1

High Flight Media 

3608 Espejo St. Northeast

Albuquerque, New Mexico, 87111

Tel. 505.271.6880

info@highflightmedia.com

U.S. Department of TransportationNovember 4th, 2015

Docket Management System

1200 New Jersey Ave S.E. 

Washington, D.C. 20590

Re: Request for Exemption under Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 

and Part 11 of the Federal Aviation Regulations from Certain Provisions of 14 C.F.R.

Dear Sir or Madam:

Pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (the Reform 

Act) and 14 C.F.R. Part 11, Donnie Frank files this petition for exemption on behalf of himself and 

his company, High Flight Media (“High Flight Media”) - a company that operates Small 

Unmanned Aircraft (“UA”) Systems (“UAS”) used to conduct Aerial Photography and 

Videography. Specifically, applicant seeks an exemption from the Federal Aviation Regulations 

(“FARs”) listed in Appendices A and B to allow commercial operation of its UAs, so long as such 

operations are conducted within and under the conditions outlined herein or as may be established 

by the FAA in a grant of this petition.

Approval of the exemption for petitioner will allow commercial operation of the DJI 

Phantom 1 for Geospatial Analysis, Aerial Photography, Aerial Videography, Aerial Mapping, 

Crop Inspections, Utility Inspections, Structure Inspections and Film Industry Closed Set 

Operations in Class G airspace nationwide, or as otherwise prescribed in an Air Traffic 

Organization (“ATO”) issued COA. The UA operations contemplated by this petition are in the 

public interest because they clearly satisfy the "Four D's" of exemplary uses of unmanned aircraft: 

to replace work that is dangerous, difficult, dull, or dirty, and at the same time provide an 

equivalent or greater level of safety than alternative manned aircraft operations. The UA covered 

by this petition is a small battery-powered craft; the DJI Phantom 1 weighing approximately 3.2 

lbs. (1.4kg), inclusive of battery and payload. Operation of the UAs under the strict conditions 

proposed below will provide an equivalent level of safety, as Congress intended, while still 

allowing commercial operations. Operations using these UAs are far safer than conventional 

operations conducted with full-scale helicopters and fixed-wing aircraft that weigh thousands of 

pounds, carry highly flammable fuel, and operate in close proximity to the ground, trees, 

infrastructure, and people.
2

Congress directed the FAA to consider seven factors in deciding whether to approve 

Section 333 exemption petitions - size, weight, speed, operational capability, proximity to airports, 

proximity to populated areas, and operation within visual line of sight. In this case, each factor 

supports the exemption request. In particular, the UAs are small, and will operate at slow speeds 

and close to the ground. They will be able to fly more safely and efficiently, and will be able to

conduct aerial photography and videography that otherwise would be conducted via manned 

aircraft - involving risk of injury or death to photographers, inspectors and other risks to 

property. The substantial increase of safety and decrease of risk to human life and to property 

weighs heavily in favor of granting the exemption.

Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. §11.35, petitioner requests confidential treatment for certain 

information provided with this request for exemption. Specifically, petitioner is submitting 

proprietary documents, its Safety Plans, the Phantom 1 User Manuals, and the DJI Training 

Documents, under separate cover as Exhibits 1-3 and 8. It requests that the information 

contained in those exhibits not be made public because they are trade secrets whose disclosure 

would harm petitioner and DJI, Ltd., the manufacturer of the Phantom series UAV’s. They may 

contain valuable commercial data that is not publicly available and are protected from release 

under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. §552(b)(4).

For your ease in reviewing this petition, please refer to the table of contents which 

begins on page 3. If we can provide any additional information to facilitate greater understanding 

or review of this document, please do not hesitate to contact us at 505-271-6880 or via email at

info@highflightmedia.com.

Regards,
3

Table of Contents

I. Publishable Summary ........................................................................................................................... 5

II. Petitioner’s Contact Information........................................................................................................... 5

III. Proposed Operations............................................................................................................................. 6

A. The UA........................................................................................................................................6

B. The Crew ........................................................................................................................ 7

C. Flight Conditions............................................................................................................ 7

D. Flight Operations............................................................................................................ 8

IV. Aircraft and Equivalent Level of Safety.................................................................................. 9

V. Proposed Conditions of the Exemption................................................................................... 9

VI. Privacy................................................................................................................................... 12

VII. Public Interest and Safety...................................................................................................... 13

VIII. Regulations from Which Exemption is Requested....................................................... 15

A. Appendix A: FARs as to which High Flight Media wishes the same determination to 

be made as has been made previously ............................................................................. 15

B. Appendix B: High Flight Media’s argument for exemption from 14 C.F.R. §61.113: 

Private pilot privileges and limitations: Pilot in command. ............................................ 18

1. The FAA and foreign regulators recognize that obtaining a manned aircraft pilot

license is unnecessary for safe operation of a UA ................................................... 18

2. The FAA has and has already exercised the authority to exempt applicants from

the airman certificate requirement ............................................................................ 20
4

Exhibit List

Exhibit 1: High Flight Media MPTFOM...............Submitted separately due to upload constraints

DJI Phantom 1 Documents

Exhibit 2: DJI Phantom 1 User Manual....................Submitted separately due to upload constraints

Exhibit 3: DJI Phantom 1 Quick Start Guide............Submitted separately due to upload constraints

Exhibit 4: DJI Phantom 1 Specifications..............Submitted separately due to upload constraints

Exhibit 5: DJI Phantom 1 Training Guide.............Submitted separately due to upload constraints

Exhibit 6: DJI Naza-M v2 User Manual....................Submitted separately due to upload constraints
5

I. Publishable Summary

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

Federal Register, should it be determined that publication is needed:

Applicant seeks an exemption from the following rules:

14 C.F.R 21(h); 14 C.F.R. 43.7; 14 C.F.R. 43.11; 14 C.F.R. 45.11; 14 C.F.R. 45.27; 14

C.F.R. 45.29; 14 C.F.R. 91.7(a); 14 C.F.R. 91.9(b)(2); 14 C.F.R. 91.9(c); 14 C.F.R.

91.103(b)(2); 14 C.F.R. 91.105; 14 C.F.R. 91.109; 14 C.F.R. 91.113(b); 14 C.F.R.

91.119(c); 14 C.F.R. 91.121; 14 C.F.R. 91.151(a); 14 C.F.R. 91.203(a) and (b); 14 C.F.R.

215; 14 C.F.R. 91.403; 14 C.F.R. 91.405(a); 14 C.F.R. 91.407(a)(1); 14 C.F.R. 409(a)(1)

and (a)(2); and 14 C.F.R. 91.417(a) and (b) to operate commercially a small unmanned 

aircraft system (UA) (3.2 lbs. or less).

Approval of the exemption requested by petitioner will allow commercial operation of the 

DJI Phantom 1 for aerial Geospatial Analysis, Aerial Photography, Aerial Videography, 

Aerial Mapping, Crop Inspections, Utility Inspections, Structure Inspections and Film 

Industry Closed Set Operations in Class G airspace nationwide, or as otherwise prescribed 

in an ATO issued COA. The requested exemption should be granted because operation of

small UAs, weighing approximately 3.2 lbs. (1.4 kg), inclusive of battery and payload, 

conducted in the strict conditions outlined below, will provide an equivalent level of safety, 

while still allowing commercial operations. The lightweight aircraft covered by the 

exemption are far safer than conventional operations conducted with helicopters and fixedwing aircraft weighing thousands of pounds and carrying highly flammable fuel, and 

operating in close proximity to the ground and people. The seven factors Congress directed 

the FAA to consider when approving Section 333 exemption petitions - size, weight, speed, 

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

within visual line of sight – each support the request. In particular, the aircraft are small, and 

will operate at slow speeds, and close to the ground in order to more safely and efficiently 

conduct inspections that would otherwise involve a risk of death to the inspectors. The 

substantial increase of safety and decrease of risk to human life, coupled with the low risk 

use of UAs to conduct these operations, weigh heavily in favor of granting the exemption.

II. Petitioner’s Contact Information

Donnie Frank

Managing Member 

High Flight Media

3608 Espejo, St. Northeast

Albuquerque, NM 87111

Tel: 505-271-6880
6

III. Proposed Operations

A. The UA

The requested exemption will permit the operation of one small, unmanned multirotor 

aircraft, the DJI Phantom 1. The specific conditions of the proposed exemption that relate to the 

characteristics of the UA are numbers 1, 5, and 16-20 in Section V below. Each has been adopted 

or imposed by the FAA in numerous previous grants of Section 333 exemption petitions. This 

petition and all of the exhibits are collectively referred to as the “operating documents.”

1. DJI Phantom 1

The requested exemption will permit petitioner to operate the Phantom 1, with a maximum 

weight of approximately 3.2 lbs. (1.4 kg), inclusive of batteries and technical payload. This 

rotorcraft operates at a speed of no more than 40 knots and has the capability to hover and move in 

the vertical and horizontal planes simultaneously.

The UA will have the following specifications or equivalent:

Airframe: DJI Phantom 1

Dimensions: diagonal motor-motor distance 350 mm (approximately 13.78 in.).

Flight Control System: DJI Naza-M V2, which includes the GPS and Compass and the internal 

measurement unit (IMU), which contains an accelerometer and barometric altimeter that measures 

both attitude and altitude respectively.

Motors: electric brushless motors with a combined thrust of 6.2 lbs. (est.).

Propellers: 4x9” (DJI 9043’s)

Data Link: 2.4 GHz USB ground modem 

Video Link: 5.8 Ghz

OSD: visible via a dedicated mobile device which allows live telemetry to be displayed to the 

visual observer, including the battery level and altitude

Batteries: 4000mAh - 5200mAh LiPo Battery (application dependent).

The FAA has previously approved use of the Phantom 1 in Exemption Nos. 11138, 11189, 

and 11191.
7

The Crew

The crew will consist of a pilot in command (PIC) and a visual observer (VO).

The PIC and VO will have been trained in operation of UAs generally and received up- todate information on the UAs to be operated pursuant to this grant. The PIC will have completed, at 

a minimum:

 For PICs of the Phantom 1:

o 10 hours of simulator training on RealFlight RC Flight Simulator, utilizing a 

quadcopter

o The DJI Phantom 1 training guide, submitted as Exhibit 5.

The PIC will be required to participate in annual training thereafter.

The specific conditions of the proposed exemption that relate to the training and 

characteristics of the crew are numbers 3 and 6-9 in Section V below. Each has been adopted or 

imposed by the FAA in numerous previous grants of Section 333 exemption petitions.

B. Flight Conditions

The UA will be used to conduct Geospatial Analysis, Aerial Photography, Aerial 

Videography, Aerial Mapping, Crop Inspections, Utility Inspections, Structure Inspections and 

Film Industry Closed Set Operations nationwide. Unless a written agreement is in place with local 

Air Traffic Control permitting use in other classes of airspace, it will only be flown in Class G 

airspace, under 400 feet above ground level (“AGL”), and under controlled conditions over 

property that is restricted as stated in petitioner’s Safety Plan. Petitioner will work with the local 

FSDO when planning operations. Petitioner will only operate its UA in visual meteorological 

conditions (VMC). The UA will at all times be no less than 500 feet below and no less than 2,000 

feet horizontally from a cloud, and petitioner will not conduct operations unless visibility is at

least 3 statute miles from the PIC. The flight crew will always make a safety assessment of the 

risk of every operation, and will only operate when it is determined that no hazards are present.

The specific conditions of the proposed exemption that relate to the flight conditions in 

which the UA will be operated are numbers 2, 4, 16, and 28-29 in Section V below. Each has been 

adopted or imposed by the FAA in numerous previous grants of Section 333 exemption petitions.
8

C. Flight Operations

The purpose of every UA flight will be to safely, accurately, and efficiently conduct 

geospatial analysis and inspections of undeveloped property and public rights of way, or to take 

photos and/or video of property, structures, events, other points of interest, or scripted events on 

closed movie/film sets. The UA will conduct aerial surveys using RGB, NIR, infrared, and 

multispectral cameras, as well as LiDAR sensors. Once collected, this data will be used to conduct 

drainage studies, engineering grading analysis, and for resource management. Photos and video 

will be collected via digital cameras and will be used for inspections and/or advertisement and/or 

entertainment purposes.

Every UA flight will use at minimum a two person flight crew: a PIC and a VO. The 

standard operational procedures that they will follow are set out in the following list.

Aircraft Physical Inspection – Preflight

Preflight Checklist

Post-flight Checks 

Although the majority of flights will be over undeveloped property and away from areas 

accessible to the public, certain flights will be over public roads and private property that could 

bring the UA within 500 feet of nonparticipating individuals. If this is the case, the flight crew will 

procure a temporary barricading permit that will safely prohibit vehicular and pedestrian access to 

the affected area for the duration of the operation. During road operations, men and women will 

work as flaggers to control the flow of traffic in both directions. This temporary restriction in 

traffic flow while the UA is directly overhead would prevent nonparticipating individuals from 

entering the area. However, should a nonparticipating individual or vehicle enter into the flight 

area, the operation will cease immediately and the PIC will land the UA, keeping the safety of the 

nonparticipating individual or vehicle as the priority.

The specific conditions of the proposed exemption that relate to flight operations are 

numbers 11-12, 17-25, and 32-35 in Section V below. Each has been accepted or imposed by the 

FAA in numerous previous grants of Section 333 exemption petitions.
9

IV. Aircraft and Equivalent Level of Safety

Petitioner proposes that the exemption apply to UAs that have the characteristics and that 

operate with the limitations proposed herein. These limitations provide for a level of safety at least 

an equivalent to or higher than manned aircraft operations under the current regulatory structure. 

Section V below identifies the limitations and conditions to which petitioner agrees to be bound 

when conducting commercial operations under a grant of this petition. Appendix A contains a 

matrix connecting (i) the specific proposed condition with (ii) the FAR provision for which it 

provides an equivalent level of safety and (iii) one or more recent Section 333 exemption grants in 

which the FAA recognized this equivalent level ofsafety.

Approval of the commercial operations outlined in this petition presents no national security

issue. The PIC is willing to undergo a background check, including the proposed Transportation 

Security Administration vetting process, to ensure that no national security threat is present. 

Operation and Certification of Small Unmanned Aircraft, 80 Fed. Reg. 9543 at 9572 (proposed 

Feb. 23, 2015 (to be codified at 14 C.F.R. Parts 21, 43, 45, et al.)).

V. Proposed Conditions of the Exemption

1. The Phantom 1 will weigh approximately 3.2 lbs. (1.4 kg.).

2. UA operations under this exemption will be limited to conducting operations for the purpose 

of Geospatial Analysis, Aerial Photography, Aerial Videography, Aerial Mapping, Crop 

Inspections, Utility Inspections, Structure Inspections and Film Industry Closed Set 

Operations.

3. Flights will be operated within line of sight of a pilot and visual observer.

4. Flights will be operated at an altitude of no more than 400 feet AGL, as indicated by the 

procedures specified in the operating documents. All altitudes reported to ATC must be in feet 

AGL.

5. The Phantom 1 will not be flown at an indicated airspeed exceeding 40 knots.

6. Minimum flight crew for each operation will consist of the pilot in command (PIC) and a 

visual observer (VO).

7. The PIC will have, at minimum, 25 hours of training on the UA to be operated under this 

grant before accepting commercial operations.

8. The petitioner will not permit any PIC to operate unless the PIC meets its qualification criteria 

and demonstrates the ability to safely operate the UA in a manner consistent with how the UA 

will be operated under this exemption, including evasive and emergency maneuvers and 

maintaining appropriate distances from persons, vessels, vehicles and structures. PIC 

qualification flight hours and currency will be logged in a manner consistent with 14 CFR § 

61.51(b). A record of the PIC and VO training will be documented and made available upon 

request by the Administrator. Training operations will only be conducted during dedicated 

training sessions. During training, proficiency, and experience-building flights, all persons not 

essential for flight operations will be considered non-participants, and the PIC will operate the 

UA with appropriate distance from non-participants in accordance with 14 CFR § 91.119.
10

9. The VO will not perform any other duties beyond assisting the PIC with seeing and avoiding 

other air traffic and other ground based obstacles/obstructions, and will not be permitted to 

operate the camera or other instruments.

10. The PIC will be designated before the flight and will not be allowed to transfer his or her 

designation for the duration of the flight. The PIC will ensure that the VO can perform the 

functions prescribed in these conditions and the operating documents.

11. A briefing will be conducted in regard to the planned UA operations prior to each day’s 

activities. It will be mandatory that all personnel who will be performing duties in connection 

with the operations be present for this briefing.

12. Prior to each flight, the PIC will inspect the UA, including the Ground Control Station, to 

ensure it is in a condition for safe flight. If the inspection reveals a condition that affects the 

safe operation of the UA, the PIC will not operate the UA until the necessary maintenance has 

been performed and the UA is found to be in a condition for safe flight. All maintenance and 

alterations will be properly documented in the aircraft records.

13. Petitioner will conduct a functional flight test on any UA that has undergone maintenance or 

alterations that affect the UA operation or flight characteristics, e.g. replacement of a flight 

critical component. The PIC who conducts the functional test flight will make an entry in the 

aircraft records.

14. The petitioner will carry out its maintenance, inspections, and record keeping requirements, in 

accordance with the UA manufacturer’s aircraft/component, maintenance, overhaul, 

replacement, inspection, and life limit requirements set forth in the operating documents. 

Maintenance, inspection, alterations, and status of replacement/overhaul component parts will 

be noted in the aircraft records, including total time in service, description of work 

accomplished, and the signature of the authorized person returning the UA to service. The 

authorized person will make an entry in the aircraft record of the corrective action taken against 

discrepancies discovered between inspections.

15. Each UA operated under the exemption will comply with all manufacturer SafetyBulletins.

16. The UA will be operated within visual line of sight (VLOS) of the PIC and VO at all times. 

This requires the PIC to be able to use human vision unaided by any device other than 

corrective lenses. PIC and VO will at all times be able to communicate verbally. They will not 

be permitted to use electronic messaging or texting to communicate during flight operations.

17. The PIC will not begin 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 prepare 

to land the UA with 25% battery power remaining.

18. Actual total flight time for each operational flight will result in no less than a 25% battery 

reserve.

19. The UA will have the capability to abort a flight in case of unexpected obstacles or 

emergencies.

20. The UA will be programmed so that if it loses communications, it will return to a predetermined location within the planned operating area and land or be recovered in accordance 
11

with the operating documents

21. If the UA and its radio control link are disconnect during flight, the system’s failsafe 

protection will be triggered and the multirotor will return to home and land automatically, 

rather than flying off uncontrollably or landing at an unknown location.

22. The operating documents required under 14 CFR §§ 91.9 and 91.203 will be maintained and 

available to the PIC at the Ground Control Station of the UA any time the UA is operating. 

These documents will be made available to the Administrator or any law enforcement official 

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

grant and the procedures outlined in the operating documents, the grant conditions and 

limitations will take precedence and will be followed. Otherwise, the petitioner will follow the 

procedures outlined in its operating documents. If it updates or revises its operating documents, 

it will present updated and revised documents to the Administrator upon request. If the 

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

granted the exemption, then the Petitioner will petition for an amendment to the grant of 

exemption.

23. Petitioner will obtain written and/or oral permission from the landowners/authorized agents of 

the landowners over which flights will be conducted.

24. Petitioner will obtain all required permissions and permits from territorial, state, county or city 

jurisdictions, including local law enforcement, fire, or other appropriate governmental 

agencies.

25. UA operations will not be conducted during night, as defined in 14 CFR § 1.1. All operations 

will be conducted under visual meteorological conditions (VMC). Flights will not be conducted 

under special visual flight rules (SVFR).

26. The UA will not be operated 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 has been obtained, and the operation is conducted in accordance with a NOTAM 

as required by the operator’s COA. Any letter of agreement with the airport management will 

be made available to the Administrator upon request.

27. The UA will 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.

28. The petitioner will obtain an Air Traffic Organization (ATO) issued Certificate of Waiver or 

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

Petitioner will 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 will be conducted in accordance 

with airspace requirements in the ATO issued COA, including class of airspace, altitude level 

and potential transponder requirements.
12

29. All operations shall be conducted in Class G airspace or as otherwise prescribed in an ATO 

issued COA.

30. All aircraft operated in accordance with this exemption will be identified by serial number, 

registered in accordance with 14 CFR part 47, and have identification (N-Number) markings in 

accordance with 14 CFR part 45, Subpart C. Markings will be as large as practicable.

31. Before conducting operations, petitioner will ensure that the radio frequency spectrum used 

for operation and control of the UA complies with the Federal Communications Commission 

(FCC) or other appropriate government oversight agency requirements.

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

activities at all times.

33. The UA will not be operated by the PIC from any moving device or vehicle.

34. The UA will not be operated over congested or densely populated areas.

35. Petitioner will conduct all flight operations at least 500 feet from all nonparticipating persons, 

vessels, vehicles, and structures unless one of the following three conditions is met:

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

the UA and/or debris in the event of an accident. The petitioner will 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, the PIC 

will ensure that flight operations cease immediately.

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.

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

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

36. Petitioner will report any incident, accident, or flight operation that transgresses the lateral or 

vertical boundaries of the operational area as defined by the applicable COA to the FAA's UA 

Integration Office (AFS-80) within 24 hours. Petitioner will report accidents to the National 

Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) per instructions contained on the NTSB Web site: 

www.ntsb.gov.

VI. Privacy

There is little concern that the proposed flights will cause invasions of privacy because 

most flights will occur over undeveloped property, public rights of way, closed sets or private 

property. When the UA is being flown, the onboard cameras and sensors will be focused on the 

ground beneath the UA, and thus turned so as to be facing away from any occupied structures that 

may be in the area to minimize inadvertent video or still images of uninvolved persons.
13

All data collected will be stored on a private hard drive. Should data be stored in any 

online medium, it will be password protected and not made available for public use. No 

nonparticipating individuals will be identified unless they are trespassing or interfering with 

petitioner’s operations. Should the information collected be made public, any nonparticipating 

individuals or vehicles will be blurred or blacked-out. No attempt will be made to identify any

individuals filmed during the flights except in cases where they are trespassing upon or damaging 

property, or interfering with petitioner’s or its customers’ operations.

VII. Public Interest and Safety

The planned UA use will increase ground safety for aerial geospatial analysis projects. The 

enhanced safety and reduced environmental impact achieved using a UA with the specifications 

described by the petitioner and carrying no passengers or crew, rather than a manned aircraft of 

significantly greater proportions, carrying crew in addition to flammable fuel, gives the FAA good 

cause to find that the UA operation enabled by this exemption is in the public interest.

Satisfaction of the criteria provided in Section 333 of the Reform Act of 2012 – size, 

weight, speed, operating capabilities, proximity to airports and populated areas and operation 

within visual line of sight and national security – provide more than adequate justification for the 

grant of the requested exemption allowing commercial operation of applicant’s UA, pursuant to 

High Flight Media’s operating procedures.

Traditional methods for geospatial analysis lead to a number of risks for engineers because 

they require engineers to traverse large geographic areas while carrying heavy equipment 

necessary for surveys. This equipment makes it difficult to navigate across rugged terrain. 

Engineers risk encounters with wildlife, including poisonous snakes. Engineers are also subject to 

prolonged exposure to the elements, especially in the height of summer and winter. At higher 

elevations, the dangers associated with extended exposure to cold temperatures are compounded.

Traditional methods also take engineers into active mining sites, containing multi-ton 

machines that could cause risk of life or injury to engineers. The presence of these engineers often 

leads to significant disruption of the mining site, which causes productivity and financial loss.

Additionally, there are geographic areas that are culturally, archaeologically, and 

environmentally sensitive that would otherwise be inaccessible. Many Native American Tribes do 

not allow non-tribe members to enter certain areas of their land due to their cultural and religious 

beliefs. Traditional survey methods can damage sensitive archaeological and environmental areas 

that need to be mapped, but using a manned aircraft would otherwise be cost prohibitive.

Use of a UA will ameliorate many of the hazards associated with traditional methods. 

Individuals involved with operations will be responsible for carrying less, and lighter, equipment, 

over shorter distances. There will be less risk of engineers running into wildlife, including 

stepping into dens of snakes. Individuals will be exposed to the elements for shorter periods of 

time because operations will be resolved more quickly. This will significantly decrease time

spent in 100oF or more temperatures during summer months and in 0°F or less during winter. 

UA flights over culturally, archaeologically, and environmentally sensitive areas will allow these 

areas to be mapped without damaging those areas.

Finally, when projects are over public roads, use of the UA will reduce the number of 

individuals who may otherwise be in danger from careless motorists. Additionally, these 

analytical projects may be conducted more quickly, reducing the amount of time workers need to 
14

be in the road and the amount of time that traffic will be blocked.
15

VIII. Regulations from Which Exemption is Requested

A. Appendix A: FARs as to which High Flight Media wishes the same determination to 

be made as has been made previously.

FAR

Provision

Applicable condition(s) in 

Section 5 of petition

FAA Exemption Decision

21(h) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 16, 25, 28, 29,

34, 35

Nos. 11062, 11063, 11064, 11065, 11066, 11067,

11080, 11109, 11111, 11110, 11114, 11136, 11138,

11150, 11153, 11156, 11157, 11166, 11167, 11170,

11171, 11172, 11174, 11176, 11177, 11178, 11184,

11185, 11188, 11189, 11191, 11192, 11193, 11195

43.7 13, 14 No. 11208

43.11 12 No. 11208

45.11 30 No. 11208

45.27 39 No. 11188

45.29 30 Nos. 11136, 11157, 11170, 11185, 11193

61.113 7 See Appendix B for argument regarding why 

petitioner should be exempted from the private pilot 

license requirement

91.7(a) 12 Nos. 11062, 11063, 11064, 11065, 11066, 11067,

11080, 11109, 11110, 11136, 11138, 11150, 11153,

11156, 11157, 11158, 11160, 11161, 11166, 11167,

11170, 11171, 11172, 11174, 11177, 11178, 11184,

11185, 11188, 11189, 11191, 11192, 11193, 11195,

11204

91.9(b)(2) 22 Nos. 11062, 11063, 11064, 11065, 11066, 11067,

11080, 11109, 11110, 11111, 11112, 11114, 11136,

11138, 11150, 11153, 11156, 11157, 11062, 11063,

11064, 11065, 11066, 11067, 11080, 11109, 11110,

11111, 11112, 11114, 11136, 11138, 11150, 11153,

11156, 11157, 11174, 11177, 11178, 11184, 11185,

11189, 11192, 11193, 11195

91.9(c) 30 Nos. 11136, 11170, 11171, 11174, 11185

91.103(b)(2) 3, 9, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 28 No. 11062, 11063, 11064, 11065, 11066, 11067,

11080, 11109, 11138, 11150, 11153, 11156, 11158,

11160, 11161, 11166, 11167, 11171, 11172, 11176,

11177, 11178, 11184, 11185, 11188, 11188, 11189,

11191, 11192, 11193, 11195, 11204

91.105 6 No. 11185

91.113(b) 3, 32 No. 11238

91.119(c ) 4, 34 Nos. 11162, 11163, 11164, 11165, 11166, 111080,

111109, 11110, 11111, 11112, 11114, 11136,

11138, 11150, 11153, 11156, 11160 11161, 11166,

11167, 11170, 11171, 11172, 11174, 11176, 11178,

11185, 11188, 11189, 11190, 11193
16

FAR

Provision

Applicable condition(s) in 

Section 5 of petition

FAA Exemption Decision

91.121 4 Nos. 11162, 11163, 11164, 11165, 11166, 111080,

111109, 11136, 11138, 11150, 11153, 11156, 11160

11161, 11166, 11167, 11170, 11171, 11174, 11176,

11178, 11185, 11188, 11189, 11190, 11193

91.151(a) 17, 18 Nos. 11110, 11153, 11156, 11161; 111109, 11110,

11112, 11136, 11138, 11150, 11153, 11156, 11160

11161, 11166, 11167, 11170, 11171, 11172, 11174,

11176, 11178, 11185, 11188, 11189, 11190, 11193

91.203 (a) 

and (b)

22 Nos. 11062, 11063, 11064, 11065, 11066,

11067, 11080, 11109, 11110, 11111, 11112,

11114, 11136, 11138, 11150, 11153, 11156,

11157, 11170, 11171, 11172, 11174, 11176,

11177, 11178, 11184, 11185, 11188, 11188,

11189, 11191, 11192, 11193, 11195

91.215 26, 27 No. 11185, 11195

91.403 12, 13, 14 No. 11185

91.405(a) 12, 13, 14 Nos. 11062, 11063, 11064, 11065, 11066,

11067, 11080, 11109, 11110, 11111, 11112,

11114, 11136, 11138, 11150, 11153, 11156,

11157, 11158, 11160, 11161, 11166, 11167,

11170, 11171, 11172, 11174, 11176, 11177,

11178, 11184, 11185, 11188, 11188, 11189,

11191, 11192, 11193, 11195, 11204

91.407(a)(1) 14 Nos. 11062, 11063, 11064, 11065, 11066,

11067, 11080, 11109, 11110, 11111, 11112,

11114, 11136, 11138, 11150, 11153, 11156,

11157, 11158, 11160, 11161, 11166, 11167,

11170, 11171, 11172, 11174, 11176, 11177,

11178, 11184, 11185, 11188, 11188, 11189,

11191, 11192, 11193, 11195, 11204

91.409(a)(1) 12, 13, 14 Nos. 11062, 11063, 11064, 11065, 11066,

11067, 11080, 11109, 11110, 11111, 11112,

11114, 11136, 11138, 11150, 11153, 11156,

11157, 11158, 11160, 11161, 11166, 11167,

11170, 11171, 11172, 11174, 11176, 11177,

11178, 11184, 11185, 11188, 11188, 11189,

11191, 11192, 11193, 11195, 11204

91.409(a)(2) 12, 13, 14 Nos. 11062, 11063, 11064, 11065, 11066,

11067, 11080, 11109, 11110, 11111, 11112,

11114, 11136, 11138, 11150, 11153, 11156,

11157, 11158, 11160, 11161, 11166, 11167,

11170, 11171, 11172, 11174, 11176, 11177,

11178, 11184, 11185, 11188, 11188, 11189,

11191, 11192, 11193, 11195, 11204
17

FAR

Provision

Applicable condition(s) in 

Section 5 of petition

FAA Exemption Decision

91.417(a) 12, 13, 14 Nos. 11062, 11063, 11064, 11065, 11066,

11067, 11080, 11109, 11110, 11111, 11112,

11114, 11136, 11138, 11150, 11153, 11156,

11157, 11158, 11160, 11161, 11166, 11167,

11170, 11171, 11172, 11174, 11176, 11177,

11178, 11184, 11185, 11188, 11188, 11189,

11191, 11192, 11193, 11195, 11204

91.417(b) 12, 13, 14 Nos. 11062, 11063, 11064, 11065, 11066,

11067, 11080, 11109, 11110, 11111, 11112,

11114, 11136, 11138, 11150, 11153, 11156,

11157, 11158, 11160, 11161, 11166, 11167,

11170, 11171, 11172, 11174, 11176, 11177,

11178, 11184, 11185, 11188, 11188, 11189,

11191, 11192, 11193, 11195, 11204
18

B. Appendix B: High Flight Media’s argument for exemption from 14 C.F.R. §61.113: 

Private pilot privileges and limitations: Pilot in command.

High Flight Media requests an exemption from 14 C.F.R. §61.113 so that the PIC of the 

UA will not be required to possess a private or commercial pilot’s license. As the FAA and 

numerous other national airspace regulators have recognized, UA operations conducted by

persons who do not hold a pilot’s license can still achieve the equivalent level of safety of current 

operations by manned aircraft with pilots holding a private or commercial pilot’s license.

Although it recognizes that a pilot’s license is unnecessary for safe UA operation, the FAA 

has to date declined to allow grant exemptions under Section 333 that would permit individuals 

who possess neither a private nor a commercial pilot’s certificate to conduct commercial UA 

operations. It has specified two reasons for declining to do so. First, it has stated that it does not 

possess the authority under Section 333 to exempt individuals from the requirement under 49 

U.S.C. §44711 to hold an airman certificate authorizing the airman to serve in the capacity for 

which the certificate was issued. Exemption No. 11110 at 14. Second, the FAA has concluded that 

the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) security screening required of all certified airmen 

meets the statutory requirement in Section 333 that operations not pose a threat to national 

security. Exemption No. 11110 at 15.

High Flight Media respectfully requests that the FAA reconsider its position. There is no 

dispute that it is unnecessary for an operator of a UA to go through the rigorous process of 

becoming a certified pilot in order to safely operate a UA. In addition, the FAA does have the 

authority to exempt UA operators from the requirement in 49 U.S.C. §44711to hold an airman 

certificate for “serv[ing] in the capacity for which the certificate was issued.” Indeed, it has 

exercised that authority repeatedly in the Section 333 process. Finally, the FAA’s security 

concerns can be addressed by a variety of methods involving operator background checks to be 

conducted by government agencies.

1. The FAA and foreign regulators recognize that obtaining a manned aircraft 

pilot license is unnecessary for safe operation of a UA

The FAA, like the other national airspace regulators that have considered the issue, has 

concluded that UA operations conducted by persons who do not hold a pilot’s license can still 

achieve the equivalent level of safety of current operations by manned aircraft with pilots 

holding a private or commercial pilot’s license. In its recent UAS NPRM, the FAA stated:

“While these airman certification requirements are necessary for manned aircraft 

operations, they impose an unnecessary burden for many small UAS operations. 

This is because a person typically obtains a private or commercial pilot certificate 

by learning how to operate a manned aircraft. Much of that knowledge would not 

be applicable to small UAS operations because a small UAS is operated differently 

than manned aircraft. In addition, the knowledge currently necessary to obtain a 

private or commercial pilot certificate would not equip the certificate holder with 

the tools necessary to safely operate a small UAS... Thus, requiring persons 

wishing to operate a small UAS to obtain a private or commercial pilot certificate 

imposes the cost of certification on those persons, but does not result in a 

significant safety benefit because the process of obtaining the certificate does not 

equip those persons with the tools necessary to mitigate the public risk posed
- 19 -

by small UAS operations.” Operation and Certification of Small Unmanned 

Aircraft, 80 Fed. Reg. 9543 at 9550 (proposed Feb. 23, 2015 (to be codified at 14

C.F.R. Parts 21, 43, 45, et al.).

The FAA’s conclusion that manned aircraft flying experience is unnecessary for the 

operation of a UA is supported by research by the FAA and the Army Research Laboratory. They 

demonstrate that UAs, even those much larger than the UAs proposed by High Flight Media, can 

be safely flown by non-certificated pilots with a small amount of training. For example, one Army 

Research Laboratory study concluded:

"[T]he specific motor skills needed to control the radio-controlled UAV would 

have to be learned by aviators independently of the motor skills learned in flying 

an aircraft. In particular, the somatic and visual cues that pilots use during aircraft 

landings would not be useful (and perhaps even counter-productive) for the 

different skill sets and perceptual viewpoint necessary for radio-controlled 

landings.”1

Additional research reports lend further support for the exclusion requested. For example, 

a report sponsored by the FAA concluded that "We know that certain systems, like the

U.S. Army Hunter and Shadow systems, are successfully flown by pilots with no manned aircraft 

experience."2

In addition, foreign government airspace regulators that have examined the issue have 

consistently recognized that the skills required to fly a manned aircraft are irrelevant to operating 

a UA. For that reason, they have concluded that UA operators do not need to have a private or 

commercial pilot’s license. Canada, for example, does not require a pilot’s license to operate a 

UA. Transport Canada requires training of UA operators, but that training is limited to pilot 

ground school and flight operation training on UAs, not manned aircraft.3 Moreover, Canada 

allows this training to be “provided by other pilots, manufacturers, [UA] flight training 

organizations or . . . self taught.” 4

1 Michael J. Barnes, Beverly G. Knapp, Barry W. Tillman, Brett A. Walters & Darlene Veliki, 

Crew systems analysis of unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) future job and tasking environments, 

Technical Report ARL-TR-2081, Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD: Army Research Laboratory, 

page 12 (2000), available at http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a374230.pdf.

2 Kevin W. Williams, Unmanned Aircraft Pilot Medical Certification Requirements, Report 

DOT/FAA/AM-07/3, FAA Civil Aerospace Medical Institute, page 2, (2007), available at 

http://fas.org/irp/program/collect/ua-pilot.pdf. While the authors speculated that UAS use in 

populated areas may change this assessment, indicating further research was needed to address 

this concern, this concern is inapplicable as High Flight Media’s flights will not be in congested 

areas.

See also Jason S. McCarley & Christopher D. Wickens, Human Factors Implications of UAVs in 

the National Airspace, Institute of Aviation, Aviation Human Factors Division, University of 

Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 13 (2004), available at 

http://www.tc.faa.gov/logistics/grants/pdf/2004/04-G-032.pdf.

3 See Civil Aviation, Standards, Transport Canada, Advisory Circular: Guidance Material for 

Operating Unmanned Air Vehicle Systems under an Exemption at 14 and 18-22, (Nov. 27, 2014) 

available at http://www.tc.gc.ca/media/documents/ca-opssvs/ac-600-004.pdf.

4 Id. at 14.
20

Similarly, the United Kingdom’s Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) recognized that 

determining “Remote Pilot qualification requirements on the same basis as manned aircraft may 

yield requirements that are too inflexible, too onerous and inappropriate for UAS operations.”5 As 

a result, the CAA only requires UA operators to demonstrate UA operator competence.6 While 

there are a variety of ways to demonstrate competence, the most common is to complete a course 

that will lead to a ground exam and flight test. Australia, too, requires only passage of a UAspecific ground school program in lieu of a private pilot license.7 Finally, more than a dozen 

countries, including Germany, Italy, France, Spain and the Netherlands, have adopted the 

National UAS Certificate for Small Unmanned Aircraft (BNUC-S) Standard for UA pilot 

certification.8 This standard results in a type-specific UA certificate and does not require the 

operator to have a pilot’s license. The process involves taking a short ground school course, 

passing a ground school test and then passing a practical test on commercial operation of the 

specific UAS per the UAS manufacturer’s operations manual.

All of this experience and evidence indicates that the proposed exemption will provide a 

greater level of safety than operations under 14 C.F.R. §61.113. In this instance, the PIC will have 

gone through training as described above in Section III B. This training and education is focused 

on UAs generally, and in particular on the aircraft to be operated, rather than taking additional 

time and risk to train on a manned aircraft, weighing several thousand pounds and carrying highly 

flammable fuel.

The FAA has concluded in the NPRM that such UA-specific training is more than 

sufficient to provide an equivalent level of safety for UA operations. Sometime in the next 18- 24 

months, that position will be enshrined in a valid regulation. However, in the meantime, the FAA 

claims it lacks the authority to relax the requirement to possess a pilot certificate. As we show in 

the next section, that position is both incorrect and contradicted by the FAA’s recent decisions.

2. The FAA has and has already exercised the authority to exempt applicants from 

the airman certificate requirement

The FAA claims that it lacks authority to exempt UA operators from the requirement of 49 

U.S. §44711 to hold an airman certificate authorizing the airman “to serve in the capacity for 

which the certificate was issued.” See, e.g., Exemption No. 11110 at 14. This claim is inconsistent 

with both (i) the statutory language of that section and Section 333, and (ii) numerous recent FAA

decisions.

The operative part of 49 USC §44711 provides that a “person may not . . . serve in any 

capacity as an airman with respect to a civil aircraft, . . . used, or intended for use, in air 

commerce — (A) without an airman certificate authorizing the airman to serve in the capacity

5 Civil Aviation Authority, Safety Regulation Group, Unmanned Aircraft System Operations in 

UK Airspace – Guidance, Section 2, Chapter 5, Page 2 (Aug. 10, 2012), available at 

https://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP722.pdf.

6 Civil Aviation Authority, Unmanned Aircraft and Aircraft Systems, available at

http://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?catid=1995&pagetype=90

7 Australian Government Civil Aviation Safety Authority, available at 

http://www.casa.gov.au/scripts/nc.dll?WCMS:STANDARD::pc=PC_100374. 

8 

See EuroUSC International, “Pilot Qualification,” available at 

http://eurousc.com/services/pilot-qualifications/.
21

for which the certificate was issued . . . “ If the FAA’s interpretation were correct, this language 

would require that any person wishing to operate a UA for commercial operations have an airman 

certificate authorizing the person to serve as an airman in commercial operations.

However, in all of its recent grants of Section 333 petitions, the FAA has – without 

explicitly acknowledging the fact - exempted commercial UA operators from the § 44711(A) 

requirement that they hold an airman certificate authorizing them “to serve in the capacity for 

which the certificate was issued.” It has done so by allowing them to operate UA so long as they 

hold a private pilot’s or sport pilot’s authorization, even though such a certificate does not permit 

commercial operations. Exemption No. 11062 at 15-18; Exemption No. 11110 at 14-16;

Exemption No. 11191 at 3-5; and Exemption No. 11229 at 3 and 8.

The FAA argues that it cannot exempt applicants from the requirements of §44711 

because, while the specific language of Section 333 grants it limited statutory flexibility relative to 

49 U.S.C. §44704 for the purposes of airworthiness certification, Section 333 does not provide 

flexibility relative to §44711 and other sections of Title 49. Exemption No. 11110 at 14. This 

argument ignores the plain language of Section 333. The relevant language of Section 333 is:

(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.

The language of Section 333(b) is permissive: it requires that the Secretary “determine, at 

a minimum . . . 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).” Nothing in (b) precludes the Secretary 

from determining whether or not a pilot’s license is required for operation of a UA identified 

under paragraph (b)(1).

Indeed, the FAA has implicitly conceded the point by granting exemptions from the 

requirement that commercial UA operators hold a commercial pilot certificate. From an analytical 
22

standpoint, there is no difference between granting an exemption from the commercial pilot’s 

license requirement and granting an exemption from the private or sport pilot’s license 

requirement. Both are clearly exemptions from a specific statutory requirement in 49 U.S.C.

§44711. If the FAA has the statutory authority under Section 333(b) to do the former, it has the 

same authority to do the latter.9

For all of the reasons set forth above, the FAA should reconsider its position and exercise 

its full authority to grant an exemption from all the requirements of 49 USC §44711, so that a 

person serving as a commercial UAS operator need not have a pilot’s license.

9 The FAA has not specifically identified the statutory provision that underpins its authority

to grant the exemptions from the commercial pilot’s license requirement. Whether the statutory

basis is Section 333 or some other provision makes no difference. If there is a basis for a partial 

exemption from in 49 U.S.C. § 44711, that basis also justifies an exemption from the entire 

provision.