15 December 2015

Christopher O. Johnson

779 Clifton Way

Vacaville, CA

95688

Email: c07chris.johnson@gmail.com

Phone: (808) 639-1142

John R. Cuellar

5305 Perry Polk Dr.

Fairfield, CA

94533

Email: john.cuellar@hotmail.com

Phone: (210) 386-3595

Erik M. Evans

422 Cannon Dr.

Travis AFB, CA

94535

Email: Evans098@gmail.com

Phone: (334) 322-2051

U.S. Department of Transportation

Docket Management System

1200 New Jersey Ave., SE

Washington, DC 20590

Re: Petition of Christopher O. Johnson, John R. Cuellar, and Erik M. Evans for a Grant of 

Exemption Pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012

1. Summary: Pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 

(FMRA) and 14 C.F.R. Part 11, we are applying for an exemption from the Federal Aviation 

Regulations listed below to operate unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) for commercial aerial data 

collection. The data will be used in support of the following industries: Agriculture, Aerial 

Survey and Mapping, Search and Rescue, Real Estate, Mining, Construction, Engineering, and 

Emergency Management. We respectfully submit that this petition qualifies for approval, as the 

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has previously issued grants of exemption in 

circumstances similar in all material respects to those presented herein.

2. Background and Description of Petitioners:

Christopher O. Johnson: I am a current and qualified USAF KC-10A pilot cleared to fly by a 

USAF flight surgeon and also hold a commercial pilot certificate with two type ratings. I have 

over 500 hours in the KC-10A and have prior experience as an MQ-1B Instructor Pilot, Mission 

Commander, and Squadron Safety Officer with over 1000 hours of PIC time in the MQ-1B. 

John R. Cuellar: I am a current and qualified USAF KC-10A pilot cleared to fly by a USAF 

flight surgeon and also hold a commercial pilot certificate with two type ratings. I have over 500 

hours in the KC-10A and have prior experience as an MQ-1B Instructor Pilot, Mission 
Commander, Director of Operations, and UAS Liaison Officer to US Air Forces Europe and 

Africa command and control with over 1000 hours of PIC time in the MQ-1B. 

Erik M. Evans: I am a current and qualified USAF KC-10A pilot cleared to fly by a USAF flight 

surgeon and also hold a commercial pilot certificate with two type ratings. I have over 500 hours 

in the KC-10A and have prior experience as a MQ-1B Instructor Pilot, Supervisor of Flying, and 

Operations Supervisor with over 1000 hours of PIC time in the MQ-1B. 

The qualifications mentioned above will serve to maintain an equivalent level of aviation safety 

consistent with current flight operations in the NAS.

3. Description of Proposed Operation: We seek an exemption pursuant to Section 333 of the 

FMRA to commercially operate a senseFly eBee and eXom UAS. Both of the aforementioned

systems have already been approved for commercial use in other Grants of Exemption. These 

vehicles meet the criteria established in Section 333 of the FMRA and are suitable platforms for 

the conduct of aerial data collection in support of the industries noted above. 

Both UAS operate well below the 55lb and 87 knot restrictions set forth by the FAA. The 

senseFly eBee is a small composite fixed wing UAS with a wingspan of 96 cm, it weighs 1.52lbs 

and can fly for approximately 50 minutes cruising at 56 mph. The senseFly eXom is a 

quadcopter type UAS weighing 3.9 lbs. It is able to fly as fast as 27 mph for 22 minutes. 

We are committed to maintaining the highest standards of flight safety and have vast experience 

operating UAS abroad and within the NAS. We will leverage this unique knowledge and 

experience to create the safest possible American UAS operation. All UAS operations will be 

performed in accordance with the applicable operating manual and within the requirements of an 

applicable Certificate of Waiver or Authorization (COA). All flights will be performed under 

VLOS in VMC with a PIC holding a FAA airman’s certificate, class III medical or military 

equivalent, and qualified VO. All flights will maintain at or below 400 ft AGL or as allowed by 

COA.

The proposed operations in this Petition for Exemption are not new or novel to the FAA. The 

FAA has previously issued grants of exemption to use small UAS for aerial data collection in 

support of similar industries. The low-risk UAS operations proposed in this Petition for 

Exemption fall squarely within the category of aerial data collection that has been subject to 

previous approval. The operations we propose will be in the public’s interest because they will 

allow the previously mentioned industries the most economical access to aerial data collection.

The UAS I propose to operate will also serve to lessen the exposure of aircrews, manned aircraft, 

and large amounts of aviation fuel to the general risk encountered during flight operations.

4. Regulations from which Exemption is Sought: We seek exemption from several provisions 

of 14 CFR Parts 21, 45, 61, and 91 for purposes of conducting the requested operations using 

small UAS, including:

91.9(c); 45.23(b) and 45.27(a) - Aircraft Marking and Identification Requirements
91.405(a); 91.407(a)(1); 91.409(a)(1) and (2); 91.417(a) and (b) - Maintenance and Inspection 

Requirements

61.113; 61.101(e)(4) and (5) - Private and Recreational Pilot Privileges and Limitations

91.7(a) – Civil Aircraft Airworthiness

91.9(b)(2); 91.203(a) and (b) - Carrying Aircraft Flight Manual, Certification and Registration in 

the Aircraft 

91.103 – Preflight Action

91.109(a) – Flight Instruction

91.119(c) – Minimum Safe Altitudes Over Other than Congested Areas

91.121 – Altimeter Settings

91.151(a) – Fuel Requirements for Flight in VFR Conditions

Listed below are the specific sections of 14 C.F.R. for which exemption is sought.

A) 91.9(c), 45.23(b) and 45.27(a): Aircraft Marking and Identification Requirements 

We seek an exemption from the aircraft marking and identification requirements 

contained in 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.9(c), 45.23(b) and 45.27(a). 

· 14 C.F.R. § 91.9(c), Civil Aircraft Flight Manual, Marking and Placard requirements, provides 

that:

No person may operate a U.S.-registered civil aircraft unless that aircraft is identified in 

accordance with Part 45 of this chapter.

· 14 C.F.R. § 45.23(b), Markings of the Aircraft, states:

When marks include only the Roman capital letter “N” and the registration number is displayed 

on limited, restricted or light-sport category aircraft or experimental or provisionally certificated 

aircraft, the operator must also display on that aircraft near each entrance to the cabin, cockpit, or 

pilot station, in letters not less than 2 inches nor more than 6 inches high, the words “limited,” 

“restricted,” “light-sport, “experimental,” or “provisional,” as applicable.

· 14 C.F.R. § 45.27(a), Rotorcraft, states:

Each operator of a rotorcraft must display on that rotorcraft horizontally on both

surfaces of the cabin, fuselage, boom, or tail the marks required by § 45.23.

In prior grants of exemption under Section 333 of the Reform Act, the FAA determined that 

exemption from these requirements was warranted provided that the aircraft “have identification 

(N-Number) markings in accordance with 14 C.F.R Part 45, Subpart C if the markings are as 

large as practicable.”
All UAS operated will bear N-number markings that are as large as practicable in accordance 

with 14 C.F.R. Part 45, Subpart C.

B. 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) and (2); 91.417(a) and (b): Maintenance Inspections 

We seek an exemption from the maintenance inspection requirements contained in 14 C.F.R. § 

91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) and (2); 91.417(a) and (b). These regulations specify 

maintenance and inspection standards in reference to 14 C.F.R. Part 43. An exemption from 

these regulations is needed because Part 43 and these sections only apply to aircraft with an 

airworthiness certificate, which the UAS to be operated under this grant of exemption will not 

have. 

An equivalent level of safety will be achieved because maintenance and inspections will be 

performed in accordance with any required manufacturer Safety or Service Bulletins. The PIC 

will conduct a pre-flight inspection of the UAS and all associated equipment to account for all 

discrepancies and/or inoperable components. Maintenance will be performed and verified to 

address any conditions potentially affecting safe operation of the UAS and no flights will occur 

unless, and until, all flight critical components of the UAS have been found to be airworthy and 

in a condition safe for operation. A functional test flight will be conducted following the 

replacement of any flight-critical components. The PIC who conducts the functional test flight 

will make an entry in the UAS aircraft records of the flight.

All operations will follow the UAS manufacturer’s maintenance, overhaul, replacement, 

inspection, and life limit requirements for the aircraft and aircraft components. Operations will 

be documented and a record maintained of the UAS maintenance, preventative maintenance, 

alterations, status of replacement/overhaul component parts, and the total time in service of 

Petitioner’s UAS. As a whole, the procedures noted above will ensure that an equivalent or 

higher level of safety will be achieved.

C. 61.113, 61.101(e)(4) and (5): Private and Recreational Pilot Privileges and Limitations 

We seek exemption from 14 CFR § 61.113, which restricts private pilot certificate holders from 

flying aircraft for compensation or hire, and would also require a second class medical certificate. 

The purpose of Part 61 is to ensure that the skill and competency of any PIC matches the 

airspace in which the PIC will be operating, as well as requiring certifications if the private pilot 

is carrying passengers or cargo for hire. In this case, while the UAS will be operated as part of a 

commercial operation, it carries neither passengers nor cargo. 

In the Grant of Exemption No. 11062 to Astraeus Aerial, the FAA determined that the unique 

characteristics of UAS operation outside of controlled airspace did not warrant the additional 

cost and restrictions attendant with requiring the PIC to have a Commercial Pilot Certificate and 

Class II Medical Certificate. The fulfillment of the additional requirements for a private pilot to 

become qualified as a commercial pilot would not lead to any additional safety benefits when 

UAS operations are involved. 
More recently, the FAA determined that holders of recreational and sport pilot certificates would 

also have adequate aeronautical knowledge to pilot a UAS. Accordingly, because these 

individuals would also be subject to security screening by the Department of Homeland Security 

(DHS), the FAA determined that holders of recreational and sport pilot certificates would be 

qualified to serve as the PIC for UAS operations. 

D. 91.7(a): Civil Aircraft Airworthiness

Inasmuch as there will be no airworthiness certificate issued for the UAS, we seek an exemption 

from 14 C.F.R. § 91.7(a), which requires that a civil aircraft be in an airworthy condition to be 

operated. While the petitioner’s UAS will not have an airworthiness certificate, the FAA has 

determined that for the purposes of this exemption the pilot may determine the aircraft is in an 

airworthy condition prior to flight. The senseFly operating manuals contain procedures that

allow the PIC to determine whether the aircraft is in a condition safe for flight, and an exemption 

from § 91.7(a) is therefore warranted. 

E. 91.9(b)(2): Civil Aircraft Flight Manual in the Aircraft and 91.203(a) and (b): Carrying 

Civil Aircraft Certification and Registration 

Title 14 C.F.R. § 91.9(b)(2) and § 91.203(a) and (b) require the operator to carry airworthiness 

documents and other aircraft manuals onboard the aircraft. 

Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. § 91.9(b)(2): 

(b) No person may operate a U.S.-registered civil aircraft – ... 

2) For which an Airplane or Rotorcraft Flight Manual is required by § 21.5 of this chapter, unless 

there is available in the aircraft a current approved Airplane or Rotorcraft Flight Manual, 

approved manual material, markings, and placards, or any combination thereof. 

Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. § 91.203(a) and (b): 

(a) Except as provided in § 91.715, no person may operate a civil aircraft unless it has within it 

the following: 

(1) An appropriate and current airworthiness certificate...

(b) No person may operate a civil aircraft unless the airworthiness certificate required by 

paragraph (a) of this section or a special flight authorization issued under § 91.715 is displayed at 

the cabin or cockpit entrance so that it is legible to passengers or crew.

Given the small size and configuration of the UAS, it would be impossible to keep airworthiness 

documents and other aircraft manuals on board the UAS because there is simply no room and the 

UAS has no cabin or cockpit. 
In an FAA Office of Chief Counsel’s Opinion dated August 8, 2014, and prepared by Dean E. 

Griffith, Attorney, AGC-220, it was acknowledged that the intent of 14 C.F.R. 91.9(b) and 

91.203(a) and (b) is met if the pilot of the unmanned aircraft has access to the UAS flight manual, 

registration certificate, and other required documents from the ground control station from which 

he or she is operating the aircraft. As this FAA Office of Chief Counsel Opinion clarifies, the 

intent of the rule is to ensure the pilot has access to these key documents during flight. Therefore, 

an equivalent level of safety will be achieved by ensuring that the pilot has access to the 

documents at the ground control station from which he or she is piloting the UAS.

F. 91.103: Preflight Action 

We seek an exemption from 14 C.F.R. § 91.103, which requires a PIC to become familiar with 

specific information before each flight, including information contained in the FAA-approved 

Flight Manual on board the aircraft. While the PIC will be familiar with all information 

necessary to safely conduct the flight, an exemption is requested to the extent that an FAAapproved Flight Manual is required. 

Adherence to the requirements in the operating manual will ensure that the UAS is in an 

airworthy condition prior to flight. The PIC will perform a series of checklists designed to 

identify any defects or inoperable components, which cover pre-flight, take-off, landing and 

post-flight procedures. The PIC will also be required to review weather, NOTAMs, flight 

requirements, battery charge, landing and takeoff distance, UA performance data, and 

contingency landing areas—before initiation of flight. The operating manual will be kept at the 

ground control station and will be accessible to the PIC at all times while operating the UAS. 

G. 91.109(a): Flight Instruction 

We seek an exemption from 14 C.F.R. § 91.109(a), which provides in pertinent part that “[n]o 

person may operate a civil aircraft (except a manned free balloon) that is being used for flight 

instruction unless that aircraft has fully functioning dual controls.” UAS and remotely piloted 

aircraft, by their design, do not have functional dual controls. Instead, flight control is 

accomplished through the use of a device that communicates with the aircraft via radio 

communications. Accordingly, an exemption will be required for the flight instruction 

requirements of 14 C.F.R. § 91.109(a). 

Given the size and speed of the UAS that we intend to use, an equivalent level of safe training 

can still be achieved without dual controls because no pilot or passengers are aboard the UAS, 

and as required by the operating documents, all persons will be a safe distance away in the event 

that the UAS experiences any difficulties during flight instruction. Moreover, all flight training 

will be conducted in controlled and sterile environment. As a whole, the procedures provided for 

in the operating manual ensure that UAS flight instruction can be performed safely. 

H. 91.119(c): Minimum Safe Altitudes Over Other Than Congested Areas 

We request an exemption from the minimum safe altitude requirements of 14 C.F.R. § 91.119(c). 

Section 91.119 prescribes the minimum safe altitudes under which aircraft may not operate, 
including 500 feet above the surface and away from any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure in 

non-congested areas. See 14 C.F.R. § 91.119(c). 

An exemption is required because the proposed UAS operations will normally need to occur 

below 400 feet AGL. Additionally, due to the nature of the proposed operations, the PIC and/or 

Observers may need to be less than 500 feet away from the UAS. Compared to flight operations 

with rotorcraft weighing far more than the maximum weights proposed herein, and given the

lack of flammable fuel with the UAS, any risk associated with these operations is far less than 

those that presently exist with conventional aircraft. 

An equivalent level of safety will be achieved given the size, weight, and speed of the UAS, as 

well the controlled location where the operations will occur. In order to avoid any risk to manned 

aircraft, flight operations will be restricted to below 400 feet AGL. As set forth in the operating 

documents, the UAS will be operated in a controlled environment, and all flights will occur at a 

lateral distance of at least 500 feet from nonparticipating persons, unless that person is in a 

position where he or she is shielded from the UAS and any possible debris resulting from UAS 

failure. Procedures will be in place to ensure flight operations can be safely terminated if a 

nonparticipating person within 500 feet of the UAS leaves a shielded position. Further, UAS 

operations will occur at least 500 feet away from vehicles or structures unless the property 

owner/controller has granted permission and the PIC has made a safety assessment of the risk of 

operating closer to those objects, and operations near the PIC or Observer will not present an 

undue hazard per § 91.119(a). Adherence to these restrictions will ensure the proposed 

operations can be conducted without compromising safety to persons or property on the ground. 

I. 91.121: Altimeter Settings 

For the proposed operations, we request an exemption from 14 C.F.R. § 91.121, which requires a 

person operating an aircraft to maintain cruising altitude or flight level by reference to an 

altimeter that is set to the elevation of the departure airport or barometric pressure. 

The FAA has stated that an equivalent level of safety to the requirements of 14 C.F.R. § 91.121 

can be achieved in circumstances where: (1) the UAS will be operated 400 feet AGL or below, 

(2) within VLOS, (3) where GPS based altitude information is relayed in real time to the 

operator at a ground-based on-screen display and, (4) where prior to each flight, a zero altitude 

initiation point is established for the PIC to confirm accuracy of the onboard GPS.

The UAS that Petitioner intends to use for performing the proposed operations meet all these 

operational characteristics. Moreover, the PIC will ensure proper operation of the aircraft’s GPS 

prior to each flight operation. As the FAA has determined in circumstances similar to this 

Petition for Exemption, the UAS I propose to operate and my knowledge of aviation safety 

mitigation techniques, ensure that an equivalent level of safety will be achieved, and a grant of 

exemption to the requirements of §191.121 is therefore appropriate.17 

J. 91.151(a): Fuel Requirements for Flight in VFR Conditions 

We request an exemption from 14 C.F.R. § 91.151(a)’s fuel requirements for flight in VFR 

conditions. Section 91.151 states: 
(a) No person may begin a flight in an airplane under VFR conditions unless (considering wind 

and forecast weather conditions) there is enough fuel to fly to the first point of intended landing 

and, assuming normal cruising speed –

(1) During the day, to fly after that for at least 30 minutes; or 

(2) At night, to fly after that for at least 45 minutes. 

Here, the technological limitations on UAS battery power means that no meaningful flight 

operations can be conducted while still maintaining a 30-minute battery reserve. An exemption 

from the fuel requirements of 14 C.F.R. § 91.151(a) is therefore required. 

The FAA has previously granted relief from the fuel requirements of § 91.151(a) for flight in 

daytime VFR conditions in circumstances similar to those presented in this Petition for 

Exemption. In Exemption No. 11213 to Aeryon Labs, Inc., the FAA determined that a 

requirement prohibiting the PIC from beginning a UAS flight unless (considering wind and 

forecast weather conditions) there was enough available power for UAS to operate for the 

intended operational time and to operate after that for at least five minutes or with the reserve 

power recommended by the manufacturer if greater, would ensure an equivalent level of safety 

to the fuel requirements of § 91.151(a). Operations will adhere to these requirements and an 

exemption from § 91.151(a)’s fuel requirements for flight in VFR conditions is therefore 

appropriate.

5. Public Interest:

The public interest will be served by granting our Petition for Exemption. Congress has 

established a national policy that favors early integration of UAS into the NAS in controlled, safe 

working environments such as those proposed in this Petition. Granting this Petition for 

Exemption helps fulfill Congress’ goal in passing Section 333(a) through (c) of the Reform 

Act—the FAA Administrator’s assessment of whether certain UAS may operate safely in the 

NAS before completion of the statutorily required rulemaking. 

More importantly however, and as recognized by the FAA in prior grants of exemption allowing 

commercial operation of UAS for purposes similar to those described herein, granting the 

requested exemptions will significantly improve safety and reduce risk by alleviating the public’s 

exposure to danger and emissions associated with using manned aircraft to perform equivalent 

aerial data collection. Petitioner’s UAS are battery powered and create no emissions. Moreover, 

in the unlikely event that one of Petitioner’s UAS crash, there is no fuel to ignite and explode. 

Any accident involving Petitioner’s lightweight UAS will present significantly less danger to the 

pilot and other individuals on the ground than one involving a full size aircraft. 

Beyond increased levels of safety, the public stands to benefit enormously from the use of UAS. 

UAS offer a unique, safe, low cost method of obtaining an aerial perspective on an area. From 

the printing press, to the internet, and everything in between, new technologies are often used to 

advance and protect the public’s rights by enhancing access to important information. Like the 
technologies that came before it, UAS offer an alternative means to gather and disseminate vital 

mapping data and other important information in situations where it would be too unsafe or cost 

prohibitive to fly a conventional aircraft. The public as a whole will benefit from the increased 

access to information that UAS can bring to industries across the country. 

6. Conclusion: Our Petition for Exemption satisfies the criteria articulated in Section 333 of the 

Reform Act of 2012, including: weight, speed, operating capabilities, proximity to airports and 

populated areas, operation within VLOS and national security. The proposed operations in this 

Petition for Exemption are similar to those in previously issued grants of exemptions, and they 

would benefit the public as a whole by improving safety. In consideration of the foregoing, this 

Petition for Exemption provides the FAA with all the necessary justification for issuance of a 

Grant of Exemption allowing Christopher O. Johnson, John R. Cuellar and Erik M. Evans to use 

small UAS for aerial data collection in support of multiple industries.

Thank you for your prompt consideration of my requested exemptions. Should you have any 

questions, or if you need additional information to support the requested exemptions, please do 

not hesitate to contact the undersigned. 

Respectfully,

Christopher O. Johnson

John R. Cuellar

Erik M. Evans