Exemption Request

Regulatory docket number: TBD

The following petition is made by Cody L. Kelley and made to

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

WASHINGTON, DC 20591

for an exemption from Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 21, subpart H; and 

sections 61.113(a) & (b), 91.7 (a), 91.121, 91.151 (b), 91.405 (a), 91.407 (a) (1), 91.409 (a) (1) 

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

Cody L. Kelley seeks exemption from 14 C.F.R. part 21, subpart H; and sections to operate an 

Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and 

Reform Act of 2012 (FMRA). This exemption will permit Cody L. Kelley to operate an UAS for 

the commercial purpose of conducting aerial video and photography for construction sites, real 

estate, surveying, and landscape over certain areas of the United States.

 INTRODUCTION

Cody L. Kelley has been actively flying and building fixed wing, helicopter, and multirotor 

model aircraft for 8 years. Kelley has been actively pursuing his private pilot license for almost 

five years, and started flight lessons at age twelve. Kelley has been a member of the Academy 

of Model Aeronautics (AMA) since 2012 (AMA # 995192) and was rated as an IP Instructor by 

the AMA at age fourteen. Kelley has been a cadet in Civil Air Patrol for four years, and is 

currently the Cadet Commander of the Pilgrim Composite Squadron in Plymouth, 

Massachusetts. Kelley currently holds the rank of Cadet First Lieutenant. Kelley has attended 

Civil Air Patrol’s Model Aircraft and Remote Control Academy two times in Salina, Kansas, and 

was a cadet instructor both times. Kelley also earned a full scholarship to the Experimental 

Aircraft Association’s (EAA) Advanced Air Academy in Oshkosh, Wisconsin in order to learn 

about the manufacturing process of aircraft as well as advanced aerodynamics. Kelley also 

conducts a UAS Academy at the Marshfield Boys and Girls Club, where he instructs kids ages 

10-17 on the proper flight instruction of UA’s, as well as current rules and regulations for safe 

and legal flight. 

The objective of Cody L. Kelley’s aerial photography is to provide high quality video and still 

images of landscape for public, private, and commercial uses including: 

● Aerial inspections of private and public structures

● Aerial video and images for private and commercial property owners 

● Aerial video and images for environmental consulting

● Educate public and aspiring young people of safe and legal UAS operation

In order to conduct these operations, Cody L. Kelley seeks an exemption to operate Blade 

systems, specifically the Blade Chroma, for compensation or hire within the National Airspace 

System (NAS). The Blade Chroma is a vertical take-off and landing (VTOL) unmanned aircraft 

(UA) with a ground control station (GCS). All UAs will be operated by an individual with a pilot 
certification, current FAA medical certification or a valid U.S driver’s license, and meet the flight 

review requirements specified in 14 C.F.R. § 61.56 in an aircraft in which the PIC is rated on his 

or her flight certificate. 

BASIS FOR PETITION

Petitioner Cody L. Kelley, pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 

C.F.R. § 11.61) and the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (FMRA), Section 333, 

Special Rules for Certain Unmanned Aircraft Systems, hereby petitions the Administrator to 

commercially operate the Blade Chroma UAS in the National Airspace System (NAS), and for 

an exemption from the requirements of 14 C.F.R part 21, subpart H; and Sections 61.113(a) & 

(b), 91.7(a), 91.121, 91.151(b), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), and 91.417(a) & 

(b).

Name And Address Of The Petitioner:

Cody L. Kelley

186 Foster Avenue 

Marshfield, MA 02050

Tel: (857)-294-0349

Email: coky444@live.com

Specific Sections of 14 C.F.R. From Which Cody L. Kelley Seeks Exemption:

1. Cody L. Kelley Seeks Exemption From The Following Requirements Of Section 

61.113(a) And (b). Section 61.113, entitled Private pilot privileges and limitations: 

Pilot in command, subsections (a) and (b) prescribe the following, in relevant part: 

(a.) No person who holds a private pilot certificate may act as a pilot in command 

(PIC) of an aircraft that is carrying passengers or property for compensation or hire; nor 

may that person, for compensation or hire, act as PIC of an aircraft. 

(b.) A private pilot may, for compensation or hire, act as PIC of an aircraft in 

connection with any business or employment if—

(1) The flight is only incidental to that business or employment; and 

(2) The aircraft does not carry passengers or property for compensation or hire.

2. Cody L. Kelley Seeks Exemption From The Requirements Of Section 91.7 (a). 

Section 91.7, entitled Civil aircraft airworthiness, subsection (a), states the following: 

(a) No person may operate a civil aircraft unless it is in airworthy condition. 
3. Cody L. Kelley Seeks Exemption From The Requirements Of Section 91.121.

Section 91.121, entitled Altimeter settings, subsection (a), states the following, in part: 

(a) 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--

(1) Below 18,000 feet MSL, to--

(i) The current reported altimeter setting of a station along the route and 

within 100 nautical miles of the aircraft; 

(ii) 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; or 

(iii) 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.

4. Cody L. Kelley Seeks Exemption From The Requirements Of Section 91.151(b). 

Section 91.151, entitled Fuel requirements for flights in VFR conditions, subsection (b), states 

the following: 

(b) No person may begin a flight in a rotorcraft under VFR conditions unless (considering wind 

and forecast weather conditions) there is enough fuel to fly to the first point of intended landing 

and, assuming normal cruising speed, to fly after that for at least 20 minutes. 

5. Cody L. Kelley Sees Exemption From The Requirements Of Section 91.405(a). 

Section 91.405, entitled Maintenance required, subsection (a), states the following: 

Each owner or operator of an aircraft—

(a) Shall have that aircraft inspected as prescribed in subpart E of this part and shall 

between required inspections, except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, have 

discrepancies repaired as prescribed in part 43 of this chapter[.]
6. Cody L. Kelley Sees Exemption From The Requirements Of Section 91.407(a)(1)

Section 91.407, entitled Operation after maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, or 

alteration, subsection (a)(1), states the following: 

(a) No person may operate any aircraft that has undergone maintenance, preventive 

maintenance, rebuilding, or alteration unless--

(1) It has been approved for return to service by a person authorized under §43.7 of this 

chapter[.]

7. Cody L. Kelley Seeks Exemption From The Requirements Of Section 91.409 (a) (1) And 

91.409 (a) (2). 

Section 91.409, entitled Inspections, subsection (a), states the following:

(a) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, no person may operate an 

aircraft unless, within the preceding 12 calendar months, it has had -

(1) An annual inspection in accordance with part 43 of this chapter and has been 

approved for return to service by a person authorized by § 43.7 of this chapter; 

or 

(2) An inspection for the issuance of an airworthiness certificate in accordance 

with part 21 of this chapter.

8. Cody L. Kelley Seeks Exemption From The Requirements Of Section 91.417 (a) and 

91.417 (b). 

Section 91.417, entitled Maintenance records, subsections (a) and (b), state the following: 

(a) Except for work performed in accordance with §§ 91.411 and 91.413, each registered 

owner or operator shall keep the following records for the periods specified in paragraph 

(b) of this section: 

(1) Records of the maintenance, preventive maintenance, and alteration and 

records of the 100-hour, annual, progressive, and other required or approved 

inspections, as appropriate, for each aircraft (including the airframe) and each engine, 

propeller, rotor, and appliance of an aircraft. The records must include--

(i) A description (or reference to data acceptable to the Administrator) of 

the work performed; and
(ii) The date of completion of the work performed; and 

(iii) The signature, and certificate number of the person approving the 

aircraft for return to service. 

(2) Records containing the following information: 

(i) The total time in service of the airframe, each engine, each propeller, 

and each rotor. 

(ii) The current status of life-limited parts of each airframe, engine, 

propeller, rotor, and appliance. 

(iii) The time since last overhaul of all items installed on the aircraft which 

are required to be overhauled on a specified time basis. 

(iv) The current inspection status of the aircraft, including the time since 

the last inspection required by the inspection program under which the aircraft 

and its appliances are maintained. 

(v) The current status of applicable airworthiness directives (AD) and 

safety directives including, for each, the method of compliance, the AD or safety 

directive number and revision date. If the AD or safety directive involves recurring 

action, the time and date when the next action is required. 

(vi) Copies of the forms prescribed by § 43.9(d) of this chapter for each 

major alteration to the airframe and currently installed engines, rotors, propellers, 

and appliances. 

(b) The owner or operator shall retain the following records for the periods 

prescribed: 

(1) The records specified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section shall be 

retained until the work is repeated or superseded by other work or for 1 year after 

the work is performed. 

(2) The records specified in paragraph (a)(2) of this section shall be 

retained and transferred with the aircraft at the time the aircraft is sold. 

(3) A list of defects furnished to a registered owner or operator under § 

43.11 of this chapter shall be retained until the defects are repaired and the 

aircraft is approved for return to service.
Extend Of Relief Cody L. Kelley Seeks And The Reason Cody L. Kelley Seek The Relief: 

1. Extent Of Relief Cody L. Kelley Seeks And The Reason Cody L. Kelley Seeks 

Relief From Section 61.113(a) And (b). 

Relief from Section 61.113(a) and (b) entitled Private pilot privileges and limitations: Pilot 

in command, is requested to the extent necessary to allow a PIC holding a private pilot or higher 

level certificate, as well as a current and valid airman medical certificate, and who has met 

certain flight-hour and currency requirements, to conduct the proposed UAS flight operations for 

compensation or hire. 

This relief is requested since the limitations set forth in Section 61.113(a) and (b) state 

that a private pilot may, for compensation or hire, act as PIC of an aircraft in connection with any 

business or employment if: (1) The flight is only incidental to that business or employment; and 

(2) The aircraft does not carry passengers or property for compensation or hire. 

As set forth more fully below, Cody L. Kelley submits that an equivalent level of safety 

will be maintained because no PIC will be allowed to operate the Blade Chroma UAS unless 

that PIC has met certain flight-hour and currency requirements, demonstrating that the PIC is 

able to safely operate the Blade Chroma UAS in a manner consistent with the operations 

specifications as described in this exemption, including evasive and emergency maneuvers, as 

well as maintaining appropriate distances from people, vessels, vehicles and structures.

Further, Cody L. Kelley submits that all flights of the Blade Chroma UAS conducted by 

the PIC pursuant to the grant of this Petition: (1) will be incidental to Cody L. Kelley’s business; 

and (2) will not carry passengers or property for compensation or hire.

2. Extend Of Relief Cody L. Kelley Seeks And The Reason Cody L. Kelley Seeks Relief 

From Section 91.7(a). 

Relief from Section 91.7(a) entitled Civil aircraft airworthiness, is requested to the extent 

required to allow Cody L. Kelley to determine that the Blade Chroma UAS is in airworthy 

condition prior to every flight by ensuring that the UAS is in compliance with the operating 

documents (i.e. Monthly Maintenance Log, and Blade Chroma Instruction Manual).

Cody L. Kelley seeks the requested relief because the Blade Chroma UAS does not 

require an airworthiness certificate in accordance with 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H. Therefore, 

Cody L. Kelley will ensure that the Blade Chroma UAS is in airworthy condition based upon its 

compliance with the operating documents (i.e., Monthly Maintenance Log, and Blade Chroma 

Instruction Manual) prior to every flight, and further, determine that the aircraft are in condition 

for safe flight, as stated in the conditions and limitations below.

3. Extent Of Relief Cody L. Kelley Seeks And The Reason Cody L. Kelley Seeks Relief 

From Section 91.121. 
Relief from Section 91.121, entitled Altimeter settings, may be required to allow flight 

operations of the Blade Chroma, which utilize a barometric pressure sensor, GPS equipment, 

and a radio communications telemetry data link to downlink altitude information from the UA to 

the PIC at the ground control station (GCS). Since the FAA requires that any altitude information 

concerning UAS operations be reported to air traffic control (ATC) in feet above ground level 

(AGL), Cody L. Kelley seeks the requested relief because the Blade Chroma UA’s altimeter may 

be set on the ground to zero feet AGL, rather than the local barometric pressure or field altitude, 

before each flight. 

Considering the limited altitude of the proposed operations, relief from 14 CFR 91.121 is 

sought to the extent necessary to comply with the applicable conditions and limitations stated 

below. As more fully set forth herein, an equivalent level of safety will be maintained since the 

Blade Chroma UA is equipped with a barometric pressure sensor and GPS equipment, which 

automatically ensures that a ground level pressure setting will be established prior to each flight, 

and provides the PIC with altitude information of the UA on the heads-up display of the GCS.

4. Extent Of Relief Cody L. Kelley Seeks And The Reason Cody L. Kelley Seeks Relief 

From Section 91.151(b).

Relief from Section 91.151(b) entitled Fuel requirements for flight in VFR conditions, is 

requested to the extent required to allow flights of the battery powered Blade Chroma UA during 

daylight hours in visual meteorological conditions (VMC), under visual flight rules (VFR), for a 

total duration of 13.5 minutes to the first point of intended landing and, assuming normal 

cruising speed, to fly after that for at least 4.5 minutes. Cody L. Kelley seeks the requested relief 

because without an exemption from Section 91.151(b), the flight time duration of the battery 

powered Blake Chroma UA will severely constrain the practicality of any aerial video or still 

photo flight operations that Cody L. Kelley proposes to conduct pursuant to this Petition.

Significantly, as set forth below, the technical specifications of the Blade Chroma UAS, 

the Blade Chroma operating documents, and Cody L. Kelley’s proposed operating limitations, 

ensure that Cody L. Kelley will safely operate the battery powered Blade Chroma UA during 

daylight hours in visual meteorological conditions (VMC), under visual flight rules (VFR), with 

enough battery power to fly for a total duration of 13.5 minutes to the first point of intended 

landing and, assuming normal cruising speed, to fly after that for at least 4.5 minutes.

5. Extent Of Relief Cody L. Kelley Seeks And The Reason Cody L. Kelley Seeks Relief 

From Sections 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), And 91.417(a) & (b). 

Since Sections 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), and 91.417(a) & (b) only 

apply to aircraft with an airworthiness certificate, Cody L. Kelley requests relief from these 

Sections because the Blade Chroma UAS does not require airworthiness certificates. As set 

forth more fully below, the Blade Chroma UAS meets the conditions of FMRA Section 333 for 
operation without an airworthiness certificate. Accordingly, Cody L. Kelley will use trained 

technicians to perform maintenance, alterations, or preventive maintenance on the UAS using 

the methods, techniques, and practices prescribed in the UAS operating documents (i.e. 

Monthly Maintenance Log, and Blade Chroma Instruction Manual). Furthermore, Cody L. Kelley 

will document and maintain all maintenance records for the Blade Chroma UAS. 

How This Request Would Benefit The Public As A Whole: 

Granting the present Petition will further the public interest by allowing Cody L. Kelley to 

safely, efficiently, and economically perform aerial video and photography for construction sites, 

real estate, surveying, and landscape over certain areas of the United States. Additionally, use 

of the Blade Chroma UAS will decrease congestion of the NAS, reduce pollution, and provide 

significant benefits to the economy. Notably, the benefits of Cody L. Kelley’s proposed operation 

of the Blade Chroma UAS will be realized without implicating any privacy issues. 

1. The Public Will Benefit From Decreased Congestion Of The NAS. 

The Blade Chroma UA is battery powered and serve as a safe, efficient, and economical 

alternative to the manned aircraft traditionally utilized to obtain aerial imagery. By reducing the 

amount of manned aircraft needed to perform aerial acquisitions, an exemption allowing the use 

of a Blade Chroma UAS would reduce the amount of manned aircraft in the NAS, reduce noise 

and air pollution, as well as increase the safety of life and property in the air and on the ground. 

Furthermore, by reducing the number of manned aircraft operating in the NAS, congestion 

around airports caused by arriving and departing aircraft will be reduced. The Blade Chroma UA 

does not require an airport to takeoff or land. Likewise, a reduction of manned aircraft 

conducting aerial video and photography missions would result in fewer aircraft that must be 

handled by air traffic control during the ground, takeoff, departure, arrival, and landing phases of 

flight operations.

2. The Public Will Benefit From The Safety And Efficiency Of The Blade Chroma UAS. 

Conducting aerial acquisitions with the Blade Chroma UAS, instead of manned aircraft, 

will greatly benefit the public by drastically reducing the levels of air and noise pollution 

generated during traditional aerial video and still photography flight operations. By using battery 

power and electric motors, the Blade Chroma UAS produce no air pollution, and is the most 

viable environmentally conscious alternative to the cabin class, six cylinder internal combustion 

engine aircraft that are typically utilized for aerial video and photography, while burning 

approximately 20-30 gallons per hour of leaded aviation fuel. The Blade Chroma UA, while 

reducing the carbon footprint of aerial acquisitions, also eliminates noise pollution, as the UA is 

propelled by battery powered electric motors, rather than an internal combustion engine. 

By using the Blade Chroma UAS to perform aerial acquisitions, the substantial risk to life 

and property in the air and on the ground, which is usually associated with traditional manned 

aircraft flight operations, will be substantially reduced or completely eliminated. Aside from the 
lack of flight crew members located onboard the aircraft, the Blade Chroma UA (weighing 

approximately 2 pounds 11 ounces, at the maximum gross weight with a length of 16 inches 

and with no fuel on board), has less physical potential for collateral damage to life and property 

on the ground, and in the air, compared to the manned aircraft that typically conduct similar 

operations (weighing approximately 6,000 pounds with a wingspan of approximately 42 feet, a 

length of 34 feet, and a fuel capacity of 180 gallons). 

3. Performing Aerial Video and Photography Operations With The Blade Chroma UAS 

Will Benefit The Economy.

In addition to being safe and efficient, the Blade Chroma UAS are also an economical 

alternative to using manned aircraft to conduct similar aerial operations. As such, operation of 

the Blade Chroma UAS will allow United States based companies, like Cody L. Kelley, to remain 

competitive and contribute to growth of the U.S. economy. Specifically, with the rising cost of 

aviation fuel and the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) regulatory actions phasing out 

leaded aviation fuels, U.S. owned and operated companies must adopt new and alternative 

technology in order to remain competitive. Operating the battery powered Blade Chroma UAS is 

one such technology that not only allows companies greater operational flexibility compared to 

manned aircraft, but provides such flexibility without the high operational cost of a traditional 

manned aircraft. By operating the Blade Chroma UAS, companies such as Cody L. Kelley, can 

remain competitive and profitable, and therefore, provide greater job stability to employees and 

contractors, which will ultimately contribute to growth of the U.S. economy. Improved financial 

performance of U.S. companies, through commercial use of the Blade Chroma UAS, provides a 

stable workforce that increases consumer spending; improves local, state, and federal tax 

revenues; and allows companies to invest in research and development in order to remain 

competitive both in the United States and abroad.

4. There Will Be No Privacy Issues.

Similar to the manned aerial acquisition flight operations that have been conducted for 

decades, Cody L. Kelley’s proposed operation of the Blade Chroma UAS will not implicate any 

privacy issues. Specifically, the Blade Chroma UAS will be operated only in compliance with 

operating documents (i.e. Monthly Maintenance Log, and Blade Chroma Instruction Manual) 

which requires property owner involvement as well as local law enforcement notification, and in 

accordance with the Federal Aviation Regulations, including the minimum altitude requirements 

of 14 C.F.R. § 91.119

Reasons Why This Exemption Would Not Adversly Affect Saftey:

1. Reasons Why The Blade Chroma UA Meet The Conditions Of The FAA

Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (FMRA) Section 333. 

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

the unmanned aircraft and its operation, Cody L. Kelley’s operation of the Blade Chroma 
UAS will meet the conditions of FMRA Section 333, and will not require an airworthiness 

certificate in accordance with 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H. 

Section 333 provides authority for a UAS to operate without airworthiness certification 

and sets forth requirements for considering whether a UAS will create a hazard to users 

of the NAS or the public, or otherwise pose a threat to national security. Specifically, 

FMRA Section 333 states the following, in part: 

(a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other requirement of this subtitle, and not 

later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of 

Transportation shall determine if certain unmanned aircraft systems may operate 

safely in the national airspace system before completion of the plan and 

rulemaking required by section 332 of this Act or the guidance required by 

section 334 of this Act. 

(b) Assessment of Unmanned Aircraft Systems.--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; and 

(2) whether a certificate of waiver, certificate of authorization, or 

airworthiness certification under section 44704 of title 49, United States 

Code, is required for the operation of unmanned aircraft systems 

identified under paragraph (1).

(c) Requirements for Safe Operation.--If the Secretary determines under 

this section that certain unmanned aircraft systems may operate safely in 

the national airspace system, the Secretary shall establish requirements 

for the safe operation of such aircraft systems in the national airspace 

system.

In seeking this exemption, Cody L. Kelley submits that the Blade Chroma UAS can 

operate safely in the NAS pursuant to FMRA Section 333, as demonstrated by: (a) the 

characteristics of the Blade Chroma UAS; (b) the pilot certification requirement; and (c) 

the specific operating limitations. 

a. The Specifications Of The Blade Chroma Demonstrates Its Safe 

Characteristics.
The Blade Chroma UAS do not create a hazard to users of the NAS or the public, 

or otherwise pose a threat to national security considering its size, weight, speed, 

and operational capability. 

i. Technical Specifications Of The Blade Chroma UAS.

The technical specifications of the Blade Chroma UAS are set 

forth by the Blade Chroma User Manuals, attached hereto as Exhibit A 

and B. 

ii. The Blade Chroma UAS Autonomous Flight And Navigation 

Modes Enable The UAS To Remain Within A Defined Operational

Area. 

The Blade Chroma UAS may be operated in both manual and fully 

autonomous flight modes. A complete description of the flight and 

navigational modes of the Blade Chroma UAS is provided in the manual 

attatched. 

iii. The Blade Chroma UAS Are Designed For Automatic Return To 

Home Point Or Hover In The Event Of Loss Of The Control Link Or 

Navigation.

When the Control Link is lost, the Blade Chroma UA will remain 

stationary, in flight, for 3 seconds or more. If, after 3 seconds, the Blade 

Chroma UA has not reacquired the control link data from the GCS, the 

UA will assume that the Control Link is lost and the UA will return to the 

home position (i.e., failsafe mode) via GPS, and will descend to the 

takeoff position and shutdown. 

A complete description of the Failsafe Functions of the Blade 

Chroma are set forth in the Blade Chroma User Manual, attached. 

iv. The Blade Chroma GCS And Its Operation. 

A complete description of the operation and specifications of the 

Blade Chroma GCS and flight control software is provided in the Blade 

Chroma User Manual, attached.

b. Flight Operations Of Blade Chroma UAS Are Limited To The Line Of Sight Of A

Certificated Pilot in Command With A Safety Observer.
Cody L. Kelley will only utilize certificated pilots who possess a current and valid airman 

medical certificate to act as a pilot in command (PIC) of the Blade Chroma UAS. 

Additionally, a safety observer will assist all pilots during flight time. 

c. Flights Of Blade Chroma UAS Will Be Conducted Pursuant To Specific 

Operating Limitations. 

In seeking this exemption, Cody L. Kelley proposes to commercially operate Blade 

Chroma UAS for the special purpose of conducting aerial video and photography over 

certain areas of United States, pursuant to the following specific operating limitations: 

1. Operations authorized by this grant of exemption will be limited to the following aircraft 

described in the operating documents, rotorcraft UAS weighing less than 55 pounds 

maximum gross weight: Blade Chroma Unmanned Aircraft System. Proposed operations 

of any other aircraft will require a new petition or a petition to amend this grant. 

2. UAS operations under this exemption will be limited to conducting operations for the 

purpose of aerial video and photography. 

3. The UA may not be flown at an indicated airspeed exceeding 20 knots. 

4. The UA must be operated at an altitude of no more than 500 feet above ground level 

(AGL), as indicated by the procedures specified in the operating documents unless a 

special request is made and approved by ATC. All altitudes reported to ATC must be 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 

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

6. The use of first person view (FPV) by the PIC or safety observer (SO) is not permitted. 

7. All operations must utilize a safety observer (SO). The SO may be used to satisfy the 

VLOS requirement as long as the PIC always maintains VLOS capability. The SO 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 SO can perform the functions prescribed in the operating documents. 

8. The SO must not perform any other duties beyond assisting the PIC with seeing and 

avoiding other air traffic and other ground based obstacles/obstructions and is not 

permitted to operate the camera or other instruments. 
9. The operating documents and the grant of exemption must be accessible during UAS 

operations and made available to the Administrator upon request. If a discrepancy exists 

between the conditions and limitations contained in the grant of exemption and the 

procedures outlined in the operating documents, the conditions and limitations contained 

in the grant of exemption 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 

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

petitions for extension or amendment to the grant of exemption. If the operator 

determines that any update or revision would affect the basis upon which the FAA 

granted the exemption, then the operator must petition for 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. 

10. Prior to each flight the PIC must inspect the UAS to ensure that it is in a condition for 

safe flight. If the 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. The Ground Control 

Station must be included in the preflight inspection. All maintenance and alterations must 

be properly documented in the aircraft records. 

11. 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. The PIC who conducts the functional test flight must 

make an entry in the aircraft records. 

12. The pre-flight inspection must account for all potential discrepancies, e.g. inoperable 

components, items, or equipment, not already covered in the relevant sections of the 

operating documents. 

13. The operator must follow the UAS manufacturer’s aircraft/component, maintenance, 

overhaul, replacement, inspection, and life limit requirements. 

14. The operator must carry out its maintenance, inspections, and record keeping 

requirements, in accordance with the operating documents. Maintenance, inspection, 

alterations, and status of replacement/overhaul component parts must be noted in the 

aircraft records, including total time in service, description of work accomplished, and the 

signature of the authorized person returning the UAS to service. 

15. Each UAS operated under this exemption must comply with all manufacturer's Safety 

Bulletins. 

16. The authorized person must make an entry in the aircraft record of the corrective 

action taken against discrepancies discovered between inspections. 
17. The PIC must possess at least a private pilot certificate and at least a current thirdclass medical certificate. 

18. The operator may not permit any PIC to operate unless the PIC meets the operator’s 

qualification criteria and demonstrates the ability to safely operate the UAS in a manner 

consistent with how the UAS will be operated under the exemption, including evasive 

and emergency maneuvers and maintaining appropriate distances from persons, 

vessels, vehicles and structures. PIC qualification flight hours must be logged in a 

manner consistent with 14 C.F.R. § 61.51(b). Flights for the purposes of training the 

operator’s PICs are permitted under the terms of the 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 C.F.R. § 91.119. 

19. UAS operations may not be conducted during night, as defined in 14 C.F.R. § 1.1. All 

operations must be conducted under visual meteorological conditions (VMC). If flight at 

night is required, a special request will be made at the FAA office closest to proposed 

area of operations. Flights under special visual flight rules (SVFR) are not authorized. 

20. The UA may not operate within 5 nautical miles of an airport reference point as 

denoted on a current FAA-published aeronautical chart unless a letter of agreement with 

that airport’s management is obtained, and the operation is conducted in accordance 

with a NOTAM as required by the operator’s COA. The letter of agreement with the 

airport management must be made available to the Administrator upon request. 

21. 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. 

22. If the UA loses communications or loses its GPS signal, it must return to a 

predetermined location within the planned operating area and land or be recovered in 

accordance with the operating documents. 

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

accordance with the operating documents. 

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

weather conditions) there is enough power to fly at normal cruising speed to the 

intended landing point and land the UA with 25% battery power remaining. 

25. The operator must obtain an Air Traffic Organization (ATO) issued Certificate of 

Waiver or Authorization (COA) prior to conducting any operations under the grant of 

exemption. This COA will also require the operator to request a Notice to Airman 
(NOTAM) not more than 72 hours in advance, but not less than 48 hours prior to the 

operation. All operations shall be conducted in accordance with airspace requirements in 

the ATO issued COA including class of airspace, altitude level and potential transponder 

requirements. 

26. All aircraft operated in accordance with the exemption must be identified by serial 

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

as large as practicable. 

27. Before conducting operations, the radio frequency spectrum used for operation and 

control of the UA must comply with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) or 

other appropriate government oversight agency requirements. 

28. The documents required fewer than 14 C.F.R. 91.9 and 91.203 must be available to 

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

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

upon request. 

29. The UA must remain clear and yield the right of way to all manned aviation 

operations and activities at all times. 

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

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

persons (persons other than the PIC, SO, operator trainees or essential 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 and/or; 

b. The aircraft is operated near vessels, vehicles or structures where the 

owner/controller of such vessels, vehicles or structures has granted permission 

and the PIC has made a safety assessment of the risk of operating closer to 

those objects and determined that it does not present an undue hazard, and; 

c. Operations nearer to the PIC, SO, operator trainees or essential persons do 

not present an undue hazard to those persons per § 91.119(a).

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

permission from the land owner/controller or authorized representative. Permission from 
land owner/controller or authorized representative will be obtained for each flight to be 

conducted. 

33. 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.

2. Reasons Why An Exemption From The Requirements Of Section 61.113(a) And (b) 

Would Not Adversely Affect Safety. 

Cody L. Kelley submits that the equivalent level of safety established by Section 

61.113(a) and (b) will be maintained because no PIC will be allowed to operate the 

Blade Chroma UAS unless that PIC has demonstrated, by meeting minimum flight-hour 

and currency requirements, that the PIC is able to safely operate the Blade Chroma UAS 

in a manner consistent with the exemption, including evasive and emergency maneuvers 

and maintaining appropriate distances from people, vessels, vehicles and structures. 

Considering Cody L. Kelley’s proposed area of operations, and the operating limitations 

set forth-above; the parallel nature of private pilot aeronautical knowledge requirements 

to those of commercial pilot requirements (See Exemption No. 11062); and the 

airmanship skills necessary to safely operate the Blade Chroma UAS, Cody L. Kelley 

submits that the additional manned airmanship experience of a commercially certificated 

pilot would not correlate to the airmanship skills necessary for Cody L. Kelley’s specific 

proposed flight operations. 

The FAA has previously granted relief from Section 61.113(a) and (b) specific to UAS, in 

circumstances similar, in all material respects, to those presented herein (e.g. Exemption 

Nos. 11062, 11063, 11064, 11065, 11066, 11067, 11080, 11109, 11110, 11112, 11136, 

11138, 11150, 11153, 11156, 11158, 11159, 11160, 11161). 

Cody L. Kelley will not allow any PIC to operate the Blade Chroma UAS unless that PIC 

has demonstrated, by meeting minimum flight-hour requirements or the Blade Chroma 

UAS training and currency requirements, that the PIC is able to safely operate the Blade 

Chroma UAS in a manner consistent with this exemption, including evasive and 

emergency maneuvers and maintaining appropriate distances from people, vessels, 

vehicles and structures.

Specifically, the PIC must have accumulated and logged, in a manner consistent with 14 

C.F.R. § 61.51(b), 25 hours of total time as a UAS rotorcraft pilot (with a minimum of 5 

hours of those hours as a UAS pilot operating the same make and model of UAS to be 

used for operations under the exemption). In addition to the hour requirements, the PIC 

must accomplish 3 takeoffs and landings in the preceding 90 days (for currency 

purposes).
As in Exemption Nos. 11062, 11138, and 11153, prior documented flight experience that 

was obtained in compliance with applicable regulations will ensure an equivalent level of 

safety during Cody L. Kelley’s proposed operations. The Administrator has held that 

prior documented flight experience that was obtained in compliance with applicable 

regulations would ensure safe operations, stating as follows:

In Exemption No. 11062, the FAA required that prior to conducting operations for 

the purpose of motion picture filming (or similar operations), the PIC must have 

accumulated and logged, in a manner consistent with 14 CFR 61.51(b), 25 hours 

of total time as a UAS rotorcraft pilot including at least 10 hours logged as a UAS 

pilot with a multi-rotor UAS. Prior to operations under Exemption No. 11062, the 

PIC must also have accumulated and logged a minimum of 5 hours as a UAS 

pilot operating the same make and model of UAS to be used for operations under 

the exemption. For clarification, the FAA considers these minimum hour 

requirements to be inclusive rather than additive; i.e. 5 hours make and model 

time may be included in the 10 hours of multi-rotor time and the 10 hours may be 

included in the total 25 hours of UAS rotorcraft time. In addition to the hour 

requirements, the PIC must accomplish 3 takeoffs and landings in the preceding 

90 days (for currency purposes). The FAA finds that at a minimum, the flight-hour 

requirements in Exemption No. 11062 are appropriate to practice and build 

proficiency in the skills necessary to safely conduct the petitioner’s proposed 

operations. The FAA also finds that prior documented flight experience that was 

obtained in compliance with applicable regulations would satisfy this requirement. 

Training, proficiency, and experience-building flights can also be conducted 

under the grant of exemption to accomplish the required flight time. During 

training, proficiency, and experience-building flights the PIC is required to 

operate the UA with appropriate distances in accordance with 14 C.F.R 91.119.

Exemption No. 11138 at page 15. 

Accordingly, Cody L. Kelley will ensure safe operations by not allowing any PIC 

to operate the Blade Chroma UAS unless that PIC has demonstrated, by meeting 

minimum flight-hour and currency requirements, that the PIC is able to safely 

operate the Blade Chroma UAS in a manner consistent with the exemption, 

including evasive and emergency maneuvers and maintaining appropriate 

distances from people, vessels, vehicles and structures.

3. Reasons Why An Exemption From The Requirements Of Section 91.7(a) Would Not 

Adversely Affect Safety. 

The equivalent level of safety established by Section 91.7(a) will be maintained because 

prior to every flight, Cody L. Kelley will ensure that the Blade Chroma UAS is in an 
airworthy condition based upon the UAS’s compliance with its operating documents and 

as stated in the conditions and limitations herein. 

Additionally, the FAA has previously granted relief from Section 91.7(a) specific to UAS, 

in circumstances similar, in all material respects, to those presented herein (e.g. 

Exemption Nos. 11062, 11063, 11064, 11065, 11066, 11067, 11080, 11109, 11110, 

11112, 11136, 11138, 11150, 11153, 11156, 11157, 11158, 11159, 11160, 11161).

4. Reasons Why An Exemption From The Requirements Of Section 91.121 Would Not 

Adversely Affect Safety. 

The equivalent level of safety established by Section 91.121 will be maintained because 

the altitude information of the Blade Chroma UAs will be provided to the PIC via GPS 

equipment and a radio communications telemetry data link, which downlinks from the UA 

to the GCS for active monitoring of the flight path and altitude. This altitude information, 

combined with Cody L. Kelley’s operation of the Blade Chroma UAs within visual line of 

sight, at or below 400 feet AGL, will ensure a level of safety equivalent to Section 

91.121. The altitude information will be generated by GPS equipment installed onboard 

the aircraft. Prior to each flight, a zero altitude initiation point is automatically established 

by the UA at ground level. The FAA has previously granted relief from Section 91.121 

specific to UAS, in circumstances similar, in all material respects, to those presented 

herein (e.g. Exemption Nos. 11062, 11063, 11064, 11065, 11066, 11067, 11080, 11109, 

11112, 11136, 11138, 11150, 11153, 11156, 11157, 11158, 11159, 11160, 11161). 5. 

Reasons Why An Exemption From The Requirements Of Section 91.151(b) Would Not 

Adversely Affect Safety. A grant of this exemption would ensure an equivalent level of 

safety established by 14 C.F.R. Section 91.151(b) as a result of (1) the technical 

specifications of the Blade Chroma UA; (2) the limitations on the proposed flight 

operations; and (3) the location of the proposed flight operations. Accordingly, Cody L. 

Kelley will ensure that it will safely operate the battery powered Blade Chroma UA during 

daylight hours in VFR conditions, with enough battery power to fly for a total duration of 

13.5 minutes to the first point of intended landing and, assuming normal cruising speed, 

to fly after that for at least 4.5 minutes. 

Here, as in Exemption No. 11109, the technical specifications of the Blade Chroma UA; 

the limitations on the proposed flight operations; and the location of the proposed 

operations, will ensure an equivalent level of safety established by 14 C.F.R. Section 

91.151(b). Furthermore, safety will be ensured as the Blade Chroma UA provide audible 

and visual warnings to the PIC at the GCS when the UA experiences low battery 

voltage, the first warning occurring at approximately 33% remaining battery power, and 

again at approximately 10% remaining battery power. At the critically low battery level, 

the Blade Chroma will descend and land automatically. 

Significantly, previous exemptions granted by the FAA concerning Section 91.151 

establish that safety is not adversely affected when the technical characteristics and 
operating limitations of the UAS are considered. Relief has been granted for manned 

aircraft to operate at less than the minimums prescribed in Section 91.151, including 

Exemption Nos. 2689, 5745, and 10650. Moreover, the FAA has previously granted 

relief from Section 91.151 specific to UAS, in circumstances similar, in all material 

respects, to those presented herein (e.g. Exemption Nos. 8811, 10808, 10673, 11042, 

11062, 11063, 11064, 11065, 11066, 11067, 11080, 11109, 11110, 11136, 11138, 

11150, 11153, 11156, 11157, 11158, 11159, 11160, 11161). 

6. Reasons Why An Exemption From The Requirements Of Sections 91.405(a), 

91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), And 91.417(a) & (b) Would Not Adversely Affect Safety. 

In seeking this exemption, Cody L. Kelley submits that the equivalent level of safety with 

regard to the regulatory maintenance and alteration requirements established by 

Sections 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), and 91.417(a) & (b) will be met 

because Cody L. Kelley will use trained technicians to perform maintenance, alterations, 

or preventive maintenance on the UAS using the methods, techniques, and practices 

prescribed in the operating documents (i.e., the Cody L. Kelley Aerial Operations 

Manual, Monthly Maintenance Log, and Blade Chroma Instruction Manual). 

Furthermore, Cody L. Kelley will document and maintain all maintenance records for the 

Blade Chroma

Since the Blade Chroma UAS will be inspected as prescribed by the operating 

documents, Cody L. Kelley will maintain the equivalent level of safety established by 

Sections 91.405(a), 91.409(a)(1), and 91.409(a)(2). A copy of the Blade Chroma User 

Manual is attached hereto as Exhibit C and D; a copy of the Blade Chroma UAS 

Maintenance LOG is attached hereto as Exhibit E. 

Likewise, the exemption sought will not adversely affect safety because Cody L. Kelley 

will use trained technicians to perform maintenance, alterations or preventive 

maintenance on the UAS using the methods, techniques, and practices prescribed by 

the operating documents. 

Furthermore, the exemption sought would maintain an equivalent level of safety 

established by Sections 91.407, 91.417(a) and 91.417(b), because all maintenance of 

the Blade Chroma UAS will be performed by trained technicians. Maintenance will be 

documented and maintained utilizing the monthly maintenance log. 

Significantly, previous exemptions granted by the FAA concerning Sections 91.405(a), 

91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), and 91.417(a) & (b) establish that safety is not 

adversely affected when the technical characteristics and operating limitations of the 

UAS are considered.

In consideration of Cody L. Kelley’s proposed operating limitations, the operating 

documents, and the technical aspects of the Blade Chroma UAS, Cody L. Kelley submits 
that safety will not be adversely affected by granting exemption from 14 C.F.R. Sections 

91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1) and (a)(2), 91.409(a)(2), and 91.417(a) and (b). The FAA has 

previously granted relief specific to UAS in circumstances similar, in all material 

respects, to those presented herein (e.g. Exemption Nos. 11062, 11063, 11064, 11065, 

11066, 11067, 11080, 11109, 11110, 11112, 11136, 11138, 11150, 11153, 11156, 

11157, 11158, 11159, 11160, 11161).

7. The FAA May Prescribe Any Other Conditions For Safe Operation.

In accordance with Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 

(FMRA) and 14 C.F.R. § 21.16 entitled Special Conditions, Cody L. Kelley requests that 

the FAA prescribe special conditions for the intended operation of the Blade Chroma 

UAS, which contain such safety standards that the Administrator finds necessary to 

establish a level of safety equivalent to that established by 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H, 

and 14 C.F.R §§ 61.113(a) & (b), 91.7 (a), 91.121, 91.151(b), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 

91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), and 91.417(a) & (b). Such special conditions will permit safe 

operation of the UA for the limited purpose of conducting aerial video and photography 

over certain areas of the United States for compensation or hire. FMRA Section 333 sets 

forth the requirements for considering whether a UAS will create a hazard to users of the 

NAS or the public, or otherwise pose a threat to national security; and further, provides 

the authority for such UAS to operate without airworthiness certification in accordance 

with any requirements that must be established for the safe operation of the UAS in the 

NAS. 

Likewise, the Administrator may prescribe special conditions pursuant to 14 C.F.R. § 

21.16, for operation of the Blade Chroma UAS, since the airworthiness regulations of 14 

C.F.R. Part 21 do not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards, due to the novel 

or unusual design features of the aircraft. Section 21.16, entitled Special Conditions, 

states the following: 

If the FAA finds that the airworthiness regulations of this subchapter do not 

contain adequate or appropriate safety standards for an aircraft, aircraft engine, 

or propeller because of a novel or unusual design feature of the aircraft, aircraft 

engine or propeller, he prescribes special conditions and amendments thereto for 

the product. The special conditions are issued in accordance with Part 11 of this 

chapter and contain such safety standards for the aircraft, aircraft engine or 

propeller as the FAA finds necessary to establish a level of safety equivalent to 

that established in the regulations. 

See 14 C.F.R. § 21.16.

Therefore, in accordance with FMRA Section 333 and 14 C.F.R. § 21.16, the 

FAA may prescribe special conditions for Leading Edge’s intended operation of 

the Blade Chroma UAS, which contain such safety standards that the 
Administrator finds necessary to establish a level of safety equivalent to that 

established by 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H, and 14 C.F.R Sections 61.113(a) & 

(b), 91.7(a), 91.121, 91.151(b), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), 

and 91.417(a) & (b).

A Summary That Can Be Published In The Federal Register:

Cody L. Kelley seeks exemption from the requirements of 14 C.F.R Sections 

61.113(a)&(b), 91.7(a), 91.121, 91.151(b), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), 

and 91.417(a) & (b).

A Brief Description Of The Nature Of The Exemption Cody L. Kelley Seeks: 

This exemption will permit Cody L. Kelley to commercially operate an Unmanned Aircraft 

System (UAS) for the purpose of conducting aerial video and photography over certain 

areas of the United States.

Any Additional Information, Views, Or Arguments Available To Support Cody L. Kelley’s 

Request: 

This Petition is made pursuant to the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 

(FMRA) Section 333, which directs the Secretary of Transportation to determine if 

certain UAS may operate safely in the NAS. As such, Cody L. Kelley’s request for 

exemption may be granted pursuant to the authority of FMRA Section 333 and 14 C.F.R. 

Part 11, as set forth above. 

FMRA Section 333 sets forth the requirements for considering whether a UAS will create 

a hazard to users of the NAS or the public, or otherwise pose a threat to national 

security; and further, provides the authority for such UAS to operate without 

airworthiness certification. 

As discussed in detail above, Cody L. Kelley will operate the Blade Chroma UAS safely 

in the NAS, without creating a hazard to users of the NAS, or the public, or otherwise 

pose a threat to national security.

CONCLUSION

As set forth herein, Cody L. Kelley seeks an exemption pursuant to 14 C.F.R. § 11.61 

and Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (FMRA), which will 

permit safe operation of the Blade Chroma UAS commercially, without an airworthiness 

certificate, for the limited purpose of conducting aerial video and photography over 

certain areas of the United States. By granting this Petition, the FAA Administrator will 

be fulfilling the Congressional mandate of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 

2012, while also advancing the interests of the public, by allowing Cody L. Kelley to 
safely, efficiently, and economically operate the Blade Chroma UAS commercially within 

the NAS. 

Wherefore, in accordance with the Federal Aviation Regulations and the FAA 

Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, Section 333, Cody L. Kelley respectfully 

requests that the Administrator grant this Petition for an exemption from the 

requirements of 14 C.F.R Sections 61.113(a) & (b), 91.7(a), 91.121, 91.151(b), 

91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), and 91.417(a) & (b), and permit Leading 

Edge to operate the Blade Chroma UAS commercially for the purpose of conducting 

aerial video and photography over certain areas of the United States. 

Dated: February 1st, 2016 

Respectfully submitted, 

Cody L. Kelley

APPENDICES

A - Blade Chroma Manufacturer's User Manual