September 16, 2015

Exemption No. 12859

Regulatory Docket No. FAA−2015−2087

Mr. Jacody Swor

265 Cedar Park Circle

Sarasota, FL 34242

Dear Mr. Swor:

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 8, 2015, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for an 

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

photography, videography, cinematography, inspection, and data collection.

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.

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. Jacody Swor 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. Jacody Swor 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 Phantom 3 

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.
8

This exemption terminates on September 30, 2017, unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

Sincerely,

/s/

John S. Duncan

Director, Flight Standards Service

Enclosures
Jacody Swor, Sarasota FL Section 333 Exemption Petition

May 8

th

, 2015

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. 45.23(b); 14 C.F.R. Part 21; 14 C.F.R. 61.113(a)&(b); 91.7(a); 91.9(b) (2); 91.103(b); 91.109; 

119.121; 91.151(a); 91.203(a)&(b); 91.405(a); 91.407(a) (1); 91.409(a) (2); 91.417(a)&(b) 

Dear Sir or Madam, 

Jacody Swor, hereby 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, Jacody Swor, an owner and operator of small unmanned aircraft, be 

exempted from the Federal Aviation Regulations (“FARs”) listed below so that I, Jacody Swor, may 

operate my small ultra lightweight unmanned aircraft system (“UAS”) commercially in airspace regulated 

by the Federal Aviation Administration (“FAA”). 

As described herein I, Jacody Swor, am a licensed Florida Realtor (SL#:3301773) as well as part UAS 

hobby team and business owner of Lift Off UAVs LLC; experienced in flying hobby mutlirotor UAS for 

recreational purposes since 2008. I have added a hobby grade DJI Phantom 3

1 UAS to my inventory with 

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

Operations: over land, waterways, and oceans; operations over/in nonrestricted National Parks, National 

Forests, flight in non-navigable 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. 

Under FL Senate Bill 766, § 934.54(d), under one specific exemption states;

..“By a person or an entity engaged in a business or profession licensed by the state, or by an agent, 

employee, or contractor thereof, if the drone is used only to perform reasonable tasks within the scope of 

practice or activities permitted under such person’s or entity’s license. However, this exception does not 

apply to a profession in which the licensee’s authorized scope of practice includes obtaining information 

about the identity, habits, conduct, movements, whereabouts, affiliations, associations, transactions, 

reputation, or character of any society, person, or group of persons.” 

With exemption I, Jacody Swor, will pilot the ultra light UAS within the scope of my real estate business

practices. Being licensed by the Department of Business and Professional Regulation and held responsible 

by the Florida Real Estate Commission, I Jacody Swor, Herein attest to holding accountability and good 

faith for public interest and commitment to my clients.

 

1

Serial Number
Jacody Swor, Sarasota FL Section 333 Exemption Petition

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 controls2to 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, benefit/stimulate tourism 

within Florida, general aerial photography, and to enhance real estate listing videos for homeowners who 

cannot afford expensive manned aircraft for the same purpose, all of which will promote local economic 

growth through increased employment and increased tax base. Both with public safety in mind by keeping 

heavier manned aircraft containing combustible fuel that that poses potential public hazard. 

I. Contact Information: 

Jacody Swor

265 Cedar Park Circle

Sarasota, FL 34242

Mobile: (941) 356-4545

Email: jswor19@gmail.com

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

Jacody Swor Requests Exemption are: 

a. 14 CFR 21; 

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

c. 14 CFR 61.113 (a) & (b);

d. 14 C.F.R. 91.7 (a); 14 C.F.R. 91.9 (b) (2);

 

2

Safety Protocols & Controls Inspire One User Manual in addition to Minimum VFR regulations
Jacody Swor, Sarasota FL Section 333 Exemption Petition

e. 14 C.F.R. 91.103;

f. 14 C.F.R. 91.109;

g. 14 C.F.R. 91.119;

h. 14 C.F.R. 91.121;

i. 14 C.F.R. 91.151 (a);

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

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

l. 14 CFR 407 (a) (1);

m. 14 CFR 409 (a) (2);

n. and, 14 CFR 417 (a) & (b).

III. The Extent of relief Jacody Swor seeks and the Reason He Seeks Such Relief:

I, Jacody Swor, 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, 

Jacody Swor, 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, Jacody Swor. 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 (3) 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 Mode3for aerial videography/photography. This is the safest, most reliable 

 

3

Positing Mode includes GPS, Vision Positioning Sensors, and Barometer for position hold, self leveling, altitude command, GPS, return home 

and dynamic return to home feature, and safety control to return home or land in the event of communication interruption between RC transmitter 

and UAS. See “Flight Mode” in Phantom 3 User Manual
Jacody Swor, Sarasota FL Section 333 Exemption Petition

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 (50-100) 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 (24) 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 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 3 Positing Mode includes 

GPS, Vision Positioning Sensors, and Barometer for position hold, self leveling, altitude

command, GPS, return home and dynamic return to home feature, and safety control to 

return home or land in the event of communication interruption between RC transmitter 

and UAS. See “Flight Mode” in DJI Phantom 3 User airspace system. My UAS, the DJI 

Phantom 3, used in hobby flight, has a demonstrable safety record and does not pose any 

threat to the general public or national security. 

IV. How Jacody Swor’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 
Jacody Swor, Sarasota FL Section 333 Exemption Petition

videography is cost prohibitive. Only large companies and high end Realtors or luxury 

homeowners can afford to absorb such expense, depriving average homeowners and 

lower budget Realtors from a valuable marketing tool. 

The public’s interest is additionally furthered by allowing small businesses in the tourism 

industry to afford the currently cost prohibitive aerial photography used by large 

international corporations. 

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 

Florida. 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 

videography without such risks. The public’s interest is furthered by minimizing 

ecological and crash threat by permitting aerial video/photo capture through my battery 

operated ultra light weight UAS's. Permitting me to immediately fly within national air 

space furthers economic growth. Granting my exemption request substantially furthers 

the economic impact within the State of Florida for companies looking to relocate or 

build in Florida as well as individuals looking to relocate for career advancement through 

academic and geographical awareness. Both of which serve as a stimulus to the 

community. 

V. Reasons Why Jacody Swor’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 3 pounds complete with a small ultra light weight 

high quality camera; 
Jacody Swor, Sarasota FL Section 333 Exemption Petition

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 1822 minutes per flight;

D. I land my UAS prior to 20% 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; 

G. My UAS has Failsafe RTH4, 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

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 Phantom 3 User 

Manual; 

L. I always obtain 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 follow the UAS manufacturer’s aircraft/component, maintenance; overhaul, 

replacement, inspection, and life limit requirements. 

P. The operating documents/manual will be accessible during UAS operations 

and made available upon request. 

My safety protocols6provide a level of safety equal to or exceeding existing 6 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 operate my UAS in specific areas away from mass populations. 

 

4

Phantom 3 User Manual protocols

5

Flight Environment Requirements Phantom 3 User Manual

6

Operating within Flight Limitations & Procedures outlined in User Manual, AR listed above, visual meteorological conditions (or VMC), & any Applicable FARs
Jacody Swor, Sarasota FL Section 333 Exemption Petition

● 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 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. 
Jacody Swor, Sarasota FL Section 333 Exemption Petition

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. 

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, twoinch 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, Jacody Swor, 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. 

Regarding UAS operational training, I have flown numerous practice flights in 

remote areas as a hobbyist simulating flights for future commercial use to gain 

familiarization with the characteristics of his UAS’ performance under different 

temperature and weather conditions. I further states that I practice computerized 

simulated flights daily to maintain adequate skills and response reflex time. In a 

supplemental request to the FAA, I request consideration of a 120 day temporary 

airman certificate in accordance with § 63.13, to allow myself time to obtain a 

private pilot certificate or to allow the FAA time to establish minimum UAS 

airman certification standards.Thus, allowing me to operate my UAS meet and 

exceed current safety levels in relation to 14 C.F.R. §61.113 (a) & (b). In 

addition, Grant of Exemption No. 11062 to Astraeus Aerial (Astraeus), the FAA 

determined that a PIC with a private pilot certificate operating the Astraeus UAS 

would not adversely affect operations in the NAS or present a hazard to persons 

or property on the ground.

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 
Jacody Swor, Sarasota FL Section 333 Exemption Petition

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 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, Jacody Swor 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 
Jacody Swor, Sarasota FL Section 333 Exemption Petition

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 large. 

Respectfully Submitted, 

Jacody Swor

265 Cedar Park Circle

Sarasota, FL 34242

Mobile: (941) 356-4545

Email: jswor19@gmail.com