Exemption No. 13465A

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

WASHINGTON, DC 20591

In the matter of the petition of

KANSAS STATE UNIVERSITY

for an exemption from part 21 and

§§ 61.113(a) and (b), 61.3(d)(2)(iii), 91.7(a), 

91.9(b)(2), 91.109, 91.119, 91.121, 91.151(a), 

91.203(a) and (b), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 

91.409(a)(2), and 91.417(a) and (b) of 

Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations

Regulatory Docket No. FAA−2014−1088

GRANT OF AMENDMENT

The FAA is amending the October 30, 2015 grant of exemption to Kansas State University to 

clarify the aircraft and Conditions and Limitations. Specifically, in this exemption, the FAA 

has:

 Clarified safe operations of the gas-powered UAV Factory Penguin B UAS

 Clarified that the Pilot-In-Command (PIC), manipulator of the controls, and the Visual 

Observer (VO) must maintain visual line of sight with the unmanned aircraft (UA).

 Clarified operations near people

 Clarified condition and limitation #1

 Clarified condition and limitation #25

By letter dated December 18, 2014,

1 Mr. Mark Blanks, Kansas State University (hereinafter 

petitioner or operator), 2310 Centennial Road, Salina, Kansas 67401, petitioned the Federal 

Aviation Administration (FAA) for an exemption from part 21, and §§ 61.3(d)(2)(iii), 

 

1 The petitioner responded to the FAA’s request for information on June 1, 2015.
2

61.113(a) and (b), 91.7(a), 91.9(b)(2), 91.109, 91.119, 91.121, 91.151(a), 91.203(a) and (b), 

91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(2), and 91.417(a) and (b) of Title 14 Code of Federal 

Regulations (14 CFR). The petitioner requested to operate several unmanned aircraft systems

(UAS) to conduct flight instruction of UAS.

The petitioner supports its request with the following information:

The petition for exemption describing the proposed operation and the regulations from which

the petitioner seeks exemption is posted to the docket. To view the petition, visit 

http://www.regulations.gov, enter the regulatory docket number found on the first page of this 

document into the search box and click “Search,” then click on the “Open Docket Folder” link

next to a result associated with the docket number.

KSU currently operates a pilot school certificated under 14 C.F.R. part 141 that is accredited 

by the Aviation Accreditation Board International. KSU seeks to leverage its experience 

training students in manned-aircraft aviation in order to train students to operate small UAS. 

KSU also has extensive prior experience operating and maintaining UAS to conduct flights 

within the NAS.

 

The petitioner has provided the following information along with its petition to support its 

request for an exemption:

1) Crow Flight Operations and Maintenance Manual

2) Penguin B Flight Operations and Maintenance Manual

The petition and the documents above are hereinafter referred to as the operating documents.

Discussion of Public Comments:

A summary of the petition was published in the Federal Register on January 8, 2015 (80 FR 

1068). The Air Line Pilots Association, International (ALPA) and the National Agricultural 

Aviation Association (NAAA) filed comments opposing the petition.

ALPA expressed concern regarding several aspects of the petition. ALPA noted that while the 

anticipated operation will occur below 400 feet above ground level (AGL) and in 

predetermined and sterile areas, the petition does not define “predetermined” nor does it offer 

a means to control the airspace or areas of operation. Specifically, ALPA stated, “there must 

be means both to ensure that the sUAS remains within the defined airspace and to ensure that 
3

the hazard of other aircraft intruding on the operation is mitigated. Without clear and specific 

information detailing the flight operations, airspace, environment and location, and 

mitigations strategies along with the KSU SOP, the petition does not quantify how the 

equivalent level of safety is being measured and maintained in the NAS.” 

The FAA believes the requirements to operate within visual line of sight (VLOS) and fly no 

higher than 400 feet AGL which allow the operator to see both the aircraft and its operating 

environment are sufficient mitigations to this risk so that the operations will not adversely 

affect the safety of the airspace in which the operations occur.

ALPA noted that the petitioner does not clearly state how the pilot and the observer will be 

able to communicate with each other. ALPA stated that when voice communication is used, 

both the pilot and observer should be able to maintain visual observation of both the aircraft 

and the area of operation in accordance with FAA Notice 8900.227. NAAA stated UAS 

observers must be present and able to communicate with the operator from the most minimal 

distance possible. The conditions and limitations below require that the PIC, the person 

manipulating the flight controls, and VO to maintain VLOS capability and communicate 

verbally during flight operations and address the concerns regarding PIC and VO 

communication.

ALPA asserted the unmanned aircraft’s (UA) lithium polymer batteries have numerous 

associated fire and explosion hazards as outlined in DOT/FAA/AR-09/55, “Flammability 

Assessment of Lithium-Ion and Lithium-Ion Polymer Battery Cell Designed for Aircraft 

Power Usage (January 2010),” and that the safe carriage of the batteries and the mitigations in 

place for known risks should be addressed. The FAA notes that the referenced study was 

primarily conducted to determine how certain battery cells react in a fire situation aboard 

manned airplanes. Given the size of the battery and the operating conditions of the UAS, the 

FAA concludes that the use of a lithium polymer battery will not pose an undue safety risk for 

the proposed operations.

ALPA commented that the petitioner’s system does not have a barometric altimeter as

required by 14 CFR § 91.121. ALPA stated that processes or mitigations must be in place to 

ensure the UA can accurately maintain altitude including engineering processes, software 

development and control, electronic hardware development and control, configuration 

management, and design assurance to ensure the aircraft and its control system(s) operate to 

the same level of safety as other aircraft operated commercially in the National Airspace 

System (NAS). The FAA has inserted conditions and limitations in this exemption to mitigate 

the risk associated with the absence of a traditional barometric altimeter, including the 
4

condition that the PIC and VO must maintain VLOS capability during all flight operations 

and the limitation of a maximum operating altitude of 400 feet AGL.

ALPA commented that command and control (C2) link failures are one of the most common 

failures on a UAS, and that lost link mitigations should require safe modes to prevent flyaways or other scenarios. The FAA has inserted conditions and limitations in this exemption 

requiring operators to reestablish link, immediately recover or land the UA, or terminate the 

flight to mitigate the risk associated with such failures.

ALPA also noted that the petitioner’s proposed commercial operations are for “compensation 

or hire,” and therefore contends the pilot must hold at least a current FAA commercial pilot 

certificate with an appropriate category and class rating for the type of aircraft being flown, as 

well as specific and adequate training on the UAS make and model intended to be used. 

Similarly, ALPA asserted a current second-class airman medical certificate should be 

required. NAAA also commented on pilot qualification, stating—

Just as manned aircraft pilots are required to undergo a rigorous training curriculum 

and show that they are fit to operate a commercial aircraft, so too must UAS operators. 

Holding a commercial certificate holds UAS operators to similar high standards as 

commercial aircraft operators and ensures they are aware of their responsibilities as 

commercial operators within the NAS. Medical requirements ensure they have the 

necessary visual and mental acuity to operate a commercial aircraft repeatedly over a 

sustained period of time.

The FAA has reviewed the knowledge and training requirements of sport, recreational, private 

and commercial certificates and concluded that a UAS PIC holding a minimum of a sport pilot 

certificate, and operating under this exemption, would not adversely affect operations in the 

NAS or present a hazard to persons or property on the ground. Additional discussion of the 

FAA’s review is found in the FAA’s analysis section of this exemption.

ALPA noted the petitioner must specify a means to meet see and avoid requirements in 

§ 91.113 given the absence of an onboard pilot. The FAA notes that all flights must be 

operated within VLOS of the PIC, the person manipulating the flight controls of the small 

UAS, and VO.

ALPA also expressed concern that the petition makes no reference to compliance with, or a 

request for waiver from, 14 CFR 61.195, Flight instructor limitations and qualifications, 

which defines the requirements for flight instructors. The FAA notes that a certificated flight 

instructor is authorized to provide the instruction required for the certificates or ratings or 
5

currency listed in 14 CFR § 61.193. A person instructing on how to operate the UAS under 

the petitioner’s training program would not need to be a certificated flight instructor because 

the instruction is not being provided for a certificate or rating listed in § 61.193. The FAA has 

determined that none of the UAS operations proposed by the petitioner require such flight 

instruction because § 61.31(l) allows for operation of the UAS by an airman who is current 

per 14 CFR § 61.56 without a category and class rating. However, instruction provided 

toward obtaining the pilot certificate required by this exemption would need to be provided by 

a certificated flight instructor.

ALPA opposed the petitioner’s request to avoid providing aircraft documentation (such as 

used for aircraft maintenance tracking, AD issuance, related performance information) of its 

small UAS. The FAA has granted relief from 14 CFR 91.417 (a) and (b) to the extent 

necessary, requiring that the PIC determine that the UAS is in a condition for safe flight prior 

to every operation. 

ALPA opposed the petitioner’s request for an exemption from the aircraft maintenance and 

record keeping requirements. ALPA asserted that the petitioner’s small UAS “should comply 

to the same level of safety as other aircraft operated commercially in the NAS.” The FAA 

finds that adherence to the petitioner’s operating documents, as required by the conditions and 

limitations below, is sufficient to ensure that safety is not adversely affected.

ALPA also expressed concern that the petitioner’s request is not for a single specific operation 

or location, but for all operations of the same general type. ALPA stated that this results in a 

considerable increase in the FAA’s oversight tasks. The FAA notes ALPA’s concern and in 

order to minimize potential impact to the NAS, the FAA requires that UAS operated under 

this exemption comply with a Certificate of Waiver or Authorization (COA) issued by the Air 

Traffic Organization. The COA covers specific air traffic requirements. The FAA recognizes 

that UAS integration will generate new NAS access demand and will review and adjust 

accordingly.

NAAA noted that its members operate in low-level airspace, and therefore clear low-level 

airspace is vital to the safety of these operators. NAAA stated that seeing and avoiding other 

aircraft and hazardous obstructions is the backbone for agricultural safety, and that 

agricultural pilots depend on pilots of other aircraft to perform their see-and-avoid functions 

to prevent collisions. NAAA believes UAS operations at low altitudes will increase the 

potential for collision with agricultural aircraft. 

The FAA recognizes these concerns and has incorporated associated conditions and 

limitations into this exemption, including: (a) operator must operate under a COA issued by 
6

ATO, which covers specific air traffic requirements for all operations; (b) operations 

conducted within VLOS of the pilot in command (PIC), the person manipulating the flight 

controls of the small UAS, and the VO; and (c) the small unmanned aircraft must always yield 

right-of-way to manned aircraft.

NAAA stated that FAA airworthiness certification should be a requirement for all unmanned 

aircraft to operate within the NAS. NAAA recommended UAS be equipped with ADS-B or 

similar identification and positioning systems, strobe lights, high-visibility markings and 

registration numbers. NAAA also recommended UAS be operated strictly within the line-ofsight of the ground controller, with the assistance of a VO and clear of any low-flying manned 

aircraft. 

As discussed in greater detail below, Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act 

of 2012 authorizes the Secretary of Transportation to determine, considering a number of 

factors laid out in the statute, that an airworthiness certificate is not necessary for certain 

operations. The Secretary has made that determination in this case and therefore the aircraft 

operated by the petitioner will not need to be certificated by the FAA.

The FAA’s analysis is as follows:

The FAA has organized its analysis into five sections: (1) Unmanned Aircraft Systems 

(UAS), (2) the UAS pilot in command (PIC), (3) Training Operations, (4) the UAS operating 

parameters, and (5) the public interest.

Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS)

The petitioner requested relief from 14 CFR part 21, Certification procedures for products 

and parts. In accordance with the statutory criteria provided in Section 333 of PL 112-95 in 

reference to 49 USC 44704, and in consideration of the size, weight, speed, and limited 

operating area associated with the aircraft and their operation, the Secretary of Transportation 

has determined that these aircraft meet the conditions of Section 333 and that an airworthiness 

certificate is not required. Therefore, the FAA finds that the requested relief from 14 CFR part 

21 and any associated noise certification and testing requirements of part 36 is not necessary.

The petitioner requested operating with both gas and electrically powered UA. The petitioner 

requested to operate the gas powered UAV Factory Penguin B at an altitude of 1,200 feet 

AGL and indicated that operating this aircraft poses lower risk at higher altitudes. Because 

the petitioner has not defined that risk, the FAA is not prepared to act on the request to 

operate the gas-powered UAV Factory Penguin B UAS above 400 feet AGL. It is the 
7

operator’s responsibility to determine that the UAV Factory Penguin B can be safely operated

below 400 feet AGL under the conditions and limitations of this exemption. In accordance 

with the conditions and limitations, the petitioner must not operate so close to persons or 

property as to create an undue hazard. The petitioner may submit additional data for future 

FAA review and consideration to allow the petitioner to operate the UAV Factory Penguin B 

UAS above 400 feet AGL.

The petitioner requested relief from the following sections 14 CFR §§ 91.405(a) Maintenance 

required, 91.407(a)(1) Operation after maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, or 

alteration, 91.409(a)(2) Inspections, and 91.417(a) and (b) Maintenance records. The FAA 

has determined that relief from § 91.409(a)(1) is also necessary, because it is an alternate 

inspection requirement of 91.409(a)(2). Prior UAS specific relief has been granted in Grant 

of Exemption No. 11213 to Aeryon Labs, Inc. Therefore the FAA finds that exemption from 

14 CFR §§ 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) and (2), and 91.417(a) and (b) is warranted 

subject to the conditions and limitations below.

UAS Pilot in Command (PIC)

The petitioner stated that all its UAS pilots will possess a private pilot certificate and second 

class medical certificate. The petitioner also stated that students and non-current UAS 

operators may participate in UAS operations under the supervision of an appropriately 

qualified UAS flight instructor, as discussed in the UAS Operating Parameters section below. 

In this exemption the FAA is exempting KSU pilots from the prohibition on receiving

compensation for providing UAS flight training to non-certificated student pilots. As in 

previously issued exemptions, KSU pilots will be required to hold an FAA pilot certificate. 

We note that during these operations, the PIC is responsible for the safety of flight regardless 

of whether the PIC or the student is manipulating the aircraft controls.

KSU has stated that all of its pilots will hold at least a private pilot certificate with a second 

class airman medical certificate. In Exemption No. 11213, the FAA compared the 

aeronautical knowledge requirements of the commercial and private pilot certificates to the 

recreational and sport pilot certificates to determine how they differed and what would be 

required for a UAS pilot. The FAA determined that the UAS PIC must hold either an airline 

transport, commercial, private, recreational, or sport pilot certificate along with a current FAA 

airman medical certificate or a valid U.S. driver’s license. Therefore, as in Exemption No. 
8

11213, KSU instructors that will serve as PICs under operations conducted under this 

exemption may hold any of those pilot certificates.2

14 CFR §1.1 defines a PIC as the person who has final authority and responsibility for the 

operation and safety of the flight, has been designated as pilot in command before or during 

the flight, and holds the appropriate category, class, and type rating, if appropriate for the 

conduct of the flight. Accordingly, based on KSU’s request, the FAA grants relief from §§ 

61.101(e)(4) and (5), and 61.113(a), to allow a PIC holding a private pilot certificate to 

operate a UAS for compensation and hire, subject to the conditions and limitations below.3 

The petitioner also requested relief from § 61.113(b); however relief is not necessary since 

relief is already granted to § 61.113(a). The FAA is also granting relief from § 61.315(a) as 

previously determined in Exemption No. 11213, to permit the holder of a sport pilot 

certificate to act as the PIC of UAS operated under this exemption. 

Additionally, the PIC must hold either a medical certificate issued under 14 CFR part 67 or a 

U.S. issued driver’s license as previously determined in Exemption No. 11213. The PIC must 

also comply with 14 CFR § 61.53, Prohibition on operations during medical deficiency. See

Exemption 11213 (Aeryon Labs) for relief granted from Medical certificates: Requirement 

and duration § 61.23(a) and § 61.23(c).

 

The FAA also considered medical certificate requirements for a visual observer. As in 

Exemption No. 11213, the FAA determined that this is not necessary subject to the conditions 

and limitations below. In particular, the UA must never be operated beyond the actual visual 

capabilities of the VO, and the VO, any student manipulating the controls, and the PIC must 

have the ability to maintain VLOS with the UA at all times. It is the responsibility of the PIC 

to be aware of the VO’s visual limitations and limit operations of the UA to distances within 

the visual capabilities of both the PIC and VO.

The petitioner also requested relief from 14 CFR § 61.3(d)(2)(iii), Requirements for 

certificates, ratings, and authorizations. Given that the training the petitioner intends to 

provide is not for an FAA airman certificate and the log books recording training given are 

not part of an FAA certificate program, the FAA finds that relief from 14 CFR

§ 61.3(d)(2)(iii) is not necessary.

Training Operations

 

2 Note that, as discussed under Training Operations, below, a KSU instructor will be required to serve as PIC 

during student training flights even when students are manipulating the aircraft’s controls.

3

Similar relief from § 61.315(c)(2) and (3) is not necessary because these limitations on sport pilot certificate 

privileges only apply to light-sport aircraft (LSA). The UAS being operated under this exemption are not LSA.
9

The petitioner proposes to conduct flight operations to provide UAS training or instruction to 

non-certificated persons for compensation or hire. The proposal included training scenarios

with a trainer holding a private pilot certificate and second class airman medical certificate 

serving as the PIC. The FAA is granting the exemption to permit KSU instructors to receive 

compensation for providing flight instruction to students.

These operations will be consistent with the FAA’s approach for student pilots of manned 

aircraft. Student pilots may manipulate the controls of an aircraft in most part 91 operations 

unless specifically restricted. Students do not need to obtain a medical certification or pass a 

knowledge test prior to flights where a qualified instructor serves as the PIC. See 14 CFR § 

61.87. When a student, or other non-qualified person, is manipulating the controls of an 

aircraft, the PIC retains responsibility for the safety of the flight. Student flight operations 

under this exemption must always be conducted under the supervision of a PIC and the PIC 

must always have the ability to immediately take direct control of the aircraft.

The instructor is designated the PIC for the entire duration of the operation. Students are not 

required to hold any certification to manipulate the controls of an unmanned aircraft under

this exemption. However, the PIC must have sufficient override capability to immediately 

take direct control of the aircraft and safely abort the operation if necessary. 

The FAA considered whether to require the instructor/trainer to hold an-FAA issued flight 

instructor certificate. However, the agency previously determined that risk posed by UAS 

operations under FAA exemptions is mitigated in part by demonstration of aeronautical 

knowledge through a pilot certificate and UAS specific training rather than flight hours in a 

manned aircraft. See Exemption Nos. 11062, 11213. Moreover, a certificated flight instructor 

would not have a basis for evaluating a student’s proficiency as the FAA has not established 

UAS flight training standards. Accordingly, the FAA has determined that a PIC qualified 

under this exemption has the requisite knowledge to ensure that instructional operations are 

conducted safely.

When conducting training, the PIC is responsible for conducting safe operations and for 

meeting all applicable conditions and limitations as prescribed in this exemption and ATOissued COA, and operating in accordance with the operating documents. All training 

operations must be conducted during dedicated training sessions and trainers may receive 

compensation under this exemption. The petitioner may not conduct operations during

training sessions for any purpose other than training. In accordance with the conditions and 

limitations, the training operation must be conducted with a dedicated VO. The visual 

observer’s responsibility is to maintain constant visual contact with the unmanned aircraft to 

be able to advise the PIC if other aircraft or unexpected people or objects have entered the 
10

operational area. Given the nature of this task, the VO must be dedicated only to visual 

observer responsibilities. Students receiving instruction or observing an operation may not 

serve as visual observers. A student who is focused on learning the UAS operation would not 

be able to focus on VO duties as well because that would increase the risk of the operation. 

Regarding the petitioner’s requested relief from 14 CFR § 91.109 Flight instruction; 

Simulated instrument flight and certain flight tests, the petitioner describes training scenarios 

in which a dual set of controls will be utilized. The petitioner proposed using two types of 

dual controls: either (1) a “buddy box” system using two transmitters, with one being operated 

by the PIC and the other operated by the student; or (2) a ground control system (GCS) 

operated by the student and the PIC having a secondary transmitter with full override

capability. The FAA finds that the PIC must have sufficient override capability to

immediately take direct control of the aircraft and safely abort the operation if necessary such 

as through proposed mitigations above. The capability to safely abort the operation provides 

that safety will not be adversely affected even if the UAS does not have a dual set of controls. 

Therefore, the FAA is granting relief from 14 CFR § 91.109(a) subject to the applicable 

conditions and limitations stated below. 

UAS Operating Parameters

The petitioner has requested relief from 14 CFR § 91.7(a), Civil aircraft airworthiness. While 

the petitioner’s UAS will not require an airworthiness certificate, the FAA has determined 

that for the purposes of this exemption the pilot may determine the aircraft is in an airworthy 

condition prior to flight. The FAA’s regulations state that the PIC of a civil aircraft is 

responsible for determining whether the aircraft is in a condition for safe flight. Therefore, 

relief from § 91.7(a) is granted.

The petitioner requested relief from 14 CFR § 91.9(b)(2) Civil aircraft flight manual, 

marking, and placard requirements and § 91.203(a) and (b) Civil aircraft: Certifications 

required. The FAA has previously determined that relief from these sections is not necessary. 

See Exemption No. 11213. Relevant materials may be kept in a location accessible to the PIC 

in compliance with the regulations.

The petitioner has requested relief from 14 CFR § 91.119, Minimum safe altitudes. In 

previous exemptions, the FAA classified UAS operations as closed-set motion picture and 

television filming operations or aerial data collection. See Exemption No. 11213. Due to the 

close proximity to persons, only closed-set filming operations were required to have a Motion 

Picture and Television Operations Manual (MPTOM) in accordance with their exemption. 

Aerial data collection and any operation not classified as closed-set filming were not required 
11

to have an MPTOM or similar manual because their operations were not conducted within 

close proximity to people unless adequate barriers were provided.

Operations Near People

For the reasons discussed below, the FAA finds that KSU may allow a small unmanned 

aircraft to fly closer than 500 feet to a student who is part of a flight training class. KSU may 

also allow the small unmanned aircraft to fly directly over the student manipulating the flight 

controls of the small UAS and people who are directly participating in the flight operation, 

such as the PIC and the visual observer.

KSU is a certificated part141 pilot school. Part 141 pilot schools are closely overseen by the 

FAA and must satisfy a number of regulatory requirements. Those requirements include 

establishing a high pass rate for their students who take aviation knowledge and practical tests 

and maintaining a minimum graduation rate. 

In its petition for exemption, KSU described the following safety mitigations it will exercise 

during small UAS operations. The small unmanned aircraft will not exceed a speed of 50 

knots. The person operating as a flight instructor and PIC will possess at least a private pilot 

certificate with a Class 2 airman medical certificate. The PIC and the student will use a 

“buddy box” system that utilizes two transmitters. The transmitter of the student (trainer 

transmitter or buddy box) will be connected by a trainer cable to another transmitter (master 

transmitter) controlled by the PIC instructor. The PIC instructor will be able to control the 

UAS with his or her transmitter then flip a switch to turn control over to the student and flip 

the switch again to reclaim control at any time. In this way, the PIC instructor will be able to 

easily demonstrate how to fly the UAS or rescue the UAS if the student makes a poor 

aeronautical decision without passing the same transmitter back and forth (which could result 

in delays and crashes.) Further, all operations will take place in a sterile environment 

maintained according to the standard KSU operating procedure. Some operations will be 

conducted within a gated and sterile environment operated by the Kansas Department of 

Emergency Management.

Based on KSU’s experience and qualifications as a part 141 pilot school, the qualifications of 

people acting as the PIC, and the parameters under which the flight operations will be 

conducted, the FAA finds that a small unmanned aircraft that flies closer than 500 feet to a 

student who is manipulating the flight controls of the small UAS for purposes of flight 

training will not adversely affect safety. The FAA also finds a small unmanned aircraft flying 

over that student will not adversely affect safety. Additionally, the FAA finds a small 
12

unmanned aircraft flying closer than 500 feet to and/or over people who are directly 

participating in the flight operation, such as the PIC and the visual observer will not adversely 

affect safety. Finally, the FAA finds that KSU operating a small unmanned aircraft closer 

than 500 feet but not directly over a student who is part of the training class but is not 

manipulating the flight controls of the small UAS will not adversely affect safety.

With the exception of the people directly participating in the flight operation of a small UAS 

or students who are part of the flight training class, a UA may only be operated within 500 

feet of a person when barriers or structures are present that sufficiently protect that person 

from the UA and/or debris or hazardous materials such as fuel or chemicals in the event of an 

accident. Under these conditions, the operator must ensure that nonparticipating persons 

remain under such protection for the duration of the operation. If a situation arises where 

nonparticipating persons leave such protection and are within 500 feet of the UA, flight 

operations must cease immediately in a manner that does not cause undue hazard to persons. 

Additionally, operations for training, proficiency, or experience building for PICs to qualify to 

operate under this exemption may not be conducted within 500 feet of nonparticipating 

persons to ensure the safety of others.

A small UA may be flown over or near people subject to the conditions and limitations below.

All people associated with the operations must be briefed by the PIC on the potential risk of 

the proposed flight operation(s) and acknowledge and consent to those risks. The FAA 

routinely uses briefings as a means to notify passengers and others of safety information and 

to risks of certain operations. See, e.g., 14 CFR §§ 91.319(d)(1) (advising passengers of 

experimental nature of an aircraft); 136.7 (air tour briefings). The requirement to obtain 

consent provides an additional margin of safety by building upon the briefing requirement to 

ensure that participants have acknowledged that a UA will be operated within 500 feet. The 

consent requirement is consistent with exemptions authorizing UAS closed-set filmmaking. 

See Exemption No. 11062. 

In Exemption No. 11062 (Astraeus Aerial), the FAA granted exemption to the part 91 

minimum safe altitude rules consistent with the relief typically provided to manned operations 

in FAA Order 8900.1 V3, C8, S1, Issue a Certificate of Waiver for Motion Picture and 

Television Filming. The order allows UA to be operated within 500 feet of participating 

persons, vehicles, and structures directly involved in the performance of the actual filming. 

That exemption required the operator to have an approved Motion Picture and Television 

Operations Manual (MPTOM). Based on existing motion picture filming practice, Exemption 
13

No. 11062 established the requirement that UAS operations must comply with the petitioner’s

MPTOM when conducting closed-set filming operations. 

Additionally, the FAA recognizes that there are additional risks when operating a UA close to 

people, whether for the purpose of closed-set filming or otherwise. As such the FAA has 

determined that when conducting these types of operations, the operator must have an 

operations manual addressing the items as specified in the conditions and limitations below. 

Unmanned aircraft operations conducted in close proximity to people (less than 500 feet) 

invoke added safety risks. Regardless of the operation type (closed set film-making or other 

operation types), the operations manual requirement helps ensure that safety will not be 

adversely affected because the operator must document and address operational safety 

practices relevant to its operation. An operations manual must include items such as; the 

operator’s contact information, distribution and revision information, persons authorized, plan 

of activities, permission to operate, security methodology, briefing instructions, essential 

flight personnel minimum requirements, communications information, and accident 

notification plan. Documented operational safety practices and procedures help ensure a safe 

and repeatable process for conducting flight operations. Formal procedures ensure adequate 

safety guidelines are available and adhered to in normal operational environments, but also 

during emergency circumstances. The operations manual is considered part of the operating 

documents and must be accessible to the PIC during operations. This operations manual is 

based on the requirement in previous exemptions for a MPTOM for closed-set filming. 

Operators conducting these operations must also submit a written Plan of Activities to the 

local Flight Standards District Office at least 24 hours prior to initiating operations as 

described in the conditions and limitations below. The written plan of activities includes 

pertinent items provided to Flight Standards District Offices. The written plan of activities is 

necessary for Aviation Safety Inspectors to conduct surveillance of activities and ensure 

compliance with the provisions of the authorization and waiver, associated special provisions, 

operations manual, and the plan of activities in accordance with FSIMS 8900.1 to ensure the 

safety of the NAS.

Operations Near Vessels, Vehicles, and Structures

Operations near vessels, vehicles, and structures are those operations in which a UA is 

operated within 500 feet of such objects. To conduct such operations, the PIC must: (1) have 

permission from a person with legal authority over any vessels, vehicles or structures located 

within 500 feet of the UA’s operating area; and (2) make a safety assessment of the risk of 

operating closer to those objects and determine that no undue hazard would result from the 

operation. 
14

In consideration of the above, the FAA finds that:

a. Relief from § 91.119(a), which requires operating at an altitude that allows a safe 

emergency landing if a power unit fails, is not granted. The FAA expects the 

petitioner to be able to perform an emergency landing without undue hazard to persons 

or property on the surface if a power unit fails.

b. Relief from § 91.119(b), operation over congested areas, is not granted, because this 

exemption prohibits operations over congested or densely populated areas.

c. Relief from § 91.119(c) is necessary because the aircraft will be operated at altitudes 

below 500 feet AGL. Section 91.119(c) states that no person may operate an aircraft 

below the following altitudes: over other than congested areas, an altitude of 500 feet 

above the surface, except over open water or sparsely populated areas. The FAA finds 

operations conducted in compliance with the conditions and limitations in this 

exemption warrant relief from § 91.119(c).

d. Relief from § 91.119(d) is not necessary. Although this section allows operations 

below the minimums set forth in the other paragraphs of 91.119 for helicopters, the 

conditions and limitations below control operations under this exemption.

Per 14 CFR § 91.119, manned aircraft are commonly flown at altitudes of 500 feet above the 

surface in areas over other than congested areas. The petitioner has proposed operating its 

gas-powered aircraft at altitudes up to 1,200 feet above ground level (AGL). The petitioner 

states that operating gas-powered aircraft at higher altitudes reduces the risks associated with 

internal combustion engine powered aircraft. In all previous grants of exemption under 

Section 333, the FAA has limited operating altitudes to less than 400 feet AGL. The FAA 

finds that UAS operations at altitudes above 400 feet AGL introduce greater risks to manned 

aviation because of see-and-avoid difficulties when manned and unmanned aircraft operate in 

shared airspace. As in prior exemptions, the FAA is limiting operations under this exemption 

to 400 feet AGL as stated in the conditions and limitations below. 

The petitioner requested relief from 14 CFR § 91.121, Altimeter settings. When the UA is 

equipped with a barometric altimeter, relief from § 91.121 is not necessary. When the UA is 

not equipped with a barometric altimeter, an alternate means for measuring and reporting UA 

altitude is necessary, such as global positioning system (GPS). As stated in the conditions and 

limitations below, the FAA requires altitude be reported in feet AGL. The petitioner may 

choose to set the altitude indicator to zero feet AGL rather than local barometric pressure or 

field altitude before flight. Considering the limited altitude of the proposed operations, relief 

from 14 CFR § 91.121 is granted to the extent necessary to comply with the applicable 

conditions and limitations stated below.
15

In previous exemptions, the FAA required that the UA be returned to a pre-determined 

location within the private or controlled area of operation if the UAS loses communication or 

GPS signal. The FAA has re-examined the situation where the GPS signal is lost or the PIC 

loses communications with the UA and determined that these two situations employ unique 

functions and incur different failure modes. Therefore, the FAA has included two separate 

conditions and limitations addressing each situation. In the situation where the UAS uses 

GPS navigation and the GPS signal is necessary to safely operate the UA, the PIC is required 

to immediately recover or land the UA. However, if the UA can be operated safely without a 

GPS signal, the operation may continue. If the PIC loses command or control link with the 

UA, the UA must follow a pre-determined route to either reestablish link or immediately land. 

The modified conditions and limitations preserve the same intent and level of safety, while 

also adding clarity and reducing restrictiveness for the operator.

The petitioner has requested relief from 14 CFR § 91.151(a), Fuel requirements for flight in 

VFR conditions, for the electrically powered UAS only. Prior UAS specific relief has been 

granted in Exemption Nos. 8811, 10808, and 10673 for daytime, Visual Flight Rules (VFR) 

conditions. The conditions and limitations below prohibit the PIC from beginning a UAS 

flight unless (considering wind and forecast weather conditions) there is enough available 

power for UAS to operate for the intended operational time and to operate after that for at 

least five minutes or with the reserve power recommended by the manufacturer if greater. The 

FAA finds that this provides sufficient reason to grant relief from 14 CFR § 91.151(a)(1) to 

the extent necessary and in accordance with the conditions and limitations below for all UAS 

listed in this exemption.

The FAA Air Traffic Organization (ATO) reviews all proposed UAS operations and evaluates 

the safety of these operations relative to the requested airspace through the existing COA 

process. The majority of current UAS operations occurring in the NAS are being coordinated 

through air traffic control (ATC) by the issuance of a COA. This process not only makes 

local ATC facilities aware of UAS operations, but also provides ATC the ability to consider 

airspace issues that are unique to UAS operations.

The FAA has issued a COA to this operator, which is attached to this exemption. The COA 

sets the requirements for alerting other users of the NAS to the UAS activities being 

conducted. The conditions and limitations below prescribe the requirement for the petitioner 

to follow the terms of a COA. If the petitioner intends to conduct operations outside of the 

parameters of what is permitted under the attached COA it may apply to the ATO for a new or 

amended COA.
16

In previous exemptions, the FAA limited UAS operations to outside 5 nautical miles of an 

airport reference point (ARP) as denoted in the current FAA Airport/Facility Directory (AFD) 

or, for airports not denoted with an ARP, the center of the airport symbol as denoted on the 

current FAA-published aeronautical chart unless a letter of agreement (LOA) with that 

airport’s management is obtained or otherwise permitted by a COA issued to the exemption 

holder. In order to maintain operational safety in the vicinity of airports, particularly as it 

affects Class B, C, or D airspace, instead of contacting the airport management, the petitioner 

must apply to the ATO for a new or amended COA. The ATO will coordinate an LOA with 

local air traffic management via the COA process. The FAA finds that this approach 

facilitates consistency between the exemption and the COA.

Public Interest

The FAA finds that a grant of exemption is in the public interest. Professional training 

programs for UAS operators will positively affect unmanned aviation activities by providing 

future UAS operators with a safe environment to gain proficiency and experience. This gives 

the FAA good cause to find that the UAS operation enabled by this exemption is in the public 

interest.

The following table summarizes the FAA’s determinations regarding the relief sought by the 

petitioner:

Relief considered (14 CFR) FAA determination (14 CFR)

21 Relief not necessary

45.23(b) Relief not necessary

61.23(a) and (c) Relief granted with conditions and limitations

61.101(e)(4) and (5) Relief granted with conditions and limitations

61.113(a) Relief granted with conditions and limitations

61.133 Relief not necessary

61.3(d)(2)(iii) Relief not necessary

61.315(a) Relief granted with conditions and limitations

91.7(a) Relief granted with conditions and limitations

91.7(b) Relief not necessary

91.9(b)(2) Relief not necessary
17

Relief considered (14 CFR) FAA determination (14 CFR)

91.9(c) Relief not granted

91.103 Relief not granted

91.109(a) Relief granted with conditions and limitations

91.119(a) Relief not granted

91.119(b) Relief not granted

91.119(c) Relief granted with conditions and limitations

91.119(d) Relief not necessary

91.121 Relief granted with conditions and limitations

91.151(a)(1) Relief granted with conditions and limitations

91.203(a) and (b) Relief not necessary

91.405(a) Relief granted with conditions and limitations

91.407(a)(1) Relief granted with conditions and limitations

91.409(a)(1) and (2) Relief granted with conditions and limitations

91.417(a) and (b) Relief granted with conditions and limitations

The FAA’s Decision

In consideration of the foregoing, I find that a grant of exemption is in the public 

interest. Therefore, pursuant to the authority contained in 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 40113, 

and 44701, delegated to me by the Administrator, Kansas State University is granted an 

exemption from 14 CFR §§ 61.23(a) and (c), 61.101(e)(4) and (5), 61.113(a), 61.315(a), 

91.7(a), 91.109(a), 91.119(c), 91.121, 91.151(a)(1), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) and 

(2), and 91.417(a) and (b), to the extent necessary to allow the petitioner to conduct UAS 

operations according to the conditions and limitations listed below.

Conditions and Limitations

The conditions and limitations within Grant of Exemption No. 13465 have been superseded, 

and are amended as follows. 

In this grant of exemption, Kansas State University is hereafter referred to as the operator.
18

Failure to comply with any of the conditions and limitations of this exemption will be grounds 

for the immediate suspension or rescission of this exemption.

1. Operations authorized by this exemption are limited to the 3D Robotics X8, 3D 

Robotics X8-M, 3D Robotics Aero, and 3D Robotics Aero-M

4 when weighing less 

than 55 pounds including payload and the equipment used to secure the payload. 

Proposed operations of any other aircraft will require a new petition or a petition to 

amend this grant.

2. The UA may not be operated at a speed exceeding 87 knots (100 miles per hour). The 

operator may use either groundspeed or calibrated airspeed to determine compliance 

with the 87 knot speed restriction. In no case will the UA be operated at airspeeds 

greater than the maximum UA operating airspeed recommended by the aircraft 

manufacturer.

3. The UA must be operated at an altitude of no more than 400 feet above ground level 

(AGL). Altitude must be reported in feet AGL. This limitation is in addition to any 

altitude restrictions that may be included in the applicable COA.

4. Air Traffic Organization (ATO) Certificate of Waiver or Authorization (COA). All 

operations must be conducted in accordance with an ATO-issued COA. The 

exemption holder must apply for a new or amended COA if it intends to conduct 

operations that cannot be conducted under the terms of the attached COA.

5. The PIC and any student manipulating the flight controls must have the capability to 

maintain visual line of sight (VLOS) at all times. This requires the PIC and any

student manipulating the flight controls to be able to use human vision unaided by any 

device other than corrective lenses, as specified on that individual’s FAA-issued 

airman medical certificate or valid U.S. driver’s license issued by a state, the District 

of Columbia, Puerto Rico, a territory, a possession, or the Federal Government, to see 

the UA.

6. All operations must utilize a visual observer (VO). The UA must be operated within 

the visual line of sight (VLOS) of the VO at all times. The VO must use human vision 

unaided by any device other than corrective lenses to see the UA. The VO, the person 

 

4 The petitioner also proposed to operate the KSU Crow UAS and the UAV Factory Penguin B UAS. The FAA 

must conduct an assessment on these aircraft, which also includes a finding that the proposed UAS meet the 

conditions in Section 333 of Public Law 112−95. The analysis on the UAV Factory Penguin B UAS remains 

valid, pending FAA approval of the aircraft. When the FAA completes its review, we will proceed accordingly 

and no further action will be required by the petitioner.
19

manipulating the flight controls of the small UAS, and the PIC must be able to 

communicate verbally at all times. Electronic messaging or texting is not permitted 

during flight operations. The PIC must be designated before the flight and cannot 

transfer his or her designation for the duration of the flight. The PIC must ensure that 

the VO can perform the duties required of the VO. Students receiving instruction or 

observing an operation as part of their instruction may not serve as visual observers.

7. This exemption and all documents needed to operate the UAS and conduct its 

operations in accordance with the conditions and limitations stated in this exemption, 

are hereinafter referred to as the operating documents. The operating documents must 

be accessible during UAS operations and made available to the Administrator upon 

request. If a discrepancy exists between the conditions and limitations in this 

exemption, the applicable ATO-issued COA, and the procedures outlined in the 

operating documents, the most restrictive conditions, limitations, or procedures apply 

and must be followed. The operator may update or revise its operating documents as 

necessary. The operator is responsible for tracking revisions and presenting updated 

and revised documents to the Administrator or any law enforcement official upon 

request. The operator must also present updated and revised documents if it petitions 

for extension or amendment to this exemption. If the operator determines that any 

update or revision would affect the basis upon which the FAA granted this exemption, 

then the operator must petition for an amendment to its exemption. The FAA’s UAS 

Integration Office may be contacted if questions arise regarding updates or revisions 

to the operating documents.

8. Any UAS that has undergone maintenance or alterations that affect the UAS operation 

or flight characteristics, e.g. replacement of a flight critical component, must undergo 

a functional test flight prior to conducting further operations under this exemption. 

Functional test flights may only be conducted by a PIC with a VO and essential flight 

personnel only and must remain at least 500 feet from all other people. The functional 

test flight must be conducted in such a manner so as to not pose an undue hazard to 

persons and property.

9. The operator is responsible for maintaining and inspecting the UAS to ensure that it is 

in a condition for safe operation.

10. Prior to each flight, the PIC must conduct a pre-flight inspection and determine the 

UAS is in a condition for safe flight. The pre-flight inspection must account for all 

potential discrepancies, e.g. inoperable components, items, or equipment. If the 
20

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.

11. The operator must follow the UAS manufacturer’s maintenance, overhaul, 

replacement, inspection, and life limit requirements for the aircraft and aircraft 

components. Each UAS operated under this exemption must comply with all 

manufacturer safety bulletins.

12. PIC certification: Under this exemption, a PIC must hold either an airline transport, 

commercial, private, recreational, or sport pilot certificate. The PIC must also hold a 

current FAA airman medical certificate or a valid U.S. driver’s license issued by a 

state, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, a territory, a possession, or the Federal 

government. The PIC must also meet the flight review requirements specified in 14 

CFR § 61.56 in an aircraft in which the PIC is rated on his or her pilot certificate.

13. PIC qualifications: The PIC must demonstrate the ability to safely operate the UAS in 

a manner consistent with how it will be operated under this exemption, including 

evasive and emergency maneuvers and maintaining appropriate distances from 

persons, vessels, vehicles and structures before operating non-training, proficiency, or 

experience-building flights under this exemption. PIC qualification flight hours and 

currency may be logged in a manner consistent with 14 CFR § 61.51(b), however 

UAS pilots must not log this time in the same columns or categories as time accrued 

during manned flight. UAS flight time must not be recorded as part of total time.

 

14. Training: The operator may conduct training operations when the trainer/instructor is 

qualified as a PIC under this exemption and designated as PIC for the entire duration 

of the flight operation. Students/trainees are considered direct participants in the flight 

operation when manipulating the flight controls of a small UAS and are not required 

to hold any airman certificate. The student/trainees may be the manipulators of the 

controls; however, the PIC must directly supervise their conduct and the PIC must also 

have sufficient override capability to immediately take direct control of the small UAS 

and safely abort the operation if necessary, including taking any action necessary to 

ensure safety of other aircraft as well as persons and property on the ground in the 

event of unsafe maneuvers and/or emergencies for example landing in an empty area 

away from people and property. 

Under all training situations, the PIC is responsible for the safety of the operation. 

The PIC is also responsible for meeting all applicable conditions and limitations as 
21

prescribed in this exemption and ATO-issued COA, and operating in accordance with 

the operating documents. All training operations must be conducted during dedicated 

training sessions and may or may not be for compensation or hire. The operation must 

be conducted with a VO who is not a student and not the PIC. The VO must maintain 

visual sight of the aircraft at all times during flight operations without distraction in 

accordance with the conditions and limitations below. Furthermore, the PIC must 

operate the UA not closer than 500 feet to any nonparticipating person without 

exception.

15. UAS operations may not be conducted during night, as defined in 14 CFR § 1.1. All 

operations must be conducted under visual meteorological conditions (VMC). Flights 

under special visual flight rules (SVFR) are not authorized.

16. The UA may not be operated 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.

17. For UAS operations where GPS signal is necessary to safely operate the UA, the PIC 

must immediately recover/land the UA upon loss of GPS signal.

18. If the PIC loses command or control link with the UA, the UA must follow a predetermined route to either reestablish link or immediately recover or land.

19. The PIC must abort the flight operation if unpredicted circumstances or emergencies

that could potentially degrade the safety of persons or property arise. The PIC must 

terminate flight operations without causing undue hazard to persons or property in the 

air or on the ground.

20. The PIC is prohibited from beginning a flight unless (considering wind and forecast 

weather conditions) there is enough available power for the UA to conduct the 

intended operation and to operate after that for at least five minutes or with the reserve 

power recommended by the manufacturer if greater.

21. All aircraft operated in accordance with this exemption must be identified by serial 

number, registered in accordance with 14 CFR part 47, and have identification (NNumber) markings in accordance with 14 CFR part 45, Subpart C. Markings must be 

as large as practicable.

22. Documents used by the operator to ensure the safe operation and flight of the UAS and 

any documents required under 14 CFR §§ 91.9 and 91.203 must be available to the 
22

PIC at the Ground Control Station of the UAS any time the aircraft is operating. These 

documents must be made available to the Administrator or any law enforcement 

official upon request.

23. The UA must remain clear and give way to all manned aircraft at all times. 

24. The UAS may not be operated by the PIC from any moving device or vehicle. 

25. All flight operations must be conducted at least 500 feet from all persons, vessels, 

vehicles, and structures unless when operating:

a. Over or near people directly participating in the operation. People directly 

participating in the operation include the PIC, VO, the student manipulating 

the flight controls of the small UAS, and other consenting personnel that are 

directly participating in the safe operation of the UA.

b. Near but not over students who are not manipulating the flight controls of the 

small UAS. These students must be briefed on the potential risks and 

acknowledge and consent to those risks. Operators must notify the local Flight 

Standards District Office (FSDO) with a plan of activities at least 24 hours 

prior to flight operations. 

c. Near nonparticipating persons: Except as provided in subsections (a) and (b) 

of this section, a UA may only be operated closer than 500 feet to a person 

when barriers or structures are present that sufficiently protect that person from 

the UA and/or debris or hazardous materials such as fuel or chemicals in the 

event of an accident. Under these conditions, the operator must ensure that the 

person remains under such protection for the duration of the operation. If a 

situation arises where the person leaves such protection and is within 500 feet 

of the UA, flight operations must cease immediately in a manner that does not 

cause undue hazard to persons.

d. Near vessels, vehicles and structures. Prior to conducting operations the 

operator must obtain permission from a person with the legal authority over 

any vessels, vehicles or structures that will be within 500 feet of the UA during 

operations. The PIC must make a safety assessment of the risk of operating 

closer to those objects and determined that it does not present an undue hazard. 

26. All operations shall be conducted over private or controlled-access property with 

permission from a person with legal authority to grant access. Permission will be 

obtained for each flight to be conducted.

27. Any incident, accident, or flight operation that transgresses the lateral or vertical 

boundaries of the operational area as defined by the applicable COA must be reported 

to the FAA's UAS Integration Office within 24 hours. Accidents must be reported to 
23

the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) in accordance with its UAS 

accident reporting requirements.

28. The operator must have an operations manual that contains at least the following 

items, although it is not restricted to these items.

a. Operator name, address, and telephone number.

b. Distribution and Revision. Procedures for revising and distributing the operations 

manual to ensure that it is kept current. Revisions must comply with the applicable 

conditions and limitations in this exemption.

c. Persons Authorized. Specify criteria for designating individuals as essential 

personnel. The operations manual must include procedures to ensure that all 

operations are conducted at distances from persons in accordance with the 

conditions and limitations of the exemption.

d. Plan of Activities. The operations manual must include procedures for the 

submission of a written plan of activities.

e. Permission to Operate. The operations manual shall specify requirements and 

procedures that the operator will use to obtain permission to operate over property

or near vessels, vehicles, and structures in accordance with this exemption.

f. Security. The manual must specify the method of security that will be used to 

ensure the safety of nonparticipating persons. This should also include procedures 

that will be used to stop activities when unauthorized persons, vehicles, or aircraft 

enter the operations area, or for any other reason, in the interest of safety.

g. Briefing of essential personnel and all other participating persons. Procedures 

must be included to brief personnel and participating persons on the risks involved, 

emergency procedures, and safeguards to be followed during the operation. 

h. Essential Flight Personnel Minimum Requirements. In accordance with this 

exemption, the operator must specify the minimum requirements for all essential 

flight personnel in the operating manual. The PIC at a minimum will be required to 

meet the certification standards specified in this exemption.

i. Communications. The operations manual must contain procedures to provide 

communications capability with participants during the operation. The operator 

can use oral, visual, or radio communications as along as the participants are

apprised of the current status of the operation.

j. Accident Notification. The operations manual must contain procedures for 

notification and reporting of accidents in accordance with this exemption.

In accordance with this exemption, the operating manual and all other operating 

documents must be accessible to the PIC during UAS operations.
24

29. At least 24 hours prior to operations, the operator must submit a written Plan of 

Activities to the local Flight Standards District Office having jurisdiction over the 

proposed operating area.

The Plan of Activities must include at least the following:

a. Dates and times for all flights. For seasonal or long-term operations, this can 

include the beginning and end dates of the timeframe, the approximate frequency 

(e.g. daily, every weekend, etc.), and what times of the day operations will occur. 

A new plan of activities must be submitted prior to each season or period of 

operations.

b. Name and phone number of the on-site person responsible for the operation.

c. Make, model, and serial or N-Number of each UAS to be used.

d. Name and certificate number of each UAS PIC involved in the operations.

e. A statement that the operator has obtained permission from property owners. 

Upon request, the operator will make available a list of those who gave 

permission.

f. Signature of exemption holder or representative stating the plan is accurate.

g. A description of the flight activity, including maps or diagrams of the area over 

which operations will be conducted and the altitudes essential to accomplish the 

operation.

In accordance with this exemption, the Plan of Activities and all other operating 

documents must be accessible to the PIC during UAS operations. A new Plan of 

Activities must be submitted should there be any changes to items (a) through (g).

Unless otherwise specified in this exemption, the UAS, the UAS PIC, and the UAS operations 

must comply with all applicable parts of 14 CFR including, but not limited to, parts 45, 47, 

61, and 91.

This exemption terminates on October 31, 2017, unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

Issued in Washington, DC, on November 20, 2015.

/s/

John S. Duncan, 

Director, Flight Standards Service

Enclosure