April 1, 2015 

 Exemption No. 11266 

 Regulatory Docket No. FAA−2014−0733 

Mr. Ryan Darling 

Darling Geomatics 

9040 South Rita Road, Suite 2350 

Tucson, AZ 85747 

Dear Mr. Darling: 

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your request for exemption. It transmits our 

decision, explains its basis, and gives you the conditions and limitations of the exemption, 

including the date it ends. 

The Basis for Our Decision 

By letter dated September 17, 2014, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration 

(FAA) on behalf of Darling Geomatics (hereinafter petitioner or operator) for an exemption. 

The exemption would allow the petitioner to operate an unmanned aircraft system (UAS) to 

conduct mapping and surveying. 

See Appendix A for the petition submitted to the FAA describing the proposed operations and 

the regulations that the petitioner seeks an exemption. 

Discussion of Public Comments: 

A summary of the petition was published in the Federal Register on October 7, 2014, 

(79 FR 60573). Two comments were received. The Small UAV Coalition (Coalition) 

commented in support of the petition, while the Air Line Pilots Association, International 

(ALPA) opposed it. 
2 

The Coalition stated the petitioner has proposed to abide by stronger safety measures than 

hobby and modeler groups operating similar aircraft. The Coalition stated that it does not 

believe that heightened safety measures should be required for the petitioner simply because 

of the commercial nature of its operations. The Coalition urged the FAA to adopt an 

evaluation framework for UAS operations under Section 333 of Public Law 112–95 that 

weighs the relative safety issues and risks of UAS by class and operational circumstances, 

rather than adopting artificial distinctions among unmanned aerial vehicles based on 

commercial and noncommercial operations. The petitioner’s UAS pose considerably less 

safety risk than larger UAS. The Coalition asserted that because UAS operations like the 

petitioner’s pose minimal risk to safety, they should be subject to minimal and appropriate 

regulations. 

The Coalition noted the FAA is to consider the seven factors1 in Section 333 as a minimum. 

The Coalition stated the petition shows the FAA should consider factors other than those 

specified in Section 333, such as location, altitude of its UAS, proposed training regimen, the 

proven experience of the sUAS, and the approvals obtained by SenseFly from the national 

aviation authorities of nine countries. The Coalition maintained that the petitioner’s proposed 

operations satisfy the seven factors in Section 333 and include several additional mitigating 

factors to ensure the safety and security of the proposed UAS operations. The Coalition 

emphasized the FAA must evaluate each factor within the context of the petitioner’s proposed 

UAS operations. 

The Coalition also commented that the FAA should grant relief from the requirement to hold 

an airman’s certificate. The Coalition further stated that if an airman certificate is required, 

that at a minimum, the FAA should provide an exception from the training and testing 

requirements in part in favor of requirements pertinent to the aircraft and operation proposed. 

The Coalition also asserted that in section 333 Congress intended for the FAA to consider 

national security with respect to the operation as opposed to addressing it through pilot 

certification. 

The FAA notes that, as discussed in the grant of exemption to Trimble Navigation Ltd. 

(Exemption No. 11110), neither section 333, nor the FAA’s exemption authority2

 allows the 

FAA to exempt pilots from the statutory requirement to hold an airman certificate as 

prescribed in 49 USC § 44711. 

The Coalition commented that a visual observer (VO) should not be required for all small 

UAS operations. The Coalition further asserted that the presence of one or more VOs may 

allow the UAS to be operated beyond visual line of sight (VLOS) of the pilot in command 

 

1

 Section 333(b) of P.L. 112-95 states, in part: “In making the determination under subsection (a), the Secretary 

shall determine, at a minimum-- (1) which types of unmanned aircraft systems, if any, as a result of their size, 

weight, speed, operational capability, proximity to airports and populated areas, and operation within visual line 

of sight do not create a hazard to users of the national airspace system or the public or pose a threat to 

national security; ...” 

2

 49 USC § 44701(f) 
3 

(PIC) and that the petitioner’s proposal to operate the unmanned aircraft (UA) within VLOS 

of the PIC and/or VO should be permitted. 

The FAA notes that one of the determinations for operations under section 333 is operation 

within visual line of sight. The PIC must maintain VLOS while operating the UA. The FAA 

finds that a VO complements the PIC’s capability to see and avoid other aircraft, including 

when the PIC may be momentarily attending to other flying tasks. The VO provides an 

additional level of operational safety. 

ALPA expressed concern regarding several aspects of the petition. ALPA stated “there must 

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

the hazard of other aircraft intruding on the operation is mitigated.” The FAA believes the 

limitations under which the petitioner will operate (i.e., VLOS and at or below 400 feet AGL) 

are sufficient mitigations to this risk so that the operations will not adversely affect safety. 

ALPA noted the petition does not state an observer will participate in sUAS operations, and 

therefore does not address the communication method to be used by the pilot and observer. 

ALPA stated that text messaging could have an unknown latency and extend to several 

minutes. ALPA also argued that voice communication with the pilot is a limited mitigation if 

both the pilot and observer are not able to maintain a visual observation of both the aircraft 

and the area. The a conditions and limitations regarding PIC and VO communications address 

those concerns. 

ALPA asserted the UAS’s 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 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 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 to mitigate the risk associated with such failures. 

ALPA also noted that the petitioner’s proposed 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. 
4 

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

and commercial certificate 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. 

Although the petitioner did not request an exemption from § 91.113, 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 and VO. 

Regarding the petitioner’s request for exemption from the minimum safe altitude 

requirements of § 91.119, ALPA stated all aircraft in the NAS must operate to the same high 

level of safety. ALPA argued this includes maintaining a safe altitude for both airplanes and 

helicopters. 

ALPA mentioned the aircraft will 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). 

Regarding the fuel requirements of § 91.151, ALPA argued that using batteries as the only 

source of an aircraft’s power is a substantial shift from traditional methods of propulsion, and 

requires further research to determine best safety practices. The FAA has inserted a condition 

and limitation that addresses this concern. 

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. A certificated flight instructor is 

authorized to provide the instruction required for the certificates or ratings or 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. We note 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. Instruction provided toward obtaining the pilot certificate required by this 

exemption would need to be provided by a certificated flight instructor. 

ALPA expressed concern on whether the petitioner’s UAS can comply with the aircraft light 

requirements for night operations in § 91.209, given its limited electric power. The petitioner 

indicates that night operations will not be conducted and this exemption limits operations to 

daytime only. 
5 

ALPA stated that it 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 will not be 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 ALPAs 

concern and in order to minimize potential impact to the NAS, the FAA requires that each 

operator secure a Certificate of Authorization or COA which covers specific details of the 

petitioners operation. The FAA recognizes that UAS integration will generate new NAS 

access demand and will review and adjust accordingly. 

Airworthiness Certification 

The UAS proposed by the petitioner is a SenseFly eBee. 

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

and parts, Subpart H—Airworthiness Certificates. In accordance with the statutory criteria 

provided in Section 333 of Public Law 112−95 in reference to 49 U.S.C. § 44704, and in 

consideration of the size, weight, speed, and limited operating area associated with the 

aircraft and its operation, the Secretary of Transportation has determined that this aircraft 

meets the conditions of Section 333. 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 Basis for Our Decision 

You have requested to use a UAS for aerial data collection. The FAA has issued grants of 

exemption in circumstances similar in all material respects to those presented in your petition. 

In Grants of Exemption Nos. 11062 to Astraeus Aerial (see Docket No. FAA−2014−0352), 

11109 to Clayco, Inc. (see Docket No. FAA−2014−0507), 11112 to VDOS Global, LLC (see

Docket No. FAA−2014−0382), and 11213 to Aeryon Labs, Inc. (see Docket No. 

FAA−2014−0642), the FAA found that the enhanced safety achieved using an unmanned 

aircraft (UA) with the specifications described by the petitioner and carrying no passengers or 

crew, rather than a manned aircraft of significantly greater proportions, carrying crew in 

addition to flammable fuel, gives the FAA good cause to find that the UAS operation enabled 

by this exemption is in the public interest. 
6 

Having reviewed your reasons for requesting an exemption, I find that— 

 They are similar in all material respects to relief previously requested in Grant of 

Exemption Nos. 11062, 11109, 11112, and 11213; 

 The reasons stated by the FAA for granting Exemption Nos. 11062, 11109, 11112, and 

11213 also apply to the situation you present; and 

 A grant of exemption is in the public interest. 

Our 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, Darling Geomatics 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), 91.119(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 operate a UAS to perform aerial data collection. 

This exemption is subject to the conditions and limitations listed below. 

Conditions and Limitations 

In this grant of exemption, Darling Geomatics is hereafter referred to as the operator. 

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

grounds for the immediate suspension or rescission of this exemption. 

1. Operations authorized by this grant of exemption are limited to the SenseFly eBee 

when weighing less than 55 pounds including payload. Proposed operations of any 

other aircraft will require a new petition or a petition to amend this exemption. 

2. Operations for the purpose of closed-set motion picture and television filming are 

not permitted. 

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

exemption holder 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. 

4. 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. 

5. The UA must be operated within visual line of sight (VLOS) of the PIC at all times. 

This requires the PIC to be able to use human vision unaided by any device other than 
7 

corrective lenses, as specified on the PIC’s FAA-issued airman medical certificate or 

U.S. driver’s license. 

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

the visual line of sight (VLOS) of the PIC and VO at all times. The VO may be used 

to satisfy the VLOS requirement as long as the PIC always maintains VLOS 

capability. The VO and 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. 

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 grant of 

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 and the procedures outlined in the operating documents, 

the conditions and limitations herein take precedence and must be followed. 

Otherwise, the operator must follow the procedures as outlined in its operating 

documents. The operator may update or revise its operating documents. It is the 

operator’s responsibility to track such revisions and present 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 grant of 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 grant of exemption. The FAA’s UAS 

Integration Office (AFS-80) 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 must remain at 

least 500 feet from 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 

inspection reveals a condition that affects the safe operation of the UAS, the aircraft is 
8 

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. 

12. Each UAS operated under this exemption must comply with all manufacturer safety 

bulletins. 

13. Under this grant of 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 Colombia, 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. 

14. The operator may not permit any PIC to operate unless the PIC demonstrates the 

ability to safely operate the UAS in a manner consistent with how the UAS will be 

operated under this exemption, including evasive and emergency maneuvers and 

maintaining appropriate distances from persons, vessels, vehicles and structures. PIC 

qualification flight hours and currency must be logged in a manner consistent with 

14 CFR § 61.51(b). Flights for the purposes of training the operator’s PICs and VOs 

(training, proficiency, and experience-building) and determining the PIC’s ability to 

safely operate the UAS in a manner consistent with how the UAS will be operated 

under this exemption are permitted under the terms of this exemption. However, 

training operations may only be conducted during dedicated training sessions. During 

training, proficiency, and experience-building flights, all persons not essential for 

flight operations are considered nonparticipants, and the PIC must operate the UA 

with appropriate distance from nonparticipants in accordance with 14 CFR § 91.119. 

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 operate within 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 FAApublished aeronautical chart, unless a letter of agreement with that airport’s 

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

holder. The letter of agreement with the airport management must be made available 

to the Administrator or any law enforcement official upon request. 
9 

17. 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. 

18. If the UAS loses communications or loses its GPS signal, the UA must return to a predetermined location within the private or controlled-access property. 

19. The PIC must abort the flight in the event of unpredicted obstacles or emergencies. 

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

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

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

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

22. 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. 

23. 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 

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. 

24. The UA must remain clear and give way to all manned aviation operations and 

activities at all times. 

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

26. All Flight operations must be conducted at least 500 feet from all nonparticipating 

persons, vessels, vehicles, and structures unless: 

a. Barriers or structures are present that sufficiently protect nonparticipating persons 

from the UA and/or debris in the event of an accident. The operator must ensure 

that nonparticipating persons remain under such protection. 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 ensuring the safety 

of nonparticipating persons; and, 

b. The owner/controller of any vessels, vehicles or structures has granted permission 

for operating closer to those objects and the PIC has made a safety assessment of 
10 

the risk of operating closer to those objects and determined that it does not 

present an undue hazard. 

The PIC, VO, operator trainees or essential persons are not considered 

nonparticipating persons under this exemption. 

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

permission from the property owner/controller or authorized representative. 

Permission from property owner/controller or authorized representative will be 

obtained for each flight to be conducted. 

28. 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 (AFS-80) within 24 hours. Accidents must be 

reported to the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) per instructions 

contained on the NTSB Web site: www.ntsb.gov. 

If this exemption permits operations for the purpose of closed-set motion picture and 

television filming and production, the following additional conditions and limitations apply. 

29. The operator must have a motion picture and television operations manual (MPTOM) 

as documented in this grant of exemption. 

30. At least 3 days before aerial filming, the operator of the UAS affected by this 

exemption must submit a written Plan of Activities to the local Flight Standards 

District Office (FSDO) with jurisdiction over the area of proposed filming. The 3-day 

notification may be waived with the concurrence of the FSDO. The plan of activities 

must include at least the following: 

a. Dates and times for all flights; 

b. Name and phone number of the operator for the UAS aerial filming conducted 

under this grant of exemption; 

c. Name and phone number of the person responsible for the on-scene operation of 

the UAS; 

d. Make, model, and serial or N-Number of UAS to be used; 

e. Name and certificate number of UAS PICs involved in the aerial filming; 

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

and/or local officials to conduct the filming production event; the list of those 

who gave permission must be made available to the inspector upon request; 

g. Signature of exemption holder or representative; and 

h. A description of the flight activity, including maps or diagrams of any area, city, 

town, county, and/or state over which filming will be conducted and the altitudes 

essential to accomplish the operation. 
11 

31. Flight operations may be conducted closer than 500 feet from participating persons 

consenting to be involved and necessary for the filming production, as specified in the 

exemption holder’s MPTOM. 

Unless otherwise specified in this grant of 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 April 30, 2017, unless sooner superseded or rescinded. 

Sincerely, 

/s/ 

John S. Duncan 

Director, Flight Standards Service 
September 17th, 2014

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Docket Management System 

1200 New Jersey Ave., SE 

Washington, DC 20590

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

Aviation Regulations

Dear Madam, Sir,

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

14 C.F.R. Part 11, Darling Geomatics (“Darling”), an operator of the eBee Unmanned Aircraft

System (“eBee”) seeks an exemption from the Federal Aviation Regulations (“FARs”) listed below:

 14 C.F.R. 21

 14 C.F.R. 45.23

 14 C.F.R 45.29

 14 C.F.R. 61.133(a)

 14 C.F.R. 91.7(b)

 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. 91.151(a)

 14 C.F.R. 91.203(a) & (b)

 14 CFR Subpart E (91.401 - 91.417)

The requested exemption would authorize commercial operations using the eBee for mapping and 

survey applications. These operations will be subject to strict operating requirements and

conditions defined by the Safety Code of the Academy of Model Aeronautics (see Annex B), in 

order to ensure at least an equivalent level of safety to currently authorized operations using 

manned aircrafts. 

The eBee will be operated by an individual who fulfills the following requirements:

 Has successfully passed a manufacturer’s training program for the eBee;

 Has a commercial pilot certificate;

 Has an AMA membership.

1. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE AIRCRAFT

The eBee is a small (37.8 inches wingspan) and ultra-light (maximum take-off weight of 1.7

pounds) platform made of flexible foam that performs precision aerial mapping missions thanks to 

the on-board GPS and the related flight management software (eMotion) that allows the operator to 

plan safely and efficiently a mission in 3D, and then monitor it in real-time. Thanks to the embedded

camera, protected by a foam envelope, the eBee takes a collection of high-definition still images 

that are used later to generate maps and contour lines of the surveyed area. 
The four main characteristics of the eBee are:

a. Very light weight

The eBee is so light that the operator can launch it by hand and let it land on almost any surface 

without requiring a parachute or landing net (belly land). Its low impact energy (38 J in case of a 

controlled emergency landing) also significantly reduces the risk of hazardous situations. Finally, 

the wings of the eBee are detachable and made of flexible foam with no sharp or hard edges and 

almost no internal strengthening structure. 

b. Electric-powered

The eBee is electric powered. A brushless engine technology makes it silent and reliable. The 

propeller is attached with a rubber band to the body of the plane so that it can easily flex away in 

case of contact with any object. 

c. Semi-automatic flight

The artificial intelligence incorporated within the eBee autopilot system continuously analyzes data 

from the Inertial Measurement Unit and from the onboard GPS and takes care of all the aspects of 

the flight under the supervision of the operator.

d. Option for Manual control

Additionally, the eBee provides an override capability that allows the operator to take manual 

actions during the flight (Go to Home, Go Land, Hold and Resume the mission) and also suspend 

automated operations and take manual control of the aircraft should it become necessary to

respond emergent circumstances, thanks to the remote controller provided with the system.

2. APPLICATIONS

Surveying and mapping for:

Federal and Local Flood Control

Federal, State, and Local Disaster Management

Landfills

Mining

Utilities

Agriculture

Golf Courses

Construction Sites

3. APPLICABLE LEGAL STANDARD UNDER SECTION 333

a. Airworthiness assessment of the eBee

Darling notes that the airworthiness of the eBee has already been demonstrated for different 

projects in the United States, involving state/federal agencies or universities (among others the 

New Mexico State University: https://newscenter.nmsu.edu/Articles/view/10208/nmsu-uas-flighttest-center-conducts-ebee-airworthiness-assessment, and the USACE New Orleans, who

coordinated with the Department of Army and the FAA to obtain all authorizations required in order 

to operate the eBee UAS.
Moreover, SenseFly obtained flight approvals for the eBee (delivered by national civil aviation 

authorities) in many countries, among others:

 Switzerland (flight approval for VLOS operations)

 Canada (flight approval for VLOS operations)

 Australia (flight approval for VLOS operations)

 France (flight approval for Extended-VLOS operations)

 Germany (flight approval for VLOS operations)

 United Kingdom (flight approval for VLOS operations)

 Norway (flight approval for VLOS operations)

 Sweden (flight approval for VLOS operations)

 Denmark (flight approval for VLOS operations)

b. Operating requirements

Grant of the exemption to Darling for the eBee will be subject to the following operating conditions, 

based on the operating conditions set forth by the Academy of Model Aeronautics (see Annex B). 

The main restrictions are summarized below:

 Operations to be conducted over private, controlled-access, or public property where 

approved;

 Permission from the land owner/authority required before commencing any flight;

 Operations over congested areas shall be avoided;

 Operations must not interfere with manned aircraft operations, must yield the right of way to 

manned aircraft, and operators must See & Avoid other aircraft and obstacles at all times

 Operations limited to Visual Flight Rules Meteorological Conditions (VMC) and daylight 

hours

 Aircraft operations must remain within Visual Line of Sight (VLOS) and will be visually 

monitored at all times;

 VLOS guaranteed with a GPS geo-fence around operator of 0.5 miles

 Flight ceiling pre-programed at 400 feet;

 All operations conducted within 5 miles from an airport shall only be initiated after verbal 

coordination with the airport authority, or air traffic control when a control tower is present at 

the airport;

 All operations shall comply with required permissions and permits established by territorial, 

state, county or city jurisdictions; including local law enforcement, fire, or other appropriate 

governmental agencies.

 The eBee operations will be compliant with existing safety procedures inherent to the 

activities of the related company.

c. Darling Geomatics Operator Requirements

 Has successfully passed a manufacturer’s training program for the eBee;

 Has an AMA membership;

 Holds a commercial pilot certificate
3. CONCLUSION

Darling Geomatics sees a great need for inexpensive yet highly detailed aerial mapping 

information. With the eBee, Darling Geomatics will be able to help local governments achieve 

greater efficiency and cost savings in managing drainages, landfills, urban forests, and disasters. 

In addition, with an eBee, Darling can expand its surveying services for existing customers in 

Utilities and Mining, and new markets such as Agriculture. The result of this technology and cost 

saving for everyone will increase profits and create more jobs. 

Sincerely,

Darling Geomatics

Ryan Darling, CFII 2877864

ANNEX A: EXEMPTION REQUEST AND EQUIVALENT LEVEL OF SAFETY SHOWINGS 

UNDER APPLICABLE RULES SUBJECT TO EXEMPTION

Darling requests an exemption from the following regulations as well as any additional regulations

that may technically apply to the operation of the eBee:

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 issuance of 

airworthiness certificates as required by FAR § 91.203(a)(1). Given the size of the eBee, its very 

light weight and the limited (the maximum take-off weight is 1.7 pounds) 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 different criteria demonstrates that the eBee operated without an 

airworthiness certificate, under the conditions proposed in that exemption, will be at least as safe, 

or safer, than a conventional aircraft with an airworthiness certificate. A risk assessment for 

operations with the eBee, which demonstrates that assertion, was submitted as part of this 

application.

Indeed, the eBee weighs less than 1.7 pounds, maximum take-off weight. It is made of flexible 

foam, does not carry a pilot or passenger, does 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 the operator through 

the constant communication link between the eBee and the ground station. Moreover, a geo-fence 

and a flight ceiling will be defined by the operator before each flight to make sure the eBee will not 

go beyond the defined flight envelop. 

14 C.F.R. § 45.23 & 14 C.F.R. § 45.29: Display of marks; size of marks
These regulations provide that each aircraft must display "N" and the aircraft's registration number 

in letters at least 3 inches high. Additionally, the aircraft must display the word "EXPERIMENTAL" 

in letters at least 2 inches high near the entrance to the cabin, cockpit, or pilot station. 

Given the size of the eBee (wingspan of 37.8 inches), this requirement is impossible to match.

The equivalent level of safety will be achieved by having the upper part of the eBee stick with a 

copy of the AMA membership of the operator in charge. The AMA agrees to provide 2 original 

copies of the AMA license to every eBee operator.

Moreover, each operator will display at the ground station a high contrast flag or banner that 

contains the words "Unmanned Aircraft System Ground Station" in letters 3 inches high or greater. 

Since the aircraft will operate within 1/2 NM of the ground station, the banner should be visible to 

anyone that observes the aircraft and chooses to investigate its point of origin.

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 eBee without an

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

aircraft and the previous airworthiness assessments given to the eBee, among others:

 New Mexico State University: https://newscenter.nmsu.edu/Articles/view/10208/nmsu-uasflight-test-center-conducts-ebee-airworthiness-assessment

 USACE New Orleans, who coordinated with the Department of Army and the FAA to obtain 

all authorizations required in order to operate the eBee UAS for levee system monitoring, 

documentation of construction progress, and extensive oblique photography of USACE 

structures & activities

An equivalent level of safety will be achieved by insuring compliance with the SenseFly manuals 

prior to each flight. 

14 C.F.R. § 91.9: Civil aircraft flight manual, marking, and placard requirements.

This regulation provides that no person may operate an aircraft unless a current, approved flight 

manual is in the aircraft. We assume that the intent of this requirement is to ensure that flight 

manual information is available to the aircrew while operating the aircraft. We request an 

exemption to this requirement since the aircraft is not only too small to carry documentation, the 

documentation would not be available to the crew.

The equivalent level of safety will be achieved by keeping a hard copy of the flight manual in the 

eBee transportation box.

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

The regulation provides that "No person may operate a civil aircraft that is being used for flight

instruction unless that aircraft has fully functioning dual controls."

Flight instruction will be accomplished through an elaborated training program, using first the 

simulation mode of the flight management software eMotion as set forth in Exhibit 2. The equivalent 

level of safety during the training will be achieved by the manufacturer providing the training as 

outlined in Exhibit 2 and through the use of experienced and qualified operators familiar with the 
eBee.

14 CFR § 91.119: Minimum Safe Altitudes

The regulation provides that over sparsely populated areas the aircraft cannot be operated closer 

than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure. Since the aircraft will be operating at a 

maximum of 400 feet AGL, the eBee cannot comply with this requirement.

The equivalent level of safety will be achieved because the eBee will only fly over private property 

with the permission of the landowner. The operator will define before every flight a working area 

radius and a flight area ceiling, preventing the eBee to go beyond the flight area.

The landowner and the persons who may be on the ground in the flight area will be briefed of the 

expected route of flight and the associated risks to persons and property on the ground. Due to the 

small size of the eBee and the material with which the eBee is built, the hazard to persons, vessels, 

vehicles, and structures is not comparable to manned aircraft and should be considered in granting 

the exemption.

Moreover, the aircraft will not be operated over congested areas nor over any open-air assembly of 

persons. The aircraft will be operated at an altitude allowing, if a power unit fails, an emergency 

landing without undue hazard to persons or property on the surface.

14 CFR 91.121 – Altimeter settings

This section requires that each person operating an aircraft shall maintain the cruising altitude or 

flight level of that aircraft, as the case may be, by reference to an altimeter that is set, when 

operating below 18,000 feet MSL to:

 The current reported altimeter setting of a station along the route and within 100 nautical 

miles of the aircraft;

 If there is no station within the area prescribed in paragraph (a)(1)(i) of this section, the 

current reported altimeter setting of an appropriate available station;

 In the case of an aircraft not equipped with a radio, the elevation of the departure airport or 

an appropriate altimeter setting available before departure.

To provide an equivalent level of safety, the eBee autopilot calculates the reference altitude

(ground level) with the on-board GPS during the pre-flight tests. The GPS and barometer data are 

merged with respect to their respective precisions. The GPS provides reliable information to correct 

potential barometric bias, while rapid variations in altitude are detected through the barometer. 

Hence, barometric bias induced by environmental factors is rejected.

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

The regulation provides that no person may begin a flight in an airplane under day-VFR conditions 

unless there is enough fuel to fly to the first point of intended landing and to fly after that for at least

30 minutes.

Given the area of operation for the eBee, Darling believes that an equivalent level of safety is 

already achieved with the specific procedure preventing the eBee to accept a take-off order is the 

battery level is below a given value. Moreover, SenseFly has integrated “low” and “critical” battery 

level warnings and implemented a “return to Home” (and “Go Land”) actions in these situations.

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

This regulation provides as follows:
 No person may operate a civil aircraft unless it has an appropriate and current

airworthiness certificate.

 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.

The eBee weighs only 1.7 pounds (max take-off weight). As such, there is no ability or place to 

carry certification and registration documents or to display them on the UAS. In addition, there is no

pilot or passengers on board the aircraft.

To obtain an equivalent level of safety and meet the intent of 91.203, Darling propose that 

documents deemed appropriate for this aircraft by the FAA will be co-located with the operator at 

the ground control station in the eBee box and available for inspection upon request. In order to 

identify the aircraft, Darling proposes that a copy of the AMA membership of the operator will be 

permanently affixed to the eBee on the upper side of the body.

14 CFR Subpart E (91.401 - 91.417) - Maintenance, Preventive Maintenance, and Alterations

The regulation provides that the operator is primarily responsible for maintaining the aircraft in an 

airworthy condition, including compliance with Parts 39 and 43. Paragraphs 91.407 and 91.409 

require that the aircraft be "approved for return to service by a person authorized under 43.7" after 

maintenance and inspection. 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.

Darling proposes that the maintenance of the eBee will be accomplished by the owner/operator 

according to the maintenance manual, such as Exhibit 3, provided by SenseFly. An equivalent 

level of safety will be achieved because the eBee is small in size, it is not a complex mechanical 

device, it will carry no external payload, and it will operate only in restricted predetermined areas.

Moreover, the operator is the person most familiar with the aircraft and is best suited to maintain

the aircraft in an airworthy condition and to ensure an equivalent level of safety. Finally, before 

every flight, the eBee runs automatically a sequence of pre-flight tests to make sure that every 

sensor and every critical part is running properly. If a problem is detected, the eBee will not be able 

to be switched-on and a message error is displayed on the main screen of eMotion. The operator 

can then refer to the maintenance manual to troubleshoot this issue. Several parts of the eBee are 

easily interchangeable (propellers, wings), which allows the operator to make sure the wings and 

propulsion system are always airworthy when a mission is initiated.
ANNEX B: ACADEMY OF MODEL AERONAUTICS SAFETY REQUIREMENTS

http://www.modelaircraft.org/files/105.pdf

http://www.modelaircraft.org/files/540-D.pdf

http://www.modelaircraft.org/files/560.pdf