AFS-15-075-E

Exemption No. 11220

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

WASHINGTON, DC 20591

In the matter of the petition of

AERIAL PRODUCTION SERVICES, 

INC.

for an exemption from part 21; and 

§§ 45.23(b); 61.113(a) and (b); 91.7(a); 

91.9(b)(2); 91.103(b); 91.109; 91.119;

91.121; 91.151(a); 91.203(a) and (b);

91.405(a); 91.407(a)(1); 91.409(a)(2); 

and 91.417(a) and (b) of Title 14, Code of 

Federal Regulations

Regulatory Docket No. FAA–2014–0836

GRANT OF EXEMPTION

By letter dated October 7, 2014,

1 Mr. Michael D. Curran, Esq./ATP/CFI/MEI, 

Curran & Curran Law, 90 North Coast Highway 101, Suite 103, Encinitas, California 92024,

petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on behalf of Aerial Production 

Services, Inc. (hereinafter petitioner or operator), for an exemption from part 21, and 

§§ 45.23(b), 61.113(a) and (b), 91.7(a), 91.9(b)(2), 91.103(b), 91.109, 91.119, 91.121,

91.151(a), 91.203(a) and (b), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(2), and 91.417(a) and (b) of 

Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). The exemption would allow the petitioner to 

operate the DJI Phantom 2 unmanned aircraft system (UAS) to conduct aerial photography 

and inspection.

2

The petitioner supports its request with the following information:

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

including the regulations that the petitioner seeks an exemption.

The petitioner has provided the following information to support its request for an exemption:

 1 By email dated February 17, 2015, the petitioner responded to the FAA’s Request for Information.

2 By email dated March 9, 2015, the petitioner’s legal counsel clarified the petitioner’s proposed operations to 

only include aerial photography and inspection. Closed-set filming operations are not proposed by the petitioner.
2

1. Aerial Production Services, Inc. Operator’s Manual and Checklists V2.14.15

2. Phantom 2 User Manual V1.4

The petition and the document above are hereinafter referred to as the operating documents.

The FAA evaluated the petition and determined it was not precedent-setting. Therefore, a 

summary of the petition was not published in the Federal Register for public comment.

The FAA’s analysis is as follows:

The FAA has organized its analysis into four sections: (1) UAS, (2) the UAS pilot in 

command (PIC), (3) the UAS operating parameters, and (4) the public interest.

Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS)

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

and parts. In accordance with the statutory criteria provided in Section 333 of P.L. 112-95 in 

reference to 49 USC § 44704, and in consideration of the size, weight, speed, and limited 

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

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

finds that the requested relief from 14 CFR part 21, and any associated noise certification and 

testing requirements of part 36, is not necessary.

Manned aircraft conducting aerial photography operations can weigh thousands of pounds or 

more and are operated by an onboard pilot and may carry other onboard crewmembers, as 

well as carry large quantities of fuel. The petitioner’s unmanned aircraft (UA) weighs less 

than 5 pounds, including payload. The pilot and crew will be remotely located from the 

aircraft. The limited weight and construction reduces the potential for harm to persons or 

damage to property in the event of an incident or accident. The risk to an onboard pilot and 

crew during an incident or accident is eliminated with the use of a UAS for the proposed 

operation.

Manned aircraft are at risk of fuel spillage and fire in the event of an incident or accident. The 

UA carries no fuel, and therefore the risk of fire following an incident or accident due to fuel 

spillage is eliminated.

The petitioner’s UAS has the capability to operate safely after experiencing certain in-flight 

contingencies or failures and uses a failsafe mode to return to home and land when connection 

is lost. The UAS is also able to respond to a loss of the global positioning system (GPS) or a 

lost-link event with pre-coordinated automated flight maneuvers. These safety features 

provide an equivalent level of safety compared to a manned aircraft holding a restricted 

airworthiness certificate performing a similar operation.
3

Regarding the petitioner’s requested relief from 14 CFR § 45.23(b), Display of marks, the 

petitioner’s request is made under the assumption that marking with the word 

“experimental” will be required as a condition of an exemption request. However, this 

marking is reserved for aircraft that are issued experimental certificates under § 21.191. 

Since the petitioner’s UAS will not be certificated under 14 CFR § 21.191, a grant of 

exemption for 14 CFR § 45.23(b) is not necessary. 

Regarding the petitioner’s requested relief from 14 CFR §§ 91.405(a) Maintenance required, 

91.407(a)(1) Operation after maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, or alteration, 

91.409(a)(2) Inspections, and 91.417(a) and (b) Maintenance records, the FAA has evaluated 

the petitioner’s request and determined that an exemption to these requirements is warranted. 

The FAA notes that the petitioner’s operating documents contain preflight and post flight 

checks for the UAS. The FAA has also determined that relief from § 91.409(a)(1) is also 

necessary because it is an alternate inspection requirement of § 91.409(a)(2). The FAA finds 

that adherence to the operating documents and the conditions and limitations below is 

sufficient to ensure that safety is not adversely affected.

Pilot in Command (PIC)

Regarding the petitioner’s requested relief from 14 CFR § 61.113(a) and (b) Private pilot 

privileges and limitations, the petitioner requested to operate its UAS without an FAAcertificated pilot. However, the FAA does not possess the authority to exempt the petitioner 

from the statutory requirement to hold an airman certificate, as prescribed in 49 USC § 44711. 

Although Section 333 provides limited flexibility to the statutory requirement to hold an 

airworthiness certificate, it does not provide flexibility for other requirements of title 49. For 

further information see Exemption No. 11110, Trimble Navigation, Ltd.

The FAA is also requiring a pilot certificate for UAS operations because pilots holding an 

FAA issued private or commercial pilot certificate are subject to security screening by the 

Department of Homeland Security that certificated airmen undergo. As previously 

determined by the Secretary, the requirement to have an airman certificate ameliorates 

security concerns over civil UAS operations conducted in accordance with Section 333.

Given these grounds, the FAA must determine the appropriate level of pilot certification for 

the petitioner’s proposed operation. Under current regulations, civil operations for 

compensation or hire require a PIC holding a commercial pilot certificate, per 14 CFR part 61. 

Based on the private pilot limitations, in accordance with pertinent parts of 14 CFR

§ 61.113(a), a pilot holding a private pilot certificate cannot act as a PIC of an aircraft for 

compensation or hire. However, in Grant of Exemption No. 11062 to Astraeus Aerial 

(Astraeus), the FAA determined that a PIC with a private pilot certificate operating the 

Astraeus UAS would not adversely affect operations in the NAS or present a hazard to 

persons or property on the ground.
4

The petitioner’s proposal to operate its UAS without an FAA-certificated pilot is similar to 

other petitions considered by the FAA. As in Exemption Nos. 11109 (Clayco, Inc.) and 

11170 (Viafield), the FAA has analyzed the petitioner’s proposed operation and determined it 

does not differ significantly from these grants of exemption. The petitioner plans to operate 

in the NAS over controlled access property with the permission of the property 

owner/controller, while also limiting property access to consenting participants while 

operations are underway. Given: 1) the similar nature of the petitioner’s proposed operating 

environment to that of Clayco and Viafield, 2) the parallel nature of private pilot aeronautical 

knowledge requirements to those of commercial requirements [ref: Exemption No. 11062, 

Astraeus Aerial], and 3) the airmanship skills necessary to operate in the UAS, the FAA finds 

that the additional manned airmanship experience of a commercially certificated pilot would 

not necessarily correlate to the airmanship skills required for the petitioner’s proposed 

operations. Therefore, the FAA finds that a PIC holding a private pilot certificate and a thirdclass airman medical certificate is appropriate for the proposed operations.

With regard to the airmanship skills necessary to operate the UAS, the petitioner has proposed 

pilot qualification criteria and a training program described in the operating documents. The 

conditions and limitations below stipulate that the petitioner may not permit any PIC to 

operate unless that PIC has completed the petitioner’s training program, that the PIC is able 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. The petitioner is responsible for 

assessing its operations and identifying any additional skills required to operate safely under 

normal and abnormal conditions. Normal condition skills may include the ability to maintain 

altitude, maintain visual line of sight (VLOS), and navigational skills. Abnormal condition 

skills may include the ability to avoid obstacles, avoid air traffic, and respond to loss of link.

In conclusion, the FAA finds that a PIC holding a current private pilot certificate and a thirdclass airman medical certificate, and who has completed the petitioner’s flight training 

requirements, can conduct the proposed UAS operations without adversely affecting the 

safety of the National Airspace System (NAS) and persons or property on the ground. Upon 

consideration of the overall safety case presented by the petitioner, the FAA finds that 

granting the relief from 14 CFR § 61.113(a) is warranted. The FAA also finds that relief from 

14 CFR § 61.113(b) is not necessary.

The petitioner indicates it plans to supplement its proposed operation(s) with a visual observer 

(VO). In Grant of Exemption No. 11062, the FAA agreed with the petitioner’s proposed use 

of a VO and required a VO to be used in all UAS operations. The UA must never be operated 

beyond the actual visual capabilities of the VO, and the VO and PIC must have the ability to 

maintain VLOS with the UA at all times. It is the responsibility of the PIC to be aware of the 

VO’s visual limitations and limit operations of the UA to distances within the visual 

capabilities of both the PIC and VO. Moreover, the VO will not be operating the aircraft. 

Therefore, as in Grant of Exemption No. 11062, the FAA does not consider a medical 
5

certificate necessary for the VO and the requirement for a VO is included in the conditions 

and limitations below. Therefore, as in Grant of Exemption No. 11062 to Astraeus Aerial, the 

FAA does not consider a medical certificate necessary for the VO.

UAS Operating Parameters

Regarding the petitioner’s requested relief from 14 CFR § 91.7(a) Civil aircraft 

airworthiness, the FAA finds that relief from § 91.7(a) is necessary. While the petitioner’s 

UAS will not require an airworthiness certificate in accordance with 14 CFR part 21, Subpart 

H, the FAA considers the petitioner’s compliance with its operating documents to be a 

sufficient means for determining an airworthy condition. Therefore, relief from § 91.7(a) is 

granted. The petitioner is still required to ensure that its aircraft is in an airworthy condition –

based on compliance with the operating documents prior to every flight, and as stated in the 

conditions and limitations below.

In accordance with 14 CFR § 91.7(b) Civil aircraft airworthiness, the PIC of the UAS is 

responsible for determining whether the aircraft is in a condition for safe flight. The FAA, as 

in grant of Exemption No. 11062 to Astraeus, has determined that the operating documents 

include procedures to be used prior to each flight that can ensure compliance with § 91.7(b). 

The petitioner is required to ensure that its aircraft is in a condition for safe flight – based on

compliance with the operating documents– prior to every flight.

Regarding the petitioner’s requested relief from §§ 91.9(b)(2) Civil aircraft flight manual, 

marking, and placard requirements and 91.203(a) and (b) Civil aircraft: Certifications 

required, the FAA has previously determined in Grant of Exemption 11062, Astraeus Aerial,

that relief from these sections is not necessary. Relevant materials may be kept in a location 

accessible to the PIC in compliance with the regulations.

Regarding the petitioner’s requested relief from 14 CFR § 91.103 Preflight action, although 

there will be no approved Airplane or Rotorcraft Flight Manual as specified in paragraph 

(b)(1), the FAA believes that the petitioner can comply with the other applicable requirements 

in 14 CFR § 91.103(b)(2). The procedures outlined in the petitioner’s operating documents 

address the FAA’s concerns regarding compliance with § 91.103(b). The PIC will take all 

actions including reviewing weather, flight battery requirements, landings, and takeoff 

distances and aircraft performance data before initiation of flight. The FAA has imposed 

stricter requirements with regard to visibility and distance from clouds; this is to both keep the 

UA from departing VLOS and to preclude the UA from operating so close to a cloud as to 

create a hazard to other aircraft operating in the NAS. The FAA also notes the risks associated 

with sun glare; the FAA believes that the PIC’s and VO’s ability to still see other air traffic, 

combined with the PIC’s ability to initiate a return-to-home sequence, are sufficient 

mitigations in this respect. The PIC will also account for all relevant site-specific conditions 

in his or her preflight procedures. Therefore, the FAA finds that exemption from 

14 CFR 91.103 is not necessary.
6

Regarding the petitioner’s requested relief from 14 CFR § 91.109 Flight instruction; 

Simulated instrument flight and certain flight tests, the petitioner did not describe training 

scenarios in which a dual set of controls would be utilized or required, i.e. dual flight 

instruction, provided by a flight instructor or other company-designated individual, that would 

require that individual to have fully functioning dual controls. Furthermore, the FAA is 

requiring that the petitioner’s PICs possess at least a private pilot’s certificate. Also, this 

exemption will require that training operations only be conducted during dedicated training 

sessions. The FAA finds that safety will not be adversely impacted if the petitioner follows 

the training outlined in the operating documents. As such, the FAA finds that the petitioner 

can conduct its operations without the requested relief from § 91.109.

Regarding the petitioner’s requested relief from 14 CFR § 91.119 Minimum safe altitudes, the 

petitioner did not specify the paragraph(s) in 14 CFR § 91.119 from which it requires relief. 

Relief from § 91.119(a), which requires operating at an altitude that allows a safe emergency 

landing if a power unit fails, is not granted. The FAA expects the petitioner to be able to 

perform an emergency landing without undue hazard to persons or property on the surface if a 

power unit fails. Relief from § 91.119(b), operation over congested areas, is not applicable, 

because the petitioner states that operations will be conducted over sparsely populated areas. 

Relief from § 91.119(c) is necessary because the aircraft will be operated at altitudes below 

400 feet above ground level (AGL). Section 91.119(c) states that no person may operate an 

aircraft below the following altitudes: over other than congested areas, an altitude of 500 feet 

above the surface, except over open water or sparsely populated areas. Section 91.119(c) 

provides that in operations over water or sparsely populated areas, the aircraft may not be 

operated closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure. The petitioner states 

that it will operate pursuant to the following, self-imposed restrictions related to § 91.119:

• Petitioner will not operate within the boundaries of Class B, C, or D airspace without 

written approval from the FAA; 

• Petitioner will avoid operations over nonparticipating persons; 

• Petitioner will limit operations to Visual Meteorological Conditions (VMC) and 

daylight hours; 

• Petitioner will ensure aircraft operations remain within VLOS of the PIC and VO and 

will be visually monitored at all times; 

• Petitioner will operate no closer than 5 miles from an airport

As discussed in Exemption No. 11109 to Clayco, Inc. (see Docket No. FAA-2014-0507), 

operations conducted closer than 500 feet to the ground may require that the UA be operated 

closer than 500 feet to essential persons, or objects that would not be possible without 

additional relief. Therefore, the FAA is requiring that prior to conducting UAS operations, all 

persons not essential to flight operations (nonparticipating persons) must remain at 

appropriate distances. In open areas this requires the UA to remain 500 feet from all persons 

other than essential flight personnel (i.e., PIC, VO, operator trainees or essential persons). 
7

The FAA has also considered that the UA will weigh about 5 pounds. If barriers or structures 

are present that can sufficiently protect nonparticipating persons from the UA or debris in the 

event of an accident, then the UA may operate closer than 500 feet to persons afforded such 

protection. The operator must also 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. When considering how 

to immediately cease operations, the primary concern is the safety of those nonparticipating 

persons. In addition, the FAA finds that operations may be conducted closer than 500 feet to 

vessels, vehicles and structures when the land owner/controller grants such permission and the 

PIC makes a safety assessment of the risk of operating closer to those objects and determines 

that it does not present an undue hazard. 

Thus, the FAA finds that relief from § 91.119(c) is warranted, provided adherence to the 

procedures in the operating documents and the FAA’s additional conditions and limitations 

outlined below. Relief from § 91.119(a) is unwarranted as the FAA expects the petitioner to 

be able to perform an emergency landing without undue hazard to persons or property on the 

surface. Relief from §§ 91.119(b) and 91.119(d) are not applicable.

Regarding the petitioner’s requested relief from 14 CFR § 91.121 Altimeter Settings, the UAS 

will not have a typical barometric altimeter onboard the aircraft. It uses information 

generated from GPS to transmit altitude information to the PIC. As stated in the conditions 

and limitations below, the FAA requires any altitude reported to Air Traffic Control (ATC) to 

be in feet AGL. The petitioner may choose to set the GPS altitude indicator to zero feet AGL 

rather than local barometric pressure or field altitude before flight. Considering the limited 

altitude of the proposed operations, relief from 14 CFR § 91.121 is granted to the extent 

necessary to comply with the applicable conditions and limitations stated below.

Regarding the petitioner’s requested relief from § 91.151 (a) Fuel requirements for flight in 

VFR conditions, prior relief has been granted for manned aircraft to operate at less than 

prescribed minimums, including Exemption Nos. 2689, 5745, and 10650. In addition, similar 

UAS-specific relief has been granted in Exemption Nos. 8811, 10808, and 10673 for daytime, 

VFR conditions. The petitioner’s request references two different minimum power states: 

1) at 30 minutes flight time or 25% power, whichever comes first, and 2) at 60 minutes flight 

time or 10% power, whichever comes first. The petitioner’s UA operating documents 

reference two low battery indications, the first at 30% power remaining and a second at 15% 

power remaining. A third signal, not visible to the pilot, triggers auto-land. As in exemption 

No. 11138 (Douglas Trudeau), the FAA finds that the UA’s proposed flight altitudes and 

proximity to the pilot provide sufficient reason to grant relief from 14 CFR § 91.151(a) as 

requested, and in accordance with the conditions and limitations below. Thus, the petitioner 

will land the UAS at 30 minutes total flight time or 25% power remaining, whichever occurs 

first. Additionally, 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.
8

The FAA Air Traffic Organization (ATO) reviews all proposed UAS operations and evaluates 

the safety of these operations relative to the requested airspace through the existing Certificate 

of Waiver or Authorization (COA) process. The majority of current UAS operations 

occurring in the NAS are being coordinated through Air Traffic Control (ATC) by the 

issuance of a COA. This process not only makes local ATC facilities aware of UAS 

operations, but also provides ATC the ability to consider airspace issues that are unique to 

UAS operations. The COA will require the operator to request a NOTAM, which is the 

mechanism for alerting other users of the NAS to the UAS activities being conducted. The 

conditions and limitations below prescribe the requirement for the petitioner to obtain an 

ATO-issued COA.

Public Interest

The FAA finds that a grant of exemption is in the public interest. The enhanced safety and 

reduced environmental impact achieved using a 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.

The following table summarizes the FAA’s determinations regarding regulatory relief:

Relief considered (14 CFR) FAA determination (14 CFR)

21 Relief not necessary

45.23(b) Relief not necessary

61.113(a) and (b)

Relief from 61.113(a) is granted with 

conditions and limitations; relief from 

61.113(b) not necessary

91.7(a) Relief granted with conditions and 

limitations

91.9(b)(2) Relief not necessary

91.103 Relief not necessary

91.109 Relief not necessary

91.119

Relief not granted for paragraph (a); 

paragraph (b) relief not applicable; 

paragraph (c) relief granted with 

conditions and limitations; paragraph (d) 

relief not applicable

91.121 Relief granted with conditions and 

limitations
9

The FAA’s 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, Aerial Production Services, Inc. is granted an 

exemption from 14 CFR §§ 61.113(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 for the purpose of aerial photography and inspection. This 

exemption is subject to the conditions and limitations listed below.

Conditions and Limitations

Relative to this grant of exemption, Aerial Production Services, Inc. is hereafter referred to as 

the operator.

The petition and the following supporting documentation are hereinafter referred to as the 

operating documents: 

1) Aerial Production Services, Inc. Operator’s Manual and Checklists V2.14.15

2) Phantom 2 User Manual V1.4

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 following aircraft 

described in the operating documents which is a quad-rotor aircraft weighing about 5

pounds: DJI Phantom 2 Unmanned Aircraft System. Proposed operations of any other 

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

91.151(a) Relief granted from 91.151(a)(1), day, 

with conditions and limitations

91.203(a) and (b) Relief not necessary

91.405(a) Relief granted with conditions and 

limitations

91.407(a)(1) Relief granted with conditions and 

limitations

91.409(a)(1) and (2) Relief granted with conditions and 

limitations

91.417(a) and (b) Relief granted with conditions and 

limitations
10

2) UAS operations under this exemption are limited to conducting operations for the 

purpose of aerial photography and inspection for various industries.

3) The UA may not be flown at an indicated airspeed exceeding 50 knots.

4) The UA must be operated at an altitude of no more than 400 feet above ground level 

(AGL), as indicated by the procedures specified in the operating documents. All 

altitudes reported to ATC must be in feet AGL.

5) The UA must be operated within visual line of sight (VLOS) of the pilot in command 

(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) 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 functions 

prescribed in the operating documents. 

7) The VO 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.

8) The operating documents and this 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 in this exemption and the procedures 

outlined in the operating documents, the conditions and limitations herein take 

precedence and must be followed. Otherwise, the operator must follow the procedures 

as outlined in its operating documents. The operator may update or revise its 

operating documents. It is the operator’s responsibility to track such revisions and 

present updated and revised documents to the Administrator 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.
11

9) Prior to each flight, the PIC must inspect the UAS to ensure it is in a condition for safe 

flight. If the inspection reveals a condition that affects the safe operation of the UAS, 

the UAS 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.

10) 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.

11) The pre-flight inspection section in the operating documents must account for all 

potential discrepancies (e.g., inoperable components, items, or equipment, not already 

covered in the relevant sections of the operating documents).

12) The operator must follow the UAS manufacturer’s aircraft/component, maintenance,

overhaul, replacement, inspection, and life limit requirements. 

13) 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.

14) Each UAS operated under this exemption must comply with all manufacturer Safety 

Bulletins.

15) The authorized person must make an entry in the aircraft record of the corrective 

action taken against discrepancies discovered between inspections.

16) The PIC must possess at least a private pilot airman certificate and at least a current 

third class medical certificate. 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.

17) 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 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). The PIC must ensure 

that the VO is trained appropriately in order to fulfill her or her duties. A record of 
12

training must be documented and made available upon request by the Administrator. 

Flights for the purposes of training the operator’s PICs and VOs (training, proficiency, 

and experience-building) are permitted under the terms of this exemption. However, 

training 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.

18) 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.

19) 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 Notice to Airmen (NOTAM), as required by the operator’s 

Certificate of Waiver or Authorization (COA). The letter of agreement with the airport 

management must be made available to the Administrator upon request.

20) 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.

21) If the UA loses communications or loses its GPS signal, it must return to a predetermined location within the planned operating area and land or be recovered in 

accordance with the operating documents.

22) The PIC must abort the flight in the event of unpredicted obstacles or emergencies in 

accordance with the operating documents.

23) 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.

24) The operator must obtain an Air Traffic Organization (ATO) issued COA prior to 

conducting any operations under this grant of exemption. This COA will require the 

operator to request a 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.

25) 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-
13

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

as large as practicable.

26) 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.

27) The operator is required to keep a copy of the UAS manufacturer’s operating/flight 

manual and all other operating documents in a location accessible to the PIC, during 

flight operations. These documents must be made available to the Administrator or 

any law enforcement official upon request.

28) The UA must remain clear and yield the right of way to all other aviation operations 

and activities at all times.

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

30) The UA may not be operated over congested or densely populated areas. 

31) 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 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, VO, 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 property owner/controller or authorized representative. 

Permission from property owner/controller or authorized representative will be 

obtained prior to the beginning of every flight.

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 
14

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

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

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 March 31, 2017, unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

Issued in Washington, DC, on March 20, 2015.

/s/

John S. Duncan

Director, Flight Standards Service