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