David Boeke

101 Lewis Brook Rd

Pennington, NJ 08534

david@boeke.com

908.947.8466

July 31, 2015

U.S. Department of Transportation

Docket Management System 

1200 New Jersey Ave., SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

RE: Section 333 Petition to Operate Small Unmanned Aerial Systems 

Petition Summary: 

Pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, Pub. L. No. 

112-95 (2012), 126 Stat. 11 (“Section 333”) and the Federal Aviation Administration’s 

(“FAA”) general exemption authority under 49 U.S.C. section 44701(f), David A. Boeke

(“Petitioner”) hereby petitions for exemptions from 14 C.F.R Part 21, Subpart H 

(Airworthiness Certificates), 14 C.F.R. Part 27 (Airworthiness Standards: Normal 

Category Rotorcraft), 14 C.F.R sections 61.113(a)-(b), 91.103(b)(1), 91.119(c), 91.121, 

91.151, 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(2), and 91.417(a)- (b). 

The proposed exemption, if granted, would allow Petitioner to conduct commercial 

operations of small unmanned aircraft systems (“UAS”) meeting or exceeding all of the 

operational and safety requirements Congress has set forth in Section 333. 

Statutory Authority 

Section 333, titled “Special Rules for Certain Unmanned Aircraft Systems”, provides a 

mechanism for seeking expedited FAA authorization of safe civil UAS operations in the 

NAS. Section 333(a) states that the FAA “shall determine if certain unmanned aircraft 

systems may operate safely in the national airspace system before completion of the 

(comprehensive) plan and rulemaking required by section 332(b)(1) of this Act or the 

guidance required by section 334 of this Act.” In Section 332(b)(1), Congress made it 

clear that Section 333 provides a mechanism for “expedited operation authorization” if 

several factors are met. Petitioner meets all requirements to permit FAA approval of 

commercial UAS operations. 
Characteristics of the Aircraft 

The petitioner states that the unmanned aircraft (UA) to be operated under this request are

less than 55 lbs. fully loaded, fly at speeds of no more than 50 knots, carry neither pilots

nor passengers, carry no explosive materials or flammable liquid fuels, and operate

exclusively within a secured area. The aircraft in use are:

• DJI Phantom 3 Professional

• 3D Robotics Solo

Both UAS are vertical takeoff multi-engine helicopters with GPS, full autonomous 

autopilot capabilities, telemetry, manual ground control and an on-screen-display with 

first-person-view system. 

In addition, both aerial photo platforms have integrated safety features built into their 

design, as described in the accompanying manuals, to ensure the safety of persons and 

property within and surrounding the limited operating area. The petitioner further 

describes that, in the event either UAS loses communications or its GPS signal, the UAS

will have the capability to return to a pre-determined safe location within the Security 

Perimeter and land. 

Description of Operations 

The Petitioner, David A. Boeke is a U.S. Citizen who resides in the State of New Jersey

and is the proposed Pilot In Control (PIC) who would operate the UAS's in question. Mr. 

Boeke is a professional photographer and technology architect with 25 years of 

experience flying remote control aircraft. Mr. Boeke has logged over 50 hours of flight 

time with the UAS's in question and over 500 hours in control of other remote control

aircraft without any incident. Mr. Boeke is an independent consultant that plans to 

leverage the capabilities of Unmanned Aerial Systems to offer a multitude of services, 

including: 

- Aerial surveying & mapping

- Aerial filmmaking and photography 

- Construction site inspections and monitoring 

- Wildlife and forestry monitoring 

- Educational and research operations 

- Remote asset inspection

Although Mr. Boeke does not hold a Private or Sport Pilot's License, he has attended 

general aeronautics "ground school" classes taught by certified FAA flight instructors, 

and has logged 4 hours flight time with certified instructors in single engine fixed wing 

aircraft.
The Petitioner Requests Relief From the Following: 

David A. Boeke requests an exemption from the following regulations as well as 

any additional regulations that may technically apply to the operation of the DJI Phantom 

3 or 3D Robotics Solo: 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H: 

Airworthiness Certificates 14 CFR § 91.203(a)(1) Section 91.203 requires all 

civil aircraft to have a certificate of airworthiness. Part 21, Subpart H, entitled 

Airworthiness Certificates, establishes the procedural requirements for the issuance of 

airworthiness certificates as required by FAR § 91.203(a). Given the size of UAS in this 

petition and their very light weight (aircraft weight is < 4 pounds) and the limited 

operating area associated with its utilization, it is unnecessary to go through the 

certificate of airworthiness process under Part 21 Subpart H in order to achieve or exceed 

current safety levels. Such an exemption meets the requirements of an equivalent level of 

safety under Part 11 and Section 333 of the Reform Act. The Federal Aviation Act and 

Section 333 of the Reform Act both authorize the FAA to exempt aircraft from the 

requirement for an airworthiness certificate, upon consideration of the size, weight, 

speed, operational capability, and proximity to airports and populated areas of the UAS 

involved. An analysis of these different criteria demonstrates that the DJI Phantom 3 and 

the 3D Robotics Solo operated without an airworthiness certificate, under the conditions 

proposed in that exemption will be at least as safe, or safer, than a conventional aircraft 

with an airworthiness certificate. 

14 C.F.R. § 45.23 & 14 C.F.R. § 45.29: Display of marks; size of marks These 

regulations provide that each aircraft must display "N" and the aircraft's registration 

number in letters at least 3 inches high. Additionally, the aircraft must display the word 

"EXPERIMENTAL" in letters at least 2 inches high near the entrance to the cabin, 

cockpit, or pilot station. Given the small size of the aircraft (there is no surface area on 

the aircraft large enough) this requirement is impossible to match. 

14 C.F.R. § 91.7(a): Civil aircraft airworthiness 

This regulation requires that no person may operate a civil aircraft unless it is in 

airworthy condition. The petitioner has 25 years of experience building and operating 

remote control aircraft (both fixed wing and rotating wing). The Petitioner received AMA 

training from certified instructors on safe operation of remotely controlled vehicles 

including how to execute pre-flight safety and control inspections. The petitioner asserts 

that these pre-flight inspections of airworthiness will be conducted prior to flight 

following the manufacture’s recommended pre-flight safety checklist procedure outlined 

in the included Operations Manuals.

14 C.F.R. § 91.9: Civil aircraft flight manual, marking, and placard requirements. 

This regulation provides that no person may operate an aircraft unless a current, approved 

flight manual is in the aircraft. The Petitioner assumes that the intent of this requirement 

is to ensure that flight manual information is available to the aircrew while operating the 

aircraft. The Petitioner requests an exemption to this requirement since the 
documentation would not be available to PIC if on the aircraft. The equivalent level of 

safety will be achieved by keeping a hard copy of the flight manual in the UAS

transportation boxes. 

14 C.F.R. § 91.109(a) & 91.319(a)(1): Flight Instruction 

Section 91.103 provides that no person may operate a civil aircraft (except a manned free 

balloon) that is being used for flight instruction unless that aircraft has fully functioning 

dual controls. 

By design, UAS and remotely piloted aircraft do not have fully functional dual controls. 

Flight control is accomplished through the use of a control box that communicates with 

the aircraft via radio communications. The equivalent level of safety is provided by the 

fact that neither a pilot nor passengers will be carried in the aircraft, the ability to control 

the UAS via radio signals from the controller and by the size and speed of the aircraft. 

The UAS also are equipped with backup systems that will return the aircraft to a predetermined safe location upon loss of signal from the pilots radio control system.

14 CFR § 91.119: Minimum Safe Altitudes 

The regulation provides that over sparsely populated areas the aircraft cannot be operated 

closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure. Since the aircraft will be 

operating at a maximum of 400 feet AGL, the UAS cannot comply with this requirement. 

The equivalent level of safety will be achieved because operator will define before every 

flight a working area radius and a flight area ceiling, preventing the UAS from going

beyond the flight area. 

The persons who may be on the ground in the flight area will be briefed of the expected 

route of flight and the associated risks to persons and property on the ground. Due to the 

small size of the UAS and the materials that they are built from, the hazard to persons, 

vessels, vehicles, and structures is not comparable to manned aircraft and should be 

considered in granting the exemption. 

14 CFR 91.121 – Altimeter settings 

This section requires that 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 operating below 18,000 feet MSL to: 

The current reported altimeter setting of a station along the route and within 100 nautical 

miles of the aircraft: 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; 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. 

To provide an equivalent level of safety, the UAS calculate the reference altitude (ground 

level) with the on-board GPS during the pre-flight tests. 
14 C.F.R. § 91.151(a): Fuel Requirements for Flight in VFR Conditions 

The regulation provides that no person may begin a flight in an airplane under day-VFR 

conditions unless there is enough fuel to fly to the first point of intended landing and to 

fly after that for at least 30 minutes. 

Given the limited area of operation for the UAS, the Petitioner believes that an equivalent 

level of safety is achieved with the low battery failsafe feature in which enforce that these 

UAS will automatically land if the battery reaches below a determined safety point. 

14 C.F.R. § 91.203 (a) & (b): Carrying Civil Aircraft Certification and Registration This

regulation provides as follows: No person may operate a civil aircraft unless it has an 

appropriate and current airworthiness certificate. 

No person may operate a civil aircraft unless the airworthiness certificate required by 

paragraph (a) of this section or a special flight authorization issued under §91.715 is 

displayed at the cabin or cockpit entrance so that it is legible to passengers or crew. 

Both UAS weigh less than 4 pounds. As such, there is no ability or place to carry 

certification and registration documents or to display them on the UAS. In addition, there 

is no pilot or passengers on board the aircraft. 

To obtain an equivalent level of safety and meet the intent of 91.203, the Petitioner

proposes that the documents deemed appropriate for this aircraft by the FAA will be colocated with the operator at the ground control station in the transportation box and 

available for inspection upon request. 

14 CFR Subpart E (91.401 - 91.417) - Maintenance, Preventive Maintenance, and 

Alterations: The regulation requires that the operator is primarily responsible for 

maintaining the aircraft in an airworthy condition, including compliance with Parts 39 

and 43. Paragraphs 91.407 and 91.409 require that the aircraft be "approved for return to 

service by a person authorized under 43.7" after maintenance and inspection. Section 

91.409(a)(2) requires an annual inspection for the issuance of an airworthiness certificate. 

Section 91.417(a) requires the owner or operator to keep records showing certain 

maintenance work that has been accomplished by certificated mechanics, under Part 43, 

or licensed pilots and records of approval of the aircraft for return to service. 

The Petitioner proposes that the maintenance of the UAS will be accomplished by the 

owner/operator according to the maintenance manual, provided by the manufacturer. 

An equivalent level of safety will be achieved because the UAS are small in size. Are not 

a complex mechanical devices, and will not carry any external payload; furthermore, they

will operate only in restricted predetermined areas. The operator is the person most 

familiar with the aircraft and is best suited to maintain the aircraft in an airworthy 

condition and to ensure an equivalent level of safety. Finally, before every flight, both 

UAS run automatic sequences of pre-flight tests to make sure that every sensor and every 

critical part is running properly. 
14 CFR Subsections (a) and (b) of § 61.113 requires an individual operating an aircraft

for compensation or hire to hold a commercial pilot certificate. The FAA has the 

statutory authority to waive the pilot requirements for commercial operations 49 U.S.C. § 

44701(f). 

The Petitioner 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 DJI Phantom 3 

Professional and 3D Robotics Solo UAS's unless that PIC has demonstrated, by meeting 

minimum flight-hour and currency requirements, that the PIC is able to safely operate the 

UAS in a manner consistent with the 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.P.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).

Considering the Petitioner’s proposed area of operations, the operating limitations set 

forth above and the airmanship skills necessary to safely operate the DJI Phantom 3 

Professional or 3D Robotic’s Solo, the Petitioner submits that the additional manned 

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

airmanship skills necessary for the specific proposed flight operations.

Further, Mr. Boeke submits that all flights of the DJI Phantom 3 Professional and 3D 

Robotics Solo UAS's, conducted by the PIC pursuant to the grant of this Petition: (1) will 

be incidental to Mr. Boeke's business; and (2) will not carry passengers or property for 

compensation or hire.

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).
The Petitioner has Supplied the Following Additional Information: 

• 3D Robotics Solo Operations Manual: http://3drobotics.com/wpcontent/uploads/2015/07/v4_07_07_15.pdf

• DJI Phantom 3 Operations Manual: http://download.djiinnovations.com/downloads/phantom_3/en/Phantom_3_Professional_User_Manu

al_v1.2_en.pdf

Pre-flight Inspection, Maintenance 

Before each flight, the Pilot In Command, will perform a series of pre-flight and takeoff 

checks as defined by the Operation Manuals supplied. After every 60 minutes of airtime, 

the craft will undergo a thorough inspection of all aircraft components, including, but not 

limited to: 

a. Actuators / Servos 

b. Motors, wiring and connectors 

c. Propellers, smooth, no chips 

d. Electronic speed controller, wiring and connectors e. Batteries, wiring and connectors 

e. Remote command and control 

f. Ground control station 

UAS Operating Parameters 

The petitioner states that all flights will be operated within visual line of sight (VLOS) of 

the pilot. Daytime Visual Flight Rules and all operations will be conducted with the 

assistance of a second spotter/observer. The UAS flights will be limited to a maximum 

altitude of 400 feet AGL. Altitude is accurately measured by the GPS. The petitioner 

further states that an operator will ensure that only consenting production personnel will 

be allowed within 100 feet of the UA operation and UAS will be kept at least 100’ from 

any inhabited structure. 

Flight Standards District Offices (FSDOs) will be notified as required prior to operations 

to describe intended coordination for proposed operation(s). Petitioner will obtain an Air 

Traffic Organization (“ATO”) issued Certificate of Waiver or Authorization (“COA”) 

prior to conducting any operations under this grant of exemption. In fulfilling its 

requirements under the COA, Petitioner will be required to request a NOTAM no more 

than 72 hours in advance, but not less than 48 hours prior to the operation. 

Petitioner’s UAS will remain clear and yield the right of way to all manned operations 

and activities at all times (including, but not limited to, ultralight vehicles, parachute 

activities, parasailing activities, and hang gliders). Petitioner will not conduct UAS 

operations within 5 nautical miles of the geographic center of a non-towered airport 

unless a letter of agreement with that airport’s management is obtained and the operation 

is conducted in accordance with a Notice to Airmen (“NOTAM”). 
Radio Frequencies 

Both UAS will use the 2.4GHz frequency, which is allotted by the FCC for data 

transmission and vehicle control in unlicensed frequency bands. All devices used will 

comply with FCC usage and emissions regulations. 

Safety and Benefits of the UAS 

The petitioner will be using the UAS in a variety of applications that generally require 

expensive full-size manned aircraft to complete. Small, light and unmanned aerial 

vehicles offer a myriad of benefits over the use of full-sized manned aircraft such as for 

electric power line inspection, oil/gas pipeline inspection, and film and still photography. 

Manned aircraft that are carrying crew and flammable fuel are being replaced with small 

UAS carrying no passengers or crew creating a greater margin of safety for the pilots and 

crew. 

By granting Petitioner’s requested exemptions, the FAA will help drive development of 

safe and successful commercial UAS operations and will advance the public knowledge 

base for such operations. Petitioner is committed to promoting the UAS research efforts 

of policymakers including the FAA, NASA, DOD and DARPA by sharing data from its 

commercial UAS operations and serving as a resource for future UAS research 

operations. Thus, the FAA has good cause to grant this Petition. 

Conclusion 

For reasons stated, the exemptions requested herein should be granted and Petitioner 

should be permitted to conduct small UAS operations in accordance with its manuals and 

all other operating parameters deemed necessary and appropriate by the FAA. 

Respectfully Submitted, 

David A. Boeke

101 Lewis Brook Rd

Pennington, NJ, 08534

david@boeke.com

908-947-8466