### May 22
, 2015

Exemption No. 11675 Regulatory Docket No. FAA

–20 15

–0713

Mr. Kevin M. Kralicek Owner Kralicek Aerial Photography 8212 Winding Stream Lane Denton, TX 76210

Dear Mr. Kralicek : 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 March 1 7, 2015 , you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for an exemption

. The petitioner requested to operate an unmanned aircraft system (UAS) to conduct aerial photography and videography

. See Appendix A for the petition submitted to the FAA des cribing 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 is a Tarot 650.
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

### 2

aircraft and its operation, the Secretary of Transportation has determined that this aircraft meets the conditions of Section 333. Therefore, the FAA finds that the requested relief from 14 CFR part 21
, 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 collection

. The FAA ha s issued grants of exemption in circumstances similar in all material respects to those presented in your petition. In Grants of Exemption No s

. 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 Lab s , 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. Kevin Kralicek 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 i s subject to the conditions and limitations listed below.

Conditions and Limitations

In this grant of exemption, Mr. Kevin Kralicek is hereafter referred to as the operator.
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.

### 3

1. Operations authorized by this grant of exemption are limited to the Tarot 650 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 b e 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. Th e 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 fli ght. 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 revis e its operating documents. It is the operator’s responsibility to track such revisions and present updated and revised 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

### 4

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 mus t 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 revi ew 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 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,

### 5

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 symbo l 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 sign al, 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 un less (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 5 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 c onducted 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.

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.

### 6

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, v ehicles, 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 protectio n. 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 control led

- 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.

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

### 7

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 f or 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 involve d 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.
This exemption terminates on May 31, 2017 , unless sooner superseded or rescinded.
Sincerely,

/s/ John S. Duncan Director, Flight Standards Service

EnclosuresKevin M. Kralicek / Owner / Kralicek Aerial Photography, Denton, TX

– Section 333 Exemption Petition

Digitally Signed/Digital Copy Original Available Upon Request March 17
, 201 5

U. S. Department of Transportation Docket Management System 1 200 New Jersey Ave, SE Wa shington, DC 20590

**RE: Exemption**  **Request Section**  **333 of**  **the FAA**  **Reform Act**  **of the**  **Federal Aviation**  **Regulations from**  **1 4**  **C.F.R. 45.23{b);**  **1**

**4** C.F.R. Part 2 1 ; 1

4 C.F.R. 61. 1 13(a)&(b); 91.7(a); 91.9( b); (2); 91. 1 03(b); 91.109; 119

. 1 2 1 ; 91.lSl(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, Kevin M Kralicek
, am writing pursuant to the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 201 2 and the procedures contained within 1 4 C.F.R. 1 1
, to request that I, Kevin M. Kralicek
, an owner and operator of
sm all unm anned aircraft, be exempt from the Federal Aviation Regulations ("FARs") listed below so that I, Kevin M. Kralicek
, may operate my small ultra

- lightweight unm anned aircraft system ("sUAS") commercially in airspace regulated by the Federal Aviation Administration ("FAA").

As described herein, I
, Kevin M. Kralicek
, am a n experienced photographer within the State of Texas ; experienced in fly ing hobby helicopters for recreational purposes. I have recently added a hobby /professional grade quadcopter sUAS to my inventory which i s equipped with a camera and intended for aerial photography /videography/cinematography.

I have flown small RC electric aircrafts for over six (6 ) ye ars without incident. Committed to safety with each flight. I am currently in the process of starting a small photography/videography company, " Kralicek Aerial Photography", for the purpose of providing the real estate industry a safe alternative for obtaining up
-to

- date aerial photos and video to better enhance the sale of real estate in North ern Texas

. My
, Kevin M. Kralicek
, exemption request would permit operation of the ultra

- lightweight, unmanned (piloted by remote control) and comparatively inexpensive sUAS(s) in tightly controlled and limited airspace. ' Predetermined in areas away from general public, ai rports, heliports and vehicular traffic for community videos, and within property boundaries for individual hom eowner real estate listing videos/photos. Currently, similar lightweight, remote control sUAS's are legally operated by unm onitored am ateur hobby i sts with no safety plan or controls in place to prevent catastrophe. I, Kevin M. Kralicek
, have personally instilled safety protocols and controls 3 to avoid and prevent public hazard, as well as ma nned aircraft hazards/catastrophe. I, Kevin M. Kralicek
, have invested a tremendous am ount of tim e and mo ney for education and proper equipment with the ma in objective of safety in order to provide a safe and professional alternative for the real estate industry to obtain real estate listing vi deos; following exemption and approval by the FAA. To further safety protocols exclusi ve to lightweight sUAS's specific to real estate v i deo and photography usage as I
, Kevin M. Kralicek
, 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 , Kevin M. Kralicek’s
, request comports with the Secretary of Transportation's (FAA Adm inistrator's) responsibilities and authority to not only i ntegrate sUAS's into the national airspace system, but to " establish requ i rements for the safe operation of such a i rcraft systems (sUAS's) in the national airspace system" under Secti on 333(c) of the Reform Act specific to the use of sUAS's for real estate/Realtor purposes. Further, I, Kevin M. Kralicek
, will conduct my operations in compliance with theKevin M. Kralicek / Owner / Kralicek Aerial Photography, Denton, TX

– Section 333 Exemption Petition

Digitally Signed/Digital Copy Original Available Upon Request protocols described herein or as otherwise established by the FAA.

For the reasons stated below, I
, Kevin M. Kralicek
, respectfully request the grant ing of an exemption allowing me to operate an ultra

- lightweight remote controlled sUAS's for academic community
awareness to benefit/stimulate attraction to the Northern Texas area and to enhance real estate listing videos for homeowners who cannot afford expensive manned aircraft for the same purpose. Both of which will promote local economic growth through i ncreased employment and increased tax base. Both with public safety i n mind by keeping heavier manned aircraft containing combustible fuel that poses potential public hazard.

**I. Contact**  **Information:** Kevin M. Kralicek

/ Owner / sUAS Pilot Kralicek Aerial Photography 8212 Wi nding Stream LN Denton, TX 76210 Mobile: (8 1 6) 896

- 2341 Em ail: kkralicek@satx.rr.com

**II. The**  **Specific Sections**  **of Title**  **1 4**  **of the**  **Code of**  **Federal Regulations**  **From Which**  **Kevin M. Kralicek**  **Requests Exemption**  **are:** 1 4 CFR 2 1 ; 1 4 C.F.R. 45.23(b); 1 4 CFR 61.1 1 3 (a) & (b); 1 4 C.F.R. 9 1
, et seq

. ; 1 4 CFR 407 (a) ( 1 ); 1 4 CFR 409 (a) (2); and, 1 4 CFR 4 1 7 (a) 

### & (b).

**Ill. The**  **Extent of**  **relief Kevin M. Kralicek**  **seeks and**  **the Reason**  **He Seeks**  **Such Relief:** 

I, Kevin M. Kralicek
, subm i t this application in accordance w i th the Reform Act, 1 1 2 P.L. 95 §§ 33 1

- 334, seeking relief from any currently applicable FARs operating to prevent me , Kevin M. Kralicek
, contemplated commercial cinematic, academic and other flight operations within the national airspace system. The Reform Act i n Section 332 provides for such integration of civil unmanned aircraft systems i nto our national airspace system as it i s i n the public's i nterest to do so. My
, Kevin M. Kralicek’s
, ultra

lightwei ght sUAS me ets the definition of "small unma nned aircraft' as defined i n Section 331 and therefore the integration of my ultra

- lightwei ght sUAS i s expressly contemplated by the Reform Act. would like to operate my ultra

- lightweight sUAS prior to the time period by which the Reform Act requires the FAA to promulgate rules governi ng such craft. Thereby, providing direct experience and valuable information for formal regulation that can be adm inistered uniformly to all real estate related sUAS aerial video and photography. The Reform Act guides the Secretary in determining the ty pes of sUAS's that my operate safely i n our national airspace system. Considerations include: The weight, size, speed and overall capabilities of the sUAS's; Wh ether the sUAS will be operated near airports or heavily populated areas; and, Wh ether the sUAS will be operated by line of s i ght. 1 1

2 P.L. 95 § 333 (a). Each of these items reflect in favor of an exemption for me , Kevin M. Kralicek

. My sUAS utilizes four (4) counterrotating propellers for balance, control and stability. My sUAS is equipped with GPS and auto return to takeoff safety technology. We ighing less than five (5) pounds (far below the ma ximum 55 pound lim it); including camera with gim bal.Kevin M. Kralicek / Owner / Kralicek Aerial Photography, Denton, TX

– Section 333 Exemption Petition

Digitally Signed/Digital Copy Original Available Upon Request 

### I, Kevin M. Kralicek, consider safety foremost with each flight. My small unmanned aircraft i s designed to hover in place via GPS and operate in less than a 24 knot ( 1 5 mph) wind. For safety, stability and fear of fi nancial loss. I will not fly in w i nds exceed i ng 16 kph ( 10 mph). Built in safety systems i nclude a GPS mode that allows my sUAS to hover in place when radio controls are released. When pilot communication i s lost , my sUAS is designed t o return to the point of take off, slowly descend, land , and disengage the electric motors. I do not and will not operate my sUAS near airports, Hospital s, Military installations or areas, nor Police heliports, and will not operate near areas where general public is within fifty to one hundred (50

- 100) yards depending on location, conditions and weather. I am constantly on alert for any manned aircraft ( Personal crafts, Police/Medical helicopters, etc.) and am prepared to land/abort immediately to the nearest and safest ground point should a manned aircraft approach my location or I suspect manned aircraft m a y approach near my location. My sUAS i s capable or vertical and horizontal operations, and is flown only withi n my line of si ght , as the remote control sUAS pilot. Utilizing battery power rather than combustible fuels, fli ghts generally last between fifteen (15 ) to thirty (30 ) minutes, with an altitude under one hundred fifty ( 1 50) feet. I

, Kevin M. Kralicek, utilize a fresh fully charged battery with each flight as a safety precaution; full flight time limit for each battery i s thirty (30 ) to thirty five ( 35 ) minutes as tested. I do not operate my sUAS at or below manufacture recommend minimum charge levels for operation; preferring to remain well within safe operating range to en sure adequate communication between radio transmitter and sUAS receiver to eliminate any potenti al for crash, loss of control , or hazard. Reserve batteries are at hand with each operation to e nsure replacement for sufficient safe level of operation. I do not believe i n taking ri sks that may cause a crash, could create hazard s to the public/property/manned aircraft, and have no desire to lose an i nvestment. I have clocked numerous practice fli ghts i n familiarization with the characteristics of this specific sUAS's performance under different temperature and weather conditions. I also have with me at all practice flights and future commercial fli ghts a second team member acting solely as a spotter to ensure the safety of the public, property, and manned aircraft.

I
, Kevin M. Kralicek, am extreme l y cautious when operat i ng of my sUAS/ ultra

- l ightweight unm anned aircraft and will not "create a hazard to users of the national a i rspace system or the public

. " 1 1 2 P. L. 95 § 333 (b). Given the small size and weight of my sUAS it falls well within Congress's contemplated safety
zone when it prom ulgated the Reform Act and the corresponding directive to integrate sUAS's i nto the national airspace system. Kevin M. Kralicek's sUAS, used in hobby flight, has a demonstrable safety record and does not pose any threat to the general public or national security.

**IV. How**  **Kevin M. Kralicek's Request**  **Will Benefit**  **the Public as a Whole:** 

Aeri al photography and videography for geographical awareness and /or for real estate ma rk eting has been around for a long time through ma nned fixed wi ng aircraft and helicopters. For small budget real estate companies and average homeowners, the expense of such aerial photography and videography is cost prohibitive. Only

large companies and high end Realtors or luxury homeowners can afford such expense. Depriving non
- luxury and lower budget Realtors from a valuable ma rk eting tool. It is my belief that sUAS flight is currently taki ng place by either the real estate agents themselves, or maybe being done by

som eone they know. Either wa y, it i s my objective to provide this service as a trained professional with a "safety first" mi ndset so that the eventual commercialization of sUAS flight i s not affected negatively by those who are doing this without proper training.
Congress has already proclaimed that it i s i n the public's interest to i ntegrate commercially flown sUAS's i nto the national airspace s ystem, hence the passing of the Reform Act. Granting my , Kevin M. Kralicek, exemption furthers the public interest through academic/visual awareness of the geographical benefits in and around the Northern Texas area. My ultra

- lightweight sUAS i s battery powered and creates no
em issions that can harm the environment. The consequence of my ultra

- lightweight sUAS crashing is farKevin M. Kralicek / Owner / Kralicek Aerial Photography, Denton, TX

– Section 333 Exemption Petition

Digitally Signed/Digital Copy Original Available Upon Request less than a full sized helicopter or fixed wing aircraft; which are heavy
, contain combustible fuel and can
cause catastrophic devastation to the public. The public's i nterest i s furthered by mi nim izing ecological and crash threat by permitting aerial video/photo capture through my battery operated ultra

- lightweight sUAS's. Permitting me , Kevin M. Kralicek, to immediately fly withi n national air space furthers economic g rowth. Granting my exemption request substantially furthers the economic im pact for the Northern Texas counties for compan i es and individuals looking to re locate and build i n the said areas 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 Kevin M. Kralicek's**  **Exemption Will**  **Not Ad**  **versely Af**  **fect Safety**  **Or How**  **The Exemption**  **Will Provide**  **a Level**  **of Safety**  **At Least**  **Equal To**  **Existing Rules:** 

My
, Kevin M. Kralicek
, exemption will not adversely af fect safety. Quite the contrary
, for the reasons stated permitting me , Kevin M. Kralicek
, to log mo re flight tim e in FAA controlled airspace, with communication with the FAA, will allow me to contribute to the innovation and implementation of new and novel, as of ye t undiscovered safety development in cooperation with the FAA. In addition, I
, Kevin M. Kralicek
, submit the following representations of enhancements to current aerial videography and photography for real estate:

• My sUAS wei ghs less than 5 pounds complete with a small ultra

- lightweight high quality Go Pro Hero 3+ Black Camera;

• I only operate my sUAS below 200 feet (well within the 400 foot permissible ceiling set by the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012);

• My sUAS only operates for 15

- 20 minutes per flight;

• I land my sUAS prior to ma nufacturer recommended mi nim um level of battery power;

• I pilot my sUAS through remote control only by line of si ght and with an additional spotter;

• My sUAS has GPS
, a flight safety feature
, whereby it returns to point of takeoff, hovers
, and then slowly lands if communication with the remote transmitter i s lost;

• I actively analyze flight data , the Center We ather Service Unit, NOAA, and other sources of information to constantly update and enhance safety protocols prior to and during flights ;

• I only operate i n reasonably safe environments that are strictly controlled, are away from power lines, elevated lights, airports
, and acti vely populated areas;

• I conduct extensive pre
-flight inspections and protocol s during which safety carries prim ary im portance;

• I always obtain all necessary perm i ssi ons prior to operation; and,

• I have procedures i n place to abort flights i n the event of safety breaches or potential danger

• My sUAS utilizes a Spektrum 2.4GH z DSMX system. Spektrum systems are distinguished in that they use direct

- sequence spread spectrum (DSSS) technology on the 2.4 GHz ISM band

. Spektrum refers to their technology as "Digital Spectrum Modulation." Each transmitter has a globally unique identifier (GUID), to which receivers can be bound, ensuring that no transmitter will interfere with other nearby Spektrum DSMX systems. This wor ks in a manner that both transmitter and receiver are constantly changing through the different frequencies of the 2.4 GHzrange. The Spektrum system is also unique in that it offers "Model Match" in which each transmitter program for a particular flight m odel is bound to one and only one receiver. This prevents a user from fly ing his/her sUAS while the transmitter is still programmed for his/her RC hobby airplane. The Spektrum 2.4 GHz DSMX technology allows for uninterrupted frequency transmission. If at any tim e, in the very small chance it is interupted or loss of signal, the sUAS will go into a failsafe
mo de allowing the sUAS to return to the point of takeoff, hover, land, and disengage the motors. If signal is ever lost, this redundanc y takes over but can be overridden once in range or the interference ceases.Kevin M. Kralicek / Owner / Kralicek Aerial Photography, Denton, TX

– Section 333 Exemption Petition

Digitally Signed/Digital Copy Original Available Upon Request My, Kevin M. Kralicek 's, safety protocols provi de a level of safety equal to or exceeding existing rules. It is important to note that absent the integrati on of commercial sUAS i nto our nati onal 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 i s remarkably astounding, there has been local i ncidents involving loss of life as well as extensive property damage; it i s far safer to operate a battery powered ultra

- lightweight sUAS.

• Fi rst, the potential loss of life is dim ini shed because sUAS's carry no people on board and I only operate my sUAS in specific areas a way from ma ss populations.

• Second, there i s no fuel onboard a sUAS and thus the potential for fire or explosion i s greatly dim inished.

• Third, the small size and extreme ma neuverability of my sUAS 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 am azing im ages, my sUAS need not be so close to the objects they are focused on through the technology of post editing software allowi ng pan and zoom. Accordingly
, my sUAS has been experimentally operated for fa mi liarization/competency and will cont i nue to operate at and above current safety levels.



### VI. **A Summary**  **The FA**  **A May**  **Publish in**  **the Federal**  **Register:**

A. 1 4 C.F.R. 21 and 1

4 C.F.R. 9 1 : Airworthiness Certificates, Manuals and The Like.

1 4 C.F.R. 2 1
, Subpart H, entitled Airworthiness Certificates, sets forth requirements for procurement of necessary airworthiness certificates i n relation to FAR § 91.203(a)(l ). The size, wei ght and enclosed operational area of my , Kevin M. Kralicek’ s sUAS permits exemption from Part 21 because my sUAS me ets (and exceeds) an equivalent level of safety pursuant to Secti on 333 of the Reform Act. The FAA i s authorized to exempt aircraft from the airworthiness certificate requirement under both the Act (49 U.S.C § 44701 (f) and Secti on 333 of the Reform Act. Both pi eces of legi sl ation permit the FAA exempt sUAS's from the airworthi ness certificate requirement in consideration of the weight, size, speed, ma neuverability and proximity to areas such as airports and dense populations. My
, Kevin M. Kralicek 's, current and projected sUAS's
me et or exceed each of the elem ents.

1 4 C.F.R. 91.7(a) prohibits the operat i on of an a i rcraft without an a i rworth i ness certificate. As
no such certificate will be applicable in the form contemplated by the FARs, this Regulation i s i napplicable.

1 4 C.F.R. § 91.9 (b) (2) requires an aircraft flight ma nual in the a i rcraft. As there are no on board pilots or passengers, and given the size of the sUAS's, thi s Regulation is inapplicable. An equivalent level of safety will be achieved by ma intaini ng a safety/flight ma nual delineating

areas of where safety can be define d 5

. The FAA has previously i ssued exempt i ons to this regulation i n Exempt i on Nos. 8607, 8737, 8738, 9299, 9299A, 9565, 9565B, 10 167A, 1 0602, 10700 and 32827.

1 4 C.F.R. § 91. 1 21 regard i ng alt i me ter settings i s i napplicable insofar as my sUAS utilizes electronic global positioning systems with a barometric sensor.

1 4 C.F.R. § 91.203 (a) and (b) provides for the carry ing of civil a i rcraft certifications and registrati ons. They are inapplicable for the same reasons described above. The equivalent levelKevin M. Kralicek / Owner / Kralicek Aerial Photography, Denton, TX

– Section 333 Exemption Petition

Digitally Signed/Digital Copy Original Available Upon Request of safety will be achieved by ma intaining any such required certifications and registrations by
me , Kevin M. Kralicek

.

B. 1 4 C.F.R. § 6 1

. 1 13: Private Pilot Pr i vileges and Limitations: PIC.

Applicable Codes of Federal Regulation require aircraft to be ma rked according to certain specifications. My sUAS are, by definition, unm anned. They therefore do not have a cabin, cockpit or pilot station on which to ma rk certai n words or phrases. Further, two

- i nch lettering i s difficult to place on such small aircraft with dim ensions sm aller than mi nim al lettering requirement. Regardless, I will ma rkits sUASs in the largest possible lettering by placing the word "EXPERIMENTAL" on its fuselage as requ i red by 1 4 C.F.R § 45.29 (f) so that I
, the pilot, or anyone assisting me as a spotter with the UAV will see the ma rk ings. The FAA has previously i ssued exemptions to this regulat i on through Exemptions Nos. 8738, 10 167, 1 0 1 67A and 1

0700.

C. 1 4 C.F.R § 61. 1 13: Private Pilot Privileges and Limitations: PIC.

Pursuant to 1

4 C.F.R. §§ 61. 1 13 (a) & (b), pr i vate pilots are limited to non
- commercial operations. I, Kevin M. Kralicek
, can achieve an equivalent level of safety as achieved by current Regulations because my sUAS does not carry any pilots or passengers. Further, while helpful
, a pilot’s license will not ensure remote control piloting skills. The risks attended to the operation of my sUAS i

s far less than the risk levels inherent i n the commercial activities outlined in 1 4 C.F.R. § 6 1
, et seq. Thus, allow i ng me, Kevin M. Kralicek
, to operate my sUAS meet and exceed current safety levels i n relat i on to 1 4 C.F.R. § 61. 1 13 (a) 

### & (b).

D. 1 4 C.F.R. 91. 1 1

9: M i n i mum Safe Altitudes.

1 4 C.F.R. § 91. 1 1

9 prescr i bes safe altitudes for the operation of civil aircraft. It allows helicopters to be operated at lower altitudes in certain conditions. My sUAS will never operate at an altitude greater than 200 AGL; safely below the standard of 400 AGL. I, Kevin M. Kralicek
, will however operate my sUAS in safe areas away from public and traffic, providing a level of safety at least equivalent to or below those in relation to mi nim um safe altitudes. Given the size, weight, ma neuverability and speed of my sUAS, an equivalent or higher level of safety will be achieved.

E. 1 4 C.F.R. 91.405 (a); 407 (a) ( 1 ); 409 (a) (2); 4 1 7 (a) & (b): Maintenance Inspections.

The above

- cited Regulations require, am ongst other things, aircraft owners and operators to "have [the] aircraft inspected as prescribed i n subpart E of this part and shall between required i nspect i ons, except as provided i n paragraph (c) of th i s section, have d i screpancies repaired as prescr i bed in part 43 of this chapte r

.. . . "

These Regulati ons only apply to aircraft with an airworthiness certificate. They will not, therefore, apply to my , Kevin M. Kralicek 's, sUAS. However, as a safety precaution, I inspect my sUAS before and after each flight.

A Summary The FAA May Publish in the Federal Reg i ster: A. 1 4 C.F.R. 21 and 1

4 C.F.R. 9 1 : Airworthi ness Certificates, Manua l s and The Like. 1 4 C.F.R. 2 1
, Subpart H, ent itled Airworthi ness Certificates, sets forth requirements for procurement of necessary airworthiness certificates in relation to FAR § 91.203{a)(l). The size, weight and enclosed operational area of my sUAS permits exemptionKevin M. Kralicek / Owner / Kralicek Aerial Photography, Denton, TX

– Section 333 Exemption Petition

Digitally Signed/Digital Copy Original Available Upon Request from Part 21 because my, Kevin M. Kralicek 's, sUAS meets an equivalent level of safety pursuant to Secti on 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 sUAS's from the airworthiness certificate requirement i n consideration of the weight, size, speed, maneuverability and proximity to areas such as airports and dense populations. My sUAS meets or exceeds each of these elements. 1 4 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. 1 4 C.F.R. § 91.9 (b) (2) requires an aircraft flight manual i n the aircraft. As there are no pilots or passengers, and given the size of the sUAS's, the Regulati on i s inappli cable. An equivalent level of safety will be achieved by mainta i n i ng a manual. The FAA has previously i ssued exemptions to th i s regulation in Exempt i on Nos. 8607, 8737, 8738, 9299, 9299A, 9565, 9565B, 10 1 67, ma i ntenance program that involves regular software updates and curative measures for any damaged hardware. Therefore, an equivalent level of safety will be achieved.

**In Summary,**  **Kevin M. Kralicek seeks**  **an exemption**  **from the**  **following Regulations:** 

1 4 C.F.R. 2 1
, subpart H; 1 4 C.F.R. 45.23(b); 1

4 C.F.R. §§ 61. 1 13 (a) & (b); 1 4 C.F.R. § 91.7 (a); 1

4 C.F.R. § 91.9 (b)(2); 1

4 C.F.R. § 91.103(b); 1 4 C.F.R. § 91. 1 09; 1

4 C.F.R. § 91.1 1 9; 1

4 C.F.R. § 91. 1 2 1 ; 1

4 C.F.R. § 91. 1 51(a); 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.203 (a) and (b); 1 4 C.F.R. § 91.405 (a); 1 4 C.F.R. § 91.407 (a)( l ); 1 4 C.F.R. § 91.409 (a)(2); 1

4 C.F.R. § 91.409 (a)(2); and 1 4 C.F.R. §§ 91.4 1 7 (a) & (b) to commerc i ally operate my, Kevin M. Kralicek’s
, small unmanned vehicle/lightweight unmanned aircraft vehicle i n 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 Northern Texas 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, Kevin M. Kralicek 's, request for exemption will reduce current risk levels and thereby enhance safety. My sUAS craft do not contai n potentially explosive fuel, i s smaller, lighter and more maneuverable then conventional real estate video and photographic aircraft with much less flight time. Further, I operate at lower altitudes and in controlled airspace eliminati ng potential public risk flyi ng to and from established air fields. I, Kevin M. Kralicek
, have been i nformally 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 complyi ng with the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 201 2. There are zero personnel on board my, Kevin M. Kralicek 's sUAS and therefore the likelihood of death or serious bodily i njury i s si gnificantly diminished. My, Kevin M. Kralicek 's, operation of my sUAS, weighing less than 5 pounds and traveling at lower speeds withi n limited areas will provide

an equivalent level of safety as that achieved under current FARs. Accordingly, I, Kevin M. Kralicek
, respectfully request that the FAA grant my exemption request and am willing to cooperate in sharing i nformation to benefit the FAA, safety of manned aircraft, and the general public at large.

Respectfully submitted, 

# Kevin M. Kralicek

Kevin M

. Kralicek, Owner Kralicek Aerial Photography 8212 Wi nding Stream LN Denton, TX 762