July 14, 2015

Exemption No. 12038

Regulatory Docket No. FAA–2015–1433

Mr. Kenneth Dungey

P.O. Box 65241

Tucson, AZ 85728

Dear Mr. Dungey:

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 April 18, 2015, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for 

an exemption. The petitioner requested to operate an unmanned aircraft system (UAS) to 

conduct aerial videography and cinematography.

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 Vision and DJI Phantom 3.

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

and parts, Subpart H—Airworthiness Certificates. In accordance with the statutory criteria 

provided in Section 333 of Public Law 112−95 in reference to 49 U.S.C. § 44704, and in 

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

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 
2

14 CFR part 21, Certification procedures for products and parts, Subpart H—Airworthiness 

Certificates, and any associated noise certification and testing requirements of part 36, is 

not necessary.

The Basis for Our Decision

You have requested to use a UAS for aerial data collection1. The FAA has issued grants of 

exemption in circumstances similar in all material respects to those presented in your petition. 

In Grants of Exemption Nos. 11062 to Astraeus Aerial (see Docket No. FAA−2014−0352), 

11109 to Clayco, Inc. (see Docket No. FAA−2014−0507), 11112 to VDOS Global, LLC (see

Docket No. FAA−2014−0382), and 11213 to Aeryon Labs, Inc. (see Docket No. 

FAA−2014−0642), the FAA found that the enhanced safety achieved using an unmanned 

aircraft (UA) with the specifications described by the petitioner and carrying no passengers or 

crew, rather than a manned aircraft of significantly greater proportions, carrying crew in 

addition to flammable fuel, gives the FAA good cause to find that the UAS operation enabled 

by this exemption is in the public interest.

Having reviewed your reasons for requesting an exemption, I find that—

 They are similar in all material respects to relief previously requested in Grant of 

Exemption Nos. 11062, 11109, 11112, and 11213;

 The reasons stated by the FAA for granting Exemption Nos. 11062, 11109, 11112, and 

11213 also apply to the situation you present; and 

 A grant of exemption is in the public interest.

Our Decision

In consideration of the foregoing, I find that a grant of exemption is in the public interest. 

Therefore, pursuant to the authority contained in 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 40113, and 44701, 

delegated to me by the Administrator, Mr. Kenneth Dungey is granted an exemption from 

14 CFR §§ 61.23(a) and (c), 61.101(e)(4) and (5), 61.113(a), 61.315(a), 91.7(a), 91.119(c), 

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

the extent necessary to allow the petitioner to operate a UAS to perform aerial data collection. 

This exemption is subject to the conditions and limitations listed below.

Conditions and Limitations

In this grant of exemption, Mr. Kenneth Dungey 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 

Vision 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 

not permitted. 

3. The UA may not be operated at a speed exceeding 87 knots (100 miles per hour). The 

exemption holder may use either groundspeed or calibrated airspeed to determine 

compliance with the 87 knot speed restriction. In no case will the UA be operated at 

airspeeds greater than the maximum UA operating airspeed recommended by the 

aircraft manufacturer.

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

(AGL). Altitude must be reported in feet AGL.

5. The UA must be operated within visual line of sight (VLOS) of the PIC at all times. 

This requires the PIC to be able to use human vision unaided by any device other than 

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

U.S. driver’s license.

6. All operations must utilize a visual observer (VO). The UA must be operated within 

the visual line of sight (VLOS) of the PIC and VO at all times. The VO may be used 

to satisfy the VLOS requirement as long as the PIC always maintains VLOS 

capability. The VO and PIC must be able to communicate verbally at all times; 

electronic messaging or texting is not permitted during flight operations. The PIC 

must be designated before the flight and cannot transfer his or her designation for the 

duration of the flight. The PIC must ensure that the VO can perform the duties 

required of the VO.

7. This exemption and all documents needed to operate the UAS and conduct its 

operations in accordance with the conditions and limitations stated in this grant of 

exemption, are hereinafter referred to as the operating documents. The operating 

documents must be accessible during UAS operations and made available to the 

Administrator upon request. If a discrepancy exists between the conditions and 

limitations in this exemption and the procedures outlined in the operating documents, 

the conditions and limitations herein take precedence and must be followed. 

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 July 31, 2017, unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

Sincerely,

/s/

John S. Duncan

Director, Flight Standards Service

Enclosures
Kenneth Dungey, Tucson Arizona - Section 333 Exemption Petition

April 18th 2015

U. S. Department of Transportation

Docket Management System

1200 New Jersey Ave, SE

Washington, DC 20590

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

45.23(b); 14 C.F.R. Part 21; 14 C.F.R. 61.113(a)&(b); 91.7(a); 91.9(b) (2); 91.103(b); 91.109; 119.121; 91.151(a); 

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

Dear Sir or Madam,

I, Kenneth Dungey, am writing pursuant to the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 and 

the procedures contained within 14 C.F.R. 11, to request that I, Kenneth Dungey, an owner and 

operator of small unmanned aircraft, be exempted from the Federal Aviation Regulations 

(“FARs”) listed below so that I, Kenneth Dungey, may operate my small ultra light weight 

unmanned aircraft system (“UAS”) commercially in airspace regulated by the Federal Aviation 

Administration (“FAA”).

As described herein I, Kenneth Dungey, an Current FAA licensed Private Pilot, (Single Engine 

land); experienced in flying hobby helicopters for recreational purposes. I have added a hobby 

grade quad-copter 1 UAS to my inventory equipped with a onboard camera with intent for 

aerial videography/cinematography to enhance academic community awareness for those 

individuals and companies unfamiliar with the geographical layout of the metro Tucson area, 

and augment real estate and special event photos/video; following exemption and approval by 

the FAA. Thereby enhancing their academic research experience for the metro Tucson area. I 

plan to add a second quad-copter DJI Inspire to my inventory in the future with comparable 

safety capabilities.

I have flown small RC electric multirotors for over four (4) years, and have been flying RC 

aircraft for over twenty five (25) years. I have also recently completed a 3 sUAS Multorotor 

Operator Course given by AUV Flight Services located in Tucson. Committed to safety with each 

flight. My, Kenneth Dungey’s, exemption request would permit operation of ultra light weight, 

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

controlled and limited airspace. Conducting predetermined operation in areas away from 

general public, airports, heliports and vehicular traffic for community videos, and within 

property boundaries for individual homeowner real estate listing videos/photos. Currently, 

similar lightweight, remote controlled UAS's are legally operated by unmonitored amateur 

hobbyists with no safety plan or controls in place to prevent catastrophe. I, Kenneth Dungey, 

 

1

Appendix A – DJI Phantom quadcopter Operator Manual
have personally instilled safety protocols and controls to avoid and prevent public hazard, as 

well as manned aircraft hazards/catastrophe. This will act to further safety protocols exclusive 

to lightweight UAS's specific to real estate video and photography and private event usage as I, 

Kenneth Dungey, record flight data and other information gained through permitted flight 

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

protocol and safety regulation.

Granting my, Kenneth Dungey’s, request comports with the Secretary of Transportation’s (FAA 

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

airspace system, but to “...establish requirements for the safe operation of such aircraft 

systems [UAS's] in the national airspace system” under Section 333(c) of the Reform Act specific 

to the use of UAS's for real estate/Realtor purposes. Further I, Kenneth Dungey, will conduct my 

operations in compliance with the protocols described herein or as otherwise established by 

the FAA. For the reasons stated below I, Kenneth Dungey, respectfully request the grant of an

exemption allowing me to operate ultra light weight, remote controlled UAS’s for academic 

community awareness to benefit/stimulate attraction to the metro Tucson area and to enhance 

real estate photos/videos and special events who cannot afford expensive manned aircraft for 

the same purpose. Both of which will promote local economic growth through increased 

employment and increased tax base. Both with public safety in mind by keeping heavier 

manned aircraft containing combustible fuel that that poses potential public hazard.

I. Contact Information:

Kenneth Dungey

P.O Box 65241

Tucson, AZ 85728

Telephone: (520) 400-4888

Email: kendungey@sbcglobal.net

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

Dungey Requests Exemption are:

14 CFR 21;

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

14 CFR 61.113 (a) & (b);

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

14 CFR 407 (a) (1);

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

14 CFR 417 (a) & (b).

III. The Extent of relief Kenneth Dungey seeks and the Reason He Seeks Such Relief:

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

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

Dungey, contemplated commercial cinematic, academic and other flight operations within the 

national airspace system. The Reform Act in Section 332 provides for such integration of civil 
unmanned aircraft systems into our national airspace system as it is in the public’s interest to 

do so. My, Kenneth Dungey’s, ultra light weight UAS meets the definition of “small unmanned 

aircraft” as defined in Section 331 and therefore the integration of my ultra light weight UAS is 

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

prior to the time period by which the Reform Act requires the FAA to promulgate rules 

governing such craft. Thereby, providing direct experience and valuable information for formal 

regulation that can be administered uniformly to all real estate/ special event related UAS aerial 

video and photography. The Reform Act guides the Secretary in determining the types of UAS's 

that may operate safely in our national airspace system. Considerations include: The weight, 

size, speed and overall capabilities of the UAS's; Whether the UAS will be operated near 

airports or heavily populated areas; and, Whether the UAS will be operated by line of sight. 112 

P.L. 95 § 333 (a). Each of these items reflect in favor of an exemption for me, Kenneth Dungey. 

My UAS utilizes four (4) rotating propellers for balance, control and stability. My UAS is 

equipped with GPS and auto return safety technology. Weighing less than five (5) pounds (far 

below the maximum 55 pound limit); including camera with gimbal.

I, Kenneth Dungey, consider safety as foremost with each flight. My small unmanned aircraft is 

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

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

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

are released. With three modes to choose from, I utilize the GPS Mode 

2

 for aerial 

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

and hazard. When pilot communication is lost this UAS is designed slowly descend to point of 

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

operate near areas where general public is within twenty five to fifty (25-50) yards depending 

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

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

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

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

operations, and are flown only within my line of sight of me, as the remote control pilot. 

Utilizing battery power rather than combustible fuels, flights generally last between three (5) to 

seven (10) minutes, with an altitude under one two hundred (200) feet. I, Kenneth Dungey, 

utilize a fresh fully charged battery with each flight as a safety precaution; full flight time limit 

for each battery is eighteen (18) to twenty (20) minutes as tested. I do not operate my UAS at 

or below manufacture recommend minimum charge levels for operation; preferring to remain 

well within a safe operating range to insure adequate communication between radio control 

and UAS to eliminate potential for crash, loss of control or hazard. Reserve batteries are at 

hand with each exercise to insure replacement for sufficient safe level of operation. I do not 

believe in taking risk that may cause a crash, that could create hazard to the 

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

 

2

GPS Mode includes, position hold, self-leveling, altitude command, GPS, return home feature, and safety

control to return home or land in the event of communication interruption between RC transmitter and UAS. See Appendix A -

Operator Manual.
numerous practice flights in remote areas as a hobbyist simulating flights for future commercial 

use to gain familiarization with the characteristics of this specific UAS's performance under 

different temperature and weather conditions. I also practice computerized simulated flights to

maintain adequate skills and response reflex time. All for the sake of safety.

I, Kenneth Dungey, am extremely cautious when operating of my UAS/ultra light weight 

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

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

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

corresponding directive to integrate UAS's into the national airspace system. Kenneth Dungey’s 

UAS, used in hobby flight, has a demonstrable safety record and does not pose any threat to 

the general public or national security.

I have met the current qualifications and have far exceeded the current requirement:

as determined by the FAA, 4 require "...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...a minimum of 5 

hours as UAS pilot operating the make and model of UAS to be used..." 

IV. How Kenneth Dungey’s Request Will Benefit the Public As A Whole:

Aerial videography for geographical awareness and for real estate marketing and special events

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

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

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

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

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

catastrophic crash that the Tucson community has experienced in the past with military aircraft 

and medical helicopter crashes within the city of Tucson. Each resulting in loss of life. Each with 

combustible fuel that exploded and burned on impact. Police helicopters have made 

emergency hard landings within city limits. My, Kenneth Dungey's, UAS pose no such threat 

since size and lack of combustible fuel alleviates any potential threat to the public. Congress has 

already proclaimed that it is in the public’s interest to integrate commercially flown UAS's into 

the national airspace system, hence the passing of the Reform Act. Granting my, Kenneth 

Dungey’s, exemption request furthers the public interest through academic/visual awareness of 

the geographical benefits in and around the metro Tucson area. My ultra light weight UAS is 

battery powered and creates no emissions that can harm the environment. The consequence of 

my ultra light weight UAS crashing is far less than a full size helicopter or fixed wing aircraft; 

which are heavy, contain combustible fuel and can cause catastrophic devastation to the public.

4 Appendix- D Flight Log

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

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

Kenneth Dungey, to immediately fly within national air space furthers economic growth. 
Granting my exemption request substantially furthers the economic impact for the metro 

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

as individuals looking to relocate for career advancement through academic and geographical 

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

V. Reasons Why Kenneth Dungey’s Exemption Will Not Adversely Affect Safety Or How The 

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

My, Kenneth Dungey’s, exemption will not adversely affect safety. Quite the contrary, for the 

reasons stated permitting me, Kenneth Dungey, to log more flight time in FAA controlled 

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

implementation of new and novel, for development in cooperation with the FAA. In addition I, 

Kenneth Dungey, submit the following representations of enhancements to current aerial 

videography and photography for real estate:

My UAS weighs less than 5 pounds complete; I only operate my UAS below 200 feet (well 

within the 400 foot permissible ceiling set by the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012); 

my UAS only operate for 5-10 minutes per flight; I land my UAS prior to manufacturer 

recommended minimum level of battery power;

 I pilot my UAS through remote control only by line of sight;

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

communication with the remote control pilot is lost;

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

enhance safety protocols;

 I only operate in reasonably safe environment that are strictly controlled, are away from 

power lines, elevated lights, airports and actively populated areas;

 I conduct extensive pre-flight inspections and protocol, during which safety carries 

primary importance;

 I always obtains all necessary permissions prior to operation; and,

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

danger.

My, Kenneth Dungey’s, safety protocols provide a level of safety equal to or exceeding existing 

rules. It is important to note that absent the integration of commercial UAS into our national 

airspace system, helicopters are the primary means of aerial video and photography for 

community awareness and real estate. While the safety record of such helicopters is 

remarkably astounding, it is far safer to operate a battery powered ultra light weight UAS.

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

operates my UAS in specific areas away from mass populations. Second, there is no fuel on 

board a UAS and thus the potential for fire or explosions is greatly diminished. Third, the small

size and extreme maneuverability of my UAS allow me to remotely pilot away from and avoid 
hazards quickly and safely. Lastly, given its small size and weight, even when close enough to 

capture amazing images, my UAS need not be so close to the objects they are focused on 

through the technology and use of post editing software allowing pan and zoom.

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

continue to operate at and above current safety levels.

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

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

Subpart H, entitled Airworthiness Certificates, sets forth requirements for procurement of 

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

enclosed operational area of my, Kenneth Dungey’s, UAS permits exemption from Part 21 

because my UAS meets (and exceeds) an equivalent level of safety pursuant to Section 333 of 

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

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

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

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

such as airports and dense populations. My, Kenneth Dungey’s, current and projected UAS's 

meet or exceed each of the elements.

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

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

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

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

inapplicable. An equivalent level of safety will be achieved by maintaining a safety/flight 

manual delineating areas of where safety can be defined. The FAA has previously issued 

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

10167, 10167A, 10602, 10700 and 32827. 14 C.F.R. § 91.121 regarding altimeter settings is 

inapplicable insofar as my UAS utilizes electronic global positioning systems with a barometric sensor.

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

They are inapplicable for the same reasons described above. The equivalent level of safety will be 

achieved by maintaining any such required certifications and registrations by me, Kenneth Dungey.

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

be marked according to certain specifications. My UAS are, by definition, unmanned. They therefore do 

not have a cabin, cockpit or pilot station on which to mark certain words or phrases. Further, two-inch 

lettering is difficult to place on such small aircraft with dimensions smaller that minimal lettering 

requirement. Regardless, I will mark its UASs in the largest possible lettering by placing the word 

“EXPERIMENTAL” on its fuselage as required by 14 C.F.R. §45.29 (f) so that I the pilot, or anyone 

assisting me as a spotter with the UAV will see the markings. The FAA has previously issued exemptions 

to this regulation through Exemptions Nos. 8738, 10167, 10167A and 10700.
C. 14 C.F.R. § 61.113: Private Pilot Privileges and Limitations: PIC. Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. §§ 61.113 (a) & 

(b), private pilots are limited to non-commercial operations. I, Kenneth Dungey, am a current FAA 

certified private (single engine land). Thus, allowing me, Kenneth Dungey, to operate my UAS meet and 

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

D. 14 C.F.R. 91.119: Minimum Safe Altitudes. 14 C.F.R. § 91.119 prescribes safe altitudes for the 

operation of civil aircraft. It allows helicopters to be operated at lower altitudes in certain conditions. 

My UAS will never operate at an altitude greater than 200 AGL; safely below the standard of 400 AGL. I,

Kenneth Dungey, will however operate my UAS in safe areas away from public and traffic, providing a 

level of safety at least equivalent to or below those in relation to minimum safe altitudes. Given the size, 

weight, maneuverability and speed of my UAS, an equivalent or higher level of safety will be achieved.

E. 14 C.F.R. 91.405 (a); 407 (a) (1); 409 (a) (2); 417(a) & (b): Maintenance Inspections. The above-cited 

Regulations require, amongst other things, aircraft owners and operators to “have [the] aircraft 

inspected as prescribed in subpart E of this part and shall between required inspections, except as 

provided in paragraph (c) of this section, have discrepancies repaired as prescribed in part 43 of this 

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

therefore, apply to my, Kenneth Dungey's, UAS. However, as a safety precaution I inspect my UAS 

before and after each flight.

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

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

Airworthiness Certificates, sets forth requirements for procurement of necessary airworthiness 

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

my UAS permits exemption from Part 21 because my, Kenneth Dungey’s, UAS meets an 

equivalent level of safety pursuant to Section 333 of the Reform Act. The FAA is authorized to 

exempt aircraft from the airworthiness certificate requirement under both the Act (49 U.S.C. § 

44701 (f)) and Section 333 of the Reform Act. Both pieces of legislation permit the FAA to 

exempt UAS's from the airworthiness certificate requirement in consideration of the weight, 

size, speed, maneuverability and proximity to areas such as airports and dense populations. My

UAS meets or exceeds each of the elements. 14 C.F.R. 91.7(a) prohibits the operation of an 

aircraft without an airworthiness certificate. As no such certificate will be applicable in the form 

contemplated by the FARs, this Regulation is inapplicable. 14 C.F.R. § 91.9 (b) (2) requires an 

aircraft flight manual in the aircraft. As there are no pilots or passengers, and given the size of 

the UAS's, this Regulation is inapplicable. An equivalent level of safety will be achieved by 

maintaining a manual. The FAA has previously issued exemptions to this regulation in 

Exemption Nos. 8607, 8737, 8738, 9299, 9299A, 9565, 9565B, 10167, maintenance program 

that involves regular software updates and curative measures for any damaged hardware. 

Therefore, an equivalent level of safety will be achieved.

In summary, Kenneth Dungey seeks an exemption from the following

Regulations:

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

C.F.R. § 91.9 (b)(2); 14 C.F.R. § 91.103(b); 14 C.F.R. § 91.109; 14 C.F.R. § 91.119; 14 C.F.R. § 
91.121; 14 C.F.R. § 91.151(a); 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.203(a) and (b); 14 C.F.R. § 91.405 (a); 14 C.F.R. § 

91.407 (a)(1); 14 C.F.R. § 91.409 (a)(2); 14 C.F.R. § 91.409 (a ) (2); and, 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.417 (a) & 

(b) to commercially operate my, Kenneth Dungey's, small unmanned vehicle/lightweight 

unmanned aircraft vehicle in community awareness and real estate operations, and to develop 

economic platforms for real estate to enhance the experience of those seeking to relocate to 

the metro Tucson area. Currently, area awareness and real estate aerial 

videography/photography relies primarily on the use of larger aircraft running on combustible 

fuel. Posing potential risk to the public. Granting my, Kenneth Dungey’s, request for exemption 

will reduce current risk levels and thereby enhance safety. My UAS craft do not contain 

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

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

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

established air fields. I, Kenneth Dungey, have been informally analyzing flight information and 

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

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

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

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

are no personnel on board my, Kenneth Dungey’s, UAS and therefore the likelihood of death or 

serious bodily injury is significantly diminished. My, Kenneth Dungey’s, operation of my UAS, 

weighing less than 5 pounds and travelling at lower speeds within limited areas will provide an 

equivalent level of safety as that achieved under current FARs. Accordingly I, Kenneth Dungey, 

respectfully request that the FAA grant my exemption request and am willing to cooperate in 

sharing information to benefit the FAA, safety of manned aircraft, and the general public at 

large.

Respectfully submitted,

Kenneth Dungey

P.O. Box 65241

Tucson, AZ 85728