1

CHI-53647-1

Lutjen, Inc.’s Petition for Exemption

For Purposes of Operating Small Unmanned Aircraft System

FAA Rules Docket: ____________

Name and Address of Petitioner

Lutjen, Inc.

1301 Burlington Street #100

North Kansas City, MO. 64116

Counsel for Petitioner

Thomas L. Gemmell

HUSCH BLACKWELL LLP

120 South Riverside Plaza, 22nd Floor

Chicago, Illinois 60606

(312) 526-1523

tom.gemmell@huschblackwell.com
2

CHI-53647-1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

GLOSSARY OF ABBREVIATIONS .......................................................................... 3

SUMMARY ...........................................................................................................................4

INTRODUCTION AND INTERESTS OF PETITIONER......................................................4

BACKGROUND.................................................................................................................... 4

BASIS FOR PETITION ........................................................................................................................5

NAME AND ADDRESS OF PETITIONER.................................................................................6

WHY GRANTING LUTJEN’S REQUEST WOULD BE IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST............. 6

WHY GRANTING THE EXEMPTION WOULD NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT SAFETY...... 8

SPECIFIC SECTIONS OF 14 C.F.R. FROM WHICH LUTJEN SEEKS EXEMPTION....... 14

SUMMARY THAT CAN BE PUBLISHED IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER ......................... 28

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, VIEWS, OR ARGUMENTS SUPPORTING LUTJEN’S 

REQUEST ......................................................................................................................... 28

CONCLUSION.................................................................................................................... 28
3

CHI-53647-1

GLOSSARY OF ABBREVIATIONS

AD Airworthiness Directives

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

DHS Department of Homeland Security

EPA Environmental Protection Agency

FAA Federal Aviation Administration

FAR Federal Aviation Regulation

FCC Federal Communications Commission

FMRA FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012

FPV First Person View

GCS Ground Control Station

GPS Global Positioning System

LOL Loss of Link

LSA Light Sport Aircraft

MSL Mean Sea Level

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

SVFR Special Visual Flight Rules

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
4

CHI-53647-1

SUMMARY

Lutjen, Inc. (Lutjen) seeks exemption from the requirements of 14 C.F.R §§ 61.23(a), 

61.101(e)(4) and (5), 61.315(a), 91.7(a), 91.119(c), 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 Lutjen to operate an Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) for the commercial purpose of 

conducting aerial video and photography for land planning, GIS services, survey planning, 

sustainable design and predevelopment services within the United States.

INTRODUCTION AND INTERESTS OF THE PETITIONER

Lutjen will provide its clients with the highest quality digital content for use in their land 

planning, GIS services, survey planning, sustainable design and predevelopment projects. 

Lutjen has been developing relationships with clients, regulatory agencies and other 

professionals in the building industry for a quarter of a century. Lutjen has earned a solid 

reputation for achieving client goals while keeping state of the art technology in the forefront. 

The objective of Lutjen’s aerial video and photography operations is to provide high quality 

imaging for a variety of commercial, public, and residential uses, specifically targeting:

• Land Planning

• GIS Services

• Land Surveying

• Predevelopment Design Services

BACKGROUND 

Unmanned Aircraft Systems: DJI Inspire 1 UAS

Lutjen seeks an exemption to operate the DJI Inspire 1 UAS for compensation or hire within the 

United States. The DJI Inspire 1 UAS (Inspire 1) is a vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) 

Unmanned Aircraft (UA) with a Ground Control Station (GCS) utilizing electronic tablet or smart 

phone systems. The Inspire 1 is an electric powered rotary wing UAS that is capable of 

transmitting live airborne video images and location information to a Ground Control Station 

(GCS). The Inspire stores the photographs and data on board and makes them available for 

download after completion of the flight. The Inspire 1 is 22 in x 22 in x 8 in and weighs 6.4 

pounds, well under the 55 lbs. mandated maximum weight in the FMRA. The Inspire 1 can 

conduct hovering flight and has a maximum cruising speed of 42 knots. It is battery powered, 

has a flight endurance of 22 minutes and can operate in temperatures ranging from 0° to 40° C. 

The Inspire 1 has an omni-directional antenna and has a range of 2.1 km and operates in the 

2.420 – 2.483 GHz frequency range. The Inspire 1 that will be operated by Lutjen 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.
5

CHI-53647-1

BASIS FOR PETITION

Petitioner, 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 Inspire 1 UAS in the National Airspace System (NAS), and for an exemption from 

the requirements of 14 C.F.R §§ 61.101(e)(4) and (5), 61.3 15(a), 61.23(a), 91.7(a), 91.119(c),

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, Lutjen’s operation of the Inspire 1 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, Lutjen 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.

Lutjen submits that the requested relief is proper since an equivalent level of safety will 

be ensured. Lutjen will use experienced personnel or technicians to perform maintenance, 

alterations, or preventive maintenance on the Inspire 1 UAS’s using the methods, techniques, 

and practices prescribed in the DJI Inspire 1 User Manual (as published and updated by DJI), 

the DJI Inspire 1 Safety Guidelines (as published and updated by DJI), the Intelligent Flight 

Battery Safety Guidelines (as published and updated by DJI), and the DJI Inspire 1 

Maintenance Manual. All DJI published and updated materials (in their most current and up-todate form) are publicly available for download at http://www.dji.com/product/inspire-1/download 

and are hereinafter referred to as “Operating Documents.” Furthermore, Lutjen will document 

and maintain all maintenance records for the Inspire 1 UAS.

Relief from certain requirements of Section 61.101(e)(4) and (5) entitled Recreational 

pilot privileges and limitations: Pilot in command, and from Section 61.315(a) entitled What are 

the privileges and limits of my sport pilot certificate, and from Section 61.23(a) entitled Medical 

certificates: Requirements and duration, is requested by Lutjen to the extent necessary to allow 

a Pilot in Command (PIC) holding a sport pilot or higher level certificate, as well as a valid 

driver’s license, and who has demonstrated, by meeting minimum flight-hour and currency 

requirements, that the PIC is able to safely operate the Inspire 1 in a manner consistent with this 

exemption, including evasive and emergency maneuvers and maintaining appropriate distances 

from people, vessels, vehicles and structures.

Lutjen seeks relief from Section 91.7(a), entitled Civil aircraft airworthiness, because the 

Inspire 1 does not require an airworthiness certificate in accordance with 14 C.F.R. Part 21, 

Subpart H. As such, Lutjen submits that it will ensure that the Inspire 1 is in an airworthy 

condition, prior to every flight, by determining that the Inspire 1 is in compliance with the 

Operating Documents, and that the aircraft is in a condition for safe flight.
6

CHI-53647-1

Lutjen also seeks an exemption from the requirements of Section 91.121, entitled 

Altimeter Settings, as the Inspire 1 will not have a typical barometric altimeter onboard. 

However, altitude information of the Inspire 1 will be provided to the PIC via Global Positioning 

System (GPS) equipment and radio communications telemetry data link, which downlinks from 

the UAS to the GCS for active monitoring of the flight path. This altitude information, combined 

with Lutjen operation of the Inspire 1 within visual line of sight, at or below 200 feet AGL, will 

ensure a level of safety equivalent to Section 91.121.

Additionally, Lutjen seeks an exemption from the requirements of Section 91.151(b), 

entitled Fuel requirements for flight in VFR conditions. Lutjen submits that safety will not be 

affected by operation of the Inspire 1 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 13.5 minutes to the first point of intended landing and, assuming normal cruising 

speed, to fly after that for at least 4.5 minutes.

In accordance with 14 C.F.R. § 11.81, Lutjen provides the following information in 

support of its petition for exemption:

A. Name and Address of the Petitioner.

Lutjen

1301 Burlington Street #100

North Kansas City, MO. 64116

B. Why Granting Lutjen’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 Lutjen to safely, 

efficiently, and economically conduct aerial video and photography of land planning, GIS 

services, survey planning, sustainable design and predevelopment services over certain areas 

of the United States.

Additionally, use of the Inspire 1 will decrease congestion of the NAS, reduce pollution, 

and provide significant benefits to the economy. Notably, the benefits of Lutjen’s proposed 

operation of the Inspire 1 will be realized without implicating any privacy issues.

1. Public will Benefit from Decreased Congestion of the NAS.

The Inspire 1 is 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 an Inspire 1 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.
7

CHI-53647-1

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 Inspire 

1 does 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 Inspire 1.

Conducting aerial acquisitions with the Inspire 1, 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 Inspire 1 produces 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 Inspire 1, while reducing the carbon footprint of aerial 

acquisitions, also eliminates noise pollution, as the UAS is propelled by battery powered electric 

motors, rather than an internal combustion engine. By using the Inspire 1 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 Inspire 1 (weighing approximately 6.5 pounds maximum gross weights with a length 

of 17.3 inches, width of 17.7 inches, and 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 Inspire 1 will 

Benefit the Economy.

In addition to being safe and efficient, the Inspire 1 is also an economical alternative to 

using manned aircraft to conduct similar aerial operations. As such, operation of the Inspire 1 

will allow United States based companies, like Lutjen 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 battery powered Inspire 1 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 Inspire 1, companies such as Lutjen can remain competitive and 

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

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

companies, through commercial use of the Inspire 1, provides a stable workforce that increases 

consumer spending; 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.
8

CHI-53647-1

4. There Are No Privacy Issues.

Similar to the manned aerial acquisition flight operations that have been conducted for 

decades, Lutjen proposed operation of the Inspire 1 will not implicate any privacy issues. 

Specifically, the Inspire 1 will be operated only in compliance with the conditions set forth in any 

exemption granted under this petition. 

C. Why Granting the Exemption would not Adversely Affect Safety.

1. Why The Inspire 1 Meets 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, Lutjen operation of the Inspire 1 meets the conditions 

of FMRA Section 333, and will not require an 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, Lutjen submits that the 

Inspire 1 can operate safely in the NAS pursuant to FMRA Section 333, as 

demonstrated by: (a) the characteristics of the Inspire 1; (b) the pilot certification 

requirement; and (c) the specific operating limitations.
9

CHI-53647-1

a. The Specifications of the Inspire 1 Demonstrate its Safe Characteristics.

The Inspire 1 does 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 Inspire 1.

The technical specifications of the Inspire 1 are set forth by the DJI Inspire 1 UAS 

Specifications and Data Sheet, https://www.dji.com/product/inspire-1/spec.

(ii) The Inspire 1 autonomous flight and navigation modes enable the UAS to remain 

within a defined operational area.

The Inspire 1 may be operated in both manual and fully autonomous flight modes. A 

complete description of the flight and navigational modes of the Inspire 1 is provided in the DJI 

Inspire 1 UAS User Manual of the Operating Documents (http://www.dji.com/product/inspire1/download).

(iii) The Inspire 1 is 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 Inspire 1 will remain stationary, in flight, for 3 seconds 

or more. If, after 3 seconds, the Inspire 1 does not reacquire control link data from the GCS, the 

UAS will assume that the Control Link is lost and the UAS 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 the Failsafe Functions of the Inspire 1 are set forth in the DJI 

Inspire 1 User Manual of the Operating Documents (http://www.dji.com/product/inspire1/download).

(iv) The Inspire 1 GCS and its operation.

A complete description of the operation and specifications of the Inspire 1 GCS and flight 

control software is provided in the DJI Inspire 1 User Manual of the Operating Documents

(http://www.dji.com/product/inspire-1/download).

b. Flight Operations of Inspire 1 are Limited to the Line of Sight of a Certificated Pilot 

in Command with a Safety Observer.

Lutjen will only utilize certificated pilots who possess a current and valid airman medical 

certificate to act as a pilot in command (PIC) of the Inspire 1. Additionally, a safety observer will 

assist all pilots during flight time.
10

CHI-53647-1

c. Flights of Inspire 1 Will Be Conducted Pursuant to Specific Operating Limitations.

In seeking this exemption, Lutjen proposes to commercially operate the Inspire 1 for the 

special purpose of conducting aerial video and photography over certain areas of 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 UAS weighing less than 55 pounds 

maximum gross weight: DJI Inspire 1 UAS. 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 UAS must be operated at an altitude of no more than 200 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 of the FAA (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 
11

CHI-53647-1

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. The UAS 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 airline transport, commercial, private, recreational or sport pilot 

certificate. The PIC must also hold a current FAA airman medical certificate or a valid 

U.S. driver’s license issued by a state, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, a territory, a 

possession, or the Federal government. 

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. § 61.5 1(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 experience-building flights, all persons not essential for flight operations 

are considered nonparticipants, and the PIC must operate the UAS with appropriate 

distance from nonparticipants in accordance with 14 C.F.R. § 91.119.
12

CHI-53647-1

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

a. 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 UAS 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 UAS 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 UAS 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 UAS with 25% battery power remaining.

25. In the event the intended operations do not qualify for the FAA’s blanket 200-foot 

Certificate of Waiver or Authorization (COA), the operator must obtain an Air Traffic 

Organization (ATO) issued 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 (N -

Number) 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 under 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 
13

CHI-53647-1

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. 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, Lutjen requests that the FAA 

prescribe special conditions for the intended operation of the Inspire 1, 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 Inspire 1, 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 
14

CHI-53647-1

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.

D. The Specific Sections of 14 C.F.R. from which Lutjen seeks Exemption, The Extent 

of Relief Lutjen seeks, the Reason Lutjen seeks the Relief, and 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 Lutjen seeks Exemption.

1. Lutjen seeks Exemption from the Requirements of Section 61.23(a). 

Section 61.23, entitled Operations requiring a medical certificate: Requirements and 

duration, subsection (a) prescribes the following, in relevant part:

(a) Operations requiring a medical certificate. Except as provided in paragraphs (b) and 

(c) of this section, a person—

(3) Must hold at least a third-class medical certificate—

(i) When exercising the privileges of a private pilot certificate; 

(ii) When exercising the privileges of a recreational pilot certificate; 

(iii) When exercising the privileges of a student pilot certificate;

Extent of Relief Lutjen seeks and the Reason Lutjen seeks Relief from Section 

61.23(a).

Relief from Section 61.23(a), entitled Operations requiring a medical certificate: 

Requirements and duration, is requested to the extent required to necessary to allow a 

PIC holding a sport pilot certificate or higher level certificate, as well as a current and 

valid driver’s license, to conduct the proposed UAS flight operations for compensation or 

hire.

This relief is requested since the limitations set forth in Section 61.23(a) 

otherwise require the PIC of any flight for compensation or hire to hold a comprehensive 

FAA issued medical certificate. In Exemption No. 11213 to Aeryon Labs, Inc., the FAA 

“finds that, because of the risk mitigations established in the conditions and limitations of 

this exemption, a person that holds a U.S. issued driver’s license who is operating a 

UAS will not adversely affect safety. The FAA is granting relief from § 61.23(a) to allow 

any pilot that holds one of the pilot’s certificates discussed above to operate a UAS 

under this exemption with a U.S. issued driver’s license, in lieu of an FAA-issued 

medical certificate. The FAA is also granting relief from § 61.23(c) to allow sport pilot 

certificate holders to operate aircraft other than LSA with a U.S. issued driver’s license 

under this exemption.
15

CHI-53647-1

Why an Exemption from the Requirements of Section 61.23(a) would not 

Adversely Affect Safety.

In exemption nos. 11213 and 11578, the FAA previously found that because of 

the risk mitigations established in the conditions and limitations of that exemption (which 

are substantially similar to the conditions and limitations set forth above), a person that 

holds a U.S. issued driver’s license who is operating a UAS will not adversely affect 

safety.

2. Lutjen seeks Exemption from The Requirements of Section 61.101(e)(4) and (5).

Section 61.101, entitled Recreational pilot privileges and limitations: Pilot in 

command, subsections (e)(4) and (5) prescribe the following, in relevant part:

(e) Except as provided in paragraphs (d) and (i) of this section, a recreational 

pilot may not act as pilot in command of an aircraft.

(4) For compensation or hire;

(5) In furtherance of a business;

Extent of Relief Lutjen seeks and the Reason Lutjen seeks Relief from Section 

61.101(e)(4) and (5).

Relief from Section 61.101(e)(4) and (5) entitled Recreational pilot privileges and 

limitations: Pilot in command, is requested to the extent necessary to allow a PIC holding 

a recreational or higher level certificate 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 61.101(e)(4) and 

(5) state that a recreation pilot may not, for compensation or hire.

As set forth more fully below, Lutjen submits that an equivalent level of 

safety will be maintained because no PIC will be allowed to operate the Inspire 1 unless 

that PIC has met certain flight-hour and currency requirements, demonstrating that the 

PIC is able to safely operate either the Inspire 1 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.

Why an Exemption from the Requirements of Section 61.101(e)(4) and (5) would 

not Adversely Affect Safety.

Lutjen submits that the equivalent level of safety established by Section 

61.101(e)(4) and (5) will be maintained because no PIC will be allowed to operate the 

Inspire 1 unless that PIC has demonstrated, by meeting minimum flight-hour and 

currency requirements, that the PIC is able to safely operate the Inspire 1 in a manner 

consistent with the exemption, including evasive and emergency maneuvers and 

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

Considering Lutjen proposed area of operations, and the operating limitations set forth-
16

CHI-53647-1

above; the parallel nature of sport pilot aeronautical knowledge requirements to those of 

commercial pilot requirements; and the airmanship skills necessary to safely operate the 

Inspire 1, Lutjen submits that the additional manned airmanship experience of a 

commercially certificated pilot would not correlate to the airmanship skills necessary for 

Lutjen specific proposed flight operations.

The FAA has previously granted relief from Section 61.101(e)(4) and (5)) specific 

to UAS, in circumstances similar, in all material respects, to those presented herein (e.g. 

Exemption Nos. 11213 and 11578).

Lutjen will not allow any PIC to operate the Inspire 1 unless that PIC has 

demonstrated, by meeting minimum flight -hour requirements or the Inspire 1 training 

and currency requirements, that the PIC is able to safely operate the Inspire 1 in a 

manner consistent with this exemption, including evasive and emergency maneuvers 

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

3. Lutjen 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) state the following:

(a) Except as provided in paragraphs (b) through (h) of this section, no person who holds 

a private pilot certificate may act as pilot in command of an aircraft that is carrying 

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

or hire, act as pilot in command of an aircraft.

(b) A private pilot may, for compensation or hire, act as pilot in command of an aircraft in 

connection with any business or employment if:

(1) The flight is only incidental to that business or employment; and

(2) The aircraft does not carry passengers or property for compensation or hire.

Extent of Relief Lutjen seeks and the Reason Lutjen 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, Lutjen submits that an equivalent level of safety will 

be maintained because no PIC will be allowed to operate the Inspire 1 unless that PIC 
17

CHI-53647-1

has met certain flight-hour and currency requirements, demonstrating that the PIC is 

able to safely operate either the Inspire 1 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, Lutjen submits that all flights of the Inspire 1 conducted by the PIC 

pursuant to the grant of this Petition: (1) will be incidental to Lutjen Inc’s, business; and 

(2) will not carry passengers or property for compensation or hire.

Why an Exemption from the Requirements of Section 61.113(a) and (b) would not 

Adversely Affect Safety.

Lutjen 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 

Inspire 1 unless that PIC has demonstrated, by meeting minimum flight-hour and 

currency requirements, that the PIC is able to safely operate the Inspire 1 in a manner 

consistent with the exemption, including evasive and emergency maneuvers and 

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

Considering Lutjen proposed area of operations, and the operating limitations set forthabove; the parallel nature of sport pilot aeronautical knowledge requirements to those of 

commercial pilot requirements (See Exemption No. 11062); and the airmanship skills 

necessary to safely operate the Inspire 1, Lutjen submits that the additional manned 

airmanship experience of a commercially certificated pilot would not correlate to the 

airmanship skills necessary for Lutjen 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).

Lutjen will not allow any PIC to operate the Inspire 1 unless that PIC has 

demonstrated, by meeting minimum flight -hour requirements or the Inspire 1 training 

and currency requirements, that the PIC is able to safely operate the Inspire 1 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 Lutjen 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 
18

CHI-53647-1

61.5 1(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 flight-hour 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 experiencebuilding flights can also be conducted under the grant of exemption to 

accomplish the required flight time. During training, proficiency, and experiencebuilding flights the PIC is required to operate the UA with appropriate distances in 

accordance with 14 C.F.R91.119. 

Exemption No. 11138 at page 15.

Accordingly, Lutjen will ensure safe operations by not allowing any PIC to 

operate the Inspire 1 unless that PIC has demonstrated, by meeting minimum flight-hour 

and currency requirements, that the PIC is able to safely operate the Inspire 1 in a 

manner consistent with the exemption, including evasive and emergency maneuvers 

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

4. Lutjen seeks Exemption from the Requirements of Section 61.315(a). 

Section 61.315(a), entitled What are the Privileges and Limits of my Sport Pilot 

Certificate, subsection (a) prescribe the following, in relevant part:

(c) You may not act as pilot in command of a light-sport aircraft:

(2) For compensation or hire.

(3) In furtherance of a business.

Extent of Relief Lutjen seeks and the Reason Lutjen seeks Relief from Section 

61.315(a).

Relief from Section 61.315(a) entitled “What are the privileges and limits of my 

sport pilot certificate”, is requested to the extent necessary to allow a PIC holding a sport 

pilot or higher level certificate to conduct the proposed UAS flight operations for 

compensation or hire.

This relief is requested since the limitations set forth in Section 61.315(a) restrict 

a sport pilot from acting as the PIC of any flight for compensation or hire, or for the 

furtherance of any business.

In Exemption No. 11213 to Aeryon Labs, Inc., the FAA re-assessed the level of 
19

CHI-53647-1

pilot certificate that would be appropriate for the petitioner’s operations. In evaluating this 

petition, similar to the evaluation of the private and commercial pilot certificates in 

Exemption No. 11062, the agency compared the aeronautical knowledge requirements 

of the recreational and sport pilot certificates to those of the private pilot certificate. They 

found that the aeronautical knowledge requirements that would be applicable to a UAS 

operation for a recreational pilot and sport pilot certificate are substantially similar as 

those for a private pilot certificate.

Additionally, similar to the private and commercial pilot certificates, holders of 

recreational and sport pilot certificates are subject to security screening by the 

Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

Therefore, because they must demonstrate aeronautical knowledge relevant to 

UAS operations and are subject to DHS screening, factors that were considered by the 

FAA in allowing private pilot operations under previous exemptions, the FAA now 

determines that holders of recreational and sport pilot certificates may serve as the PIC 

for UAS operations.

Why an Exemption from the Requirements of Section 61.315(a) would not 

Adversely Affect Safety.

In exemption nos. 11213 and 11578, the FAA previously found that holders of 

sport pilot certificates may serve as PIC for UAS operations as they have demonstrated 

aeronautical knowledge relevant to UAS operations, are subject to Department of 

Homeland Security screening, and risk is also mitigated through conditions and 

limitations regarding PIC training.

5. Lutjen 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.

Extent of Relief Lutjen seeks and the Reason Lutjen 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 Lutjen to determine that the Inspire 1 is in airworthy condition 

prior to every flight by ensuring that the UAS is in compliance with the Operating 

Documents.

Lutjen seeks the requested relief because the Inspire 1 does not require an 

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

Lutjen will ensure that the Inspire 1 is in airworthy condition based upon its compliance 

with the Operating Documents prior to every flight, and further, determine that the 

aircraft are in condition for safe flight, as stated in the conditions and limitations below.

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 
20

CHI-53647-1

because prior to every flight, Lutjen will ensure that the Inspire 1 is 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).

6. Lutjen seeks Exemption from the Requirements of Section 91.119(c).

Section 91.119(c), entitled Minimum safe altitudes: General, subsection (c) state 

the following: 

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

below the following altitudes:

***

(c) Over other than congested areas. An altitude of 500 feet above the surface, 

except over open water or sparsely populated areas. In those cases, the aircraft may not 

be operated closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure.

Extent of Relief Lutjen seeks and the Reason Lutjen seeks Relief from Section 

91.119(c).

Section 91.119(c) establishes safe altitudes for operation of civil aircraft over 

areas other than congested areas. An exemption from subsection 91.119(c) is 

necessary because, pursuant to this Petition, the Inspire 1 US will at almost all times be 

operated below 400 feet AGL.

Why an Exemption from the Requirements of Section 91.119(c) Would Not 

Adversely Affect Safety.

An equivalent or even higher level of safety can be provided instead by operating the 

Inspire 1 within the VLOS of the PIC with the assistance of a VO so as to ensure the 

safety of and deconfliction with any persons or property in the air and on the ground, 

including participating and non-participating personnel. Further the Inspire flight 

operations will be monitored at all times by both the PIC and VO and will be in 

compliance with local public safety requirements, so as to prevent access to the 

restricted areas of operation. 

The FAA has previously granted exemptions in circumstances similar, in all material 

respects, to those presented herein (e.g. Exemption Nos. 111062 (Astraeus Aerial), 

11063 (Snaproll Media LLC), 11064 (RC Pro Productions Consulting, dba Vortex Aerial), 

11065 (HeliVideo Productions, LLC), 11066 (Aerial MOB, LLC) and 11067 (Pictorvision 

Inc.).

7. Lutjen 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 
21

CHI-53647-1

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.

Extent of Relief Lutjen seeks and the Reason Lutjen seeks Relief from Section 

91.121.

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

flight operations of the Inspire 1, which utilize a barometric pressure sensor, GPS 

equipment, and a radio communications telemetry data link to downlink altitude 

information from the UAS 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), Lutjen seeks the requested relief 

because the Inspire 1’s 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 Inspire 1 is 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 UAs 

on the heads-up display of the GCS.

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 Inspire 1 will be provided to the PIC via GPS 

equipment and a radio communications telemetry data link, which downlinks from the 

UAS to the GCS for active monitoring of the flight path and altitude. This altitude 

information, combined with Lutjen’s operation of the Inspire 1 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 al l material respects, to those presented herein (e.g. 

Exemption Nos. 11062, 11063, 11064, 11065, 11066, 11067, 11080, 11109, 11112, 
22

CHI-53647-1

11136, 11138, 11150, 11153, 11156, 11157, 11158, 11159, 11160, 11161).

8. Lutjen 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 the

intended landing and, assuming normal cruising speed, to fly after that for at least 20 

minutes.

Extent Of Relief Lutjen seeks and the Reason Lutjen 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 battery powered 

Inspire 1 during daylight hours in visual meteorological conditions (VMC), under visual

flight rules (VFR), for a total duration of 13.5 minutes to the first point of intended landing 

and, assuming normal cruising speed, to fly after that for at least 4.5 minutes. Lutjen

seeks the requested relief because without an exemption from Section 91.151(b), the 

flight time duration of the battery powered Inspire 1 will severely constrain the practicality 

of any aerial video or still photo flight operations that Lutjen proposes to conduct 

pursuant to this petition.

Significantly, as set forth below, the technical specifications of the Inspire 1, the 

Operating Documents, and Lutjen proposed operating limitations, ensure that Lutjen will 

safely operate the battery powered Inspire 1 during daylight hours in visual 

meteorological conditions (VMC), under visual flight rules (VFR), with enough battery 

power to fly for a total duration of 13.5 minutes to the first point of intended landing and, 

assuming normal cruising speed, to fly after that for at least 4.5 minutes.

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 Inspire 

1; (2) the limitations on the proposed flight operations; and (3) the location of the 

proposed flight operations. Accordingly, Lutjen will ensure that it will safely operate the 

battery powered DJI Inspire 1 UA during daylight hours in VFR conditions, with enough 

battery power to fly for a total duration of 13.5 minutes to the first point of intended 

landing and, assuming normal cruising speed, to fly after that for at least 4.5 minutes.

Here, as in Exemption No. 11109, the technical specifications of the Inspire 1; 

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 Inspire 1 provide audible and 

visual warnings to the PIC at the GCS when the UAs experiences low battery voltage, 

the first warning occurring at approximately 33% remaining battery power, and again at 

approximately 10% remaining battery power. At the critically low battery level, the Inspire 

1 will descend and land automatically.
23

CHI-53647-1

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).

9. Lutjen 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.

Extent of Relief Lutjen Seeks and the Reason Lutjen seeks Relief from Section 

91.405(a).

Since Section 91.405(a) only applies to aircraft with an airworthiness certificate, 

Lutjen requests relief from this Section because the Inspire 1 does not require 

airworthiness certificate. As set forth more fully below, the Inspire 1 meets the conditions 

of FMRA Section 333 for operation without an airworthiness certificate. Accordingly, 

Lutjen will use trained technicians to perform maintenance, alterations, or preventive 

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

Operating Documents (i.e., the DJI Inspire 1 User Manual, the DJI Inspire 1 Safety 

Guidelines, the Intelligent Flight Battery Safety Guidelines, the DJI Inspire 1 

Maintenance Manual). Furthermore, Lutjen will document and maintain all maintenance 

records for the Inspire 1.

Why an Exemption from the Requirements of Section 91 .405(a) Would Not 

Adversely Affect Safety.

In seeking this exemption, Lutjen submits that the equivalent level of safety with 

regard to the regulatory maintenance and alteration requirements established by Section 

91.405(a) will be met because Lutjen will use trained technicians to perform 

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

techniques, and practices prescribed in the Operating Documents (i.e., the DJI Inspire 1 

User Manual, the DJI Inspire 1 Safety Guidelines, the Intelligent Flight Battery Safety 

Guidelines, the DJI Inspire 1 Maintenance Manual). Furthermore, Lutjen will document 

and maintain all maintenance records for the Inspire 1.

Since the Inspire 1 will be inspected as prescribed by the Operating Documents, 

Lutjen will maintain the equivalent level of safety established by Section 91.405(a). 

Likewise, the exemption sought will not adversely affect safety because Lutjen
24

CHI-53647-1

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.

Significantly, previous exemptions granted by the FAA concerning Section 

91.405(a) establish that safety is not adversely affected when the technical 

characteristics and operating limitations of the UAS are considered.

10. Lutjen 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.

Extent of Relief Lutjen Seeks and the Reason Lutjen seeks Relief from Section 

91.407(a)(1).

Since Section 91.407(a)(1) only applies to aircraft with an airworthiness 

certificate, Lutjen requests relief from this Section because the Inspire 1 does not require 

airworthiness certificate. As set forth more fully below, the Inspire 1 meets the conditions 

of FMRA Section 333 for operation without an airworthiness certificate. Accordingly, 

Lutjen will use trained technicians to perform maintenance, alterations, or preventive 

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

Operating Documents. Furthermore, Lutjen will document and maintain all maintenance

records for the Inspire 1.

Why An Exemption From The Requirements Of Section 91.407(a)(1) Would Not 

Adversely Affect Safety.

In seeking this exemption, Lutjen submits that the equivalent level of safety with 

regard to the regulatory maintenance and alteration requirements established by Section 

91.407(a)(1) will be met because Lutjen will use trained technicians to perform 

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

techniques, and practices prescribed in the Operating Documents. Furthermore, Lutjen

will document and maintain all maintenance records for the Inspire 1.

Likewise, the exemption sought will not adversely affect safety because Lutjen

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 because all maintenance of the Inspire 1 will be 

performed by trained technicians. Maintenance will be documented and maintained 

utilizing the monthly maintenance log. Significantly, previous exemptions granted by the 
25

CHI-53647-1

FAA concerning Section 91.407(a)(1) establish that safety is not adversely affected 

when the technical characteristics and operating limitations of the UAS are considered.

11. Lutjen 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.

Extent of Relief Lutjen Seeks and the Reason Lutjen seeks Relief from Sections 

91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2).

Since Sections 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2) only apply to aircraft with an airworthiness 

certificate, Lutjen requests relief from these Sections because the Inspire 1 does not 

require airworthiness certificate. As set forth more fully below, the Inspire 1 meets the 

conditions of FMRA Section 333 for operation without an airworthiness certificate. 

Accordingly, Lutjen will use trained technicians to perform maintenance, alterations, or 

preventive maintenance on the UAS using the methods, techniques, and practices 

prescribed in the Operating Documents. Furthermore, Lutjen will document and maintain 

all maintenance records for the Inspire 1.

Why an Exemption from the Requirements of Sections 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2) Would 

Not Adversely Affect Safety.

In seeking this exemption, Lutjen submits that the equivalent level of safety with 

regard to the regulatory maintenance and alteration requirements established by 

Sections 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2) will be met because Lutjen will use trained technicians to 

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

methods, techniques, and practices prescribed in the Operating Documents. 

Furthermore, Lutjen will document and maintain all maintenance records for the Inspire 

1.

Since the Inspire 1 will be inspected as prescribed by the Operating Documents, 

Lutjen will maintain the equivalent level of safety established by Sections 91.409(a)(1) 

and 91.409(a)(2).

Likewise, the exemption sought will not adversely affect safety because Lutjen

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.
26

CHI-53647-1

Significantly, previous exemptions granted by the FAA concerning Sections 

91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2) establish that safety is not adversely affected when the technical 

characteristics and operating limitations of the UAS are considered.

12. Lutjen 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.
27

CHI-53647-1

(3) A list of defects furnished to a registered owner or operator under § 43.11 of this 

chapter shall be retained until the defects are repaired and the aircraft is 

approved for return to service.

Extent of Relief Lutjen Seeks and the Reason Lutjen seeks Relief from Sections 

91.417(a) & (b).

Since Sections 91.417(a) & (b) only apply to aircraft with an airworthiness 

certificate, Lutjen requests relief from these Sections because the Inspire 1 does not

require airworthiness certificate. As set forth more fully below, the Inspire 1 meets the 

conditions of FMRA Section 333 for operation without an airworthiness certificate. 

Accordingly, Lutjen will use trained technicians to perform maintenance, alterations, or 

preventive maintenance on the UAS using the methods, techniques, and practices 

prescribed in the Operating Documents. Furthermore, Lutjen will document and maintain 

all maintenance records for the Inspire 1.

Why an Exemption from the Requirements Of Sections 91.417(a) & (b) Would Not 

Adversely Affect Safety.

In seeking this exemption, Lutjen submits that the equivalent level of safety with 

regard to the regulatory maintenance and alteration requirements established by 

Sections 91.417(a) & (b) will be met because Lutjen will use trained technicians to 

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

methods, techniques, and practices prescribed in the Operating Documents. 

Furthermore, Lutjen will document and maintain all maintenance records for the Inspire 

1.

Likewise, the exemption sought will not adversely affect safety because Lutjen

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 91.417(a) and 91.417(b) because all maintenance of the Inspire 

1 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 and 91.417(a) & (b) establish that safety is not 

adversely affected when the technical characteristics and operating limitations of the 

UAS are considered.

E. A Summary that can be Published in the Federal Register, stating: The Rules From 

Which Lutjen Seeks Exemption:

Lutjen, Inc. seeks exemption from the requirements of 14 C.F.R Sections 61.23 (a), 

61.101 (e) (4) and (5), 61.315(a), 91.7(a), 91.119(c), 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 Lutjen seeks:
28

CHI-53647-1

This exemption will permit Lutjen, Inc. to commercially operate an Unmanned Aircraft 

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

areas of the United States. 

F. Any Additional Information, Views, or Arguments Available to Support Lutjen

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, Lutjen 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, Lutjen will operate the Inspire 1 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, Lutjen, Inc. 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 DJI Inspire 1 UAS 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 Lutjen to safely, efficiently, and economically operate the Inspire 1 

commercially within the NAS.

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

Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, Section 333, Lutjen, Inc. respectfully requests that the 

Administrator grant this Petition for an exemption from the requirements of 14 C.F.R Sections 

61.23(a), 61.101(e)(4) and (5), 61.315(a), 91.7(a), 91.119(c) 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 Lutjen to operate the DJI 

Inspire 1 UAS commercially for the purpose of conducting aerial video and photography over 

areas of the United States.