1 

### Petition for Exemption Under 14 CFR § 11.81 to Allow Commercial

Use of Unmanned Aircraft Vehicles

Petitioner:

Owner: Douglas M Scheid, RA

Address: 3897 East River Rd

Grand Island NY 14072

Email: dscheid@scheidaia.com

Website: www. Scheidaia.com

To whom it may concern:

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

and 14 C.F.R. Part 11, Douglas M Scheid is a registered Architect, and currently holds a Private

Pilot Certification (Certificate # 3396383) with ASEL;Instrument Airplane ratings, and hereby

applies for an exemption from the listed Federal Aviation Regulations (“FARs”) to allow

commercial operation of its UAV,s ( Unmanned Aerial Vehicle).

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

unmanned and relatively inexpensive UAV,s in airspace that is limited, predetermined and

controlled.

The proposed exemption, if granted, would allow Douglas M Scheid to conduct commercial

operations of UAV,s meeting or exceeding all of the operational and safety requirements the

FAA has set forth in Section 333.

Douglas M Scheid plans to use the capabilities of UAV,s to offer a multitude of services,

including:

‐ Aerial surveying

‐ Building Inspections

‐ Roof Inspections

‐ Photography and presentation

‐ Construction site inspections and monitoring

‐ Real Estate Development and Inspections

The Petitioner is requesting an exemption to enable operation of a DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ V3.0

Quadcopter with FPV HD Video Camera with a 3

‐ Axis Gimbal. The DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ V3.0

Quadcopter also has the failsafe function of the autopilot system, which means, when the

communication between the Main Controller and the transmitter is disconnected the system

will automatically trigger Return to Home and will land safely. The Phantom 2 User Manual V1.4

is hereby incorporated by reference.2 Specifically, the UAS is:

A lightweight (< 7.0 lb gross weight with all on

‐ board equipment), battery operated 4

‐‐ motor

rotorcraft in the form of a quadcopter that takes off and lands vertically, manufactured by DJI,

Model Phantom 2

, with the following equipment:

 An on

‐ board flight computer with GPS navigation and location ability that receives

signals for flight controls from a ground

‐ based transmitter/controller;

 An on

‐ board camera capable of capturing imagery in the form of full color, high

definition still photos and video;

The Ground Station Includes:

 A Pilot in Command (PIC) in operational control of a flight operation from beginning to

end and who controls the UAS while in the air;

 A 100mW, 2.4GHz radio transmitter/controller operated by the PIC to control the UAS

while in flight;

 A radio receiver receiving live video and flight data from the on

‐ board camera and

computer projects it all together onto a screen for the PIC to view during flight;

 A Visual Observer (VO) is a person who provides a second pair of eyes to visually track

the UAS while in flight.

The UAS Pilot in Command

Mr. Scheid asserts that under § 61.113 (a) and (b) private pilots are limited to noncommercial

operations, however, he can achieve an equivalent level of safety as achieved by current

regulations because his UAS does not carry any pilots or passengers. Further, while helpful, a

pilot license will not ensure remote control piloting skills. He further indicates that the risks of

operating a UAS are far less than the risk levels inherent in the commercial activities outlined in

14 CFR part 61, et seq., thus he requests an exemption from § 61.113 Private Pilot Privileges

and Limitations: Pilot in Command.

Regarding UAS operational training, in addition to over 1200 hours of flight hours as a Private

Pilot operating in the NAS, Mr. Scheid has flown numerous practice flights in remote areas as a

hobbyist simulating flights for future commercial use to gain familiarization with the

characteristics of his UAS’ performance under different temperature and weather conditions.

Additionally, Mr. Scheid agrees to abide by the UAS Operating Parameters following.3 UAS Operating Parameters

Mr. Scheid states he will abide by the following additional operating conditions under the

exemption for which he is making application:

 Operate his UAS below 400 feet, within direct visual line of sight with the PIC, outside of

Class, A, B, C, and D airspace, (unless a letter of agreement with the applicable

controlling facility is obtained);

 No flight will be made with a Gross weight exceeding 55 pounds;

 All operations must utilize a visual observer (VO). The VO and PIC must be able to

communicate by voice at all times during a flight operation;

 Operate the UAS for 20 minutes or less, per flight, maintaining 25% battery reserve;

 Land his UAS prior to the manufacturer’s recommended minimum level of battery

power;

 Operate his UAS only within visual line of sight (VLOS), and during hours of daylight;

 Use the UAS’ global positioning system (GPS) flight safety feature whereby it hovers and

then slowly lands if communication with the remote control pilot is lost;

 Prior to each flight the PIC will inspect the UAS to ensure 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 necessary maintenance has been

performed and the UAS is found to be in a condition for safe flight. The Ground Control

Station, if utilized, will be included in the preflight inspection. All maintenance and

alterations will be properly documented in the aircraft records;

 Contact respective airports if operations will be within 5 miles to advise them of his

estimated flight time, flight duration, elevation of flight, and other pertinent

information;

 The UAV will not be operating over any open

‐ air assembly of people;

 The UAV will not be operating at night;

 Always obtain all necessary permissions prior to operation; and

 Have procedures in place to abort flights in the event of safety breaches or potential

danger.

Statutory Authority Section 333, titled “Special Rules for Certain Unmanned Aircraft Systems”,

provides a mechanism for seeking expedited FAA authorization of safe civil Unmanned Aircraft

Systems (UAS) operations in the National Airspace System (“NAS”). Section 333(a) states that

the FAA “shall determine if certain unmanned aircraft systems may operate safely in the

national airspace system before completion of the (comprehensive) plan and rule making

required by section 332(b)(1) of this Act or the guidance required by section 334 of this Act.” In

Section 332(b)(1), Congress made it clear that Section 333 provides a mechanism for “expedited

operation authorization” if several factors are met. Petitioner meets all requirements to permit

FAA approval of commercial UAV operations.4 Sections from which exemptions are sought:

14 CFR Part 21, Subpart H Certification procedures for products and parts, Airworthiness Certificates

14 CFR Part 36 Noise standards: Type and airworthiness

14 CFR § 45.23 Display of marks; general

14 CFR Part 61 Certification: Pilots, flight instructors, and ground instructors

14 CFR § 91.7 Civil aircraft airworthiness

14 CFR § 91.9 Civil aircraft flight manual, marking, and placard requirements

14 CFR § 91.103 Preflight action

14 CFR § 91.105 Flight crewmember stations

14 CFR § 91.109 Flight instruction

14 CFR § 91.119 Minimum safe altitudes

14 CFR § 91.121 Altimeter settings

14 CFR § 91.151 Fuel requirements for flights in VFR conditions

14 CFR § 91.173 ATC clearance and flight plan in IFR conditions

14 CFR § 91.203 Civil aircraft: Certifications required

14 CFR § 91.207 Emergency locator transmitters

14 CFR Part 91, Subpart E Maintenance

The Extent of Relief Sought, and Reasons for Seeking the Exemption

14 CFR Part 21

, Subpart H. Part 21 establishes the procedures for issuance of certificates

of airworthiness, as mandated by 49 U.S.C. § 44704. Under Section 333 and 49 U.S.C. §

44701(b), the FAA may exempt aircraft from airworthiness certification. The petitioner

requests an exemption from the requirements of this Part because the size, weight,

speed, operational capability in which the Subject UAS pose significantly less risk than

the risks posed by conventional aircraft. Manned aircraft pose risks to the life and safety

of the crew; that is not a consideration with the Subject UAS. Risks to third parties are

also minimized given the lightweight and slow speed at which the Subject U AS would

operate. Nor are there risks of fuel spillage or fire in the event of an accident. Thus Mr.

Scheid requests that the FAA waive the requirement that the Subject UAS, particularly

the aircraft portion, require an airworthiness certificate.5 14 CFR Part 36. FAR Part 36, Subparts A, F, and O, establish certain noise standards for

certification of various aircraft types. Because the Subject UAS would not have an

airworthiness certificate, and given its small size and negligible noise impact, the

petitioner requests an exemption from FAR Part 36.

14 CFR § 45.23. FAR Part 45.23 establishes marking requirements for aircraft; paragraph

(b) mandates that the registration number be displayed in letters not less than two

inches in height. The Subject UAS is small enough that it cannot accommodate the type

‐

size requirement. Accordingly, Mr. Scheid requests an exemption from this part.

14 CFR Part 61. FAR Part 61 sets forth the certification requirements for pilots. Subpart

E establishes the privileges and limitations for holders of a private pilot certificate. The

petitioner requests an exemption that would allow him to operate the Subject UAS for

compensation or hire as part of his Architectural business for the reasons articulated in

In re Trudeau, FAA Exemption No. 11138, and In re Astraeus, FAA Exemption No. 11062.

Mr. Scheid will operate the Subject UAS over property where the owner or owner's

representative has requested that the operation occur. Furthermore, possession of a

pilot certificate does not ensure remote control piloting skills. He thus request

exemption from this section.

14 CFR § 91.7. Under FAR 91.7, no person may operate an aircraft unless it is in an

airworthy condition. To the extent that "airworthy" is defined as requiring an

airworthiness certificate, the petitioner would request an exemption from this FAR for

the same reasons identified in his request for an exemption of 14 CFR Part 21, Subpart

H. He will not, however, operate the Subject UAS if it is not in a condition for safe flight,

as required under FAR 91.7(b).

14 CFR § 91.9. Petitioner requests exemption from the requirement of FAR 91.9, which

requires that all aircraft have certain markings, placards and on

‐ board flight manuals for

the same reasons as stated in his request for exemption under 14 CFR Part 21, Subpart

H, and for a deviation from the marking requirements of 14 CFR Part 36, Subparts A, F,

and 0. Additionally, relevant materials will be kept in a location accessible to the PIC in

compliance with the regulations.

14 CFR § 91.103. FAR 91.103 mandates certain pre

‐ flight action. Petitioner will take all

necessary pre

‐ flight action, but requests an exemption from this requirement insofar as

it is interpreted as requiring pre

‐ flight actions appropriate to manned aircraft only.

14 CFR § 91.105. FAR 91.105 mandates that crewmembers be at designated stations,

have safety belts fastened, etc. Petitioner would be at a designated ground station for

each mission, but requests an exemption to accommodate the fact that the Subject UAS

is unmanned.6 14 CFR § 91.109. This FAR requires that all flight instruction be conducted in aircraft that

have dual controls, or throw

‐ over controls, with an instructor. From time to time the

petitioner will conduct his own refresher training, but requests an exemption insofar as

this FAR would be interpreted to require that the ground control station have a second

controller or dual control capability.

14 CFR § 91.119. FAR 91.119 sets forth the minimum safe altitudes over various areas.

Petitioner requests an exemption from this FAR in order to accomplish the intended

function of the mission for which he seeks an exemption.

14 CFR § 91.121. FAR 91.121 mandates various altimeter settings in order to maintain

level flight. Petitioner requests and exemption from this FAR as the Subject UA V will not

have an altimeter that matches the requirements of this FAR. Operations with the

Subject UAV will, however, maintain altitude below the 400' AGL ceiling by the

petitioner monitoring the altitude of the UAS and through the Subject UAS's ability to

establish a flight zone that cannot exceed the ceiling.

14 CFR § 91.151. Petitioner requests an exemption from the VFR

‐ flight fuel carrying

requirements because the Subject UAS will operate on battery power. Operations with

the Subject UAS will, however, maintain a five

‐ minute reserve battery time.

19 CFR § 91.173. Petitioner requests an exemption from the IFR

‐ clearance requirement

for flights into controlled airspace. It is possible Mr. Scheid may operate the Subject UAS

in conditions that are IFR within controlled airspace. He would request that, after

contacting ATC for the controlled airspace, he would be allowed to operate in what

might be IFR conditions, but where he still has complete and unfettered line of sight

visibility with the Subject UAS.

14 CFR § 91.203. FAR 91.203 requires that a civil aircraft have an airworthiness

certificate and a registration certificate. Mr. Scheid requests that he be exempt from

complying with this FAR insofar as it mandates issuance of an airworthiness certificate,

for the reasons stated in his request for an exemption under 14 CFR Part 21, Subpart H.

14 CFR § 91.207. FAR 91.207 prohibits operation of a US

‐ registered aircraft unless it is

equipped with an emergency locator transmitter. Given the limited distance of flights of

the Subject UAS, Mr. Scheid requests an exemption from this FAR.

14 CFR Part 91, Subpart E. FAR 91, Subpart E requires that owners or operators of

aircraft have the aircraft inspected at certain intervals, and by certain mechanics.

Petitioner requests an exemption from this Subpart because the Subject UAS has a

trouble

‐ shooting and maintenance program that is best executed by the

owner/operator, and is simply different from the maintenance of manned aircraft.

Petitioner will, however, maintain a maintenance log and any maintenance records of

repair of the Subject UAS.7 Public Interest and Benefit Considerations.

UAV’s are oftentimes seen as superior to helicopters due to the lesser cost of equipment, the

reduction of personnel needed to operate equipment, reduced noise levels and zero emissions

into the environment. In addition to providing cost savings and having little to no impact on the

environment.

The use of UAV’s for inspection of buildings and related facilities is safer than attempting to

utilize ground based manned equipment, and often times is not possible due to terrain or other

access limitations.

These factors are beneficial for, and in the best interest of, the public.

Conclusion:

As pointed out in this application, the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ V3.0 Quadcopter which is

currently planned for use, under authorization by the FAA, is a small, light

‐ weight device

operated within the line of sight of the Pilot

‐ in

‐ Command (PIC), less than 400 feet above the

ground and outside 5 miles from any airport, airfield other location with aviation activities,

unless the air traffic control authorities (ATC) have been notified and have authorized each

flight within a radius of this distance.

Douglas M Scheid is certain that the studies conducted until now by the FAA, about Section

332, Public Law 112

‐ 95, 2014, have already provided you with the assurances on the

airworthiness of UAV,s.

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

Douglas M Scheid should be permitted to conduct UAV operations in accordance with Section

333 and all other operating parameters deemed necessary and appropriate by the FAA.

Respectfully Submitted:

Douglas M Scheid, RA