## Everett Fenton Gidley

- 333 Petition

December 6, 2015 P a g e | 1 of 9 

### Erick F. Larsen

Consultant to

Everett Fenton Gidley
262 W. Linden Ave. # C Burbank, LA, Ca 91502
818

- 732

- 0330 ErickLarsen@Outlook.com December 6, 2015

- 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 the Federal Aviation Regulat ions

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, Everett Fenton Gidley

, ( Everett Gidley

, 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 System s (UAS), so long as such operations are conducted within and under the conditions outlined herein or as may be established by the FAA as required by Section 333.

I. INTRODUCTION

Petitioner

, Everett Gidley is a United States born citizen with who has a valid California Driver’s

License . He is performing expert professional architectural cinematography, videography, photography , and website development worldwide

, with the followin g contact information :

Everett Gidley
9663 Santa Monica Blvd #683 Beverly Hills, CA 90210

310

- 990

- 0106 efgidley@gmail.com www.efg3.com

Everett Gidley is a highly creative and skilled professional architect and p hotographer whose
commercial services inclu de aerial photography, cinematography

, and website development. Creating great content to populate websites and other media is his forte. He produce s some of the

## Everett Fenton Gidley

- 333 Petition

December 6, 2015 P a g e | 2 of 9 finest photography using the most advanced tools possible

. Everett Gidley is conveniently base d in Beverly Hills, adjacent to Hollywood , California

.

Everett Gidley has develo ped numerous diverse clients in need of safe and lawful commercial UAS aerial data collection (ADC) services. Growth of p etitioner’s UAS business services will provide new job s and an incr eased level of safety to many who currently are in need of UAS ADC commercial

services. Current FAA UAS policy prevents Petitioner from providing civil UAS ADC commercial services in the absence of the requested exemption s

.

A. Commercial Operati ons to Be Conducted :

Petitioner seeks to operate his fleet of UAS to conduct aerial data collection (ADC) which includes any remote sensing and measuring by an instrument(s) aboard the unmanned aircraft (UA). Examples include imagery (photography, video, i nfrared, etc.), electronic measurement (precision surveying, RF analysis, etc.), chemical measurement (particulate measurement, etc.), or any other gathering of data by instruments aboard the UA.

In particular Petitioner seeks authorization to conduct com mercial 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,

securi ty, real estate, resort, golf, cemetery, entertainment, sports, utility, energy (oil, gas, solar, wind, & electric), hydro (water), transportation (port, rail, truck, auto, & bus), mining, bridge, telecommunications, agriculture (farming, ranching, & growi ng) flare s tack, platform, tower, pole, pipeline and other infrastructure, structures, sites, systems, features 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, search & rescue, emergency services, humanitarian relief, public & private entity support, assistance and monitoring
of infrastructure, structures, si tes, systems, features, and operations; and,

4.) Research, education, training, development, testing, certification, and validation of safe and lawful commercial, experimental, hobby, and recreational UAS curriculum, education, and safe flight training, demon strations, and events involving UAS design, manufacture, assembly, purchase, sale, maintenance, repair, inspection, safe operation, record keeping, and required
FAA documentation.

Hereinafter, 1 through 4 , above, referred to as petitioner’s "proposed oper ations".

## Everett Fenton Gidley

- 333 Petition

December 6, 2015 P a g e | 3 of 9 B. Petitioner’s Commercial UAS Aircraft Fleet :

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 (shown in table 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.

Commercial operations of any other type of aircraft 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 C PR 91. 121 14 CFR 91.151 (a) 14 CFR 91.405 (a) 14 CFR 407 (a) (1) 14 CPR 409 (a) (1) & (2) 14 CFR 417 (a) & (b)

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

Each UAS utilized by Petitioner is an electric multi

- rotor craft, weig hing 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 capability 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 N Number Serial

Number Manufacturer Name

Model

Web Link to UAS Specs Name

TBD TBD DJI Inspire 1 http://www.dji.com/product/inspire

1/download Everett Gidley

TBD TBD DJI Inspire 1 Pro http://store.dji.com/product/inspire

- 1

- pro#/spec Everett Gidley

TBD TBD DJI
Phantom 3 Professional

h ttp://www.dji.com/product/phantom

3/download Everett Gidley

TBD TBD DJI
Phantom 3 Advanced http://www.dji.com/product/phantom

- 3 Everett Gidley

## Everett Fenton Gidley

- 333 Petition

December 6, 2015 P a g e | 4 of 9 controlled access property with permission from the owner/controller of the property or

authoriz ed 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 present that sufficiently
protect non

- participants in the eve nt 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

2014

- 0884 (March 6, 2015) and to Measure, a 32 Advisors Comp any, 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 imp act 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 addition to flammable fuel, gives the FAA good cause to fi nd that the UAS operation enabled by this exemption is in the public interest."

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

IV. EQUIVALENT LEVEL OF SAFETY

Everett Gidley proposes th at his fleet of UAS

, with the characteristics and as operated with the limitations listed below, provide for at least an equivalent or even higher level of safety to operations under the current regulatory framework.

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

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

V. EXEMPTIONS REQUESTED

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

## Everett Fenton Gidley

- 333 Petition

December 6, 2015 P a g e | 5 of 9 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 s port pilot’s certificate, and a current FAA medical certificate or a valid U.S. driver’s license issued by a state, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, a territory, a possession, or
the Federal government. Petitioner’s PIC will also meet the flight revi ew 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 wi th 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 ma nner consistent with 14 CFR § 61.51(b). Dedicated UAS f lights for the purposes 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 requested by petitioner to be allowed under the terms of this exemption.

Petitioner further proposes that such PIC and VO training operations will only be conducted during
dedicated trai ning 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 w ith 14 CFR §

91.119.

Based upon the above and for the reasons set forth in the FAA's grant of an exemption to Astraeus Aerial, Petitioner does not believe a commercial pilot certificate is necessary for the operation s he intends to conduct. 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. Add itionally, 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., Eve rett Gidley requests an exemption from 14 CFR. § 91.7(a). See, e.g., In the matter of the petition of Total Safety U.S., Inc., Exemption No. 11156 (issued Jan. 29, 2015).

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

Section 91.119 establishes sa fe 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 pro posed operations

## Everett Fenton Gidley

- 333 Petition

December 6, 2015 P a g e | 6 of 9 would be considered to be in "congested areas," Petitioner's operati onal procedures, including

FOM

, 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 o perations at lower altitudes should be allowed.

Everett Gidley will establish a 500' buffer/sterile area for his operations that will exclude personnel not associated with the operations. Petitioner will also exercise additional control over the sterile

a rea as needed . Consequently, Everett Gidley believes these procedures will reduce or eliminate any potential adverse impacts to safety for o perations in congested areas. Everett Gidley therefore requests an exemption from 14 CFR § 91.119(b).

Section 91.11 9 (c) prohibits operations in other than congested areas below 500 feet above the surface, or closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle or structure. Since this exemption is
for UAS that fly similarly to a helicopter and requests authority to ope rate at altitudes up to 400 ft. AGL, an exemption may be needed to allow such proposed operations.

The equivalent level of safety will be achieved given the size, weight, speed of each of petitioner’s

UAS as well as the location where they will be operate d. As discussed above, p etitioner will
establish a sterile area, including safety buffers of 500 feet for personnel not associated with the operation. Everett Gidley there fore requests an exemption from Section 91.119(c) for all authorized personnel associ ated 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 GPS altitude read out, an exemption is requested.

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

S ection 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 cruisi ng 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 30 minutes. Flights wil l 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 planned landing zone from anywhere in its limited operating area when the Low Voltage Warning
alerts.

## Everett Fenton Gidley

- 333 Petition

December 6, 2015 P a g e | 7 of 9 For these reasons, Everett Gidley requests an exemption f rom 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 requi re 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 fli ght, 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 u pon 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 exemptions, Petitioner believes exemptions from the following regulations are not necessary:

14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpar t 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.

Everett Gidley also believes that an exemption from 14 C.F.R. § 91.103: Preflight A ction 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 wit h § 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).

P etitioner's PIC will take all actions including reviewing weath er, flight battery requirements, landing and takeoff clearance distances and aircraft performance data before initiation of flight to

## Everett Fenton Gidley

- 333 Petition

December 6, 2015 P a g e | 8 of 9 ensure the safety of the flight. Consequently, in light of this agency's prior finding in Tot al Safety
U.S., Inc., Everet t Gidley 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 above provisions
from which he has herein stated that he believes no exemption is required: Petit ioner requests that such exemptions be granted upon the basis of all that he has stated in this petition and in his operating documents.

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

Petitioner seeks an exemption from the following 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 cond uct aerial data collection (ADC) which includes any remote sensing and measuring by an instrument(s) aboard the Unoccupied (Unmanned) Aircraft (UA). Examples include imagery (photography, video, infrared, etc.), electronic measurement (precision surveying, RF analysis, etc.), chemical measurement (particulate measurement, etc.), or any other gathering of data by

instruments aboard the UA.

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

VII. CONCLU SION

Everett Gidley 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), 12646 to Measure, a 32 Advisors Company, LLC, ( see Docket

No. FAA

– 2015

– 1602 ), and 11213 to Aeryo n Labs, Inc. ( see Docket No. FAA−2014−0642), 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 significan tly greater proportions, carrying crew in addition to flammable fuel, gives the FAA good
cause to find that the UAS fleet operation enabled by granting an exemption to petitioner is in the public interest.

Upon review of Everett Gidley ’s reasons for reque sting this exemption, It reasonably should be
determined that:

## Everett Fenton Gidley

- 333 Petition

December 6, 2015 P a g e | 9 of 9 1.) They are similar in all material respects to relief previously requested in Grant of Exemption Nos. 11062, 11109, 11112, 12646

, and 11213; 2.) The reasons stated by the FAA for granting Exemption Nos. 11062, 11109, 11112,
12646, and 11213 also apply to the situation petitioner presents; and 3.) A grant of exemption is in the public interest.

Therefore, pursuant to the authority contained in 49 U.S. C. 106(f), 40113, and 44701, Everett Gidley 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) a nd (b), to t he extent necessary to allow petitioner’s proposed operations.

Satisfaction of the criteria provided in Section 333 of the Reform Act of 2012

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

- provide more than adequate justification to grant the requested exemptions allowing the proposed operations in the NAS by petitioner

, Everett Gidley

.

Respectfully,

/Signed/ 

### E rick F. Larsen

Consultant to

Everett Fenton Gidley

262 W. Linden Ave. # C Burbank, LA, Ca 91502
818

- 732

- 0330 ErickLarsen@Outlook.com