September 10, 2015

Exemption No. 12813

Regulatory Docket No. FAA−2015−2654

Mr. Kevin Wardwell

Home Inspector

14260 West Talon Creek Drive

Boise, ID 83713

Dear Mr. Wardwell:

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.

By letter dated June 4, 2015, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for an 

exemption. You requested to operate an unmanned aircraft system (UAS) to conduct 

community videos, and within property boundaries for individual homeowner real estate 

listing videos/photos.

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

the regulations that the petitioner seeks an exemption.

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition 

in the Federal Register because the requested exemption would not set a precedent, and any 

delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to the petitioner.

Airworthiness Certification

The UAS proposed by the petitioner is a 3d Robotics IRIS+.

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 
2

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, Certification procedures for products and parts, Subpart H—Airworthiness 

Certificates, 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 collection1

. 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.

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, Mr. Kevin Wardwell 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.

 

1 Aerial data collection includes any remote sensing and measuring by an instrument(s) aboard the UA. 

Examples include imagery (photography, video, infrared, etc.), electronic measurement (precision surveying, RF 

analysis, etc.), chemical measurement (particulate measurement, etc.), or any other gathering of data by 

instruments aboard the UA.
3

Conditions and Limitations

In this grant of exemption, Mr. Kevin Wardwell 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 3d Robotics IRIS+

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 

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. 
4

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 

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 Columbia, Puerto Rico, a territory, a possession, or the Federal 

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

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

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 
5

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 

FAA-published 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.

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 

pre-determined 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 
6

(N−Number) 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 

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.
7

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.

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 September 30, 2017, unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

Sincerely,

/s/

John S. Duncan

Director, Flight Standards Service

Enclosures
Kevin Wardwell, Real estate inspector Boise ID - Section 333 Exemption Petition 

June 4, 2015

U. S. Department of Transportation 

Docket Management System 

1200 New Jersey Ave, SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

Re: Exemption Request Section 333 of the FAA Reform Act of the Federal Aviation Regulations from 14 

C.F.R. 45.23(b); 14 C.F.R. Part 21; 14 C.F.R. 61.113(a)&(b); 91.7(a); 91.9(b) (2); 91.103(b); 91.109; 

119.121; 91.151(a); 91.203(a)&(b); 91.405(a); 91.407(a) (1); 91.409(a) (2); 91.417(a)&(b)

Dear Sir or Madam,

I, Kevin Wardwell, am writing pursuant to the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 and the 

procedures contained within 14 C.F.R. 11, to request that I, Kevin Wardwell, an owner and operator of 

small unmanned aircraft, be exempted from the Federal Aviation Regulations (“FARs”) listed below so 

that I, Kevin Wardwell, may operate my small ultra light weight unmanned aircraft system (“UAS”) 

commercially in airspace regulated by the Federal Aviation Administration (“FAA”). As described herein 

I, Kevin Wardwell, am a licensed Real-estate inspector within the State of Idaho; experienced in flying 

hobby helicopters for recreational purposes. I have added a hobby grade quad-copter1 UAS to my 

inventory equipped with a GoPro4+ Black camera with intent for aerial videography/cinematography to 

enhance academic community awareness for those individuals and companies unfamiliar with the 

geographical layout of the land of Idaho, and augment real estate listing videos; following exemption 

and approval by the FAA. Thereby enhancing their academic research experience for the Idaho area.

I have flown small RC electric helicopters for over ten (10) years without incident. Committed to safety 

with each flight. My, Kevin Wardwell, exemption request would permit operation of ultra light weight, 

unmanned (piloted by remote control) and comparatively inexpensive UAS(s) in tightly controlled and 

limited airspace.2 Predetermined in areas away from general public, airports, heliports and vehicular 

traffic for community videos, and within property boundaries for individual homeowner real estate 

listing videos/photos. Currently, similar lightweight, remote controlled UAS's are legally operated by 

unmonitored amateur hobbyists with no safety plan or controls in place to prevent catastrophe. I, Kevin 

Wardwell, will continue to strictly comply with safety.

1 Appendix A – 3dr IRIS+ quad-copter Operator Manual 

2 Appendix B – Idaho area maps 
Kevin Wardwell, Home Inspector Boise ID- Section 333 Exemption Petition

and maintenance procedures included in all applicable UAS manufacturer’s instructions and operating 

manuals to avoid and prevent public hazard, as well as manned aircraft hazards/catastrophe. This will 

act to further safety protocols exclusive to lightweight UAS's specific to real estate video and 

photography usage as I, Kevin Wardwell, record flight data and other information gained through 

permitted flight operations to share with the FAA through any required FAA reports to assist with future 

protocol and safety regulation. 

Granting my, Kevin Wardwell’s, request comports with the Secretary of Transportation’s (FAA 

Administrator’s) responsibilities and authority to not only integrate UAS's into the national airspace 

system, but to “...establish requirements for the safe operation of such aircraft systems [UAS's] in the 

national airspace system” under Section 333(c) of the Reform Act specific to the use of UAS's for real 

estate/Realtor purposes. Further I, Kevin Wardwell, will conduct my operations in compliance with the 

protocols described herein or as otherwise established by the FAA. 

For the reasons stated below I, Kevin Wardwell, respectfully request the grant of an exemption allowing 

me to operate ultra light weight, remote controlled UAS’s for academic community awareness to 

benefit/stimulate attraction to the Idaho area and to enhance real estate listing videos for homeowners 

who cannot afford expensive manned aircraft for the same purpose. Both of which will promote local 

economic growth through increased employment and increased tax base. Both with public safety in 

mind by keeping heavier manned aircraft containing combustible fuel that that poses potential public 

hazard. 

I.Contact Information: 

Kevin wardwell, Home Inspector® 

14260 W. Talon Creek Dr.

Boise, ID 83713

II. The Specific Sections of Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations From Which Kevin 

Wardwell Requests Exemption are: 

14 CFR 21; 

14 C.F.R. 45.23(b);

14 CFR 61.113 (a) & (b);

14 C.F.R. 91, et seq.;

14 CFR 407 (a) (1);

14 CFR 409 (a) (2); and, 

14 CFR 417 (a) & (b).

Kevin Wardwell, Home Inspector®, Boise ID - Section 333 Exemption Petition 
Kevin Wardwell, Home Inspector®, Boise ID - Section 333 Exemption Petition 

III. The Extent of relief Kevin Wardwell seeks and the Reason He Seeks Such Relief: 

I, Kevin Wardwell, submit this application in accordance with the Reform Act, 112 P.L. 95 §§ 

331-334, seeking relief from any currently applicable FARs operating to prevent me, Kevin 

Wardwell, contemplated commercial cinematic, academic and other flight operations within 

the national airspace system. The Reform Act in Section 332 provides for such integration of 

civil unmanned aircraft systems into our national airspace system as it is in the public’s 

interest to do so. My, Kevin Wardwell’s, ultra light weight UAS meets the definition of “small 

unmanned aircraft” as defined in Section 331 and therefore the integration of my ultra light 

weight UAS is expressly contemplated by the Reform Act. I would like to operate my ultra 

light weight UAS prior to the time period by which the Reform Act requires the FAA to 

promulgate rules governing such craft. Thereby, providing direct experience and valuable 

information for formal regulation that can be administered uniformly to all real estate 

related UAS aerial video and photography. The Reform Act guides the Secretary in 

determining the types of UAS's that may operate safely in our national airspace system. 

Considerations include: The weight, size, speed and overall capabilities of the UAS's; 

Whether the UAS will be operated near airports or heavily populated areas; and, Whether 

the UAS will be operated by line of sight. 112 P.L. 95 § 333 (a). Each of these items reflect in 

favor of an exemption for me, Kevin Wardwell. My UAS utilizes four (4) counter-rotating 

propellers for balance, control and stability. My UAS is equipped with GPS and auto return 

safety technology. Weighing less than five (5) pounds (far below the maximum 55 pound 

limit); including camera with gimbal.

I, Kevin Wardwell, considers safety as foremost with each flight. My small unmanned aircraft 

is designed to hover in place via GPS and operate in less than a 24 knot (15 mph) wind. For 

safety, stability and fear of financial loss I will not fly in winds exceeding 16 kph (10 mph). 

Built in safety systems include a GPS mode that allows my UAS to hover in place when radio 

controls are released. With three modes to choose from, I utilize the Loiter Mode for aerial 

videography/photography. This is the safest, most reliable and stable mode to prevent 

accident and hazard. When pilot communication is lost UAS is designed slowly descend to 

point of take off. I do not operate my UAS near airports, Hospitals nor Police heliports, and 

do not operate near areas where general public is within fifty to one hundred (50-100) yards 

depending on location, conditions and weather. I am constantly on alert for any manned 

aircraft (Police/Medical helicopters, etc.) and prepared to land/abort immediately to the 

nearest and safest ground point should a manned aircraft approach my location or I suspect 

manned aircraft may approach near my location. My UAS is capable of vertical and 

horizontal operations, and are flown only within my line of sight of me, as the remote 

control pilot. Utilizing battery power rather than combustible fuels, flights generally last 

between three (3) to seven (7) minutes, with an altitude under one hundred fifty (150) feet. 

I, Kevin

3 Loiter Mode includes safe circle for operation, position hold, self-leveling, altitude command, GPS, return home feature, and 

safety control to return home or land in the event of communication interruption between RC transmitter and UAS. 

See Appendix A - Operator Manual

Kevin Wardwell, Home Inspector®, Boise ID - Section 333 Exemption Petition 
Kevin Wardwell, Home Inspector®, Boise ID - Section 333 Exemption Petition

Wardwell, utilize a fresh fully charged battery with each flight as a safety precaution; full

flight time limit for each battery is fifteen (15) to twenty-five (25) minutes as tested. I do not 

operate my UAS at or below manufacture recommend minimum charge levels for operation; 

preferring to remain well within a safe operating range to insure adequate communication 

between radio control and UAS to eliminate potential for crash, loss of control or hazard. 

Reserve batteries are at hand with each exercise to insure replacement for sufficient safe 

level of operation. I do not believe in taking risk that may cause a crash, that could create 

hazard to the public/property/manned aircraft, and have no desire to lose an investment. I 

have clocked numerous practice flights in remote areas as a hobbyist simulating flights for 

future commercial use to gain familiarization with the characteristics of this specific UAS's 

performance under different temperature and weather conditions. I also practice 

computerized simulated flights to maintain adequate skills and response reflex time. All for 

the sake of safety.

I, Kevin Wardwell’s, am extremely cautious when operating of my UAS/ultra light weight 

unmanned aircraft and will not “create a hazard to users of the national airspace system or 

the public.” 112 P.L. 95 § 333 (b). Given the small size and weight of my UAS it falls well 

within Congress’s contemplated safety zone when it promulgated the Reform Act and the 

corresponding directive to integrate UAS's into the national airspace system. Kevin 

Wardwell’s UAS, used in hobby flight, has a demonstrable safety record and does not pose 

any threat to the general public or national security.

IV. How Kevin Wardwell’s Request Will Benefit the Public As A Whole: 

Aerial videography for geographical awareness and for real estate marketing has been 

around for a long time through manned fixed wing aircraft and helicopters. For small budget 

real estate companies and average homeowners the expense of such aerial videography is 

cost prohibitive. Only large companies and high end Realtors or luxury homeowners can 

afford to absorb such expense. Depriving non -luxury homeowners and lower budget 

Realtors from a valuable marketing tool. Manned aircraft pose a threat to the public through 

potential catastrophic crash that the community has experienced in the past. Each resulting 

in loss of life. Each with combustible fuel that exploded and burned on impact. Police 

helicopters have made emergency hard landings within city limits. My, Kevin Wardwell’s, 

UAS pose no such threat since size and lack of combustible fuel alleviates any potential 

threat to the public. 

Congress has already proclaimed that it is in the public’s interest to integrate commercially 

flown UAS's into the national airspace system, hence the passing of the Reform Act. 

Granting my, Kevin Wardwell’s, exemption request furthers the public interest through 

academic/visual awareness of the geographical benefits in and around the Idaho area. My 

Kevin Wardwell, Home Inspector®, Boise ID - Section 333 Exemption Petition 
Kevin Wardwell, Home Inspector®, Boise ID - Section 333 Exemption Petition

ultra light weight UAS is battery powered and creates no emissions that can harm the 

environment. The consequence of my ultra light weight UAS crashing is far less than a full 

size helicopter or fixed wing aircraft; which are heavy, contain combustible fuel and can 

cause catastrophic devastation to the public. 

The public’s interest is furthered by minimizing ecological and crash threat by permitting 

aerial video/photo capture through my battery operated ultra light weight UAS's. Permitting 

me, Kevin Wardwell, to immediately fly within national air space furthers economic growth. 

Granting my exemption request substantially furthers the economic impact for the 

community for companies looking to relocate or build in the Idaho area as well as 

individuals looking to relocate for career advancement through academic and geographical 

awareness. Both of which serve as a stimulus to the community. 

V. Reasons Why Kevin Wardwell’s Exemption Will Not Adversely Affect Safety Or How The 

Exemption Will Provide a Level of Safety At Least Equal To Existing Rule: 

My, Kevin Wardwell’s, exemption will not adversely affect safety. Quite the contrary, for the 

reasons stated permitting me, Kevin Wardwell, to log more flight time in FAA controlled 

airspace, with communication with the FAA, will allow me to contribute to the innovation 

and implementation of new and novel, as of yet undiscovered safety protocols for Realtors 

that can be embraced by the NAR6 , AAR7 , and TAR8 for development in cooperation with 

the FAA. In addition I, Kevin Wardwell, submit the following representations of 

enhancements to current aerial videography and photography for real estate: 

a. My UAS weighs less than 5 pounds complete with a small ultra light weight high 

quality GoPro 4+ Black camera;

b. I only operate my UAS below 200 feet (well within the 400 foot permissible ceiling 

set by the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012);

c. my UAS only operate for 20-25 minutes per flight; I land my UAS prior to 

manufacturer recommended minimum level of battery power; I pilot my UAS 

through remote control only by line of sight;

d. My UAS has GPS a flight safety feature whereby it hovers and then slowly lands if 

communication with the remote control pilot is lost; 

e. I actively analyze flight data and other sources of information to constantly update 

and enhance safety protocols;

f. I only operate in reasonably safe environment that are strictly controlled, are away 

from power lines, elevated lights, airports and actively populated areas; I conduct 

extensive pre-flight inspections and protocol, during which safety carries primary 

importance;

g. I always obtains all necessary permissions prior to operation; and, I have 

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

danger.

Kevin Wardwell, Home Inspector®, Boise ID - Section 333 Exemption Petition 
Kevin Wardwell, Home Inspector®, Boise ID - Section 333 Exemption Petition 

My, Kevin Wardwell’s, safety protocols provide a level of safety equal to or exceeding existing rules. It is 

important to note that absent the integration of commercial UAS into our national airspace system, 

helicopters are the primary means of aerial video and photography for community awareness and real 

estate. While the safety record of such helicopters is remarkably astounding, there has been local 

incident involving loss of life as well as extensive property damage; it is far safer to operate a battery 

powered ultra light weight UAS.

First, the potential loss of life is diminished because UAS's carry no people on board and I only 

operates my UAS in specific areas away from mass populations.

Second, there is no fuel on board a UAS and thus the potential for fire or explosions is greatly 

diminished. 

Third, the small size and extreme maneuverability of my UAS allow me to remotely pilot away 

from and avoid hazards quickly and safely. 

Lastly, given its small size and weight, even when close enough to capture amazing images, my 

UAS need not be so close to the objects they are focused on through the technology and use of post 

editing software allowing pan and zoom.

Accordingly, my UAS has been experimentally operated for familiarization/competency and will 

continue to operate at and above current safety levels.

VI. A Summary The FAA May Publish in the Federal Register: 

A. 14 C.F.R. 21 and 14 C.F.R. 91: Airworthiness Certificates, Manuals and The Like. 

 14 C.F.R. 21, Subpart H, entitled Airworthiness Certificates, sets forth requirements for 

procurement of necessary airworthiness certificates in relation to FAR § 91.203(a)(1). The size, 

weight and enclosed operational area of my, Kevin Wardwell’s, UAS permits exemption from 

Part 21 because my UAS meets (and exceeds) an equivalent level of safety pursuant to Section 

333 of the Reform Act. The FAA is authorized to exempt aircraft from the airworthiness 

certificate requirement under both the Act (49 U.S.C. § 44701 (f)) and Section 333 of the Reform 

Act. Both pieces of legislation permit the FAA to exempt UAS's from the airworthiness certificate 

requirement in consideration of the weight, size, speed, maneuverability and proximity to areas 

such as airports and dense populations. My, Kevin Wardwell’s, current and projected UAS's 

meet or exceed each of the elements. 

 14 C.F.R. 91.7(a) prohibits the operation of an aircraft without an airworthiness certificate. 

As no such certificate will be applicable in the form contemplated by the FARs, this Regulation is 

inapplicable. 

 14 C.F.R. § 91.9 (b) (2) requires an aircraft flight manual in the aircraft. As there are no on 

board pilots or passengers, and given the size of the UAS's, this Regulation is inapplicable. An 

equivalent level of safety will be achieved by maintaining a

Kevin Wardwell, Home Inspector®, Boise ID - Section 333 Exemption Petition 
Kevin Wardwell, Home Inspector®, Boise ID - Section 333 Exemption Petition 

safety/flight manual delineating areas of where safety can be defined.10 The FAA has previously 

issued exemptions to this regulation in Exemption Nos. 8607, 8737, 8738, 9299, 9299A, 9565, 

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

14 C.F.R. § 91.121 regarding altimeter settings is inapplicable insofar as my UAS utilizes 

electronic global positioning systems with a barometric sensor. 

14 C.F.R. § 91.203 (a) and (b) provides for the carrying of civil aircraft certifications and 

registrations. They are inapplicable for the same reasons described above. The equivalent level 

of safety will be achieved by maintaining any such required certifications and registrations by 

me, Kevin Wardwell. 

B. 14 C.F.R. § 45.23: Marking of The Aircraft. Applicable Codes of Federal Regulation require 

aircraft to be marked according to certain specifications. 

My UAS are, by definition, unmanned. They therefore do not have a cabin, cockpit or pilot 

station on which to mark certain words or phrases. Further, two inch lettering is difficult to place 

on such small aircraft with dimensions smaller that minimal lettering requirement. Regardless, I 

will mark its UASs in the largest possible lettering by placing the word “EXPERIMENTAL” on its 

fuselage as required by 14 C.F.R. §45.29 (f) so that I the pilot, or anyone assisting me as a spotter 

with the UAV will see the markings. The FAA has previously issued exemptions to this regulation 

through Exemptions Nos. 8738, 10167, 10167A and 10700.

C. 14 C.F.R. § 61.113: Private Pilot Privileges and Limitations: PIC. 

Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. §§ 61.113 (a) & (b), private pilots are limited to non -commercial 

operations. I, Kevin Wardwell, can achieve an equivalent level of safety as achieved by current 

Regulations because my UAS does not carry any pilots or passengers. Further, while helpful, a 

pilot license will not ensure remote control piloting skills. The risks attended to the operation of 

my UAS is far less than the risk levels inherent in the commercial activities outlined in 14 C.F.R. § 

61, et seq. Thus, allowing me, Kevin Wardwell, to operate my UAS meet and exceed current 

safety levels in relation to 14 C.F.R. §61.113 (a) & (b).

C. 14 C.F.R. 91.119: Minimum Safe Altitudes. 

14 C.F.R. § 91.119 prescribes safe altitudes for the operation of civil aircraft. It allows 

helicopters to be operated at lower altitudes in certain conditions. My UAS will never 

operate at an altitude greater than 200 AGL; safely below the standard of 400 AGL. I, Kevin 

Wardwell, will however operate my UAS in safe areas away from public and traffic, 

providing a level of safety at least equivalent to or below those in relation to minimum safe 

altitudes. Given the size, weight, maneuverability and speed of my UAS, an equivalent or 

higher level of safety will be achieved.

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

10 Appendix E - Safety/Flight Manual

Kevin Wardwell, Home Inspector®, Boise ID - Section 333 Exemption Petition 
Kevin Wardwell, Home Inspector®, Boise ID - Section 333 Exemption Petition 

The above- cited Regulations require, amongst other things, aircraft owners and operators 

to “have [the] 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. . . .” 

These Regulations only apply to aircraft with an airworthiness certificate. They will not, 

therefore, apply to my, Kevin Wardwell’s, UAS. However, as a safety precaution I inspect my 

UAS before and after each flight. 

A Summary The FAA May Publish in the Federal Register: A. 14 C.F.R. 21 and 14 C.F.R. 91: 

Airworthiness Certificates, Manuals and The Like. 14 C.F.R. 21, Subpart H, entitled 

Airworthiness Certificates, sets forth requirements for procurement of necessary 

airworthiness certificates in relation to FAR § 91.203(a)(1). The size, weight and enclosed 

operational area of my UAS permits exemption from Part 21 because my Kevin Wardwell’s, 

UAS meets an equivalent level of safety pursuant to Section 333 of the Reform Act. The FAA 

is authorized to exempt aircraft from the airworthiness certificate requirement under both 

the Act (49 U.S.C. § 44701 (f)) and Section 333 of the Reform Act. Both pieces of legislation 

permit the FAA to exempt UAS's from the airworthiness certificate requirement in 

consideration of the weight, size, speed, maneuverability and proximity to areas such as 

airports and dense populations. My UAS meets or exceeds each of the elements. 14 C.F.R. 

91.7(a) prohibits the operation of an aircraft without an airworthiness certificate. As no such 

certificate will be applicable in the form contemplated by the FARs, this Regulation is 

inapplicable. 14 C.F.R. § 91.9 (b) (2) requires an aircraft flight manual in the aircraft. As there 

are no pilots or passengers, and given the size of the UAS's, this Regulation is inapplicable. 

An equivalent level of safety will be achieved by maintaining a manual. The FAA has 

previously issued exemptions to this regulation in Exemption Nos. 8607, 8737, 8738, 9299, 

9299A, 9565, 9565B, 10167, maintenance program that involves regular software updates 

and curative measures for any damaged hardware. Therefore, an equivalent level of safety 

will be achieved. 

In summary, Kevin Wardwell seeks an exemption from the following Regulations:

14 C.F.R. 21, subpart H; 14 C.F.R. 45.23(b); 14 C.F.R. §§ 61.113 (a) & (b); 14 C.F.R. § 91.7 (a); 

14 C.F.R. § 91.9 (b)(2); 14 C.F.R. § 91.103(b); 14 C.F.R. § 91.109; 14 C.F.R. § 91.119; 14 C.F.R. 

§ 91.121; 14 C.F.R. § 91.151(a); 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.203(a) and (b); 14 C.F.R. § 91.405 (a); 14 

C.F.R. § 91.407 (a)(1); 14 C.F.R. § 91.409 (a)(2); 14 C.F.R. § 91.409 (a ) (2); and, 14 C.F.R. §§ 

91.417 (a) & (b) to commercially operate my, Kevin Wardwell’s, small unmanned 

vehicle/lightweight unmanned aircraft vehicle in community awareness and real estate 

operations, and to develop economic platforms for real estate inspections to enhance the 

experience of those seeking to relocate to the Treasure Valley area. Currently, area 

awareness and real estate aerial videography/photography relies primarily on the use of 

larger aircraft running on combustible fuel. Posing potential risk to the public. Granting my, 

Kevin Wardwell’s, request for exemption will reduce current risk levels and thereby enhance 

safety. My UAS craft do not contain potentially 

Kevin Wardwell, Home Inspector®, Boise ID - Section 333 Exemption Petition 
Kevin Wardwell, Home Inspector®, Boise ID - Section 333 Exemption Petition

explosive fuel, is smaller, lighter and more maneuverable than conventional real estate 

video and photographic aircraft with much less flight time. Further, I operate at lower 

altitudes and in controlled airspace eliminating potential public risk flying to and from 

established air fields. I, Kevin Wardwell, have been informally analyzing flight information 

and will compile safety protocols and the implementation of a flight operations manual for 

real estate usage that exceeds currently accepted means and methods for safe flight. Formal 

collection of information shared with the FAA will enhance the FAA's internal efforts to 

establish protocols for complying with the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012. 

There are no personnel on board my, Kevin Wardwell’s, UAS and therefore the likelihood of 

death or serious bodily injury is significantly diminished. My, Kevin Wardwell’s, operation of 

my UAS, weighing less than 5 pounds and travelling at lower speeds within limited areas will 

provide an equivalent level of safety as that achieved under current FARs. Accordingly I, 

Kevin Wardwell, respectfully request that the FAA grant my exemption request and am 

willing to cooperate in sharing information to benefit the FAA, safety of manned aircraft, 

and the general public at large.

 Respectfully submitted, 

Kevin Wardwell, Home Inspector® 

14260 W. Talon Creek Dr. 

Boise, ID 83713