Page 1 of 18

Garber Graphics LLC Petition for Exemption to FAA S ection 333

Paul Garber Garber Graphics LLC DBA Above & Beyond Aerial Imagi ng N7135 Torgerson Rd Iola, WI 54945

715-570-2477 garbergraphics@gmail.com



### SUMMARY

Paul E. Garber seeks exemption from Section 333 of the FAA Reform Act of the Federal Aviation Regulations from part 21, Certification procedures for products and parts, Subpart H –

Airworthiness Certificates , and the following sections of the Code of Federal Regulations, 14 C.F.R §§ 45.23(b), 61.113(a) & (b), 91.7(a), 91.9(b)(2), 91.119, 91.121, 91.151 (a) and (b), 91.203(a) and (b), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409( a)(1) and (a)(2), and 91.417(a) and (b). Paul E. Garber seeks exemption in order to operate an Unmanned Aircraft System pursuant to

Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (FMRA). This exemption will permit Paul Garber to operate an Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) for the commercial purpose of real estate photography, building exterior inspection, l andscape photography, and conducting aerial video and photography for tourism agencies, rural h omeowners, and farms.



### INTRODUCTION AND INTERESTS OF THE PETITIONER

My name is Paul E. Garber and I am establishing a s mall business in central Wisconsin specializing in aerial video and photography services utilizing Unmanned Aircraft Systems. The business name, Above & Beyond Aerial Imaging, is a registere d trade name of Garber Graphics, LLC.

I am writing pursuant to the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 and the procedures contained within 14 C.F.R. 11, to request that Paul E. Garber of Above & Beyond Aerial Imaging - owner of an unmanned aircraft system (UAS) - be gra nted exemption from the Federal Aviation Regulations (FARS) listed within so that I may oper ate my UAS commercially in airspace regulated by the Federal Aviation Administration.

The objective of Paul E. Garber's aerial video and photography services is to provide high quality imaging for a variety of commercial, public, and re sidential uses, specifically targeting:

• Real Estate Photography

• Tourism agencies

• Agricultural operations

• Building exterior inspections

• Documenting rural properties for insurance purposes /sentimental reasons

• Construction projects.

• Increase public knowledge of UAS and promote safe U AS



### EQUIPMENT

Unmanned Aircraft System: 3D Robotics (3DR) SOLO Paul E. Garber seeks an exemption to operate a 3DR SOLO for compensation or hire within the

NAS.Page 2 of 18

The 3DR SOLO is a quad copter vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) Unmanned Aircraft (UA) with a Ground Control Station (GCS) utilizing a tablet c omputer.

Appendices: 1 - 3DR Sols User Manual (PDF) http://3drobotics.co m/kb/solo-user-manual 2 - Technical Specifications 3 - Preflight Checklist



### BASIS FOR PETITION

Petitioner, Paul E. Garber, pursuant to the provisi ons of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 C.F.R. § 11.61) and Section 333 of the FAA Moderniz ation and Reform Act of 2012 (FMRA), Special Rules for Certain Unmanned Aircraft Systems , hereby petitions the Administrator to commercially operate the 3DR SOLO UAS in the Nation al Airspace System (NAS), and for an exemption from the requirements of 14 C.F.R §§ 61.1 13(a) & (b), 91.7(a), 91.121, 91.151(b), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), and 91.417(a) & (b).

In consideration of the speed, weight, size, and li mited operating area associated with the unmanned aircraft and its operation, Paul E. Garber 's operation of the 3DR SOLO UAS meets the conditions of FMRA Section 333 and therefore, will not require an airworthiness certificate in accordance with 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H.

Accordingly, Paul E. Garber requests relief from 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), and 91.417(a) & (b), as thes e sections set forth requirements for maintenance that only apply to aircraft with an air worthiness certificate.

Paul E. Garber submits that the requested relief is proper since an equivalent level of safety will be ensured. Paul E. Garber will use experienced per sonnel or technicians to perform maintenance, alterations, or preventive maintenance on the UAS u sing the methods, techniques, and practices prescribed in the operating documents (i.e., Monthl y Maintenance Log, and 3DR SOLO User Manual). Furthermore, Paul E. Garber will document and maintain all maintenance records for the

3DR SOLO UAS.

Relief from certain requirements of 14 C.F.R.§ 61.1 13(a) and (b), entitled Private pilot privileges and limitations: Pilot in command, is requested by Paul E. Garber to the extent necessary to allow a Pilot in Command (PIC) holding a private pilot or higher level certificate, as well as an airman medical certificate, and who has demonstrated, by m eeting minimum flight- hour and currency requirements, that the PIC is able to safely operat e the 3DR SOLO UAS in a manner consistent with this exemption, including evasive and emergenc y maneuvers and maintaining appropriate distances from people, vessels, vehicles and struct ures.

Paul E. Garber seeks relief from 14 C.F.R. § 91.7(a ), entitled Civil aircraft airworthiness, because the 3DR SOLO UAS does not require an airworthiness certificate in accordance with 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H. As such, Paul E. Garber submits that he will ensure that the 3DR SOLO UAS is in an airworthy condition, prior to every flight, by d etermining that the UAS is in compliance with the operating documents (i.e., Monthly Maintenance Log, and the 3DR SOLO User Manual), and that the aircraft is in a condition for safe flight

.

Paul E. Garber also seeks an exemption from the req uirements of 14 C.F.R. § 91.121, entitled Altimeter Settings, as the 3DR SOLO UAS will not ha ve a typical barometric altimeter onboard. However, altitude information of the 3DR SOLO UAS w ill be provided to the PIC via GlobalPage 3 of 18

Positioning System (GPS) equipment and radio commun ications telemetry data link, which

downlinks from the UA to the GCS for active monitor ing of the flight path. This altitude information, combined with Paul E. Garber’s operati on of the 3DR SOLO UAS within visual line of sight, at or below 400 feet AGL, will ensure a leve l of safety equivalent to 14 C.F.R. § 91.121.

Additionally, Paul E. Garber seeks an exemption fro m the requirements of 14 C.F.R. § 91.151(b), entitled Fuel requirements for flight in VFR condit ions. Paul E. Garber submits that safety will not be affected by operation of the 3DR SOLO UAS during daylight hours in visual meteorological conditions (VMC) under visual flight rules (VFR), w ith enough battery power to fly for a total duration of approximately 13.5 minutes to the first point of intended landing and, assuming normal cruising speed, to fly after that for at lea st 4.5 minutes.

In accordance with 14 C.F.R. § 11.81, Paul E. Garbe r provides the following information in support of its petition for exemption:

A. The name and address of the Petitioner and point of contact is :

Paul E. Garber Garber Grapghics LLC [doing business as] Above & B eyond Aerial Imaging N7135 Torgerson Rd Iola, WI 54945

715-570-2477 garbergrapghics@gmail.com

B. The Specific Sections Of 14 C.F.R. From Which Paul E. Garber Seeks Exemption

.

1. Paul E. Garber Seeks Exemption From The Requirem ents Of 14 C.F.R. § 61.113(a) and (b) entitled Private pilot privileges and limitations: Pilot in command, subsections (a) and (b) prescribe the following, in relevant part: (a) No person who holds a private pilot certificate may act as a pilot in command (PIC) of an aircraft that is carrying passengers or property fo r compensation or hire; nor may that person, for compensation or hire, act as PIC of an aircraft. (b) A private pilot may, for compensation or hire, act as PIC 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 prope rty for compensation or hire.

2. Paul E. Garber Seeks Exemption From The Requirem ents Of 14 C.F.R.§ 91.7(a), entitled Civil aircraft airworthiness, subsection (a), states the following: (a) No person may operate a civil aircraft unless i t is in an airworthy condition.

3. Paul E. Garber Seeks Exemption From The Requirem ents Of 14 C.F.R. § 91.121, entitled Altimeter settings, subsection (a), states the foll owing, in part: (a) Each person operating an aircraft shall maintai n the cruising altitude or flight level of that aircraft, as the case may be, by reference to an al timeter that is set, when operating- (1) Below 18,000 feet MSL, to-- (i) The current reported altimeter setting of a sta tion along the route and within 100 nautical miles of the aircraft; (ii) If there is no station within the area prescri bed in paragraph (a)(1)(i) of this section, the current reported altimeter setting of an appropriat e available station; or (iii) In the case of anPage 4 of 18

aircraft not equipped with a radio, the elevation o f the departure airport or an appropriate altimeter setting available before departure.

4. Paul E. Garber Seeks Exemption From The Requirem ents Of 14 C.F.R. § 91.151(b), entitled Fuel requirements for flight in VFR conditions, sub section (b), states the following: (b) No person may begin a flight in a rotorcraft un der VFR conditions unless (considering wind and forecast weather conditions) there is enough fu el to fly to the first point of intended landing and, assuming normal cruising speed, to fly after t hat for at least 13.5 minutes.

5. Paul E. Garber Seeks Exemption From The Requirem ent Of 14 C.F.R. § 91.405(a), entitled Maintenance required, subsection (a), states the fo llowing: Each owner or operator of an

aircraft— (a) Shall have that aircraft inspected as prescribe d in subpart E of this part and shall between required inspections, except as provided in paragra ph (c) of this section, have discrepancies repaired as prescribed in part 43 of this chapter [ .]

6. Paul E. Garber Seeks Exemption From The Requirem ents Of 14 C.F.R. § 91.407(a)(1), entitled Operation after maintenance, preventive maintenance , rebuilding, or alteration, subsection (a)(1), states the following: (a) No person may operate any aircraft that has und ergone maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, or alteration unless-- (1) It has been approved for return to service by a person authorized under § 43.7 of this chapter[.]

7. Paul E. Garber Seeks Exemption From The Requirem ents Of 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.409(a)(1) and (2), entitled Inspections, subsection (a), states the fo llowing: (a) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this sec tion, no person may operate an aircraft unless, within the preceding 12 calendar months, it has had -- (1) An annual inspection in accordance with part 43 of this chapter and has been approved for return to service by a person authorized by § 43.7 of this chapter; or (2) An inspection for the issuance of an airworthin ess certificate in accordance with part 21 of this chapter.

8. Paul E. Garber Seeks Exemption From The Requirem ents Of 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.417(a) and (b), entitled Maintenance records, subsections (a) and ( b), state the following: (a) Except for work performed in accordance with §§ 91.411 and 91.413, each registered owner or operator shall keep the following records for th e periods specified in paragraph (b) of this

section: (1) Records of the maintenance, preventive maintena nce, and alteration and records of the 100- hour, annual, progressive, and other required or ap proved 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. (ii) The current status of life-limited parts of ea ch airframe, engine, propeller, rotor, and appliance.Page 5 of 18

(iii) The time since last overhaul of all items ins talled 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 safet y directive number and revision date. If the AD or safety directive involves recurring action, t he 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, p ropellers, and appliances. (b) The owner or operator shall retain the followin g records for the periods prescribed: (1) The records specified in paragraph (a)(1) of th is 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 th is section shall be retained and transferred with

the aircraft at the time the aircraft is sold. (3) A list of defects furnished to a registered own er 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.

C. The Extent Of Relief Paul E. Garber Seeks And Th e Reason Paul E. Garber Seeks The

Relief

.

1. Extent Of Relief Paul E. Garber Seeks and the Re ason Paul E. Garber Seeks Relief From 14 C.F.R. §§ 61.113(a) And (b).

Relief from Section 61.113(a) and (b) entitled Priv ate pilot privileges and limitations: Pilot in command, is requested to the extent necessary to al low a PIC holding a private pilot or higher level certificate, as well as a current and valid a irman medical certificate, and who has met certain flight-hour and currency requirements, to c onduct the proposed UAS flight operations for compensation or hire. This relief is requested sinc e the limitations set forth in Section 61.113(a) and (b) state that a private pilot may, for compens ation or hire, act as PIC 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. As set forth more fully below, Paul E. Garber submits that an equivalent level of safety will be maintained because no PIC will be allowed to ope rate the 3DR SOLO UAS unless that PIC has met certain flight-hour and currency requirements, demonstrating that the PIC is able to safely operate the 3DR SOLO UAS in a manner consistent wit h the operations specifications as described in this exemption, including evasive and emergency maneuvers, as well as maintaining appropriate distances from people, vessels, vehicle s and structures.

Further, Paul E. Garber submits that all flights of the 3DR SOLO UAS, conducted by the PIC pursuant to the grant of this Petition: (1) will be incidental to Paul E. Garber' business; and (2) will not carry passengers or property for compensat ion or hire.

2. Extent Of Relief Paul E. Garber Seeks and the Re ason Paul E. Garber Seeks Relief From 14 C.F.R. § 91.7(a).

Relief from Section 91.7(a) entitled Civil aircraft airworthiness, is requested to the extent required

to allow Paul E. Garber to determine that the 3DR S OLO UAS is in airworthy condition prior to every flight by ensuring that the UAS is in complia nce with the operating documents (i.e., Maintenance Log, and 3DR SOLO Instruction Manual).Page 6 of 18

Paul E. Garber seeks the requested relief because t he 3DR SOLO UAS does not require an

airworthiness certificate in accordance with 14 C.F .R. Part 21, Subpart H. Therefore, Paul E.

Garber will ensure that the 3DR SOLO UAS is in airw orthy condition based upon its compliance with the operating documents (i.e., Monthly Mainten ance Log, and 3DR SOLO User Manual) prior to every flight, and further, determine that the ai rcraft are in condition for safe flight, as stated in

the conditions and limitations below.

3. Extent Of Relief Paul E. Garber Seeks and the Re ason Paul E. Garber Seeks Relief From 14 C.F.R. § 91.121.

Relief from Section 91.121, entitled Altimeter sett ings, may be required to allow flight operations of the 3DR SOLO UAS, which utilizes a barometric pr essure sensor, GPS equipment, and a radio communications telemetry data link to downlink alti tude information from the UA to the PIC at the ground control station (GCS). Since the FAA require s that any altitude information concerning UAS operations be reported to air traffic control ( ATC) in feet above ground level (AGL), Paul E. Garber seeks the requested relief because the 3DR S OLO UAS altimeter may be set on the ground to zero feet AGL, rather than the local barometric pressure or field altitude, before each flight. Considering the limited altitude of the proposed op erations, relief from 14 CFR 91.121 is sought to the extent necessary to comply with the applicab le conditions and limitations stated below. As more fully set forth herein, an equivalent level of safety will be maintained since the 3DR SOLO UAS is equipped with a barometric pressure sensor a nd GPS equipment, which automatically ensures that a ground level pressure setting will b e established prior to each flight, and provides

the PIC with altitude information of the UA on the heads-up display of the GCS.

4. Extent Of Relief Paul E. Garber Seeks and the Re ason Paul E. Garber Seeks Relief From 14 C.F.R. § 91.151(b).

Relief from Section 91.151(b) entitled Fuel require ments for flight in VFR conditions, is requested to the extent required to allow flights of the batt ery powered 3DR SOLO UAS during daylight hours in visual meteorological conditions (VMC), un der visual flight rules (VFR), for a total duration of 13.5 minutes to the first point of inte nded landing and, assuming normal cruising speed, to fly after that for at least 4.5 minutes. Paul E. Garber seeks the requested relief because without an exemption from Section 91.151(b), the fl ight time duration of the battery powered 3DR SOLO UAS will severely constrain the practicali ty of any aerial video or still photo flight operations that Paul E. Garber proposes to conduct pursuant to this Petition.

Significantly, as set forth below, the technical sp ecifications of the 3DR SOLO UAS, the 3DR SOLO UAS operating documents, and Paul E. Garber’ propos ed operating limitations, ensure that Paul E. Garber will safely operate the battery powered 3DR SOLO UAS during daylight hours in visual meteorological conditions (VMC), under visual fligh t rules (VFR), with enough battery power to fly for a total duration of 13.5 minutes to the first p oint of intended landing and, assuming normal cruising speed, to fly after that for at least 4.5 minutes.

5. Extent Of Relief Paul E. Garber Seeks and the Re ason Paul E. Garber Seeks Relief From 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & ( a)(2), and 91.417(a) & (b).

Since Sections 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1 ) & (a)(2), and 91.417(a) & (b) only apply to aircraft with an airworthiness certificate, Paul E. Garber requests relief from these Sections because the 3DR SOLO UAS does not require an airwor thiness certificate.Page 7 of 18

As set forth more fully below, the 3DR SOLO UAS mee ts the conditions of FMRA Section 333 for operation without an airworthiness certificate. Acc ordingly, Paul E. Garber will use trained technicians to perform maintenance, alterations, or preventive maintenance on the 3DR SOLO UAS using the methods, techniques, and practices pr escribed in the UAS operating documents (i.e., Maintenance Log, and 3DR SOLO UAS User Manua l). Furthermore, Paul E. Garber will

document and maintain all maintenance records for t he 3DR SOLO UAS.

D. The Reasons Why Granting Paul E. Garber Request Would Be In The Public Interest; That Is, How It Would Benefit The Public As A Whole

.

Granting the present Petition will further the publ ic interest by allowing Paul E. Garber to safely, efficiently, and economically perform aerial video and photography of construction sites, real estate, and landscape over certain areas of the Uni ted States. Additionally, use of the 3DR SOLO UAS will decrease congestion of the NAS, reduce pol lution, and provide significant benefits to the economy. Notably, the benefits of Paul E. Garber’ p roposed operation of the 3DR SOLO UAS will be realized without implicating any privacy issues.

1. The Public Will Benefit From Decreased Congestio n Of The NAS.

The 3DR SOLO UAS is battery powered and serves as a safe, efficient, and economical alternative to the manned aircraft traditionally utilized to ob tain aerial imagery. By reducing the amount of manned aircraft needed to perform aerial acquisitio ns, an exemption allowing the use of a 3DR

SOLO UAS would reduce the amount of manned aircraft in the NAS, reduce noise and air pollution, as well as increase the safety of life a nd property in the air and on the ground.

Furthermore, by reducing the number of manned aircr aft operating in the NAS, congestion around airports caused by arriving and departing aircraft will be reduced. The 3DR SOLO UAS does not require an airport to takeoff or land. Likewise, a reduction of manned aircraft conducting aerial video and photography missions would result in fewe r aircraft that must be handled by air traffic control during the ground, takeoff, departure, arri val, and landing phases of flight operations.

2. The Public Will Benefit From The Safety And Effi ciency Of The 3DR SOLO UAS.

Conducting aerial acquisitions with the 3DR SOLO UA S, instead of manned aircraft, will greatly benefit the public by drastically reducing the leve ls of air and noise pollution generated during traditional aerial video and still photography flig ht operations. By using battery power and electric motors, the 3DR SOLO UAS produces no air pollution, and is the most viable environmentally conscious alternative to the cabin class, six cylin der internal combustion engine aircraft that are typically utilized for aerial video and photography , while burning approximately 20-30 gallons per hour of leaded aviation fuel. The 3DR SOLO UAS, whi le reducing the carbon footprint of aerial acquisitions, also eliminates noise pollution, as t he 3DR SOLO is propelled by battery powered electric motors, rather than an internal combustion engine.

By using the 3DR SOLO UAS to perform aerial acquisi tions, the substantial risk to life and property in the air and on the ground, which is usu ally associated with traditional manned aircraft flight operations, will be substantially reduced or completely eliminated. Aside from the lack of flight crew members located onboard the aircraft, t he (weighing 3.9 pounds and measuring approx 18" square and 10" high, and with no fuel on board), has less physical potential for collateral damage to life and property on the groun d, and in the air, compared to the manned aircraft that typically conduct similar operations (weighing approximately 6,000 pounds with a wingspan of approximately 42 feet, a length of 34 f eet, and a fuel capacity of 180 gallons).Page 8 of 18

3. Performing Aerial Video and Photography Operatio ns With The 3DR SOLO UAS Will Benefit The Economy.

In addition to being safe and efficient, the 3DR SO LO UAS is also an economical alternative to using manned aircraft to conduct similar aerial ope rations. As such, operation of the 3DR SOLO UAS will allow United States based companies, like Paul E. Garber, to remain competitive and contribute to growth of the U.S. economy. Specifica lly, with the rising cost of aviation fuel and the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) regulatory actions phasing out leaded aviation fuels, U.S. owned and operated companies must adopt new an d alternative technology in order to remain competitive. Operating the battery powered 3 DR SOLO UAS is one such technology that not only allows companies greater operational flexi bility compared to manned aircraft, but provides such flexibility without the high operatio nal cost of a traditional manned aircraft.

By operating the 3DR SOLO UAS, companies such as Pa ul E. Garber, can remain competitive and profitable, and therefore, provide greater job stab ility to employees and contractors, which will ultimately contribute to growth of the U.S. economy . Improved financial performance of U.S. companies, through commercial use of the 3DR SOLO U AS, provides a stable workforce that increases consumer spending; improves local, state, and federal tax revenues; and allows companies to invest in research and development in order to remain competitive both in the

United States and abroad.

4. There Are No Privacy Issues.

Similar to the manned aerial acquisition flight ope rations that have been conducted for decades, Paul E. Garber’ proposed operation of the 3DR SOLO UAS will not implicate any privacy issues. Specifically, the 3DR SOLO UAS will be operated onl y in compliance with operating documents (i.e., Maintenance Log, 3DR User Manual) which requ ire property owners' involvement as well as local law enforcement notification, and in accordan ce with the Federal Aviation Regulations, including the minimum altitude requirements of 14 C .F.R. § 91.119.

E. The Reasons Why Granting The Exemption Would Not Adversely Affect Safety, Or How The Exemption Would Provide A Level Of Safety A t Least Equal To That Provided By The Rule From Which Paul E. Garber Seeks Exempti on

.

1. Reasons Why The Meet The Conditions Of The FAA M odernization and Reform Act of 2012 (FMRA) Section 333.

In consideration of the size, weight, speed, and li mited operating area associated with the unmanned aircraft and its operation, Paul E. Garber ’s operation of the 3DR SOLO UAS meets the conditions of FMRA Section 333, and will not requir e an airworthiness certificate in accordance with 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H. Section 333 prov ides authority for a UAS to operate without airworthiness certification and sets forth requirem ents for considering whether a UAS will create a hazard to users of the NAS or the public, or otherw ise pose a threat to national security.

Specifically, FMRA Section 333 states the following , in part: (a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other requirem ent of this subtitle, and not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the S ecretary of Transportation shall determine if certain unmanned aircraft systems may operate safel y in the national airspace system before completion of the plan and rulemaking required by s ection 332 of this Act or the guidance required by section 334 of this Act. (b) Assessment of Unmanned Aircraft Systems.--In ma king the determination under subsection (a), the Secretary shall determine, at a minimum--Page 9 of 18

(1) which types of unmanned aircraft systems, if an y, as a result of their size, weight, speed, operational capability, proximity to airports and p opulated areas, and operation within visual line of sight do not create a hazard to users of the nat ional airspace system or the public or pose a threat to national security; and (2) whether a ce rtificate of waiver, certificate of authorization,

or airworthiness certification under section 44704 of title 49, United States Code, is required for the operation of unmanned aircraft systems identifi ed under paragraph (1). (c) Requirements for Safe Operation.--If the Secret ary determines under this section that certain unmanned aircraft systems may operate safely in the national airspace system, the Secretary shall establish requirements for the safe operation of such aircraft systems in the national airspace system. In seeking this exemption, Paul E. Garber submits that the 3DR SOLO UAS can operate safely in the NAS pursuant to FMRA Section 333, as demonstrated by: (a) the characteristics of the 3DR SOLO UAS; (b) the pilot certification requirement; and (c) the specific operating limitations.

a. The Specifications Of The 3DR SOLO UAS Demonstra te Its Safe Characteristics.

The 3DR SOLO UAS does not create a hazard to users of the NAS or the public, or otherwise pose a threat to national security considering its size, weight, speed, and operational capability.

i. Technical Specifications Of 3DR SOLO UAS. The te chnical specifications of the 3DR SOLO UAS are set forth by the Specifications listed in Appen dix 2.

ii. The 3DR SOLO UAS Autonomous Flight And Navigati on Modes Enable the 3DR SOLO UAS To Remain Within A Defined Operational Area. The 3DR S OLO UAS may be operated in both manual and fully autonomous flight modes. A complete descr iption of the flight and navigational modes of the 3DR SOLO UAS is provided in the User Manual, re ferenced in Appendix 1.

iii. The 3DR SOLO UAS Is Designed For Automatic Ret urn To Home Point Or Hover In The Event Of Loss Of The Control Link Or Navigation. When the Control Link is lost, the UAs will remain stationary, in flight, for 3 seconds or more. If, after 3 seconds, the UAs do not reacquire contr ol link data from the GCS, the UAs will assume

that the Control Link is lost and the UAs will retu rn to the home position (i.e., failsafe mode) via GPS, and will descend to the takeoff position and s hutdown. A complete description of the Failsafe

Functions of the UAS are described in the User Manu al, referenced in Appendix 1.

iv. The GCS And Its Operation. A complete description of the operation and specifi cations of the GCS and flight control software is provided in the User Manual, referenced in Appendix 1.

b. Flight Operations Of UAS Is Limited To The Line Of Sight Of A Certificated Pilot in Command With A Safety Observer. Paul E. Garber will only ut ilize certificated pilots who possess a current and valid airman medical certificate to act as a pi lot in command (PIC) of the 3DR SOLO UAS. Additionally, a safety observer will assist all pilots during flight time.

c. Flights Of 3DR SOLO UAS Will Be Conducted Pursua nt To Specific Operating Limitations. In seeking this exemption, Paul E. Garber proposes to commercially operate 3DR SOLO UAS for the special purpose of conducting aerial video and photography over certain areas of United States, pursuant to the following specific operatin g limitations: 1. Operations authorized by this grant of exemptio n will be limited to the following aircraft described in the operating documents, rotorcraft 3D R SOLO UAS weighing less than 55 pounds maximum gross weight: Unmanned Aircraft Systems. P roposed operations of any other aircraft will require a new petition or a petition to amend this grant.Page 10 of 18

2. UAS operations under this exemption will be lim ited to conducting operations for the purpose of aerial video and photography. 3. The UA may not be flown at an indicated airspee d exceeding 20 knots. 4. The UA must be operated at an altitude of no mo re than 400 feet above ground level (AGL), as indicated by the procedures specified in the operating documents unless a special request is made and approved by ATC. All altitudes reported to ATC must be in feet AGL. 5. The UAs must be operated within visual line of sight (VLOS) of the PIC at all times. This requires the PIC to be able to use human vision una ided by any device other than corrective lenses, as specified on the PIC’s FAA-issued airman medical certificate. 6. The use of first person view (FPV) by the PIC o r safety observer (SO) is not permitted. 7. All operations must utilize a safety observer ( SO). The SO may be used to satisfy the VLOS requirement as long as the PIC always maintain s VLOS capability. The SO and PIC must be able to communicate verbally at all times. Electron ic messaging or texting is not permitted during flight operations. The PIC must be designated befor e the flight and cannot transfer his or her designation for the duration of the flight. The PIC must ensure that the SO can perform the functions prescribed in the operating documents. 8. The SO must not perform any other duties beyond assisting the PIC with seeing and avoiding other air traffic and other ground based o bstacles/obstructions and is not permitted to operate the camera or other instruments. 9. The operating documents and the grant of exempt ion must be accessible during UAS operations and made available to the Administrator upon request. If a discrepancy exists between the conditions and limitations contained in the gra nt of exemption and the procedures outlined in the operating documents, the conditions and limitat ions contained in the grant of exemption take precedence and must be followed. Otherwise, the ope rator must follow the procedures as outlined in its operating documents. The operator m ay update or revise its operating documents. It is the operator’s responsibility to track such r evisions and present updated and revised documents to the Administrator upon request. The op erator must also present updated and revised documents if it petitions for extension or amendment to the grant of exemption. If the operator determines that any update or revision wou ld affect the basis upon which the FAA granted the exemption, then the operator must petit ion for amendment to its grant of exemption. The FAA’s UAS Integration Office (AFS-80) may be co ntacted if questions arise regarding updates or revisions to the operating documents. 10. Prior to each flight the PIC must inspect the UAS to ensure that it is in a condition for safe flight. If the inspection reveals a condition that affects the safe operation of the UAS, the aircraft is prohibited from operating until the nec essary maintenance has been performed and the UAS is found to be in a condition for safe flight. The Ground Control Station must be included in the preflight inspection. All maintenance and alter ations must be properly documented in the

aircraft records. 11. Any UAS that has undergone maintenance or alte rations that affect the UAS operation or flight characteristics, e.g. replacement of a fl ight critical component, must undergo a functional test flight. The PIC who conducts the functional te st flight must make an entry in the aircraft

records. 12. The pre-flight inspection must account for all potential discrepancies, e.g. inoperable components, items, or equipment, not already covere d in the relevant sections of the operating

documents. 13. The operator must follow the UAS manufacturer’ s aircraft/component, maintenance, overhaul, replacement, inspection, and life limit r equirements. 14. The operator must carry out its maintenance, i nspections, and record keeping requirements, in accordance with the operating docu ments. Maintenance, inspection, alterations, and status of replacement/overhaul component parts must be noted in the aircraft records, including total time in service, description of wor k accomplished, and the signature of the authorized person returning the UAS to service.Page 11 of 18

15. Each 3DR SOLO UAS operated under this exemptio n must comply with all manufacturer Safety Bulletins. 16. The authorized person must make an entry in th e aircraft record of the corrective action taken against discrepancies discovered betwe en inspections. 17. The PIC must possess at least a private pilot certificate and at least a current thirdclass medical certificate. 18. The operator may not permit any PIC to operate unless the PIC meets the operator’s qualification criteria and demonstrates the ability to safely operate the UAS in a manner consistent with how the UAS will be operated under the exemption, including evasive and emergency maneuvers and maintaining appropriate dis tances from persons, vessels, vehicles and structures. PIC qualification flight hours must be logged in a manner consistent with 14 C.F.R. § 61.51(b). Flights for the purposes of training the operator’s PICs are permitted under the terms of the exemption. However, training operations may onl y be conducted during dedicated training sessions. During training, proficiency, and experie nce-building flights, all persons not essential for flight operations are considered nonparticipants, a nd the PIC must operate the UA with appropriate distance from nonparticipants in accord ance with 14 C.F.R. § 91.119. 19. UAS operations may not be conducted during nig ht, as defined in 14 C.F.R. § 1.1. All operations must be conducted under visual meteorolo gical conditions (VMC). If flight at night is required, a special request will be made at the FAA office closest to proposed area of operations. Flights under special visual flight rules (SVFR) ar e not authorized. 20. The UA may not operate within 5 nautical miles of an airport reference point as denoted on a current FAA-published aeronautical cha rt unless a letter of agreement with that airport’s management is obtained, and the operation is conducted in accordance with a NOTAM as required by the operator’s COA. The letter of agree ment with the airport management must be made available to the Administrator upon request. 21. The UA may not be operated less than 500 feet below or less than 2,000 feet horizontally from a cloud or when visibility is les s than 3 statute miles from the PIC.

22. If the UA loses communications or loses its GP S signal, it must return to a predetermined location within the planned operating ar ea and land or be recovered in accordance with the operating documents. 23. The PIC must abort the flight in the event of unpredicted obstacles or emergencies in accordance with the operating documents. 24. The PIC is prohibited from beginning a flight unless (considering wind and forecast weather conditions) there is enough power to fly at normal cruising speed to the intended landing point and land the UA with 25% battery power remain ing. 25. The operator must obtain an Air Traffic Organi zation (ATO) issued Certificate of Waiver or Authorization (COA) prior to conducting any oper ations under the grant of exemption. This COA will also require the operator to request a Not ice to Airman (NOTAM) not more than 72 hours in advance, but not less than 48 hours prior to the operation. All operations shall be conducted in accordance with airspace requirements in the ATO is sued COA including class of airspace, altitude level and potential transponder requirements. 26. All aircraft operated in accordance with the e xemption must be identified by serial number, registered in accordance with 14 C.F.R. par t 47, and have identification (N- Number) markings in accordance with 14 C.F.R. part 45, Subp art C. Markings must be as large as practicable. 27. Before conducting operations, the radio freque ncy spectrum used for operation and control of the UA must comply with the Federal Comm unications Commission (FCC) or other appropriate government oversight agency requirement s. 28. The documents required fewer than 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.9 and 91.203 must be available to

the PIC at the Ground Control Station of the UAS an y time the UAS is operating. These

documents must be made available to the Administrat or or any law enforcement official upon

request.Page 12 of 18

29. The UA must remain clear and yield the right o f way to all manned aviation operations

and activities at all times. 30. The UAS may not be operated by the PIC from an y moving device or vehicle. 31. Flight operations must be conducted at least 5 00 feet from all nonparticipating persons (persons other than the PIC, SO, operator trainees or essential persons), vessels, vehicles, and

structures unless: a. Barriers or structures are present that sufficie ntly protect nonparticipating persons from the UA and/or debris in the event of an accident. The oper ator must ensure that nonparticipating persons remain under such protection. If a situation arises where nonparticipating persons leave such protection and are within 500 feet of the UA, fligh t operations must cease immediately and/or; b. The aircraft is operated near vessels, vehicles or structures where the owner/controller of such vessels, vehicles or structures has granted permiss ion and the PIC has made a safety assessment of the risk of operating closer to those objects an d determined that it does not present an undue hazard, and; c. Operations nearer to the PIC, SO, operator train ees or essential persons do not present an undue hazard to those persons per 14 C.F.R. § 91.11 9(a). 32. All operations shall be conducted over private or controlled-access property with permission from the land owner/controller or author ized representative. Permission from land owner/controller or authorized representative will be obtained for each flight to be conducted. 33. Any incident, accident, or flight operation th at transgresses the lateral or vertical boundaries of the operational area as defined by th e applicable COA must be reported to the FAA's UAS Integration Office (AFS-80) within 24 hou rs. Accidents must be reported to the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) per ins tructions contained on the NTSB Web site: www.ntsb.gov.

2. Reasons Why An Exemption From The Requirements O f 14 C.F.R. §§ 61.113(a) and (b) Would Not Adversely Affect Safety.

Paul E. Garber submits that the equivalent level of safety established by Section 61.113(a) and (b) will be maintained because no PIC will be allow ed to operate the 3DR SOLO UAS unless that PIC has demonstrated, by meeting minimum flight-hou r and currency requirements, that the PIC is able to safely operate the UAS in a manner consi stent with the exemption, including evasive and emergency maneuvers and maintaining appropriate distances from people, vessels, vehicles

and structures.

Considering Paul E. Garber’s proposed area of opera tions, and the operating limitations set forthabove; the parallel nature of private pilot aeronau tical knowledge requirements to those of commercial pilot requirements (See Exemption No. 11 062); and the airmanship skills necessary to safely operate the UAS, Paul E. Garber submits t hat the additional manned airmanship experience of a commercially certificated pilot wou ld not correlate to the airmanship skills necessary for Paul E. Garber’ specific proposed fli ght operations. The FAA has previously granted relief from Section 61.113(a) and (b) specific to U AS, 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, 11 150, 11153, 11156, 11158, 11159, 11160, 11161). Paul E. Garber will not allow any PI C to operate the UAS unless that PIC has demonstrated, by meeting minimum flight-hour requir ements or UAS training and currency requirements, that the PIC is able to safely operat e the UAS in a manner consistent with this exemption, including evasive and emergency maneuver s and maintaining appropriate distances from people, vessels, vehicles and structures.

Specifically, the PIC must have accumulated and log ged, in a manner consistent with 14 C.F.R. § 61.51(b), 25 hours of total time as a UAS rotorcraf t pilot (with a minimum of 5 hours of thosePage 13 of 18

hours as a UAS pilot operating the same make and mo del of UAS to be used for operations under the exemption). In addition to the hour requirement s, the PIC must accomplish 3 takeoffs and landings in the preceding 90 days (for currency pur poses).

As in Exemption Nos. 11062, 11138, and 11153, prior documented flight experience that was obtained in compliance with applicable regulations will ensure an equivalent level of safety during Paul E. Garber’s proposed operations. The Administr ator has held that prior documented flight experience that was obtained in compliance with app licable regulations would ensure safe operations, stating as follows: In Exemption No. 11062, the FAA required that prior to conducting operations for the purpose of motion picture filming (or similar operations), the PIC must have accumulated and logged, in a manner consistent with 14 C.F.R. § 61.51(b), 25 hou rs of total time as a UAS rotorcraft pilot including at least 10 hours logged as a UAS pilot w ith a multi-rotor UAS. Prior to operations under Exemption No. 11062, the PIC must also have accumul ated and logged a minimum of 5 hours as a UAS pilot operating the same make and model of UA S to be used for operations under the exemption. For clarification, the FAA considers the se minimum hour requirements to be inclusive rather than additive; i.e. 5 hours make and model t ime may be included in the 10 hours of multirotor time and the 10 hours may be included in the total 25 hours of UAS rotorcraft time. In addition to the hour requirements, the PIC must acc omplish 3 takeoffs and landings in the preceding 90 days (for currency purposes). The FAA finds that at a minimum, the flight-hour requirements in Exemption No. 11062 are appropriate to practice and build proficiency in the skills necessary to safely conduct the petitioner’s proposed operations. The FAA also finds that prior documented flight experience that was obtaine d in compliance with applicable regulations would satisfy this requirement.

Training, proficiency, and experience-building flig hts can also be conducted under the grant of exemption to accomplish the required flight time. D uring training, proficiency, and experiencebuilding flights the PIC is required to operate the UA with appropriate distances in accordance with 14 C.F.R § 91.119. Exemption No. 11138 at page 15.

Accordingly, Paul E. Garber will ensure safe operat ions by not allowing any PIC to operate the UAS unless that PIC has demonstrated, by meeting mi nimum flight-hour and currency requirements, that the PIC is able to safely operat e the UAS in a manner consistent with the exemption, including evasive and emergency maneuver s and maintaining appropriate distances from people, vessels, vehicles and structures.

3. Reasons Why An Exemption From The Requirements O f 14 C.F.R. § 91.7(a) Would Not Adversely Affect Safety. The equivalent level of safety established by Secti on 91.7(a) will be maintained because prior to every flight, Paul E. Garber will ensure that the U AS is in an airworthy condition based upon the UAS’s compliance with its operating documents and a s stated in the conditions and limitations

herein.

Additionally, the FAA has previously granted relief from Section 91.7(a) 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, 11 109, 11110, 11112, 11136, 11138, 11150, 11153, 11156, 11157, 11158, 11159, 11160, 11 161).

4. Reasons Why An Exemption From The Requirements O f 14 C.F.R. § 91.121 Would Not Adversely Affect Safety.Page 14 of 18

The equivalent level of safety established by Secti on 91.121 will be maintained because the altitude information of the UA will be provided to the PIC via GPS equipment and a radio communications telemetry data link, which downlinks from the UA to the GCS for active monitoring of the flight path and altitude. This al titude information, combined with Paul E. Garber’s operation of the within visual line of sig ht, at or below 400 feet AGL, will ensure a level of safety equivalent to Section 91.121. The altitud e information will be generated by GPS equipment installed onboard the aircraft.

Prior to each flight, a zero altitude initiation po int is automatically established by the 3DR SOLO UAS at ground level. The FAA has previously granted relief from Section 91.121 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, 11 109, 11112, 11136, 11138, 11150, 11153, 11156, 11157, 11158, 11159, 11160, 11161).

5. Reasons Why An Exemption From The Requirements O f 14 C.F.R. § 91.151(b) Would Not Adversely Affect Safety. A grant of this exemption would ensure an equivalen t level of safety established by 14 C.F.R. Section 91.151(b) as a result of (1) the technical specifications of the 3DR SOLO UAS; (2) the limitations on the proposed flight operations; and (3) the location of the proposed flight operations. Accordingly, Paul E. Garber will ensure that it will safely operate the battery powered UA during daylight hours in VFR conditions, with en ough battery power to fly for a total duration of 13.5 minutes to the first point of intended land ing and, assuming normal cruising speed, to fly after that for at least 4.5 minutes. Here, as in Ex emption No. 11109, the technical specifications of the 3DR SOLO UAS; the limitations on the propose d flight operations; and the location of the proposed operations, will ensure an equivalent leve l of safety established by Section 91.151(b). Furthermore, safety will be ensured as the 3DR SOLO UAS provide audible and visual warnings to the PIC at the GCS when the UAs experiences low bat tery voltage, the first warning occurring at approximately 33% remaining battery power, and agai n at approximately 10% remaining battery power. At the critically low battery level, the 3DR SOLO UAS will descend and land automatically.

Significantly, previous exemptions granted by the F AA concerning Section 91.151 establish that safety is not adversely affected when the technical characteristics and operating limitations of the UAS are considered. Relief has been granted for man ned aircraft to operate at less than the minimums prescribed in Section 91.151, including Ex emption Nos. 2689, 5745, and 10650. Moreover, the FAA has previously granted relief fro m Section 91.151 specific to UAS, in circumstances similar, in all material respects, to those presented herein (e.g. Exemption Nos. 8811, 10808, 10673, 11042, 11062, 11063, 11064, 110 65, 11066, 11067, 11080, 11109, 11110, 11136, 11138, 11150, 11153, 11156, 11157, 11158, 11 159, 11160, 11161).

6. Reasons Why An Exemption From The Requirements O f 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), And 91.417(a) & (b) Would No t Adversely Affect Safety. In seeking this exemption, Paul E. Garber submits t hat the equivalent level of safety with regard to the regulatory maintenance and alteration requir ements established by Sections 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), and 91.417(a) & (b) will be met because Paul E. Garber will use trained technicians to perform maintenance, alt erations, or preventive maintenance on the 3DR SOLO UAS using the methods, techniques, and pra ctices prescribed in the operating documents (i.e., the User Manual, and Maintenance L og). Furthermore, Paul E. Garber will

document and maintain all maintenance records for t he 3DR SOLO UAS. Since the 3DR SOLO UAS will be inspected as prescribed by the operating do cuments, Paul E. Garber will maintain the equivalent level of safety established by Sections 91.405(a), 91.409(a)(1), and 91.409(a)(2). A copy of the User Manual is attached hereto as Exhib it C. Likewise, the exemption sought will notPage 15 of 18

adversely affect safety because Paul E. Garber will use trained technicians to perform maintenance, alterations or preventive maintenance on the UAS using the methods, techniques, and practices prescribed by the operating documents . Furthermore, the exemption sought would maintain an equivalent level of safety established by Sections 91.407, 91.417(a) and 91.417(b),

because all maintenance of the 3DR SOLO UAS will be performed by trained technicians.

Maintenance will be documented and maintained utili zing the maintenance log.

Significantly, previous exemptions granted by the F AA concerning Sections 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), and 91.417(a) & (b) establish that safety is not adversely affected when the technical characteristics and ope rating limitations of the UAS are considered. In consideration of Paul E. Garber’s proposed opera ting limitations, the operating documents, and the technical aspects of the 3DR SOLO UAS, Paul E. Garber submits that safety will not be adversely affected by granting exemption from 14 C. F.R. Sections 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1) and (a)(2), 91.409(a)(2), and 91.417(a) and (b). The FA A has previously granted relief specific to UAS in circumstances similar, in all material respe cts, to those presented herein (e.g. Exemption Nos. 11062, 11063, 11064, 11065, 11066, 11067, 1108 0, 11109, 11110, 11112, 11136, 11138, 11150, 11153, 11156, 11157, 11158, 11159, 11160, 11 161).

7. The FAA May Prescribe Any Other Conditions For S afe Operation.

In accordance with Section 333 of the FAA Moderniza tion and Reform Act of 2012 (FMRA) and 14 C.F.R. § 21.16 entitled Special Conditions, Paul E. Garber requests that the FAA prescribe special conditions for the intended operation of the 3DR SO LO UAS, which contain such safety standards that the Administrator finds necessary to establish a level of safety equivalent to that established by 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H, and 14 C.F.R §§ 61 .113(a) & (b), 91.7 (a), 91.121, 91.151(b), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), and 91.417(a) & (b). Such special conditions will permit safe operation of the UAs for the limited pu rpose of conducting aerial video and photography over certain areas of the United States for compensation or hire. FMRA Section 333 sets forth the requirements for considering whether a UAS will create a hazard to users of the NAS or the public, or otherwise pose a threat to na tional security; and further, provides the authority for such UAS to operate without airworthi ness certification in accordance with any requirements that must be established for the safe operation of the UAS in the NAS. Likewise, the Administrator may prescribe special conditions purs uant to 14 C.F.R. § 21.16, for operation of the 3DR SOLO UAS, since the airworthiness regulations o f 14 C.F.R. Part 21 do not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards, due to the novel o r unusual design features of the aircraft. Section 21.16, entitled Special Conditions, states the following: If the FAA finds that the airworthiness regulations of this subchapter do not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards for an aircraft, aircr aft engine, or propeller because of a novel or unusual design feature of the aircraft, aircraft en gine or propeller, he prescribes special conditions and amendments thereto for the product. The special conditions are issued in accordance with Part 11 of this chapter and contain such safety sta ndards for the aircraft, aircraft engine or propeller as the FAA finds necessary to establish a level of safety equivalent to that established in the regulations. See 14 C.F.R. § 21.16.

Therefore, in accordance with FMRA Section 333 and 14 C.F.R. § 21.16, the FAA may prescribe special conditions for Above & Beyond Aerial Imagin g's intended operation of the 3DR SOLO UAS, which contain such safety standards that the Admini strator finds necessary to establish a level of safety equivalent to that established by 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H, and 14 C.F.R Sections 61.113(a) & (b), 91.7(a), 91.121, 91.151(b), 91.405 (a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), and 91.417(a) & (b).Page 16 of 18

F. A Summary That Can Be Published In The Federal R egister, stating: The Rules From Which Paul E. Garber Seeks Exemption :

Paul E. Garber seeks exemption from the requirement s of 14 C.F.R Sections 61.113(a)&(b), 91.7(a), 91.121, 91.151(b), 91.405(a ), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), and 91.417(a) & (b).

A Brief Description Of The Nature Of The Exemption Paul E. Garber Seeks: This exemption will permit Paul E. Garber to commer cially operate an Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) for the purpose of conducting aerial video an d photography over certain areas of the United

States.

G. Any Additional Information, Views, Or Arguments Available To Support Paul E. Garber’ Request.

This Petition is made pursuant to the FAA Moderniza tion and Reform Act of 2012 (FMRA) Section 333, which directs the Secretary of Transportation to determine if certain UAS may operate safely in the NAS. As such, Paul E. Garber’ request for ex emption may be granted pursuant to the authority of FMRA Section 333 and 14 C.F.R. Part 11 , as set forth above. FMRA Section 333 sets forth the requirements for co nsidering whether a UAS will create a hazard to users of the NAS or the public, or otherwise pos e a threat to national security; and further, provides the authority for such UAS to operate with out airworthiness certification. As discussed in detail above, Paul E. Garber will o perate the 3DR SOLO UAS safely in the NAS, without creating a hazard to users of the NAS, or t he public, or otherwise pose a threat to national security.



### CONCLUSION

As set forth herein, Paul E. Garber seeks an exempt ion pursuant to 14 C.F.R. § 11.61 and Section

333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (FMRA), which will permit safe operation of the 3DR SOLO UAS commercially, without an airworthi ness certificate, for the limited purpose of conducting aerial video and photography over certai n areas of the United States. By granting this Petition, the FAA Administrator will be fulfilling the Congressional mandate of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, while also ad vancing the interests of the public, by allowing Paul E. Garber to safely, efficiently, and economically operate the 3DR SOLO UAS commercially within the NAS.

WHEREFORE, in accordance with the Federal Aviation Regulations and the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, Section 333, Paul E. Garber res pectfully requests that the Administrator grant this Petition for an exemption from the requi rements of 14 C.F.R §§ 61.113(a) & (b), 91.7(a), 91.121, 91.151(b), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1) , 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), and 91.417(a) & (b), and permit Above & Beyond Aerial Imaging to op erate the 3DR SOLO UAS commercially for the purpose of conducting aerial video and photogra phy over certain areas of the United States.

Dated: August 17, 2015 Respectfully submitted,

Paul E. Garber

_________________________ Paul Garber Garber Graphics LLC DBA Above & Beyond Aerial Imaging N7135 Torgerson Rd Iola, WI 54945

715-570-2477 garbergraphics@gmail.comPage 17 of 18

Appendices: 1 - 3DR Sols User Manual (PDF) http://3drobotics.c om/kb/solo-user-manual 2 - Technical Specifications 3 - Preflight Checklist

APPENDIX – 1 3DR Sols User Manual (PDF) http://3drobotics.com/kb/solo-user-manual

APPENDIX – 2 TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS Above & Beyond Aerial Imaging uses only the safe an d reliable 3DR SOLO UAS. 3D Robotics is an industry leader in small UAS prod uction. The 3DR SOLO is loaded with state of the art software enabling the user to set parameter s which will not allow flight into controlled airspace. Parameters can also be set to limit fligh t to no higher than a predetermined and set altitude and speed as well as limit flight to a pre determined and set distance. In addition, software provides real-time altitude and location i nformation to the PIC via the linked monitor (tablet device).

Solo is a quad-rotor aerial vehicle powered by the 3D R Pixhawk 2 autopilot system and APM:Copter flight

control software. Solo communicates with the controller and Solo app over the 3DR Link secure Wi-Fi connection. Autopilot: 3DR Pixhawk 2 Flight code: ArduPilot Copter

Control: 3DR Solo Controller

Wireless communication: 3DR Link 1.0 Frequency: 2.4 GHz Height: 10 in. (25 cm) Motor-to-motor dimension: 18 in. (26 cm) Propulsion: 880 K V motors, two clockwise rotating motors and two counterclockwise rotating motors Propeller: 10 in. x 4.5 in. (25 cm x 11.4 cm) Weight with battery: 3.3 lbs. (1.5 kg) Controller battery life: 3 hours Extended controller battery life: 6 hours Controller battery: Li-ion 2600 mAh 7.2 Vdc (5200 mA h for extended battery) Power: Electric (rechargeable lithium polymer battery) Battery: Lithium polymer, 5200 mAh, 14.8 Vdc Battery weight: 1 lb. (.5 kg) Estimated flight time: 25 minutes* Maximum altitude: 328 ft. (100 m) Range: .5 miles** (.8 km) Payload capacity: 1.1 lbs. (500 g) Cruise speed: 5.7 mph (2.5 m/s) Maximum speed: 55 mph (25.5 m/s) Maximum climb rate: 11 mph (5.0 m/s) Maximum descent rate: 5.5 mph (2.5 m/s) Headwind limitation: 25 mph (11 m/s) Crosswind limitation: 25 mph (11 m/s) Camera: Streaming video compatible with GoPro® HERO 3, 3+ or 4 Full compatibility with GoPro® HERO 3+ or 4 Solo app compatibility: iOS 8.0 or later / Android 4 .3 or later Operating temperature: 32° F - 113° F (0° C - 45° C ) Operating relative humidity: 0-85% RH *Flight time varies with payload, wind conditions, ele vation, temperature, humidity, flying style, and pilot skill. Listed flight time applies to elevati ons less than 2,000 ft above sea level. **Range varies with location, antenna orientation, ba ckground noise and multi-path.

Appendix 3 - Preflight ChecklistPage 18 of 18

Before flying, check the following conditions.

4.1.1 Location

Your current location and environmental conditions are suitable for flight. (Section 3.1) Solo is on a level surface at a clear launch point a sufficient distance from yourself and others. (Se ction 3.1)

4.1.2 Components

The propellers are correctly attached. (Section 2.4 ) The propellers can spin smoothly and without obstru ction when turned. No components on Solo appear loose or damaged.

4.1.3 Power

The controller is powered on with at least 50% char ge. (Section 2.3) Solo is powered on with a fully charged battery. (S ection 2.2)

4.1.4 Video (Optional)

The Solo app is connected to Solo and streaming vid eo. (Section 2.6) The GoPro® is recording.