Richard Boyle (dba Sky Eye View) Section 333 Exemption Request 

Contact Information: 

Richard Boyle (dba Sky Eye View)

3753 Swetland Drive

Doylestown, PA 18902

Phone: (215) 429-1409

Email: skyeyecandy@gmail.com

May 14, 2015 

U. S. Department of Transportation 

Docket Management System

1200 New Jersey Ave, SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

Exemption Request Section 333 of the FAA Reform Act of the Federal Aviation Regulations from 

Part 21; 14 C.F.R. 45.23(b); 14 C.F.R. Part 21; 14 C.F.R. 61.113(a)&(b); 91.7(a); 91.9(b) (2); 

91.121; 91.151(a); 91.203(a)&(b); 91.405(a); 91.407(a) (1); 91.409(a) (2); 91.417(a)&(b) ; 

91.119c 

Dear Sir or Madam, 

I, Richard Boyle (dba Sky Eye View), am writing pursuant to the FAA Modernization and Reform 

Act of 2012 and the procedures contained within 14 C.F.R. 11, to request that I, Richard Boyle 

(dba Sky Eye View), Academy of Model Aeronautics (AMA) Member, Association for Unmanned 

Vehicle Systems International (AUSVI) Member, be exempted from the Federal Aviation 

Regulations (“FARs”) listed below so that I, Richard Boyle (dba Sky Eye View), may operate my 

state-of-the-art professional grade small unmanned aircraft systems (sUAS) commercially in 

airspace regulated by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). 

The sUAS are as follows:

1. DJI S1000 octocopter using the DJI A2 flight controller with Zenmuse gimbal and Panasonic 

GH4 camera. Maximum take off weight is 24 pounds.

2. DJI S1000 octocopter using the DJI A2 flight controller with Zenmuse gimbal and Panasonic 

GH3 camera. Maximum take off weight is 24 pounds.

Flight operations and control for both are identical since both use the same DJI A2 flight 

controller and prescribed flight envelope exemptions will be the same. Line of site (LOS) 

operation only, 400 foot altitude restriction, maximum 30 knot speed, and 1500 foot maximum 

lateral distance, Both sUAS have GPS guidance systems with fail-safe and return to home 

capability. I have 100+ hours of flight time experience with each sUAS and I will be the sole 

operator of the sUAS. 

I, Richard Boyle (dba Sky Eye View), have flown sUAS for recreational purposes and I am 

knowledgeable of current FAA guidelines and regulations. My intent for the commercial use of 
these sUAS is to create videos and photographs for people who can benefit from the unique 

vantage provided by my equipment and services.

My exemption request would permit operation of sUAS in predetermined in areas away from 

general public, airports, heliports and vehicular traffic for community videos, and within property 

boundaries for small business and individual real estate listing videos and photos with the 

permission of the property owners or designee. Currently, similar sUAS are legally operated by 

unmonitored amateur hobbyists with no safety plan or controls. I, Richard Boyle (dba Sky Eye 

View), have personally instilled safety systems within AMA guidelines, AC 91.57 circular, and 

completed a comprehensive training program provided by the sUAS dealer where I purchased 

the sUAS. 

Operation of the sUAS will be per attached user guides and modified RCAPA checklists, AC 

91-57 (400 foot max altitude, line of site (LOS) operation only, not within Class C or B airspace, 

and only in Class D with prior permission and Transceiver contact with Control tower, Class G 

and E airports at least 3 miles from airports or with proper Airspace procedures Authorization or 

Contact, and under visual flight rules (VFR). 

Granting my, Richard Boyle (dba Sky Eye View), request comports with the Secretary of 

Transportation’s (FAA Administrator’s) responsibilities and authority to not only integrate sUAS's 

into the national airspace system, but to “...establish requirements for the safe operation of such 

aircraft systems [sUAS] in the national airspace system” under Section 333(c) of the Reform Act 

specific to the use of sUAS for aerial media and real estate purposes. Further I, Richard Boyle 

(dba Sky Eye View), will conduct my operations in compliance with the protocols described 

herein or as otherwise established by the FAA. 

For the following reasons I, Richard Boyle (dba Sky Eye View), respectfully request the grant of 

an exemption allowing me to operate remote controlled sUAS: 

1. Community awareness to benefit and enhance attraction to the Southeastern Pennsylvania 

area.

2. Utilize aerial media for small business and real estate listing videos for homeowners who 

cannot afford expensive manned aircraft for the same purpose. 

3. Cost effective commercial infrastructure inspection to promote public safety. 

This exception is similar and has precedence as exemption 11153 (Burnzeye View, INC.) and 

exemption 11138 (Douglas Trudeau). 

I have attached the following documents with my request:

1. Operator Manuals for the DJI S100 (Quick Start and Full)

2. Operator Manual for the DJI A2 Flight System

3. Operator Manual for the DJI Lightbridge System

4. Operational/preflight checklist guidelines 
The specific sections of Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations from which Richard Boyle 

(dba Sky Eye View) requests exemption are: 

14 C.F.R. Part 21

14 C.F.R. 45.23(b);

14 C.F.R. Part 21;

14 C.F.R. 61.113(a)&(b); 91.7(a);

91.9(b) (2);

91.121;

91.151(a); 91.203(a)&(b); 91.405(a);

91.407(a) (1);

91.409(a) (2); 91.417(a)&(b) ;

91.119c 

The extent of relief Richard Boyle (dba Sky Eye View) seeks and the reason he seeks such 

relief: 

I, Richard Boyle (dba Sky Eye View), submit this application in accordance with the Reform Act, 

112 P.L. 95 §§ 331-334, seeking relief from any currently applicable FARs operating to prevent 

me, Richard Boyle (dba Sky Eye View), contemplated commercial cinematic, academic, and 

other flight operations within the national airspace system. The Reform Act in Section 332 

provides for such integration of civil unmanned aircraft systems into our national airspace 

system as it is in the public’s interest to do so. My, Richard Boyle (dba Sky Eye View)’s, sUAS 

meet the definition of “small unmanned aircraft” as defined in Section 331 and therefore the 

integration of sUAS are expressly contemplated by the Reform Act. 

I would like to operate my sUAS commercially prior to the time period by which the Reform Act 

requires the FAA to promulgate rules governing such craft. The Reform Act guides the Secretary 

in determining the types of UAS's that may operate safely in our national airspace system. 

Considerations include: The weight, size, speed and overall capabilities of the sUAS; whether 

the sUAS will be operated near airports or heavily populated areas; and, whether the sUAS will 

be operated by line of sight (LOS). 112 P.L. 95 § 333 (a). Each of these items reflect in favor of 

an exemption for me, Richard Boyle (dba Sky Eye View). My sUAS use eight (8) counterrotating propellers for balance, control and stability. My sUAS are equipped with GPS and auto 

return fail safe technology. Weighing less than twenty four (24) pounds, below the maximum 55 

pound limit, including cameras and gimbals. 

I, Richard Boyle (dba Sky Eye View), consider safety the main priority of each flight. I am an 

experienced sUAS pilot and have knowledge of airspace and manned flight operations. I have 

100+ hours of flight experience and will operate each flight per attached user guides and 

modified RCAPA checklists, AC 91-57 (operation between sunrise and sunset, 400 foot max 

altitude, line of site (LOS) operation, not within Class C or B airspace, only in Class D with prior 

permission and Transceiver contact with Control tower, Class G and E airports at least 3 miles 

from airports or with proper Airspace procedures Authorization or Contact, and under visual 

flight rules (VFR). 

The sUAS and control systems operate with GPS and accelerometers which keep the craft in 

place with no control input and allow return to home if the radio control signal is lost. 
To further ensure safe flights I always use a fully charged and tested lithium battery and land 

once voltage drops to 20% capacity. Both of the crafts are equipped with real-time flight data 

transmitters as well as LED indicators to guarantee these safety guidelines are observed. The 

sUAS also has an auto return fail safe protocol if the battery voltage becomes too low. 

I, Richard Boyle (dba Sky Eye View)’s, am extremely cautious when operating my sUAS and will 

not “create a hazard to users of the national airspace system or the public.” 112 P.L. 95 § 333 

(b). Given the small size and weight of my sUAS it falls well within Congress’s contemplated 

safety zone when it promulgated the Reform Act and the corresponding directive to integrate 

sUAS into the national airspace system. Richard Boyle’s (dba Sky Eye View) sUAS, are used in 

hobby flight, has a demonstrable safety record and does not pose any threat to the general 

public or national security. 

How Richard Boyle (dba Sky Eye View)’s request will benefit the public:

Aerial videography for business use, geographical awareness and for real estate marketing has 

been traditionally completed with manned fixed wing aircraft and helicopters. Aerial videography 

is cost prohibitive. Only large businesses, realtors, and luxury homeowners can afford such an 

expense. This deprives small businesses, small realtors, and non-luxury homeowners from 

utilizing a valuable marketing tool. Manned aircraft pose more of a threat to both the pilots and 

the general public due to the size and the combustable fuel held on board than sUAS which are 

low mass and contain no combustable fuel.

Congress has already proclaimed that it is in the public’s interest to integrate commercially flown 

UAS's into the national airspace system. The sUAS proposed for exemption are battery 

powered and create no emissions that can harm the environment. The consequence of a sUAS 

crash is much less than a full size helicopter or fixed wing aircraft. 

Permitting me, Richard Boyle (dba Sky Eye View), to immediately fly within national air space 

furthers economic growth. Granting my exemption request substantially promotes the economic 

impact for the Southeastern Pennsylvania community. 

Reasons why Richard Boyle (dba Sky Eye View)’s exemption will not adversely affect public 

safety or how the exemption will provide a level of safety at least equal to existing rule: 

My, Richard Boyle (dba Sky Eye View)’s, exemption will not adversely affect public safety. I will 

be flying UAS’s with tighter restrictions than the general hobbyist who may or may not be 

operating to AC 91-57. I have intimate knowledge of airspace and aircraft operations as well as 

basic sectional knowledge. 

My operations will only be conducted in non-navigable airspace or airspace that manned aircraft 

should not be flying in. <400 feet AGL. 

As a commercial operation, I will have a financial interest in public safety.

The aircraft will only operate 7-15 minutes per flight minimizing risk compared to full size 

aircraft. 

sUAS are directly controlled, within my line of site, and have fail safe return to home systems.
I operate according to RCAPA checklists, AC 91-57, and user manuals for each flight. 

My, Richard Boyle (dba Sky Eye View), safety protocols provide a level of safety equal to or 

exceeding existing rules.

sUAS do not need to operate at an altitude as high as manned aircraft and pose less danger in 

a crash. 

A Summary the FAA may publish in the Federal Register: 

14 C.F.R. 21 and 14 C.F.R. 91: Airworthiness Certificates, Manuals and The Like. 

14 C.F.R. 21, Subpart H, entitled Airworthiness Certificates, sets forth requirements for 

procurement of necessary airworthiness certificates in relation to FAR § 91.203(a)(1). The size, 

weight of my, Richard Boyle (dba Sky Eye View), sUAS permits exemption from Part 21 

because my sUAS meets (and exceeds) an equivalent level of safety pursuant to Section 333 of 

the Reform Act. The FAA is authorized to exempt aircraft from the airworthiness certificate 

requirement under both the Act (49 U.S.C. § 44701 (f)) and Section 333 of the Reform Act. Both 

pieces of legislation permit the FAA to exempt sUAS from the airworthiness certificate 

requirement in consideration of the weight, size, speed, maneuverability and proximity to areas 

such as airports and dense populations. My, Richard Boyle (dba Sky Eye View)’s, current and 

projected sUAS meet or exceed each of the elements. Precedence of exemption 11138 

14 C.F.R. 91.7(a) prohibits the operation of an aircraft without an airworthiness certificate. As no 

such certificate will be applicable in the form contemplated by the FARs, this Regulation is 

inapplicable. Aircraft will be inspected and preflighted per operators manual and attached 

preflight guidelines. 

14 C.F.R. § 91.9 (b) (2) requires an aircraft flight manual in the aircraft. As there are no on board 

pilots or passengers, and given the size of the sUAS, this Regulation is non applicable. An 

equivalent level of safety will be achieved by maintaining a safety/flight manual delineating 

areas of where safety can be defined. The FAA has previously issued exemptions to this 

regulation in Exemption Nos. 8607, 8737, 8738, 9299, 9299A, 9565, 9565B, 10167, 10167A, 

10602, 10700 and 32827. 

14 C.F.R. § 91.121 regarding altimeter settings is inapplicable insofar as the sUAS utilizes 

electronic global positioning systems with a barometric sensor which “zeros” at field elevation. 

Since flight times are limited to 15 minutes AGL indications will be accurate. 

14 C.F.R. § 91.151 Fuel requirements for flight in VFR conditions prescribed minimums below 

entire duration of flight time of sUAS. The sUAS will land with at least 30% of battery life. Visual 

LED warnings from sUAS as well as telemetry data will show battery level and auto land will 

begin at 30% battery life. 

14 C.F.R. § 91.203 (a) and (b) provides for the carrying of civil aircraft certifications and 

registrations. They are inapplicable for the same reasons described above. The equivalent level 

of safety will be achieved by maintaining any such required certifications and registrations by 

me, Richard Boyle (dba Sky Eye View). 

14 C.F.R. § 45.23: Marking of The Aircraft. 

Applicable Codes of Federal Regulation require aircraft to be marked according to certain 

specifications. My sUAS are, by definition, unmanned. They therefore do not have a cabin, 

cockpit or pilot station on which to mark certain words or phrases. Further, two-inch lettering is 

difficult to place. Per exemption 11138 which highlights previous exemptions, no marking is 

required or applicable. 
14 C.F.R. §§ 61.113 (a) & (b), private pilots are limited to non-commercial operations. 

I, Richard Boyle (dba Sky Eye View), can achieve an equivalent level of safety as achieved by 

current Regulations because my sUAS does not carry any pilots or passengers. Further, I have 

knowledge of airspace and aircraft operations and have a personal interest that sUAS and 

manned aircraft do not intersect. The risks attended to the operation of my sUAS is far less than 

the risk levels inherent in the commercial activities outlined in 14 C.F.R. § 61, et seq. Thus, 

allowing me, Richard Boyle (dba Sky Eye View), to operate my sUAS meet and exceed current 

safety levels in relation to 14 C.F.R. §61.113 (a) & (b). 

14 C.F.R. § 91.119c prescribes safe altitudes for the operation of civil aircraft. It allows 

helicopters to be operated at lower altitudes in certain conditions. My sUAS will never operate at 

an altitude greater than 400 AGL. I, Richard Boyle (dba Sky Eye View), will however operate my 

sUAS in safe areas away from the public and auto traffic. I will operate only with permission of 

said property and structure owners or designee, providing a level of safety at least equivalent to 

or below those in relation to minimum safe altitudes. In addition the DJI flight controllers on each 

sUAS allow me to restrict the sUAS to a maximum altitude of 400 feet and 1500 feet 

horizontally. Given the size, weight, maneuverability and speed of my sUAS, an equivalent or 

higher level of safety will be achieved. 

Per exemption 11138 ... “If barriers or structures are present that can sufficiently protect 

nonparticipating persons from the sUAS or debris in the event of an accident, then the sUAS 

may operate closer than 500 feet to persons afforded such protection. The operator must also 

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 sUAS, flight 

operations must cease immediately. When considering how to immediately cease operations, 

the primary concern is the safety of those nonparticipating persons. In addition, the FAA finds 

that operations may be conducted closer than 500 feet to vessels, vehicles, and structures 

when the owner/controller of any such vessels, vehicles, or structures grants permission for the 

operation and the pilot in charge (PIC) makes a safety assessment of the risk of operating 

closer to those objects and determines that it does not present an undue hazard.” 

14 C.F.R. 91.405 (a); 407 (a) (1); 409 (a) (2); 417(a) & (b): Maintenance Inspections. 

The above-cited Regulations require, amongst other things, aircraft owners and operators to 

“have [the] 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. . . .” 

These Regulations only apply to aircraft with an airworthiness certificate. They will not, 

therefore, apply to my, Richard Boyle (dba Sky Eye View), sUAS. However, as a safety 

precaution I inspect my sUAS before and after each flight. 

A Summary The FAA May Publish in the Federal Register: A. 14 C.F.R. 21 and 14 C.F.R. 91: 

Airworthiness Certificates, Manuals and The Like. 14 C.F.R. 21, Subpart H, entitled 

Airworthiness Certificates, sets forth requirements for procurement of necessary airworthiness 

certificates in relation to FAR § 91.203(a)(1). The size, weight and enclosed operational area of 

my UAS permits exemption from Part 21 because my, Richard Boyle (dba Sky Eye View)’s, 

UAS meets an equivalent level of safety pursuant to Section 333 of the Reform Act. The FAA is 

authorized to exempt aircraft from the airworthiness certificate requirement under both the Act 

(49 U.S.C. § 44701 (f)) and Section 333 of the Reform Act. Both pieces of legislation permit the 

FAA to exempt UAS's from the airworthiness certificate requirement in consideration of the 

weight, size, speed, maneuverability and proximity to areas such as airports and dense 

populations. My UAS meets or exceeds each of the elements. 14 C.F.R. 91.7(a) prohibits the 

operation of an aircraft without an airworthiness certificate. As no such certificate will be 

applicable in the form contemplated by the FARs, this Regulation is inapplicable. 14 C.F.R. § 
91.9 (b) (2) requires an aircraft flight manual in the aircraft. As there are no pilots or passengers, 

and given the size of the UAS's, this Regulation is inapplicable. An equivalent level of safety will 

be achieved by maintaining a manual. The FAA has previously issued exemptions to this 

regulation in Exemption Nos. 8607, 8737, 8738, 9299, 9299A, 9565, 9565B, 10167, 

maintenance program that involves regular software updates and curative measures for any 

damaged hardware. Therefore, an equivalent level of safety will be achieved. 

Request precedence of 11138 exemption... 

“7) Prior to each flight, the pilot in charge (PIC) must inspect the sUAS to ensure it is in a 

condition for safe flight. If the inspection reveals a condition that affects the safe operation of the 

sUAS, the sUAS is prohibited from operating until the necessary maintenance has been 

performed and the sUAS is found to be in a condition for safe flight. The Ground Control Station 

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

documented in the aircraft records. 

8) Any sUAS maintenance or alterations that affect the sUAS operation or flight characteristics, 

e.g. replacement of a flight critical component, must undergo a functional test flight. The piloting 

charge (PIC) who conducts the functional test flight must make an entry in the aircraft records. 

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

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

relevant sections of the operating documents. 

10) The operator must follow the sUAS manufacturer’s aircraft/component, maintenance, 

overhaul, replacement, inspection, and life limit requirements. 

11) The operator must carry out its maintenance, inspections, and record keeping requirements, 

in accordance with the operating documents. Maintenance, inspection, and alterations must be 

noted in the aircraft records, including total flight hours, description of work accomplished, and 

the signature of the authorized person returning the sUAS to service. 

12) Each sUAS operated under this exemption must comply with all manufacturer Safety 

Bulletins. 

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

taken against discrepancies discovered between inspections.” 

In summary, Richard Boyle (dba Sky Eye View) seeks an exemption from the following 

Regulations: 

Part 21; 14 C.F.R. 45.23(b); 14 C.F.R. Part 21; 14 C.F.R. 61.113(a)&(b); 91.7(a); 91.9(b) (2); 

91.121; 91.151(a); 91.203(a)&(b); 91.405(a); 91.407(a) (1); 91.409(a) (2); 91.417(a)&(b) ; 

91.119c) to commercially operate my, Richard Boyle (dba Sky Eye View), sUAS in community 

awareness, small business, and real estate operations. Currently, aerial media for small 

business, area awareness, and real estate aerial videography/photography relies primarily on 

the use of larger aircraft running on combustible fuel. Posing a potential risk to the public. 

Granting my, Richard Boyle (dba Sky Eye View)’s, request for exemption will reduce current risk 

levels and thereby enhance safety. My sUAS craft do not contain potentially explosive fuel, is 

smaller, lighter and more maneuverable than conventional real estate video and photographic 

aircraft with much less flight time. Further, I operate at lower altitudes in primarily non navigable 

airspace eliminating potential public risk flying to and from established air fields.

Formal collection of information shared with the FAA will enhance the FAA's internal efforts to 

establish protocols for complying with the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012. There 

are no personnel on board my, Richard Boyle (dba Sky Eye View), sUAS and therefore the 

likelihood of death or serious bodily injury is significantly diminished. My, Richard Boyle (dba 

Sky Eye View)’s, operation of my sUAS, weighing less than twenty four (24) pounds, traveling at 
lower speeds within limited areas will provide an equivalent level of safety as that achieved 

under current FARs. Accordingly I, Richard Boyle (dba Sky Eye View), respectfully request that 

the FAA grant my exemption request and am willing to cooperate in sharing information to 

benefit the FAA, safety of manned aircraft, and the general public at large. 

Respectfully submitted, 

Richard Boyle