1

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

the Federal Aviation Regulations 

Dear Sir or Madam: 

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

Act”) and 14 C.F.R. Part 11, William J. Henderson, an operator of the YUNEEC Q500 

(“Q500”) Unmanned Aircraft System (“UAS”) seeks exemption from the Federal Aviation 

Regulations (“FARs”) as described below. 

The exemption request will permit William J. Henderson to operate UASs commercially for 

the purpose of filming and photographing property, people, and events. William J. 

Henderson will provide a service that is beneficial to an industry that is already using, and 

seeking to use, UASs for these purposes with a legal and safe option while providing 

relevant experience and information to the FAA and the UAS community. This will benefit 

the public with the controlled operation of UASs by William J. Henderson and increased 

integration into the National Airspace System (“NAS”). 

All operations by William J. Henderson will strictly adhere to safety, applicable FARs, 

Operator’s Handbook, applicable Airworthiness Directives, and all other guidelines from the 

FAA. William J. Henderson will, at all times, conduct operations in a manner as to maintain 

the same level of safety as current manned aircraft operations.

William J. Henderson will operate exclusively in controlled conditions, within visual line of 

sight (“VLOS”), at low altitudes of 400 feet above ground level (“AGL”), or no higher than 

200 feet above the highest obstacle (“AHO”) with prior Flight Safety District Office (“FSDO”) 

approval. Any UAS in operation by William J. Henderson will not exceed 55 lbs. weight. 

At all times William J. Henderson will, maintain safe operations, ensure current

requirements are met, and consistently assure an open line of communication with the FAA. 

William J. Henderson will maintain the highest of standards in all UASs operations. A 

thorough understanding of the importance of safety guidelines in the NAS, and a desire to 

promote the appropriate integration of UASs for the furtherance of aviation as a whole is the 

foundation upon which this William J. Henderson will operate. 
2

The name and address of the applicant are: 

William J. Henderson

Ph: 919.434.5844

Email: wjh@htc-odessa.com 

Address: 416 Cottonseed Way

 Durham, NC 27703

The regulations from which the exemption is requested are as follows: 

14 C.F.R. Part 21; 

14 C.F.R. 91.7(a) ;

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

14 C.F.R. 91.109(a) ;

14 C.F.R. 91.119; 

14 C.F.R. 91.105 

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

14 C.F.R. 91.203(a) & (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. 91.417(a). 

Appendix A discusses each rule listed above and explains why exemptions pursuant to the 

proposal set forth in this letter are appropriate, provide an equivalent level of safety, and are 

in the public interest. 

The Applicable Legal Standard Under Section 333 

William J. Henderson submits that grant of this exemption application advances the 

Congressional mandate in Section 333 of the Reform Act to accelerate the introduction of 

UASs into the NAS if it can be accomplished safely. This law directs the Secretary of 

Transportation to consider whether certain UASs may operate safely in the NAS before 

completion of the rulemaking required under Section 332 of the Reform Act. In making this 

determination, the Secretary is required to determine which types of UASs do not create a 

hazard to users of the NAS, the public, or pose a threat to national security in light of the 

following: 

● The UAS’s size, weight, speed, and operational capability; 
3

● Operation of the UAS in close proximity to airports and populated areas; And

● Operation of the UAS within visual line of sight of the operator. 

Reform Act § 333(a) (1). If the Secretary determines that such vehicles “may operate safely 

in the national airspace system, the Secretary shall establish requirements for the safe 

operation of such aircraft in the national airspace system.” Id. §333(c) (emphasis added).1

The Federal Aviation Act expressly grants the FAA the authority to issue exemptions. This 

statutory authority, by its terms, includes exempting civil aircraft, as the term is defined 

under §40101 of the Act, from the requirement that all civil aircraft must have current 

airworthiness certificate and those regulations requiring commercial pilots to operate aircraft 

in commercial service: 

The Administrator may grant an exemption from a requirement of a 

regulation prescribed under subsection (a) or (b) of this section or any of 

sections 44702-44716 of this title if the Administrator finds the exemption is 

in the public interest. 

The grant of the requested exemption is in the public interest based on the clear direction in 

Section 333 of the Reform Act; The additional authority in the Federal Aviation Act, as 

amended; The strong equivalent level of safety surrounding the proposed operations; And

the significant public benefit, including enhanced safety and cost savings associated with 

use of UASs for aerial videography/photography, the reduction or elimination of unregulated 

operators, and the safe integration of UASs. Accordingly, the applicant respectfully 

requests that the FAA grant the requested exemption without delay. 

Airworthiness 

Grant of the exemption to William J. Henderson will be subject to the following mandatory 

airworthiness conditions: 

● The UAS will never exceed a gross takeoff weight (GTOW) of 55 lbs., or in excess of 

the Operator Handbook/Manufacturer recommendations, whichever is more 

restrictive. 

● The Manufacturer checklist and William J. Henderson preflight checklist will be 

followed prior to each flight. 

 

1

Applicant submits that this provision places a duty on the Administrator to not only process applicants for 

exemptions under Section 333, but for the Administrator, if he deems the conditions proposed herein 

require modification in order to allow approval, to supply conditions for the safe operation of the UAS. 

Stunning Heights respectfully requests the opportunity to consult with FAA staff in order to address any 

issues or concerns that this proposal may raise that they believe may require modification. 
4

● The aircraft registration number will be displayed on the aircraft in accordance with 

current regulations. 

● The POH, registration, copy of exemption, checklist, and copy of maintenance 

records will be mandatory documents for operation and must be located with or in 

the base station and accessible to the PIC at all times. 

● Any FAA or manufacturer required placards are placed and clearly visible on the 

base station or controlling device. 

● All equipment installed on the UAS will be operational for flight. 

● PIC will be the determining authority on the airworthiness of the UAS prior, during, 

and after each flight, and will cease operations upon deeming the UAS not airworthy 

until proper maintenance or action has been taken. 

● In adherence to 14 C.F.R. §43.9 each person who maintains, performs preventative

maintenance, rebuilds, or alters the UAS, airframe, motor, propeller, appliance, or 

component part will make an entry in the maintenance record of that equipment 

containing the following information: 

○ Description of work performed. 

○ Date of completion of work performed. 

○ Name of the person performing the work. 

○ Signature of the person performing the work. 

● In addition to the information above, the following will be included on any 

maintenance records for record keeping and reporting to the FAA upon request: 

○ Aircraft total time. 

○ Time in service of part by method of Time since New (TSN) or Time since

Overhaul (TSO). 

○ Manufacturer, model, serial and/or part number when available. 

● Any maintenance action that may affect flight characteristics or airworthiness will 

have a maintenance operational check and test flight performed by the PIC

Mandatory Operating Conditions 

Grant of the exemption to William J. Henderson will be subject to the following mandatory 

operating conditions: 

● Operations occurring within Class B airspace require coordination and 

approval from the FAA Flight Standards District Office having jurisdiction, and 

upon request with Air Traffic Control one hour prior to operations commencing 

(14 CFR §91.215(d)(3)). Communication commencing operations, during 

operations, and termination of operations by use and constant monitoring of 

appropriate tower frequency by ground radio. 
5

● Operations within Class B 30NM Mode C Veil require at minimum 48 hour 

prior notification of the FAA Flight Standards District Office having jurisdiction. 

Notification and communication with Air Traffic Control upon commencing 

operations, during operations, and termination of operations by use and 

constant monitoring of appropriate tower frequency by ground radio (14 CFR 

§91.215(3)). 

● Operations within Class C, or D airspace require notification at minimum 24 

hour prior notification of the FAA Flight Standards District Office having 

jurisdiction, and upon request with Air Traffic Control one hour prior to 

operations commencing (14 CFR §91.215(d) (3)). Communication 

commencing operations, during operations, and termination of operations by 

use and constant monitoring of appropriate tower frequency by ground radio. 

● Operations within 2.5 NM radius of airport runway centerline within class E, or 

G airspace require at a minimum 24 hour prior notification of the FAA Flight 

Standards District Office having jurisdiction, at a minimum 24 hour prior 

notification of the Airport Manager or Controlling Agency, notification and 

communication with any control tower, or on CTAF frequency, upon 

commencing operations, during operations, and termination of operations by 

use and constant monitoring of appropriate frequency by ground radio. 

● Operations within class E or G airspace not within 2.5 NM of airport runway 

centerline requires constant monitoring of applicable CTAF or 123.025 

(helicopter air to air) and reporting upon commencing operations, during 

operations, and termination of operations by ground radio. 

● No operations are to be conducted within 2.5 NM in-line with runway 

centerline azimuth and on the approach end of a runway that is actively in 

use. 

● All operations are required to remain at, or below, 400 feet AGL unless prior 

approval is received from the FAA Flight Standards District Office having 

jurisdiction, and no flight exceeding 400 feet AGL may go above 200 feet 

above the highest obstacle, or outside visible range, or beyond the capability 

of the UAS (whichever is lower in altitude). 

● Operations are to be conducted over private or controlled-access property. 

● Permission from land owner/controller required before commencing any flight. 

● Operations to occur under Visual Flight Rules during Visual Meteorological 

Conditions (VMC). 

● Aircraft to remain within Visual Line of Sight (VLOS). 

● Operations to be conducted in a controlled environment with only the 

necessary persons present, any person present, not employed by William J. 

Henderson, will sign a waiver acknowledging UAS operations, proper safety 

procedures, and a statement acknowledging risks. 

● Operations will be conducted with a visual observer (VO), in addition to the 

UAS pilot, who will remain in VLOS with the UAS pilot, the UAS, and the area 

of operations at all times. VO will assist in maintaining a controlled 
6

environment, spotting hazards to persons or property, monitoring and 

communicating on appropriate ATC, CTAF, or other appropriate radio 

frequencies. 

● UAS will not be operated below 25% battery capacity, or a battery power 

reserve of less than 10% flight time, whichever is the greater of the two. 

Operator Requirements 

William J. Henderson understands and upholds the stance that necessary precautions are 

required to protect aircraft already operating in the NAS, and the safety and security of the 

flight crew members, passengers as well as the public and property. For this reason 

William J. Henderson will require all pilots of the UAS to be a trained in the operation of the 

UASs.

The PIC and the Visual Observer will, at all times, be aware that UASs currently cannot 

adhere to the standard “see and avoid” requirements due to the size of the UAS impacting 

the distance at which it can be identified by pilots of manned aircraft. William J. Henderson

maintains a zero tolerance policy for any pilot that fails to give complete right of way, and 

wide berth to any aircraft that comes within 1 statute mile horizontally or 2000 feet vertically 

of operations. 

The PIC will adhere to appropriate FARs as well as follow the included UAS user Manual. 

The PIC will, while the exemption is in place, log all flights conducted, or any flight to meet 

the requirements. 

The visual observer will be trained according to the Operating Manual. The 

VO will be required to exhibit proficiency in operating the UAS. The VO will not, at any time 

during operations conducted under this exemption, operate or control any portion of the 

flight of the UAS unless they meet the PIC requirements of this exemption. 

Privacy 

All flights will occur over private or controlled access property with the property owner’s or 

controlling authority’s prior consent and knowledge. Filming will be of people who have also 

consented to being filmed or otherwise have agreed to be in the area where filming will take 

place. 

* * * 

In summary, applicant seeks an exemption from the FARs set forth above and in Appendix 

A to allow commercial operations of UASs conducting aerial flights as described. 
7

Approval of the exemption allowing commercial operations of William J. Henderson UASs 

will increase safety by permitting an operator to conduct a service safely that is already 

occurring without FAA knowledge, exemption, or adhering to prescribed safety guidelines. 

The exemption will also encourage the education of UAS operators and the adoption of FAA 

guidelines and approval for commercial UAS operations. It benefits the public through a 

higher level of safety of UAS operations and a service that benefits the local public and 

business. It also benefits the public through a smooth and well approached integration of 

UASs into the NAS, and continual communication with the FAA and the information gained. 

The UASs operated by William J. Henderson satisfies the criteria set forth in Section 333 of 

the Reform Act–size, weight, speed, operating capabilities, operation within visual line of 

sight, and national security–and showing an equivalent level of safety to manned aircraft 

flights and safety focused standards of operation, providing more than adequate justification 

for the grant of the requested exemptions allowing commercial operations. 

Respectfully,

William J. Henderson

APPENDIX A

EXEMPTION REQUEST AND EQUIVALENT LEVEL OF SAFETY SHOWINGS UNDER 

APPLICABLE RULES SUBJECT TO EXEMPTION 

Due to the flight characteristics, such as the ability to hover, vertical takeoff and landing, and 

the type of operations performed by the UASs operated by William J. Henderson, William J. 

Henderson respectfully request that where a regulation differentiates according to class that 

it be permitted to operate under those regulations pertaining to helicopters. 

William J. Henderson requests an exemption from the following regulations as well as any 

additional regulations that may technically apply to the operation of its UASs: 

14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H: Airworthiness Certificates 14 CFR § 91.203(a) (1) 

Section 91.203(a) (1) requires all civil aircraft to have a certificate of airworthiness. Part 21, 

Subpart H, entitled Airworthiness Certificates, establishes the procedural requirements for the 
8

issuance of airworthiness certificates as required by FAR § 91.203(a)(1). Given the size of 

the aircraft and the limited operating area associated with its utilization, it is unnecessary to 

go through the certificate of airworthiness process under Part 21 Subpart H to achieve or 

exceed current safety levels. 

Such an exemption meets the requirements of an equivalent level of safety under Part 11 and 

Section 333 of the Reform Act. The Federal Aviation Act and Section 333 of the Reform Act 

both authorize the FAA to exempt aircraft from the requirement for an airworthiness certificate, 

upon consideration of the size, weight, speed, operational capability, and proximity to airports 

and populated areas of the UAS involved. 

In this case, an analysis of these criteria demonstrates that the William J. Henderson UASs 

operated without an airworthiness certificate, under the conditions proposed herein, will be at 

least as safe, or safer, than a conventional aircraft (fixed wing or rotorcraft) with an airworthiness 

certificate. The UASs will remain less than 55 lbs. GTOW. Will not carry a pilot or passenger, 

will not carry flammable fuel, and will operate exclusively within an area pre-disclosed and in 

compliance with conditions set forth herein. Operations under this exemption will be tightly

controlled and monitored by both the operator, pursuant to the conditions set forth above, and by 

local public safety requirements. The FAA will have advance notice of all operations through the 

filings with the FSDO. Receipt of the prior permission of the land owner, or controlling 

authority, the size of the aircraft, the lack of flammable fuel, and the fact that the aircraft is 

carried to the location and not flown there all establish the equivalent level of safety. The UASs 

construction with absorbent material provides at least an equivalent level of safety to that of such 

operations being conducted with conventional aircraft that would be orders-of-magnitude larger 

and would be carrying passengers, cargo, and flammable fuel. 

14 C.F.R. § 91.7(a): Civil aircraft airworthiness. 

This regulation requires that no person may operate a civil aircraft unless it is in airworthy

condition. Should the exemption be granted allowing commercial operation of the UASs without 

an airworthiness certificate, no standard will exist for airworthiness of the UASs. Given the size 

of the aircraft and the requirements that have presumably already been met in the approved 

standard operating procedures (for instance, the Maintenance & Inspection Manual and Safety 

Checklist), an equivalent level of safety will be achieved by ensuring compliance with the 

operating manuals prior to each flight. 

14 C.F.R. § 91.9(b) (2): Civil Aircraft Flight Manual in the Aircraft. 

The regulation provides: 
9

No person may operate a U.S.-registered civil aircraft ... 

(2) For which an Airplane or Rotorcraft Flight Manual is not required by §21.5 of 

this chapter, unless there is available in the aircraft a current approved airplane or 

Rotorcraft Flight Manual, approved manual material, markings, and placards, or 

any combination thereof. 

The equivalent level of safety will be achieved by keeping the flight manual at the ground control 

point where the pilot flying the UAS will have immediate access to it. The FAA has issued to 

others the following exemptions to this regulation: Exemption Nos. 8607, 8737, 8738, 9299, 

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

14 C.F.R. § 91.109(2) 

This regulation provides that flight crewmembers must keep a safety belt fastened while at a 

crewmember station. William J. Henderson UASs are by definition not manned and therefore 

maintain an equivalent level of safety without the use of safety belt since no danger is posed due 

to no persons being aboard the aircraft. 

14 C.F.R. § 91.121(a) 

This regulation requires that aircraft be operated at altitude in reference to an altimeter set to 

applicable barometric pressure. According to the Flight Manuals and information included with 

this exemption request the UASs operated by William J. Henderson uses GPS positioning, and 

the Q500 uses, in addition, a specialized sensor that limits the aircraft altitude to a predetermined 

height set by the PIC during preflight inspections. This, in addition to all flights being conducted 

by VLOS, assures altitude restrictions will be maintained by the PIC. Given the nature of the 

flight being limited to an upper altitude limit, the limited area of operations, the See and Avoid 

procedures set forth by William J. Henderson, and in light of the UASs not being operated at 

VFR or IFR cruising altitudes an equivalent level of safety will be achieved. 

14 C.F.R. § 91.109(a) & 91.319(a) (1): Flight Instruction 

These regulations provide that no person may operate a civil aircraft (except a manned free 

balloon) that is being used for flight instruction unless that aircraft has fully functioning dual 

controls. UASs are a remotely piloted aircraft and by design, do not have fully functional dual 

controls. Flight control is accomplished through the use of a control box that communicates with 

the aircraft via radio communications. If instruction is accomplished through a training program, 

as set forth in an equivalent level of safety will be assured. The FAA has approved exemptions 

for flight training without fully functional dual controls for a number of aircraft and for flight 

instruction in experimental aircraft. See Exemption Nos. 5778K & 9862A. The equivalent level 

of safety will be achieved by William J. Henderson. 
10

14 CFR § 91.119: Minimum Safe Altitudes 

Section 91.119 establishes safe altitudes for operation of civil aircraft. Due to the flight 

characteristics of William J. Henderson UASs (vertical takeoff and landing, and ability to hover) 

as well as the nature of the type of flights conducted by UASs and the similarity to helicopters 

William J. Henderson requests to operate in accordance with section 91.119(d). The equivalent 

level of safety will be achieved given the size, weight, speed, and material with which the UASs 

are built. Furthermore; No flight will be taken without the permission of the land owner or those 

who control the land. Because of the advance notice to the landowner, all affected individuals 

will be notified of the flights. Compared to aerial photography or videography operations 

conducted with aircraft or rotorcraft weighing far more than the UAS and carrying flammable 

fuel, any risk associated with these operations will be far less than those currently allowed with 

conventional aircraft operating at or below 500 feet AGL. Indeed, the low-altitude operations of 

the UAS will maintain separation between these small-UAS operations and the operations of 

conventional aircraft that must comply with Section 91.119, give right of way to all manned 

aircraft.

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

This regulation prohibits an individual from beginning “a flight in a rotorcraft 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 20 minutes.” 

Given the limitations on its proposed operations and the location of those proposed operations, 

a longer time frame for flight in daylight VFR conditions is reasonable. William J. Henderson

believes that an exemption from 14 CFR § 91.151(b) is safe and within the scope of a prior

exemption. See Exemption 10673 (allowing Lockheed Martin Corporation to operate without

compliance with 91.151(a)). Operating the small UAS, without 20 minutes of reserve fuel

does not engender the type of risks that Section 91.151(b) was meant to prevent given the size

and speed at which the UAS operates. The fact that it carries no pilot, passenger, or cargo also

enhances its safety. Additionally, limiting flights to a 20 minute reserve would greatly reduce 

their utility. In the unlikely event that the UAS should run out of fuel, it would simply land. 

Given its weight and construction material, the risks are less than contemplated by the current 

regulation. 

William J. Henderson believes that an equivalent level of safety can be achieved by maintaining 

25% battery power, or 10% of time (whichever is longer) would be more than adequate to return 

the UAS to its planned landing zone from anywhere in its operating area. 

14 C.F.R. § 91.203 (a) & (b): Carrying Civil Aircraft Certification and Registration 
11

This regulation provides as follows: 

(a) . . . No person may operate a civil aircraft unless it has . . . an appropriate 

and current airworthiness certificate. 

(b) No person may operate a civil aircraft unless the airworthiness certificate 

required by paragraph (a) of this section or a special flight authorization issued 

under §91.715 is displayed at the cabin or cockpit entrance so that it is legible to 

passengers or crew. 

William J. Henderson UASs have no cockpit or cabin to place or carry certification. As such, the 

exemption and any other certifying document from the FAA will be maintained with the ground 

station, and placed in a manner as to be clearly visible to any government official or person 

authorized in the controlled operations environment. 

An equivalent level of safety will be achieved by keeping these documents at the ground control 

point where the pilot flying the UAS will have immediate access to them. The FAA has issued 

numerous exemptions to this regulation. A representative sample of other exceptions includes 

Exemption Nos. 9565, 9665, 9789, 9789A, 9797, 9797A, 9816A, and 10700. 

14 C.F.R. § 91.405(a) ; 407(a) (1) ; 409(a) (2) ; 417(a): Maintenance Inspections 

Section 91.405(a) requires 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 prescribed in part 43 of this chapter 

. . . .” Section 91.407 similarly makes reference to requirements in Part 43; Section 

91.409(a) (2) requires an annual inspection for the issuance of an airworthiness certificate. 

 

Section 91.417(a) requires the owner or operator to keep records showing certain maintenance 

work that has been accomplished by certificated mechanics, under Part 43, or licensed pilots and

records of approval of the aircraft for return to service. 

Maintenance on William J. Henderson aircraft will be accomplished by the owner/operator 

pursuant to the manuals, provided by William J. Henderson, and the manufacturer. An equivalent 

level of safety will be achieved because the UAS is small in size, will operate only in restricted 

predetermined areas and is not a complex mechanical device. As provided in the attached 

Maintenance Manual and the Safety Checklist, which were reviewed as part of the application, 

the operator of the UAS will ensure that it is in working order prior to initiating flight, perform 

required maintenance, and keep a log of any maintenance that is performed. Moreover, William 

J. Henderson PIC is familiar with the aircraft, has extensive experience with UAS maintenance, 

and has hundreds of hours of UAS airframe and power plant maintenance, and is best suited to 

maintain the aircraft in an airworthy condition and to ensure an equivalent level of safety. 
12

The Maintenance Manual provides for a 30 day/100 hour and Annual inspection of the airframe 

and components similar in scope to inspections on manned aircraft. This will ensure an 

equivalent level of safety to the maintenance requirements in Part 91. 

In addition, between such inspections, should a mechanical issue arise, the aircraft will 

either return to its launch site or immediately land. 

APPENDIX B 

SUMMARY OF WILLIAM J. HENDERSON SECTION 333 EXEMPTION REQUEST 

William J. Henderson hereby provides pursuant to Part 11 a summary of its exemption 

application to allow commercial operation of its UASs in aerial photography/videography. An 

exemption is requested from the following regulations: 

14 C.F.R. Part 21; 

14 C.F.R. 91.7(a) ;

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

14 C.F.R. 91.109(a) ;

14 C.F.R. 91.119; 

14 C.F.R. 91.105 

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

14 C.F.R. 91.203(a) & (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. 91.417(a).