FAA Exemption Petition Robert P. Woolverton 1

May 2, 2015

U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations

West Building Ground Floor, Room w12-140

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Washington, DC 20590

Subj: Petition for Exemption to Operate a DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ v3.0 Quad-Copter Unmanned 

Aerial System for Real Estate Aerial Video Purposes

Dear Sir or Madam:

The purpose of this letter is to petition the Federal Aviation Administration for an exemption 

from certain Federal Aviation Regulations in order for the petitioner, Robert P. Woolverton, to 

operate an Unmanned Aerial System (UAS) within the Seattle metropolitan area of the National

Airspace System, in furtherance of his spouse’s business as a real estate broker. Mr. Woolverton 

is well acquainted with the risks that come with the privilege of operating an aircraft in the 

United States, but is also familiar with the opportunities available via new unmanned flight 

technology. He has flown radio-controlled model aircraft recreationally for more than ten years, 

flying electric powered model airplanes and helicopters as well as flight simulators for such 

recreational model aircraft. He also has more than twenty hours of flight time with the DJI 

Phantom 2 Vision+ v3.0 that is the subject of this Petition.

The petitioner desires to use the Phantom2 Vision+ v3.0 UAS to record low altitude video of 

residential real estate to supplement real estate listing videos he creates for his wife’s business 

who is a real estate broker. Granting this exemption will benefit the public interest in the 

following ways:

• Ultra-Small electric-powered unmanned aerial systems can obtain low altitude video 

footage with far less risk of injury or property damage, and far less noise disturbance than 

a manned helicopter flight. This UAS weighs less than 3 pounds, carries no fuel or crew, 

therefore the risk of fire following an incident or accident due to fuel spillage is 

eliminated, and risk to onboard crew is also eliminated, and

• The addition of aerial video published on the internet provides the consumer with greater 

detailed information which may terminate their interest in a property- thereby preventing 

needless travel to view a property, resulting in lower vehicle emissions, less traffic 

congestion, and time savings for the consumer, and

• Residential properties with listing videos sell faster and for more money, thereby 

increasing commerce, and

• Will allow more home sellers and more home buyers to enjoy the benefits (listed above) 

of aerial real estate video as manned helicopter services are cost-prohibitive for most 

consumers.

Precedence for granting such an exemption request can be found in FAA exemption # 11138.
FAA Exemption Petition Robert P. Woolverton 2

Pursuant to 14 CFR §§ 11.61-.103 and Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act 

of 2012, PL 112-95 (Feb. 14, 2012), the petitioner is submitting the following information with 

this request:

Identity of Petitioner.

Petitioner: Robert P. Woolverton

10509 NE 187th St

Bothell, WA 98011

206-794-6302

bobwoolverton@gmail.com

Description of Operations.

A. The UAS that is the Subject of this Petition.

Mr. Woolverton is the owner of a DJI Phantom 2, Vision+ v3.0 Quadcopter with a 3-axis gimbal 

and HD video camera, serial number of PH645419244, and its associated portable ground station 

controller (together the "Subject UAS"). The Subject UAS is a quad-copter with a camera 

mounted beneath it, piloted via a portable ground station. It weighs less than 3 pounds (1,242 

grams). He purchased the Subject UAS on November 30, 2014, from CopterShop in 

Woodinville, WA. (www.coptershop.com). The Phantom 2 is a widely known unmanned 

aircraft, and is the same type of aircraft that was recently the subject of the approval of an 

exemption by the FAA. See In re Douglas Trudeau, FAA Exemption No. 11138 (Jan. 5, 2015).

The portable ground station used by Mr. Woolverton to pilot the unmanned aircraft is a twochannel, wireless communication device using an FCC-compliant 5.8GHz frequency band for 

controlling the aircraft, and a 2.4 MHz data link for video and flight data. The Subject UAS is 

equipped with lost-link capability, which enables the Phantom 2 to enter a fail-safe Return-toHome Mode in the event that the link between the aircraft and the ground station is lost.

The Subject UAS can operate for a total of approximately 20 minutes on one battery charge. It 

has a maximum range from the ground station of 2,300 feet. However, it also has programmable 

height and radius limits to establish an operations area. Without programming the Subject UAS, 

it has a default height limit of 393 feet AGL.

(The DJI Phantom2 Vision+ owner’s manual, v1.8, updated 1-30-2015, is included as Exhibit A. 

Pre-flight checklist is located on p.25, Flight Limits on p.30, Failsafe Function on p.27. The 

manual could not be combined into this document because it is password protected. The manual 

can also be located at: http://www.dji.com/product/phantom-2-vision-plus/download )

B. The UAS Pilot in Command.

Mr. Woolverton asserts that under § 61.113 (a) and (b) private pilots are limited to noncommercial operations, however, he can achieve an equivalent level of safety as achieved by 

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

helpful, a pilot license will not ensure remote control piloting skills. He further indicates that the 

risks of operating a UAS are far less than the risk levels inherent in the commercial activities 
FAA Exemption Petition Robert P. Woolverton 3

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

Privileges and Limitations: Pilot in Command.

Regarding UAS operational training, Mr. Woolverton has flown numerous practice flights in 

remote areas as a hobbyist simulating flights for future commercial use to gain familiarization 

with the characteristics of his UAS’ performance under different temperature and weather 

conditions. He further states that he practices computerized simulated flights to maintain 

adequate skills and response reflex time. Additionally, Mr. Woolverton agrees to abide by the 

UAS Operating Parameters listed in the next section.

UAS Operating Parameters

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

exemption for which he is making application:

• Operate his UAS below 300 feet and within a radius of 1,000 feet from the controller to 

aid in direct line of sight visual observation;

• Operate the UAS for 15-20 minutes or less, per flight

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

power;

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

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

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

• Conduct all operations under his own personal and flight safety protocols (including 

posting a warning sign reading: “Attention Aerial Photography in Progress – Remain 

Back 150 feet”) contained in the operating documents and will actively analyze flight 

data and other sources of information to constantly update and enhance his safety 

protocols;

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

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

• Always obtain all necessary permissions prior to operation; and

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

danger.

Specific Sections of 14 CFR From Which Petitioner Seeks an Exemption

Mr. Woolverton seeks an exemption from the following FARs:

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

Airworthiness Certificates

14 CFR Part 36 Noise standards: Type and airworthiness

14 CFR § 45.23 Display of marks; general

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

instructors

14 CFR § 91.7 Civil aircraft airworthiness

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

requirements
FAA Exemption Petition Robert P. Woolverton 4

14 CFR § 91.103 Preflight action

14 CFR § 91.105 Flight crewmember stations

14 CFR § 91.109 Flight instruction

14 CFR § 91.119 Minimum safe altitudes

14 CFR § 91.121 Altimeter settings

14 CFR § 91.151 Fuel requirements for flights in VFR conditions

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

14 CFR § 91.203 Civil aircraft: Certifications required

14 CFR § 91.207 Emergency locator transmitters

14 CFR Part 91, Subpart E Maintenance

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

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

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

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

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

operational capability and proximity to airports in which the Subject UAS pose significantly less 

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

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

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

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

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

portion, require an airworthiness certificate.

14 CFR Part 36. FAR Part 36, Subparts A, F, and O, establish certain noise standards for 

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

certificate, and given its small size and negligible noise impact, the petitioner requests an 

exemption from FAR Part 36.

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

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

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

requirement. Accordingly, Mr. Woolverton requests an exemption from this part.

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

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

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

hire as part of his aerial photography business for the reasons articulated in In re Trudeau, FAA 

Exemption No. 11138, and In re Astraeus, FAA Exemption No. 11062. Mr. Woolverton will 

operate the Subject UAS over property where the owner or owner's representative has requested 

that the operation occur. Furthermore, possession of a pilot certificate does not ensure remote 

control piloting skills. He thus request exemption from this section.
FAA Exemption Petition Robert P. Woolverton 5

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

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

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

identified in his request for an exemption of 14 CFR Part 21, Subpart H. He will not, however,

operate the Subject UAS if it is not in a condition for safe flight, as required under FAR 91.7(b).

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

requires that all aircraft have certain markings, placards and on-board flight manuals for the 

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

deviation from the marking requirements of 14 CFR Part 36, Subparts A, F, and 0. Additionally, 

relevant materials will be kept in a location accessible to the PIC in compliance with the 

regulations.

14 CFR § 91.103. FAR 91.103 mandates certain pre-flight action. Petitioner will take all 

necessary pre-flight action, but requests an exemption from this requirement insofar as it is

interpreted as requiring pre-flight actions appropriate to manned aircraft only (e.g., that flights be 

from an airport, etc.).

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

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

mission, but requests an exemption to accommodate the fact that the Subject UAS is unmanned.

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

that have dual controls, or throw-over controls, with an instructor. From time to time the

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

would be interpreted to require that the ground control station have a second controller or dual

control capability.

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

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

the mission for which he seeks an exemption.

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

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

an altimeter that matches the requirements of this FAR. Operations with the Subject UAV will,

however, maintain altitude below the 300' AGL ceiling by the petitioner monitoring the altitude

of the UAS and through the Subject UAS's ability to establish a flight zone that cannot exceed

the ceiling.

14 CFR § 91.151. Petitioner requests an exemption from the VFR-flight fuel carrying

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

Subject UAS will, however, maintain a five-minute reserve battery time.

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

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

in conditions that are IFR within controlled airspace (e.g., a flight on a day with less than three
FAA Exemption Petition Robert P. Woolverton 6

miles visibility in a neighborhood that falls within the Class D airspace of KBFI). He would

request that, after contacting ATC for the controlled airspace, he would be allowed to operate in

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

visibility with the Subject UAS.

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

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

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

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

14 CFR § 91.207. FAR 91.207 prohibits operation of a US-registered aircraft unless it is

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

Subject UAS, Mr. Woolverton requests an exemption from this FAR.

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

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

requests an exemption from this Subpart because the Subject UAS has a trouble-shooting and

maintenance program that is best executed by the owner/operator, and is simply different from

the maintenance of manned aircraft. Petitioner will, however, maintain a maintenance log and

any maintenance records of repair of the Subject UAS

.

Public Interest and Benefit Considerations.

Aerial imaging services generally require use of a manned platform. Close-proximity aerial

photography is difficult to do, and usually requires the use of a helicopter or slow-moving

aircraft at an appropriate distance over a populated area. The operation must be conducted in

VFR conditions, and adds aircraft in congested airspace.

By using the Subject UAS, Mr. Woolverton aims to provide the public with quality aerial

photography services at a fraction of the cost involved with manned flight. Furthermore, the risks 

inherent with manned flight are significantly reduced where the aircraft conducting the operation 

is less than five pounds, remains below 300' AGL, and can operate within a very confined 

cylinder on or directly over the location being photographed. 

Publishing real estate listing videos on the internet that includes aerial video provides the 

consumer with greater detailed information which may terminate their interest in a prospective 

property- thereby preventing needless travel to view a property, resulting in lower vehicle 

emissions, less traffic congestion, and time savings for the consumer. Also, real estate with 

listing videos tend to sell faster and for more money, thereby increasing commerce.

Why the Exemptions Would Not Adversely Affect Safety.

The proposed operations will not adversely affect safety for four primary reasons.

First, the operations will be conducted in airspace where there is typically no activity

among other users of the NAS. Flights are limited to property over which the owner has

requested that the Subject UAS operate, so the owners will be aware of the flight operation. As
FAA Exemption Petition Robert P. Woolverton 7

an experienced recreational pilot of radio controlled model aircraft Mr. Woolverton fully 

recognizes the dangers that a small UAV could pose to all types of manned aircraft. The 

operations he is proposing to undertake pending approval of this Exemption Request are 

operations where manned aircraft will not fly. There would be a rigid separation between where 

a manned aircraft can fly (particularly due to FAR 91.119 which establishes minimum safe 

altitudes, to include an absolute prohibition of operating an aircraft within 500' of any structure) 

and where Mr. Woolverton would operate the UAV.

Second, the Subject UAS is simply not a large aircraft. Weighing in at less than 3 pounds, 

the likelihood that it would damage property or injure a person is low, even in the event of a 

mishap. Furthermore, aerial imaging is still something done via manned aircraft, and the risk 

there is at least equal to the risk posed by the proposed operation.

Third, the Subject UAS has inherent lost-link capabilities to bring it back to its operating

base for each mission. It is a redundant system for a more foreseeable problem that could arise.

Fourth, the Subject UAS will be operated only by the petitioner. Mr. Woolverton is an 

experienced radio controlled pilot with sufficient flight time and experience with the aircraft to 

conduct a reasonably safe operation.

Language for Inclusion in the Federal Register.

Mr. Woolverton proposes that the following language be included in the Federal Register:

Petition for Exemption.

Federal Aviation Regulations from which Petitioner seeks exemption: 14 CFR 14 CFR 

Part 21, Subpart H; Part 36; § 45.23; Part 61; §§ 91. 7; 91.9; 91.103; 91.105; 91.109; 

91.119; 91.121; 91.151; 91.173; 91.203; 91.207; and 14 CFR Part 91, Subpart E.

Description of Relief Sought: The petitioner is seeking an exemption from the abovereferenced Federal Aviation Regulations to conduct aerial photography using a light, 

unmanned aerial vehicle for homeowners and real estate brokers seeking to provide 

aerial images of homes being listed for sale in the Seattle metropolitan area.

Conclusion.

Mr. Woolverton would like to thank the FAA for considering this request. Please do not hesitate 

to contact him should there be a need for additional information. He looks forward to working 

with the FAA in its determination, and to being part of the discussion as the FAA considers how 

to expand, train, test, register, track and control commercial UAV use in the United States.

Respectfully Submitted,

Robert P. Woolverton

Petitioner