November 1, 2015

U. S. Department of Transportation Docket Management System 1200 New Jersey Ave, SE Wa shington, DC 20590

**Re:** Exem ption Request Section 333 of the FAA Reform Act of the Federal Aviation Regulations from 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); 91.103(b); 91.109; 119.121; 91.151(a); 91.203(a)&(b); 91.405(a); 91.407(a) (1 ); 91.409(a) (2); 91.417(a)&(b)

Dear Sir or Madam,

Anthony Busack hereby petitions the Secretary of Transportation and Federal Aviation Administration for exemption to the above referenced and below more fully described Federal Aviation Regulations (“FA Rs”), that currently may or may not apply to the recreational/business operations of model aircraft including small unmanned aerial systems (“UASs).

Pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 and the procedures contained withi n 14 C.F.R. 11, Petition that I, Anthony Busack, an owner and operator of small unmanned aircraft, be exempted from the Federal Aviation Regulations (“FARs”) listed below so that I, Anthony Busack, may operate my small ultra lightweight unmanned aircraft s ystem (“UAS”) commercially in airspace regulated by the Federal Aviation Administration (“FAA”).

As described herein I, Anthony Busack, have over 200hrs of experience in flying UAVs over the past two years typically flying two other DJI Phantom2. I have a dded a DJI Inspire 1 quadcopter UAS to my inventory with intent to conduct aerial photography/ Inspection included but not limited to the following; Business Operations: over land, waterways , and oceans; operation over/in non restricted National Parks, Nati onal Forests, flight in non navigable airspace, using non intrusive recording devices, operation in otherwise unrestricted U.S. States/Territories for aerial videography/cinematography for commercial operation and to enhance academic community awareness fo r those individuals and companies unfamiliar with the geographical layout of such areas.

As described more fully below, the requested exemption would permit the operation of UAS under controlled conditions in airspace that is 1) limited; 2) predetermined in areas away from general public, airports, heliports and vehicular traffic for community videos, and within property boundaries for individual homeowner real estate listing videos/photos; and 3) controlled as to access. The exemption would also provide s afety enhancements to the already safe operations within the aerial photography, film and television industry presently using conventional aircraft and small, unmanned and relatively inexpensive UASs.

Currently, similar lightweight, remote controlled UAS' s are legally operated by unmonitored amateur hobbyists with no safety plan or controls in place to prevent catastrophe. I operate my UAS within all safety protocols and controls to avoid and prevent public hazard, as well as manned aircraft hazards/catast rophe. This will act tofurther safety protocols exclusive to lightweight UAS's specific to aerial video and

photography usage as I record flight data and other information gained through permitted flight operations to share with the FAA through any required FAA reports to assist with future protocol and safety regulation.

Granting my request comports with the Secretary of Transportation’s (FAA Administrator’s) responsibilities and authority to not only integrate UAS's into the national airspace system, bu t to “...establish requirements for the safe operation of such aircraft systems [UAS's] in the national airspace system” under Section 333(c) of the Reform Act specific to the use of UAS's for commercial purposes. Further I will conduct my operations in co mpliance with the protocols described herein or as otherwise established by the FAA.

For the reasons stated below I respectfully request the grant of an exemption allowing me to operate ultra lightweight, remote controlled UAS’s for academic community

awa reness, benefit/stimulate tourism within Indiana, general aerial photography, and to enhance real estate listing videos for homeowners who cannot afford expensive manned aircraft for the same purpose, all of which will promote local economic growth through increased employment and increased tax base. Both with public safety in mind by keeping heavier manned aircraft containing combustible fuel that that poses potential public hazard.

**I. Contact Information:** 

**An thony** 

**Busack 9810 Gulfstream Dr, Fishers, IN 4603**  **7 Mobile: (317) 665**

**- 0395 Email:**  **abusack@y ahoo.com** 

**The Specific Sections of Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations From Which An**  **thony**

**Busack Requests Exemption are:**

regulation14 CFR 2114 C.F.R. 45.23(b); 14 CFR 61.113 (a) & (b); 14 C.F.R. 91.7 (a); 14 C.F.R. 91.9 (b) (2); 14 C.F.R. 91.103; 14 C.F.R. 91.109; 14 C.F.R. 91.119; 14 C.F.R. 91.121; 14 C.F.R. 91.151 (a); 14 C.F.R. 91.203 (a) & (b); 14 C.F.R. 91.405 (a); 14 CFR 407 (a) (1); 14 CFR 409 (a) (2); and, 14 CFR 417 (a) & (b).

**III. The Extent of r elief A**  **nthony Busack seeks and the Reason He Seeks Such**  **Relief:**

I, Anthony Busack, 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, Anthony Busack , 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 ultra light weight UAS meets the definition of“small unmanned aircraft” as defined in Section 331 and therefore the integration of my

ultra light weight UAS is expressly contemplated by the Reform Act. I would like to operate my ultra lightweight UAS prior to the time period by which the Reform Act requires the FAA to promulgate rules governing such craft. Thereby, providing direct experience and valuable information for formal regulation that can be administered uniformly to all UAS aerial video and photography. The Reform Act guides the Secretary in determining the types of UASs that may operate safely in our national airspace system. Considerations include: The weight, size, speed and overall capabilities of the UAS's; W het her the UAS will be operated near airports or heavily populated areas; and, Wh ether the UAS will be operated by line of sight. 112 P.L. 95 § 333 (a). Each of these items reflect in favor of an exemption for me, Anthony Busack. My UAS utilizes four (4)

coun terrotating propellers for balance, control and stability. My UAS is equipped with GPS and auto return safety technology. W eighing less than seven (7) pounds (far below the maximum 55 pound limit); including camera with gimbal.

I consider safety as forem ost with each flight. My small unmanned aircraft is designed to hover in place via GPS and operate in less than a 10 m/s wind knot (approx 22 mph) wind. For safety, stability and fear of financial loss I will not fly in winds exceeding 7 m/s (15 mph). Buil t in safety systems include a GPS mode that allows my UAS to hover in place when radio controls are lost. W ith three modes to choose from, I utilize the Positioning Mode 1 for aerial videography/photography. This is the safest, most reliable and stable mode to prevent accident and hazard. W hen pilot communication is lost UAS is designed slowly descend to point of takeoff , or near the control transmitter when utilizing Dynamic Mode. I do not operate my UAS near airports, Hospitals nor Police heliports, and d o not operate near areas where general public is within fifty to one hundred (50

- 100) yards depending on location, conditions and weather. I am constantly on alert for any manned aircraft (Police/Medical helicopters, etc.) and prepared to land/abort immed iately to the nearest and safest ground point should a manned aircraft approach my location or I suspect manned aircraft may approach near my location. My UAS is capable of vertical and horizontal operations, and are flown only within my line of sight, as the remote control pilot. Utilizing battery power rather than combustible fuels, flights generally last between eight (8) to twelve (12) minutes, with an altitude under two hundred fifty (250) feet.

I utilize a fresh fully charged battery with each flight as a safety precaution; full flight time limit for each battery is eighteen (18) to twenty two (22) minutes as tested. I do not operate my UAS at or below manufacture recommend minimum charge levels for operation; preferring to remain well within a safe operating range to insure adequate communication between radio control and UAS to eliminate potential for crash, loss of control or hazard. Reserve batteries are at hand with each exercise to insure replacement for sufficient safe level of operation. I do not believe in taking risk that may cause a crash, that could create hazard to the public/property/manned aircraft, and have no desire to lose an investment. I have clocked over 200 hours of personal use to gain familiarization with the characteristics of this specific UAS's performance under

1 Positioning Mode includes GPS, Vision Positioning Sensors, and Barometer for position hold, self

- leveling, altitude command, GPS, return to home and dynamic return to home feature, and safety control to return home or land in the event of communication interruption between RC transmitter and UAS. See “Flight Mode” in Inspire 1 User Manualdifferent temperature and weather conditions. I also practice computerized simulated

flights to maintain adequate skills and response reflex time; all for the sake of safety.

I am extremely cautious when operating of my UAS/ultra lightweight unmanned aircraft 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 UAS it falls well within Congress’s contemplated safety zone when it promulgated the Reform Act and the corresponding directive to integrate UAS's into the national airspace system. My UAS, the DJI Inspire 1, used in hobby flight, has a demonstrable safety record and does not pose any threat to the general public or national security.

**IV. How A nthony Busack’s Request Will Benefit the Public A**  **s A Whole:** 

Aerial videography for geographical awareness and for real estate marketing has been around for a long time through manned fixed wing aircraft and helicopters. For small budget real estate companies and average homeowners the expense of such aerial videography is cost prohibitive. Only la rge companies and high end Realtors or luxury homeowners can afford to absorb such expense, depriving non

- luxury homeowners and lower budget Realtors from a valuable marketing tool.

The public’s interest is additionally furthered by allowing small busine sses in the tourism industry to afford the currently cost prohibitive aerial photography used by large international corporations.

Congress has already proclaimed that it is in the public’s interest to integrate commercially flown UAS's into the national airspace system, hence the passing of the Reform Act. Granting my exemption request furthers the public interest through academic/visual awareness of the geographical benefits in and around the State of Indiana. My ultra light weight UAS is battery powered and creates no emissions that can harm the environment. The consequence of my ultra light weight UAS crashing is far less than a full size helicopter or fixed wing aircraft; which are heavy, contain combustible fuel and can cause catastrophic devastation to the public.

Manned aircraft can pose a threat to the public through potential catastrophic crash that many local communities have experienced in the past with military aircraft and medical/police helicopter crashes. These have resulted in a loss of life and endangered the public with combustible fuel that burned on impact. My UAS poses no such threat since size and lack of combustible fuel alleviates any potential threat to the public. Additionally, this actually furthers the public’s interest by making it safer for business to conduct aerial photography and videography without such risks.

The public’s interest is furthered by minimizing ecological and crash threat by permitting aerial video/photo capture through my battery operated ultra light weight U AS's. Permitting me to immediately fly within national air space furthers economic growth. Granting my exemption request substantially furthers the economic impact within the State of Indiana for companies looking to relocate or build in Indiana as well as individuals looking to relocate for career advancement through academic and geographical awareness. Both of which serve as a stimulus to the community.

**V. Reasons Why**

**A nthony Busack’s Exemption Will Not A** **dversely A**  **ffect Safety Or How The Exemption Will P**  **rovide a Level of Safety A**  **t Least Equal To Existing Rule:** My exemption will not adversely affect safety. Quite the contrary, for the reasons stated

permitting me to log more flight time in FAA controlled airspace, with communication with the FAA, will all ow me to contribute to the innovation and implementation of new and novel, as of yet undiscovered safety protocols for development in cooperation with the FAA. In addition I submit the following representations of enhancements to current aerial videography and photography:

1. My UAS weighs less than 7 pounds complete with a small ultralight weight high quality camera; 2. I only operate my UAS below 300 feet (well within the 400 foot permissible ceiling set by the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012); 3. My U AS only operates for 18

- 22 minutes per flight; 4. I land my UAS prior to 20% Battery Remaining; 5. I pilot my UAS through remote control only by line of sight; 6. I pilot my UAS only with a visual observer; 7. My UAS has Failsafe RTH, a flight safety feature where by it hovers and then slowly lands if communication with the remote control pilot is lost for 3 seconds; 8. My UAS has GPS and Vision Positioning System utilizing two sonar sensors and one monocular camera for positioning and to identify the current aircraft ’s position; 9. My UAS has a flight recorder and I actively analyze flight data and other sources of information to constantly update and enhance safety prototocols; (page 15 User Manual) 10. I only operate in reasonably safe environment that are strictly control led, are away from power lines, elevated lights, airports and actively populated areas; 11. I conduct extensive preflight inspections and protocol per the Inspire 1 User Manual; 12. I always obtain all necessary permissions prior to operation; 13. I immediately abort flights in the event of potential danger; 14. I only operate my UAS well within “flight environment requirements” per page 45 of the user manual & visual meteorological conditions (VMC) per user manual. 15. I will not operate my UAS less than 500 feet below or less than 2000 feet horizontally from a cloud or when visibility is less than 2 statute miles from the PIC. 16. Only I, Anthony Busack, act as the Pilot in Command during flights; 17. I follow UAS manufacturer’s aircraft/component, maintenance, overhaul, replaceme nt, inspection, and life limit requirements; 18. The operating documents/manual will be accessible during UAS operations and made available upon request;

My safety protocols provide a level of safety equal to or exceeding existing rules. It is important to note that absent the integration of commercial UAS into our national airspace system, helicopters are the primary means of aerial video and photography for communi ty awareness, real estate, and marketing purposes. Wh ile the safety record of such helicopters is remarkably astounding, there have been incidents involving loss of life as well as extensive property damage; it is far safer to operate a battery powered ult ra light weight UAS.

 ● First, the potential loss of life is diminished because UAS's carry no people on board and I only operates m y UAS in specific areas away from mass populations.

 ● Second, there is no fuel on board a UAS and thus the potential for fire or explosions is greatly dim inished. ● Third, the small size and extreme maneuverability of my UAS allow me to remotely pilot away from and avoid hazards quickly and safely.

 ● Fourth, given its small size and weight, even when close enough to capt ure amazing images, my UAS need not be so close to the objects they are focused on through the technology and use of post editing software allowing pan and zoom.

Accordingly, my UAS has been experimentally operated for familiarization and competency and will continue to operate at and above current safety levels.

**VI. A Summary The FAA** 

**May Publish in the Federal Register:** 

1. 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 Cert ificates, 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 m y UAS meets (and exceeds) an equiv alent 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 legislatio n 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 current and projected UAS's meet or exceed 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) requi res an aircraft flight manual in the aircraft. As there are no on board 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 safety/flight manual delineating areas of where safety can be defined. 10 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 i napplicable in so far as m y UAS utilizes electronic global positioning s ys tems with a barometric sensor.

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 reason s described above. The equivalent level of safety will be achieved by maintaining any such required certifications and registrations by me, Anthony Busack.

2. 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 UAS 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 on such small aircraft with dimensions smaller that minimal lettering requirement. The FAA has previously issued exemptions to this regulation through Exemptions Nos. 8738, 10167, 10167A and 10700.

3. 14 C.F.R. § 61.113: Private Pilot Privileges and Limitations : PIC.

Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. §§ 61.113 (a) & (b), private pilots are limited to non commercial operations. I, Anthony Busack, can achieve an equivalent level of safety as achieved by current Regulations because my UAS does not carry any pilots or passenge rs. The risks attended to the operation of m y UAS is far less than the risk levels inherent in the commercial activities outlined in 14 C.F.R. § 61, et seq. Thus, allowing me to operate m y UAS meet and exceed current safety levels in relation to 14 C.F.R. §61.113 (a) & (b).4. 14 C.F.R. 91.119: Minimum Safe Altitudes.

14 C.F.R. § 91.119 prescribes safe altitudes for the operation of civil aircraft. It allows helicopters to be operated at lower altitudes in certain conditions. My UAS will never operate at an altitude greater than 300 AGL; safely below the standard of 400 AGL. I will however operate m y UAS in safe areas away from public and traffic, providing a level of safety at least equivalent to or below those in relation to minimum safe altitudes. Given th e size, weight, maneuverability and speed of my UAS, an equivalent or higher level of safety will be achieved.

5. 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 thin gs, 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 m y UAS. However, as a safety precaution I inspect my UAS before and after each flight and maintained per the manufacturer’s aircraft/component, maintenance, overhaul, replacement, inspection, and life limit requirements.

**In summary , A**  **nthony Busack seeks an exemption from the follow ing**  **Regulations:**

14 C.F.R. 21, subpart H; 14 C.F.R. 45.23(b); 14 C.F.R. §§ 61.113 (a) & (b); 14 C.F.R. § 91.7 (a); 14 C.F.R. § 91.9 (b)(2); 14 C.F.R. § 91.103(b); 14 C.F.R. § 91.109; 14 C.F.R. § 91.119; 14 C.F.R. § 91.121; 14 C.F.R. § 91.151(a); 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.203(a) and (b); 14 C.F.R. § 91.405 (a); 14 C.F.R. § 91.407 (a)(1); 14 C.F.R. § 91.409 ( a)(2); 14 C.F.R. § 91.409 (a ) (2); and, 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.417 (a) & (b) to commercially operate my lightweight unmanned aircraft system for aerial photography/Inspection/ included but not limited to the following; Business Operations: over land, water ways, and oceans; operation over/in non

- restricted National Parks, National Forests, flight in non

- navigable airspace, using non intrusive recording devices, operation in otherwise unrestricted U.S. States/Territories for aerial videography/cinematography for commercial operation and to enhance academic community awareness for those individuals and companies unfamiliar with the geographical layout of such areas. Currently, area awareness and real estate aerial videography/photography relies primarily on the us e of larger aircraft running on combustible fuel, posing potential risk to the public. Granting my request for exemption will reduce current risk levels and thereby enhance safety. My UAS does not contain potentially explosive fuel, is smaller, lighter and more maneuverable than conventional photographic aircraft with much less flight time. Further, I operate at lower altitudes and in controlled airspace eliminating potential public risk flying to and from established airfields. I have been analyzing flight information and will compile safety protocols and the implementation of a flight operations manual that exceeds currently accepted means and methods for safe flight. Formal collection of information shared with the FAA will enhance the FAA's internal effo rts to establish protocols for complying with the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012. There are no personnel on board my UAS and therefore the likelihood of death or serious bodily injury is significantly diminished. The operation of my UAS, weighing less than 7 pounds and travelling at lower speeds within limited areas will provide an equivalent level of safety as that achieved under current FARs. Accordingly I respectfully request that the FAA grant myexemption request and am willing to cooperate i n sharing information to benefit the

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

Respectfully Submitted,

Anthony Busack 9810 Gulfstream Dr. Fishers, IN 46037