### Air Cam Shots ’ 333 Petition

August 3, 2015 P a g e | 1 of 10 

## Erick F. Larsen

Consultant to

Air Cam Shots

262 W. Linden Ave. # C Burbank, LA, Ca 91502

818

- 732

- 0330 ErickLarsen@Outlook.com August 3, 2015

U. S. Department of Transportation

Do cket Management System 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE Washington, DC 20590

Re: Donny Robert Melara dba A ir Cam Shots ’ Request (Petition) for Exemption from Certain Regulations per Section 333 of the FAA Reform Act and Part 11 of the Federal Aviation Regulati ons

Dear Sir or Madam:

Pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (the Reform Act) and 14
C.F.R. Part 11, Donny Robert Melara ( Donny or Donny Melara ) dba Air Cam Shots ( A ir Cam Shots

, Petitioner, or Operator ) hereby applies for an exemption from the listed Federal Aviation Regulations (FARs ) to allow business use (commercial operation) of his small unoccupied (unmanned) aerial s ystem s (UAS), so long as such operations are conducted within and under the

conditions outlined he rein or as may be established by the FAA as required by Section 333.

I. INTRODUCTION

Petitioner, Donny Melara dba Air Cam Shots , is a United States born citizen, with the fo llowing contact information, operating worldwide and at:

AIR CAM SHOTS

1317 N. SAN FERNANDO BLVD. #328 BURBANK, CA 91504

Phone: (323) 327

- 3016 donny@aircamshots.com

www.aircamshots.com

Petitioner, Donny Melara dba Air Cam Shot s , has been building and operating mo del aircraft and

UAS for more than a decade

. Serving as Chief Pilot , Shooter, and C o

- founder of Air Cam Shots, Donny has a passion for UAS and photography. Donny merged the two and has become one of the

most skilled UAS, RC Flyer

- Shooters in the business. His additional skills include research and development, having buil t over 200 high performance unoccupied (unmanned) aircraft (UA)

### Air Cam Shots ’ 333 Petition

August 3, 2015 P a g e | 2 of 10 ranging from 195 mph Jets to Aerobatic Planes and Helicopters. He is has received many awards for competing in tournaments internationally. He speaks both English and Spanish fluently. He

curr ently maintains a duly issued US Passport and a Driver’s License issued by the California Department of Motor Vehicles.

Petitioner has incorporated UAS operations into his existing businesses. Small business is the backbone of America. Through years of air craft and UAS commercial and hobbyist experience, petitioner has develo ped numerous diverse clients in need of UAS training and f or safe and lawful

commercial UAS aerial data collection (ADC ) services. Petitioner’s small UAS business will provide new jobs and an increased level of safety to clients currently in need of UAS training and ADC commercial services. Existing FAA UAS policy bars Petitioner from providing UAS training and ADC commercial services in the absence of the requested exemption s

.

Petitio ner, Air Cam Shots , provides training for unoccupied (unmanned) aircraft (UA) to

recreational , commercial, governmental, Emergency Management Agencies (EMA) and entities. Petitioner’s main priority is to promote safety in the national airspace. Air Cam Sho ts’ training

includes e.g. obeying FAA regulations, joining the AMA, understanding how to fly UA, and making sure that all safety standards are being met.

Air Cam Shots recognizes the enormous potential of UAS but also recognizes the need for due diligenc e and responsibility on the part of all persons that will fly UAS to ensure the safety of the National Airspace (NAS). Air Cam Shots is assisting with the integration of UAS into the NAS by educating new users of this technology.

Air Cam Shots’ UAS train ing is based on the military model of classroom instruction, trainer demonstration, and user hands on performance. Understanding and proficiency is determined by knowledge and proficiency testing.

Instruction includes the following:

 FAA regulations

 Limita tions and restrictions of where and when users can fly

 Liability for flying irresponsibly

 Pre, during, and post flight safety check lists

 Benefits of Academy of Model Aeronautics (AMA) membership.

 User types and details (commercial, public, and recreationa l)

 Identification of No fly zones

 Review of knowbeforeyoufly.com

 Similar safe UA operating principles and techniques

Similar exemptions have been granted to other UAS training operations, including Exemption No. 11625 Regulatory Docket No. FAA

– 2015

– 0551 and generally, exemptions 2689F, 5745, 10673, and

10808.

### Air Cam Shots ’ 333 Petition

August 3, 2015 P a g e | 3 of 10 Petitioner also seeks to operate UAS to conduct aerial data collection (ADC) which includes any remote sensing and measuring by an instr ument(s) aboard the u nm anned a ircraft (UA). Examples

include i magery (photography, video, infrared, etc.), electronic measurement (precision surveying, RF analysis, etc.), chemical measurement (particulate measurement, etc.), or any other gathering of data by instruments aboard the UA.

In particular Petitioner seeks authorization to conduct commercial UAS training and remote ADC, mapping, surveying, photog raphy, filming, demonstrations, training, surveying, measuring, and inspections of (or for):

1.) Construction, architectural, engineering, insurance, risk managem ent, security, real estate, resort, golf, cemetery, entertainment, sports, utility, energy (oil, gas, solar, wind, & electric), hydro (water), transportation (port, rail, truck, & bus), mining, bridge, telecommunications, agriculture (farming, ranching, & growing) flare stack, platform, tower, pole, and pipeline infrastructure, structures, sites, systems, features and operations; and,

2 .) R ecreational , commercial, governmental, Emergency Management Agencies (EMA) and

entities ; and,

3 .) C losed

- set motion picture and television (MPT) filming and production which mu st be conducted pursuant to petitioner’s FOM, petitioner’s operating documents, and the MPT operations manual (MPTOM) special operating provisions ( Appendix AA of petitioner’s FOM); and,

4 .) E nvironmental, scientific, conservation, climate change, natural

resource, wildlife, oceanographic, forestry, weather, search & rescue, emergency services, humanitarian relief, public & private entity support, assistance and monitoring

of infrastructure, st ructures, sites, systems, features, and operations; and,

5 .) Research, education, crew training, development, testing, certification, and validation of safe and lawful commercial, hobby, and recreational UAS curriculum, education, and safe flight

trainin g , demonstrations, and events involving UAS design, manufacture, assembly, purchase, sale, maintenance, repair, inspection, safe operation, record keeping, and required FAA

documentation.

Hereinafter, 1 through 5 , above, referred to as petitioner’s "propo sed operations".

In support of his application, petitioner confidentially submits his proprietary and confidential Flight Operations Manual (FOM) , MPTOM, and other manufacturer’s model specific aircraft documentation (operating documents) for each aircraf t in hi s fleet of four ( 4 ) UAS aircraft (fleet) as shown in the table immediately below:

N

- Number Serial Number Manufacturer Name

Model Name

Address

### Air Cam Shots ’ 333 Petition

August 3, 2015 P a g e | 4 of 10 Each UAS in p etitioner’s fleet is in the process of being duly registered with the FAA which will assign registration number s shortly.

Specific Regulations f or which an exemption is sought:

14 CFR 61.113 (a) 14 CFR 91.7 (a) 14 CFR 91.119 (b) & (c)

14 CPR 91. 121 14 CFR 91.151 (a) 14 CFR 91.405 (a) 14 CFR 407 (a) (1) 14 CPR 409 (a) (1) & (2)

14 CFR 417 (a) & (b)

II. PETITIONER’S PROPOSED OPERATIONS DO NOT CREATE SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS

Each of Petitioner ’s UAS is an electric multi

- rotor craft, weighing less than 5 5 lbs. including ADC payload. Each operates at a speed of no more than 100 mph (87 kno ts) and has the capability to hover, and/or move in a vertical and horizontal plane simultaneously. It will only be operated as visual line of sight (VLOS), remain under 400 ft. above ground level (AGL), and will operate only over private or controlled acc ess property with permission from the owner/controller of the property or authorized representative.

During petitioner’s proposed operations the site will be secured and non

- participants will be kept at least 500 feet away from the operation unless barrie rs or structures are present that sufficiently

protect non

- participants in the event of an accident or loss of control.

Petitioner has drafted, and submits confidentially, his Flight Operations Manual (FOM) which discusses safety considerations, training, general operating procedures, specifications, inspection, maintenance, setup of the UAS, and other proprietary procedures for the proposed UAS operations.

III. PETITIONER'S PROPOSED OPERATIONS ARE IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST

The FAA has issued a Grant of Exemp tion to FalconSkyCam for operations that are substantially similar to those proposed herein. Docket No. FAA

- 2014

- 0884 (March 6, 2015). In issuing the Grant, the FAA noted that "[t]he enhanced safety and reduced environmental impact achieved using a TBD TBD DJI INNOVATIONS

PHANTOM 3 PROFESSIONAL DONNY ROBERT MELARA

TBD TBD DJI INNOVATIONS

S

- 10 00 A 2 FLIGHT C ONTROL DONNY ROBERT MELARA

TBD TBD DJI INNOVATIONS

INSPIRE 1 DONNY ROBERT MELARA

TBD TBD DJI INNOVATIONS

PHANTOM 2 DONNY ROBERT MELARA

### Air Cam Shots ’ 333 Petition

August 3, 2015 P a g e | 5 of 10 UAS wit h the specifications described by the petitioner and carrying no passengers or crew, rather than a manned aircraft of significantly greater proportions, carrying crew in addition to flammable fuel, gives the FAA good cause to find that the UAS operation en abled by this exemption is in the public interest."

Accordingly, Petitioner respectfully requests that the FAA grant the requested exemption summarily and without delay.

IV. EQUIVALENT LEVEL OF SAFETY

Petitioner proposes that each of his UAS with the char acteristics and as operated with the limitations listed below, provide for at least an equivalent or even higher level of safety to operations under the current regulatory framework.

These limitations and conditions to which Petitioner agrees to be bound when conducting commercial operations under an FAA issued exemption include:

1.) Each UAS utilized by Petitioner will weigh Less than 55 lbs, operate at a speed of no more than 100 mph (87 knots), and will remain under 400 ft. (AGL). 2.) Flights will be operated only during daylight hours, only in visual meteorological conditions, and only within visual line of sight (VLOS) of the pilot in command (PIC) of the UAS. 3.) All operations will utilize a visual observer (VO) in addition to the pilot in command (PIC). 4.) Maximu m total flight time for each operational flight will be approximately 30 minutes, or when the Low Battery warning activates.

V. EXEMPTIONS REQUESTED

14 C.F.R. § 61.113 (a) and (b): Private, Recreational, or Sport vs. Commercial Pilot Certificates

Sections 61.113 (a) and (b) prohibit private , recreational, or sport certified pilots from operating a traditional aircraft for compensation or hire. Petitioner proposes that his PIC will have at least a private , recreational, or sport pilot’s certificate, and a cu rrent FAA 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. Petitioner’s PIC will also meet the flight review requirements specified in

14 CF R § 61.56 in an aircraft in which the PIC is rated on his or her pilot certificate.

Petitioner will not permit any PIC to operate unless the PIC demonstrates the ability to safely operate the UAS in a manner consistent with how the UAS will be operated u nder petitioner’s exemption, including evasive and emergency maneuvers and maintaining appropriate distances from persons, vessels, vehicles and structures. PIC qualification flight hours and currency will be logged in a manner consistent with 14 CFR § 61. 51(b). Flights for the purposes of training the petitioner’s PICs and VOs (training, proficiency, and experience

- building) and determining the PIC’s ability to safely operate the UAS in a manner consistent with how the UAS will be operated under

### Air Cam Shots ’ 333 Petition

August 3, 2015 P a g e | 6 of 10 petitioner ’s exemption are requested by petitioner to be allowed under the terms of this exemption.

Petitioner further proposes that such PIC and VO training operations will only be conducted during dedicated training sessions. During training, proficiency, and ex perience

- building flights, all persons not essential for flight operations will be considered nonparticipants, and the PIC will operate the UA with appropriate distance from nonparticipants in accordance with 14 CFR §

91.119.

Based upon the above and for the reasons set forth in the FAA's grant of an exemption to Astraeus Aerial, Petitioner does not believe a commercial pilot certificate is necessary for the operations it intends to conduct. See, e.g., In the matter of the petition of Astraeus Aerial, Exem ption No. 11062 (issued Sept. 25, 2014). For those reasons, Petitioner requests an exemption from 14 C.F.R. § 61.113 (a) and (b).

14 C.F.R. § 91.7 (a): Civil Aircraft Airworthiness

Section 91.7 prohibits operation of an unairworthy aircraft, and places r esponsibility for airworthiness determinations on the PIC. The UAS will not have an airworthiness certificate, and there is no FAA regulatory standard for determining airworthiness of the UAS. Additionally, Petitioner's operating documents, including FOM, set forth inspection and maintenance procedures to ensure airworthiness. For these reasons, and in accordance with the FAA's grant of an exemption from section 91.7 to Total Safety U.S., Inc., Petitioner requests an exemption from 14 CFR. § 91.7(a). See, e .g., In the matter of the petition of Total Safety U.S., Inc., Exemption No. 11156 (issued Jan. 29, 2015).

14 C.F.R. §91.119 (b) and (c): Minimum Safe Altitudes

Section 91.119 establishes safe altitudes for operation of civil aircraft. Section 91.119 (b) prohibits aircraft in congested areas from flying less than 1,000 feet above the highest obstacle within a horizontal radius of 2,000 feet of the aircraft. To the extent that Petitioner’s proposed operations

would be considered to be in "congested areas," Petitioner's operational procedures, including FOM, and the size, weight and speed of each UAS, provide an equivalent level of safety such that the proposed operations at lower altitudes should be allowed.

As described in his Flight Operations Manual (FO M), Petitioner will establish a 500' buffer/sterile area for its operations that will exclude personnel not associated with the operations. Petitioner will also exercise additional control over the sterile area as needed, as set forth in the FOM. Consequen tly, Petitioner believes these procedures will reduce or eliminate any potential adverse impacts to safety for operations in congested areas. Petitioner therefore requests an exemption from 14 CFR § 91.119(b).

Section 91.119 (c) prohibits operations in o ther than congested areas below 500 feet above the surface, or closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle or structure. Since this exemption is

### Air Cam Shots ’ 333 Petition

August 3, 2015 P a g e | 7 of 10 for a UAS that flies similarly to a helicopter and requests authority to operate at altitudes up to 400

ft. AGL, an exemption may be needed to allow such proposed operations.

The equivalent level of safety will be achieved given the size, weight, speed of the UAS as well as the location where it is operated. As discussed above, Petitioner’s FOM provides fo r establishment of a sterile area, including safety buffers of 500 feet for personnel not associated with the operation. Petitioner therefore requests an exemption from Section 91.119(c) for all authorized personnel associated with the proposed operations.

14 C.F.R. §91.121 Altimeter Settings

This regulation requires each person operating an aircraft to maintain a cruising altitude by reference to an altimeter that is set "... to the elevation of the departure airport or an appropriate altimeter setting a vailable before departure." As the UAS may not have a barometric altimeter, but instead a constant GPS altitude read out, an exemption is requested.

14 C.F.R. § 91.151(a): Fuel Requirements for Flight in VFR Conditions

Section 91.151 (a) prohibits an ind ividual from beginning "a flight in an airplane under VFR conditions unless (considering wind and forecast weather conditions) there is enough fuel to fly to the first point of intended landing, and, assuming normal cruising speed

- (1) During the day, to fly after that for at least 30 minutes; or (2) At night, to fly after that for at least 45 minutes."

Maximum total flight time for each of the proposed operations will be no more than 30 minutes. Flights will be safely landed when the battery falls below its nominal voltage, should that occur prior to completi on of the operation. Petitioner’s UAS has a constant battery voltage display and a Low Voltage LED Warning which alerts when the battery reaches pre

- determined levels. This battery level would be more than adequate to return the UAS to its planned landing zone from anywhere in its limited operating area when the Low Voltage Warning alerts.

For these reasons, Petitioner requests an exemption from 14 C.F.R. § 91.151 (a). Similar exemptions have been gra nted to other operations, including Exemptions 2689F, 5745, 10673, and

10808.

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

These regulations require that an aircraft operator or owner "shall have that aircr aft 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 ...," and others shall inspect or mainta in the aircraft in compliance with Part 43.

As provided in petitioner’s FOM, the operator and the PIC will ensure that the UAS is in working order prior to initiating each flight, and the operator will perform required maintenance and inspections, and kee p a log of any maintenance performed.

### Air Cam Shots ’ 333 Petition

August 3, 2015 P a g e | 8 of 10 VI. REGULATIONS FOR WHICH EXEMPTIONS ARE UNNECESSARY

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has issued numerous prior exemptions for many different types of UAS operations. In those exemptions, the agency noted that e xemptions from certain regulations were not necessary, due to "the size, weight, speed and limited operating area associated with [the UAS] and its operation."

Based upon the FAA's guidance and the fact that petitioner’s UAS is even smaller and slower tha n many of those UAS in previously issued exemptions, Petitioner believes exemptions from the following regulations are not necessary:

14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H: Airworthiness Certificates. 14 C.F.R. § 45.23 (b): Marking of the Aircraft. 14 C.F.R. §91. 7(b): Civil aircraft airworthiness. 14 C.F.R. §91.109: Flight instruction.

Petitioner also believes that an exemption from 14 C.F.R. § 91.103: Preflight Action is not necessary. This regulation requires each pilot in command to take certain actions befor e flight to insure the safety of flight. An FAA approved rotorcraft flight manual will not be provided for the aircraft. An equivalent level of safety will be provided as set forth in the FOM and operating documents submitted as part of this request.

The FAA has previously found that adherence to procedures contained in an applicant's operating documents demonstrate compliance with § 91.103, and therefore an exemption from the regulation was not necessary. See, e.g., In the matter of the petition of Total Safety U.S., Inc., Exemption No. 11156 (issued Jan. 29, 2015).

As detailed in his operating documents, petitioner's PIC will take all actions including reviewing weather, flight battery requirements, landing and takeoff clearance distances and aircraft

pe rformance data before initiation of flight to ensure the safety of the flight. Consequently, in light of this agency's prior finding in Total Safety U.S., Inc., Petitioner does not believe an exemption from 14 C.F.R. § 91.103 is necessary.

If it is dete rmined that the petitioner does require exemptions from any of the above provisions from which he has herein stated that he believes no exemption is required: Petitioner requests that such exemptions be granted upon the basis of all that he has stated in t his petition and in his operating documents

.

Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. Part 11, the following summary is provided for publication in the Federal Register, should it be determined that publication is needed:

Petitioner seeks an exemption from the following ru les:

### Air Cam Shots ’ 333 Petition

August 3, 2015 P a g e | 9 of 10 14 C.F.R. § 61.113 (a) and (b); 91.7 (a); 91.119 (b) and (c); 91.121; 91.151 (a); 91.405 (a); 91.407 (a) (1); 91.409 (a) (1) & (2) and 91.417 (a) & (b) to conduct training and aerial data collection (ADC) which includes any remote sensing and measuri ng by an instrument(s) aboard the Unoccupied (Unmanned) Aircraft (UA). Examples include imagery (photography, video, infrared, etc.), electronic measurement (precision surveying, RF analysis, etc.), chemical measurement (particulate measurement, etc.), or any other gathering of data by instruments aboard the UA.

Approval of exemptions allowing commercial operations of UAS for these purposes will enhance safety by reducing risk. Conventional means for performing these assessments require either physically c limbing or scaling structures, poles or towers, using ropes to scale or rappel up or down poles, towers or structures, using high

- reach man lifts to access the towers, poles, sites, or structures (limited reach), or by using conventional helicopters or tra ditional aircraft operating at extremely low altitudes over the subject structure, pole, site, or tower being examined. These conventional means all pose high risks to persons and property, including many actual human deaths each year.

In contrast, a UAS weighing less than 55 lbs. and powered by batteries, eliminates virtually all of that risk given the reduced mass and lack of combustible fuel carried on board. The UAS is carried by hand to the proposed operations site and not flown. The UAS carries no pa ssengers or crew and, therefore, will not expose them to the risks associated with traditional manned aircraft flights; ground based aerial lift (bucket truck) operations, or manual climbing, scaling, and inspection operations.

The proposed operations of these small UAS, each weighing less than 55 lbs., conducted in the strict conditions outlined in this petition, will provide an equivalent level of safety supporting the grant of the exemptions requested, including exempting Petitioner from the requirement s of Part 21 and allowing commercial UAS operations. These lightweight aircraft operate at slow speeds, and close to the ground, and, as a result, are far safer

than the conventional alternatives.

Privacy All of the proposed operations, UAS flights, will occur only over private or controlled access property with permission from the owner/controller of the property or authorized representative. Petitioner’s proposed operations will be conducted in accordance with all applicable laws and regulations governin g privacy at the venue of the flight operation.

VII. CONCLUSION

Pe titioner , Air Cam Shots, has requested to use two small UAS for training and aerial data collection (ADC). The FAA has issued grants of exemption in circumstances similar in all material respects to those presented in this petition. In Grants of Exemption Nos. 11062 to Astraeus Aerial ( see Docket

No. FAA−2014−0352), 11109 to Clayco, Inc. ( see Docket No. FAA−2014−0507), 11112 to VDOS

### Air Cam Shots ’ 333 Petition

August 3, 2015 P a g e | 10 of 10 Global, LLC ( see Docket No. FAA−2014−0382), 11213 to Aeryon Labs, Inc. ( see Docket No. FAA−2014−0642), and 11625 to DART drones, LLC. ( see Docket No. FAA

– 2015

– 0551), the FA A found that the enhanced safety achieved using an unmanned aircraft (UA) with the specifications described by the petitioner and carrying no passengers or crew, rather than a manned aircraft of significantly greater proportions, carrying crew in addition to flammable fuel, gives the FAA good cause to find that the UAS operation enabled by granting an exemption to petitioner is in the public

interest.

Upon review of petition er’s reasons for requesting these exemption s , It reasonably should be

determined th at:

1.) They are similar in all material respects to relief previously requested in Grant of Exemption Nos. 11062, 11109, 11112, 11625, and 11213; 2.) The reasons stated by the FAA for granting Exemption Nos. 11062, 11109, 11112, 11625, and 11213 also apply to the situation petitioner presents; and 3.) A grant of exemption is in the public interest.

Therefore, pursuant to the authority contained in 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 40113, and 44701, Petitioner should be granted an exemption from 14 CFR §§ 61.23(a) and (c), 61.101( e)(4) and (5), 61.113(a), 61.315(a), 91.7(a), 91.119(c), 91.121, 91.151(a)(1), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) and (2), and 91.417(a) and (b), to the extent necessary to allow the pe titioner’s proposed operations.

Satisfaction of the criteria provi ded in Section 333 of the Reform Act of 2012

- size, weight, speed, operating capabilities, proximity to airports and populated areas and daylight UAS operation s to within visual line of sight (VLOS) and national security

- provide more tha n adequate justi fication to

grant the requested exemptions allowing the proposed operation s in the NAS by petitioner, Donny

Robert Melara dba A ir Cam Shots

.

Respectfully,

/Signed/ 

### Erick F. Larsen

Consultant to

Air Cam Shots

262 W. Linden Ave. # C Burbank, LA, Ca 9150 2

818

- 732

- 0330 ErickLarsen@Outlook.com