1 

Exemption No. 11192 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

WASHINGTON, DC 20591 

In the matter of the petition of 

VIKING UNMANNED AERIAL 

SYSTEMS, INC. 

for an exemption from part 21; §§ 45.23(b); 

61.113(a) and (b); 91.7(a); 91.9(b)(2); 

91.103; 91.109; 91.119; 91.121; 91.151(a); 

91.203(a) and (b); 91.405(a); 91.407(a)(1); 

91.409(a)(2); and 91.417(a) and (b) of 

Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations 

Regulatory Docket No. FAA–2014–0850

GRANT OF EXEMPTION 

By letter dated June 6, 2014 Mr. Christopher M. Taylor, Viking Unmanned Aerial 

Systems, Inc. (AgriView Aerial Solutions Division) (hereinafter Petitioner or Operator), 16 

Sanford Drive, Suite 5, Gorham, Maine 04038 petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration 

(FAA) for an exemption from part 21, §§ 45.23(b), 61.113(a) and (b), 91.7(a), 91.9(b)(2), 

91.103, 91.109, 91.119, 91.121, 91.151(a), 91.203(a) and (b), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 

91.409(a)(2), and 91.417(a) and (b) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). The 

exemption would allow the petitioner to operate the Viking Ranger EX unmanned aircraft 

system (UAS) to conduct aerial photography and 3D mapping for the agriculture industry. 

The petitioner supports its request with the following information: 

The petitioner proposes to operate the Viking Ranger EX UAS to conduct aerial photography 

and 3D mapping for the agriculture industry. See Appendix A for the petition submitted to 

the FAA, including the regulations from which the petitioner seeks an exemption. 

The petitioner has provided the following information to support its request for an exemption, 

which includes proprietary supporting documents: 

1) AgriView Aerial Solutions Flight Operations Standard Operating Procedure 
2) Viking Ranger EX 3dMapping – UAS System Deployment Manual and Specifications 

3) Viking Ranger EX UAS Aircraft Safety Checklist 

4) Pixhawk Autopilot Quick Start Guide 

5) Pixhawk Flight Controller Component Maintenance Manual Overview 

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.

The FAA’s analysis is as follows: 

The FAA has organized its analysis into four sections: (1) UAS, (2) the UAS pilot in 

command (PIC), (3) the UAS operating parameters, and (4) the public interest. 

UAS 

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

and parts. In accordance with the statutory criteria provided in Section 333 of P.L. 112-95 in 

reference to 49 USC § 44704, and in consideration of the size, weight, speed, and limited 

operating area associated with the aircraft and its operation, the Secretary of Transportation 

has determined that this aircraft meets the conditions of Section 333. Therefore, the FAA 

finds that the requested relief from 14 CFR part 21, and any associated noise certification and 

testing requirements of part 36, is not necessary. 

Manned aircraft conducting aerial photography and 3D mapping for the agriculture industry 

can weigh thousands of pounds or more and are operated by an onboard pilot, in addition to 

other crewmembers as necessary. The petitioner’s UA weighs less than 6 lbs. The pilot and 

crew will be remotely located from the aircraft. The limited weight reduces the potential for 

harm to participating and nonparticipating persons or damage to property in the event of an 

incident or accident. The risk to an onboard pilot and crew during an incident or accident is 

eliminated with the use of a UAS for the proposed operation. 

Manned aircraft are at risk of fuel spillage and fire in the event of an incident or accident. The 

UA carries no fuel, and therefore the risk of fire following an incident or accident due to fuel 

spillage is eliminated. 

This exemption does not require an electronic means to monitor and communicate with other 

aircraft, such as transponders or sense and avoid technology. Rather, the FAA is mitigating 

the risk of these operations by placing limits on altitude, requiring stand-off distance from 

clouds, permitting daytime operations only, and requiring that the UA be operated within 

visual line of sight (VLOS) and yield right of way to all manned operations. Additionally, the 

exemption provides that the operator will request a notice to airmen (NOTAM) prior to 

operations to alert other users of the NAS. 

The petitioner has stated that its UAS has the capability to operate safely after experiencing 

certain in-flight contingencies or failures and uses a failsafe mode to return to home and land 
in those instances. The petitioner stated as well that its UAS is able to respond to a loss of 

GPS or a lost-link event with pre-coordinated automated flight maneuvers. 

Regarding the petitioner’s requested relief from 14 CFR § 45.23(b), Display of marks, the 

petitioner’s request is made under the assumption that marking with the word “experimental” 

will be required as a condition of an exemption request. However, this marking is reserved for 

aircraft that are issued experimental certificates under § 21.191. Since the petitioner’s UAS 

will not be certificated under 14 CFR § 21.191, a relief from 14 CFR § 45.23(b) is not 

necessary. Markings must be as large as practicable per § 45.29(f). 

Regarding the petitioner’s requested relief from 14 CFR §§ 91.405(a) Maintenance required, 

91.407(a)(1) Operation after maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, or alteration, 

91.409(a)(2) Inspections, and 91.417(a) and (b) Maintenance records, the FAA has 

determined that relief from § 91.409(a)(1) is also necessary, because it is an alternate 

inspection requirement of § 91.409(a)(2). The FAA notes that the petitioner’s operating 

documents contain preflight checks for the UAS. The petitioner also states that all required 

maintenance will be performed and logged. The FAA finds that adherence to the operating 

documents, as required by the conditions and limitations below, is sufficient to ensure that 

safety is not adversely affected. In accordance with the petitioner’s UAS maintenance, 

inspection, and recordkeeping requirements, the FAA finds that exemption from 

14 CFR §§ 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) and (2), and 91.417(a) and (b) is warranted 

subject to the conditions and limitations below. 

UAS PIC 

Regarding the petitioner’s requested relief from 14 CFR § 61.113 Private pilot privileges and 

limitations, the FAA must consider the appropriate level of pilot certification for the 

petitioner’s proposed operations. The petitioner states it would operate its UAS with a pilot 

holding a sport pilot certificate or a recreational pilot certificate and certified by the UA 

manufacturer and has completed the FAA private pilot written exam. Under current 

regulations, civil operations for compensation or hire require a PIC holding a commercial pilot 

certificate per 14 CFR part 61. As established in 14 CFR § 61.113(a), with limited exception, a 

pilot holding a private pilot certificate cannot act as a PIC of an aircraft for compensation or 

hire. However, in Grant of Exemption No. 11062 to Astraeus Aerial (Astraeus), the FAA 

determined that a PIC with a private pilot certificate operating the Astraeus UAS would not 

adversely affect operations in the NAS or present a hazard to persons or property on the 

ground. Additionally, as previously determined by the Secretary of Transportation, the 

requirement to have an airman certificate ameliorates security concerns over civil UAS 

operations conducted in accordance with Section 333.
The FAA has analyzed the petitioner’s proposed operation and determined it does not differ 

significantly from the situation described in Grant of Exemption No. 11062 (Astraeus). The 

petitioner commits to operating in Class G airspace, over private property or other confined 

areas, and with a security perimeter established in which a safe separation from nonconsenting persons can be maintained. Given: 1) the similar nature of the petitioner’s 

proposed operating environment to that of Astraeus, 2) the parallel nature of private pilot 

aeronautical knowledge requirements to those of commercial requirements, and 3) the 

airmanship skills necessary to operate the UAS, the FAA finds that the additional manned 

airmanship experience of a commercially certificated pilot would not correlate to the 

airmanship skills necessary for the petitioner’s proposed operations. Therefore, the FAA finds 

that a PIC holding a private pilot certificate and a third-class airman medical certificate is 

appropriate for the proposed operations and that granting relief from 14 CFR § 61.113(a) is 

warranted. 

With regard to the airmanship skills necessary to operate the UAS, the petitioner has stated 

that it will require its PICs be certified by the manufacturer of the UAS to be operated. The 

conditions and limitations below require the petitioner to ensure the PIC has demonstrated 

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 people, vessels, vehicles, and structures. 

The petitioner indicates it will supplement its proposed operation(s) with a visual observer 

(VO) who has met the petitioner’s training requirements. The conditions and limitations 

below stipulate that the PIC must ensure that the VO can perform the functions prescribed in 

the operating documents. It is the responsibility of the PIC to limit operations of the UA to 

distances within the visual capabilities of both the PIC and VO. 

The FAA considers the PIC to be designated for the duration of the flight. Therefore, per the 

conditions and limitations below, the PIC must be designated before the flight and cannot 

transfer his or her designation for the duration of the flight. 

UAS Operating Parameters 

The petitioner requested relief from 14 CFR § 91.7(a) Civil aircraft airworthiness and the 

FAA finds that relief from § 91.7(a) is necessary. While the petitioner’s UAS will not 

require an airworthiness certificate in accordance with 14 CFR part 21, subpart H, the FAA 

considers the petitioner’s compliance with its operating documents to be a sufficient means 

for determining an airworthy condition. Therefore, relief from § 91.7(a) is granted. The 

petitioner is still required to ensure that its aircraft is in an airworthy condition – based on 

compliance with the operating documents prior to every flight, and as stated in the conditions 

and limitations below. 

Additionally, in accordance with 14 CFR § 91.7(b), the PIC of the UAS is responsible for 

determining whether the aircraft is in a condition for safe flight and the FAA finds that the 

PIC can comply with this requirement. 
Regarding the petitioner’s requested relief from 14 CFR § 91.9(b)(2) Civil aircraft flight 

manual, marking, and placard requirements and 14 CFR § 91.203(a) and (b) Civil 

aircraft: Certifications required, the FAA has previously determined in Grant of 

Exemption 11062, Astraeus Aerial, that relief from these sections is not necessary. 

Relevant materials may be kept in a location accessible to the PIC in compliance with the 

regulations. 

Regarding the petitioner’s requested relief from 14 CFR § 91.103, Preflight action, the 

petitioner’s operating documents require the PIC to take certain actions before flight to 

ensure the safety of the flight. The procedures outlined in the operating documents address 

the FAA’s concerns regarding compliance with § 91.103. According to the petitioner, the 

PIC will take all actions including reviewing weather, flight battery requirements, landing, 

and takeoff distances/conditions, and aircraft performance data before initiation of flight. 

The FAA has imposed stricter requirements with regard to visibility and distance from 

clouds; this is to both keep the UA from departing VLOS and to preclude the UA from 

conflicting with other aircraft operating in the NAS. The FAA also notes the risks 

associated with sun glare; the FAA believes that the PIC’s and VO’s ability to still see 

other air traffic, combined with the PIC’s ability to initiate a return-to-home sequence, are 

sufficient mitigations in this respect. The PIC will also account for all relevant sitespecific conditions in his or her preflight procedures. Therefore, the FAA finds that 

exemption from 14 CFR § 91.103 is not necessary. 

Regarding the petitioner’s requested relief from 14 CFR § 91.109 Flight instruction; 

Simulated instrument flight and certain flight tests, the petitioner did not describe training 

scenarios in which a dual set of controls would be utilized or required, i.e. dual flight 

instruction, provided by a flight instructor or other company-designated individual, that would 

require that individual to have fully functioning dual controls. Rather, the petitioner intends to 

accomplish training through the procedures referenced in the operating documents. 

Furthermore, the FAA is requiring that the petitioner’s PICs possess at least a private pilot’s 

certificate. Also, this exemption will require that training operations only be conducted during 

dedicated training sessions. The FAA finds that safety will not be adversely impacted if the 

petitioner follows the self-administered training and internal procedures outlined in the 

operating documents. Therefore, the FAA finds that the petitioner can conduct its operations 

without the requested relief from § 91.109. 

Regarding the petitioner’s requested relief from 14 CFR § 91.119, Minimum safe altitude, the 

petitioner states that all operations will be conducted in Class G airspace, will avoid congested 

or densely populated areas (as identified by yellow areas on VFR sectional charts), will operate 

within a confined “sterile area” with landowner permission, and will operate with the consent 

of all persons inside the sterile area. The petitioner also states that it will operate as close as 30 

feet to consenting persons based upon an equivalent level of safety determination. The 

petitioner did not further describe how a “sterile area” would be created nor did it provide 

information on how persons not participating in or essential to the flight operations would be 

protected from an accident involving the UA. Therefore, the FAA is requiring that prior to 

conducting UAS specific operations, all persons not essential to flight operations 

(nonparticipating persons) must remain at appropriate distances. In open areas this requires 
the UA to remain 500 feet from all persons other than essential flight personnel (i.e. the PIC, 

VO, and any sensor operator). The FAA has also considered that the UA in this case will 

weigh less than 6 pounds. If barriers or structures are present that can sufficiently protect 

nonparticipating persons from debris in the event of an accident, then the UA may operate 

closer than 500 feet to persons afforded such protection. 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. When considering how to immediately cease operations, 

the primary concern is the safety of those nonparticipating persons. In addition, the FAA 

finds that operations may be conducted closer than 500 feet to vessels, vehicles and structures 

when the land owner/controller grants such permission and the PIC makes a safety assessment 

of the risk of operating closer to those objects. 

Thus, the FAA finds that relief from § 91.119(c) is necessary because all operations will be 

conducted below 400 feet above ground level (AGL) and may be operated closer than 500 

feet from persons, vessels, vehicles, and structures as described above. Provided adherence 

to the procedures in the operating documents and the additional conditions and limitations 

outlined below, the FAA finds that relief from § 91.119(c) is warranted. 

Relief from § 91.119(a), which requires operating at an altitude that allows a safe emergency 

landing if a power unit fails, is not granted. The FAA expects the petitioner to be able to 

perform an emergency landing without undue hazard to persons or property on the surface if a 

power unit fails. Relief from 14 CFR § 91.119(b), operation over congested areas, is not 

applicable, because the petitioner states that operations will only be conducted within the 

sterile area described in the operating documents. The conditions and limitations below will 

specifically prohibit operations over those areas. Relief from § 91.119(d) is also not 

necessary due to the nature of the proposed UAS operations. 

The petitioner also noted that it will avoid congested or populated areas “which are depicted 

in yellow on VFR charts.” Since there is no precise definition of the term “congested area” 

and because aeronautical charts and NOTAMS provide only general guidance for developing 

a proposed route that complies with § 91.119, the petitioner should consult with the local 

Flight Standards District Office (FSDO) to discuss areas that would reasonably be considered 

“congested” within proximity of the proposed operations. Ultimately, the PIC is responsible 

for maintaining the minimum safe altitudes required in § 91.119. 

Regarding the requested relief from 14 CFR § 91.121 Altimeter settings, the petitioner stated 

that its UAS uses a global positioning system (GPS) altitude indicator rather than a barometric 

altimeter. As stated in the conditions and limitations below, the FAA requires any altitude 

reported to Air Traffic Control (ATC) to be in feet AGL. The petitioner may choose to set the 

GPS altitude indicator to zero feet AGL, if that option exists, rather than local barometric 

pressure or field altitude before flight. Considering the limited altitude of the proposed 

operations, relief from 14 CFR § 91.121 is granted to the extent necessary to comply with the 

applicable conditions and limitations stated below. 
Regarding the petitioner’s requested relief from 14 CFR 91.151(a) Fuel requirements for flight 

in VFR conditions, relief has been granted for manned aircraft to operate at less than the 

minimums prescribed in 14 CFR § 91.151(a), including Exemption Nos. 2689, 5745, and 

10650. In addition, similar UAS-specific relief has been granted in Exemption Nos. 8811, 

10808, and 10673 for daytime, VFR conditions. The petitioner states that its UAS operations 

will be conducted in a confined “sterile area,” with an unmanned aircraft (UA) weighing 

under 6 pounds, within VLOS, and limited to 90 minutes of flying. These factors, combined 

with the petitioner’s stated intention to terminate flights with 25% remaining battery power, 

provides the FAA with sufficient reason to grant the requested relief from 14 CFR § 

91.151(a). In accordance with the conditions and limitations below, the PIC is prohibited from 

beginning a flight unless (considering wind and forecast weather conditions) there is enough 

power to fly at normal cruising speed to the intended landing point and land the UA with 25% 

battery power remaining. 

Additionally, in evaluating the petitioner’s proposed operating parameters with regard to 

VLOS and a safe operating perimeter, the FAA considered operations from a moving device 

or vehicle. Since the petitioner did not discuss provisions for these circumstances, the 

conditions and limitations below preclude operations from moving devices or vehicles. 

Regarding an Air Traffic Organization (ATO) issued Certificate of Waiver or Authorization 

(COA), the majority of current UAS operations occurring in the NAS are being coordinated 

through ATC by the issuance of a COA. This is an existing process that not only makes local 

ATC facilities aware of UAS operations, but also provides ATC the ability to consider 

airspace issues that are unique to UAS operations. The COA will require the operator to 

request a NOTAM, which is the mechanism for alerting other users of the NAS to the UAS 

activities being conducted. The conditions and limitations below prescribe the requirement 

for the petitioner to obtain an ATO-issued COA. 

Public Interest 

The FAA finds that a grant of exemption is in the public interest. The potential improvements 

to the efficiency and yield of U.S. farm lands using a UAS with the specifications described by 

the petitioner, and carrying no passengers or crew, instead of 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. 
The following table summarizes the FAA’s determinations regarding the relief sought by the 

petitioner: 

Relief considered (14 CFR) FAA determination (14 CFR) 

Part 21 Relief not necessary 

45.23(b) Relief not necessary 

61.113(a) Relief granted with conditions and 

limitations 

91.7(a) Relief granted with conditions and 

limitations 

91.9(b)(2) Relief not necessary 

91.103 Relief not necessary 

91.109 Relief not necessary 

91.119 

Relief not granted for paragraph (a); 

paragraph (b) relief not applicable; 

paragraph (c) relief granted with 

conditions and limitations; paragraph (d) 

relief not necessary 

91.121 Relief granted with conditions and 

limitations 

91.151(a) Relief from 91.151(a)(1), day, granted 

with conditions and limitations 

91.203(a) and (b) Relief not necessary 

91.405(a) Relief granted with conditions and 

limitations 

91.407(a)(1) Relief granted with conditions and 

limitations 

91.409(a)(2) 

Relief granted with conditions and 

limitations; relief from 91.409(a)(1) also 

granted with conditions and limitations 

91.417(a) and (b) Relief granted with conditions and 

limitations 

The FAA’s 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, Viking Unmanned Aerial Systems Inc. is granted an 

exemption from 14 CFR §§ 61.113(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 

petitioner to operate a UAS for the purpose of conducting aerial photography and 3D mapping 

for the agriculture industry. This exemption is subject to the conditions and limitations listed 

below. 

Conditions and Limitations 
Relative to this grant of exemption, Viking Unmanned Aerial Systems Inc. is hereafter 

referred to as the operator. 

 

The petition and the following supporting documentation are hereinafter referred to as the 

operating documents: 

1) AgriView Aerial Solutions Flight Operations Standard Operating Procedure 

2) Viking Ranger EX 3dMapping – UAS System Deployment Manual and Specifications 

3) Viking Ranger EX UAS Aircraft Safety Checklist 

4) Pixhawk Autopilot Quick Start Guide 

5) Pixhawk Flight Controller Component Maintenance Manual Overview 

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. 

The following conditions and limitations are subject to all flights utilizing this exemption: 

1. Operations authorized by this grant of exemption are limited to the following aircraft 

described in the operating documents which has one motor, is fixed wing, and weighs 

less than 6 pounds: Viking Ranger EX. Proposed operations of any other aircraft will 

require a new petition or a petition to amend this grant. 

2. UAS operations under this exemption are limited to conducting aerial photography 

and 3D mapping for the agriculture industry. 

3. The UA may not be flown at a speed exceeding 70 knots. 

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

(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. 

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 functions 

prescribed in the operating documents. 

7. The VO must not perform any other duties beyond assisting the PIC with seeing and 

avoiding other air traffic and other ground based obstacles/obstructions and is not 

permitted to operate the camera or other instruments. 
8. The operating documents and this grant of exemption 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 upon request. The 

operator must also present updated and revised documents if it petitions for extension 

or amendment to this grant of exemption. If the operator determines that any update or 

revision would affect the basis upon which the FAA granted this exemption, then the 

operator must petition for 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. 

9. Prior to each flight the PIC must inspect the UAS to ensure it is in a condition for safe 

flight. 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. The Ground 

Control Station must be included in the preflight inspection. All maintenance and 

alterations must be properly documented in the aircraft records. 

10. 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. The PIC who conducts the functional test flight must make an 

entry of the flight in the UAS aircraft records. The requirements and procedures for a 

functional test flight and aircraft record entry must be added to the operating 

documents. 

11. The pre-flight inspection must account for all potential discrepancies, e.g. inoperable 

components, items, or equipment, not already covered in the relevant sections of the 

operating documents. 

12. The operator must follow the UAS manufacturer’s aircraft/component, maintenance, 

overhaul, replacement, inspection, and life limit requirements. 

13. The operator must carry out its maintenance, inspections, and record keeping 

requirements in accordance with the operating documents. Maintenance, inspection, 

and alterations must be noted in the aircraft logbook, including total time in service, 

description of work accomplished, and signature of the person authorized to return the 

UAS to service. 

14. The authorized person must make an entry in the aircraft record of the corrective 

action taken against discrepancies discovered between inspections. 

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

bulletins. 
16. The PIC must possess at least a private pilot certificate and at least a current third - 

class medical certificate. 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. 

17. Prior to operations conducted for the purpose of aerial photography and 3D mapping 

the PIC must have met the operator’s qualification criteria and completed the 

operator’s mission specific training. Training, proficiency, and experience-building 

flights can be conducted under this grant of exemption to qualify the operator’s PIC(s), 

VO(s), and any sensor operators. However, said training operations may only be 

conducted during dedicated training sessions. During training, proficiency, and 

experience-building flights the PIC is required to operate the UA with appropriate 

distance from non-participants in accordance with 14 CFR § 91.119. 

18. Prior to operations conducted for the purpose of aerial photography and 3D mapping 

the PIC, VO, and any sensor operators must have met all qualification and training 

requirements, as outlined in the operating documents. A record of completion of these 

requirements must be documented and made available to the Administrator upon 

request. 

19. The operator may not permit the PIC to operate the UAS for the purpose of aerial 

photography and 3D mapping unless the PIC has demonstrated and logged in a 

manner consistent with 14 CFR § 61.51(b), 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 people, vessels, vehicles, and structures. 

20. 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. 

21. The UA may not operate within 5 nautical miles of the airport reference point as 

denoted on a current FAA-published aeronautical chart unless a letter of agreement 

with that airport’s management is obtained, and the operation is conducted in 

accordance with a NOTAM as required by the operator’s COA. The letter of 

agreement with airport management must be made available to the Administrator 

upon request. 

22. 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. 

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

pre- determined location within the planned operating area and land or be recovered 

in accordance with the operating documents. 
24. The PIC must abort the flight in the event of unpredicted obstacles or emergencies in 

accordance with the operating documents. 

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

weather conditions) there is enough power to fly at normal cruising speed to the 

intended landing point and land the UA with 25% battery power remaining. 

26. The operator must obtain an Air Traffic Organization (ATO) issued Certificate of 

Waiver or Authorization (COA) prior to conducting any operations under this grant 

of exemption. This COA will also require the operator to request a Notice to Airman 

(NOTAM) not more than 72 hours in advance, but not less than 48 hours prior to the 

operation. All operations shall be conducted in accordance with airspace 

requirements in the ATO-issued COA including class of airspace, altitude level and 

potential transponder requirements. 

27. 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 (NNumber) markings in accordance with 14 CFR part 45, Subpart C. Markings must be 

as large as practicable. 

28. Before conducting operations, the radio frequency spectrum used for operation and 

control of the UA must comply with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) 

or other appropriate government oversight agency requirements. 

29. The 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 UAS is operating. These 

documents must be made available to the Administrator or any law enforcement 

official upon request. 

30. The UA must remain clear and yield the right of way to all manned operations and 

activities at all times. 

31. The UAS may not be operated by the PIC from any moving device or vehicle. 

32. The UA may not be operated over congested or densely populated areas. 

33. 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 and/or; 

b. The aircraft is operated near vessels, vehicles or structures where the property 

owner/controller of has granted permission 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, and; 

c. Operations near the PIC, VO, sensor operator, operator trainees or other essential 

persons, do not present an undue hazard to these persons per § 91.119(a). 

34. 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. 

35. 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. 

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 March 31, 2017, unless sooner superseded or rescinded. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on March 3, 2015. 

/s/ 

John Barbagallo 

Acting Deputy Director, Flight Standards Service