September 17, 2015

Exemption No. 12918

Regulatory Docket No. FAA−2015−2388

Mr. Matthew Roderick

10721 Blackhawk Drive

Boise, ID 83709

Dear Mr. Roderick:

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 May 5, 2015, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for an 

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

photography, surveys, marketing, motion picture filming, inspections, and search and rescue 

operations.

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 are the DJI Phantom 2 and DJI Phantom 3.

In accordance with the statutory criteria provided in Section 333 of Public Law 112−95 in 

reference to 49 U.S.C. § 44704, and in consideration of the size, weight, speed, and limited 

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

has determined that this aircraft meets the conditions of Section 333. Therefore, the FAA 

finds that relief from 14 CFR part 21, Certification procedures for products and parts, 
2

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 collection1and closed set motion picture and 

filming. 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. Matthew Roderick 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 

and closed set motion picture and filming. This exemption is subject to the conditions and 

limitations listed below.

Conditions and Limitations

In this grant of exemption, Mr. Matthew Roderick is hereafter referred to as the operator.

 

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

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 DJI Phantom 2 and 

DJI Phantom 3 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

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. 

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 
4

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 

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 
5

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 

(N−Number) markings in accordance with 14 CFR part 45, Subpart C. Markings must 

be as large as practicable.
6

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.

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

as documented in this grant of exemption.
7

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.
8

This exemption terminates on September 30, 2017, unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

Sincerely,

/s/

John S. Duncan

Director, Flight Standards Service

Enclosures
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

WASHINGTON, DC

Regulatory Docket No. _______________

IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION FOR EXEMPTION OF:

MATTHEW RODERICK

FOR AN EXEMPTION SEEKING RELIEF FROM THE REQUIREMENTS OF

TITLE 14 OF THE CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS

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) CONCERNING COMMERCIAL 

OPERATION OF DJI Phantom 2 UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS

PURSUANT TO SECTION 333 OF

THE FAA MODERNIZATION AND REFORM ACT OF 2012

(PUBLIC LAW 112-95)

Submitted on May 5, 2015

MATTHEW RODERICK

10721 Blackhawk Drive.

Boise, Idaho 83709

208.866.6598

matt@airequipco.com
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

GLOSSARY OF ABBREVIATIONS ..................................................................................3

SUMMARY ..........................................................................................................................4

INTRODUCTION AND INTERESTS OF PETITIONER................................................... 4

BACKGROUND................................................................................................................... 4

BASIS FOR PETITION........................................................................................................ 5

NAME AND ADDRESS OF PETITIONER.......................................................7

THE SPECIFIC SECTIONS OF 14 C.F.R. FROM WHICH MATTHEW RODERICK

SEEKS EXEMPTION........................................................................8

THE EXTENT OF RELIEF MATTHEW RODERICK SEEKS AND THE REASON

MATTHEW RODERICK SEEKS THE RELIEF.......................................12

THE REASONS WHY GRANTING MATTHEW RODERICK’S REQUEST

WOULD BE IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST .........................................................15
THE REASONS WHY GRANTING THE EXEMPTION WOULD NOT

ADVERSELY AFFECT SAFETY.........................................................................18

SUMMARY THAT CAN BE PUBLISHED IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER.............33

ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, VIEWS, OR ARGUMENTS

AVAILABLE TO SUPPORT MATTHEW RODERICK’S REQUEST............34

CONCLUSION...................................................................................................................35

APPENDICES........................................................................................36

GLOSSARY OF ABBREVIATIONS

AGL Above Ground Level 

AOI Area of Interest

ATC Air Traffic Control

ATO Air Traffic Organization

AV Aerial Vehicle

CFR Code of Federal Regulations

COA Certificate of Authorization

FAA Federal Aviation 

Administration

FAR Federal Aviation Regulation

GCS Ground Control Station

GPS Global Positioning System

LOL Loss of Link

MSL Mean Sea Level

NAS National Airspace System

NOTAM Notice to Airman

PIC Pilot In Command

Section 333 Faa Modernization and 

Reform act of 2012 (FMRA)

SO Safety Observer

SOP Standard Operating 

Proceedures

UA Unmanned Aircraft

UAS Unmanned Aircraft System

VFR Visual Flight Rules

VLOS Visual Line of Sight

VMC Visual Meterological 

Conditions

VTOL Vertical Takeoff and 

Landing
SUMMARY

MATTHEW RODERICK seeks exemption from the requirements of 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), to operate an Unmanned Aircraft System pursuant to Section 

333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (FMRA). This exemption will 

permit MATTHEW RODERICK to operate an Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) for the 

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

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

INTRODUCTION AND INTERESTS OF THE PETITIONER

MATTHEW RODERICK provides his clients with expertise and knowledge in advanced 

technologies and solutions to increase efficiency, productivity and effectiveness. 

MATTHEW RODERICK is an instrument rated pilot with nearly 100 hours of flying 

experience. He has over 10 years recreational/hobby experience in all aspects of aerial 

video and photography. The objective of MATTHEW RODERICK and his aerial 

operations is to safely provide high quality imaging for a variety of commercial, public, 

and residential uses, specifically targeting:

• Agriculture

• General aerial still photos

• Wildlife population surveys

• Real Estate marketing 

• Motion Picture Filming 

• Aerial inspections of public and private 

 structures. 

• Search and Rescue operations 

BACKGROUND

 Unmanned Aircraft Systems: DJI Phantom 2 UASs

MATTHEW RODERICK seeks an exemption to operate DJI systems for compensation or 
hire within the NAS. The DJI Phantom 2 is a vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) 

Unmanned Aircraft (UA) with a Ground Control Station (GCS) utilizing electronic tablet 

or smart phone systems. The DJI Phantom 2 has a maximum gross weight of 

approximately 2 pounds 11 ounces, while having a length of 16 inches, width of 16 inches, 

height of 8 inches, and a maximum speed of approximately 29 knots. The DJI Phantom 2 

UA is equipped with four main rotors, driven by Lithium Polymer battery powered electric 

motors.

The DJI Phantom 2 UA that will be operated by MATTHEW RODERICK will be 

registered in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 44103, Registration of Aircraft, as well as 14 

C.F.R Part 47, Aircraft Registration, and marked in accordance with 14 C.F.R. Part 45,

Identification and Registration Marking.

BASIS FOR PETITION

Petitioner, MATTHEW RODERICK, 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 DJI Phantom 

2 UA in the National Airspace System (NAS), and for an exemption from the 

requirements of 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).

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

unmanned aircraft and its operation, MATTHEW RODERICK’s operation of the DJI 

Phantom 2 UA meets the conditions of FMRA Section 333 and therefore, will not require 

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

Accordingly, MATTHEW RODERICK requests relief from Sections 91.405(a), 

91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), and 91.417(a) & (b), as these sections set forth 

requirements for maintenance that only apply to aircraft with an airworthiness certificate.

MATTHEW RODERICK submits that the requested relief is proper since an equivalent 

level of safety will be ensured. MATTHEW RODERICK will use experienced personnel 

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

UASs using the methods, techniques, and practices prescribed in the operating 

documents (i.e., Monthly Maintenance Log, and DJI Phantom 2 Instruction Manual). 

Furthermore, MATTHEW RODERICK will document and maintain all maintenance 

records for the DJI Phantom 2 UA.

Relief from certain requirements of Section 61.113(a) and (b), entitled Private Pilot
Privileges and Limitations: Pilot in Command, is requested by MATTHEW RODERICK

to the extent necessary to allow a Pilot in Command (PIC) holding a private pilot or higher 

level certificate, as well as an airman medical certificate, and who has demonstrated, by 

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

operate the DJI Phantom 2 UA in a manner consistent with this exemption, including 

evasive and emergency maneuvers and maintaining appropriate distances from people, 

vessels, vehicles, and structures.

MATTHEW RODERICK seeks relief from Section 91.7(a), entitled Civil Aircraft

Airworthiness, because the DJI Phantom 2 UA does not require an airworthiness 

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

RODERICK submits that he will ensure that the DJI Phantom 2 UA is in an airworthy 

condition, prior to every flight, by determining that the UA is in compliance with the 

operating documents (i.e., Monthly Maintenance Log, and DJI Phantom 2 Instruction 

Manual), and that the aircraft is in a condition for safe flight.

MATTHEW RODERICK also seeks an exemption from the requirements of Section 

91.121, entitled Altimeter Settings, as the DJI Phantom 2 UA will not have a typical 

barometric altimeter onboard. However, altitude information of the DJI Phantom 2 UA

will be provided to the PIC via Global Positioning System (GPS) equipment and radio 

communications telemetry data link, which downlinks from the UA to the GCS for active 

monitoring of the flight path. This altitude information, combined with MATTHEW 

RODERICK’s operation of the DJI Phantom 2 UA within visual line of sight, at or below 

500 feet AGL, will ensure a level of safety equivalent to Section 91.121.

Additionally, MATTHEW RODERICK seeks an exemption from the requirements of 

Section 91.151(b), entitled Fuel Requirements for Flight in VFR Conditions. MATTHEW 

RODERICK

submits that safety will not be affected by operation of the DJI Phantom 2 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 approximately 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.

In accordance with 14 C.F.R. § 11.81, MATTHEW RODERICK provides the 

following information in support of his petition for exemption:
Name And Address Of The Petitioner.

The name and address of the Petitioner and point of contact is:

MATTHEW RODERICK

10721 Blackhawk DR

Boise, Idaho 83709

208.866.6598

matt@airequipco.com
The Specific Sections Of 14 C.F.R. From Which MATTHEW RODERICK

Seeks Exemption.

1. MATTHEW RODERICK Seeks Exemption From The 

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. MATTHEW RODERICK 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 an airworthy 

condition. 

 3. MATTHEW RODERICK 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. MATTHEW RODERICK Seeks Exemption From The 

Requirements Of Section 91.151(b).

Section 91.151, entitled Fuel Requirements for Flight 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. MATTHEW RODERICK Seeks Exemption From The 

Requirement 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. MATTHEW RODERICK Seeks 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. MATTHEW RODERICK Seeks Exemption From The 

 Requirements Of Sections 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. MATTHEW RODERCIK Seeks Exemption From The 

 Requirements Of Sections 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. 
The Extent Of Relief MATTHEW RODERICK Seeks And The Reason 

MATTHEW RODERICK Seeks The Relief.

1. Extent Of Relief MATTHEW RODERICK Seeks And The Reason 

MATTHEW RODERICK 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, MATTHEW RODERICK submits that an equivalent level 

of safety will be maintained because no PIC will be allowed to operate the DJI Phantom 2 

UA unless that PIC has met certain flight-hour and currency requirements, demonstrating 

that the PIC is able to safely operate either the DJI Phantom 2 UA 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, MATTHEW RODERICK submits that all flights of the DJI Phantom 2 UA, 

conducted by the PIC pursuant to the grant of this Petition: (1) will be incidental to 

MATTHEW RODERICK’s business; and (2) will not carry passengers or property for 

compensation or hire.
2. Extent Of Relief MATTHEW RODERICK Seeks And The Reason 

MATTHEW RODERICK 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 MATTHEW RODERICK to determine that the DJI Phantom 2 UA 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 DJI Phantom 2 Instruction 

Manual).

MATTHEW RODERICK seeks the requested relief because the DJI Phantom 2 UA does

not require an airworthiness certificate in accordance with 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H. 

Therefore, MATTHEW RODERICK will ensure that the DJI Phantom 2 UA is in 

airworthy condition based upon its compliance with the operating documents (i.e., 

Monthly Maintenance Log, and DJI Phantom 2 Instruction Manual) prior to every flight, 

and further, determine that the aircraft is in condition for safe flight, as stated in the 

conditions and limitations below.

3. Extent Of Relief MATTHEW RODERICK Seeks And The Reason 

MATTHEW RODERICK Seeks Relief From Section 91.121.

Relief from Section 91.121, entitled Altimeter Settings, may be required to allow flight 

operations of the DJI Phantom 2 UA, which utilizes 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), MATTHEW RODERICK seeks the 

requested relief because the DJI Phantom 2 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 DJI Phantom 2 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 MATTHEW RODERICK Seeks And The Reason 

MATTHEW RODERICK 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 DJI Phantom 2 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. MATTHEW 

RODERICK seeks the requested relief because without an exemption from Section 

91.151(b), the flight time duration of the battery powered DJI Phantom 2 UA will severely 

constrain the practicality of any aerial video or still photo flight operations that 

MATTHEW RODERICK proposes to conduct pursuant to this Petition.

Significantly, as set forth below, the technical specifications of the DJI Phantom 2 UA, the 

DJI Phantom 2 and MATTHEW RODERICK’s proposed operating limitations, ensure 

that MATTHEW RODERICK will safely operate the battery powered DJI Phantom 2 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 MATTHEW RODERICK Seeks And The Reason 

MATTHEW RODERICK 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, MATTHEW RODERICK requests relief 

from these Sections because the DJI Phantom 2 UA does not require airworthiness 

certificates. As set forth more fully below, the DJI Phantom UAS meets the conditions of 

FMRA Section 333 for operation without an airworthiness certificate. Accordingly, 

MATTHEW RODERICK 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., the Monthly Maintenance Log, and DJI 

Phantom 2 Instruction Manual). Furthermore, MATTHEW RODERICK will document 

and maintain all maintenance records for the DJI Phantom 2 UAS.
The Reasons Why Granting MATTHEW RODERICK’s Request Would Be In 

The Public Interest; That Is, How It Would Benefit The Public As A Whole.

Granting the present Petition will further the public interest by allowing 

MATTHEW RODERICK to safely, efficiently, and economically perform aerial 

video and photography of construction sites, real estate, and landscape over certain 

areas of the United States.

Additionally, use of the DJI Phantom 2 UAS will decrease congestion of the NAS, reduce 

pollution, and provide significant benefits to the economy. Notably, the benefits of 

MATTHEW RODERICK’s proposed operation of the DJI Phantom 2 UAS will be 

realized without implicating any privacy issues.

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

The DJI Phantom 2 UA is battery powered and serves as a safe, efficient, and economical 

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

reducing the number of manned aircraft needed to perform aerial acquisitions, an 

exemption allowing the use of a DJI Phantom 2 UAS would reduce the number of manned 

aircraft in the NAS and 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 DJI Phantom 

2 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 DJI 

Phantom 2 UAS.

Conducting aerial acquisitions with the DJI Phantom 2 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 DJI Phantom 2 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 DJI Phantom 2 UA, while
reducing the carbon footprint of aerial acquisitions, also eliminates noise pollution, as the 

UAs are propelled by battery-powered electric motors, rather than an internal combustion 

engine.

By using the DJI Phantom 2 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 DJI Phantom 

2 UA (weighing approximately 2 pounds 11 ounces at its maximum gross weight with a 

length of 16 inches and widths 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 DJI 

Phantom 2 UAS Will Benefit The Economy.

In addition to being safe and efficient, the DJI Phantom 2 UA is also an economical 

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

of the DJI Phantom 2 UAS will allow United States based companies, like MATTHEW 

RODERICK, 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 DJI Phantom 2 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 DJI Phantom 2 UAS, companies such as MATTHEW RODERICK, 

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 DJI Phantom 2 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 Are No Privacy Issues.

Similar to the manned aerial acquisition flight operations that have been conducted for 
decades, MATTHEW RODERICK’s proposed operation of the DJI Phantom 2 UAS will 

not implicate any privacy issues. Specifically, the DJI Phantom 2 UAS will be operated 

only in compliance with operating documents (i.e., The Monthly Maintenance Log, and

DJI Phantom 2 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.
The Reasons Why Granting The Exemption Would Not Adversely Affect Safety, Or 

How The Exemption Would Provide A Level Of Safety At Least Equal To That 

Provided By The Rule From Which MATTHEW RODERICK Seeks Exemption.

1. Reasons Why The DJI Phantom 2 UA Meets 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, MATTHEW RODERICK’s operation of the DJI 

Phantom 2 UAS meets 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, MATTHEW RODERICK submits that the DJI Phantom 2 

UAS can operate safely in the NAS pursuant to FMRA Section 333, as demonstrated by: 

(a) the characteristics of the DJI Phantom 2 UA; (b) the pilot certification requirement; 

and (c) the specific operating limitations.

a. The Specifications Of The DJI Phantom 2 UAS Demonstrates Its 

Safe Characteristics.

The DJI Phantom 2 UAS does 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 DJI Phantom 2 UAS

The technical specifications of the DJI Phantom 2 UAS are set forth by the DJI Phantom 

2 User Manual, attached hereto as Appendix A.

ii. The DJI Phantom 2 UAS Autonomous Flight And Navigation 

Modes Enable The UAS To Remain Within A Defined 

Operational Area.
The DJI Phantom 2 UAS may be operated in both manual and fully autonomous flight 

modes. A complete description of the flight and navigational modes of the DJI Phantom 2 

UAS is provided at pages 25-35 of the DJI Phantom 2 User Manual, attached hereto as 

Appendix A.

iii. The DJI Phantom 2 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 DJI Phantom 2 UA will remain stationary, in flight, 

for 3 seconds or more. If, after 3 seconds, the DJI Phantom 2 UA does not reacquire 

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 Function of the DJI Phantom 2 UAS is set forth at 

pages 27 through 29 of the DJI Phantom 2 User Manual, attached hereto as Appendix A.

iv. The DJI Phantom 2 GCS And Its Operation.

A complete description of the operation and specifications of the DJI Phantom 2 GCS 

and flight control software is provided at pages 32 through 43 of the DJI Phantom 2 

User Manual. DJI Phantom 2 User Manuals are attached hereto as Appendix A.

b. Flight Operations Of DJI Phantom 2 UAS Are Limited To The Line 

Of Sight Of A Certificated Pilot in Command With A Safety Observer.

MATTHEW RODERICK will be the only person to act as a pilot in command (PIC) of the 

DJI Phantom 2 UAS. Additionally, a safety observer will assist him during flight time.

c. Flights Of DJI Phantom 2 UAS Will Be Conducted Pursuant To 

Specific Operating Limitations.
In seeking this exemption, MATTHEW RODERICK proposes to commercially operate 

DJI Phantom 2 UAS for the special purpose of conducting aerial video and photography 

over certain areas of the 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 UASs 

weighing less than 55 pounds maximum gross weight: DJI Phantom 2 

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 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 

third-class 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 

pre-determined 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 (N- Number) 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.

MATTHEW RODERICK 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 DJI Phantom 2 UAS unless that PIC has demonstrated, by meeting minimum flighthour and currency requirements, that the PIC is able to safely operate the DJI Phantom 2

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

maneuvers and maintaining appropriate distances from people, vessels, vehicles, and 

structures.

Considering MATTHEW RODERICK’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 DJI Phantom 2 UAS, MATTHEW 

RODERICK submits that the additional manned airmanship experience of a 

commercially certificated pilot would not correlate to the airmanship skills necessary for 

MATTHEW RODERICK’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).

MATTHEW RODERICK will not allow any PIC to operate the DJI Phantom 2 UAS 

unless that PIC has demonstrated, by meeting minimum flight-hour requirements or the 

DJI Phantom 2 UAS training and currency requirements, that the PIC is able to safely 

operate the DJI Phantom 2 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 MATTHEW RODERICK’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.

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, MATTHEW RODERICK will ensure that the DJI Phantom 2 UAS 

is in an airworthy condition based upon the UAS’ 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 DJI Phantom 2 UA 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 MATTHEW RODERICK’s operation of the DJI Phantom 2 

UA within visual line of sight, at or below 500 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 UASs 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 DJI Phantom 

2 UAS; (2) the limitations on the proposed flight operations; and (3) the location of the 

proposed flight operations. Accordingly, MATTHEW RODERICK will ensure that it will 

safely operate the battery-powered DJI Phantom 2 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 DJI Phantom 2 

UAS, 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 DJI Phantom 2 UAS provides

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 DJI Phantom 2 UAS 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, MATTHEW RODERICK 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 MATTHEW RODERICK will use trained technicians to perform maintenance, 

alterations, or preventive maintenance on the UASs using the methods, techniques, and 

practices prescribed in the operating documents (i.e. The Monthly Maintenance Log and

DJI Phantom 2 Instruction Manual). Furthermore, MATTHEW RODERICK will 

document and maintain all maintenance records for the DJI Phantom 2 UAS.

Since the DJI Phantom 2 UAS will be inspected as prescribed by the operating 

documents, MATTHEW RODERICK 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 DJI 

Phantom 2 User Manual is attached hereto as Appendix A; a copy of the DJI Phantom 2 

UAS Maintenance LOG is attached hereto as Appendix B.

Likewise, the exemption sought will not adversely affect safety because 

MATTHEW RODERICK 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 

DJI Phantom 2 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 MATTHEW RODERICK’s proposed operating limitations, the 

operating documents, and the technical aspects of the DJI Phantom 2 UAS, MATTHEW 

RODERICK 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, MATTHEW RODERICK

requests that the FAA prescribe special conditions for the intended operation of the DJI 

Phantom 2 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 DJI Phantom 2 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 DJI Phantom 2 

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, 

stating: The Rules From Which MATTHEW RODERICK Seeks 

Exemption:

MATTHEW RODERICK 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 MATTHEW 

RODERICK Seeks:

This exemption will permit MATTHEW RODERICK 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 MATTHEW RODERICK’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, MATTHEW 

RODERICK’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, MATTHEW RODERICK will operate the DJI 

Phantom 2 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.

Listed in Appendix C is a link to a brief article outlining the environmental 

benefits of commercial use of a UAS.
CONCLUSION

As set forth herein, MATTHEW RODERICK 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 DJI Phantom 2 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 MATTHEW RODERICK

to safely, efficiently, and economically operate the DJI Phantom 2 UAS

commercially within the NAS.

WHEREFORE, in accordance with the Federal Aviation Regulations and the 

FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, Section 333, MATTHEW 

RODERICK 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 MATTHEW RODERICK to operate the DJI Phantom 2 UAS

commercially for the purpose of conducting aerial video and photography over 

certain areas of the United States.

Dated: May 27th, 2015

Respectfully submitted,

MATTHEW RODERICK

_________________________

MATTHEW RODERICK

10721 Blackhawk Dr

Boise, Idaho 83709

208.866.6598

matt@airequipco.com
Apendix

A. DJI Phantom 2 User Manual
B. Proposed Maintenance Log

Service Date

Aircraft 

Hours Items performed Items Needing Attention

C. Link to a Supportive Article

http://rotordronemag.com/can-drones-save-planet/