Thomas O’Brien

12360 Meadowbrook Ln 

Poway, CA 92064 

1-858-945-3889 

mO’Brien67@gmail.c

om

August 8, 2015 

U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operation 

West Building Ground Floor, Room w12-140 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

Re:	Exemption	Request	Section	333	of	the	FAA	Reform	Act	and	Part	11	of	the

Federal	Aviation	Regulations	from	14	C.F.R.	45.23(b);14	CFR	Part	21;14	CFR	61.113

(a)	&	(b);	91.7	(a);91.9	(b)	(2);91.103(b);	91.109;91.119;	91.121;

91.151(a);91.203(a) &	(b);91.405	(a);	91.407(a)	(1);	91.409	(a)	(2);91.417	(a)	&	(b).		

To Whom It May Concern: 

Thomas O’Brien hereby petitions the Secretary of Transportation and Federal Aviation 

Administration for exemption to the above referenced and below more fully described Federal 

Aviation Regulations (“FARs”), that currently may or may not apply to the recreational/business 

operations of model aircraft including small unmanned aerial systems (“UASs). 

Pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 and the procedures 

contained within 14 C.F.R. 11, Petition that I, Thomas O’Brien, an owner and operator of small 

unmanned aircraft, be exempted from the Federal Aviation Regulations (“FARs”) listed below so 

that I, Thomas O’Brien, may operate small ultra lightweight unmanned aircraft system (“UAS”) 

commercially in airspace regulated by the Federal Aviation Administration (“FAA”). 

As described herein I, Thomas O’Brien is very experienced in flying hobby helicopters and fixed 

wing aircraft for recreational purposes. I currently have a DJI Phantom 3, and Yuneec Typhoon 

Q500+ quadcopter UAS with intent to conduct aerial photography/Inspection/ included but not 

limited to the following; Business Operations: over land, waterways, and oceans; operation 

over/in unrestricted National Parks, National Forests, flight in non navigable airspace, using non 

intrusive recording devices, operation in otherwise unrestricted U.S. States/Territories for aerial 
videography/cinematography for commercial operation and to enhance academic community 

awareness for those individuals and companies unfamiliar with the geographical layout of such 

areas. 

As described more fully below, the requested exemption would permit the operation of UAS 

under controlled conditions in airspace that is 1) limited; 2) predetermined in areas away from 

general public, airports, heliports and vehicular traffic for community videos, and within property 

boundaries for individual homeowner real estate listing videos/photos; and 3) controlled as to 

access. The exemption would also provide safety enhancements to the already safe operations 

within the aerial photography, film and television industry presently using conventional aircraft 

and small, unmanned and relatively inexpensive UASs. 

Currently, similar lightweight, remote controlled UAS's are legally operated by unmonitored 

amateur hobbyists with no safety plan or controls in place to prevent catastrophe. I operate my

UAS within all safety protocols and controls to avoid and prevent public hazard, as well as 

manned aircraft hazards/catastrophe. This will act to further safety protocols exclusive to 

lightweight UAS's specific to aerial video and photography usage as I record flight data and 

other information gained through permitted flight operations to share with the FAA through any 

required FAA reports to assist with future protocol and safety regulation. 

Granting my request comports with the Secretary of Transportation’s (FAA Administrator’s) 

responsibilities and authority to not only integrate UAS's into the national airspace system, but 

to “...establish requirements for the safe operation of such aircraft systems [UAS's] in the 

national airspace system” under Section 333(c) of the Reform Act specific to the use of UAS's 

for commercial purposes. Further I will conduct my operations in compliance with the protocols 

described herein or as otherwise established by the FAA. 

For the reasons stated below I respectfully request the grant of an exemption allowing me to 

operate ultra lightweight, remote controlled UAS’s for academic community awareness, general 

aerial photography, and to enhance real estate listing videos for homeowners who cannot afford 

expensive manned aircraft for the same purpose. Both with public safety in mind by keeping 

heavier manned aircraft containing combustible fuel that that poses potential public hazard. 

I. Contact Information: 

Thomas O’Brien

4670 County Road 502

Wildwood, FL 34785

Mobile: (352) 446-3497 

Email: tom@oxfordlawn.com

II. The Specific Sections of Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations 

From Which Thomas O’Brien Requests Exemption are: 14 CFR 21; 

14 C.F.R. 45.23(b); 
14 CFR 61.113 (a) & (b); 14 C.F.R. 91.7 (a); 

14 C.F.R. 91.9 (b) (2); 

14 C.F.R. 91.103; 

14 C.F.R. 91.109; 

14 C.F.R. 91.119; 

14 C.F.R. 91.121; 

14 C.F.R. 91.151 (a); 

14 C.F.R. 91.203 (a) & (b); 14 C.F.R. 91.405 (a); 

14 CFR 407 (a) (1); 

14 CFR 409 (a) (2); and, 14 CFR 417 (a) & (b). 

III. The Extent of relief Thomas O’Brien seeks and the Reason He Seeks 

Such Relief: 

I, Thomas O’Brien, submit this application in accordance with the Reform Act, 112 P.L. 95 §§ 

331334, seeking relief from any currently applicable FARs operating to prevent me Thomas

O’Brien, contemplated commercial cinematic, academic and other flight operations within the 

national airspace system. The Reform Act in Section 332 provides for such integration of civil 

unmanned aircraft systems into our national airspace system as it is in the public’s interest to do 

so. My ultra lightweight UAS meets the definition of “small unmanned aircraft” as defined in 

Section 331 and therefore the integration of my ultra lightweight UAS is expressly contemplated 

by the Reform Act. I would like to operate my ultra lightweight UAS prior to the time period by 

which the Reform Act requires the FAA to promulgate rules governing such craft. Thereby, 

providing direct experience and valuable information for formal regulation that can be 

administered uniformly to all UAS aerial video and photography. The Reform Act guides the 

Secretary in determining the types of UASs that may operate safely in our national airspace 

system. Considerations include: The weight, size, speed and overall capabilities of the UAS's; 

Whether the UAS will be operated near airports or heavily populated areas; and, Whether the 

UAS will be operated by line of sight. 112 P.L. 95 § 333 (a). Each of these items reflect in favor 

of an exemption for me Thomas O’Brien. My UAS utilizes four (4) counter rotating propellers for 

balance, control and stability. My UAS is equipped with GPS and auto return safety technology. 

Weighing less than seven (7) pounds (far below the maximum 55 pound limit); including camera 

with gimbal. 

I consider safety as foremost with each flight. My small unmanned aircraft is designed to hover 

in place via GPS and operate in less than a 10 m/s wind knot (approx 22 mph) wind. For safety, 

stability and fear of financial loss I will not fly in winds exceeding 7 m/s (15 mph). Built in safety 

systems include a GPS mode that allows my UAS to hover in place when radio controls are lost. 

With three modes to choose from, I utilize the Positioning Mode for aerial 

videography/photography. This is the safest, most reliable and stable mode to prevent accident 

and hazard. When pilot communication is lost UAS is designed slowly descend to point of 

takeoff , or near the control transmitter when utilizing Dynamic Mode. I do not operate my UAS 

near airports, Hospitals nor Police heliports, and do not operate near areas where general 

public is within fifty to one hundred (50100) yards depending on location, conditions and 

weather. I am constantly on alert for any manned aircraft (Police/Medical helicopters, etc.) and 
prepared to land/abort immediately to the nearest and safest ground point should a manned 

aircraft approach my location or I suspect manned aircraft may approach near my location. My 

UAS is capable of vertical and horizontal operations, and are flown only within my line of sight, 

as the remote control pilot. Utilizing battery power rather than combustible fuels, flights generally 

last between eight (8) to twelve (12) minutes, with an altitude under three hundred fifty(300) 

feet. I utilize a fresh fully charged battery with each flight as a safety precaution; full flight time 

limit for each battery is eighteen (18) to twenty two (22) minutes as tested. I do not operate my 

UAS at or below manufacturer recommend minimum charge levels for operation; preferring to 

remain well within a safe operating range to insure adequate communication between radio 

control and UAS to eliminate potential for crash, loss of control or hazard. Reserve batteries are 

at hand with each exercise to insure replacement for sufficient safe level of operation. I do not 

believe in taking risk that may cause a crash, that could create hazard to the 

public/property/manned aircraft, and have no desire to lose an valuable investment. I have 

clocked numerous practice flights in remote areas as a hobbyist simulating flights for future 

commercial use to gain familiarization with the characteristics of this specific UAS's performance 

under different temperature and weather conditions. I also practice computerized simulated 

flights to maintain adequate skills and response reflex time. All for the sake of safety. 

I am extremely cautious when operating of my UAS/ultra lightweight unmanned aircraft and will 

not “create a hazard to users of the national airspace system or 

the public.” 112 P.L. 95 § 333 (b). Given the small size and weight of my UAS it falls well 

within Congress’s contemplated safety zone when it promulgated the Reform Act and the 

corresponding directive to integrate UAS's into the national airspace system. My UAS, the DJI 

Phantom 3 Pro, 3DR Iris+, and Yuneec Q500+, used in hobby flight, has a demonstrable 

safety record and does not pose any threat to the general public or national security. 

IV. How Thomas O’Brien’s Request Will Benefit the Public As A Whole: 

Aerial videography for geographical awareness and for real estate marketing has been around 

for a long time through manned fixed wing aircraft and helicopters. For small budget real estate 

companies and average homeowners the expense of such aerial videography is cost 

prohibitive. Only large companies and high end Realtors or luxury homeowners can afford to 

absorb such expense, depriving non luxury homeowners and lower budget Realtors from a 

valuable marketing tool. 

Congress has already proclaimed that it is in the public’s interest to integrate commercially flown 

UAS's into the national airspace system, hence the passing 

of the Reform Act. Granting my exemption request furthers the public interest through 

academic/visual awareness of the geographical benefits in and around the State of Virginia. My 

ultra lightweight UAS is battery powered and creates no emissions that can harm the 

environment. The consequence of my ultra lightweight UAS crashing is far less than a full size 

helicopter or fixed wing aircraft; which are heavy, contain combustible fuel and can cause 

catastrophic devastation to the public. 
Manned aircraft can pose a threat to the public through potential catastrophic crash that many 

local communities have experienced in the past with military aircraft and medical/police 

helicopter crashes. These have resulted in a loss of life and endangered the public with 

combustible fuel that burned on impact. My UAS poses no such threat since size and lack of 

combustible fuel alleviates any potential threat to the public. Additionally, this actually furthers 

the public’s interest by making it safer for business to conduct aerial photography and 

videography without such risks. 

V. Reasons Why Thomas O’Brien Exemption Will Not Adversely Affect Safety Or 

How The Exemption Will Provide a Level of Safety At Least Equal To Existing Rule: 

My exemption will not adversely affect safety. Quite the contrary, for the reasons stated 

permitting me to log more flight time in FAA controlled airspace, with communication with the 

FAA, will allow me to contribute to the innovation and implementation of new and novel, as of 

yet undiscovered safety protocols for development in cooperation with the FAA. In addition I 

submit the following representations of enhancements to current aerial videography and 

photography: 

A. My UAS weighs less than 7 pounds complete with a small ultra light weight high 

quality camera; 

B. I only operate my UAS below 300 feet (well within the 400 foot permissible ceiling 

set by the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012); 

C. My UAS only operates for 18-22 minutes per flight; 

D. I land my UAS prior to 30% Battery Remaining; 

E. I pilot my UAS through remote control only by line of sight; 

F. I pilot my UAS only with a visual observer and but also use a dual controller 

setup. 

The second controller is solely used for operating the Inspire 1’s camera/gimble. 

G. My UAS has Failsafe RTH, a flight safety feature whereby it hovers and then 

slowly lands if communication with the remote control pilot is lost for 3 seconds; 

H. My UAS has GPS and a Vision Positioning System utilizing two sonar sensors 

and one monocular camera for positioning and to identify the current aircraft’s position; 

I. My UAS has a flight recorder and I actively analyze flight data and other sources 

of information to constantly update and enhance safety protocols; 

J. I only operate in reasonably safe environment that are strictly controlled, are 

away from power lines, elevated lights, airports and actively populated areas; 

K. I conduct extensive preflight inspections and protocol per the Inspire 1 User 

Manual; 

L. I always obtains all necessary permissions prior to operation; 

M. I immediately abort flights in the event of potential danger; 

N. I only operate my UAS well within “flight environment requirements5” & visual 

meteorological conditions (VMC) 

O. I will not operate my UAS less than 500 feet below or less than 2,000 feet 

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

P. Only I, Thomas O’Brien, act as Pilot in Command during flights; 
Q. I follow the UAS manufacturer’s aircraft/component, maintenance, overhaul, 

replacement, inspection, and life limit requirements. 

R. The operating documents/manual will be accessible during UAS operations and 

made available upon request. 

My safety protocols provide a level of safety equal to or exceeding existing rules. It is important 

to note that absent the integration of commercial UAS into our national airspace system, 

helicopters are the primary means of aerial video and photography for community awareness, 

real estate, and marketing purposes. While the safety record of such helicopters is remarkably 

astounding, there have been incidents involving loss of life as well as extensive property 

damage; it is far safer to operate a battery powered ultra lightweight UAS. 

● First, the potential loss of life is diminished because UAS's O’Brieny no people on board 

and I only operates my UAS in specific areas away from mass populations. ● Second, there is 

no fuel on board a UAS and thus the potential for fire or explosions is greatly diminished. 

● Third, the small size and extreme maneuverability of my UAS allow me to remotely pilot 

away from and avoid hazards quickly and safely. 

● Fourth, given its small size and weight, even when close enough to capture amazing 

images, my UAS need not be so close to the objects they are focused on through the 

technology and use of post editing software allowing pan and zoom. 

Accordingly, my UAS has been experimentally operated for familiarization and 

competency and will continue to operate at and above current safety levels. 

VI. A Summary The FAA May Publish in the Federal Register: 

A. 14 C.F.R. 21 and 14 C.F.R. 91: Airworthiness Certificates, Manuals and The Like. 

14 C.F.R. 21, Subpart H, entitled Airworthiness Certificates, sets forth 

requirements for procurement of necessary airworthiness certificates in relation 

to FAR § 91.203(a)(1). The size, weight and enclosed operational area of my 

UAS permits exemption from Part 21 because my UAS meets (and exceeds) an 

equivalent level of safety pursuant to Section 333 of the Reform Act. The FAA is 

authorized to exempt aircraft from the airworthiness certificate requirement under 

both the Act (49) U.S.C. § 44701 (f)) and Section 333 of the Reform Act. Both 

pieces of legislation permit the FAA to exempt UAS's from the airworthiness 

certificate requirement in consideration of the weight, size, speed, 

maneuverability and proximity to areas such as airports and dense populations. 

My current and projected UAS's meet or exceed each of the elements. 

14 C.F.R. 91.7(a) prohibits the operation of an aircraft without an airworthiness 

certificate. As no such certificate will be applicable in the form contemplated by 

the FARs, this Regulation is inapplicable. 14 C.F.R. § 91.9 (b) (2) requires an 

aircraft flight manual in the aircraft. As there are no on board pilots or 

passengers, and given the size of the UAS's, this Regulation is inapplicable. An 
equivalent level of safety will be achieved by maintaining a safety/flight manual 

delineating areas of where safety can be defined. 10 The FAA has previously 

issued exemptions to this regulation in Exemption Nos. 8607, 8737, 8738, 

9299,9299A, 9565, 9565B, 10167, 10167A, 10602, 10700 and 32827. 

14 C.F.R. § 91.121 regarding altimeter settings is inapplicable in so far as my 

UAS utilizes electronic global positioning systems with a barometric sensor. 14 

C.F.R. § 91.203 (a) and (b) provides for the carrying of civil aircraft certifications 

and registrations. They are inapplicable for the same reasons described above. 

The equivalent level of safety will be achieved by maintaining any such required 

certifications and registrations by me, Thomas O’Brien. 

B. 14 C.F.R. § 45.23: Marking of The Aircraft 

Applicable Codes of Federal Regulation require aircraft to be marked according 

to certain specifications. My UAS are, by definition unmanned. They therefore do 

not have a cabin, cockpit or pilot station on which to mark certain words or 

phrases. Further, two inch lettering is difficult to place on such small aircraft with 

dimensions smaller that minimal lettering requirement. The FAA has previously 

issued exemptions to this regulation through Exemptions Nos. 8738, 10167, 

10167A and 10700. 

C. 14 C.F.R. § 61.113: Private Pilot Privileges and Limitations: PIC. 

Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. §§ 61.113 (a) & (b), private pilots are limited to 

Noncommercial operations. I, Thomas O’Brien can achieve an equivalent level of 

safety as achieved by current Regulations because my UAS does not O’Brieny 

any pilots or passengers. The risks attended to the operation of my UAS is far 

less than the risk levels inherent in the commercial activities outlined in 14 C.F.R. 

§ 61, et seq. Thus, allowing me to operate my UAS meet and exceed current 

safety levels in relation to 14 C.F.R. §61.113 (a) & (b). 

D. 14 C.F.R. 91.119: Minimum Safe Altitudes. 

14 C.F.R. § 91.119 prescribes safe altitudes for the operation of civil aircraft. It 

allows helicopters to be operated at lower altitudes in certain conditions. My UAS 

will never operate at an altitude greater than 300 AGL; safely below the standard 

of 400 AGL. I will however operate my UAS in safe areas away from public and 

traffic, providing a level of safety at least equivalent to or below those in relation 

to minimum safe altitudes. Given the size, weight, maneuverability and speed of 

my UAS, an equivalent or higher level of safety will be achieved. 

E. 14 C.F.R. 91.405 (a); 407 (a) (1); 409 (a) (2); 417(a) & (b): Maintenance 

Inspections. 
The above cited Regulations require, amongst other things, aircraft owners and operators to 

“have [the] 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 

prescribed in part 43 of this chapter. . . .” 

These Regulations only apply to aircraft with an airworthiness certificate. They will not, 

therefore, apply to my UAS. However, as a safety precaution I meticulously inspect my UAS 

before and after each flight and maintained per the manufacturer’s aircraft/component, 

maintenance, overhaul, replacement, inspection, and life limit requirements.

In summary, Thomas O’Brien seeks an exemption from the following Regulations: 

14 C.F.R. 21, subpart H; 14 C.F.R. 45.23(b); 14 C.F.R. §§ 61.113 (a) & (b); 14 C.F.R. § 

91.7 (a); 14 C.F.R. § 91.9 (b)(2); 14 C.F.R. § 91.103(b); 14 C.F.R. § 91.109; 14 C.F.R. § 

91.119; 14 C.F.R. § 91.121; 14 C.F.R. § 91.151(a); 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.203(a) and (b); 14 

C.F.R. § 91.405 (a); 14 C.F.R. § 91.407 (a)(1); 14 C.F.R. § 91.409 (a)(2); 14 C.F.R. § 

91.409 (a ) (2); and, 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.417 (a) & (b) to commercially operate my 

lightweight unmanned aircraft system for aerial photography/Inspection/ included but not 

limited to the following; Business Operations: over land, waterways, and oceans; 

operation over/in nonrestricted National Parks, National Forests, flight in nonnavigable 

airspace, using nonintrusive recording devices, operation in otherwise unrestricted U.S. 

States/Territories for aerial videography/cinematography for commercial operation and 

to enhance academic community awareness for those individuals and companies 

unfamiliar with the geographical layout of such areas. 

Currently, area awareness and real estate aerial videography/photography relies primarily on 

the use of larger aircraft running on combustible fuel, posing potential risk to the public. Granting 

my request for exemption will reduce current risk levels and thereby enhance safety. My UAS 

does not contain potentially explosive fuel, is smaller, lighter and more maneuverable than 

conventional photographic aircraft with much less flight time. Further, I operate at lower altitudes 

and in controlled airspace eliminating potential public risk flying to and from established airfields. 

I have been analyzing flight information and will compile safety protocols and the 

implementation of a flight operations manual that exceeds currently accepted means and 

methods for safe flight. Formal collection of information shared with the FAA will enhance the 

FAA's internal efforts to establish protocols for complying with the FAA Modernization and 

Reform Act of 2012. There are no personnel on board my UAS and therefore the likelihood of 

death or serious bodily injury is significantly diminished. The operation of my UAS, weighing 

less than 7 pounds and travelling at lower speeds within limited areas will provide an equivalent 

level of safety as that achieved under current FARs. Accordingly I respectfully request that the 

FAA grant my exemption request and am willing to cooperate in sharing information to benefit 

the FAA, safety of manned aircraft, and the general public at large. 

Respectfully Submitted, 

Thomas O’Brien
4670 County Road 502

Wildwood, FL. 34785