Jeremy L. Lewis, Bridgeport, OH

--- Section 333 E xemption Petition

November 11, 2015

U. S. Department of Transportation Docket Management System

1200 New Jersey Ave, SE Washington, DC 20590

Re: Exemption Request Section 333 of the F AA Refor m Act of the Federal Aviation

Regulations fro m 14 C.F.R. 45.23(b); 14 C.F.R. Part 21; 14 C.F.R. 61.113(a)&(b);

91.7(a ); 91.9(b ) (2); 91.103(b ); 91.109; 119.121; 91.151(a ); 91.203(a)&(b );

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

Dear Sir or Madam,

I

, Jeremy L. Lewis, a m writing pursuant to the F AA Modernization and Refor m

Act of 2012 and the procedures contained within 14 C.F.R. 11, to request that I,

Jeremy L. Lewis, an owner and operator of small unmanned aircraft, be

exempted fro m the Federal Aviation Regulations (“FARs”) listed below so that I,

Jeremy L. Lewis, may operate my small ultra light weight unmanned aircraft

syste m (“UAS”) commercially in airspace regulated by the Federal Aviation

Administration (“FAA”).

As described herein I, Jeremy L. Lewis, am ex perienced in flying hob b y helicopters for

recreational purposes and have been doing so for several years

. I have added a hobby grade

quad

--- copter/UAS to my inventory, a DJI Phanto m 3, equipped w it h a n

integrat ed a erial video system with intent for aerial

videography/cinematography/photography for commercial purposes mostly in the Ohio,

WV, Pennsylvania area.

I have flown small RC electric airplanes and helicopters for several years without

incident. Committed to safety with each flight, my, Jeremy L. Lewis 's, ex emption

request would permit operation of ultra light weight, unmanned (piloted by remote

control) and comparatively inexpensive UAS(s) in tightly controlled and limited

airspace. Predetermined in areas away fro m general public, airports, heliports and

vehicul ar traffic f or aerial videography/cinematography for commercial purposes

. C urr ently, 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, Jeremy L. Lewis, will continue to strictly comply with safety and

maintenance procedures included in all applicable UAS manufacturer’s instructions

and operating manuals 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 video and photography usage as I, Jeremy L. Lewis

, record flight data and other information gained through permitted flight operations

to share with the F AA through any required F AA reports to assist with future pr otocol

and s af ety regulation.Granting my, Jeremy L. Lewis’s, request comports with the Secretary of

Transportation’s (F AA 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 Refor m Act specific to the use of UAS's for real

estate/Realt or purposes . Further I, Jeremy L. Lewis, will conduct my operations in

compliance with the protocols described herein or as otherwise established by the

FAA.

For the reasons stated below I, Jeremy L. Lewis, re spectfully request the grant of an

exemption allowing me to operate ultra light weight, remote controlled UAS’s for

aerial videography/cinematography/photography for commercial purposes.

I have attached the user manual for the Phantom 3 P rofessional for your review.

I. Contact Informatio n:

Jeremy L. Lewis

71465 Twin Beech Road Bridgeport, OH 43912

jllewis5@comcast.net

II

. The Specific Section s of Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulation s From

Which Jeremy L. Lewis Request s Exemptio n are:

14 CFR 21;

14 C.F.R. 45.23(b);

14 CFR 61.113 (a)&(b); 14 C.F.R. 91, et seq.;

14 CFR 407 (a) (1);

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

III. T he Extent of relief Jeremy L. Lewis seek s and the Reason He Seek s

Such R elief:

I, Jeremy L. Lewis, submit this application in accordance with the Refor m Act,

112 P.L. 95 §§ 331

--- 334, seeking relief fro m any currently applicable FARs operating

to prevent me, Jeremy L. Lewis, contemplated commercial cinematic and o ther flight

operations within the national airspace system. The Refor m Act in Section 332

provides for such integration of civil unmanned aircraft systems into our national

airspace syste m as it is in the public’s interest to do so. My, Jeremy L. Lewis’s

, ultr a

l ight weight UAS meets the definition of “small unmanned aircraft” as defined in

Section 331 and therefore the integration of my ultra light weight UAS is

expressly contemplated by the Refor m Act. I would like to operate my ultra light

weight UAS prior to the time period by which the Refor m Act requires the F AA to

promulgate rules governing such craft. Thereby, providing direct experience and

valuable information for formal regulation that can be administered uniformly to allcommercial related UAS aerial video and photography. The Refor m Act guides the

Secretary in determining the types of UAS's 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 reflects in favor of an exemption for me, Jeremy L.

Lewis. 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 five (5) pounds (far below the maximu m 55 pound limit);

including camera with gimbal.

I, Jeremy L. Lewis, 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

24 knot (15 mph) wind. For safety, stability and fear of financial loss I will not fly

in winds exceeding 16 kph (10 mph). Built in safety systems include a GPS mode

that allows my UAS to hover in place when radio controls are released. When

pilot communication is lost the UAS is designed to slowly descend to the point of

take off. I do not operate my UAS near airports, Hospitals nor Police heliports, and

do not operat e near a rea s where general pub l ic is w it hin fift y to one hundred

(50

--- 10 0) yards depending on location, conditions and weather. I a m constantly on

alert for any manned aircraft (Police/Medical helicopters, etc.) and am 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 of me, as the remote control pilot. Utilizing

battery power rather than combustible fuel s, flight s generally last less than 15

minutes

, with an altitude under four hundred (400) feet. I, Jeremy L. Lewis,

utilize a fresh fully charged battery with each flight as a safety precaution; full

flight time limit for each battery i s fifteen (15) to twenty

--- five (25) minutes as

tested. I do not operate my UAS at or below manufacture recommend minimu m

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 on

hand with each exercise to insure replacement for sufficient safe level of

operation. I do not believe in taking a risk that may cause a crash that could

create a hazard to the public/property/manned aircraft, and have no desire to

lose an 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. I have done all of this for the

sake of safety.I, Jeremy L. Lewis, a m extremely cautious when operating of my UAS/ultra light

weight unmanned aircraft and will not “create a hazard to users of the national

airspace syste m or the public.” 112 P.L. 95 § 333 (b). Given the small size and weight

of my UAS it falls well within Congress’s contemplate d safet y zone when it

promulgated the Refor m Act and the corresponding directive to integrate UAS's into

the national airspace system. Jeremy L. Lewis’s UAS, used in hobby flight, has a

demonstrable safety record and does not pose any threat to the general public or

national security.

IV

. How Jeremy L. Lewis’ s Request Will Benefit the Public A s A Whole:

Aerial videography and ph otograph y for geographic al awareness for commercial

marketing has been around for a long time through manned fixed wi ng 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 ex pense.

Depriv ing non

--- luxury homeowners and lower budget Realtors fro m a valuable

marketing tool. Manned aircraft pose a threat to the public through potential

catastrophic crash that the community has experienced in the past. Each resulting in

loss o f li fe

. Each wi th c ombustible fuel that exploded and burned on impact. Police

helicopters have made emergency hard landings within city limits. My, Jeremy L.

Lewis's, UAS pose no such threat since size and lack of combustible fuel alleviates

any po tenti al threat to th e public.

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

commercially flown UASs into the national airspace system, hence the passing of

the Refor m Act. Granting my, Jeremy L. Lewis’s, exemption request furthers the

public interest through academic/visual awareness of the geographical benefits in

and around the tri-state area. My ultra light weight UAS is battery powered and

creates no emissions that can har m the environment. The consequence of my ultr a

light weight UAS crashing is far less than a full size helicopter or fixed wing aircraft;

which are heavy, contain combustible fuel and can cause catastrophic devastat ion t o

t he publ ic.

The public’s interest is furthered by minimizing ecological and crash threat by

permitting aerial video/photo capture through my battery operated ultra light

weight UAS's. Permitting me, Jeremy L. Lewis, to immediately fly within national air

space furthers economic growth. Granting my exemption request substantially

furt hers the economic impact for the Ohio, West Virginia, and Pennsylvania area.

V. Reason s Why Jeremy L. Lewis’ s Exemption Will Not Adversely Affect

Safety Or How The Exemption Will Provide a Level of Safety At Least Equal To

Existin g Rule:My

, Jeremy L. Lewis’s, exemption will not adversely affect safet y. Quit e t he

contrary, for the reasons stated permitting me, Jeremy L. Lewis, to log more flight

time in F AA 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 s af

ety protocols for commercial operators that can be embraced by

the NAR6, AAR7, and TAR8 for development in cooperation with the FAA. In

additio n I, Jeremy L. Lewis, submit the following representations of enhancements

t o current a erial videography and photography for commercial purposes :

My UAS weighs less than 5 pounds complete with an integrated video system:

• I only operate my UAS below 400 feet ( within the 400 foot permissible

ceiling set by the F AA Modernization and Refor m Act of 2012)

• My UAS wi ll onl y opera t e for up to 15 minutes per flight

• I land my UAS prior to manufacturer recommended minimu m level of battery

power

• I pilot my UAS through remot e control only by line of sight

• My UAS has GPS a flight safety feature whereby it hovers and then slowly

lands if communication with the remote control pilot is lost

• I actively analyze flight data and other sources of information to constantly

update and e nhance s afety pr otocols

• I only operate in reasonably safe environment that are strictly controlled, are away from power lines, elevated lights, airports and ac tively po pulated ar eas

• I conduct extensive pr e

--- flight inspect ions a nd protocol

, du ring which safet y

carries primary importance;

• I always obtain all necessary permissions prior to op eration

• I have procedures in place to abort flights in the event o f safety breaches or

potential d anger

.

My

, Jeremy L. Lewis’s , s af ety protocols provide a level of safety equal to or exceeding

existing rules. It is important to note t hat absent of the integration of commercial UAS

into our national airspace system, helicopters are the primary means of aerial video

and photography for commercial 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

light weight UAS.

First, the potential loss of life is diminished because UAS's carry no people on board

and I only operates my UAS in specific areas away fro m 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 fro m and av oid hazards quick l y and sa fel y. Lastly, 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 th e technology and use of

post editing software allowing pan and zoom. Accordingly, my UAS has been

experimentally operated for familiarization/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, Jeremy L.

Lewis’s, UAS permits exemption fro m Part 21 because my UAS meets (and exceeds)

an equivalent level of safety pursuant to Section 333 of the Refor m Act. The F AA is

authorized to exempt aircraft fro m the airworthiness certificate requirement under

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

legislation permit the F AA to exempt UAS's fro m the airworthiness certificate

requirement in consideration of the weight, size, speed, maneuverability and

proximity to areas such as airports and dense populations. My, Jeremy L. Lewis’s,

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

14 C.F.R. 91.7(a ) prohibit s t he operat ion of a n aircraft without an a irwort hiness

certificate. As no such certificate will be applicable in the for m 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 F AA

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 insofar 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 maintainin g any such r equir ed

certifications and registrations by me, Jeremy L. Lewis

. 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. Regardless, I will mark its

UASs in the largest possible lettering by placing the word “EXPERIMENTAL” on its

fuselage as required by 14 C.F.R. §45.29 (f) so that I the pilot, or anyone assisting meas a spotter with the UAV will see the markings. The F AA ha s previously issued

exemptions to this regulation through Exemptions Nos. 8738, 10167, 10167 A 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 non --- commercial operations.

I, Jeremy L. Lewis , can achieve an equivalent level of safety as achieved by current

Regulations because my UAS does not carry any pilots or passengers. Further, while

helpful, a pilot license will not ensure remote control piloting skills. 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, Jeremy L.

Lewis, to operate my UAS and meet and exceed current safety levels in relation to 14

C.F.R. §61.113 (a) & (b).

D. 14 C.F.R. 91.119: Minimu m Safe Altitudes.

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

allows h elicopters to be o perated at lo wer alti tudes i n certain co nditions. My UAS

wi ll never o perate at an alti tude gr eater than 400 AGL; safely at or below the

standard of 400 AGL. I, Jeremy L. Lewis, will however operate my UAS in safe areas

away fro m public and traffic, providing a level of safety at least equivalent to or

belo w those in relation to minimu m 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. 9 1.405 (a); 4 07 (a) (1 ); 4 09 (a) (2 ); 4 17 (a) & (b): Maintenance

Inspecti ons. The a bove

--- cited Regulations require, amongst other things, aircraf t

o wners and operat ors to “ ha ve [the] a ircraft inspected as prescribed in subpart E of

t his part and s h all be twee n r equired i nspections , e xce pt as pr ovided i n paragraph

( c) o f th is sect ion, ha ve discrepa ncies repaired a s prescrib ed in part 43 of thi s

chapt er.

. . .” These Regulations onl y a ppl y to a ircraft w it h an a irwort hiness

cert ificat e. They w ill not, therefore, apply to my, Jeremy L. Lewis's, UAS. However, as

a safety precaution I inspect my UAS before and after each flight. A Summary The F AA

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 necessar y airworthiness

certificates in relation to FAR § 91.203(a)(1). The size, weight and enclosed

operational area of my UAS permits exemption fro m Part 21 because my, Jeremy L.

Lewis’s, UAS meets an equivalent level of safety pursuant to Section 333 of the

Refor m Act. The F AA is authorized to exempt aircraft fro m the airworthiness

certificate requirement under both the Act (49 U.S.C. § 44701 (f)) and Section 333 of

the Refor m Act. Both pieces of legislation permit the F AA to exempt UAS's fro m the

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

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

UAS meets or exceeds each of the elements. 14 C.F.R. 91.7(a) prohibits the

operation of an aircraft without an air worthiness certificate. As no such certificate

will be applicable in the for m 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 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

manual. The F AA has previously issued exemptions to this regulation in ExemptionNos. 8607, 8737, 8738, 9299, 9299A, 9565, 9565B, 10 167, maintenance progra m

that involves regular software updates and curative m easures for any damaged

hardware. Therefore, an equivalent level of safety will be achieved

.

In summary, Jeremy L. Lewis seek s an exemption from the followin g

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) a nd (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,

Jeremy L. Lewis's, small unmanned vehicle/lightweight unmanned aircraft vehicle

in community awareness and real estate operations, and to develop economic

platforms for real estate to enhance the experience of those seeking to relocate to

the Ohio/West Virginia/Pennsylvania area. 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,

Jeremy L. Lewis’s, request for exemption will reduce current risk levels and

thereby enhance safety. My UAS craft do not contain potentially explosive fuel, is

smaller, lighter and more maneuverable than conventional real estate video and

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

altitudes and in controlled airspace eliminating potential public r is k f lying to and fro m

established air fields. I, Jeremy L. Lewis, have been informally analyzing flight

information and will compile safety protocols and the implementation of a flight

operations manual for real estate usage that exceeds currentl y accept ed means and

methods for safe flight. Formal collection of information shared with the F AA will

enhance the FAA's internal efforts to establish protocols for complying with the F AA

Modernization and Refor m Act of 2012. There are no personnel o n board my,

Jeremy L. Lewis’s, UAS and therefore the likelihood of death or serious bodily

injury is significantly diminished. My, Jeremy L. Lewis’s , operation of my UAS,

weighing less than 5 pounds and travelling at lower speeds within limited area s

will p rovide an equivalent level of safet y a s that a chieved un der current FARs.

Accordingly I, Jeremy L. Lewis, respectfully request that the F AA grant my

exemption request and a m willing to cooperate in sharing information to

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

Respectfully submitted,

Jeremy L. Lewis

71465 Twin Beech Road

Bridgeport, OH 43912

Jllewis5@comcast.net