PETITION FOR EXEMPTION

TITLE 14, CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS

Petitioner: John F. Riley

P.O. Box 588

Blue Hill, ME 04614-0588

jfsriley@gmail.com

Exemption from Sections of 14 CFR: part 21; §§ 45.23(b); 61.113 (a) and (b); 91.9(b)(2); 

91.103; 91.109; 91.119; 91.121; 91.151(a); 91.203(a) and (b); 91.405(a); 91.407(a)(1); 

91.409(a)(2); and 91.417(a) and (b).

Extant of relief: Petitioner desires exemption from the above named regulations for the purpose 

of conducting commercial aerial videography using Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) with 

Global Positioning System (GPS) control and stabilization.

The petitioner supports its request with the following information: 

The petitioner provides the following information: 1. Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS); 2. UAS 

Pilot in Command (PIC) Requirements; 3. UAS Operating Parameters; 4. Public Interest and Safety;

5. Summary.

1. Unmanned Aircraft System:

The UAS proposed for use by the petitioner are airframes provided by Aeronavics.com (Aeronavics) 

and DJI.com (DJI), used in conjunction with DJI hardware/software controllers, data signal 

processing, and GPS stabilization and navigation electronics. Radio Control (RC) transmitters, 

propellers, electric motors, and batteries are provided by various manufacturers worldwide.

Aeronavics is located at 226 Okete Road, Raglan, 3295 Waikato, New Zealand; and DJI (DaJiang Innovations Science and Technology Co. Ltd.) is located at, Shenzhen, Guangdong 

Province, China. Please be advised that most Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) are modular (plug-in 

and replaceable parts that are commonly used in UAS), and that DJI hardware/software for 

controllers, data links, and GPS navigation are the most commonly used programmable electronics

for navigation and control in UAS usage.

The systems have the size, weight, speed, and limited operating area associated with the aircraft to be 

utilized by the applicant, an exemption from 14 CFR part 21 § 91.203 (Airworthiness Certificates), 

subject to certain conditions and limitations, is warranted and meets the requirements for an 

equivalent level of safety under 14 CFR part 11 and Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and 

Reform Act of 2012 (PL 112-95). If these UAS are operated without an airworthiness certificate in 

the restricted environment and under the conditions and limitations proposed by the petitioner it will 

be at least as safe, or safer, than a conventional aircraft (fixed wing or rotorcraft) operating with an 

airworthiness certificate issued under 14 CFR part 21, Subpart H and not subject to the proposed 

conditions and limitations. 

The UAS to be operated under this request are less than 55 lbs (20 lbs. or less typically) fully loaded, 

flying at speeds of no more than 50 knots, carrying neither a pilot nor passenger (part 21 § 61.113), 

carrying no explosive materials or flammable liquid fuels, and operates exclusively within a secured 

area. In addition, the UAS have integrated safety features built into the design of the UAS, as 
described in the UAS operating parameters, to ensure the safety of persons and property within and 

surrounding the limited operating area. In the event the UAS loses communications, its GPS signal,

or reaches 15% battery power, the UAS will have the capability to automatically return to the 

takeoff/PIC location within the limited operating area. Software for the controller could be coded for 

use by a particular unit so as to prevent interference or hijacking (part 21 § 91.109). Controllers also 

have the capability to abort a flight in the event of unpredicted obstacles or emergencies. Distance 

from the PIC can be limited with DJI UAS software and the flights can be contained in the restricted 

secure flight areas, as well as preventing flights in restricted areas such as class B airspaces.

UAS have been proven to have stable flight under severe gusty wind conditions (up to 40 knots). 

Wind shear accidents can be of minimal impact when using a UAS with low mass and soft propellers 

such as UAS, though through diligent weather planning, avoidance is the best course.

The UAS will have no airworthiness certificate, and an exemption may be needed from 14 CFR § 

45.23 as the UAS will have no entrance to the cabin, cockpit, or pilot station on which the word 

“experimental” can be placed. Given the size of the UAS, the two-inch lettering will be impossible. 

An equivalent level of safety will be provided by the UAS having flashing lights to draw attention to 

their operation.

The maintenance requirements in the pertinent sections of 14 CFR, part 91 are only applicable to 

aircraft with an airworthiness certificate in accordance with part 43, therefore the petitioner has

developed an as needed maintenance process for the UAS affected by this exemption. The petitioner

intends to follow any manufacturers’ recommended instructions and procedures when those 

maintenance procedures exist for certain components of its UAS (§ 91.9, 91.405, 91.407, 91.417).

2. UAS Pilot In Command (PIC) Requirements

The petitioner has a commercial pilot’s certificate and has experience in manned aircraft photo 

reconnaissance and videography. The petitioner asserts that safe flying of UAS will be enhanced by 

using a PIC that has a pilot’s certificate and is well versed in commercial flight procedures. It is 

hoped that any fears for commercial aircraft safety can be assuaged by the use of a commercially

rated UAS pilots. Though some have said knowledge of airspace regulations and dexterity in the 

control and operation of the UAS acquired from actual operation of the aircraft will be the most 

important factors in establishing an equivalent level of safety, another layer of safety in flying UAS

comes with the fact that a commercially rated pilot would be especially safe since that pilot could 

lose their privileges in flying manned aircraft.

Any PIC incapacitation during operations will be addressed by loss of communication time out

software and automatic navigation return to base/takeoff point activation. The petitioner believes a 

current medical certificate of any class would be adequate for the safe flying of UAS. This would 

allow the continuation of a pilot’s career beyond the 65 year old age limit.

The petitioner has over a year experience flying UAS and the skill or ability to safely operate an 

unmanned aerial vehicle, operating at 400 feet AGL or lower, within strictly controlled pre-approved 

airspace. The petitioner has further experience in the motion picture industry with training in use of 

Panavision cameras. The petitioner has further experience working with his son who works as a 

television production director. They have worked together with the latest video equipment and 

software. The petitioner has made a ‘not for profit’ documentary using UAS under the guidance of 

FAA UAS advisories and rules and calling attention to such operations to the local Flight Standards 

District Office (FSDO) of the FAA.

3. UAS Operating Parameters

The aircraft will be operated within a secure environment, which no one will be allowed to enter 

unless they are part of the production, have been fully briefed of the risks prior to operation of the 

UAS, and have consented to the risks associated with being in the operating area. Should there be a 
mishap, the UAS being flown pose significantly less of a threat than the helicopters and fixed wing 

aircraft now being employed because they are a fraction of the size, carry no flammable fuel, and do 

not carry crew or passengers. From experience, this is in contrast to conventional aircraft that are 

flown to the site, carry flammable fuel, carry passengers and crew, and operate in a much larger area.

The UAS batteries are self monitored for safe usage, overheating, and return to starting point when 

discharged to 30%, and are limited to how many times they can be charged safely before proper 

disposal. Flight control software will be constantly updated as required and will provide feedback to 

the manufacturer for maintenance, design, and safety updating (§ 91.405, 91.407, 91.409, 91.417).

All UAS flights will be operated within visual line of sight (VLOS) of a pilot and/or observer, and 

that the UAS flights will be limited to a maximum altitude of 400 feet AGL (§ 91.119). The operator 

will ensure that only consenting production personnel will be allowed within 100 feet of the UA 

operation, but this radius may be reduced to 30 feet based upon an equivalent level of safety 

determination, with the advance permission of the local Flight Standards District Office (FSDO) and 

any needed NOTAM publish in an adequate time period. The petitioner asserts that an equivalent 

level of safety can be achieved given the size, weight, and speed of the UAS, as well as the location 

where it is operated. The UAS will be operated within a safe operating perimeter, the boundaries of 

which will be determined by production personnel and the UAS PIC based on the site-specific 

filming activities and speed of the UAS required for the operation, and coordinated with the 

jurisdictional FAA FSDO and local government officials as applicable. 

With respect to preflight actions, the petitioner notes it may need an exemption from 14 CFR § 

91.103, because it will not have approved rotorcraft flight manuals. The petitioner asserts that an 

equivalent level of safety will be achieved by the PIC taking all preflight actions as set by the 

manufacturer of the UAS and the pilot’s own operating safety procedures to comply with insurance 

requirements including reviewing weather, flight battery requirements, landing and takeoff distance 

clearances, adequate GPS signal acquisition, and aircraft performance data acquisition on the 

controller before initiation of flight (§ 91.7 and 91.103 will be adhered to). Additionally, the 

petitioner will require a briefing to be conducted prior to each day’s filming regarding planned UAS 

operations, and all personnel who will be performing duties within the boundaries of the safety 

perimeter will be required to attend. 

With respect to the fuel requirements, the petitioner notes that, in order to meet the 30 minute reserve 

requirements in 14 CFR § 91.151, UAS flights would have to be limited to approximately zero 

minutes. The petitioner argues that, given the limitations on the UA’s proposed flight area and the 

location of its proposed operations within a predetermined area, a longer time frame for flight in 

daylight or night VFR conditions is reasonable. The petitioner believes that an equivalent level of 

safety can be achieved by limiting flights to 25 minutes or 30% of battery power, whichever occurs 

first. 

The petitioner requests an exemption from 14 CFR § 91.121, as its UAS have GPS altitude readouts

instead of a barometric altimeter. The petitioner asserts that an equivalent level of safety will be 

achieved. Specifically, the altitude information will be provided to the UAS PIC via a digitally 

encoded telemetric data feed. Prior to each flight, a zero altitude initiation point will be established 

and confirmed for accuracy by the PIC.

The PIC will monitor air traffic when needed through an FCC approved portable transceiver and 

headset/ microphone combination capable of communication with control towers and manned aircraft 

in the vicinity of the operations area (only certified pilots would be allowed to do so).
4. Public Interest and Safety

Given the small size of the UAS involved and the restricted secure environment within which it will 

operate, its proposed operation falls within that zone of safety in which Congress envisioned that the 

FAA must, by exemption, allow this commercial operation of UAS to commence immediately. Also,

due to the size of the UAS and the restricted areas in which the UAS will operate, approval of the 

application presents no national security issue. UAS systems the petitioner will use can be 

programmed in multiple ways to provide security and safety. The petitioner points out that given the 

clear direction in Section 333, the strong equivalent level of safety surrounding the proposed 

operations, and the significant public benefit, including enhanced safety, reduction in environmental 

impacts, and including reduced emissions associated with allowing UAS for movie and television 

operations, granting the requested exemptions is in the public interest.

The petitioner’s use of UAS for documentary or educational videography will add to the public’s 

knowledge base, allow for the public to experience video views of points of interest heretofore not 

available, and further constitutional rights to free speech.

If privacy issues are to be addressed, it is the petitioner’s opinion that UAS operations are 

exceedingly less invasive than cell phone cameras with internet capabilities or satellite photometry.

It is the petitioner’s experience that birds tend to stay away from UAS operations and that in 

conventional manned aircraft that is not the case. This furthers less environmental damage such as 

bird strikes and aircraft accidents.

In certain public areas the petitioner has seen kite flying allowed that is inherently less controllable 

and as dangerous, if not more so, than UAS operations.

5. Summary

The petitioner requests an exemption for himself, John F. Riley, from Title 14, Code of Federal Rules 

pertaining to the safe, commercial usage of unmanned aerial systems (UAS) in controlled secured 

video production areas. Exemption from Sections of 14 CFR: part 21; §§ 45.23(b); 61.113 (a) and 

(b); 91.9(b)(2); 91.103; 91.109; 91.119; 91.121; 91.151(a); 91.203(a) and (b); 91.405(a); 

91.407(a)(1); 91.409(a)(2); and 91.417(a) and (b) are requested. The petitioner supports his 

request with the following information 1. Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS); this section describes 

the UAS maximum capabilities and the failsafe and abort safety mechanisms that are programmed 

into the UAS; 2. UAS Pilot In Command (PIC) Requirements; this section describes the pilot asking 

for the exemptions and his experience and knowledge base, description of safe flight duties and 

preparation, and comments on how UAS PIC should be commercially rated pilots of any age and 

with any medical certificate class and how this would provide better security and safety in any UAS 

operation; 3. UAS Operating Parameters; this section describes the operating procedures that will be 

carried out to meet regulations and provide safety in operations, secure environment, and procedures 

when working with the local FSDO and local government authorities; 4. Public Interest and Safety;

this section addresses some of the advantages of UAS operations, especially the advantage for the 

public being privy to the exceptional views UAS videos provide.