The FAA finally revamped their regulations for unmanned rockets in 2008 with an effective date of 2 Feb. 2009. The previous regulations basically banned the operation of all unmanned rockets in controlled airspace. Which in the vast majority of the U.S. starts at 1200 feet AGL or lower. There were special exceptions for model rockets and large model rockets. Anything else required the FAA to issue a waiver.
The new regulations deal with the hobby directly. Now any rocket with no more than 1,500 grams mass (3.3 pounds) and no more than 125 grams of propellant is considered to be a Class 1 rocket and can be flown without any special effort. Class 1 rockets are treated just like model rockets were under the previous rules.
The newly created Class 2 or high power rockets encompasses the high power hobby and includes all rockets with up to 40,960 N-s of total impulse. These require prior authorization before they can be flown. This process appears as though it will be similar to the previous waiver process.
Class 3 rockets are any amateur rocket with more than 40,960 N-s impulse but less than 889,600 N-s total impulse. These require very detailed information to be submitted in order to get the required authorization. But the process is still easier than getting the full blown launch license required for the big stuff.
The official version of the regulations, kept reasonably up to date, is available at the GPO web site. Look for 14 CFR Part 101.
When evaluating a potential flying site you should check out the FAA sectional chart for that area. This will let you know how close you are to local runways and other useful things. If you don't want to track down an actual chart on paper you can view them online.
One potential problem is that you are required to provide the launch site location as latitude and longitude but NOTAMs are issued with the location specified in terms of a distance and direction from some reference point. Usually a VOR. They have been known to get it wrong so you should verify the NOTAM. You can use this web page to search for the NOTAM. Click on the "Radius & Flight Path Search" tab. Then enter the identifier for a nearby airport or VOR and a suitable radius.
As an example in the decoding of one of these NOTAMs, here is a recent one:
FTW 12/287 CVE AIRSPACE UNMANNED ROCKET 1 NMR CVE164022/4 SW LNC 2500/BLW WEF 0812131500-0812132200
This starts with an identifier of "FTW 12/287" which simply identifies the notice. "CVE" is the identifier of a VOR which happens to be next door to DFW airport. This is an "AIRSPACE" notification for an "UNMANNED ROCKET" launch. With a 1 NMR (nautical mile radius) around the location "CVE164022/4 SW LNC". This is actually two versions of the same location. The first is "CVE164022". This is relative to the CVE VOR with a distance of 022 NM on the 164 degree radial. The second version is "4 SW LNC" which translates to 4 NM SouthWest of the Lancaster airport. The affected altitudes are "2500/BLW" or 2,500 feet above ground level and below. The notice finishes with the effective times for the notice. This one was for 2008, December 13 from 1500Z to 2200Z. All times are in Zulu which is a fancy version of GMT. You will have to translate to local times.
Among the more interesting NOTAMs I have seen are the ones indicating that GPS may be unreliable:
!GPS 01/025 ZFW NAV GPS IS UNRELIABLE AND MAY BE UNAVAILABLE WITHIN A 295 NM RADIUS OF 330107N/1061726W (WMSR), AT FL400, DECREASING IN AREA WITH DECREASE IN ALTITUDE TO 262 NM RADIUS AT FL250, 185 NM RADIUS AT 10000 FT MSL AND 185 NM RADIUS AT 4000 FT AGL. THE IMPACT AREA ALSO EXTENDS IN THE MEXICAN FIR. WEF 0901212200-0901220200
Although it is mispelled here the center of this is White Sands Missile Range. The reason for the NOTAM is that in order to verify the nifty anti-jamming features of the GPS systems on weapons, you really need to test them in an environment with jamming. So every once in a while they fire up a jammer for a weapons test. These sorts of tests also happen in other test areas. So if that nifty GPS tracker you put in your rocket goes wonky but starts working again at lower altitudes, you might want to check for jamming in your area.
The FAA published some technical corrections to Part 101. The changes have very minimal. The two that might cause a little trouble have to do with changing "statute" to "nautical". The difference in distance is small (nautical miles are 6,072 feet while the statute mile is only 5,280 feet.) but noticeable. The biggest problem is that most maps use statute miles so getting the correct distances will require a little work. Reporting the operating radius should be no problem as the difference is minor. Checking the distance to a local airport could be a bit more troublesome but not a big problem as the trickiest part of that is figuring out where to measure the distance from. (My take on this is that if your operating area as defined by your location and radius intersect an airport boundary, then you need authorization.
Yet another correction was published today. This one replaces the word "unmanned" with "amateur" in a few spots while missing a couple as well. It also combines the operating restrictions at 101.25 and 101.26 (Class 2 and Class 3 respectively) into a single section at 101.25. (101.26 is deleted). Although the FAA claims to only be combining the operating restrictions into a single section without making any real changes, they in fact have dropped the weasel words that would let them add any operating restrictions they liked for Class 3. (But there is similar langauge in the general operating limitations in 101.23 so this really has no effect.) Strangely, it also reverts to using statute miles. I predict another technical correction is on the way for this error. (Note: I have left "nautical" in my pdf version.) A correction going back to nautical miles was published on 16 September.
It looks like inclusion of "model rocketry" in the list of prohibited activities in some temporary flight restrictions (TFR's) is going to be the new normal. Several years ago I found a web page at the AOPA that provides some advanced warning on TFR's. I can't imagine that the FAA is expecting everyone who flies model rockets to check for TFR's but it would probably be best if clubs did this before their scheduled launches. It is an extra hassle but no one wants to have their Estes Alpha shot down by an F-16. Here is an excerpt from a TFR: (Note the section about deadly force!)
PURSUANT TO 49 USC 40103(B), THE FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION (FAA) CLASSIFIES THE AIRSPACE DEFINED IN THIS NOTAM AS 'NATIONAL DEFENSE AIRSPACE'. PILOTS WHO DO NOT ADHERE TO THE FOLLOWING PROCEDURES MAY BE INTERCEPTED, DETAINED AND INTERVIEWED BY LAW ENFORCEMENT/SECURITY PERSONNEL. ANY OF THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONAL ACTIONS MAY ALSO BE TAKEN AGAINST A PILOT WHO DOES NOT COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OR ANY SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS OR PROCEDURES ANNOUNCED IN THIS NOTAM: A) THE FAA MAY TAKE ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION, INCLUDING IMPOSING CIVIL PENALTIES AND THE SUSPENSION OR REVOCATION OF AIRMEN CERTIFICATES; OR B) THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT MAY PURSUE CRIMINAL CHARGES, INCLUDING CHARGES UNDER TITLE 49 OF THE UNITED STATES CODE, SECTION 46307; OR C) THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT MAY USE DEADLY FORCE AGAINST THE AIRBORNE AIRCRAFT, IF IT IS DETERMINED THAT THE AIRCRAFT POSES AN IMMINENT SECURITY THREAT. PURSUANT TO TITLE 14, SECTION 91.141 OF THE CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS...
THE FOLLOWING OPERATIONS ARE NOT AUTHORIZED WITHIN THIS TFR: FLIGHT TRAINING, PRACTICE INSTRUMENT APPROACHES, AEROBATIC FLIGHT, GLIDER OPERATIONS, PARACHUTE OPERATIONS, ULTRALIGHT, HANG GLIDING, BALLOON OPERATIONS, AGRICULTURE/CROP DUSTING, ANIMAL POPULATION CONTROL FLIGHT OPERATIONS, BANNER TOWING OPERATIONS, MODEL AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS, MODEL ROCKETRY AND UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS.
The good news is that most of these will be for areas unlikely to be suitable for model rocketry.
Under the old rules in order to fly high power rockets you had to request a waiver from the rules. Primarily the prohibition on flying into controlled airspace. That is no longer required as the new rules specifically allow for amateur rocket operations. The new rules do require that you get prior authorization. This is not a waiver as you are not asking for exemptions to any rules. But I recently ran across a FAA document on their procedures for handling these requests. In spite of the fact that Section 3 is titled "Certificates of Waiver or Authorization", it is written as though we are requesting waivers. It says nothing about getting authorization. Which seems amazingly stupid. The rules were changed to specifically allow us to fly without getting rules waived.