September 11, 2015

Exemption No. 12821

Regulatory Docket No. FAA−2015−2592

Mr. Guillermo Soto

Photos by Soto, LLC

302 Lismore Terrace

Woodstock, GA 30189

Dear Mr. Soto:

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 June 2, 2015, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for an 

exemption. You requested to operate an unmanned aircraft system (UAS) to conduct 

videography, cinematography and photography services in the areas of building inspections, 

real estate, site surveys, aerial mapping, special events to include but not limited to weddings, 

private or public parties/events, geological surveying, environmental studies, wineries, 

outdoor recreational facilities and landscapes.

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 Phantom 3 Professional.

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 
2

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 

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. Guillermo Soto 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.

 

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

Conditions and Limitations

In this grant of exemption, Mr. Guillermo Soto 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.

1. Operations authorized by this grant of exemption are limited to the DJI Phantom 3 

Professional 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, 
4

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 

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.
5

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, 

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.
6

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. 

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.
7

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 

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.
8

This exemption terminates on September 30, 2017, unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

Sincerely,

/s/

John S. Duncan

Director, Flight Standards Service

Enclosures
Guillermo Soto’s Exemption Request Section 333 of the FAA Reform Act of the Federal Aviation Regulations

Page 1

June 2, 2015

Guillermo Soto

Photos by Soto, LLC

302 Lismore Terrace

Woodstock, GA 30189

(770) 380-9218

msoto@photosbysoto.com

U.S. Department of Transportation

Docket Management System

1200 New Jersey Ave. SE

Washington, DC 20590

RE: Exemption Request Section 333 of the FAA Reform Act of the Federal Aviation 

Regulations from 14 C.F.R. §§ Part 21; 45.23(b); 61.113(a)&(b); 91.7(a); 91.9(b) 

(2); 91.103(b); 91.109; 91.119; 91.151(a); 91.203(a)&(b); 91.405(a); 91.407(a) (1); 

91.409(a) (1) (2); 91.417(a)&(b)

Dear Sir or Madam: 

I, Guillermo Soto, 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, Guillermo 

Soto, an owner and operator of small unmanned aircrafts, be exempted from the 

Federal Aviation Regulations (“FARs”) listed below so that I, Guillermo Soto may 

operate my small light-weight unmanned aircraft system (“UAS”) commercially in 

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

I, Guillermo Soto, have over ten years of digital photography experience as well as over 

30 years in the field of Information Technology (IT). Using the DJI Phantom 31, I, 

Guillermo Soto, intend to provide videography, cinematography and photography 

services in the areas of building inspections, real estate, site surveys, aerial mapping, 

special events to include but not limited to weddings, private or public parties/events, 

geological surveying, environmental studies, wineries, outdoor recreational facilities and 

landscapes. 

 

1 Attachment – DJI Phantom 3 Professional Specifications
Guillermo Soto’s Exemption Request Section 333 of the FAA Reform Act of the Federal Aviation Regulations

Page 2

I, Guillermo Soto, am committed to safety with each flight. My, Guillermo Soto’s, 

exemption request would permit operation of a UAS(s) in areas away from the general 

public, airports, heliports and vehicular traffic for community videos, and within property 

boundaries for individual homeowner real estate listing videos/photos.

I. Contact Information:

Guillermo Soto, Owner

Photos by Soto, LLC

302 Lismore Terrace

Woodstock, GA 30189

770-380-9218

msoto@photosbysoto.com

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

Guillermo Soto Requests Exemption are: 

 14 CFR Part 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(b);

 14 C.F. R. 91.109;

 14 C.F.R. 91.119;

 14 C.F.R. 91.121;

 14 C.F.R. 91.203(a) & (b);

 14 C.F.R. 91.151(a);

 14 C.F.R. 91.405(a);

 14 CFR 407(a) (1);

 14 CFR 409(a) (1) & (a) (2); 

 14 CFR 417(a) & (b)

III. The Extent of Relief Guillermo Soto Seeks and the Reason He Seeks Such 

Relief:

I, Guillermo Soto, 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, Guillermo 

Soto, an owner and operator of small unmanned aircraft, be exempted from the Federal 

Aviation Regulations (“FARs”) listed below so that I may operate my small light weight 

unmanned aircraft system (“UAS”) commercially in airspace regulated by the Federal 

Aviation Administration (“FAA”). 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, Guillermo Soto’s, light-weight UAS meets the 

definition of “small unmanned aircraft” as defined in Section 331 and therefore the
Guillermo Soto’s Exemption Request Section 333 of the FAA Reform Act of the Federal Aviation Regulations

Page 3

integration of my light-weight UAS is expressly contemplated by the Reform Act. The 

Reform Act guides the Secretary in determining the types of UAS's 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, Guillermo 

Soto. My UAS utilizes four (4) counter-rotating propellers for balance, control and 

stability and is equipped with a GPS and auto return safety technology. Weighing less 

than five (5) pounds (far below the maximum 55 pound limit); including camera with 

gimbal.

I, Guillermo Soto, will operate the Phantom 3 in a safe manner, using the following 

checklists as well as operating procedures to determine that the aircraft is physically 

and electronically ready for safe flight and that permission from the property 

owner/representative is received:

Pre-flight Checklist:

 Survey the property for hazards, such as trees, utility poles and other elements 

that might compromise the flight then make a judgment as to whether to proceed.

 Check the weather for wind speed, cloud cover and any forecast changes that 

might adversely affect flight safety and performance.

 Examine the aircraft- looking at connections and searching for cracks and loose 

parts.

 Determine that the electronic elements are performing correctly (receiving more 

than 6 GPS signals along with calibration of the magnetic compass).

 Determine that the barometric altimeter reflects approximately 0 feet AGL.

 Following takeoff, hover at an altitude of approximately 10 feet to assure that the 

Home Point is solid. Then exercise all controls to confirm their functionality, if one 

of the controls is not functioning, the flight will be terminated immediately.

 Not fly over dense traffic or crowds.

 Give right-of-way to any manned aircraft.

 Stay clear of FAA controlled airspace at airports (generally a five nautical mile 

radius) as well as restricted and prohibited zones.

 Fly no higher than 400' and no further than 1000' from the Home Point,

recognizing that the primary responsibility is to safely keep the aircraft safely 

within VLOS.

 Stay clear of clouds and fog (500' vertically and 2,000' horizontally).

Post-flight Checklist:

 Inspect the Phantom 3 to determine its physical and electronic condition.

 Examine the aircraft- looking at connections and searching for cracks and loose 

parts.
Guillermo Soto’s Exemption Request Section 333 of the FAA Reform Act of the Federal Aviation Regulations

Page 4

IV. How Guillermo Soto’s Request Will Benefit the Public as A Whole:

Aerial videography and photography has been around for a long time through manned 

fixed wing aircraft and helicopters. For small budget companies and individuals, the 

expense of such aerial videography and photography is cost prohibitive. Only large 

companies and high-income individuals can afford to absorb such expense. Manned 

aircraft pose a threat to the public through potential catastrophic crashes resulting in a 

potential loss of life. My, Guillermo Soto’s, UAS poses no such threat since size and 

lack of combustible fuel alleviates any potential threat to the public. Congress has 

already proclaimed that it is in the public’s interest to integrate commercially flown UAS’ 

into the national airspace system, hence the passing of the Reform Act. My, Guillermo 

Soto, light- weight UAS is battery powered and creates no emissions that can harm the 

environment. 

V. Reasons Why Guillermo Soto’s Exemption Will Not Adversely Affect Safety

Or How the Exemption Will Provide a Level of Safety At Least Equal To Existing

Rule:

My, Guillermo Soto’s, exemption will not adversely affect safety. 

• My UAS weighs less than 5 pounds complete with a small light- weight high 

definition (HD) camera.

• I only operate my UAS below 400 feet (well within the 400 foot permissible 

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

• I land my UAS prior to manufacturer recommended minimum level of battery 

power.

• I pilot my UAS through remote control/FPV only by line of sight.

• My UAS has GPS with a flight safety feature whereby it hovers and then slowly 

lands if communication with the remote control pilot is lost.

• 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 protocol, during which safety 

carries primary importance.

• I always obtain all necessary permissions prior to operation.

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

A. 14 C.F.R. § 21, 14 C.F.R. § 91 and 91.151: 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, 

Guillermo Soto’s, 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, 
Guillermo Soto’s Exemption Request Section 333 of the FAA Reform Act of the Federal Aviation Regulations

Page 5

speed, maneuverability and proximity to areas such as airports and dense 

populations. My, Guillermo Soto’s, current and projected UAS’ 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, 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. 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 insofar as my UAS 

utilizes electronic global positioning systems with a barometric sensor.

14 C.F.R. § 91.151(a) with the condition that the PIC does not begin a flight 

unless (considering wind and forecast weather conditions) there is enough power 

to fly to the first point of intended landing and, assuming normal cruising speed, 

land the UA with 30% battery power remaining. 

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, Guillermo Soto.

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, Guillermo Soto, UAS is, by definition, unmanned. 

Therefore does 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. Regardless, I, 

Guillermo Soto, will mark the UAS 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, Guillermo Soto, the pilot, 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 noncommercial operations. I, Guillermo Soto, can achieve an equivalent level of 

safety as achieved by current Regulations because my UAS does not carry any 
Guillermo Soto’s Exemption Request Section 333 of the FAA Reform Act of the Federal Aviation Regulations

Page 6

pilots or passengers. Further, while helpful, a pilot license will not ensure remote 

control piloting skills. 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, Guillermo Soto, to operate my UAS in a manner 

that meets and exceeds 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 400 AGL; safely below the standard 

of 400 AGL. I, Guillermo Soto, 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) (1) & (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, Guillermo Soto’s, UAS. However, as a safety 

precaution, I, Guillermo Soto, inspect my UAS before and after each flight.

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 permit exemption from Part 21 because my, 

Guillermo Soto’s, UAS 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 UAS’ from the 

airworthiness certificate requirement in consideration of the weight, size, speed, 

maneuverability and proximity to areas such as airports and dense populations. My

UAS meets or exceeds 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 

pilots or passengers, and given the size of the UAS’, this 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, 
Guillermo Soto’s Exemption Request Section 333 of the FAA Reform Act of the Federal Aviation Regulations

Page 7

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, Guillermo Soto 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. § 91.119; 

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) (1); and, 14 C.F.R. § 91.417 (a) & (b) 

I, Guillermo Soto, am requesting this exemption for the purposes of aerial photography,

cinematography, videography, inspections and other flight operations. The reason for 

such a general and broad based request is that I, Guillermo Soto, wish to utilize a 

business strategy that capitalizes on opportunities as they may arise in the future. My, 

Guillermo Soto’s, business model is based on the idea of offering ad hoc small UAS

services to individuals or companies who wish to employ these services as a safe, 

effective, and legal option to enhance their business or hobby. 

Granting my, Guillermo Soto’s, request for exemption will reduce current risk levels and 

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

smaller, lighter and more maneuverable than conventional video and photographic 

aircraft. Further, I operate at lower altitudes and in controlled airspace eliminating 

potential public risk flying to and from established air fields. There are no personnel on 

board my, Guillermo Soto’s, UAS and therefore the likelihood of death or serious bodily 

injury is significantly diminished. My, Guillermo Soto’s, operation of my UAS, weighing 

less than 5 pounds and travelling at lower speeds within limited areas will provide an 

equivalent level of safety as that achieved under current FARs. Accordingly I, Guillermo 

Soto, respectfully request that the FAA grant my exemption. 

Respectfully submitted,

Guillermo Soto, Owner

Photos by Soto, LLC

302 Lismore Terrace

Woodstock, GA 30189

Attachment:

DJI Phantom 3 Professional Specifications