May 22, 2015

Exemption No. 11675

Regulatory Docket No. FAA–2015–0713

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 17, 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 describing the proposed operations and 

the regulations that the petitioner seeks an exemption.

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition 

in the Federal Register because the requested exemption would not set a precedent, and any 

delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to the petitioner.

Airworthiness Certification

The UAS proposed by the petitioner 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 has issued grants of 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

by this exemption is in the public interest.

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

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

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

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

11213 also apply to the situation you present; and 

 A grant of exemption is in the public interest.

Our Decision

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

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

delegated to me by the Administrator, Mr. 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 is 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 be able to use human vision unaided by any device other than 

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

U.S. driver’s license.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

required of the VO.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Otherwise, the operator must follow the procedures as outlined in its operating 

documents. The operator may update or revise its operating documents. It is the 

operator’s responsibility to track such revisions and present updated and revised 

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 must follow the UAS manufacturer’s maintenance, overhaul, 

replacement, inspection, and life limit requirements for the aircraft and 

aircraft components.

12. Each UAS operated under this exemption must comply with all manufacturer 

safety bulletins.

13. Under this grant of exemption, a PIC must hold either an airline transport, 

commercial, private, recreational, or sport pilot certificate. The PIC must also hold a 

current FAA airman medical certificate or a valid U.S. driver’s license issued by a 

state, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, a territory, a possession, or the Federal 

Government. The PIC must also meet the flight review requirements specified in 

14 CFR § 61.56 in an aircraft in which the PIC is rated on his or her pilot certificate.

14. The operator may not permit any PIC to operate unless the PIC demonstrates the 

ability to safely operate the UAS in a manner consistent with how the UAS will be 

operated under this exemption, including evasive and emergency maneuvers and 

maintaining appropriate distances from persons, vessels, vehicles and structures. PIC 

qualification flight hours and currency must be logged in a manner consistent with 

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 symbol as denoted on the current 

FAA-published aeronautical chart, unless a letter of agreement with that airport’s 

management is obtained or otherwise permitted by a COA issued to the exemption 

holder. The letter of agreement with the airport management must be made available 

to the Administrator or any law enforcement official upon request.

17. The UA may not be operated less than 500 feet below or less than 2,000 feet 

horizontally from a cloud or when visibility is less than 3 statute miles from the PIC.

18. If the UAS loses communications or loses its GPS signal, the UA must return to a 

pre-determined location within the private or controlled-access property.

19. The PIC must abort the flight in the event of unpredicted obstacles or emergencies.

20. The PIC is prohibited from beginning a flight unless (considering wind and forecast 

weather conditions) there is enough available power for the UA to conduct the 

intended operation and to operate after that for at least 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 conducted under the terms of the attached COA.

22. All aircraft operated in accordance with this exemption must be identified by serial 

number, registered in accordance with 14 CFR part 47, and have identification 

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

be as large as practicable.

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, vehicles, and structures unless:

a. Barriers or structures are present that sufficiently protect nonparticipating persons 

from the UA and/or debris in the event of an accident. The operator must ensure 

that nonparticipating persons remain under such protection. If a situation arises 

where nonparticipating persons leave such protection and are within 500 feet of 

the UA, flight operations must cease immediately in a manner ensuring the safety 

of nonparticipating persons; and

b. The owner/controller of any vessels, vehicles or structures has granted permission 

for operating closer to those objects and the PIC has made a safety assessment of 

the risk of operating closer to those objects and determined that it does not 

present an undue hazard.

The PIC, VO, operator trainees or essential persons are not considered 

nonparticipating persons under this exemption.

27. All operations shall be conducted over private or controlled-access property with 

permission from the property owner/controller or authorized representative. 

Permission from property owner/controller or authorized representative will be 

obtained for each flight to be conducted.

28. Any incident, accident, or flight operation that transgresses the lateral or vertical 

boundaries of the operational area as defined by the applicable COA must be reported 

to the FAA's UAS Integration Office (AFS−80) within 24 hours. Accidents must be 

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

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

If this exemption permits operations for the purpose of closed-set motion picture and 

television filming and production, the following additional conditions and limitations apply.

29. The operator must have a motion picture and television operations manual (MPTOM) 

as documented in this grant of exemption.

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 for the UAS aerial filming conducted 

under this grant of exemption;

c. Name and phone number of the person responsible for the on-scene operation of 

the UAS;

d. Make, model, and serial or N−Number of UAS to be used;

e. Name and certificate number of UAS PICs involved in the aerial filming;

f. A statement that the operator has obtained permission from property owners 

and/or local officials to conduct the filming production event; the list of those 

who gave permission must be made available to the inspector upon request;

g. Signature of exemption holder or representative; and

h. A description of the flight activity, including maps or diagrams of any area, city, 

town, county, and/or state over which filming will be conducted and the altitudes 

essential to accomplish the operation.

31. Flight operations may be conducted closer than 500 feet from participating persons 

consenting to be involved and necessary for the filming production, as specified in the 

exemption holder’s MPTOM.

Unless otherwise specified in this grant of exemption, the UAS, the UAS PIC, and the UAS 

operations must comply with all applicable parts of 14 CFR including, but not limited to, 

parts 45, 47, 61, and 91.

This exemption terminates on May 31, 2017, unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

Sincerely,

/s/

John S. Duncan

Director, Flight Standards Service

Enclosures
Kevin M. Kralicek/Owner/Kralicek Aerial Photography, Denton, TX – Section 333 Exemption Petition

Digitally Signed/Digital Copy

Original Available Upon Request

March 17, 2015

U. S. Department of Transportation Docket

ManagementSystem

1200 NewJerseyAve,SE

Washington, DC 20590

RE: Exemption Request Section 333 of the FAA Reform Act of the Federal Aviation Regulations from 14 C.F.R. 45.23{b); 14

C.F.R. Part 21; 14 C.F.R. 61.113(a)&(b); 91.7(a); 91.9( b); (2); 91.103(b); 91.109; 119.121; 91.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 2012 and the

procedures contained within 14 C.F.R. 11,to request that I, Kevin M. Kralicek, an owner and operator of

small unmanned aircraft, be exempt from the Federal Aviation Regulations ("FARs") listed below so that

I, Kevin M. Kralicek, may operate my small ultra-lightweight unmanned aircraft system ("sUAS")

commercially in airspace regulated by the Federal Aviation Administration ("FAA").

As described herein, I, Kevin M. Kralicek, am an experienced photographer within the State of

Texas; experienced in flying hobby helicopters for recreational purposes. I have recently added a

hobby/professional grade quadcopter sUAS to my inventory which is equipped with a camera and

intended for aerial photography/videography/cinematography.

I have flown small RC electric aircrafts for over six (6) years 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 Northern 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, airports, heliports and vehicular traffic for community

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

Currently, similar lightweight, remote control sUAS's are legally operated by unmonitored amateur

hobbyists with no safety plan or controls in place to prevent catastrophe. I, Kevin M. Kralicek, have

personally instilled safety protocols and controls3to avoid and prevent public hazard, as well as manned

aircraft hazards/catastrophe. I, Kevin M. Kralicek, have invested a tremendous amount of time and money

for education and proper equipment with the main objective of safety in order to provide a safe and

professional alternative for the real estate industry to obtain real estate listing videos; following

exemption and approval by the FAA. To further safety protocols exclusive to lightweight sUAS's specific

to real estate video 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

Administrator's) responsibilities and authority to not only integrate sUAS's into the national airspace

system, but to "establish requirements for the safe operation of such aircraft systems (sUAS's) in the

national airspace system" under Section 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 the
Kevin 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.

Forthe reasons stated below, I, Kevin M. Kralicek,respectfully request the granting of an exemption

allowing meto operate an ultra-lightweightremotecontrolled 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 localeconomic growth through increasedemployment and increasedtax base. Both

with public safety inmind by keeping heavier manned aircraft containing combustiblefuelthat poses

potential public hazard.

I. Contact Information:

Kevin M. Kralicek/Owner/sUASPilot

Kralicek Aerial Photography

8212 Winding Stream LN

Denton, TX 76210

Mobile: (816) 896-2341

Email: kkralicek@satx.rr.com

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

Kralicek Requests Exemption are:

14CFR 21;

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

14 CFR 61.113 (a) & (b);

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

14 CFR 407 (a) (1);

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

14 CFR 417 (a) & (b).

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

I, Kevin M. Kralicek, submit this application in accordance with the Reform Act, 112 P.L. 95 §§ 331-334, 

seeking relief from any currently applicable FARs operating to prevent me, Kevin M. Kralicek,

contemplated commercial cinematic, academic and other flight operations within the national airspace

system. The Reform Act inSection 332 provides for such integration of civil unmanned aircraft systems

into our national airspace system as it is in the public's interest to do so. My, Kevin M. Kralicek’s, ultralightweight sUAS meets the definition of "small unmanned aircraft' as defined inSection 331 and

therefore the integration of my ultra-lightweight sUAS is 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 governing such craft. Thereby, providing direct experience and

valuable information for formal regulation that can be administered uniformly to all real estate related

sUAS aerial video and photography. The Reform Act guides the Secretary in determining the types of

sUAS's that my operate safely in our national airspace system. Considerations include: The weight, size,

speed and overall capabilities of the sUAS's; Whether the sUAS will be operated near airports or heavily

populated areas; and, Whether the sUAS will be operated by line of sight. 112 P.L. 95 § 333 (a). Each of

these items reflect in favor of an exemption for me, 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. Weighing less than five (5) pounds (far below the maximum 55 pound limit);

including camera with gimbal.
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 isdesigned to

hover in place via GPS and operate in lessthan a 24 knot (15 mph) wind. Forsafety, stability and fear of

financial loss. Iwill notfly in winds exceeding 16 kph (10 mph). Built in safety systems include a GPS mode

that allows my sUAS to hover in place when radio controls are released. When pilot communication is

lost, my sUAS is designed to return to the point oftakeoff, slowly descend, land, and disengage the 

electric motors. Ido not and will not operate my sUAS near airports, Hospitals, 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. Iam 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 pointshould a manned aircraft approach my location or I

suspect manned aircraft may approach near my location. My sUAS is capable or vertical and horizontal

operations, and is flown only within my line of sight, as the remote control sUAS pilot. Utilizing battery

power rather than combustible fuels, flights generally last between fifteen (15) to thirty (30) minutes,

with an altitude under one hundred fifty (150) 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 isthirty (30) to thirty 

five (35) minutes astested. I do not operate my sUAS at or below manufacture recommend minimum

charge levelsforoperation; preferringto remainwellwithinsafe operating rangetoensure adequate

communicationbetweenradiotransmitter andsUAS receiver toeliminate any potentialfor crash,lossof

control,orhazard. Reservebatteriesareathandwitheachoperationtoensure replacementfor

sufficient safe levelofoperation. Ido not believe intaking risksthat maycause a crash,could create

hazardsto the public/property/manned aircraft,and have no desire to lose an investment. Ihave

clocked numerouspracticeflightsinfamiliarizationwiththecharacteristicsofthisspecificsUAS's

performance under differenttemperature andweather conditions. Ialso havewith meat all practice

flights and future commercialflights a second teammemberactingsolely asa spotter to ensure the 

safety of the public, property, and manned aircraft.

I,Kevin M. Kralicek, am extremely cautious when operating of my sUAS/ultra-lightweight unmanned

aircraft and will not "create a hazard to users of the national airspace system or the public." 112 P. L. 95

§ 333 (b). Given the small size and weight of my sUAS it falls well within Congress's contemplated safety

zone when it promulgated the Reform Act and the corresponding directive to integrate sUAS's into 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:

Aerial photography and videography for geographical awareness and/or for real estate marketing has been

around for a long time through manned fixed wing aircraft and helicopters. For small budget real estate

companies and average homeowners, the expense of such aerial 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 marketing tool. It is my belief that sUAS

flight is currently taking place by either the real estate agents themselves, or maybe being done by

someone they know. Either way, it is my objective to provide this service as a trained professional with a

"safety first" mindset so that the eventual commercialization of sUAS flight is not affected negatively by

those who are doing this without proper training.

Congress has already proclaimed that it is in the public's interest to integrate commercially flown sUAS's

into the national airspace system, 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 is battery powered and creates no

emissions that can harm the environment. The consequence of my ultra-lightweight sUAS crashing is far
Kevin 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 interest is furthered by minimizing 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 within national air space furthers economic

growth. Granting my exemption request substantially furthers the economic impact for the Northern

Texas counties for companies and individuals looking to relocate and build in 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 Adversely Affect 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 affect safety. Quite the contrary, for the reasons

stated permitting me, Kevin M. Kralicek, to log more flight time in FAA controlled airspace, with

communication with the FAA, will allow me to contribute to the innovation and implementation of new

and novel, as of yet 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 weighs less than 5 pounds complete with a small ultra-lightweight high quality GoPro

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 perflight;

• I land my sUAS prior to manufacturer recommended minimum level of battery power;

• I pilot my sUAS through remote control only by line of sight 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 is lost;

• I actively analyze flight data, the Center Weather Service Unit, NOAA, and other sources of

information to constantly update and enhance safety protocols prior to and during flights;

• I only operate in reasonably safe environments that are strictly controlled, are away from power

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

• I conduct extensive pre-flight inspections and protocols during which safety carries primary

importance;

• I always obtain all necessary permissions prior to operation; and,

• Ihave procedures inplaceto abort flights inthe event of safety breaches or potential danger

• My sUAS utilizes a Spektrum 2.4GHz 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 works in a manner that both transmitter 

and receiver are constantly changing through the different frequencies of the 2.4 GHz range. The 

Spektrum system is also unique in that it offers "Model Match" in which each transmitter program 

for a particular flight model is bound to one and only one receiver. This prevents a user from flying 

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

time, in the very small chance it is interupted or loss of signal, the sUAS will go into a failsafe 

mode allowing the sUAS to return to the point of takeoff, hover, land, and disengage the motors. If 

signal is ever lost, this redundancy 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 provide a levelof safety equalto or exceeding existing rules. It

is importantto notethat absent the integration of commercial sUAS intoour national airspace system,

helicopters arethe primary meansofaerial video and photography for community awareness and real

estate. While the safety record of such helicopters isremarkably astounding, there has been local

incidents involving loss of life as well as extensive property damage; it isfar safer to operate a battery

powered ultra-lightweight sUAS.

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

operate my sUAS in specific areas away from mass populations.

• Second, there is no fuel onboard a sUAS and thus the potential for fire or explosion is greatly

diminished.

• Third, the small size and extreme maneuverability 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 amazing images, my

sUAS need not be so close to the objects they are focused on through the technology of post 

editing software allowing pan and zoom.

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

continue to operate at and above current safety levels.

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

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

14 C.F.R. 21, Subpart H, entitled Airworthiness Certificates, sets forth requirements for

procurement of necessary airworthiness certificates in relation to FAR § 91.203(a)(l). The size,

weight and enclosed operational area of my, Kevin M. Kralicek’s sUAS permits exemption from

Part 21because my sUAS meets (and exceeds) an equivalent level of safety pursuant to Section

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

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

Act. Both pieces of legislation permit the FAA exempt sUAS's from the airworthiness certificate

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

such as airports and dense populations. My, Kevin M. Kralicek's, current and projected sUAS's

meet or exceed each of the elements.

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

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

inapplicable.

14 C.F.R. § 91.9 (b) (2) requires an aircraft flight manual in the aircraft. As there are no on board 

pilots or passengers, and given the size of the sUAS's, this Regulation is inapplicable. An

equivalent level of safety will be achieved by maintaining a safety/flight manual delineating

areas of where safety can be defined

5

. The FAA has previously issued exemptions to this

regulation in Exemption Nos. 8607, 8737, 8738, 9299, 9299A, 9565, 9565B, 10167A, 10602,

10700 and 32827.

14 C.F.R. §91.121 regarding altimeter settings is inapplicable insofar as my sUAS utilizes

electronic global positioning systems with a barometric sensor.

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

registrations. They are inapplicable for the same reasons described above. The equivalent level
Kevin 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 maintaining any such required certifications and registrations by

me, Kevin M. Kralicek.

B. 14C.F.R. §61.113: PrivatePilotPrivileges and Limitations:PIC.

Applicable Codes of Federal Regulation require aircraft to be marked according to certain

specifications. My sUAS are, by definition, unmanned. They therefore do not have a cabin,

cockpit or pilot station on which to mark certain words or phrases. Further, two-inch lettering is

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

requirement. Regardless, Iwill mark its sUASs in the largest possible lettering by placing the

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

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

issued exemptions to this regulation through Exemptions Nos. 8738, 10167, 10167A and 10700.

C. 14 C.F.R §61.113: Private Pilot Privileges and Limitations: PIC.

Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. §§ 61.113 (a) & (b), private pilots are limited to non-commercial 

operations. I, 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 is far less than the risk levels inherent in the commercial activities outlined in 14

C.F.R. §61,et seq. Thus, allowingme,Kevin M. Kralicek,to operate my sUAS meet and exceed

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

D. 14C.F.R. 91.119:Minimum SafeAltitudes.

14 C.F.R. § 91.119 prescribes safe altitudes for the operation of civil aircraft. It allows 

helicopters to be operated at lower altitudes in certain conditions. My 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 minimum safe altitudes. Given the

size, weight, maneuverability and speed of my sUAS, an equivalent or higher level of safety will

beachieved.

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

The above-cited Regulations require, amongst other things, aircraft owners and operators to

"have [the] aircraft inspected as prescribed in subpart E of this part and shall between required

inspections, except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, have discrepancies repaired as

prescribed in part 43 of this chapter...."

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

therefore, apply to my, 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 Register: A. 14 C.F.R. 21and 14 C.F.R. 91:

Airworthi ness Certificates, Manuals and The Like. 14 C.F.R. 21,Subpart H, entitled 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 exemption
Kevin 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

Section 333 of the Reform Act. The FAA is authorized to exempt aircraft from the airworthiness

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

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

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

airports and dense populations. My sUAS meets or exceeds each of these elements. 14 C.F.R 91.7(a)

prohibits the operation of an aircraft without an airworthiness certificate. As no such certificate will be

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

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

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

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

8607, 8737, 8738, 9299, 9299A, 9565, 9565B, 10167, maintenance program that involves regular

software updates and curative measures for any damaged hardware. Therefore, an equivalent level of

safety will be achieved.

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

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

91.9 (b)(2); 14 C.F.R. § 91.103(b); 14 C.F.R. § 91.109; 14 C.F.R. § 91.119; 14 C.F.R. § 91.121;14 C.F.R. §

91.151(a);14C.F.R. §§ 91.203 (a) and (b); 14 C.F.R. § 91.405 (a); 14C.F.R. § 91.407 (a)(l);14 C.F.R. §

91.409 (a)(2); 14 C.F.R. § 91.409 (a)(2); and 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.417 (a) & (b) to commercially operate my,

Kevin M. Kralicek’s, small unmanned vehicle/lightweight unmanned aircraft vehicle in community

awareness and real estate operations, and to develop economic platforms for real estate to enhance the

experience of those seeking to relocate to the 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 contain

potentially explosive fuel,is 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 eliminating potential public risk flying to and from established air fields. I, Kevin M. 

Kralicek, have been informally analyzing flight information and will compile safety protocols and the

implementation of a flight operations manual for real estate usage that exceeds currently accepted

means and methods for safe flight. Formal collection of information shared with the FAA will enhance

the FAA's internal efforts to establish protocols for complying with the FAA Modernization and Reform

Act of 2012. There are zero personnel on board my, Kevin M. Kralicek's sUAS and therefore the

likelihood of death or serious bodily injury is significantly diminished. My, Kevin M. Kralicek's, operation

of my sUAS, weighing less than 5 pounds and traveling at lower speeds within 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

information 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 Winding Stream LN 

Denton, TX 762