August 26, 2015

Exemption No. 12612

Regulatory Docket No. FAA−2015−2451

Mr. Andres Penso

1850 Silver Star Lane

Culpeper, VA 22701

Dear Mr. Penso:

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 May 30, 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, videography, and cinematography.

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 DJI Inspire 1.

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 

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 
2

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 collection1. 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. Andres Penso 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. Andres Penso is hereafter referred to as the operator.

 

1 Aerial data collection includes any remote sensing and measuring by an instrument(s) aboard the UA. 

Examples include imagery (photography, video, infrared, etc.), electronic measurement (precision surveying, RF 

analysis, etc.), chemical measurement (particulate measurement, etc.), or any other gathering of data by 

instruments aboard the UA.
3

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.

1. Operations authorized by this grant of exemption are limited to the DJI Inspire 1 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 
4

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 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 
5

(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, 

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 five 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.
6

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. 

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.
7

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 

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 August 31, 2017, unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

Sincerely,

/s/

John S. Duncan

Director, Flight Standards Service

Enclosures
Andres	Penso

8400	Rosebay	Lane	#203

Manassas,	VA	

(845) 800-3604

gybo102@gmail.com

May	30,	2015

U.S	Department	of	Transportation

Docket	Operations

1200	Jersey	Ave,	SE

Washington,	D.C	20590

Re:	Exemption	Request	Section	333	of	the	FAA	Reform	Act	and	Part	11	of	the	

Federal	Aviation	Regulations	from	14	C.F.R.	45.23(b);14	CFR	Part	21;14	CFR	

61.113	(a)	&	(b);	91.7	(a);91.9	(b)	(2);91.103(b);	91.109;91.119;	91.121;	

91.151(a);91.203(a)	&	(b);91.405	(a);	91.407(a)	(1); 91.409	(a)	(2);91.417	

(a)	&	(b).	

To	Whom	It	May	Concern:	

Andres	Penso	herby	petitions	the	Secretary	of	Transportation	and	Federal	Aviation	

Administration	for	exemption	to	the	above	referenced	and	below	more	fully	

described	Federal	Aviation	Regulations (“FARs”),	that	currently	may	or	may	not	

apply	to	the	recreational/business	operations	of model	aircraft	including	small	

unmanned	aerial	systems	(“UASs).

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

procedures	contained	within	14	C.F.R.	11,	Petition	that	I,	Andres	Penso,	an	owner	

and	operator	of	small	unmanned	aircraft,	be	exempted	from	the	Federal	Aviation	

Regulations	(“FARs”)	listed	below	so	that	I,	Andres	Penso,	may	operatemy	small	

ultra	lightweight	unmanned	aircraft	system	(“UAS”)	commercially	in	airspace	

regulated	by	the	Federal	Aviation	Administration	(“FAA”).

As	described	herein	I,	Andres	Penso	a	former	Aviation	Electronics	Technician	with	

the	U.S	Navy; very	experienced	in	flying	hobby	helicopters	and	fixed	wing	aircraft	

for	recreational	purposes.	I	currently	have	a	DJI	Inspire	1	quadcopter	UAS	with	

intent to	conduct	aerial photography/Inspection/	included	but	not	limited	to	the	

following;	Business	Operations: over	land,	waterways,	and	oceans;	operation
over/in	nonrestricted National	Parks, National	Forests,	flight	in	nonnavigable

airspace,	using	nonintrusive recording devices,	operation	in	otherwise	unrestricted	

U.S.	States/Territories	for	aerial videography/cinematography	for	commercial	

operation	and	to	enhance	academic community	awareness	for	those	individuals	and	

companies	unfamiliar	with	the geographical	layout	of	such	areas.

As	described	more	fully	below,	the	requested	exemption	would	permit	the	

operation	of	UAS	under	controlled	conditions	in	airspace	that	is	1)	limited;	2)	

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;	and	3)	controlled	as	to	access.	The	

exemption	would	also	provide	safety	enhancements	to	the	already	safe	operations	

within	the	aerial	photography,	film	and	television	industry	presently	using	

conventional	aircraft	and	small,	unmanned	and	relatively	inexpensive	UASs.

Currently,	similar	lightweight,	remote	controlled	UAS's	are	legally	operated	by

unmonitored	amateur	hobbyists	with	no	safety	plan	or	controls	in	place	to	prevent

catastrophe.	I	operate	my	UAS	within	all safety	protocols	and	controls to	avoid	and	

prevent	public	hazard,	as	well	as	manned	aircraft	hazards/catastrophe.	This	will	act	

to	further	safety	protocols	exclusive	to	lightweight	UAS's	specific	to	aerial	video	and	

photography	usage	as	I	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	request	comports	with	the	Secretary	of	Transportation’s	(FAA

Administrator’s)	responsibilities	and	authority	to	not	only	integrate	UAS's	into	the	

national	airspace	system,	but	to	“...establish	requirements	for	the	safe	operation	of

such	aircraft	systems	[UAS's]	in	the	national	airspace	system”	under	Section	333(c)	

of	the	Reform	Act	specific	to	the	use	of	UAS's	for	commercial	purposes.	Further	I	will

conduct	my	operations	in	compliance	with	the	protocols	described	herein	or	as

otherwise	established	by	the	FAA.

For	the	reasons	stated	below	I	respectfully	request	the	grant	of	an	exemption	

allowing	me	to	operate	ultra	lightweight,	remote	controlled	UAS’s	for	academic	

community	awareness,	general	aerial	photography,	and	to	enhance	real	estate	

listing	videos	for	homeowners	who	cannot	afford	expensive	manned	aircraft	for	the	

same	purpose.	Both	with	public	safety	in	mind by	keeping	heavier	manned	aircraft	

containing	combustible	fuel	that	that	poses potential	public	hazard.
I. Contact	Information:

Andres	Penso

8400	Rosebay	Lane	#	203

Manassas,	Virginia	20109

Mobile:	(845)	800-3604

Email:	gybo102@gmail.com

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

Which	Andres	Penso Requests	Exemption	are:

14	CFR	21;

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

14	CFR	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;

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);

14	C.F.R.	91.203	(a)	&	(b);

14	C.F.R.	91.405	(a);

14	CFR	407	(a)	(1);

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

14	CFR	417	(a)	&	(b).

III. The	Extent	of	relief	Andres Penso seeks	and	the	Reason	He	Seeks

Such	Relief:

I,	Andres	Penso,	submit	this	application	in	accordance	with	the	Reform

Act,	112	P.L.	95	§§ 331334,	seeking	relief	from	any	currently	applicable	FARs

operating	to	prevent	me	Andres	Penso,	contemplated	commercial cinematic,	

academic	and	other	flight	operations	within	the	national	airspace system.	The	

Reform	Act	in	Section	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	

ultra	light	weight	UAS	meets	the	definition	of	“small unmanned	aircraft”	as	defined	

in	Section	331	and	therefore	the	integration	of	my ultra	light	weight	UAS	is	

expressly	contemplated	by	the	Reform	Act.	I	would	like to	operate	my	ultra	

lightweight	UAS	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	

UAS	aerial	video	and	photography.	The Reform	Act	guides	the	Secretary	in	

determining	the	types	of	UASs	that	may operate	safely	in	our	national	airspace	
system.	Considerations	include:	The weight,	size,	speed	and	overall	capabilities	of	

the	UAS's;	Whether	the	UAS	will be	operated	near	airports	or	heavily	populated	

areas;	and,	Whether	the	UAS	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 Andres	Penso.	My	UAS	

utilizes	four	(4) counter	rotating	propellers	for	balance,	control	and	stability.	My	

UAS	is equipped	with	GPS	and	auto	return	safety	technology.	Weighing	less	than

seven	(7)	pounds	(far	below	the	maximum	55	pound	limit); including	camera	with	

gimbal.

I	consider	safety	as	foremost	with	each	flight.	My	small	unmanned	aircraft	is

designed	to	hover	in	place	via	GPS	and	operate	in	less	than	a	10	m/s	wind	knot

(approx	22	mph)	wind.	For	safety,	stability	and	fear	of	financial	loss	I	will	not	fly

in	winds	exceeding	7	m/s	(15	mph).	Built	in	safety	systems	include	a	GPS	mode

that	allows	my	UAS	to	hover	in	place	when	radio	controls	are	lost.	With	three

modes	to	choose	from,	I	utilize	the	Positioning	Mode	for	aerial

videography/photography.	This	is	the	safest,	most	reliable	and	stable	mode	to

prevent	accident	and	hazard.	When	pilot	communication	is	lost	UAS	is	designed

slowly	descend	to	point	of	takeoff	,	or	near	the	control	transmitter	when	utilizing

Dynamic	Mode.	I	do	not	operate	my	UAS	near	airports,	Hospitals	nor	Police

heliports,	and	do	not	operate	near	areas	where	general	public	is	within	fifty	to

one	hundred	(50100)	yards	depending	on	location,	conditions	and	weather.	I

am	constantly	on	alert	for	any	manned	aircraft	(Police/Medical	helicopters,	etc.)

and	prepared	to	land/abort	immediately	to	the	nearest	and	safest	ground	point

should	a	manned	aircraft	approach	my	location	or	I	suspect	manned	aircraft may	

approach	near	my	location.	My	UAS	is	capable	of	vertical	and	horizontal operations,	

and	are	flown	only	within	my	line	of	sight,	as	the	remote	control	pilot. Utilizing	

battery	power	rather	than	combustible	fuels,	flights	generally	last between	eight	(8)	

to	twelve	(12)	minutes, with	an	altitude	under	two	hundred	fifty(250)	feet.

I	utilize	a	fresh	fully	charged	battery	with	each	flight	as	a	safety	precaution;	full

flight	time	limit	for	each	battery	is	eighteen	(18)	to	twenty two (22)	minutes	as	

tested.	I	do	not	operate	my	UAS	at	or	below	manufacture	recommend	minimum	

charge	levels	for	operation;	preferring	to	remain	well	within	a	safe	operating	range	

to	insure	adequate	communication	between	radio	control	and	UAS	to	eliminate	

potential	for	crash,	loss	of	control	or	hazard.	Reserve	batteries	are	at	hand	with	each	

exercise	to	insure	replacement	for	sufficient	safe	level	of operation.	I	do	not	believe	

in	taking	risk	that	may	cause	a	crash,	that	could create	hazard	to	the	

public/property/manned	aircraft,	and	have	no	desire	to	lose an valuable		

investment.	I	have	clocked	numerous	practice	flights	in	remote	areas	as	a hobbyist	

simulating	flights	for	future	commercial	use	to	gain	familiarization	with the	

characteristics	of	this	specific	UAS's	performance	under	different temperature	and	

weather	conditions.	I	also	practice	computerized	simulated flights	to	maintain	

adequate	skills	and	response	reflex	time.	All	for	the	sake	of safety.

I	am	extremely	cautious	when	operating	of	my	UAS/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	UAS	it

falls	well	within	Congress’s	contemplated	safety	zone	when	it	promulgated	the

Reform	Act	and	the	corresponding	directive	to	integrate	UAS's	into	the	national	

airspace	system.	My	UAS,	the	DJI	Inspire	1,	used	in	hobby	flight,	has	a	demonstrable	

safety	record	and	does	not	pose	any	threat	to	the	general	public

or	national	security.

IV. How	Andres	Penso’s Request	Will	Benefit	the	Public	As	A	Whole:

Aerial	videography	for	geographical	awareness	and	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	videography	is	cost	prohibitive.	Only	large companies	and	high	end	Realtors	

or	luxury	homeowners	can	afford	to	absorb such	expense,	depriving	nonluxury	

homeowners	and	lower	budget	Realtors from	a	valuable	marketing	tool.

Congress	has	already	proclaimed	that	it	is	in	the	public’s	interest	to	integrate

commercially	flown	UAS's	into	the	national	airspace system,	hence	the	passing

of	the	Reform	Act.	Granting	my	exemption	request	furthers	the	public	interest

through	academic/visual	awareness	of	the	geographical	benefits	in	and	around the	

State	of	Virginia.	My	ultra	light	weight	UAS	is	battery	powered	and	creates no	

emissions	that	can	harm	the	environment.	The	consequence	of	my	ultra	light weight	

UAS	crashing	is	far	less	than	a	full	size	helicopter	or	fixed	wing	aircraft; which	are	

heavy,	contain	combustible	fuel	and	can	cause	catastrophic		devastation	to	the	

public.

Manned	aircraft	can	pose	a	threat	to	the	public	through	potential	catastrophic

crash	that	many	local	communities	have	experienced	in	the	past	with	military

aircraft	and	medical/police	helicopter	crashes.	These	have	resulted	in	a	loss	of life	

and	endangered	the	public	with	combustible	fuel	that	burned	on	impact.	My UAS	

poses	no	such	threat	since	size	and	lack	of	combustible	fuel	alleviates	any potential	

threat	to	the	public.	Additionally,	this	actually	furthers	the	public’s interest	by	

making	it	safer	for	business	to	conduct	aerial	photography	and	videography	without	

such	risks.

V.	Reasons	Why	Andre	Penso’s	Exemption	Will	Not	Adversely	Affect

Safety	Or	How	The	Exemption	Will	Provide	a	Level	of	Safety	At	Least

Equal	To	Existing	Rule:

My	exemption	will	not	adversely	affect	safety.	Quite	the	contrary,	for	the reasons	

stated	permitting	me	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	protocols for	

development	in	cooperation	with	the	FAA.	In	addition	I	submit	the	following

representations	of	enhancements	to	current	aerial	videography	and	photography:
A.	My	UAS	weighs	less	than	7	pounds	complete	with	a	small	ultra	light	weight	

high	quality	camera;

B.	I	only	operate	my	UAS	below	300	feet	(well	within	the	400	foot

permissible	ceiling	set	by	the	FAA	Modernization	and	Reform	Act	of	2012);

C.	My	UAS	only	operates	for	18-22minutes	per	flight;

D.	I	land	my	UAS	prior	to	30%	Battery	Remaining;

E.	I	pilot	my	UAS	through	remote	control	only	by	line	of	sight;

F.	I	pilot	my	UAS	only	with	a	visual	observer	and	but	also	use	a	dual	

controller	setup. The	second	controller	is	solely	used	for	operating	the	

Inspire	1’s	camera/gimble.	

G.	My	UAS	has	Failsafe	RTH,	a flight	safety	feature	whereby	it	hovers	and

then	slowly	lands	if	communication	with	the	remote	control	pilot	is	lost	for 3	

seconds;

H.	My	UAS	has	GPS	and	a	Vision	Positioning	System	utilizing	two	sonar

sensors	and	one	monocular	camera	for	positioning	and	to	identify	the

current	aircraft’s	position;

I.	My	UAS	has	a	flight	recorder	and	I	actively	analyze	flight	data	and	other

sources	of	information	to	constantly	update	and	enhance	safety protocols;

J.	I	only	operate	in	reasonably	safe	environment	that	are	strictly	controlled,	

are	away	from	power	lines,	elevated	lights,	airports	and	actively	populated	

areas;

K.	I	conduct	extensive	preflight	inspections	and	protocol	per	the	Inspire	1

User	Manual;

L.	I	always	obtains	all	necessary	permissions	prior	to	operation;

M.	I	immediately	abort	flights	in	the	event	of	potential	danger;

N.	I	only	operate	my	UAS	well	within	“flight	environment	requirements5”	&	

visual	meteorological	conditions	(VMC)

O.	I	will	not	operate	my	UAS	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.

P.	Only	I,	Andres	Penso,	act	as	Pilot	in	Command	during	flights;

Q.	I	follow	the	UAS	manufacturer’s	aircraft/component,	maintenance,

overhaul,	replacement,	inspection,	and	life	limit	requirements.

R.	The	operating	documents/manual	will	be	accessible	during	UAS

operations	and	made	available	upon	request.

My	safety	protocols provide	a	level	of	safety	equal	to	or	exceeding	existing rules.	It	is	

important	to	note	that	absent	the	integration	of	commercial	UAS	into our	national	

airspace	system,	helicopters	are	the	primary	means	of	aerial	video and	photography	

for	community	awareness,	real	estate,	and	marketing purposes.	While	the	safety	

record	of	such	helicopters	is	remarkably	astounding, there	have	been	incidents	

involving	loss	of	life	as	well	as	extensive	property damage;	it	is	far	safer	to	operate	a	

battery	powered	ultra	light	weight	UAS.

● First,	the	potential	loss	of	life	is	diminished	because	UAS's	carry	no
people	on	board	and	I	only	operates	my	UAS	in	specific	areas	away	from mass	

populations.

● Second,	there	is	no	fuel	on	board	a	UAS	and	thus	the	potential	for	fire	or

explosions	is	greatly	diminished.

● Third,	the	small	size	and	extreme	maneuverability	of	my	UAS	allow	me	to

remotely	pilot	away	from	and	avoid	hazards	quickly	and	safely.

● Fourth,	given	its	small	size	and	weight,	even	when	close	enough	to capture	

amazing	images,	my	UAS	need	not	be	so	close	to	the	objects they	are	focused	on	

through	the	technology	and	use	of	post	editing software	allowing	pan	and zoom.

Accordingly,	my	UAS	has	been	experimentally	operated	for	familiarization	

and	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.	21	and	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)(1).	The	size,	weight	and	enclosed

operational	area	of	my	UAS	permits	exemption	from	Part	21	because	

my	UAS	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	to	exempt	UAS'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	current	and	projected	UAS'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 UAS'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.	10	The	FAA	has	

previously	issued	exemptions	to	this	regulation	in	Exemption	Nos.	

8607,	8737,	8738,	9299,9299A,	9565,	9565B,	10167,	10167A,	10602,	

10700	and	32827.

14	C.F.R.	§	91.121	regarding	altimeter	settings	is	inapplicable	in	so	far

as	my	UAS	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	of	safety	will	be	achieved by	maintaining	any	such	required	

certifications	and registrations	by	me, Andres	Penso.
B.	14	C.F.R.	§	45.23:	Marking	of	The	Aircraft

Applicable	Codes	of	Federal	Regulation	require	aircraft	to	be	marked

according	to	certain	specifications.	My	UAS	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	that	minimal	lettering	requirement.	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

Noncommercial	operations.	I,	Andres	Penso	can	achieve	an	equivalent	

level	of	safety	as	achieved	by	current	Regulations	because my	UAS	

does	not	carry	any	pilots	or	passengers.	The	risks	attended	to the	

operation	of	my	UAS	is	far	less	than	the	risk	levels	inherent	in	the

																											commercial	activities	outlined	in	14	C.F.R.	§	61,	et	seq.	Thus,	allowing

me	to	operate	my	UAS	meet	and	exceed	current	safety	levels	in	

relation	to	14	C.F.R.	§61.113	(a)	&	(b).	

D.	14	C.F.R.	91.119:	Minimum	Safe	Altitudes.	

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	UAS	will	never	operate	at	an	altitude	greater	

than	300	AGL;	safely	below	the	standard of	400	AGL.	I	will	however	

operate	my	UAS	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	UAS,	an	equivalent	or	higher	level	of	safety	will	be	

achieved.

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	UAS.	However,	as	a	safety precaution	I	
meticulously	inspect	my	UAS	before	and	after	each	flight	and	maintained	per	the	

manufacturer’s	aircraft/component,	maintenance,	overhaul, replacement,	

inspection,	and	life	limit	requirements.

In	summary,	Andres	Penso	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);	14	C.F.R.	§§	91.203(a)	and	(b);	14	C.F.R.	§	91.405	(a);	14

C.F.R.	§	91.407	(a)(1);	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 lightweight	

unmanned	aircraft	system	for	aerial	photography/Inspection/ included	but	not	

limited	to	the	following;	Business	Operations:	over	land, waterways,	and	oceans;

operation	over/in	nonrestricted	National	Parks, National	Forests,	flight	in	

nonnavigable	airspace,	using	nonintrusive recording	devices,	operation	in	otherwise	

unrestricted	U.S. States/Territories	for	aerial	videography/cinematography	for	

commercial operation	and	to	enhance	academic	community	awareness	for	those

individuals	and	companies	unfamiliar	with	the	geographical	layout	of such	areas.	

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	request	for	exemption	will	reduce	current	risk	levels	

and	thereby enhance	safety.	My	UAS	does	not	contain	potentially	explosive	fuel,	is

smaller,	lighter	and	more	maneuverable	than	conventional	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	airfields.	I	

have	been	analyzing	flight	information	and	will	compile	safety	protocols	and	the	

implementation	of	a	flight	operations	manual	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	no	personnel	on	

board	my	UAS	and	therefore	the	likelihood	of	death	or	serious	bodily	injury	is	

significantly	diminished.	The	operation	of	my	UAS,	weighing	less	than	7	pounds	and	

travelling	at	lower	speeds	within	limited	areas	will	provide	an	equivalent	level	of	

safety	as	that	achieved	under	current	FARs.	Accordingly	I	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,

Andres	Penso

8400	Rosebay	Lane	#203

Manassas,	VA	20109