5548 S. Fuchsia Place, Boise, ID 83716

(208) 391-3677

April 30, 2015

U.S. Department of Transportation

Docket Management System

1200 New Jersey Ave., SE

Washington, DC 20590

Josh Cremer Photo and Video, LLC Petition for Exemption to Operate Unmanned 

Aircraft Systems for Aerial Photography and Filming

FAA Regulatory Docket

NAME AND ADDRESS OF PETITIONER COUNSEL FOR PETITIONER

Josh Cremer Photo & Video, LLC L. Shay McArthur

Attn: Josh Cremer MCARTHUR LAW, PLLC

17062 N. Tanner Place 5548 S. Fuchsia Place

Nampa, ID 83867 Boise, ID 83716

(208) 51406239 (208) 724-8208

josh@joshcremer.com shay@mcarthurlaw.org
McArthur Law, PLLC

www.shaymcarthurlaw.com

April	30,	2015

Page	2

I. 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. § 44701(f), Josh Cremer Photo & Video, LLC 

(“Petitioner”) hereby petitions for exemptions from 14 C.F.R. Part 21, 14 C.F.R. §§ 61.113(a) 

and (b), 61.133(a), 91.7(a), 91.9(b)(2), 92.103(b)(1), 91.119(c), 91.121, 91, 151, 91.203(a) and 

(b), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(2), 91.417(a)-(b). The proposed exemptions, if granted, 

would allow Petitioner to operate, small camera-mounted unmanned aircraft systems (“UAS”) 

weighing 55 pounds for less for the purpose of close-set filming of videos, web videos, corporate 

videos, real estate videos, and still photography.

Based on the small size of Petitioner’s UAS, the qualifications and experience of 

Petitioner’s UAS operators, and the restricted environment within which Petitioner will operate, 

the requested exemptions fall squarely within the zone of safety envisioned by Congress and set 

forth in Section 333. Additionally, the enhanced safety achieved by replacing significantly

larger manned aircraft carrying crew and flammable fuel with the small UAS carrying no 

passengers or crew and operated under the specific guidelines and procedures proposed by

Petitioner gives the FAA good cause to find that the UAS operations enabled by the instant 

Petition are in the public interests. Thus, the requested exemptions should be granted.

II. BACKGROUND

For the past year, Petitioner’s production and filming have provided video services for 

corporate and private individuals. Combining the latest in technology and an superb safety

record, Petitioner’s skill and knowledge has been used by local, national, and international 

organizations. In order to continue to provide the highest level of service, and promote safety by
McArthur Law, PLLC

www.shaymcarthurlaw.com

April	30,	2015

Page	3

eliminating the need for large manned aircraft, Petitioner seeks regulatory exemptions that will 

allow Petitioner to employ camera mounted UAS technology in the filming and production 

process.

III. STATUTORY AUTHORITY

A. Section 333

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 

National Airspace System (“NAS”). Section 333(a) states that the FAA “shall determine if 

certain unmanned aircraft systems may operate safely in the NAS before completion of the 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 operational authorization.” The FAAA has committed to complying 

with this mandate by granting several petitions almost identical to the one at hand. See, e.g., 

Exemption No. 11062, Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2014-0352 (granting regulatory exemptions 

to Astraeus Aerial for operation of unmanned aircraft systems for the purpose of filming for the 

motion picture and television industry).

Section 333(b) identifies several factors that the FAA should consider in determining 

whether commercial UAS operations should be approved. The include UAS that, “as a result of 

their size, weight, speed, operational capability, proximity to airports and populated areas, and 

operation within visual line of sight do not create a hazard to the users of the [NAS] or the public 

or pose a threat to national security.” See Section 333(b).

B. Section 44701(f)

In addition to the specific authority conferred by Section 333, the FAA Administrator has 

general authority to grant exemptions for the FAA’s safety regulations and minimum standards 
McArthur Law, PLLC

www.shaymcarthurlaw.com

April	30,	2015

Page	4

when the Administrator decides a requested exemption is in the public interest. See U.S.C § 

44701(f).

IV. REQUESTED EXEMPTIONS

Petitioner requests relief from the following regulations:

Part 21 prescribes, in pertinent part, the procedural requirements for issuing and changing 

design approvals, production approvals, airworthiness certificates, and airworthiness approvals.

Section 61.113 prescribes that “no person who holds a private pilot certificate may act as 

a pilot in command of an aircraft that is carrying passengers or property for compensation or 

hire; nor may that person, for compensation or hire, act a s pilot in command of an aircraft,: (see

Section 61.113(a)), and that “a private pilot may, for compensation or hire, act as pilot in 

command of an aircraft in connection with any business or employment if: (1) The flight is only 

incidental to that business or employment; and (2) The aircraft does not carry passengers or 

property for compensation or hire,” (see Section 61.113(b)).

Section 61.133(a) sets forth privileges for persons holding commercial pilot certificates, 

including a provision impliedly limiting to persons holding a commercial pilot certificate the 

ability to act as pilot in command of an aircraft “[f]or compensation or hire.”

Section 91.7(a) prescribes, in pertinent part, that no person may operate a civil aircraft unless it 

is in an airworthy condition. 

Section 91.9(b)(2) prohibits operation of U.S. registered civil aircraft unless there is 

available in the aircraft a current approved Airplane or Rotorcraft Flight Manual, approved 

manual material, markings, and placards, or any combination thereof. 

Section 91.103(b)(1) prescribes, in pertinent part, that each pilot in command shall, 

before beginning a flight, become familiar with all available information concerning that flight, 

to include, “For any flight, runway lengths at airports of intended use, and the following takeoff 
McArthur Law, PLLC

www.shaymcarthurlaw.com

April	30,	2015

Page	5

and landing distance information:... For civil aircraft for which an approved Airplane or 

Rotorcraft Flight Manual containing takeoff and landing distance data is required, the takeoff and 

landing distance data contained therein.” 

Section 91.119(c) prescribes that, except when necessary for takeoff or landing, no 

person may operate an aircraft below the following altitudes: “Over other than congested areas. 

An altitude of 500 feet above the surface, except over open water or sparsely populated areas. In 

those cases, the aircraft may not be operated closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, 

or structure.” 

Section 91.121 requires, in pertinent part, each person operating an aircraft to maintain 

cruising altitude by reference to an altimeter that is set “to the elevation of the departure airport 

or an appropriate altimeter setting available before departure.” 

Section 91.151(a) prescribes that no person may begin 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. 

Section 91.203 prohibits, in subpart (a), any person from operating a civil aircraft unless 

it has within it (1) an appropriate and current airworthiness certificate; and (2) an effective U.S. 

registration certificate issued to its owner or, for operation within the United States, the second 

copy of the Aircraft Registration Application as provided for in § 47.31(c). Section 91.203 

prescribes, in subpart (b), that no person may operate a civil aircraft unless the airworthiness 

certificate 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. 

Section 91.405(a) requires, in pertinent part, that an aircraft operator or owner shall have 

the aircraft inspected as prescribed in subpart E of the same part and shall, between required 
McArthur Law, PLLC

www.shaymcarthurlaw.com

April	30,	2015

Page	6

inspections, except as provided in paragraph (c) of the same section, have discrepancies repaired 

as prescribed in Part 43 of the chapter. 

Section 91.407(a)(1) prohibits, in pertinent part, any person from operating an aircraft 

that has undergone maintenance, preventative maintenance, rebuilding, or alteration unless it has 

been approved for return to service by a person authorized under § 43.7 of the same chapter. 

Section 91.409(a)(2) prescribes, in pertinent part, that no person may operate an aircraft 

unless, within the preceding 12 calendar months, it has had an inspection for the issuance of an 

airworthiness certificate in accordance with part 21 of this chapter. 

Section 91.417(a) and (b) prescribes, in pertinent part, that-

(a) Each registered owner or operator shall keep the following records for the 

periods specified in paragraph (b) of this section:

(1) Records of the maintenance, preventative maintenance, and alteration 

and records of the 100-hour, annual, progressive, and other required or 

approved inspections, as appropriate, for each aircraft (including the 

airframe) and each engine, propeller, rotor, and appliance of an aircraft. 

The records must include-

(i) A description (or reference to data acceptable to the 

Administrator) of the work performed; and 

(ii) The date of completion of the work performed; and 

(iii) The signature, and certificate number of the person 

approving the aircraft for return to service. 

(2) Records containing the following information: 

(i) The total time in service of the airframe, each engine, each 

propeller, and each rotor. 
McArthur Law, PLLC

www.shaymcarthurlaw.com

April	30,	2015

Page	7

(ii) The current status of life-limited parts of each airframe, engine, 

propeller, rotor, and appliance. 

(iii) The time since last overhaul of all items installed on the aircraft 

which are required to be overhauled on a specified time basis. 

(iv) The current inspection status of the aircraft, including the time 

since the last inspection required by the inspection program under 

which the aircraft and its appliances are maintained. 

(v) The current status of applicable airworthiness directives (AD) 

and safety directives including, for each, the method of compliance, 

the AD or safety directive number and revisions date. If the AD or 

safety directive involves recurring action, the time and date when the 

next action is required. 

(vi) Copies of the forms prescribed by § 43.9(d) of this chapter for 

each major alteration to the airframe and currently installed engines, 

rotors, propellers, and appliances. 

(b) The owner or operator shall retain the following records for the periods 

prescribed: 

(1) The records specified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section shall be 

retained until the work is repeated or superseded by other work or for 1 

year after the work is performed. 

(2) The records specified in paragraph (a)(2) of this section shall be 

retained and transferred with the aircraft at the time the aircraft is sold. 
McArthur Law, PLLC

www.shaymcarthurlaw.com

April	30,	2015

Page	8

(3) A list of defects furnished to a registered owner or operator under § 

43.11 of this chapter shall be retained until the defects are repaired and the 

aircraft is approved for return to service. 

V. PETITIONER’S PROPOSED OPERATIONS SATISFY SECTION 333.

A. Unmanned Aircraft Systems

The UAS to be operated under this request are less than 55 lbs. fully loaded, will be 

operated at a speed of no more than 50 knots, carry neither a pilot nor passenger, carry no 

explosive materials or flammable liquids, and operate exclusively within a secured area. 

Petitioner’s UAS use a radio frequency spectrum for operation and control that complies with 

Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) requirements, and Petitioner has integrated 

safety features into the UAS, as described in Petitioner’s UAV Pre-Flight procedure and UAV 

In-Flight & Post-Flight Procedure (collectively referred to as, “operations manuals”).1

Petitioner’s UAS are equipped with redundant safety mechanisms allowing them to 

operate safely after experiencing certain in-flight failures. If a lost-link event occurs, including 

the loss of ground communications and/or the loss of a GPS signal, Petitioner’s UAS have the 

ability to perform a pre-coordinated, predictable, automated flight maneuver and return to a 

predetermined location within a designated security perimeter for landing. The UAS further have 

the ability to abort a flight in the event of unpredicted obstacles or emergencies. All flights will 

be terminated after a maximum of 15 minutes or with 30% remaining battery power, whichever 

occurs first. Thus, good cause exists for granting Petitioner’s requested relief from 14 C.F.R. § 

91.151(a) (setting forth fuel requirements for flight in VFR conditions). 

																																																							

1 The	Operating	Manual	is	submitted	along	with	this	petition.
McArthur Law, PLLC

www.shaymcarthurlaw.com

April	30,	2015

Page	9

Petitioner’s UAS will be identified by serial number, registered in accordance with 14 

C.F.R. Part 47, and have identification (N-Number) markings in accordance with 14 C.F.R. Part 

45, Subpart C. Markings will be as large as practicable. 

Regarding Petitioner’s requested relief from 14 C.F.R. § 91.121 (Altimeter Settings), 

Petitioner seeks such relief because Petitioner will not have a typical barometric altimeter 

onboard the UAS. Instead, altitude information will be provided to the UAS PIC via a digitally

encoded telemetric data feed, which downlinks from the aircraft to a ground-based on-screen 

display. The altitude information will be generated by equipment installed onboard the UAS, 

using GPS triangulation, digitally encoded barometric altimeter, radio altimeter, or any 

combination thereof. Prior to each flight, a zero altitude initiation point will be established and 

confirmed for accuracy by the UAS PIC. Thus, good cause exists for granting the requested 

relief from 14 C.F.R. § 91.121. 

Given the size, weight, speed, and limited operating area associated with the aircraft to be 

utilized by the applicant, an exemption from 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H (Airworthiness 

Certificates), subject to certain conditions and limitations, is warranted (if necessary) and meets 

the requirements for an equivalent level of safety under 14 C.F.R. Part 11 and Section 333. The 

UAS operated without an airworthiness certificate in the restricted environment and under the 

conditions and limitations proposed by Petitioner will be at least as safe, or safer, than a 

conventional aircraft (fixed wing or rotorcraft) operating with an airworthiness certificate issued 

under 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H, and not subject to the proposed limitations and conditions. 

Petitioner will strictly comply with safety and maintenance procedures included in all 

applicable UAS manufacturer’s instructions and operating manuals. To the extent such 

information is not included in the guidelines developed by the manufacturers, Petitioners will 

develop and document maintenance, overhaul, replacement, and inspection requirements, 
McArthur Law, PLLC

www.shaymcarthurlaw.com

April	30,	2015

Page	10

procedures to document and maintain maintenance records with regard to Petitioner’s UAS, and 

UAS technician qualification criteria. Petitioner’s operations manuals will include maintenance 

requirements for Petitioner’s UAS, including “on-condition” maintenance and modifications. In 

light of these mitigating factors, exemptions from 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 

91.409(a)(1) and (2), and 91.417(a) and (b) are warranted. 

B. UAS Pilot in Command

Petitioner’s UAS pilot in command (PIC) shall not be required to hold a current pilot’s 

license because it will only operate in Class G Airspace. Since there are no standards for either 

private or commercial UAS pilot certificates, knowledge of airspace regulations acquired from 

FAA ground school 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. According to the FAA, “the FAA considers the overriding safety factor for the limited 

operations proposed by the petitioner to be the airmanship skills acquired through UAS-specific 

flight cycles, flight time, and specific make and model experience, culminating in verification 

through testing.” See Exemption No. 11062, Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2014-0352, at p. 18. 

With those factors in mind, Petitioner’s UAS PIC shall be required to meet several conditions 

and limitations as outlined in the Operations Manual, including the following: 

 The UAS PIC will have accumulated and logged a minimum of 200 flight cycles 

and 25 hours of total time as a UAS rotorcraft pilot and at least 10 hours logged as 

a UAS pilot with a similar UAS type (single blade or multi-rotor). 

 The UAS PIC will have accumulated and logged a minimum of five hours of 

flight time with the specific make and model of the UAS to be utilized for 

operations under the exemption and three takeoffs and landings in the preceding 

90 days.
McArthur Law, PLLC

www.shaymcarthurlaw.com

April	30,	2015

Page	11

 The UAS PIC will have successfully completed the qualification process as 

specified in the operations manuals, to include a knowledge and skill test. 

Regarding Petitioner’s requested relief from 14 C.F.R. § 91.7(a), it is Petitioner’s 

understanding that Petitioner’s UAS will not require an airworthiness certificate in accordance 

with 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H, and that exemption from 14 C.F.R.§ 91.7(a) is therefore 

unnecessary. To the extent such an exemption is deemed necessary, Petitioner asserts that it 

should be granted in light of the safety procedures proposed herein. In accordance with the 

pertinent part of 14 C.F.R. § 91.7(b), the operator in command of Petitioner’s UAS shall be 

responsible for determining whether the aircraft is in a safe condition for flight. Petitioner’s 

manuals for maintenance and operations shall include safety checklists to be used by the operator 

in command prior to each flight. 

Regarding Petitioner’s requested relief from 14 C.F.R. § 91.9(b)(2) (Civil aircraft flight 

manual, marking, and placard requirements and § 91.203(a) and (b), (Civil aircraft: certifications 

required), it is Petitioner’s understanding that relief from these regulations is no longer necessary

in light of the FAA Memorandum “Interpretation regarding whether certain required documents 

may be kept at an unmanned aircraft’s control station,” dated August 8, 2014. To the extent the 

FAA deems an exemption from this section necessary for Petitioner’s proposed operations, such 

exemption should be granted in light of the mitigating fact that Petitioner will maintain the 

documents required under 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.9 and 91.203 at the UAS ground control station 

during flights. 

Regarding Petitioner’s requested relief from 14 C.F.R. § 91.103(b)(1), Petitioner will 

comply with the other applicable procedures and requirements stated in § 91.103(a) and (b). 

Specifically, the PIC will take all actions including reviewing weather, flight battery

requirements, aircraft performance data, and landing and takeoff distances before initiation of a 
McArthur Law, PLLC

www.shaymcarthurlaw.com

April	30,	2015

Page	12

flight. The PIC will also account for all relevant site-specific conditions in their preflight 

procedures. Risks presented by sun glare will be mitigated by the PIC’s and VO’s ability to see 

other air traffic and initiate a return-to-home sequence if needed. 

The PIC’s UAS operation will be limited to a unique and restricted environment. Given 

the (1) separation of filming operations from other manned operations, (2) parallel nature of 

aeronautical knowledge requirements incumbent in the FAA ground school exam and the process 

of obtaining a private pilot’s license, and (3) the proposed UAS airmanship skills of Petitioner’s 

PICs, the additional manned airmanship experience of a private pilot would not correlate to the 

airmanship skills necessary for Petitioner’s proposed unmanned operations. Thus, Petitioner’s 

request for relief from 14 C.F.R.§ 61.113(a) and (b) and § 61.133(a) should be granted. 

C. Operating Parameters of Petitioner’s UAS

Petitioner’s UAS operations will be conducted within a controlled area, and provide 

notice to all non-participating persons in the area of operations prior to beginning operations. In 

this controlled area, Petitioner’s operations will remain within VLOS of the PIC and VO, below 

400 feet AGL, and at speeds below 50 knots. 

Consistent with the relief typically provided to manned operations under FAA Order 

8900.1, Volume 3, Chapter 8, Section 1, Petitioner requests relief from 14 C.F.R. § 91.119(c) 

with respect to those participating persons, vehicles, and structures directly involved in the 

performance of the actual filming. Regarding distance from participating persons, the operations 

manuals set forth safety factors for authorized and consenting production personnel. Because 

those procedures are specific to participating persons, no further FSDO or aviation safety 

inspector approval is necessary for reductions to the distances specified in Petitioner’s manuals. 

Regarding the distance from nonparticipating persons, Petitioner will ensure that no 

persons are allowed within 500 feet of the operating area except those consenting to be involved 
McArthur Law, PLLC

www.shaymcarthurlaw.com

April	30,	2015

Page	13

and necessary for the filming production, with the possibility of reducing this distance to no less 

than 200 feet if it would not adversely affect safety and the Administrator has approved it. This is 

consistent with FAA Order 8900.1, V3, C8, S1. 

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”). 

Additionally, Petitioner will not operate in Class B, C, or D airspace without written approval 

from the FAA. Nor will Petitioner operate the UAS less than 500 feet below or less than 2,000 

feet horizontally from a cloud or when visibility is less than 3 statute miles from the PIC. 

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, ultra light vehicles, parachute activities, 

parasailing activities, and hangliders). 

Although Petitioner seeks to comply with the waiver process as described in FAA Order 

8900.1, Volume 3, Chapter 8, Section 1 (Issue a Certificate of Waiver for Motion Picture and 

Television Filming), the current section of Order 8900.1 has specific processes that preclude a 

jurisdictional FAA FSDO from issuing the required Certificate of Waiver, because the section 

did not originally provide for UAS operations. Thus, Petitioner seeks exemption from the 

applicable regulations normally waived during that process. Petitioner proposes that the FAA 

include the required notifications and coordination with jurisdictional FSDOs through the 

conditions and limitations accompanying the requested exemption, and that the exemption 

sought herein will take the place of the Certificate of Waiver normally issued by a jurisdictional 

FSDO under 8900.1. Under this rubric, Petitioner will notify every FSDO with jurisdiction over 

the area that Petitioner plans to operate, just as with manned filming operations, and those 
McArthur Law, PLLC

www.shaymcarthurlaw.com

April	30,	2015

Page	14

FSDOs will have the ability to coordinate further conditions and limitations with the UAS 

Integration Office to address any local concerns. 

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 not 

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

D. The Requested Exemption Promotes the Public Interest

The enhanced safety achieved by replacing significantly larger manned aircraft carrying 

crew and flammable fuel with small UAS carrying no passengers or crew and operated under the 

specific guidelines and procedures proposed by Petitioner gives the FAA good cause to find that 

the UAS operations enabled by the instant Petition are in the public interest. Moreover, as the 

FAA has already recognized, “UAS provide an additional tool for the filmmaking industry, 

adding a greater degree of flexibility, which supplements the current capabilities offered by

manned aircraft.” See Exemption No. 11062, Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2014-0352, at p. 22.

VI. CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, the regulatory exemptions requested herein should be granted 

and Petitioner should be permitted to conduct small UAS operations for the purpose of closed-set 

filming. 

Respectfully submitted,

McArthur Law, PLLC

By:

L. Shay McArthur

Counsel for Petitioner

Josh Cremer Photo & Video, LLC