## Justin Cummings

- Lights Camera Action Cinema

- 333 Petition

January 11, 2016 Page | **1** of 9 

### Erick F. Larsen Consultant to Justin Cummings, Owner Lights Camera Action Cinema 262 W. Linden Ave. # C Burbank, LA, Ca 91502 818

- 732

- 0330 ErickLarsen@Outlook.com January 11, 2016

- Via electronic filing

- U. S. Department of Transportation Docket Management System 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE Washington, DC 20590 Re: Request (Petition) for Exemption from Certain Regulations per Section 333 of the FAA Reform Act and Part 11 of th e Federal Aviation Regulations Dear Madam or Sir : Pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (the Reform Act) and 14 C.F.R. Part 11, professional photographer, **Justin Cummings** , Owner, d/b/a **Lights Camera Action Cinema**  ( Cummin gs, Petitioner, or Operator) hereby applies for an exemption from the listed Federal Aviation Regulations (FARs) to allow business use (commercial operation) of his fleet of Unoccupied (unmanned) Aerial Systems (UAS), so long as such operations are conduct ed within and under the conditions outlined herein or as may be established by the FAA as required by Section 333. **I. INTRODUCTION**  Petitioner, Justin Cummings is a United States born citizen who has a valid California Dr iver’s License. He performs expert p rofessional cinematography, videography, photography, graphic design, and business marketing services worldwide, with the following contact information: **Justin Cummings, Owner**  **Lights Camera Action Cinema 1914 Chester Ave**  **Bakersfield Ca 93301 661**  **- 549** **- 3749**  **justin@lcacinema.com www.lcacinema.com** 

## Justin Cummings

- Lights Camera Action Cinema

- 333 Petition

January 11, 2016 Page | **2** of 9 Cummings maintains a highly creative and skilled team of professional p hotographers whose commercial services include ground based and aerial photography, cinematography, graphic arts, and website development. Creating outstanding content, in order to preserve client milestones and to populate websites, business m arketing materials and other media , are his forte. Cummings produces some of the finest photography and graphics using the most advanced methods and tools possible

. Cummings has develo ped numerous diverse clients in need of safe and lawful commercial UAS aerial data collection (ADC) services and UAS training

. Growth of p etitioner’s UAS business services will provide new jobs and an increased level of safety to many who currently are in need of UAS commercial services. Current FAA UAS policy prevents Petiti oner from providing civil UAS commercial services in the absence of the requested exemption. **A. Commercial**  **UAS	ADC Operations	to	Be	Conducted:** 
Petitioner seeks to operate his fleet of UAS to conduct **UAS training and aerial data collection**  (ADC) which includ es any remote sensing and measuring by an instrument(s) aboard the unmanned aircraft (UA). Examples include imagery (photography, video, infrared, etc.), electronic measurement (precision surveying, RF analysis, etc.), chemical measurement (particulate mea surement, etc.), or any other gathering of data by instruments aboard the UA. In particular Petitioner seeks authorization to conduct commercial UAS training and remote ADC, mapping, surveying, photography, filming, videography, demonstrations, sampling, measuring, and inspections of (or for): **1.)** Construction, architectural, engineering, website development, insurance, risk management, security, real estate, resort, golf, cemetery, entertainment, weddings, sports, utility, energy (oil, gas, solar, wind, & el ectric), hydro (water), transportation (port, rail, truck, auto, & bus), mining, bridge, telecommunications, agriculture (farming, ranching, & growing) flare stack, platform, tower, pole, pipeline and other infrastructure, structures, sites, systems, featu res and operations; and, **2.)** Recreational, commercial, governmental, Emergency Management Agencies (EMA) and entities; and, **3.)** Environmental, scientific, archaeology, conservation, climate change, natural resource, wildlife, oceanographic, forestry, weather, se arch & rescue, emergency services, humanitarian relief, public & private entity support, assistance and monitoring of infrastructure, structures, sites, systems, features, and operations; and, **4.)** Research, education, training, development, testing, certifica tion, and validation of safe and lawful civil, commercial, public, experimental, hobby, and recreational UAS curriculum, education, and safe flight training, demonstrations, and events involving UAS design,

## Justin Cummings

- Lights Camera Action Cinema

- 333 Petition

January 11, 2016 Page | **3** of 9 manufacture, assembly, purchase, sale, maintenanc e, repair, inspection, safe operation, record keeping, and required FAA documentation. Hereinafter, 1 through 4, above, refer red to as petitioner’s “ proposed operations or operations".

**B. Petitioner’s**  **Commercial UAS**  **Aircraft Fleet**  **and	Operating	D ocuments** **:** Petitioner references as his operating documents, this petition and the specific manufacturer’s model specific aircraft documentation , including Flight Operations Manual (FOM) , for each UAS in his fleet, listed below, which set forth safety considerations, training, general and specific operating procedures, specifications, inspection, maintenance, setup of t he UAS, and all other required and recommended procedures for the proposed operations. **DJI Inspire 1** http://www.dji.com/product/inspire
- 1/download **DJI Inspire 1 Pro** http://store.dji.com/product/inspire
- 1
- pro#/spec **DJI Phantom 3 Professional** h ttp://www.dji.com/product/phantom
- 3/download **DJI Phantom 3 A dv** **anced** http://www.dji.com/product/phantom
- 3 **DJI Spreading Wings**  **S900** http://www.dji.com/product/spreading
-wings
-s900 **DJI Spreading Wings S1000** htt p://www.dji.com/product/spreading
-wings
-s1000
- plus **Freefly Sy** **stems A lta**  http://freeflysystems.com/alta Each UAS in petitioner’s fleet (listed above) has previously been granted 333 authorizations by the FAA. Commercial operations of any other type of ai rcraft require a new or amended FAA 333 petition. Each of petitioner’s UAS will be duly registered with the FAA which will ass ign registration , “N”, numbers before operations are commenced

.
**C. Specific	Regulations	for	which	an	exemption	is	sought:** 
14 CFR 61.113 (a) 14 CFR 91.7 (a) 14 CFR 91.119 (b) & (c) 14 CPR 91. 121 14 CFR 91.151 (a) 14 CFR 91.405 (a) 14 CFR 407 (a) (1) 14 CPR 409 (a) (1) & (2) 14 CFR 417 (a) & (b)

## Justin Cummings

- Lights Camera Action Cinema

- 333 Petition

January 11, 2016 Page | **4** of 9 **II. PETITIONER’S PROPOSED OPERATIONS DO NOT CREATE SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS**  Each UAS u tilized by Petitioner is an electric multi

- rotor craft, weighing less than 55 lbs. including ADC payload and has been previously approved by the FAA for commercial operations

. Each operates at a speed of no more than 100 mph (87 knots) and has the capabili ty to hover, and/or move in a vertical and hori zontal plane simultaneously. Each will only be operated as visual line of sight (VLOS), remain under 400 ft. above ground level (AGL), and will operate only over private or controlled access property with perm ission from the owner/controller of the property or authorized representative. During petitioner’s proposed operations the site will be secured and non

- participants will be kept at least 500 feet away from the operation unless barriers or structures are p resent that sufficiently protect non
- participants in the event of an accident or loss of control. **III. PETITIONER'S PROPOSED OPERATIONS ARE IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST**  The FAA has issued a Grant of Exemption s to FalconSkyCam , Exemption No. 11195 , Docket No FAA

201 4

- 0884 (March 6, 2015) and to Measure, a 32 Advisors Company, LLC, Exemption No. 12646, Docket No. FAA
–2015
– 1602 ( August 28, 2015 ), for operations that are substantially similar to those proposed herein. In issuing the Grant to FalconSkyCam , the FAA noted that "[t]he enhanced safety and reduced environmental impact achieved using a UAS with the specifications described by the petitioner and carrying no passengers or crew, rather than a manned aircraft of significantly greater proportions, carrying crew in a ddition to flammable fuel, gives the FAA good cause to find that the UAS operation enabled by this exemption is in the public interest." **IV. EQUIVALENT LEVEL OF SAFETY**  Cummings proposes that his fleet of UAS, with the characteristics and as operated with t he limitations listed below, provide for at least an equivalent or even higher level of safety to operations under the current regulatory framework. These limitations and conditions to which Petitioner agrees to be bound when conducting commercial operati ons under an FAA issued exemption include: **1.)** Each UAS utilized by Petitioner will weigh Less than 55 lbs, operate at a speed of no more than 100 mph (87 knots), and will remain under 400 ft. (AGL). **2.)** Flights will be operated only during daylight hours, only i n visual meteorological conditions, and only within visual line of sight (VLOS) of the pilot in command (PIC) of the UAS. **3.)** All operations will utilize a visual observer (VO) in addition to the pilot in command (PIC). **4.)** Maximum total flight time for each opera tional flight will be less than 45 minutes, or when the Low Battery warning activates. **V. EXEMPTIONS REQUESTED** 

## Justin Cummings

- Lights Camera Action Cinema

- 333 Petition

January 11, 2016 Page | **5** of 9 **14 C.F.R. § 61.113 (a) and (b): Private, Recreational, or Sport vs.**  **Commercial Pilot Certificates** Sections 61.113 (a) and (b) prohibit private , recreational, or sport certified pilots from operating a traditional aircraft for compensation or hire. Petitioner proposes that his PIC will have at least a private, recreational, or sport pilot’s certificate, and a current FAA medical certificate or a val id U.S. driver’s license issued by a state, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, a territory, a possession, or the Federal government. Petitioner’s PIC will also meet the flight review requirements specified in 14 CFR § 61.56 in an aircraft in which the PIC is rated on his or her pilot certificate. Petitioner will not permit any PIC to operate unless the PIC demonstrates the ability to safely operate the UAS in a manner consistent with how the UAS will be operated under petitioner’s exemption, including evasive and emergency maneuvers and maintaining appropriate distances from persons, vessels, vehicles and structures. PIC qualification flight hours and currency will be logged in a manner consistent with 14 CFR § 61.51(b). Dedicated UAS flights for the p urposes of training the petitioner’s PICs and VOs (training, proficiency, and experience

- building) and for determining the PIC’s ability to safely operate the UAS in a manner consistent with how the UAS will be operated under petitioner’s exemption , are re quested by petitioner to be allowed under the terms of this exemption. PIC and VO training operations will only be conducted during dedicated training sessions. During training, proficiency, and experience

- building flights, all persons not essential for flight operations will be considered nonparticipants, and the PIC will operate the UA with appropriate distance from nonparticipants in accordance with 14 CFR § 91.119. Based upon the above and for the reasons set forth in the FAA's grant of an exemption to Astraeus Aerial, Petitioner does not believe a commercial pilot c ertificate is necessary for his proposed operation s . See, e.g., In the matter of the petition of Astraeus Aerial, Exemption No. 11062 (issued Sept. 25, 2014). For those reasons, Petitioner requests an exemption from 14 C.F.R. § 61.113 (a) and (b). **14 C.F.R. § 91.7 (a): Civil Aircraft Airworthiness** Section 91.7 prohibits operation of an unairworthy aircraft, and places responsibility for airworthiness determina tions on the PIC. Petitioner’ s UAS will not have an airworthiness certificate, and there is no FAA regulatory standard for determining airworthiness of the UAS. Additionally, Petitioner's operating documents, includi ng FOM, set forth inspection and maintenance procedures to ensure airworthiness. For these reasons, and in accordance with the FAA's grant of an exemption from section 91.7 to Total Safety U.S., Inc., Cummings requests an exemption from 14 CFR. § 91.7(a). See, e.g., In the matter of the petition of Total Safety U.S., Inc., Exemption No. 11156 (issued Jan. 29, 2015). **14 C.F.R. §91.119 (b) and (c):**  **Minimum Safe Altitudes**

## Justin Cummings

- Lights Camera Action Cinema

- 333 Petition

January 11, 2016 Page | **6** of 9 Section 91.119 establishes safe altitudes for operation of civil aircraft. Section 91.119 (b) prohibits aircraft in congested areas from flying less than 1, 000 feet above the highest obstacle within a horizontal radius of 2,000 feet of the aircraft. To the extent that Petitioner’s proposed operations would be considered to be in "congested areas," Petitioner's operating documents and procedures, and the size, weight and speed of each UAS in the petitioner’s fleet of UAS, provide an equivalent level of safety such that the proposed operations at lower safe altitudes should be allowed. Cummings will establish a 500' buffer/sterile area for his operations that w ill exclude personnel not associated with the operations. Petitioner will also exercise additional control over the sterile area as needed . Consequently, Cummings believes these procedures will reduce or eliminate any potential adverse impacts to safety fo r o perations in congested areas. Cummings therefore requests an exemption from 14 CFR § 91.119(b). Section 91.119 (c) prohibits operations in other than congested areas below 500 feet above the surface, or closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehic le or structure. Since this exemption is for UAS that fly similarly to a helicopter and requests authority to operate at altitudes up to 400 ft. AGL, an exemption may be needed to allow such proposed operations. The equivalent level of safety will be achi eved given the size, weight, speed of each of petitioner’s UAS as well as the location where they will be operated. As discussed above, p etitioner will establish a sterile area, including safety buffers of 500 feet for personnel not associated with the ope ration. Cummings therefore requests an exemption from Section 91.119(c) for all necessary and authorized personnel associated with the proposed operations. **14 C.F.R. §91.121 Altimeter Settings** This regulation requires each person operating an aircraft to maintain a cruising altitude by reference to an altimeter that is set "... to the elevation of the departure airport or an appropriate altimeter setting available before departure." As the UAS may not have a barometric altimeter, but instead a constant GP S altitude read out, an exemption is requested. **14 C.F.R. § 91.151(a): Fuel Requirements for Flight in VFR Conditions** Section 91.151 (a) prohibits an individual from beginning "a flight in an airplane under VFR conditions unless (considering wind and forecast weather conditions) there is enough fuel to fly to the first point of intended landing, and, assuming normal cruising speed

- (1) During the day, to fly after that for at least 30 minutes; or (2) At night, to fly after that for at least 45 minutes." Maximum total flight time for each of the proposed operations will be no more than approximately 45 minutes. Flights will be safely landed when the battery falls below its nominal voltage, should that occur prior to completion of the operation. Each of petitioner’s UAS has a constant battery voltage display and a Low Voltage LED Warning which alerts when the battery reaches pre

determined levels. This battery level would be more than adequate to return the UAS to its

## Justin Cummings

- Lights Camera Action Cinema

- 333 Petition

January 11, 2016 Page | **7** of 9 planned landing zone from anywhere in i ts limited operating area when the Low Voltage Warning alerts. For these reasons, Cummings requests an exemption from 14 C.F.R. § 91.151 (a). Similar exemptions have been granted to other operations, including Exemptions 2689F, 5745, 10673, and 10808. **14 C.F.R. §91.405**  **(a); 407 (a) (1); 409 (a) (1) & (2); 417(a) & (b): Maintenance Inspections**  These regulations require that an aircraft operator or owner "shall have that aircraft inspected as prescribed in subpart E of this part and shall between required inspections, except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, have discrepancies repaired as prescr ibed in part 43 of this chapter ...," and others shall inspect or maintain the aircraft in compliance with Part 43. As provided in petitioner’s operating documents, the operator and the PIC will ensure that the UAS is in safe working order prior to initiating each flight, and the operator will perform required maintenance and inspections, and keep a log of any maintenance performed. **VI. REGULATIONS FOR WHICH**  **EXEMPTIONS ARE UNNECESSARY** The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has issued numerous prior exemptions for many different types of UAS and UAS operations. In those exemptions, the agency noted that exemptions from certain regulations were not necessary, due to "the size, weight, speed and limited operating area associated with [the UAS] and its operation." Based upon the FAA's guidance and the fact that each of petitioner’s UAS is even smaller and slower than many of those UAS in previously issued exem ptions, Petitioner believes exemptions from the following regulations are not necessary: 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H: Airworthiness Certificates. 14 C.F.R. § 45.23 (b): Marking of the Aircraft. 14 C.F.R. §91.7(b): Civil aircraft airworthiness. 14 C.F.R . §91.109: Flight instruction. Cummings also believes that an exemption from 14 C.F.R. § 91.103: Preflight Action is not necessary. This regulation requires each pilot in command to take certain actions before flight to insure the safety of flight. An FAA approved rotorcraft flight manual will not be provided for the aircraft. An equivalent level of safety will be provided as set forth in this petition and in petitioner’s operating documents duly referenced as part of this request. The FAA has previously found that adherence to procedures contained in an applicant's operating documents demonstrate compliance with § 91.103, and therefore an exemption from the regulation was not necessary. See, e.g., In the matter of the petition of Total Safety U.S., Inc., Exemption No. 11156 (issued Jan. 29, 2015).

## Justin Cummings

- Lights Camera Action Cinema

- 333 Petition

January 11, 2016 Page | **8** of 9 P etitioner's PIC will take all actions including reviewing weather, flight battery requirements, landing and takeoff clearance distances and aircraft performance data before initiation of flight to ensure the sa fety of the flight. Consequently, in light of this agency's prior finding in Tot al Safety U.S., Inc., Cummings does not believe an exemption from 14 C.F.R. § 91.103 is necessary. If it is determined that the petitioner does require exemptions from any of t h e provisions from which it has herein stated that it believes no exemption is required: Petitioner requests that such exemptions be granted upon the basis of all that it has stated in this petition and in his operating documents. Petitioner has shown that g ood cause exists for not publishing a summary of this petition in the Federal Register because the requested exemption would not set a precedent, and any delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to the petitioner. Accordingly, Petitioner respectfully requests that the FAA grant the requested exemption summarily and without delay. Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. Part 11, the following summary is provided for publication in the Federal Register, should it be deter mined that publication is necessary :

Petitioner seeks an exemption from the following rules: 14 C.F.R. § 61.113 (a) and (b); 91.7 (a); 91.119 (b) and (c); 91.121; 91.151 (a); 91.405 (a); 91.407 (a) (1); 91.409 (a) (1) & (2) and 91.417 (a) & (b) to conduct aerial data collection (ADC) which includes any remote sensing and measuring by an instrument(s) aboard the Unoccupied (Unmanned) Aircraft (UA). **Privacy** All of the proposed operations, UAS flights, will occur only over private or controlled access property with permission from the owner/c ontroller of the property or authorized representative. Petitioner’s proposed operations will be conducted in accordance with all applicable laws and regulations governing privacy at the venue of the flight operation.
**VII. CONCLUSION**  Cummings has requested to use his fleet of UAS for aerial data collection (ADC). The FAA has issued grants of exemption in circumstances similar in all material respects to those presented in this petition. In Grants of Exemption Nos. 11062 to Astraeus Aerial (see Docket No. FAA−2014−0352), 11109 to Clayco, Inc. (see Docket No. FAA−2014−0507), 11112 to VDOS Global, LLC (see Docket No. FAA−2014−0382), 11213 to Aeryon Labs, Inc. (see Docket No. FAA−2014−0642), and 12645 to Allied Drones (see Docket No. FAA

- 2014

-0804), the FAA found that the enhanced safety achieved using an unmanned aircraft (UA) with the specifications described by the petitioner and carrying no passengers or crew, rather than a manned aircraft of significantly greater proportions, carrying crew in addition to flammable fuel, gives the FAA good cause to find that the UAS operation enabled by this exemption is in the public interest.

## Justin Cummings

- Lights Camera Action Cinema

- 333 Petition

January 11, 2016 Page | **9** of 9 Upon review of petitioner’s reasons for reque sting this exemption, It should be determined that: 1.) Petitioner’s requests, in all ma terial respects, are th e same as the relief previously requested in Grant of Exemption Nos. 11062, 11109, 11112, 11213, and 12645; 2.) The reasons stated by the FAA for granting Exemption Nos. 11062, 11109, 11112, 11213, and 12645 also apply to the situation p etitioner present s ; and 3.) A grant of exemption to petitioner is in the public interest. Therefore, pursuant to the authority contained in 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 40113, and 44701, Cummings should be granted an exemption from 14 CFR §§ 61.23(a) and (c), 61.101(e)( 4) and (5), 61.113(a), 61.315(a), 91.7(a), 91.119(c), 91.121, 91.151(a)(1), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) and (2), and 91.417(a) and (b), to t he extent necessary to allow petitioner’s proposed operations. Satisfaction of all of the criteria provi ded in Section 333 of the Reform Act of 2012

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

- provide more than adequate justific ation to grant the requested exemptions allowing the proposed operations in the NAS by petitioner, **Justin Cummings** , Owner, d/b/a **Lights Camera Action Cinema**

. Respectfully, /Signed/ 

### Erick F. Larsen Consultant to Justin Cummings, Owner Lights Camera Action Cinema 262 W. Linden Ave. # C Burbank, LA, Ca 91502 818

- 732

- 0330 ErickLarsen@Outlook.com