. § 11.81, Eric L. Clark provides the 

following information in support of its petition for exemption: 

Name And Address Of The Petitioner

Eric L. Clark

1707 N. Madison St.

Rome, NY 13440

315-240-3222

Eclark699@gmail.com
B. The Specific Sections Of 14 C.F.R. From Which Eric L. Clark Seeks Exemption. 

1. Eric L. Clark Seeks Exemption From The Requirements Of Section 61.113(a) And (b). 

 Section 61.113, entitled Private pilot privileges and limitations: Pilot in command, subsections (a) 

and (b) prescribe the following, in relevant part: 

(a) No person who holds a private pilot certificate may act as a pilot in command (PIC) of an aircraft 

that is carrying passengers or property for compensation or hire; nor may that person, for 

compensation or hire, act as PIC of an aircraft. 

 (b) A private pilot may, for compensation or hire, act as PIC 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. 

2. Eric L. Clark Seeks Exemption From The Requirements Of Section 91.7(a). 

Section 91.7, entitled Civil aircraft airworthiness, subsection (a), states the following: 

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

3. Eric L. Clark Seeks Exemption From The Requirements Of Section 91.121. 

Section 91.121, entitled Altimeter settings, subsection (a), states the following, in part: 

(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 100 

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.

4. Eric L. Clark Seeks Exemption From The Requirements Of Section 91.151(b).

Section 91.151, entitled Fuel requirements for flight in VFR conditions, subsection (b), states the 

following: 
(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. 

5. Eric L. Clark Seeks Exemption From The Requirement Of Section 91.405(a). 

Section 91.405, entitled Maintenance required, subsection (a), states the following: 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[.]

6. Eric L. Clark Seeks Exemption From The Requirements Of Section 91.407(a)(1) 

Section 91.407, entitled Operation after maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, or 

alteration, subsection (a)(1), states the following: 

(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[.] 

7. Eric L. Clark Seeks Exemption From The Requirements Of Sections 91.409(a)(1) And 91.409(a)(2). 

Section 91.409, entitled Inspections, subsection (a), states the following: 

(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.

8. Eric L. Clark Seeks Exemption From The Requirements Of Sections 91.417(a) And 91.417(b). 

Section 91.417, entitled Maintenance records, subsections (a) and (b), state the following: 

(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 of the maintenance, preventive maintenance, and alteration and records of the 100-

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 of the 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 of the airframe, each engine, each propeller, and each rotor. 

(ii) The current status of life-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. 

(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.
C. The Extent Of Relief Eric L. Clark Seeks And The Reason Eric L. Clark Seeks The Relief. 

1. Extent Of Relief Eric L. Clark Seeks And The Reason Eric L. Clark Seeks Relief From Section 

61.113(a) And (b). 

Relief from Section 61.113(a) and (b) entitled Private pilot privileges and limitations: Pilot in 

command, is requested to the extent necessary to allow a PIC holding a private pilot or higher level 

certificate, as well as a current and valid airman medical certificate, and who has met certain flight-hour 

and currency requirements, to conduct the proposed UAS flight operations for compensation or hire. 

This relief is requested since the limitations set forth in Section 61.113(a) and (b) state that a 

private pilot may, for compensation or hire, act as PIC 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. 

As set forth more fully below, Eric L. Clark submits that an equivalent level of safety will be 

maintained because no PIC will be allowed to operate the above mentioned UAS unless that PIC has met 

certain flight-hour and currency requirements, demonstrating that the PIC is able to safely operate the

UAS in a manner consistent with the operations specifications as described in this exemption, including 

evasive and emergency maneuvers, as well as maintaining appropriate distances from people, vessels, 

vehicles and structures.

Further, Eric L. Clark submits that all flights of the Above mentioned UAS conducted by the PIC 

pursuant to the grant of this Petition: (1) will be incidental to Eric L. Clarks business; and (2) will not 

carry passengers or property for compensation or hire. 

2. Extent Of Relief Eric L. Clark Seeks And The Reason Eric L. Clark Seeks Relief From Section 

91.7(a). 

Relief from Section 91.7(a) entitled Civil aircraft airworthiness, is requested to the extent 

required to allow Eric L. Clark to determine that the above mentioned UAS are in airworthy condition 

prior to every flight by ensuring that the UAS is in compliance with the operating documents (i.e., 

Monthly Maintenance Log, and Instruction Manuals).

Eric L. Clark seeks the requested relief because the above mentioned UAS does not require an 

airworthiness certificate in accordance with 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H. Therefore, Eric L. Clark will 

ensure that the above mentioned UAS are in airworthy condition based upon its compliance with the 

operating documents (i.e., Monthly Maintenance Log, and Instruction Manuals) prior to every flight. 

3. Extent Of Relief Eric L. Clark Seeks And The Reason Eric L. Clark Seeks Relief From Section 

91.121. 

Relief from Section 91.121, entitled Altimeter settings, may be required to allow flight 

operations of the above mentioned UAS, which utilize a barometric pressure sensor, GPS equipment, 

and a radio communications telemetry data link to downlink altitude information from the UA to the PIC 

at the ground control station (GCS). Since the FAA requires that any altitude information concerning UAS 

operations be reported to air traffic control (ATC) in feet above ground level (AGL), Eric L. Clark seeks the 

requested relief because the above mentioned UAS altimeter may be set on the ground to zero feet 

AGL, rather than the local barometric pressure or field altitude, before each flight. 
Considering the limited altitude of the proposed operations, relief from 14 CFR 91.121 is sought 

to the extent necessary to comply with the applicable conditions and limitations stated below. As more 

fully set forth herein, an equivalent level of safety will be maintained since the above mentioned UAS

are equipped with a barometric pressure sensor and GPS equipment, which automatically ensures that a 

ground level pressure setting will be established prior to each flight, and provides the PIC with altitude 

information of the UA on the heads-up display of the GCS. 

4. Extent Of Relief Eric L. Clark Seeks And The Reason Eric L. Clark Seeks Relief From Section 

91.151(b). 

Relief from Section 91.151(b) entitled Fuel requirements for flight in VFR conditions, is 

requested to the extent required to allow flights of the above mentioned battery powered UA during 

daylight hours in visual meteorological conditions (VMC), under visual flight rules (VFR), for a total 

duration of 15 minutes to the first point of intended landing and, assuming normal cruising speed, to fly 

after that for at least 3 minutes. Eric L. Clark seeks the requested relief because without an exemption 

from Section 91.151(b), the flight time duration of the above mentioned UAS will severely constrain the 

practicality of any aerial video or still photo flight operations that Eric L. Clark proposes to conduct 

pursuant to this Petition.

Significantly, as set forth below, the technical specifications of the above mentioned UAS 

operating documents, and Eric L. Clarks proposed operating limitations, ensure that Eric L. Clark will 

safely operate the above mentioned battery powered UA during daylight hours in visual meteorological 

conditions (VMC), under visual flight rules (VFR), with enough battery power to fly for a total duration of 

15 minutes to the first point of intended landing and, assuming normal cruising speed, to fly after that 

for at least 3 minutes.

5. Extent Of Relief Eric L. Clark Seeks And The Reason Eric L. Clark Seeks Relief From Sections 

91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), And 91.417(a) & (b).

Since Sections 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), and 91.417(a) & (b) only apply to 

aircraft with an airworthiness certificate, Eric L. Clark requests relief from these Sections because the 

above mentioned UAS do not require airworthiness certificates. As set forth more fully below, the above 

mentioned UAS meet the conditions of FMRA Section 333 for operation without an airworthiness 

certificate. Accordingly, Eric L. Clark will use trained technicians to perform maintenance, alterations, 

or preventive maintenance on the UAS using the methods, techniques, and practices prescribed in the 

UAS operating documents (i.e., Monthly Maintenance Log, and Instruction Manuals). Furthermore, Eric 

L. Clark will document and maintain all maintenance records for the above mentioned UAS.

D. The Reasons Why Granting Eric L. Clark’s request Would Be In The Public Interest; That Is, How It 

Would Benefit The Public As A Whole. 

Granting the present Petition will further the public interest by allowing Eric L. Clark to safely, 

efficiently, and economically perform aerial video and photography for film sets, real estate 

photography, special events to include but not limited to weddings, private or public parties, sporting 

events, corporate, commercial and private marketing, cinematography, building/structural inspections, 

insurance claims, natural disaster and catastrophe assessment, search & rescue, site surveys, aerial 

mapping, geological surveying, environmental studies, crop observation & monitoring, wildlife and 

landscape photography/videography, over certain areas of the United States. 
Additionally, use of the above mentioned UAS will decrease congestion of the NAS, reduce 

pollution, and provide significant benefits to the economy. Notably, the benefits of Eric L. Clark’s

proposed operation of the above mentioned UAS will be realized without implicating any privacy issues.

1. The Public Will Benefit From Decreased Congestion Of The NAS.

The above mentioned UAS are battery powered and serve as a safe, efficient, and economical 

alternative to the manned aircraft traditionally utilized to obtain aerial imagery. By reducing the 

amount of manned aircraft needed to perform aerial acquisitions, an exemption allowing the use of the 

above mentioned UAS would reduce the amount of manned aircraft in the NAS, reduce noise and air 

pollution, as well as increase the safety of life and property in the air and on the ground. Furthermore, 

by reducing the number of manned aircraft operating in the NAS, congestion around airports caused by 

arriving and departing aircraft will be reduced. The above mentioned UAS do not require an airport to 

takeoff or land. Likewise, a reduction of manned aircraft conducting aerial video and photography 

missions would result in fewer aircraft that must be handled by air traffic control during the ground, 

takeoff, departure, arrival, and landing phases of flight operations. 

2. The Public Will Benefit From The Safety And Efficiency Of The Above Mentioned UAS. 

Conducting aerial acquisitions with the above mentioned UAS, instead of manned aircraft, will 

greatly benefit the public by drastically reducing the levels of air and noise pollution generated during 

traditional aerial video and still photography flight operations. By using battery power and electric 

motors, the above mentioned UAS produce no air pollution, and is the most viable environmentally 

conscious alternative to the cabin class, six cylinder internal combustion engine aircraft that are typically 

utilized for aerial video and photography, while burning approximately 20-30 gallons per hour of leaded 

aviation fuel. The above mentioned UA, while reducing the carbon footprint of aerial acquisitions, also 

eliminates noise pollution, as the UAs are propelled by battery powered electric motors, rather than an 

internal combustion engine. By using the above mentioned UAS to perform aerial acquisitions, the 

substantial risk to life and property in the air and on the ground, which is usually associated with 

traditional manned aircraft flight operations, will be substantially reduced or completely eliminated. 

Aside from the lack of flight crew members located onboard the aircraft, the above mentioned UAS

(with no fuel on board), has less physical potential for collateral damage to life and property on the 

ground, and in the air, compared to the manned aircraft that typically conduct similar operations 

(weighing approximately 6,000 pounds with a wingspan of approximately 42 feet, a length of 34 feet, 

and a fuel capacity of 180 gallons). 

3. Performing Aerial Video and Photography Operations With The Above Mentioned UAS Will 

Benefit The Economy.

In addition to being safe and efficient, the above mentioned UAS are also an economical 

alternative to using manned aircraft to conduct similar aerial operations. As such, operation of the 

above mentioned UAS will allow United States based businesses, like Eric L. Clark, to remain competitive 

and contribute to growth of the U.S. economy. Specifically, with the rising cost of aviation fuel and the 

Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) regulatory actions phasing out leaded aviation fuels, U.S. 

owned and operated companies must adopt new and alternative technology in order to remain 

competitive. Operating the above mentioned battery powered UAS is one such technology that not only 

allows companies greater operational flexibility compared to manned aircraft, but provides such 

flexibility without the high operational cost of a traditional manned aircraft. 
By operating the above mentioned UAS, companies such as Eric L. Clark remain competitive and 

profitable, and therefore, provide greater job stability to employees and contractors, which will 

ultimately contribute to growth of the US economy. Improved financial performance of U.S. companies

through commercial use of the above mentioned UAS, provides a stable workforce that improves local, 

state, and federal tax revenues and allows companies to invest in research and development in order to 

remain competitive both in the United States and abroad.

4. There Are No Privacy Issues.

Similar to the manned aerial acquisition flight operations that have been conducted for decades, Eric L. 

Clark proposed operation of the above mentioned UAS will not implicate any privacy issues. Specifically, 

the above mentioned UAS will be operated only in compliance with operating documents (Maintenance

log and Instruction Manuals) which requires property owner involvement as well as local law 

enforcement notification, and in accordance with the Federal Aviation Regulations, including the 

minimum altitude requirement of 14 C.F.R. § 91.119

E. The Reasons Why Granting The Exemption Would Not Adversely Affect Safety, Or How The 

Exemption Would Provide A Level Of Safety At Least Equal To That Provided By The Rule From Which 

Eric L. Clark Seeks Exemption. 

1. Reasons Why The Above Mentioned UAs Meet The Conditions of the FAA Modernization and 

Reform Act of 2012 (FMRA) Section 333. 

In consideration of the size, weight, speed, and limited operating area associated with the 

unmanned aircraft and its operation, Eric L. Clark’s operation of the above mentioned UAS meet the 

conditions of FMRA Section 333, and will not require airworthiness certificate in accordance with 14 

C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H.

Section 333 provides authority for a UAS to operate without airworthiness certification and sets 

forth requirements for considering whether a UAS will create a hazard to users of the NAS or the public, 

or otherwise pose a threat to national security. Specifically, FMRA Section 333 states the following, in 

part:

(a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other requirement of this subtitle, and not later than 

180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Transportation shall 

determine if certain unmanned aircraft systems may operate safely in the national airspace 

system before completion of the plan and rulemaking required by section 332 of this Act or 

the guidance required by section 334 of this Act. 

(b) Assessment of Unmanned Aircraft Systems.--In making the determination under 

subsection (a), the Secretary shall determine, at a minimum-- 

(1) which types of unmanned aircraft systems, if any, as a result of their size, weight, 

speed, operational capability, proximity to airports and populated areas, and operation 

within visual line of sight do not create a hazard to users of the national airspace system 

or the public or pose a threat to national security; and 

(2) whether a certificate of waiver, certificate of authorization, or airworthiness 

certification under section 44704 of title 49, United States Code, is required for the 

operation of unmanned aircraft systems identified under paragraph (1). 
(c) Requirements for Safe Operation.--If the Secretary determines under this section that 

certain unmanned aircraft systems may operate safely in the national airspace system, the 

Secretary shall establish requirements for the safe operation of such aircraft systems in the 

national airspace system. 

In seeking this exemption, Eric L. Clark submits that the above mentioned UAS can operate 

safely in the NAS pursuant to FMRA Section 333, as demonstrated by: (a) the characteristics of the 

above mentioned UAS; (b) the pilot certification requirement; and (c) the specific operating limitations.

A. The Specifications Of The above mentioned UAS Demonstrate Its Safe Characteristics.

The above mentioned UASs do not create a hazard to users of the NAS or the public, or otherwise pose a 

threat to national security considering its size, weight, speed, and operational capability.

(i). Technical Specifications Of The Above Mentioned UAS Are As Follows:

Blade Chroma – Is a Vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) Unmanned Aircraft (UA) that utilizes 

the Yuneec ST10+ Ground Control System (GCS) with incorporated 5.5” touch screen 

display. Blade Chroma weight is 2.87 lbs (45.9 oz) and has a maximum air speed of 34.7 

knots with approximate flight time of 30min (average of 21 minutes) using 11.1V 3s 

6300mAh Li-Po battery. Motor type is 4 × 780Kv Brushless Outrunner. Rotor Type is 

Quadcopter with a wingspan of 15.7”. Prop Diameter is 10.0” and Height is 9.50”. Length is 

12.8” and width is 12.8” Blade Chroma is equipped with Satellite Navigation System (GPS, 

GLONASS)

DJI Phantom 3 Professional – Is a vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) Unmanned Aircraft 

(UA) that utilize a Ground Control Station (GCS) utilizing electronic tablet or smart phone 

systems. DJI Phantom 3 professional weight is 2.8 lbs (44.8 oz) and has a maximum airspeed 

of 31.28 knots with an approximate flight time of 23 minutes using a 3s 4480mAh Li-Po 

battery. Rotor Type is Quadcopter with a wingspan of 23.2”. Prop diameter is 9.0”. UAS 

Diagonal size (including Propellers) is 23.23” DJI Phantom 3 Professional is equipped with 

Satellite Navigation System (GPS, GLONASS) 

DJI Inspire 1 Pro - Is a vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) Unmanned Aircraft (UA) that 

utilize a Ground Control Station (GCS) utilizing electronic tablet or smart phone systems. DJI 

Inspire 1 weight is DJI 7.5 lbs (120 oz) with battery and camera and has a maximum airspeed 

of 42.58 knots with an approximate flight time of 18 minutes using a 6s 4500mAh Li-Po 

battery . Rotor Type is Quadcopter with a wingspan of 22.0”. UAS overall dimensions are 

17.24” x 17.76” x 11.85” DJI Inspire 1 is equipped with Satellite Navigation System (GPS, 

GLONASS) 

Yuneec Q500 Typhoon 4K - Is a vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) Unmanned Aircraft (UA) 

that utilizes the Yuneec ST10+ Ground Control System (GCS) with incorporated 5.5” touch 

screen display. Yuncee Q500 Typhoon weight is 2.4 lbs (38.4 oz) and has a maximum air 

speed of 15.64 knots with an approximate flight time of 25 minutes using a 11.1V 3s 

5400mAh Li-Po battery. Rotor Type is Quadcopter with a wingspan of 22.2”. Prop 

Diameter is 13” and the height is 8.30”. Length is 9.54” and width is 16.54” Yuncee Q500 

Typhoon 4k is equipped with Satellite Navigation System (GPS, GLONASS)
The above 4 UAS are equipped with four main rotors; driven by Lithium Polymer battery 

powered electric motors.

(ii). The Above Mentioned UASs Autonomous Flight And Navigation Modes Enable The UASs To 

Remain Within A Defined Operational Area. 

The above mentioned UASs may be operated in both manual and fully autonomous flight 

modes. 

A complete description of the flight and navigational modes of the above mentioned UASs

will be provided as attachments to this docket.

(iii). The Above Mentioned UASs Are Designed For Automatic Return To Home Point Or Hover In 

The Event Of Loss Of The Control Link Or Navigation. 

When the Control Link is lost, the above mentioned UASs will remain stationary, in flight, for 

3 seconds or more. If they do not reacquire control link data from the GCS, the UASs will 

assume that the Control Link is lost and the UASs will return to the home position (i.e., 

failsafe mode) via GPS and will descend to the takeoff position and shutdown. 

A complete description of failsafe features in the operators’ manual will be provided as an 

attachment to this docket. 

(iv). The Above Mentioned UASs GCS And Its Operation. 

A complete description of the operation and specifications of the above mentioned UASs

GCS and flight control software is provided as an attachment to this docket.

b. Flight Operations Of The Above Mentioned UAS Are Limited To The Line Of Sight Of A Certificated 

Pilot in Command.

Eric L. Clark will only utilize certificated pilots who possess a current and valid airman 

medical certificate to act as a pilot in command (PIC) of the above mentioned UASs.

c. Flights Of The Above Mentioned UAS Will Be Conducted Pursuant To Specific Operating Limitations. 

In seeking this exemption, Eric L. Clark proposes to commercially operate the above mentioned

UAS for the special purpose of conducting aerial video and photography for film sets, real estate 

photography, special events to include but not limited to weddings, private or public parties, sporting 

events, corporate, commercial and private marketing, cinematography, building/structural inspections, 

insurance claims, natural disaster and catastrophe assessment, search & rescue, site surveys, aerial 

mapping, geological surveying, environmental studies, crop observation & monitoring, wildlife and 

landscape photography/videography, over certain areas of the United States, pursuant to the following 

specific operating limitations:

1. Operations authorized by this grant of exemption will be limited to the following aircraft

described in the operating documents, rotorcraft UASs weighing less than 55 pounds 

maximum gross weight: Blade Chroma, DJI Phantom 3 Professional, DJI Inspire 1 Pro, Yuneec 

Q500 Typhoon 4K and Unmanned Aircraft Systems. Proposed operations of any other

aircraft will require a new petition or a petition to amend this grant. 
2. UAS operations under this exemption will be limited to conducting operations for the 

purpose of aerial video and photography. 

3. The UAs may not be flown at an indicated airspeed exceeding 20 knots. 

4. The UA must be operated at an altitude of no more than 500 feet above ground level 

(AGL), as indicated by the procedures specified in the operating documents unless a special 

request is made and approved by ATC. All altitudes reported to ATC must be in feet AGL. 

5. The UAs 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. 

6. The use of first person view (FPV) by the PIC or safety observer (SO) is not permitted. 

7. All operations must utilize a safety observer (SO). The SO may be used to satisfy the VLOS 

requirement as long as the PIC always maintains VLOS capability. The SO and PIC must be 

able to communicate verbally at all times. Electronic messaging or texting is not permitted 

during flight operations. 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 SO can 

perform the functions prescribed in the operating documents. 

8. The SO must not perform any other duties beyond assisting the PIC with seeing and 

avoiding other air traffic and other ground based obstacles/obstructions and is not 

permitted to operate the camera or other instruments. 

9. The operating documents and the 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 contained in the grant of exemption and the 

procedures outlined in the operating documents, the conditions and limitations contained in 

the grant of exemption take precedence and must be followed. Otherwise, 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 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 to the grant of exemption. If the operator determines that any update or 

revision would affect the basis upon which the FAA granted the 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. 

10. Prior to each flight the PIC must inspect the UAS to ensure that 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 must be included in the preflight inspection. All maintenance and alterations must 

be properly documented in the aircraft records. 
11. 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. The PIC who conducts the functional test flight must make an entry in 

the aircraft records. 

12. The pre-flight inspection must account for all potential discrepancies, e.g. inoperable 

components, items, or equipment, not already covered in the relevant sections of the 

operating documents. 

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

overhaul, replacement, inspection, and life limit requirements. 

14. The operator must carry out its maintenance, inspections, and record keeping 

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

alterations, and status of replacement/overhaul component parts must be noted in the 

aircraft records, including total time in service, description of work accomplished, and the 

signature of the authorized person returning the UAS to service. 

15. Each UASs operated under this exemption must comply with all manufacturer Safety 

Bulletins. 

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

taken against discrepancies discovered between inspections. 

17. The PIC must possess at least a private pilot certificate and at least a current third- class 

medical certificate. 

18. The operator may not permit any PIC to operate unless the PIC meets the operator’s 

qualification criteria and demonstrates the ability to safely operate the UAS in a manner 

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

emergency maneuvers and maintaining appropriate distances from persons, vessels, 

vehicles and structures. PIC qualification flight hours must be logged in a manner consistent 

with 14 C.F.R. § 61.51(b). Flights for the purposes of training the operator’s PICs are 

permitted under the terms of the exemption. However, training operations may only be 

conducted during dedicated training sessions. During training, proficiency, and experiencebuilding flights, all persons not essential for flight operations are considered 

nonparticipants, and the PIC must operate the UA with appropriate distance from 

nonparticipants in accordance with 14 C.F.R. § 91.119. 

19. UAS operations may not be conducted during night, as defined in 14 C.F.R. § 1.1. All 

operations must be conducted under visual meteorological conditions (VMC). If flight at 

night is required, a special request will be made at the FAA office closest to proposed area 

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

20. The UA may not operate within 5 nautical miles of an airport reference point 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. 
21. 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. 

22. If the UA loses communications or loses its GPS signal, it must return to a predetermined location within the planned operating area and land or be recovered in 

accordance with the operating documents. 

23. The PIC must abort the flight in the event of unpredicted obstacles or emergencies in 

accordance with the operating documents. 

24. 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 25% battery power remaining. 

25. The operator must obtain an Air Traffic Organization (ATO) issued Certificate of Waiver 

or Authorization (COA) prior to conducting any operations under the grant of exemption. 

This COA will also require the operator to request a Notice to Airman (NOTAM) not more 

than 72 hours in advance, but not less than 48 hours prior to the operation. All operations 

shall be conducted in accordance with airspace requirements in the ATO issued COA 

including class of airspace, altitude level and potential transponder requirements. 

26. All aircraft operated in accordance with the exemption must be identified by serial 

number, registered in accordance with 14 C.F.R. part 47, and have identification (NNumber) markings in accordance with 14 C.F.R. part 45, Subpart C. Markings must be as 

large as practicable. 

27. 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. 

28. The documents required fewer than 14 C.F.R. 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. 

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

and activities at all times. 

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

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

(persons other than the PIC, SO, operator trainees or essential 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; 

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

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

32. 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. 

33. 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. 

2. Reasons Why An Exemption From The Requirements Of Section 61.113(a) And (b) Would Not 

Adversely Affect Safety. 

Eric L. Clark submits that the equivalent level of safety established by Section 61.113(a) and (b) 

will be maintained because no PIC will be allowed to operate the above mentioned UAS unless that PIC 

has demonstrated, by meeting minimum flight-hour and currency requirements, that the PIC is able to 

safely operate the above mentioned UAS in a manner consistent with the exemption, including evasive 

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

structures.

Considering Eric L. Clark’s proposed area of operations, and the operating limitations set forthabove; the parallel nature of private pilot aeronautical knowledge requirements to those of commercial 

pilot requirements (See Exemption No. 11062); and the airmanship skills necessary to safely operate the 

above mentioned UASs, Eric L. Clark submits that the additional manned airmanship experience of a 

commercially certificated pilot would not correlate to the airmanship skills necessary for Eric L. Clark’s 

specific proposed flight operations. 

The FAA has previously granted relief from Section 61.113(a) and (b) specific to UAS, in 

circumstances similar, in all material respects, to those presented herein (e.g. Exemption Nos. 11062, 

11063, 11064, 11065, 11066, 11067, 11080, 11109, 11110, 11112, 11136, 11138, 11150, 11153, 11156, 

11158, 11159, 11160, 11161).

Eric L. Clark will not allow any PIC to operate the the above mentioned UAS unless that PIC has 

demonstrated, by meeting minimum flight-hour requirements or the above mentioned UAS training and 

currency requirements, that the PIC is able to safely operate the above mentioned UAS in a manner 

consistent with this exemption, including evasive and emergency maneuvers and maintaining 

appropriate distances from people, vessels, vehicles and structures.

Specifically, the PIC must have accumulated and logged, in a manner consistent with 14 C.F.R. § 

61.51(b), 25 hours of total time as a UAS rotorcraft pilot (with a minimum of 5 hours of those hours as a 

UAS pilot operating the same make and model of UAS to be used for operations under the exemption). 
In addition to the hour requirements, the PIC must accomplish 3 takeoffs and landings in the preceding 

90 days (for currency purposes). 

As in Exemption Nos. 11062, 11138, and 11153, prior documented flight experience that was 

obtained in compliance with applicable regulations will ensure an equivalent level of safety during Eric L. 

Clark’s proposed operations. The Administrator has held that prior documented flight experience that 

was obtained in compliance with applicable regulations would ensure safe operations, stating as follows:

In Exemption No. 11062, the FAA required that prior to conducting operations for the 

purpose of motion picture filming (or similar operations), the PIC must have 

accumulated and logged, in a manner consistent with 14 CFR 61.51(b), 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 to operations under Exemption No. 11062, the PIC must also have 

accumulated and logged a minimum of 5 hours as a UAS pilot operating the same make 

and model of UAS to be used for operations under the exemption. For clarification, the 

FAA considers these minimum hour requirements to be inclusive rather than additive; 

i.e. 5 hours make and model time may be included in the 10 hours of multi-rotor time 

and the 10 hours may be included in the total 25 hours of UAS rotorcraft time. In

addition to the hour requirements, the PIC must accomplish 3 takeoffs and landings in 

the preceding 90 days (for currency purposes). The FAA finds that at a minimum, the 

flighthour requirements in Exemption No. 11062 are appropriate to practice and build 

proficiency in the skills necessary to safely conduct the petitioner’s proposed 

operations. The FAA also finds that prior documented flight experience that was 

obtained in compliance with applicable regulations would satisfy this requirement. 

Training, proficiency, and experience-building flights can also be conducted under the 

grant of exemption to accomplish the required flight time. During training, proficiency, 

and experience-building flights the PIC is required to operate the UA with appropriate 

distances in accordance with 14 C.F.R 91.119. 

Exemption No. 11138 at page 15.

According, Eric L. Clark will ensure safe operations by not allowing any PIC to operate 

the DJI Phantom 3 UAS unless that PIC has demonstrated, by meeting minimum flighthour and currency requirements, that the PIC is able to safely operate the above 

mentioned UAS in a manner consistent with the exemption, including evasive and 

emergency maneuvers and maintaining appropriate distances from people, vessels, 

vehicles and structures.

3. Reasons Why An Exemption From The Requirements Of Section 91.7(a) Would Not Adversely Affect 

Safety. 

The equivalent level of safety established by Section 91.7(a) will be maintained because prior to 

every flight, Eric L. Clark will ensure that the above mentioned UAS are in an airworthy condition based 

upon the UAS’s compliance with its operating documents and as stated in the conditions and limitations 

herein.

Additionally, the FAA has previously granted relief from Section 91.7(a) specific to UAS, in 

circumstances similar, in all material respects, to those presented herein (e.g. Exemption Nos. 11062, 

11063, 11064, 11065, 11066, 11067, 11080, 11109, 11110, 11112, 11136, 11138, 11150, 11153, 11156, 

11157, 11158, 11159, 11160, 11161).
4. Reasons Why An Exemption From The Requirements Of Section 91.121 Would Not Adversely Affect 

Safety.

The equivalent level of safety established by Section 91.121 will be maintained because the 

altitude information of the above mentioned UAS will be provided to the PIC via GPS equipment and a 

radio communications telemetry data link, which downlinks from the UA to the GCS for active 

monitoring of the flight path and altitude. This altitude information, combined with Eric L. Clark’s 

operation of the above mentioned UAS within visual line of sight, at or below 500 feet AGL, will ensure a 

level of safety equivalent to Section 91.121. The altitude information will be generated by GPS 

equipment installed onboard the aircraft. Prior to each flight, a zero altitude initiation point is 

automatically established by the UASs at ground level.

The FAA has previously granted relief from Section 91.121 specific to UAS, in circumstances 

similar, in all material respects, to those presented herein (e.g. Exemption Nos. 11062, 11063, 11064, 

11065, 11066, 11067, 11080, 11109, 11112, 11136, 11138, 11150, 11153, 11156, 11157, 11158, 11159, 

11160, 11161). 

5. Reasons Why An Exemption From The Requirements Of Section 91.151(b) Would Not Adversely 

Affect Safety.

A grant of this exemption would ensure an equivalent level of safety established by 14 C.F.R. 

Section 91.151(b) as a result of 

(1) The technical specifications of the above mentioned UAS; 

(2) The limitations on the proposed flight operations; and 

(3) The location of the proposed flight operations. 

Accordingly, Eric L. Clark will ensure that it will safely operate the above mentioned battery 

powered UAS during daylight hours in VFR conditions, with enough battery power to fly for a total 

duration of 15 minutes to the first point of intended landing and, assuming normal cruising speed, to fly 

after that for at least 3 minutes.

Here, as in Exemption No. 11109, the technical specifications of the above mentioned UAS; the 

limitations on the proposed flight operations; and the location of the proposed operations, will ensure 

an equivalent level of safety established by 14 C.F.R. Section 91.151(b). Furthermore, safety will be 

ensured as the above mentioned UAS provide audible and visual warnings to the PIC at the GCS when 

the UAS experiences low battery voltage, the first warning occurring at approximately 25% remaining 

battery power, and again at approximately 10% remaining battery power thus providing the PIC with 

both visual and audible failsafe alerts.

Significantly, previous exemptions granted by the FAA concerning Section 91.151 establish that 

safety is not adversely affected when the technical characteristics and operating limitations of the UAS 

are considered. Relief has been granted for manned aircraft to operate at less than the minimums 

prescribed in Section 91.151, including Exemption Nos. 2689, 5745, and 10650. Moreover, the FAA has 

previously granted relief from Section 91.151 specific to UAS, in circumstances similar, in all material 

respects, to those presented herein (e.g. Exemption Nos. 8811, 10808, 10673, 11042, 11062, 11063, 

11064, 11065, 11066, 11067, 11080, 11109, 11110, 11136, 11138, 11150, 11153, 11156, 11157, 11158, 

11159, 11160, 11161). 
6. Reasons Why An Exemption From The Requirements Of Sections 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 

91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), And 91.417(a) & (b) Would Not Adversely Affect Safety.

In seeking this exemption, Eric L. Clark submits that the equivalent level of safety with regard to 

the regulatory maintenance and alteration requirements established by Sections 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 

91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), and 91.417(a) & (b) will be met because Eric L. Clark will use trained technicians to 

perform maintenance, alterations, or preventive maintenance on the UASs using the methods, 

techniques, and practices prescribed in the operating documents (i.e., the Monthly Maintenance Log, 

and Instruction Manuals). Furthermore, Eric L. Clark will document and maintain all maintenance 

records for the above mentioned UAS.

Since the above mentioned UAS will be inspected as prescribed by the operating documents, Eric 

L. Clark will maintain the equivalent level of safety established by Sections 91.405(a), 91.409(a)(1), and 

91.409(a)(2). 

Likewise, the exemption sought will not adversely affect safety because Eric L. Clark will use 

trained technicians to perform maintenance, alterations or preventive maintenance on the UAS using 

the methods, techniques, and practices prescribed by the operating documents.

Furthermore, the exemption sought would maintain an equivalent level of safety established by 

Sections 91.407, 91.417(a) and 91.417(b), because all maintenance of the above mentioned UAS will be 

performed by trained technicians. Maintenance will be documented and maintained utilizing the 

monthly maintenance log.

Significantly, previous exemptions granted by the FAA concerning Sections 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 

91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), and 91.417(a) & (b) establish that safety is not adversely affected when the 

technical characteristics and operating limitations of the UAS are considered.

In consideration of Eric L. Clark’s proposed operating limitations, the operating documents, and the 

technical aspects of the above mentioned UAS, Eric L. Clark submits that safety will not be adversely 

affected by granting exemption from 14 C.F.R. Sections 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1) and (a)(2), 91.409(a)(2), 

and 91.417(a) and (b). The FAA has previously granted relief specific to UAS in circumstances similar, in 

all material respects, to those presented herein (e.g. Exemption Nos. 11062, 11063, 11064, 11065, 

11066, 11067, 11080, 11109, 11110, 11112, 11136, 11138, 11150, 11153, 11156, 11157, 11158, 11159, 

11160, 11161).

7. The FAA May Prescribe Any Other Conditions For Safe Operation.

In accordance with Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (FMRA) and 14 

C.F.R. § 21.16 entitled Special Conditions, Eric L. Clark requests that the FAA prescribe special conditions 

for the intended operation of the above mentioned UAS, which contain such safety standards that the 

Administrator finds necessary to establish a level of safety equivalent to that established by 14 C.F.R. 

Part 21, Subpart H, and 14 C.F.R §§ 61.113(a) & (b), 91.7 (a), 91.121, 91.151(b), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 

91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), and 91.417(a) & (b). Such special conditions will permit safe operation of the UAS

for the limited purpose of conducting aerial video and photography over certain areas of the United 

States for compensation or hire. FMRA Section 333 sets forth the requirements for considering whether 

a UAS will create a hazard to users of the NAS or the public, or otherwise pose a threat to national 

security; and further, provides the authority for such UAS to operate without airworthiness certification 

in accordance with any requirements that must be established for the safe operation of the UAS in the 

NAS. 
Likewise, the Administrator may prescribe special conditions pursuant to 14 C.F.R. § 21.16, for 

operation of the above mentioned UASs, since the airworthiness regulations of 14 C.F.R. Part 21 do not

contain adequate or appropriate safety standards, due to the novel or unusual design features of the 

aircraft. Section 21.16, entitled Special Conditions, states the following: 

If the FAA finds that the airworthiness regulations of this subchapter do not contain 

adequate or appropriate safety standards for an aircraft, aircraft engine, or propeller 

because of a novel or unusual design feature of the aircraft, aircraft engine or propeller, he 

prescribes special conditions and amendments thereto for the product. The special 

conditions are issued in accordance with Part 11 of this chapter and contain such safety 

standards for the aircraft, aircraft engine or propeller as the FAA finds necessary to establish 

a level of safety equivalent to that established in the regulations. 

See 14 C.F.R. § 21.16.

Therefore, in accordance with FMRA Section 333 and 14 C.F.R. § 21.16, the FAA may prescribe 

special conditions for Eric L. Clark’s intended operation of the above mentioned UASs, which contain 

such safety standards that the Administrator finds necessary to establish a level of safety equivalent to 

that established by 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H, and 14 C.F.R Sections 61.113(a) & (b), 91.7(a), 91.121, 

91.151(b), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), and 91.417(a) & (b).

A Summary That Can Be Published In The Federal Register, stating: The Rules From Which Eric 

L. Clark Seeks Exemption: 

Eric L. Clark seeks exemption from the requirements of 14 C.F.R Sections 61.113(a)&(b), 

91.7(a), 91.121, 91.151(b), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), and 91.417(a) & 

(b).

A Brief Description Of The Nature Of The Exemption Eric L. Clark Seeks: 

This exemption will permit Eric L. Clark to commercially operate an Unmanned Aircraft 

System (UAS) for the purpose of conducting aerial video and photography over certain areas 

of the United States. 

Any Additional Information, Views, Or Arguments Available To Support Eric L. Clark’s Request. 

This Petition is made pursuant to the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 

(FMRA) Section 333, which directs the Secretary of Transportation to determine if certain 

UAS may operate safely in the NAS. As such, Eric L. Clark request for exemption may be 

granted pursuant to the authority of FMRA Section 333 and 14 C.F.R. Part 11, as set forth 

above. 

FMRA Section 333 sets forth the requirements for considering whether a UAS will create 

a hazard to users of the NAS or the public, or otherwise pose a threat to national security; 

and further, provides the authority for such UAS to operate without airworthiness 

certification. 
As discussed in detail above, Eric L. Clark will operate the above mentioned UASs safely 

in the NAS, without creating a hazard to users of the NAS, or the public, or otherwise pose a 

threat to national security.

CONCLUSION

As set forth herein, Eric L. Clark seeks an exemption pursuant to 14 C.F.R. § 11.61 and Section 333 of the 

FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (FMRA), which will permit safe operation of the Blade 

Chroma, DJI Phantom 3 Professional, DJI Inspire 1 Pro, Yuneec Q500 Typhoon 4K UASs commercially, 

without an airworthiness certificate, for the limited purpose of conducting aerial video and photography 

over certain areas of the United States. By granting this Petition, the FAA Administrator will be fulfilling 

the Congressional mandate of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, while also advancing the 

interests of the public, by allowing Eric L. Clark to safely, efficiently, and economically operate the Blade 

Chroma, DJI Phantom 3 Professional, DJI Inspire 1 Pro, Yuneec Q500 Typhoon 4K UASs commercially 

within the NAS. 

WHEREFORE, in accordance with the Federal Aviation Regulations and the FAA Modernization and 

Reform Act of 2012, Section 333, Eric L. Clark respectfully requests that the Administrator grant this 

Petition for an exemption from the requirements of 14 C.F.R Sections 61.113(a) & (b), 91.7(a), 91.121, 

91.151(b), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), and 91.417(a) & (b), and permit Eric L. Clark to 

operate the Blade Chroma, DJI Phantom 3 Professional, DJI Inspire 1 Pro, Yuneec Q500 Typhoon 4K UASs 

commercially for the purpose of conducting aerial video and photography over certain areas of the 

United States. 

Dated: December 16th, 2015

Respectfully Submitted

Eric L. Clark

1707 N. Madison St.

Rome NY, 13440

315-240-3222

Email: eclark699@gmail.com