PETITION FOR EXEMPTION

TITLE 14, CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS

Petitioner: Johnathan D. Dobbins

179 Queen Victoria Ave

Saint Johns, FL 32259

Dale.dobbins79@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 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 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. DJI (Da-Jiang 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 twoinch 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 over 2000 hours experience in manned aircraft 

photo reconnaissance and videography. The petitioner asserts that 

safe flying of UAS will be enhanced by having a military Aircrewman 

background and is well versed in commercial flight procedures. 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 has a current medical 

flight clearance from the U.S. Navy. The petitioner has over a year 

experience flying UAS and the skill or ability to safely operate an

unmanned aerial vehicle, operating at 200 feet AGL or lower, within 

strictly controlled pre-approved airspace.

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 200 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, Johnathan D. 

Dobbins, 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 hisrequest 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 have a 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.