Richard	T.	Britt	Jr.

19231 Se 23rd Place

Morriston, FL 32668

RTBrittJr@UAVideoCreations.com

352-615-0778

Hon. Michael Huerta

Administrator

Federal Aviation Administration

U. S. Department of Transportation Docket

Management System

1200 New Jersey Ave., SE

Washington, DC 20590

Re: Request for Exemption under Section 333 of the FAA Reform Act and Part 11 of the Federal

Aviation Regulations from certain parts of the FARs. To operate a DJI Phantom 2 Vision Plus, 

and/or DJI Inspire 1 or similar sUASs aircraft.

Dear Administrator Huerta:

This letter herby requests an exemption from the listed Federal Aviation Regulations (“FARs”) to allow

Mr. Richard T Britt Jr., to operate, for commercial purposes, a small Unmanned Aircraft System

(“sUASs”) under the conditions and limitations set forth in this Petition. 

This request for exemption is identical to others that have been granted by the FAA, to wit: Mr. Brian 

Walk , Exemption No. 11445, Regulatory Docket No. FAA–2015–0143 and Ms. Dyan Gibbens Exemption No. 

11446 Regulatory Docket No. FAA−2014−0890, among others.

The petitioner, Richard T Britt, is a Private Pilot in good standing for over 20 years, has owned and 

operated a Piper Warrior II under both FARs 91 and 135. Additionally, Mr. Britt owned and operated an 

FAA approved repair station for over 10 years. Mr. Britt is thoroughly familiar with all applicable rules 

and regulations set forth by the FAA to own and operate aircraft in regulated airspace. 

Currently the petitioner is retired from the aircraft repair industry and currently owns a business in 

technology but also engages in professional photography. 

Therefore, pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (the Reform Act)

and 14 C.F.R. Part 11, Mr. Richard Britt , a professional businessman and photographer, hereby applies

for an exemption from the listed Federal Aviation Regulations (“FARs”) to allow him to operate a

small Unmanned Aircraft System (“sUASs”) under the conditions and limitations set forth in this 

Petition.

The name and address of the applicant/petitioner is:

Richard T. Britt Jr.

Telephone: (352) 615-0778

Email: RTBrittJr@UAVideoCreations.com

Address: 19231 SE 23rd Place

Williston, FL 32668
2

Regulations from which the exemption is requested:

14 CFR Part 21

14 C.F.R. § 45.23(b)

14 CFR § 61.3

14 CFR § 61.56(a)(2)

14 CFR § 61.56(c)(1)

14 C.F.R. § 91.7 (a)

14 CFR § 91.9 (b) (2)

14 C.F.R. § 91.103

14 C.F.R. § 91.109

14 C.F. R. § 91.119

14 C.F.R. § 91.121

14 CFR § 91.151 (a)

14 CFR § 91.203 (a) & (b)

14 CFR § 91.205(b)

14 CFR § 91.215

14 CFR § 91.405 (a)

14 CFR § 407 (a) (1)

14 CFR § 409 (a) (2)

14 CFR § 417 (a) & (b)

The Appendix describes the FARs from which an exemption is requested as well as the subparagraph (B) 

of sUAS proposed rule making [Docket No.: FAA-2015-0150; Notice No. 15-01] and summarizes the

justification for each requested exemption. 

The Petition is submitted to fulfill Congress’ goal under Section 333(a) through (c) of the Reform Act,

which directs the Secretary of Transportation to consider whether certain unmanned aircraft systems

may operate safely in the national airspace system (NAS) before completion of the rulemaking

required under Section 332 of the Reform Act. In making this determination, the Administrator must

determine which types of UASs do not create a hazard to users of the NAS or the public or pose a

threat to national security in light of the following:

• The UAS’s size, weight, speed, and operational capability;
3

• Operation of the UAS in close proximity to airports and populated areas; and

• Operation of the UAS within visual line of sight of the operator. Reform Act § 333 (a).

If the Administrator determines that such vehicles “may operate safely in the national airspace system,

the Secretary shall establish requirements for the safe operation of such aircraft in the national airspace

system.” Id. § 333(c) (emphasis added).

The Secretary has delegated his aviation authority to the Administrator of the FAA.

The Federal Aviation Act expressly grants the FAA the authority to grant exemptions from its

regulatory requirements for civil aircraft, a term defined under §40101 of the Act, which includes

sUASs. The Administrator may grant an exemption from a requirement of a regulation prescribed

under subsection (a) or (b) of this section or any sections 44702-44716 of the Federal Aviation Act if 

Administrator finds the exemption in the public interest. 49 U.S.C. § 44701(f) See also 49 USC §

44711(a); 49 USC § 44704; 14 CFR §91.203 (a) (1).

The wide availability of small Unmanned Aircraft Systems, also known as “microdrones,” capable of

carrying high-quality video cameras and priced at affordable levels intrigues the petitioner. Mr. Britt's 

entire professional career has involved the aeronautics industry and the exploration/adaptation of new

technologies for business use. 

In March of 2015 the petitioner acquired a DJI Phantom 2 Vision Plus and has flown it for total of 20 

hours over remote areas of the North Central Florida, and on his own private 20 acre ranch. 

Currently, a number of local residents and professional colleagues have seen the petitioners video 

imagery taken for his personal use and remarked on the high quality and artistic merit of his work. 

Additionally they have requested he undertake the additional microdrone photography for

compensation.

The petitioner has researched current and purposed regulations governing the use of sUASs for 

compensation and found that this work is not permissible without special permission from the FAA. 

The petitioner also notes and has read the congressional mandate in sections 332 and 333 of the FAA

Revitalization and Reform Act of 2012 that the FAA move quickly to accommodate the economic and

societal benefits that can result from widespread deployment of sUASs technology. He has also read 

Docket No.: FAA-2015-0150 Operation and Certification of Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems, notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM). Accordingly, Petitioner applies for authorization under the Federal

Aviation Act, and the FARs rules to undertake the following activities for commercial purposes.

Unless the Petition is granted, Petitioner will be at a significant competitive disadvantage if he, as he

prefers, complies with FAA policy.

Vehicle

The Petitioner will fly a DJI Phantom 2 Vision Plus equipped with a three-axis gimbal and camera as 

supplied the from the OEM. However the Petitioner request the addition for future use the DJI Aspire 

1 equipped with a three-axis gimbal and camera as supplied the from the OEM. 

The DJI Phantom 2 Vision Plus and the DJI Aspire 1 (The Aircraft(s))have built in capability to limit the
4

height it flies above the ground, to limit the radius of the distance it flies from the operator, and to

exclude it from class B, C, and D airspace. The Aircraft(s) also has the built-in capability to return to the

launching point if the wireless control link is interrupted or if the operator commands it to do so 

through software or mechanical fail safe switch found on the control .

The DJI Phantom 2 Vision Plus weighs 2.74 lbs including propellers, battery and camera as delivered 

from the manufacturer and has a maximum payload weight of 2.6lbs. It has a top speed of about 30

miles per hour. It has four fixed-pitch rotors, thrust from which is varied by changing rotor RPMs. It is

powered by interchangeable 5200 to 6000 mAh lithium polymer battery(s) with an estimated flight 

time of 10 to 20 minutes with a 30% of battery charge remaining 

The DJI Aspire 1 weighs 6.47lbs including propellers, battery and camera as delivered from the 

manufacturer and has a maximum payload weight of 3lbs. It has a top speed of about 30 miles per 

hour. It has four fixed-pitch rotors, thrust from which is varied by changing rotor RPMs. It is powered

by interchangeable 4500 to 5700 mAh lithium polymer battery(s) with an estimated flight time of 10 to 

20 minutes with a 30% of battery charge remaining 

Flight profiles

The petitioner will program the Phantom so that it will not fly above 400 feet AGL, or more than 1500

feet radial distant from operator. He will preflight the vehicle before each mission to the OEMs 

recommendations and any additional procedures deemed necessary for safe flight as experience 

dictates.

His aerial photography missions will include but not be limited to;

1. real estate;

2. agricultural crop monitoring;

3. construction;

4. weddings and other private social events;

5. market research; 

6. aerial surveys;

7. damage assessment;

8. property survey;

9. mapping and inspections.

10. to enhance public awareness of UASs;

11. and training;

The requested exemption would permit the operation of sUAS with a gross takeoff weight of not more 

that 55lb to be operated in airspace that is;

1) outside of controlled airspace when;

a) the aircraft is register and displays the registration's N numbers on aircraft in a size and manner 

appropriate to the size of the aircraft.

b) operator will hold at least a Private Pilots rating and;

(1) have in his possession or able to product in a reasonable period of time; 

(a) a signed entry in his/her operator log book from a Certified Flight Instructor that 

he/she as passed the ground portion of bi-annual fight review within the 
5

subsequent 24 month period and;

(b) a valid Florida drivers license and;

(c) will abide by visual restriction or other restriction as may be appropriate and found 

on Florida drivers license; 

c) the operator in command has logged no less than 20 hours of flight experience in model and type 

of sUAS to be flown.

d) the operator has performed a preflight inspection of the aircraft as defined by the OEM manuals 

supplied with the aircraft;

e) operator has determined through log book entries or other records or methods that;

i) the aircraft and battery(s) have been maintained as defined by the OEM manuals supplied 

with the aircraft. 

ii) that the aircraft, it's controls or software as applicable, have the latest updates, a flight test 

has been performed subsequent to said update(s) and aircraft has been returned to service. 

If the latest update(s) is/are found not to function correctly in the aircraft, its controls or

software as applicable, said update can be reverted to their previous functioning version,

with the aircraft then test and return to service until discrepancies can be resolved with the 

latest update(s).

f) operations are performed at or below the altitude of 400 feet AGL;

g) Weather minimums are at or above VFR minimums;

h) at a minimum of 200 ft of separation from non-participating persons;

i) will yield right of way to all other aircraft;

j) will land aircraft at or before batteries in controls required for flight or in aircraft reaches 30% of 

full charge;

k) aircraft will be limit to flight within the visual flight range of the operator and/or one or more

spotter(s). However spotters may not be "stacked" or perform relay to extend the distance of the 

flight, i.e. each spotter responsible for monitoring current portion of flight must be visible to the 

operator.

l) the spotter responsible for the current portion of the flight and the operator must stay in 

communication at all times, this can be via phone, radio, voice, signal flags or other gestures. If 

communication with spotter responsible for monitoring the current portion of the flight is lost 

the operator will return aircraft to 

i) point of fight origin or;

ii) point where a spotter or operator can take responsibility for the see and avoid requirements 

or;

iii) another appropriate location where the flight can be terminated as soon as is practicable. 

2) within 4 nautical miles from the airport(s) without a control tower;

a) while meeting all requirement of section 1 above and;

b) permission has been given in advance by the authority responsible for airport operations; 

c) a radio capable of receiving at frequencies of 118.000-136.975MHz and channel spacing 25 kHz 
6

will be in the possession of the operator and monitoring the Unicom or common traffic 

frequencies as applicable by reference to current VFR Low Altitude Airway Charts and/or 

FAA's Airport/Facility Directory;

d) if an aircraft enters the airport pattern, the operator will land the sUAS at the first practicable

location until airport airspace is clear of traffic;

e) will prior to flight file a notice to airman of intended flight

The petitioner specially requests a waiver to rules 14 CFR § 61.56 subsection(a)(2) and (c)(1) that requires 

"a minimum of one hour of flight" in addition to applicable ground school certification. The petitioner 

believes this element of the rule as applied to the operation of sUMV is unnecessary and does not fall 

within the spirit of the guidelines put forth by the FAA in NPRM, Operation and Certification of Small 

Unmanned Aircraft Systems [Docket No.: FAA-2015-0150; Notice No. 15-01].

Exemption 14 CFR § 61.56 (a)(2), "Except as provided in paragraphs (b) and (f) of this section, a flight 

review consists of a minimum of 1 hour of flight training and 1 hour of ground training. and 14 CFR §

61.56 (c)(1) "Accomplished a flight review given in an aircraft for which that pilot is rated by an authorized 

instructor"

The requirement to "Accomplished a flight review given in an aircraft for which that pilot is rated by an 

authorized instructor" and to "review of those maneuvers and procedures that are necessary for the pilot 

to demonstrate the safe exercise of the privileges of the pilot certificate" would not enhance the safe 

operation of an sUAS as stated in FAA finding of NPRM subparagraph B. Current Statutory and 

Regulatory Structure Governing Small UAS. "...This is because a person typically obtains a private or 

commercial pilot certificate by learning how to operate a manned aircraft. Much of that knowledge 

would not be applicable to small UAS operation because a small UAS is operated differently than a 

manned aircraft." 

Approval of this exemption would provide safety enhancements to the already safe Photographic and 

Video gathering operations presently using manned helicopters and airplanes in Florida and other 

states in the USA and would thereby fulfill the FAA Administrator’s responsibilities to “...establish

requirements for the safe operation of such aircraft systems in the national airspace system.” Section 

333(c) of the Reform Act.

The Petitioner's proposed operations satisfy the criteria provided in Section 333 of the Reform Act relating

to size, weight, speed, operating capabilities, proximity to airports and populated areas and operation 

within visual line of sight and national security. The requested exemptions would allow the Petitioner to 

perform aerial photography and other functions as described above with his sUAS.

Respectfully submitted,

Richard T Britt, Jr. Petitioner
7

Appendix

FAR section Subject Justification

14 CFR § 45.23(b) Requirement to display

registration number on

vehicle

As appropriate to the 

size of the aircraft

14 CFR Part 21 Aircraft certification

requirements and

procedures

Designed for manned

aircraft; not suitable for offthe-shelf sUAS

14 CFR § 61.3 Requirement for pilot

certificate

For operations as stated 

above

14 CFR § 61.56(a)(2) Requirement for pilot

certificate

Except as provided in 

paragraphs (b) and (f) of 

this section, a flight 

review consists of a 

minimum of 1 hour of 

flight training and 1 hour 

of ground training.

14 CFR § 61.56(c)(1) Requirement for pilot

certificate

Accomplished a flight review 

given in an aircraft for which 

that pilot is rated by an 

authorized instructor

14 CFR § 91.7 (a) Airworthiness

requirement

As no airworthiness 

standard has been given, 

this section is not applicable 

for sUAS

14 CFR § 91.9 (b) (2) Requirement for manual to

be available in the cockpit

No cockpit, however a 

manual and checklist will 

be in the possession or in 

near proximity of the 

operator for review as 

needed.

14 CFR § 91.103(b) Requirement for crew

members to be onboard

Unmanned vehicle
8

14 CFR § 91.109 Requirement for dual

controls during flight

instruction

sUAS are not 

capable of 

supporting dual 

controls 

14 CFR § 91.119 Minimum altitudes for safe 

flight

Safety requires operation

below these altitudes

14 CFR § 91.121 Altimeter settings The sUAS altimeter cannot 

be adjust 

14 CFR § 91.151(a) Fuel requirements Fuel for this purpose 

will be defined as 

percentage of full 

battery

14 CFR § 91.203 (a) & (b) Requirement for

registration and

airworthiness

certificates to be

onboard

No one aboard to read

certificates

14 CFR § 91.205(b) Cockpit instruments

requirement

No one aboard to read

instruments

14 CFR § 91.215 Transponder

requirement

Vehicle has insufficient

useful load; will be

operated below ATC radar

coverage

14 CFR § 91.405 (a) Inspection requirements Designed for manned

aircraft; not suitable for offthe-shelf sUAS

14 CFR § 91.407(a) (1) Inspection approval

requirements

Designed for manned

aircraft; not suitable for offthe-shelf sUAS

14 CFR § 91.409 (a) (2) Airworthiness

inspection

Designed for manned

aircraft; not suitable for offthe-shelf sUAS
9

14 CFR § 91.417 (a) & (b) Maintenance records

requirements

Designed for manned

aircraft; not suitable for offthe-shelf sUAS

Billing Code 4910-13-P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Parts 21, 43, 45, 47, 61, 91, 101, 107, and 183 

[Docket No.: FAA-2015-0150; Notice No. 15-01] 

RIN 2120–AJ60 

Operation and Certification of Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems

Subparagraph B. Current Statutory and Regulatory Structure Governing Small UAS

Due to the lack of an onboard pilot, small unmanned aircraft are unable to see and avoid other aircraft in 

the NAS. Therefore, small UAS operations conflict with the FAA’s current operating regulations codified 

in 14 CFR part 91 that apply to general aviation. Specifically, at the heart of the part 91 operating 

regulations is § 91.113(b), which requires each person operating an aircraft to maintain vigilance “so as to 

see and avoid other aircraft.”

 The FAA created this requirement in a 1968 rulemaking that combined two previous aviation 

regulatory provisions, Civil Air Regulations (CAR) §§ 60.13(c) and 60.30.6 Both of the provisions that 

were combined to create the “see and avoid” requirement of § 91.113(b) were intended to address aircraft 

collision-awareness problems by requiring that a pilot on board the aircraft look out of the aircraft during 

flight to observe whether other aircraft are on a collision path with his or her aircraft. Those provisions 

did not contemplate the use of technology to substitute for the human vision of a pilot on board the 

aircraft. Similarly, there is no evidence that those provisions contemplated a pilot fulfilling his or her “see 

and avoid” responsibilities from outside the aircraft. To the contrary, CAR § 60.13(c) stated that one of the 

problems it intended to address was “preoccupation by the pilot with cockpit duties,” which indicates 

that the regulation contemplated the presence of a pilot on board the aircraft. 

Because the regulations that resulted in the see-and-avoid requirement of § 91.113(b) did not contemplate 

that this requirement could be complied with by a pilot who is outside the aircraft, § 91.113(b) currently 

requires an aircraft pilot to have the perspective of being inside the aircraft as that aircraft is moving in 

order to see and avoid other aircraft. Since the operator of a small UAS does not have this perspective, 

operation of a small UAS could not meet the see and avoid requirement of § 91.113(b) at this time. 

In addition to currently being prohibited by § 91.113(b), there are also statutory considerations that apply 

to small UAS operations. Specifically, even though a small UAS is different from a manned aircraft, the 

operation of a small UAS still involves the operation of an aircraft. This is because the FAA’s statute 

defines an “aircraft” as “any contrivance invented, used, or designed to navigate or fly in the air.” 49 

U.S.C. 40102(a)(6). Since a small unmanned aircraft is a contrivance that is invented, used, and designed 

to fly in the air, a small unmanned aircraft is an aircraft for purposes of the FAA’s statutes.7 

Because a small UAS involves the operation of an “aircraft,” this triggers the FAA’s registration and 

certification statutory requirements. Specifically, subject to certain exceptions, a person may not operate a 

civil aircraft that is not registered. 49 U.S.C. 44101(a). In addition, a person may not operate a civil aircraft 

in air commerce without an airworthiness certificate. 49 U.S.C. 44711(a)(1). Finally, a person may not 

serve in any capacity as an airman on a civil aircraft being operated in air commerce without an airman 

certificate. 49 U.S.C. 44711(a)(2)(A).8 

The term “air commerce,” as used in the FAA’s statutes, is defined broadly to include “the operation of 

aircraft within the limits of a Federal airway, or the operation of aircraft that directly affects, or may 

endanger safety in foreign or interstate air commerce.” 49 U.S.C. 40102(a)(3). Because of this broad 
1

0

definition, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) has held that “any use of an aircraft, for 

purpose of flight, constitutes air commerce.”9 Courts that have considered this issue have reached similar 

conclusions that “air commerce,” as defined in the FAA’s statute, encompasses a broad range of 

commercial and non-commercial aircraft operations.

Accordingly, because “air commerce” encompasses such a broad range of aircraft operations, a civil small 

unmanned aircraft cannot currently be operated, for purposes of flight, if: (1) it is not registered (49 U.S.C. 

44101(a)); (2) it does not possess an airworthiness certificate (49 U.S.C. 44711(a)(1)); and (3) the airman 

operating the aircraft does not possess an airman certificate (49 U.S.C. 44711(a)(2)(A)). However, the 

FAA’s current processes for issuing airworthiness and airman certificates were designed to be used for 

manned aircraft and do not take into account the considerations associated with civil small UAS. 

Specifically, obtaining a type certificate and a standard airworthiness certificate, which permits the widest 

range of aircraft operation, currently takes about 3 to 5 years. Because the pertinent existing regulations 

do not differentiate between manned and unmanned aircraft, a small UAS is currently subject to the same 

airworthiness certification process as a manned aircraft. However, it is not practically feasible for many 

small UAS manufacturers to go through the certification process required of manned aircraft. This is 

because small UAS technology is rapidly evolving at this time, and consequently, if a small UAS 

manufacturer goes through a 3-to-5-years process to obtain a type certificate, which enables the issuance 

of a standard airworthiness certificate, the small UAS would be technologically outdated by the time it 

completed the certification process. For example, advances in lightweight battery technology may allow 

new lightweight transponders and power sources within the next 3 to 5 years that are currently 

unavailable for small UAS operations. 

The FAA notes that there are several other certification options available to small UAS manufacturers and 

operators who do not wish to go through the process of obtaining a type certificate and standard 

airworthiness certificate. However, because each of these options has significant limitations, these options 

do not provide flexibility for most routine small UAS operations. These certification options are as 

follows: 

 A special airworthiness certificate in the experimental category may be issued to UAS pursuant to 14 

CFR 21.191-21.195. This certificate is time-limited, and cannot be used for any activities other than 

research and development, market surveys, and crew training. 

 A special flight permit may be issued pursuant to 14 CFR 21.197. At this time, however, a special flight 

permit for a UAS is limited to production flight testing of new production aircraft.11 

 A special airworthiness certificate in the restricted category is issued pursuant to 14 CFR 21.25(a). There 

are two options for obtaining this certificate. 

First, pursuant to § 21.25(a)(2), a certificate may be issued for aircraft accepted by an Armed Force of the 

United States and later modified for a special purpose. Second, pursuant to § 21.25(a)(1), a certificate may 

be issued for aircraft used in special purpose operations, which consist of: 

(1) agricultural operations; 

(2) forest and wildlife conservation; 

(3) aerial surveying; 

(4) patrolling (pipelines, power lines, and canals); 

(5) weather control; 

(6) aerial advertising; and 

(7) any other operation specified by the FAA. 

As can be seen from the above list, the current certification options are limited to very specific purposes. 

Accordingly, they do not provide sufficient flexibility for most routine civil small UAS operations within 

the NAS. 
1

1

In addition to obtaining an airworthiness certificate, any person serving as an airman in the operation of a 

small UAS must obtain an airman certificate. 49 U.S.C. 44711(a)(2)(A). The statute defines an “airman” to 

include an individual who is “in command, or as pilot, mechanic, or member of the crew, who navigates 

aircraft when under way.” 49 U.S.C. 40102(a)(8)(A). Because the person operating the small UAS is in 

command and is a member of the crew who navigates the aircraft, that person is an airman and must 

obtain an airman certificate. 

Under current pilot certification regulations, depending on the type of operation, the operator of the 

small UAS currently must obtain either a private pilot certificate or a commercial pilot certificate. A 

private pilot certificate cannot be used to operate a small UAS for compensation or hire unless the flight is 

only incidental to the operator’s business or employment. Typically, to obtain a private pilot certificate, 

the small UAS operator currently has to: (1) receive training in specific aeronautical knowledge areas; (2) 

receive training from an authorized instructor on specific areas of aircraft operation; (3) obtain a 

minimum of 40 hours of flight experience; and (4) obtain a third-class airman medical certificate. 

Conversely, holding at least a commercial pilot certificate allows the small UAS to generally be used for 

compensation or hire, but is more difficult to obtain. In addition to the requirements necessary to obtain a 

private pilot certificate, applicants for a commercial pilot certificate currently need to also obtain 250 

hours of flight time, satisfy extensive testing requirements, and obtain a second-class airman medical 

certificate.

While these airman certification requirements are necessary for manned aircraft operations, they impose 

an unnecessary burden for many small UAS operations. This is because a person typically obtains a 

private or commercial pilot certificate by learning how to operate a manned aircraft. Much of that 

knowledge would not be applicable to small UAS operations because a small UAS is operated differently 

than a manned aircraft. In addition, the knowledge currently necessary to obtain a private or commercial 

pilot certificate would not equip the certificate holder with the tools necessary to safely operate a small 

UAS. Specifically, applicants for a private or commercial pilot certificate currently are not trained in how 

to deal with the “see-and-avoid” and loss-of-positive-control safety issues that are unique to small 

unmanned aircraft. Thus, requiring persons wishing to operate a small UAS to obtain a private or 

commercial pilot certificate imposes the cost of certification on those persons, but does not result in a 

significant safety benefit because the process of obtaining the certificate does not equip those persons 

with the tools necessary to mitigate the public risk posed by small UAS operations. 

Recognizing the problem of applying the operating rules of part 91 to small UAS operations and the cost 

imposed on small UAS operations by existing certification processes, the FAA fashioned a temporary 

solution. Specifically, the FAA issued an advisory circular (AC) 91-57 and a policy statement elaborating 

on AC 91-57, which provide guidance for the safe operation of “model aircraft.” The policy statement 

defines a “model aircraft” as a UAS that is used for hobby or recreational purposes. The policy statement 

explains that AC 91-57: 

[E]ncourages good judgment on the part of operators so that persons on the ground or other aircraft in 

flight will not be endangered. The AC contains among other things, guidance for site selection. Users are 

advised to avoid noise sensitive areas such as parks, schools, hospitals, and churches. Hobbyists are 

advised not to fly in the vicinity of spectators until they are confident that the model aircraft has been 

flight tested and proven airworthy. Model aircraft should be flown below 400 feet above the surface to 

avoid other aircraft in flight. The FAA expects that hobbyists will operate these recreational model 

aircraft within visual line-of-sight.

Neither AC 91-57 nor the associated policy statement contains any registration or certification 

requirements. To date, the FAA has used its discretion to not bring enforcement action against modelaircraft operations that comply with AC 91-57. However, the use of discretion to permit continuing 

violation of FAA statutes and regulations is not a viable long-term solution for incorporating UAS 

operations into the NAS. Additionally, because AC 91-57 and the associated policy statement are limited 
1

2

to model aircraft, they do not apply to non-recreational UAS operations. Thus, even with the use of 

enforcement discretion, because of the difficulty of obtaining the requisite certification for a small UAS 

and because operation of a small UAS would violate the see-and-avoid requirement of § 91.113(b), nonrecreational civil small UAS operations are effectively prohibited at this time.