[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 35 (Monday, February 23, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 9543-9590]
[FR Doc No: 2015-03544]

Vol. 80

Monday,

No. 35

February 23, 2015

Part III

Department of Transportation

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Federal Aviation Administration

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

14 CFR Parts 21, 43, 45, et al.

Operation and Certification of Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems;
Proposed Rule

Federal Register / Vol. 80 , No. 35 / Monday, February 23, 2015 /
Proposed Rules

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Parts 21, 43, 45, 47, 61, 91, 101, 107, and 183

[Docket No.: FAA-2015-0150; Notice No. 15-01]
RIN 2120-AJ60

Operation and Certification of Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The FAA is proposing to amend its regulations to adopt
specific rules to allow the operation of small unmanned aircraft
systems in the National Airspace System. These changes would address
the operation of unmanned aircraft systems, certification of their
operators, registration, and display of registration markings. The
proposed rule would also find that airworthiness certification is not
required for small unmanned aircraft system operations that would be
subject to this proposed rule. Lastly, the proposed rule would prohibit
model aircraft from endangering the safety of the National Airspace
System.

DATES: Send comments on or before April 24, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by docket number FAA-2015-0150
using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30; U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room
W12-140, West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket
Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Privacy: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments
from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts
these comments, without edit, including any personal information the
commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the system
of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
www.dot.gov/privacy.
    Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at
http://www.regulations.gov at any time. Follow the online instructions
for accessing the docket or go to the Docket Operations in Room W12-140
of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical questions concerning
this action, contact Lance Nuckolls, Office of Aviation Safety,
Unmanned Aircraft Systems Integration Office, AFS-80, Federal Aviation
Administration, 490 L'Enfant Plaza East, SW., Suite 3200, Washington,
DC 20024; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    For legal questions concerning this action, contact Alex Zektser,
Office of Chief Counsel, International Law, Legislation, and
Regulations Division, AGC-220, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) 267-
3073; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in the
FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (Public Law 112-95). Section
333 of Public Law 112-95 directs the Secretary of Transportation \1\ to
determine whether ``certain unmanned aircraft systems may operate
safely in the national airspace system.'' If the Secretary determines,
pursuant to section 333, that certain unmanned aircraft systems may
operate safely in the national airspace system, then the Secretary must
``establish requirements for the safe operation of such aircraft
systems in the national airspace system.'' \2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The primary authority for this rulemaking is based on
section 333 of Public Law 112-95 (Feb. 14, 2012). In addition, this
rulemaking also relies on FAA statutory authorities. Thus, for the
purposes of this rulemaking, the terms ``FAA,'' ``the agency,''
``DOT,'' and ``the Secretary,'' are used synonymously throughout
this document.
    \2\ Public Law 112-95, section 333(c). In addition, Public Law
112-95, section 332(b)(1) requires the Secretary to issue ``a final
rule on small unmanned aircraft systems that will allow for civil
operation of such systems in the national airspace system, to the
extent the systems do not meet the requirements for expedited
operational authorization under sections 333 of [Pub. L. 112-95].''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This rulemaking is also promulgated pursuant to 49 U.S.C.
40103(b)(1) and (2), which charge the FAA with issuing regulations: (1)
To ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace; and
(2) to govern the flight of aircraft for purposes of navigating,
protecting and identifying aircraft, and protecting individuals and
property on the ground. In addition, 49 U.S.C. 44701(a)(5), charges the
FAA with prescribing regulations that the FAA finds necessary for
safety in air commerce and national security.
    Finally, the model-aircraft component of this rulemaking
incorporates the statutory mandate in section 336(b) that preserves the
FAA's authority, under 49 U.S.C. 40103(b) and 44701(a)(5), to pursue
enforcement ``against persons operating model aircraft who endanger the
safety of the national airspace system.''

List of Abbreviations and Acronyms Frequently Used in This Document

    AC Advisory Circular
    AGL Above Ground Level
    ACR Airman Certification Representative
    ARC Aviation Rulemaking Committee
    ATC Air Traffic Control
    CAFTA-DR Dominican Republic-Central America-United States Free
Trade Agreement
    CAR Civil Air Regulation
    CFI Certified Flight Instructor
    CFR Code of Federal Regulations
    COA Certificate of Waiver or Authorization
    DPE Designated Pilot Examiner
    FR Federal Register
    FSDO Flight Standards District Office
    ICAO International Civil Aviation Organization
    NAFTA North American Free Trade Agreement
    NAS National Airspace System
    NOTAM Notice to Airmen
    NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
    NTSB National Transportation Safety Board
    PIC Pilot in Command
    Pub. L. Public Law
    PMA Parts Manufacturer Approval
    TFR Temporary Flight Restriction
    TSA Transportation Security Administration
    TSO Technical Standard Order
    UAS Unmanned Aircraft System
    U.S.C. United States Code

Table of Contents

I. Executive Summary
    A. Purpose of the Regulatory Action
    B. Summary of the Major Provisions of the Regulatory Action
    C. Costs and Benefits
II. Background
    A. Analysis of Public Risk Posed by Small UAS Operations
    B. Current Statutory and Regulatory Structure Governing Small
UAS
    C. Integrating Small UAS Operations Into the NAS
III. Discussion of the Proposal
    A. Incremental Approach and Privacy
    B. Applicability
    1. Air Carrier Operations
    2. External Load and Towing Operations
    3. International Operations
    4. Foreign-Owned Aircraft That Are Ineligible for U.S.
Registration

    5. Public Aircraft Operations
    6. Model Aircraft
    7. Moored Balloons, Kites, Amateur Rockets, and Unmanned Free
Balloons
    C. Definitions
    1. Control Station
    2. Corrective Lenses
    3. Operator and Visual Observer
    4. Small Unmanned Aircraft
    5. Small Unmanned Aircraft System (small UAS)
    6. Unmanned Aircraft
    D. Operating Rules
    1. Micro UAS Classification
    2. Operator and Visual Observer
    i. Operator
    ii. Visual Observer
    3. See-and-Avoid and Visibility Requirements
    i. See-and-Avoid
    ii. Additional Visibility Requirements
    iii. Yielding Right of Way
    4. Containment and Loss of Positive Control
    i. Confined Area of Operation Boundaries
    ii. Mitigating Loss-of-Positive-Control Risk
    5. Limitations on Operations in Certain Airspace
    i. Controlled Airspace
    ii. Prohibited or Restricted Areas
    iii. Areas Designated by Notice to Airmen
    6. Airworthiness, Inspection, Maintenance, and Airworthiness
Directives
    i. Inspections and Maintenance
    ii. Airworthiness Directives
    7. Miscellaneous Operating Provisions
    i. Careless or Reckless Operation
    ii. Drug and Alcohol Prohibition
    iii. Medical Conditions
    iv. Sufficient Power for the Small UAS
    v. Registration and Marking
    E. Operator Certificate
    1. Applicability
    2. Unmanned Aircraft Operator Certificate--Eligibility &
Issuance
    i. Minimum Age
    ii. English Language Proficiency
    iii. Pilot Qualification
    a. Flight Proficiency and Aeronautical Experience
    b. Initial Aeronautical Knowledge Test
    c. Areas of Knowledge Tested on the Initial Knowledge Test
    d. Administration of the Initial Knowledge Test
    e. Recurrent Aeronautical Knowledge Test
    i. General Requirement and Administration of the Recurrent
Knowledge Test
    ii. Recurrent Test Areas of Knowledge
    iv. Issuance of an Unmanned Aircraft Operator Certificate With
Small UAS Rating
    v. Not Requiring an Airman Medical Certificate
    4. Military Equivalency
    5. Unmanned Aircraft Operator Certificate: Denial, Revocation,
Suspension, Amendment, and Surrender
    i. Transportation Security Administration Vetting and Positive
Identification
    ii. Drugs and Alcohol Violations
    iii. Change of Name
    iv. Change of Address
    v. Voluntary Surrender of Certificate
    F. Registration
    G. Marking
    1. Display of Registration Number
    2. Marking of Products and Articles
    H. Fraud and False Statements
    I. Oversight
    1. Inspection, Testing, and Demonstration of Compliance
    2. Accident Reporting
    J. Section 333 Statutory Findings
    1. Hazard to Users of the NAS or the Public
    2. National Security
    3. Airworthiness Certification
IV. Regulatory Notices and Analyses
    A. Regulatory Evaluation
    1. Total Benefits and Costs of This Rule
    2. Who is potentially affected by this Rule?
    4. Benefit Summary
    5. Cost Summary
    B. Initial Regulatory Flexibility Determination (IRFA)
    1. Description of Reasons the Agency Is Considering the Action
    2. Statement of the Legal Basis and Objectives for the Proposed
Rule
    3. Description of the Recordkeeping and Other Compliance
Requirements of the Proposed Rule
    4. All Federal Rules That May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict
With the Proposed Rule
    5. Description and an Estimated Number of Small Entities To
Which the Proposed Rule Will Apply
    6. Alternatives Considered
    C. International Trade Impact Assessment
    D. Unfunded Mandates Assessment
    E. Paperwork Reduction Act
    1. Obtaining an Unmanned Aircraft Operator Certificate With a
Small UAS Rating
    2. Registering a Small Unmanned Aircraft
    3. Accident Reporting
    F. International Compatibility and Cooperation
    G. Environmental Analysis
    H. Regulations Affecting Intrastate Aviation in Alaska
V. Executive Order Determinations
    A. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
    B. Executive Order 13211, Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
VI. Additional Information
    A. Comments Invited
    B. Availability of Rulemaking Documents

I. Executive Summary

A. Purpose of the Regulatory Action

    This rulemaking proposes operating requirements to allow small
unmanned aircraft systems (small UAS) to operate for non-hobby or non-
recreational purposes. A small UAS consists of a small unmanned
aircraft (which, as defined by statute, is an unmanned aircraft
weighing less than 55 pounds \3\) and equipment necessary for the safe
and efficient operation of that aircraft. The FAA has accommodated non-
recreational small UAS use through various mechanisms, such as special
airworthiness certificates, exemptions, and certificates of waiver or
authorization (COA). This proposed rule would be the next phase of
integrating small UAS into the NAS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Public Law 112-95, sec. 331(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The following are examples of possible small UAS operations that
could be conducted under this proposed framework:
     Crop monitoring/inspection;
     Research and development;
     Educational/academic uses;
     Power-line/pipeline inspection in hilly or mountainous
terrain;
     Antenna inspections;
     Aiding certain rescue operations such as locating snow
avalanche victims;
     Bridge inspections;
     Aerial photography; and
     Wildlife nesting area evaluations.
    Because of the potential societally beneficial applications of
small UAS, the FAA has been seeking to incorporate the operation of
these systems into the national airspace system (NAS) since 2008. In
April 2008, the FAA chartered the small UAS Aviation Rulemaking
Committee (ARC). In April 2009, the ARC provided the FAA with
recommendations on how small UAS could be safely integrated into the
NAS. Since that time, the FAA has been working on a rulemaking to
incorporate small UAS operations into the NAS.
    In 2012, Congress passed the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of
2012 (Pub. L. 112-95). Section 333 of Public Law 112-95 directed the
Secretary to determine whether UAS operations posing the least amount
of public risk and no threat to national security could safely be
operated in the NAS and if so, to establish requirements for the safe
operation of these systems in the NAS, prior to completion of the UAS
comprehensive plan and rulemakings required by section 332 of Public
Law 112-95. As part of its ongoing efforts to integrate UAS operations
in the NAS in accordance with section 332, and as authorized by section
333 of Public Law 112-95, the FAA is proposing to amend its regulations
to adopt specific rules for the operation of small UAS in the NAS.
    Based on our experience with the certification, exemption, and COA
process, the FAA has developed the framework proposed in this rule to
enable certain small UAS operations to commence upon adoption of the
final rule and accommodate technologies as they evolve and mature. This
proposed framework would allow small UAS operations for many different
non-recreational purposes, such as the ones discussed previously,
without requiring airworthiness certification, exemption, or a COA.

B. Summary of the Major Provisions of the Regulatory Action

    Specifically, the FAA is proposing to add a new part 107 to Title
14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) to allow for routine civil
operation of small UAS in the NAS and to provide safety rules for those
operations. Consistent with the statutory definition, the proposed rule
defines small UAS as those UAS weighing less than 55 pounds. To
mitigate risk, the proposed rule would limit small UAS to daylight-only
operations, confined areas of operation, and visual-line-of-sight
operations. This proposed rule also addresses aircraft registration and
marking, NAS operations, operator certification, visual observer
requirements, and operational limits in order to maintain the safety of
the NAS and ensure that they do not pose a threat to national security.
Below is a summary of the major provisions of the proposed rule.

            Summary of Major Provisions of Proposed Part 107
------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operational Limitations......   Unmanned aircraft must weigh
                                less than 55 lbs. (25 kg).
                                Visual line-of-sight (VLOS)
                                only; the unmanned aircraft must remain
                                within VLOS of the operator or visual
                                observer.
                                At all times the small unmanned
                                aircraft must remain close enough to the
                                operator for the operator to be capable
                                of seeing the aircraft with vision
                                unaided by any device other than
                                corrective lenses.
                                Small unmanned aircraft may not
                                operate over any persons not directly
                                involved in the operation.
                                Daylight-only operations
                                (official sunrise to official sunset,
                                local time).
                                Must yield right-of-way to other
                                aircraft, manned or unmanned.
                                May use visual observer (VO) but
                                not required.
                                First-person view camera cannot
                                satisfy ``see-and-avoid'' requirement
                                but can be used as long as requirement
                                is satisfied in other ways.
                                Maximum airspeed of 100 mph (87
                                knots).
                                Maximum altitude of 500 feet
                                above ground level.
                                Minimum weather visibility of 3
                                miles from control station.
                                No operations are allowed in
                                Class A (18,000 feet & above) airspace.
                                Operations in Class B, C, D and
                                E airspace are allowed with the required
                                ATC permission.
                                Operations in Class G airspace
                                are allowed without ATC permission
                                No person may act as an operator
                                or VO for more than one unmanned
                                aircraft operation at one time.
                                No operations from a moving
                                vehicle or aircraft, except from a
                                watercraft on the water.
                                No careless or reckless
                                operations.
                                Requires preflight inspection by
                                the operator.
                                A person may not operate a small
                                unmanned aircraft if he or she knows or
                                has reason to know of any physical or
                                mental condition that would interfere
                                with the safe operation of a small UAS.
                                Proposes a microUAS category
                                that would allow operations in Class G
                                airspace, over people not involved in
                                the operation, and would require airman
                                to self-certify that they are familiar
                                with the aeronautical knowledge testing
                                areas.
Operator Certification and      Pilots of a small UAS would be
 Responsibilities.              considered ``operators''.
                                Operators would be required to:
                                  [cir] Pass an initial aeronautical
                                   knowledge test at an FAA-approved
                                   knowledge testing center.
                                  [cir] Be vetted by the Transportation
                                   Security Administration.
                                  [cir] Obtain an unmanned aircraft
                                   operator certificate with a small UAS
                                   rating (like existing pilot airman
                                   certificates, never expires).
                                  [cir] Pass a recurrent aeronautical
                                   knowledge test every 24 months.
                                  [cir] Be at least 17 years old.
                                  [cir] Make available to the FAA, upon
                                   request, the small UAS for inspection
                                   or testing, and any associated
                                   documents/records required to be kept
                                   under the proposed rule.
                                  [cir] Report an accident to the FAA
                                   within 10 days of any operation that
                                   results in injury or property damage.
                                  [cir] Conduct a preflight inspection,
                                   to include specific aircraft and
                                   control station systems checks, to
                                   ensure the small UAS is safe for
                                   operation.
Aircraft Requirements........   FAA airworthiness certification
                                not required. However, operator must
                                maintain a small UAS in condition for
                                safe operation and prior to flight must
                                inspect the UAS to ensure that it is in
                                a condition for safe operation. Aircraft
                                Registration required (same requirements
                                that apply to all other aircraft).
                                Aircraft markings required (same
                                requirements that apply to all other
                                aircraft). If aircraft is too small to
                                display markings in standard size, then
                                the aircraft simply needs to display
                                markings in the largest practicable
                                manner.
Model Aircraft...............   Proposed rule would not apply to
                                model aircraft that satisfy all of the
                                criteria specified in section 336 of
                                Public Law 112-95.
                                The proposed rule would codify
                                the FAA's enforcement authority in part
                                101 by prohibiting model aircraft
                                operators from endangering the safety of
                                the NAS.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Operator Certification: Under the proposed rule, the person who
manipulates the flight controls of a small UAS would be defined as an
``operator.'' A small UAS operator would be required to pass an
aeronautical knowledge test and obtain an unmanned aircraft operator
certificate with a small UAS rating from the FAA before operating a
small UAS. In order to maintain his or her operator certification, the
operator would be

required to pass recurrent knowledge tests every 24 months subsequent
to the initial knowledge test. These tests would be created by the FAA
and administered by FAA-approved knowledge testing centers. Although a
specific distant vision acuity standard is not being proposed, this
proposed rule would require the operator to keep the small unmanned
aircraft close enough to the control station to be capable of seeing
that aircraft through his or her unaided (except for glasses or contact
lenses) visual line of sight. The operator would also be required to
actually maintain visual line of sight of the small unmanned aircraft
if a visual observer is not used.
    Visual Observer: Under the proposed rule, an operator would not be
required to work with a visual observer, but a visual observer could be
used to assist the operator with the proposed visual-line-of-sight and
see-and-avoid requirements by maintaining constant visual contact with
the small unmanned aircraft in place of the operator. While an operator
would always be required to have the capability for visual line of
sight of the small unmanned aircraft, this proposed rule would not
require the operator to exercise this capability if he or she is
augmented by at least one visual observer. No certification
requirements are being proposed for visual observers. A small UAS
operation would not be limited in the number of visual observers
involved in the operation, but the operator and visual observer(s) must
remain situated such that the operator and any visual observer(s) are
all able to view the aircraft at any given time. The operator and
visual observer(s) would be permitted to communicate by radio or other
communication-assisting device, so they would not need to remain in
close enough physical proximity to allow for unassisted oral
communication.
    Since the operator and any visual observers would be required to be
in a position to maintain or achieve visual line of sight with the
aircraft at all times, the proposed rule would effectively prohibit a
relay or ``daisy-chain'' formation of multiple visual observers by
requiring that the operator must always be capable of seeing the small
unmanned aircraft. Such arrangements would potentially expand the area
of a small UAS operation and pose an increased public risk if there is
a loss of aircraft control.
    Operational Scope: A small UAS operator would be required to see
and avoid all other users of the NAS in the area in which the small UAS
is operating. The proposed rule contains operating restrictions
designed to help ensure that the operator is able to yield right-of-way
to other aircraft at all times.
    The proposed rule would limit the exposure of small unmanned
aircraft to other users of the NAS by restricting small UAS operations
in controlled airspace. Specifically, small UAS would be prohibited
from operating in Class A airspace, and would require prior permission
from Air Traffic Control to operate in Class B, C, or D airspace, or
within the lateral boundaries of the surface area of Class E airspace
designated for an airport. The risk of collision with other aircraft
would be further reduced by limiting small UAS operations to a maximum
airspeed of 87 knots (100 mph) and a maximum altitude of 500 feet above
ground.
    Further, in order to enable maximum visibility for small UAS
operation, the proposed rule would restrict small UAS to daylight-only
operations (sunrise to sunset), and impose a minimum weather-visibility
of 3 statute miles (5 kilometers) from the small UAS control station.
    Aircraft Maintenance: Under the proposed rule, the operator of a
small UAS would be required to conduct a preflight inspection before
each flight operation, and determine that the small UAS (aircraft,
control station, launch and recovery equipment, etc.) is safe for
operation.
    Airworthiness: Pursuant to section 333(b)(2) of Public Law 112-95,
the Secretary has determined that small UAS subject to this proposed
rule would not require airworthiness certification because the safety
concerns associated with small UAS operation would be mitigated by the
other provisions of this proposed rule. Rather, this proposed rule
would require the operator to ensure that the small UAS is in a
condition for safe operation by conducting an inspection prior to each
flight.
    Registration and Marking: This proposed rule would apply to small
unmanned aircraft the current registration requirements that apply to
all aircraft. Once a small unmanned aircraft is registered, this
proposed rule would require that aircraft to display its registration
marking in a manner similar to what is currently required of all
aircraft.

C. Costs and Benefits

    This proposed rule reflects the fact that technological advances in
small UAS have led to a developing commercial market for their uses by
providing a safe operating environment for them and for other aircraft
in the NAS. In time, the FAA anticipates that the proposed rule would
provide an opportunity to substitute small UAS operations for some
higher risk manned flights, such as inspecting towers, bridges, or
other structures. The use of small unmanned aircraft would avert
potential fatalities and injuries to those in the aircraft and on the
ground. It would also lead to more efficient methods of performing
certain commercial tasks that are currently performed by other methods.
The FAA has not quantified the benefits for this proposed rulemaking
because we lack sufficient data. The FAA invites commenters to provide
data that could be used to quantify the benefits of this proposed rule.
    For any commercial operation occurring because this rule is
enacted, the operator/owner of that small UAS will have determined the
expected revenue stream of the flights exceeds the cost of the flights
operation. In each such case this rule helps enable new markets to
develop.
    The costs are shown in the table below.

            Total and Present Value Cost Summary by Provision
                   [Thousands of current year dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               7% P.V.
              Type of cost                Total costs (000)     (000)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicant/small UAS operator:             .................  ...........
    Travel Expense......................             $151.7       $125.9
    Knowledge Test Fees.................            2,548.6      2,114.2
    Positive Identification of the                    434.3        383.7
     Applicant Fee......................
Owner:                                    .................  ...........
    Small UAS Registration Fee..........               85.7         70.0
Time Resource Opportunity Costs:          .................  ...........

    Applicants Travel Time..............              296.1        245.3
    Knowledge Test Application..........              108.9         90.2
    Physical Capability Certification...               20.0         17.7
    Knowledge Test Time.................            1,307.1      1,082.9
    Small UAS Registration Form.........              220.5        179.7
    Change of Name or Address Form......               14.9         12.3
    Knowledge Test Report...............              154.9        128.5
    Pre-flight Inspection...............     Not quantified  ...........
    Accident Reporting..................       Minimal cost  ...........
Government Costs:                         .................  ...........
    TSA Security Vetting................            1,026.5        906.9
    FAA--sUAS Operating Certificate.....               39.6         35.0
    FAA--Registration...................              394.3        321.8
                                         -------------------------------
        Total Costs.....................            6,803.1      5,714.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Details may not add to row or column totals due to rounding.

II. Background

    This NPRM addresses the operation, airman certification, and
registration of civil small UAS.
    A small UAS consists of a small unmanned aircraft and associated
elements that are necessary for the safe and efficient operation of
that aircraft in the NAS. Associated elements that are necessary for
the safe and efficient operation of the aircraft include the interface
that is used to control the small unmanned aircraft (known as a control
station) and communication links between the control station and the
small unmanned aircraft. A small unmanned aircraft is defined by
statute as ``an unmanned aircraft weighing less than 55 pounds.'' \4\
Due to the size of a small unmanned aircraft, the FAA envisions
considerable potential business and non-business applications,
particularly in areas that are hard to reach for a manned aircraft.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Sec. 331(6) of Public Law 112-95.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The following are examples of possible small UAS operations that
could be conducted under this proposed framework:
     Crop monitoring/inspection;
     Research and development;
     Educational/academic uses;
     Power-line/pipeline inspection in hilly or mountainous
terrain;
     Antenna inspections;
     Aiding certain rescue operations such as locating snow
avalanche victims;
     Bridge inspections;
     Aerial photography; and
     Wildlife nesting area evaluations.
    The following sections discuss: (1) The public risk associated with
small UAS operations; (2) the current legal framework governing small
UAS operations; and (3) the FAA's ongoing efforts to incorporate small
UAS operations into the NAS.

A. Analysis of Public Risk Posed by Small UAS Operations

    Small UAS operations pose risk considerations that are different
from the risk considerations associated with manned-aircraft
operations. On one hand, certain operations of a small unmanned
aircraft, discussed more fully in section III.D of this preamble, have
the potential to pose significantly less risk to persons and property
than comparable operations of a manned aircraft. The typical total
takeoff weight of a general aviation aircraft is between 1,300 and
6,000 pounds. By contrast, the total takeoff weight of a small unmanned
aircraft is less than 55 pounds. Consequently, because a small unmanned
aircraft is significantly lighter than a manned aircraft, in the event
of a mishap, the small unmanned aircraft would pose significantly less
risk to persons and property on the ground. As such, a small UAS
operation whose parameters are well defined so it does not pose a
significant risk to other aircraft would also pose a smaller overall
public risk or threat to national security than the operation of a
manned aircraft.
    However, even though small UAS operations have the potential to
pose a lower level of public risk in certain types of operations, the
unmanned nature of the small UAS operations raises two unique safety
concerns that are not present in manned-aircraft operations. The first
safety concern is whether the person operating the small unmanned
aircraft, who would be physically separated from that aircraft during
flight, would have the ability to see manned aircraft in the air in
time to prevent a mid-air collision between the small unmanned aircraft
and another aircraft. As discussed in more detail below, the FAA's
regulations currently require each person operating an aircraft to
maintain vigilance ``so as to see and avoid other aircraft.'' \5\ This
is one of the fundamental principles for collision avoidance in the
NAS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 14 CFR 91.113(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For manned-aircraft operations, ``see and avoid'' is the
responsibility of persons on board an aircraft. By contrast, small
unmanned aircraft operations have no human beings physically on the
unmanned aircraft with the same visual perspective and the ability to
see other aircraft in the manner of a manned-aircraft pilot. Thus, the
challenge for small unmanned aircraft operations is to ensure that the
person operating the small unmanned aircraft is able to see and avoid
other aircraft.
    In considering this issue, the FAA examined to what extent existing
technology could provide a solution to this problem. The FAA notes that
advances in technologies that use ground-based radar and aircraft
sensors to detect the reply signals from aircraft ATC transponders have
provided significant improvement in the ability to detect other
aircraft in close proximity to each other. The Traffic Collision
Avoidance System also has the ability to provide guidance to flight
crews to maneuver appropriately to avoid a mid-air collision. Both of
these technologies have done an excellent job in reducing the mid-air
collision rate between manned aircraft. Unfortunately, the equipment
required to utilize these widely available technologies is

currently too large and heavy to be used in small UAS operations. Until
this equipment is miniaturized to the extent necessary to make it
viable for use in small UAS operations, existing technology does not
appear to provide a way to resolve the ``see and avoid'' problem with
small UAS operations without maintaining human visual contact with the
small unmanned aircraft during flight.
    The second safety concern with small UAS operations is the
possibility that, during flight, the person operating the small UAS may
become unable to use the control interface to operate the small
unmanned aircraft due to a failure of the control link between the
aircraft and the operator's control station. This is known as a loss of
positive control. This situation may result from a system failure or
because the aircraft has been flown beyond the signal range or in an
area where control link communication between the aircraft and the
control station is interrupted. A small unmanned aircraft whose flight
is unable to be directly controlled could pose a significant risk to
persons, property, or other aircraft.

B. Current Statutory and Regulatory Structure Governing Small UAS

    Due to the lack of an onboard pilot, small unmanned aircraft are
unable to see and avoid other aircraft in the NAS. Therefore, small UAS
operations conflict with the FAA's current operating regulations
codified in 14 CFR part 91 that apply to general aviation.
Specifically, at the heart of the part 91 operating regulations is
Sec.  91.113(b), which requires each person operating an aircraft to
maintain vigilance ``so as to see and avoid other aircraft.''
    The FAA created this requirement in a 1968 rulemaking that combined
two previous aviation regulatory provisions, Civil Air Regulations
(CAR) Sec. Sec.  60.13(c) and 60.30.\6\ Both of the provisions that
were combined to create the ``see and avoid'' requirement of Sec.
91.113(b) were intended to address aircraft collision-awareness
problems by requiring that a pilot on board the aircraft look out of
the aircraft during flight to observe whether other aircraft are on a
collision path with his or her aircraft. Those provisions did not
contemplate the use of technology to substitute for the human vision of
a pilot on board the aircraft. Similarly, there is no evidence that
those provisions contemplated a pilot fulfilling his or her ``see and
avoid'' responsibilities from outside the aircraft. To the contrary,
CAR section 60.13(c) stated that one of the problems it intended to
address was ``preoccupation by the pilot with cockpit duties,'' which
indicates that the regulation contemplated the presence of a pilot on
board the aircraft.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Pilot Vigilance, 33 FR 10505 (July 24, 1968).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Because the regulations that resulted in the see-and-avoid
requirement of Sec.  91.113(b) did not contemplate that this
requirement could be complied with by a pilot who is outside the
aircraft, Sec.  91.113(b) currently requires an aircraft pilot to have
the perspective of being inside the aircraft as that aircraft is moving
in order to see and avoid other aircraft. Since the operator of a small
UAS does not have this perspective, operation of a small UAS could not
meet the see and avoid requirement of Sec.  91.113(b) at this time.
    In addition to currently being prohibited by Sec.  91.113(b), there
are also statutory considerations that apply to small UAS operations.
Specifically, even though a small UAS is different from a manned
aircraft, the operation of a small UAS still involves the operation of
an aircraft. This is because the FAA's statute defines an ``aircraft''
as ``any contrivance invented, used, or designed to navigate or fly in
the air.'' 49 U.S.C. 40102(a)(6). Since a small unmanned aircraft is a
contrivance that is invented, used, and designed to fly in the air, a
small unmanned aircraft is an aircraft for purposes of the FAA's
statutes.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Public Law 112-95 reaffirmed that an unmanned aircraft is
indeed an aircraft by defining an unmanned aircraft as ``an aircraft
that is operated without the possibility of direct human
intervention from within or on the aircraft.'' Sec. 331(8), Public
Law 112-95 (emphasis added).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Because a small UAS involves the operation of an ``aircraft,'' this
triggers the FAA's registration and certification statutory
requirements. Specifically, subject to certain exceptions, a person may
not operate a civil aircraft that is not registered. 49 U.S.C.
44101(a). In addition, a person may not operate a civil aircraft in air
commerce without an airworthiness certificate. 49 U.S.C. 44711(a)(1).
Finally, a person may not serve in any capacity as an airman on a civil
aircraft being operated in air commerce without an airman certificate.
49 U.S.C. 44711(a)(2)(A).\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The statutes also impose other requirements that are beyond
the scope of this rulemaking. For example, 49 U.S.C. 44711(a)(4)
prohibits a person from operating as an air carrier without an air-
carrier operating certificate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The term ``air commerce,'' as used in the FAA's statutes, is
defined broadly to include ``the operation of aircraft within the
limits of a Federal airway, or the operation of aircraft that directly
affects, or may endanger safety in foreign or interstate air
commerce.'' 49 U.S.C. 40102(a)(3). Because of this broad definition,
the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) has held that ``any use
of an aircraft, for purpose of flight, constitutes air commerce.'' \9\
Courts that have considered this issue have reached similar conclusions
that ``air commerce,'' as defined in the FAA's statute, encompasses a
broad range of commercial and non-commercial aircraft operations.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Administrator v. Barrows, 7 N.T.S.B. 5, 8-9 (1990).
    \10\ See, e.g., United States v. Healy, 376 U.S. 75, 84-85
(1964) (holding that ``air commerce'' is not limited to commercial
airplanes); Hill v. NTSB, 886 F.2d 1275, 1280 (10th Cir. 1989)
(``[t]he statutory definition of ``air commerce'' is therefore
clearly not restricted to interstate flights occurring in controlled
or navigable airspace''); United States v. Drumm, 55 F. Supp. 151,
155 (D. Nev. 1944) (``any operation of any aircraft in the air space
either directly affects or may endanger safety in, interstate,
overseas, or foreign air commerce'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Accordingly, because ``air commerce'' encompasses such a broad
range of aircraft operations, a civil small unmanned aircraft cannot
currently be operated, for purposes of flight, if: (1) It is not
registered (49 U.S.C. 44101(a)); (2) it does not possess an
airworthiness certificate (49 U.S.C. 44711(a)(1)); and (3) the airman
operating the aircraft does not possess an airman certificate (49
U.S.C. 44711(a)(2)(A)). However, the FAA's current processes for
issuing airworthiness and airman certificates were designed to be used
for manned aircraft and do not take into account the considerations
associated with civil small UAS.
    Specifically, obtaining a type certificate and a standard
airworthiness certificate, which permits the widest range of aircraft
operation, currently takes about 3 to 5 years. Because the pertinent
existing regulations do not differentiate between manned and unmanned
aircraft, a small UAS is currently subject to the same airworthiness
certification process as a manned aircraft. However, it is not
practically feasible for many small UAS manufacturers to go through the
certification process required of manned aircraft. This is because
small UAS technology is rapidly evolving at this time, and
consequently, if a small UAS manufacturer goes through a 3-to-5-year
process to obtain a type certificate, which enables the issuance of a
standard airworthiness certificate, the small UAS would be
technologically outdated by the time it completed the certification
process. For example, advances in lightweight battery technology may
allow new lightweight transponders and power sources within the next 3
to 5 years that are currently unavailable for small UAS operations.
    The FAA notes that there are several other certification options
available to

small UAS manufacturers and operators who do not wish to go through the
process of obtaining a type certificate and standard airworthiness
certificate. However, because each of these options has significant
limitations, these options do not provide flexibility for most routine
small UAS operations. These certification options are as follows:
     A special airworthiness certificate in the experimental
category may be issued to UAS pursuant to 14 CFR 21.191-21.195. This
certificate is time-limited, and cannot be used for any activities
other than research and development, market surveys, and crew training.
     A special flight permit may be issued pursuant to 14 CFR
21.197. At this time, however, a special flight permit for a UAS is
limited to production flight testing of new production aircraft.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ A special flight permit for production flight testing is
not limited to small UAS and can be obtained for unmanned aircraft
weighing more than 55 pounds. We emphasize, however, that a special
flight permit is limited at this time to production flight testing
and will include operational requirements and limitations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     A special airworthiness certificate in the restricted
category is issued pursuant to 14 CFR 21.25(a). There are two options
for obtaining this certificate.
    First, pursuant to Sec.  21.25(a)(2), a certificate may be issued
for aircraft accepted by an Armed Force of the United States and later
modified for a special purpose.
    Second, pursuant to Sec.  21.25(a)(1), a certificate may be issued
for aircraft used in special purpose operations, which consist of:
    (1) agricultural operations;
    (2) forest and wildlife conservation;
    (3) aerial surveying;
    (4) patrolling (pipelines, power lines, and canals);
    (5) weather control;
    (6) aerial advertising; and
    (7) any other operation specified by the FAA.
    As can be seen from the above list, the current certification
options are limited to very specific purposes. Accordingly, they do not
provide sufficient flexibility for most routine civil small UAS
operations within the NAS.
    In addition to obtaining an airworthiness certificate, any person
serving as an airman in the operation of a small UAS must obtain an
airman certificate. 49 U.S.C. 44711(a)(2)(A). The statute defines an
``airman'' to include an individual who is ``in command, or as pilot,
mechanic, or member of the crew, who navigates aircraft when under
way.'' 49 U.S.C. 40102(a)(8)(A). Because the person operating the small
UAS is in command and is a member of the crew who navigates the
aircraft, that person is an airman and must obtain an airman
certificate.
    Under current pilot certification regulations, depending on the
type of operation, the operator of the small UAS currently must obtain
either a private pilot certificate or a commercial pilot certificate. A
private pilot certificate cannot be used to operate a small UAS for
compensation or hire unless the flight is only incidental to the
operator's business or employment.\12\ Typically, to obtain a private
pilot certificate, the small UAS operator currently has to: (1) Receive
training in specific aeronautical knowledge areas; (2) receive training
from an authorized instructor on specific areas of aircraft operation;
(3) obtain a minimum of 40 hours of flight experience; and (4) obtain a
third-class airman medical certificate.\13\ Conversely, holding at
least a commercial pilot certificate allows the small UAS to generally
be used for compensation or hire, but is more difficult to obtain. In
addition to the requirements necessary to obtain a private pilot
certificate, applicants for a commercial pilot certificate currently
need to also obtain 250 hours of flight time, satisfy extensive testing
requirements, and obtain a second-class airman medical certificate.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See 14 CFR 61.113.
    \13\ See 14 CFR part 61, Subpart E and Sec.  61.23(a)(3)(i).
    \14\ See 14 CFR part 61, Subpart F and Sec.  61.23(a)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    While these airman certification requirements are necessary for
manned aircraft operations, they impose an unnecessary burden for many
small UAS operations. This is because a person typically obtains a
private or commercial pilot certificate by learning how to operate a
manned aircraft. Much of that knowledge would not be applicable to
small UAS operations because a small UAS is operated differently than a
manned aircraft. In addition, the knowledge currently necessary to
obtain a private or commercial pilot certificate would not equip the
certificate holder with the tools necessary to safely operate a small
UAS. Specifically, applicants for a private or commercial pilot
certificate currently are not trained in how to deal with the ``see-
and-avoid'' and loss-of-positive-control safety issues that are unique
to small unmanned aircraft. Thus, requiring persons wishing to operate
a small UAS to obtain a private or commercial pilot certificate imposes
the cost of certification on those persons, but does not result in a
significant safety benefit because the process of obtaining the
certificate does not equip those persons with the tools necessary to
mitigate the public risk posed by small UAS operations.
    Recognizing the problem of applying the operating rules of part 91
to small UAS operations and the cost imposed on small UAS operations by
existing certification processes, the FAA fashioned a temporary
solution. Specifically, the FAA issued an advisory circular (AC) 91-57
and a policy statement elaborating on AC 91-57, which provide guidance
for the safe operation of ``model aircraft.'' The policy statement
defines a ``model aircraft'' as a UAS that is used for hobby or
recreational purposes.\15\ The policy statement explains that AC 91-57:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See Unmanned Aircraft Operations in the National Airspace
System, 72 FR 6689, 6690 (Feb. 13, 2007) (explaining how AC 91-57
functions).

    [E]ncourages good judgment on the part of operators so that
persons on the ground or other aircraft in flight will not be
endangered. The AC contains among other things, guidance for site
selection. Users are advised to avoid noise sensitive areas such as
parks, schools, hospitals, and churches. Hobbyists are advised not
to fly in the vicinity of spectators until they are confident that
the model aircraft has been flight tested and proven airworthy.
Model aircraft should be flown below 400 feet above the surface to
avoid other aircraft in flight. The FAA expects that hobbyists will
operate these recreational model aircraft within visual line-of-
sight.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ Id.

    Neither AC 91-57 nor the associated policy statement contains any
registration or certification requirements.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ The policy statement did, however, explain the COA process
that is currently used to allow public aircraft operations with UAS.
This process is discussed in detail in section III.C of this
preamble. As discussed in that section, this proposed rule would
allow public aircraft operations with UAS to voluntarily comply with
proposed part 107, but would otherwise leave the existing public
aircraft operations COA process unchanged.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To date, the FAA has used its discretion\18\ to not bring
enforcement action against model-aircraft operations that comply with
AC 91-57. However, the use of discretion to permit continuing violation
of FAA statutes and regulations is not a viable long-term solution for
incorporating UAS operations into the NAS. Additionally, because AC 91-
57 and the associated policy statement are limited to model aircraft,
they do not apply to non-recreational UAS operations. Thus, even with
the use of enforcement discretion, because of the difficulty of
obtaining the

requisite certification for a small UAS and because operation of a
small UAS would violate the see-and-avoid requirement of Sec.
91.113(b), non-recreational civil small UAS operations are effectively
prohibited at this time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ As used in this context, ``discretion'' refers to the FAA's
power to decide whether to commence an enforcement action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Integrating Small UAS Operations Into the NAS

    To address the issues discussed above, the FAA chartered the small
UAS Aviation Rulemaking Committee (ARC) on April 10, 2008. On April 1,
2009, the ARC provided the FAA with recommendations on how small UAS
could be safely integrated into the NAS.\19\ In 2013, the U.S.
Department of Transportation issued a comprehensive plan and
subsequently the FAA issued a roadmap of its efforts to achieve safe
integration of UAS operations into the NAS.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ A copy of the small UAS ARC Report and Recommendations can
be found in the docket for this rulemaking.
    \20\ http://www.faa.gov/about/initiatives/uas/media/uas_roadmap_2013.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In 2012, Congress passed the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of
2012 (Pub. L. 112-95). In section 332(b) of Public Law 112-95, Congress
directed the Secretary to issue a final rule on small unmanned aircraft
systems that will allow for civil operations of such systems in the
NAS.\21\ In section 333 of Public Law 112-95, Congress also directed
the Secretary to determine whether ``certain unmanned aircraft systems
may operate safely in the national airspace system.'' To make a
determination under section 333, we must assess ``which types of
unmanned aircraft systems, if any, as a result of their size, weight,
speed, operational capability, proximity to airports and populated
areas, and operation within visual line of sight do not create a hazard
to users of the national airspace system or the public or pose a threat
to national security.'' Public Law 112-95, Sec. 333(b)(1). The
Secretary must also determine whether a certificate of waiver or
authorization, or airworthiness certification is necessary to mitigate
the public risk posed by the unmanned aircraft systems that are under
consideration. Public Law 112-95, Sec. 333(b)(2). If the Secretary
determines that certain unmanned aircraft systems may operate safely in
the NAS, then the Secretary must ``establish requirements for the safe
operation of such aircraft systems in the national airspace system.''
Public Law 112-95, Sec. 333(c). The flexibility provided for in section
333 did not extend to airman certification and security vetting,
aircraft marking, or registration requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ As discussed in more detail further in the preamble, the
FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 also contained a provision
prohibiting the FAA from issuing rules and regulations for model
aircraft meeting certain criteria specified in section 336 of the
Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As noted above, section 333(b)(2) provided the Secretary of
Transportation with discretionary power as to whether airworthiness
certification should be required for certain small UAS.\22\ As
discussed previously, the FAA's statute normally requires an aircraft
being flown outdoors to possess an airworthiness certificate.\23\
However, subsection 333(b)(2) allows for the determination that
airworthiness certification is not necessary for certain small UAS. The
key determinations that must be made in order for UAS to operate under
the authority of section 333 are: (1) The operation must not create a
hazard to users of the national airspace system or the public; and (2)
the operation must not pose a threat to national security.\24\ In
making these determinations, we must consider the following factors:
Size, weight, speed, operational capability, proximity to airports and
populated areas, and operation within visual line of sight. Of these
factors, operation within visual line of sight is a primary factor for
evaluation. At this point in time, we have determined that technology
has not matured to the extent that would allow small UAS to be used
safely in lieu of visual line of sight without creating a hazard to
other users of the NAS or the public, or posing a threat to national
security.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ Public Law 112-95, sec. 333(b)(2).
    \23\ 49 U.S.C. 44711(a)(1).
    \24\ Public Law 112-95, sec. 333(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This construction of section 333 is a reasonable interpretation
that is consistent with the statutory text and reflects Congressional
intent in adopting the provision. We invite comments on whether there
are well-defined circumstances and conditions under which operation
beyond the line of sight would pose little or no additional risk to
other users of the NAS, the public, or national security. Finally, we
invite comments on the technologies and operational capabilities or
procedures needed to allow UAS flights beyond visual line of sight, and
how such technologies, capabilities and procedures could be
accommodated under this rule or in a future rulemaking.
    As a result of its ongoing integration efforts, the FAA seeks to
change its regulations to take the first step in the process of
integrating small UAS operations into the NAS. This proposal would
utilize the airworthiness-certification flexibility provided by
Congress in section 333 of Public Law 112-95, and allow some small UAS
operations to commence in the NAS.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ As discussed in section III.B.6 below, 14 CFR part 107 that
would be created by this proposed rule would not apply to model
aircraft that satisfy all of the statutory criteria specified in
section 336 of Public Law 112-95. The FAA has recently published an
interpretive rule for public comment explaining the statutory
criteria of section 336. See Interpretation of the Special Rule for
Model Aircraft, 79 FR 36172, 36175 (June 25, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, to further facilitate the integration of UAS into the
NAS, the FAA has selected six test sites to test UAS technology and
operations. As of August 2014, all of the UAS test sites, which were
selected based on geographic and climatic diversity, are operational
and will remain in place for the next 5 years to help us gather
operational data to foster further integration, as well as evaluate new
technologies. In addition, the FAA is in the process of selecting a new
UAS Center of Excellence which will also serve as another resource for
these activities. The FAA invites comments on how it can improve or
further leverage its test site program to encourage innovation, safe
development and UAS integration into the NAS.

III. Discussion of the Proposal

    As discussed in the previous section, in order to determine whether
certain UAS may operate safely in the NAS pursuant to section 333, the
Secretary must find that the operation of the UAS would not: (1) Create
a hazard to users of the NAS or the public; or (2) pose a threat to
national security. The Secretary must also determine whether small UAS
operations subject to this proposed rule pose a safety risk sufficient
to require airworthiness certification. The following preamble sections
discuss the specific components of this proposed rule, and in section
III.J below, we explain how these components work together and allow
the Secretary to make the statutory findings required by section 333.

A. Incremental Approach and Privacy

    The FAA began its small UAS rulemaking in 2005. In its initial
approach to this rulemaking, which the FAA utilized from 2005 until
November 2013, the FAA attempted to implement the ARC's recommendations
and craft a rule that encompassed the widest possible range of small
UAS operations. This approach utilized a regulatory structure similar
to the one that the FAA uses for manned aircraft. Specifically, small
UAS operations that pose a low risk to people, property, and other

aircraft would have been subject to less stringent regulation while
small UAS operations posing a greater risk would have been subject to
more stringent regulation in order to mitigate the greater risk.
    In exploring this approach, the FAA found that, as discussed
previously, there are two unique safety issues associated with UAS: (1)
Extending ``see and avoid'' anti-collision principles to a pilot that
is not physically present on the aircraft; and (2) loss of positive
control of the unmanned aircraft. In addition, at the time that it was
considering this approach, the FAA did not have the discretion
necessary to exempt these aircraft from the statutory requirement for
airworthiness certification, as the section 333 authority did not come
into effect until February 14, 2012. As a result of these issues, the
FAA's original broadly-scoped approach to the rulemaking effort took
significantly longer than anticipated. Consequently, the FAA decided to
proceed with multiple incremental UAS rules rather than a single
omnibus rulemaking in order to utilize the flexibility with regard to
airworthiness certification that Congress provided in section 333.
    Accordingly, at this time, the FAA is proposing a rule that,
pursuant to section 333 of Public Law 112-95, will integrate small UAS
operations posing the least amount of risk. Because these operations
pose the least amount of risk, this proposed rule would treat the
entire spectrum of operations that would be subject to this rule in a
similar manner by imposing less stringent regulatory burdens that would
ensure that the safety and security of the NAS would not be reduced by
operation of these UAS. In the meantime, the FAA will continue working
on integrating UAS operations that pose greater amounts of risk, and
will issue notices of proposed rulemaking for those operations once the
pertinent issues have been addressed, consistent with the approach set
forth in the UAS Comprehensive Plan for Integration and FAA roadmap for
integration.\26\ Once the entire integration process is complete, the
FAA envisions the NAS populated with UAS that operate well beyond the
operational limits proposed in this rule. Those UAS will be regulated
differently than the UAS that would be integrated through this rule,
and will be addressed in subsequent rulemakings. The FAA has selected
this approach because it would allow lower-risk small UAS operations to
be incorporated into the NAS immediately instead of waiting until the
issues associated with higher-risk UAS operations are resolved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ Section 332(a) of Public Law 112-95 requires the Secretary
of Transportation to develop a comprehensive plan to safely
accelerate the integration of civil UAS into the NAS. This plan must
be developed in consultation with representatives of the aviation
industry, federal agencies that employ UAS technology in the NAS,
and the UAS industry. Section 332(a) also requires the Secretary of
Transportation to develop a 5-year roadmap for the introduction of
civil UAS into the NAS. Both the comprehensive plan and the roadmap
were published in November 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The approach of this proposal is meant to address low risk
operations; to the greatest extent possible, it takes a data-driven,
risk-based approach to defining specific regulatory requirements for
small UAS operations. It is well understood that regulations that are
articulated in terms of the desired outcomes (i.e., ``performance
standards'') are generally preferable to those that specify the means
to achieve the desired outcomes (i.e., ``design'' standards). According
to Office of Management and Budget Circular A-4 (``Regulatory
Analysis''), performance standards ``give the regulated parties the
flexibility to achieve the regulatory objectives in the most cost-
effective way.'' \27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/regulatory_matters_pdf/a-4.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Design standards have a tendency to lock in certain approaches that
limit the incentives to innovate and may effectively prohibit new
technologies altogether. The distinction between design and performance
standards is particularly important where technology is evolving
rapidly, as is the case with small UAS.
    In this proposal, the regulatory objectives are to enable
integration of small UAS into the NAS in a manner that does not impose
unacceptable risk to other aircraft, people, or property. The FAA seeks
comment on whether there are additional requirements that could be
specified in ways that are more performance-oriented in order to
minimize any disincentives to develop new technologies that achieve the
regulatory objectives at lower cost.
    Recently, the FAA, with the approval of the Secretary, has been
issuing exemptions in accordance with 14 CFR part 11 and section 333 of
Public Law 112-95 to accommodate an increasing number of small UAS
operations that are not for hobby or recreational purposes. If adopted,
this rule will eliminate the need for the vast majority of these
exemptions. The exemption process will continue to be available for UAS
operations that fall outside the parameters of this rule. Such
operations may involve the use of more advanced technologies that are
not yet mature at the time of this rulemaking.
    The FAA also notes that, because UAS-associated technologies are
rapidly evolving at this time, new technologies could come into
existence after this rule is issued or existing technologies may evolve
to the extent that they establish a level of reliability sufficient to
allow those technologies to be relied on for risk mitigation. These
technologies may alleviate some of the risk concerns that underlie the
provisions of this rulemaking like the line of sight rule. Accordingly,
the FAA invites comments as to whether the final rule should relax
operating restrictions on small UAS equipped with technology that
addresses the concerns underlying the operating limitations of this
proposed rule, for instance through some type of deviation authority
(such as a letter of authorization or a waiver).
    The FAA also notes that privacy concerns have been raised about
unmanned aircraft operations. Although these issues are beyond the
scope of this rulemaking, recognizing the potential implications for
privacy and civil rights and civil liberties from the use of this
technology, and consistent with the direction set forth in the
Presidential Memorandum, Promoting Economic Competitiveness While
Safeguarding Privacy, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties in Domestic Use
of Unmanned Aircraft Systems (February 15, 2015), the Department and
FAA will participate in the multi-stakeholder engagement process led by
the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA)
to assist in this process regarding privacy, accountability, and
transparency issues concerning commercial and private UAS use in the
NAS. We also note that state law and other legal protections for
individual privacy may provide recourse for a person whose privacy may
be affected through another person's use of a UAS.
    The FAA conducted a privacy impact assessment (PIA) of this rule as
required by section 522(a)(5) of division H of the FY 2005 Omnibus
Appropriations Act, Public Law 108-447, 118 Stat. 3268 (Dec. 8, 2004)
and section 208 of the E-Government Act of 2002, Public Law 107-347,
116 Stat. 2889 (Dec. 17, 2002). The assessment considers any impacts of
the proposed rule on the privacy of information in an identifiable
form. The FAA has determined that this proposed rule would impact the
FAA's handling of personally identifiable information (PII). As part of
the PIA that the FAA conducted as part of this rulemaking, the FAA
analyzed the effect this impact might have on collecting, storing, and

disseminating PII and examined and evaluated protections and
alternative information handling processes in developing the proposed
rule in order to mitigate potential privacy risks.
    As proposed, the process for granting unmanned aircraft operator
certificates with a small UAS rating would be brought in line with the
process for granting traditional airman certificates. Thus, the privacy
implications of this rule to the privacy of the information that would
be collected, maintained, stored, and disseminated by the FAA in
accordance with this rule are the same as the privacy implications of
the FAA's current airman certification processes. These privacy impacts
have been analyzed by the FAA in the following Privacy Impact
Assessments for the following systems: Civil Aviation Registry
Applications (AVS Registry); the Integrated Airman Certification and
Ratings Application (IACRA); and Accident Incident Database. These
Privacy Impact Assessments are available in the docket for this
rulemaking and at http://www.dot.gov/individuals/privacy/privacy-impact-assessments#Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).

B. Applicability

    To integrate small UAS operations into the NAS, this proposed rule
would create a new part in title 14 of the CFR: Part 107. Subject to
the exceptions discussed below, proposed part 107 would prescribe the
rules governing the registration, airman certification, and operation
of civil small UAS within the United States. As mentioned previously, a
small UAS is a UAS that uses an unmanned aircraft weighing less than 55
pounds. This proposed rule would allow non-recreational small UAS to
operate in the NAS. The operations enabled by this proposed rule would
include business, academic, and research and development flights, which
are hampered by the current regulatory framework.
    Under this proposal, the regulations of part 107, which are
tailored to address the risks associated with small UAS operations,
would apply to small UAS operations in place of certain existing FAA
regulations that impede civil small UAS operations. Specifically, for
small UAS operations, the requirements of proposed part 107 would
generally replace the airworthiness provisions of part 21, the airman
certification provisions of part 61, and the operating limitations of
part 91.
    However, proposed part 107 would not apply to all small UAS
operations. For the reasons discussed below, proposed part 107 would
not apply to: (1) Air carrier operations; (2) external load and towing
operations; (3) international operations; (4) foreign-owned aircraft
that are ineligible to be registered in the United States; (5) public
aircraft; (6) certain model aircraft; and (7) moored balloons, kites,
amateur rockets, and unmanned free balloons.
1. Air Carrier Operations
    When someone is transporting persons or property by air for
compensation, that person is considered an air carrier by statute and
is required to obtain an air carrier operating certificate.\28\ Because
there is an expectation of safe transportation when payment is
exchanged, air carriers are subject to more stringent regulations to
mitigate the risks posed to persons or non-operator-owned property on
the aircraft.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ 49 U.S.C. 44711(a)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA notes that some industries may desire to transport property
via UAS.\29\ Proposed part 107 would not prohibit this type of
transportation so long as it is not done for compensation and the total
weight of the aircraft, including the property, is less than 55 pounds.
For example, research and development operations transporting property
could be conducted under proposed part 107, as could operations by
corporations transporting their own property within their business
under the other provisions of this proposed rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ Property that is transported as an external load is
discussed in the next section of the preamble.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA seeks comment on whether UAS should be permitted to
transport property for payment within the other proposed constraints of
the rule, e.g., the ban on flights over uninvolved persons, the
requirements for line of sight, and the intent to limit operations to a
constrained area. The FAA also seeks comment on whether a special class
or classes of air carrier certification should be developed for UAS
operations.
2. External Load and Towing Operations
    The FAA considered allowing small unmanned aircraft to conduct
external-load operations and to tow other aircraft or objects. These
operations involve a greater level of public risk due to the dynamic
nature of external-load configurations and inherent risks associated
with the flight characteristics of a load that is carried, or extends,
outside the aircraft fuselage and may be jettisonable. These types of
operations may also involve evaluation of the aircraft frame for safety
performance impacts, which may require airworthiness certification.
    Given the risks associated with external load and towing
operations, the FAA cannot find that a certification is not required.
However, the FAA invites comments, with supporting documentation, on
whether external-load UAS operations and towing UAS operations should
be permitted, whether they would require airworthiness certification,
whether they would require higher levels of airman certification,
whether they would require additional operational limitations, and on
other relevant issues.
3. International Operations
    At this time, the FAA also proposes to limit this rulemaking to
small UAS operations conducted entirely within the United States. The
International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) recognizes that:

    The safe integration of UAS into non-segregated airspace will be
a long-term activity with many stakeholders adding their expertise
on such diverse topics as licensing and medical qualification of UAS
crew, technologies for detect and avoid systems, frequency spectrum
(including its protection from unintentional or unlawful
interference), separation standards from other aircraft, and
development of a robust regulatory framework.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ ICAO Circular 328 (Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS)) (2011).

    ICAO has further stated that ``[u]nmanned aircraft . . . are,
indeed aircraft; therefore existing [ICAO standards and recommended
practices] SARPs apply to a very great extent. The complete integration
of UAS at aerodromes and in the various airspace classes will, however,
necessitate the development of UAS-specific SARPs to supplement those
already existing.'' \31\ ICAO has begun to issue and amend SARPs to
specifically address UAS operations. For example, the standard
contained in paragraph 3.1.9 of Annex 2 (Rules of the Air) to the
Convention on International Civil Aviation states that ``A remotely
piloted aircraft shall be operated in such a manner as to minimize
hazards to persons, property or other aircraft and in accordance with
the conditions specified in Appendix 4.'' This appendix sets forth
detailed conditions ICAO Member States must require of civil UAS
operations for the ICAO Member State to comply with the Annex 2,
paragraph 3.1.9 standard. ICAO standards in Annex 7 (Aircraft
Nationality and Registration Marks) to the Convention also require
remotely

piloted aircraft to ``carry an identification plate inscribed with at
least its nationality or common mark and registration mark'' and be
``made of fireproof metal or other fireproof material of suitable
physical properties.'' For remotely piloted aircraft, this
identification plate must be ``secured in a prominent position near the
main entrance or compartment or affixed conspicuously to the exterior
of the aircraft if there is no main entrance or compartment.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    While we embrace the basic principle that UAS operations should
minimize hazards to persons, property or other aircraft, we believe
that it is possible to achieve this goal with respect to certain small
UAS operations in a much less restrictive manner than current ICAO
standards require. Accordingly, the FAA proposes, for the time being,
to limit the applicability of proposed part 107 to small UAS operations
that are conducted entirely within the United States. The FAA envisions
that international operations would be dealt with in a future FAA
rulemaking. The FAA believes that the experience that the FAA will gain
with UAS operations under this rule will assist with future
rulemakings. The FAA also anticipates that ICAO will continue to revise
and more fully develop its framework for UAS operations to better
reflect the diversity of UAS operations and types of UAS and to
distinguish the appropriate levels of regulation in light of those
differences.
    The FAA notes that under Presidential Proclamation 5928, the
territorial sea of the United States, and consequently its territorial
airspace, extends to 12 nautical miles from the baselines of the United
States determined in accordance with international law. Thus, UAS
operating in the airspace above the U.S. territorial sea would be
operating within the United States for the purposes of this proposed
rule.
    The FAA also emphasizes that proposed part 107 would not prohibit
small UAS operators from operating in international airspace or in
other countries; however, the proposed rule also would not provide
authorization for such operations. UAS operations that do not take
place entirely within the United States would need to obtain all
necessary authorizations from the FAA and the relevant foreign
authorities outside of the part 107 framework, as that framework would
not apply to operations that do not take place entirely within the
United States. It is important to note that Article 8 of the Convention
on International Civil Aviation, to which the U.S. is a party,
provides:

    No aircraft capable of being flown without a pilot shall be
flown without a pilot over the territory of a contracting State
without special authorization by that State and in accordance with
the terms of such authorization. Each contracting State undertakes
to insure that the flight of such aircraft without a pilot in
regions open to civil aircraft shall be so controlled as to obviate
danger to civil aircraft.

    Accordingly, UAS operations in foreign countries may not take place
without the required authorizations and permission of that country.
4. Foreign-Owned Aircraft That Are Ineligible for U.S. Registration
    The FAA proposes to limit the scope of this rulemaking to U.S.-
registered aircraft. Under 49 U.S.C. 44103 and 14 CFR 47.3, an aircraft
can be registered in the United States only if it is not registered
under the laws of a foreign country and meets one of the following
ownership criteria:
     The aircraft is owned by a citizen of the United States;
     The aircraft is owned by a permanent resident of the
United States;
     The aircraft is owned by a corporation that is not a
citizen of the United States, but that is organized and doing business
under U.S. Federal or state law and the aircraft is based and primarily
used in the United States; or
     The aircraft is owned by the United States government or a
state or local governmental entity.
    An aircraft that does not satisfy the above criteria is typically
owned by a foreign person or entity and is subject to special operating
rules.\32\ As previously noted, the ICAO framework for international
UAS operations is at a relatively early stage in its development.
Accordingly, proposed part 107 would only apply to small unmanned
aircraft that meet the criteria specified in Sec.  47.3, which must be
satisfied in order for an aircraft to be eligible for U.S.
registration. The FAA notes existing U.S. international trade
obligations do permit certain kinds of operations, known as specialty
air services. Specialty air services are generally defined as any
specialized commercial operation using an aircraft whose primary
purpose is not the transportation of goods or passengers, including but
not limited to aerial mapping, aerial surveying, aerial photography,
forest fire management, firefighting, aerial advertising, glider
towing, parachute jumping, aerial construction, helilogging, aerial
sightseeing, flight training, aerial inspection and surveillance, and
aerial spraying services. The FAA will consult with the Secretary to
determine the process through which it might permit foreign-owned small
unmanned aircraft to operate in the United States. The FAA invites
comments on the inclusion of foreign-registered small unmanned aircraft
in this new framework.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ See, e.g., 14 CFR part 91, subpart H (specifying operating
rules for foreign civil aircraft).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As provided by 49 U.S.C. 40105(b)(1)(A), the FAA Administrator must
carry out his responsibilities under Part A (Air Commerce and Safety)
of title 49, United States Code, consistently with the obligations of
the U.S. Government under international agreements. The FAA invites
comments regarding whether the proposed rule needs to be modified to
ensure that it is consistent with any relevant obligations of the
United States under international agreements.
5. Public Aircraft Operations
    This proposed rule would also not apply to public aircraft
operations with small UAS that are not operated as civil aircraft. This
is because public aircraft operations, such as those conducted by the
Department of Defense, the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, are not required to comply with civil airworthiness or
airman certification requirements to conduct operations. However, these
operations are subject to the airspace and air-traffic rules of part
91, which include the ``see and avoid'' requirement of Sec.  91.113(b).
Because unmanned aircraft operations currently are incapable of
complying with Sec.  91.113(b), the FAA has required public aircraft
operations that use unmanned aircraft to obtain an FAA-issued
Certificate of Waiver or Authorization (COA) providing the public
aircraft operation with a waiver/deviation from the ``see and avoid''
requirement of Sec.  91.113(b).
    The existing COA system has been in place for over eight years, and
has not caused any significant human injuries or other significant
adverse safety impacts.\33\ Accordingly, this proposed rule would not
abolish the COA system. However, this proposed rule would provide
public aircraft operations with greater flexibility by giving them the
option to declare an operation to be a civil operation and comply with
the provisions of proposed part 107 instead

of seeking a COA from the FAA. Because proposed part 107 would address
the risks associated with small UAS operations, there would be no
adverse safety effects from allowing public aircraft operations to be
voluntarily conducted under proposed part 107.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ The FAA has been issuing COAs to public aircraft operations
using UAS for over 20 years; however, prior to 2005, those COAs were
issued using different processes.
    \34\ The FAA notes that section 334(b) of Public Law 112-95
requires the FAA to develop standards regarding the operation of
public UAS by December 31, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

6. Model Aircraft
    Proposed part 107 would not apply to model aircraft that satisfy
all of the criteria specified in section 336 of Public Law 112-95.
Section 336 of Public Law 112-95 defines a model aircraft as an
``unmanned aircraft that is--(1) capable of sustained flight in the
atmosphere; (2) flown within visual line of sight of the person
operating the aircraft; and (3) flown for hobby or recreational
purposes.'' \35\ Because section 336 of Public Law 112-95 defines a
model aircraft as an ``unmanned aircraft,'' a model aircraft that
weighs less than 55 pounds would fall into the definition of small UAS
under this rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ Sec. 336(c) of Public Law 112-95.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    However, Public Law 112-95 specifically prohibits the FAA from
promulgating rules regarding model aircraft that meet all of the
following statutory criteria: \36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ Sec. 336(a) of Public Law 112-95.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     The aircraft is flown strictly for hobby or recreational
use;
     The aircraft is operated in accordance with a community-
based set of safety guidelines and within the programming of a
nationwide community-based organization;
     The aircraft is limited to not more than 55 pounds unless
otherwise certified through a design, construction, inspection, flight
test, and operational safety program administered by a community-based
organization;
     The aircraft is operated in a manner that does not
interfere with and gives way to any manned aircraft; and
     When flown within 5 miles of an airport, the operator of
the aircraft provides the airport operator and the airport air traffic
control tower (when an air traffic facility is located at the airport)
with prior notice of the operation.
    Because of the statutory prohibition on FAA rulemaking regarding
model aircraft that meet the above criteria, model aircraft meeting
these criteria would not be subject to the provisions of proposed part
107. Likewise, operators of model aircraft excepted from part 107 by
the statute would not need to hold an unmanned aircraft operator's
certificate with a small UAS rating. However, the FAA emphasizes that
because the prohibition on rulemaking in section 336 of Public Law 112-
95 is limited to model aircraft that meet all of the above statutory
criteria, model aircraft weighing less than 55 pounds that fail to meet
all of the statutory criteria would be subject to proposed part 107.
    In addition, although Public Law 112-95 excepted certain model
aircraft from FAA rulemaking, it specifically states that the law's
exception does not limit the Administrator's authority to pursue
enforcement action against those model aircraft operators that
``endanger the safety of the national airspace system.'' \37\ This
proposed rule would codify the FAA's enforcement authority in part 101
by prohibiting model aircraft operators from endangering the safety of
the NAS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ Sec. 336(b) of Public Law 112-95.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA also notes that it recently issued an interpretive rule
explaining the provisions of section 336 and concluding that ``Congress
intended for the FAA to be able to rely on a range of our existing
regulations to protect users of the airspace and people and property on
the ground.'' \38\ In this interpretive rule, the FAA gave examples of
existing regulations the violation of which could subject model
aircraft to enforcement action. Those regulations include:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ Interpretation of the Special Rule for Model Aircraft, 79
FR 36172, 36175 (June 25, 2014). This document was issued as a
notice of interpretation and has been in effect since its issuance
on June 25, 2014. However, we note that the FAA has invited comment
on this interpretation, and may modify the interpretation as a
result of comments that were received.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Prohibitions on careless or reckless operation and
dropping objects so as to create a hazard to persons or property (14
CFR 91.13 and 91.15);
     Right-of-way rules for converging aircraft (14 CFR
91.113);
     Rules governing operations in designated airspace (14 CFR
part 73 and Sec. Sec.  91.126 through 91.135); and
     Rules relating to operations in areas covered by temporary
flight restrictions and notices to airmen (NOTAMs) (14 CFR 91.137
through 91.145).\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ Id. at 36175-76.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA notes that the above list is not intended to be an
exhaustive list of all existing regulations that apply to model
aircraft meeting the statutory criteria of Public Law 112-95, section
336. Rather, as explained in the interpretive rule, ``[t]he FAA
anticipates that the cited regulations are the ones that would most
commonly apply to model aircraft operations.'' \40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ Id. at 36176.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

7. Moored Balloons, Kites, Amateur Rockets, and Unmanned Free Balloons
    Lastly, proposed part 107 would not apply to moored balloons,
kites, amateur rockets, and unmanned free balloons. These types of
aircraft currently are regulated by the provisions of 14 CFR part 101.
Because these aircraft are already incorporated into the NAS through
part 101 and because the safety risks associated with these specific
aircraft are already mitigated by the regulations of part 101, there is
no need to make these aircraft subject to the provisions of proposed
part 107.

C. Definitions

    Proposed part 107 would create a new set of definitions to address
the unique aspects of a small UAS. Those proposed definitions are as
follows.
1. Control Station
    Proposed part 107 would define a ``control station'' as an
interface used by the operator to control the flight path of the small
unmanned aircraft. In a manned aircraft, the interface used by the
pilot to control the flight path of the aircraft is a part of the
aircraft and is typically located inside the aircraft flight deck.
Conversely, the interface used to control the flight path of a small
unmanned aircraft is typically physically separated from the aircraft
and remains on the ground during aircraft flight. Defining the concept
of a control station would clarify the interface that is considered
part of the small UAS under this regulation.
2. Corrective Lenses
    Proposed part 107 would also define ``corrective lenses'' as
spectacles or contact lenses. As discussed in the Operating Rules
section of this preamble, this proposed rule would require the operator
and/or visual observer to have visual line of sight of the small
unmanned aircraft with vision that is not enhanced by any device other
than corrective lenses. This is because spectacles and contact lenses
do not restrict a user's peripheral vision while other vision-enhancing
devices may restrict that vision. Because peripheral vision is
necessary in order for the operator and/or visual observer to be able
to see and avoid other air traffic in the NAS, this proposed rule would
limit the circumstances in which vision-enhancing devices other than
spectacles or contact lenses may be used.

3. Operator and Visual Observer
    Because of the unique nature of small UAS operations, this proposed
rule would create two new crewmember positions: The operator and the
visual observer. These positions are discussed further in section
III.D.1 of this preamble.
4. Small Unmanned Aircraft
    Public Law 112-95 defines a ``small unmanned aircraft'' as ``an
unmanned aircraft weighing less than 55 pounds.'' \41\ This statutory
definition of small unmanned aircraft does not specify whether the 55-
pound weight limit refers to the total weight of the aircraft at the
time of takeoff (which would encompass the weight of the aircraft and
any payload on board), or simply the weight of an empty aircraft.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ Sec. 331(6) of Public Law 112-95.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This proposed rule would define a small unmanned aircraft as an
unmanned aircraft weighing less than 55 pounds, including everything
that is on board the aircraft. The FAA proposes to interpret the
statutory definition of small unmanned aircraft as referring to total
weight at the time of takeoff because heavier aircraft generally pose
greater amounts of public risk in the event of an accident. In the
event of a crash, a heavier aircraft can do more damage to people and
property on the ground. The FAA also notes that this approach would be
similar to the approach that the FAA has taken with other aircraft,
such as large aircraft, light-sport aircraft, and small aircraft.\42\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \42\ See 14 CFR 1.1 (referring to ``takeoff weight'' for large,
light-sport, and small aircraft in the definitions for those
aircraft).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

5. Small Unmanned Aircraft System (Small UAS)
    This proposed rule would define a small UAS as a small unmanned
aircraft and its associated elements (including communication links and
the components that control the small unmanned aircraft) that are
required for the safe and efficient operation of the small unmanned
aircraft in the NAS. Except for one difference, this proposed
definition would be similar to the definition of ``unmanned aircraft
system'' provided in Public Law 112-95.\43\ The difference between the
two definitions is that the proposed definition in this rule would not
refer to a pilot-in-command because, as discussed further in this
preamble, this proposed rule would create a new position of operator to
replace the traditional manned-aviation positions of pilot and pilot-
in-command for small UAS operations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \43\ Sec. 331(9) of Public Law 112-95. Public Law 112-95 defines
an ``unmanned aircraft system'' as ``an unmanned aircraft and
associated elements (including communication links and the
components that control the unmanned aircraft) that are required for
the pilot in command to operate safely and efficiently in the
national airspace system.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

6. Unmanned Aircraft
    Lastly, this proposed rule would define an unmanned aircraft as an
aircraft operated without the possibility of direct human intervention
from within or on the aircraft. This proposed definition would codify
the definition of ``unmanned aircraft'' specified in Public Law 112-
95.\44\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \44\ Sec. 331(8) of Public Law 112-95.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Operating Rules

    As discussed earlier in this preamble (section III.A), instead of a
single omnibus rulemaking that applies to all small UAS operations, the
FAA has decided to proceed incrementally and issue a rule governing
small UAS operations that pose the least amount of risk. Subpart B of
this proposed rule would specify the operating constraints of these
operations. The FAA emphasizes that it intends to conduct future
rulemaking(s) to incorporate into the NAS small UAS operations that
pose a greater level of risk than the operations that would be
permitted by this proposed rule. However, those operations present
additional safety issues that the FAA needs more time to address. In
the meantime, under this proposed rule, operations that could be
conducted within the proposed operational constraints would be
incorporated into the NAS.
    The FAA also considered whether to further subdivide small UAS into
different categories of unmanned aircraft that would be regulated
differently based on their weight, operational characteristics, and
operating environment. This subdivision would have been based on five
category groups (Groups A through E). Each of these groups would have
been regulated based on its specific weight and operating
characteristics.
    This is the framework that the FAA used in its initial approach to
this rulemaking. However, because this framework attempted to integrate
a wide range of UAS operations posing different risk profiles whose
integration raised policy questions on which data was either limited or
unavailable, the FAA's initial approach would have been unduly
burdensome on all UAS groups that would have been covered under that
approach. For example, UAS in Group A, which posed the least safety
risk under the FAA's initial framework, would have been required to:
(1) Obtain a permit to operate (PTO) from the FAA, which would have to
be renewed after one year; (2) file quarterly reports with the FAA
providing their operational data; (3) establish a level of
airworthiness that would be sufficient to obtain an airworthiness
certification (the initial approach would have merged airworthiness
certification into the PTO); (4) obtain a pilot certificate by passing
a knowledge test, a practical test, and completing required ground
training with an FAA-certificated instructor; (5) obtain a NOTAM from
the FAA prior to conducting certain UAS operations (the operator would
do this by filing notice with the FAA); and (6) maintain records
documenting the complete maintenance history of the UAS.
    After extensive deliberation, the FAA ultimately determined that
such a regulatory framework was too complex, costly, and burdensome for
both the public and the FAA. The FAA then examined the entire small UAS
category of aircraft (unmanned aircraft weighing less than 55 pounds)
in light of the new authority provided for under section 333 of Public
Law 112-95 and determined that appropriate operational risk mitigations
could be developed to allow the entire category of small UAS to avoid
airworthiness certification and be subject to the least burdensome
level of regulation that is necessary to protect the safety and
security of the NAS. Furthermore, the FAA decided to also substantially
simplify the operational limitations and airman (operator)
certification requirements in a manner that would equally accommodate
all types of small UAS business users with the least amount of
complexity and regulatory burden.
    The FAA believes that treating small UAS as a single category
without airworthiness certification would accommodate a large majority
of small UAS businesses and other non-recreational users of UAS. The
operational limits in this proposed rule would mitigate risk associated
with small UAS operations in a way that would provide an equivalent
level of safety to the NAS with the least amount of burden to business
and other non-recreational users of even the smallest UAS. The FAA
invites comments, with supporting documentation, on whether the
regulation of small UAS should be further subdivided based on the size,
weight, and operating environment of the small UAS.
1. Micro UAS Classification
    In addition to part 107 as proposed, the FAA is considering
including a

micro UAS classification. This classification would be based on the UAS
ARC's recommendations, as well as approaches adopted in other countries
that have a separate set of regulations for micro UAS.
    In developing this micro UAS classification, the FAA examined small
UAS policies adopted in other countries. In considering other
countries' aviation policies, the FAA noted that each country has its
unique aviation statutory and rulemaking requirements, which may
include that country's unique economic, geographic, and airspace
density considerations. Canada is our only North American neighbor with
a regulatory framework for small UAS. The chart below summarizes
Transport Canada's operational limitations for micro UAS (4.4 pounds (2
kilograms) and under) and compares it with the regulatory framework in
proposed part 107 as well as the micro UAS classification that the FAA
is considering.

 Comparison of Canadian Rules Governing Micro UAS Class With Provisions of Proposed Part 107 and Micro UAS Sub-
                                                 Classification
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Micro UAS Sub-
             Provision                        Canada                  Small UAS NPRM           classification
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Definition of Small UAS...........  Up to 4.4 lbs (2 kg)......  Up to 55 lbs (24 kg)......  Up to 4.4 lbs (2
                                                                                kg).
Maximum Altitude Above Ground.....  300 feet..................  500 feet..................  400 feet.
Airspace Limitations..............  Only within Class G         Allowed within Class E in   Only within Class G
                                     airspace.                   areas not designated for    airspace.
                                                                 an airport. Otherwise,
                                                                 need ATC permission.
                                                                 Allowed within Class B, C
                                                                 and D with ATC
                                                                 permission. Allowed in
                                                                 Class G with no ATC
                                                                 permission.
Distance from people and            100 feet laterally from     Simply prohibits UAS        Flying over any
 structures.                         any building, structure,    operations over any         person is
                                     vehicle, vessel or animal   person not involved in      permitted.
                                     not associated with the     the operations (unless
                                     operation and 100 feet      under a covered
                                     from any person.            structure).
Ability to extend operational area  No........................  Yes, from a waterborne      No.
                                                                 vehicle.
Autonomous operations.............  No........................  Yes.......................  No.
Aeronautical knowledge required...  Yes; ground school........  Yes; applicant would take   Yes; applicant would
                                                                 knowledge test.             self-certify.
First person view permitted.......  No........................  Yes, provided operator is   No.
                                                                 visually capable of
                                                                 seeing the small UAS.
Operator training required........  Yes, ground school........  No........................  No.
Visual observer training required.  Yes.......................  No........................  No.
Operator certificate required.....  No........................  Yes (must pass basic UAS    Yes (no knowledge
                                                                 aeronautical test).         test required).
Preflight safety assessment.......  Yes.......................  Yes.......................  Yes.
Operate within 5 miles of an        No........................  Yes.......................  No.
 airport.
Operate in a congested area.......  No........................  Yes.......................  Yes.
Liability insurance...............  Yes, $100,000 CAN.........  No........................  No.
Daylight operations only..........  Yes.......................  Yes.......................  Yes.
Aircraft must be made out of        No........................  No........................  Yes.
 frangible materials.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA is considering the following provisions for the micro UAS
classification:
     The unmanned aircraft used in the operation would weigh no
more than 4.4 pounds (2 kilograms). This provision would be based on
the ARC's recommendations and on how other countries, such as Canada,
subdivide their UAS into micro or lightweight UAS;
     The unmanned aircraft would be made out of frangible
materials that break, distort, or yield on impact so as to present a
minimal hazard to any person or object that the unmanned aircraft
collides with. Examples of such materials are breakable plastic, paper,
wood, and foam. This provision would be based on the ARC's
recommendations;
     During the course of the operation, the unmanned aircraft
would not exceed an airspeed of 30 knots. This provision would be based
on the ARC's recommendation, which was concerned with damage that could
be done by unmanned aircraft flying at higher speeds;
     During the course of the operation, the unmanned aircraft
would not travel higher than 400 feet above ground level (AGL). This
provision would be based on the ARC's recommendations;
     The unmanned aircraft would be flown within visual line of
sight; first-person view would not be used during the operation; and
the aircraft would not travel farther than 1,500 feet away from the
operator. These provisions would be based on ARC recommendations and
Canada's requirements for micro UAS;
     The operator would maintain manual control of the flight
path of the unmanned aircraft at all times, and the operator would not
use automation to control the flight path of the unmanned aircraft.
This provision would be based on ARC recommendations and Canada's
requirements for micro UAS;
     The operation would be limited entirely to Class G
airspace. This provision would be based on Canada's requirements for
micro UAS; and
     The unmanned aircraft would maintain a distance of at
least 5 nautical miles from any airport. This provision would be based
on Canada's requirements for micro UAS.
    The operational parameters discussed above may provide significant
additional safety mitigations. Specifically, a very light (micro) UAS
operating at lower altitudes and at lower speeds, that is made up of
materials that break or yield easily upon impact, may pose a much lower
risk to persons, property, and other NAS users than a UAS that does not
operate within these

parameters. Additionally, limiting the micro UAS operation entirely to
Class G airspace, far away from an airport, and in close proximity to
the operator (as well as limiting the unmanned aircraft's flight path
to the operator's constant manual control) would significantly reduce
the risk of collision with another aircraft. Accordingly, because the
specific parameters of a micro UAS operation described above would
provide additional safety mitigation for those operations, the FAA's
micro UAS approach would allow micro UAS to operate directly over
people not involved in the operation. Under the FAA's micro UAS
approach, the operator of a micro UAS also would be able to operate
using a UAS airman certificate with a different rating (an unmanned
aircraft operator certificate with a micro UAS rating) than the airman
certificate that would be created by proposed part 107. No knowledge
test would be required in order to obtain an unmanned aircraft operator
certificate with a micro UAS rating; instead, the applicant would
simply submit a signed statement to the FAA stating that he or she has
familiarized him or herself with all of the areas of knowledge that are
tested on the initial aeronautical knowledge test that is proposed
under part 107.
    The FAA is also considering whether to require, as part of the
micro UAS approach, that the micro UAS be made out of frangible
material. A UAS that is made out of frangible material presents a
significantly lower risk to persons on the ground, as that UAS is more
likely to shatter if it should impact a person rather than injuring
that person. Without the risk mitigation provided by frangible-material
construction, the FAA would be unable to allow micro UAS to operate
directly over a person not involved in the operation. The FAA notes
that, currently, a majority of fixed-wing small UAS are made out of
frangible materials that would satisfy the proposed requirement. The
FAA invites comments on whether it should eliminate frangibility from
the micro UAS framework.
    The FAA also invites commenters to submit data and any other
supporting documentation on whether the micro UAS classification should
be included in the final rule, and what provisions the FAA should adopt
for such a classification. The FAA invites further comments, with
supporting documentation, estimating the costs and benefits of
implementing a micro UAS approach in the final rule. Finally, the FAA
invites comments to assess the risk to other airspace users posed by
the lesser restricted integration of micro UAS into the NAS. The FAA
notes, however, that due to statutory constraints, the FAA would be
unable to eliminate the requirement to hold an airman certificate and
register the unmanned aircraft even if it were to adopt a micro UAS
approach in the final rule.
    During the course of this rulemaking, the FAA also received a
petition for rulemaking from UAS America Fund LLC. This petition
presented the FAA with an alternative approach to regulating micro UAS,
complete with a set of regulatory provisions that would be specific to
micro UAS operations. Because the FAA was already in the process of
rulemaking at the time this petition was filed, pursuant to 14 CFR
11.73(c), the FAA will not treat this petition as a separate action,
but rather, will consider it as a comment on this rulemaking.
Accordingly, the FAA has placed a copy of UAS America Fund's rulemaking
petition in the docket for this rulemaking and invites comments on the
suggestions presented in this petition. Any comments received in
response to the proposals in the petition will be considered in this
rulemaking.
2. Operator and Visual Observer
    As briefly mentioned earlier, this proposed rule would create two
new crewmember positions: An operator and a visual observer. The FAA
proposes these positions for small UAS operations instead of the
traditional manned-aircraft positions of pilot, flight engineer, and
flight navigator. This is being proposed because, by their very nature,
small UAS operations are different from manned aircraft operations, and
this necessitates a different set of qualifications for crewmembers.
i. Operator
    The FAA proposes to define an operator as a person who manipulates
the flight controls of a small UAS. Flight controls include any system
or component that affects the flight path of the aircraft. The position
of operator would be somewhat analogous to the position of a pilot who
controls the flight of a manned aircraft. However, the FAA proposes to
create the position of an operator rather than expand the existing
definition of pilot to emphasize that, even though the operator
directly controls the flight of the unmanned aircraft, the operator is
not actually present on the aircraft.
    The FAA notes that even though a small UAS operator is not a pilot,
the operator would still be considered an airman and statutorily
required to obtain an airman certificate. The statutory flexibility
provided in section 333 of Public Law 112-95 is limited to
airworthiness certification and does not extend to airman
certification. Thus, as mentioned previously, the FAA's statute
prohibits a person without an airman certificate from serving in any
capacity as an airman with respect to a civil aircraft used or intended
to be used in air commerce.\45\ The statute defines an ``airman,'' in
part, as an individual who, as a member of the crew, navigates the
aircraft when under way.\46\ Because under this proposed rule the
operator would be a member of the crew and would navigate the small
unmanned aircraft when that aircraft is under way, an operator would be
an airman as defined in the FAA's statute. Accordingly, the operator
would statutorily be required to obtain an airman certificate in order
to fly the small unmanned aircraft.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \45\ 49 U.S.C. 44711(a)(2)(A).
    \46\ 49 U.S.C. 40102(a)(8)(A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA proposes to codify this statutory requirement in Sec.
107.13(a), which would require a person who wishes to serve as an
operator to obtain an unmanned aircraft airman certificate with a small
UAS rating. An unmanned aircraft airman certificate would be a new type
of airman certificate that would be created by this proposed rule
specifically for UAS operators to satisfy the statutory requirement for
an airman certificate. The certificate necessary to operate small UAS
would have a small UAS rating. The FAA anticipates that certificates
used to operate UAS not subject to this proposed rule would have
different certification requirements. The specific details of this
certificate are discussed further in section III.E of this preamble.
    The FAA also proposes to give each operator the power and
responsibility typically associated with a pilot-in-command (PIC) under
the existing regulations. Under the existing regulations, the PIC ``is
directly responsible for, and is the final authority as to the
operation of [the] aircraft.'' \47\ The PIC position provides
additional accountability for the safety of an operation by: (1)
Ensuring that a single person on board the aircraft is accountable for
that operation; and (2) providing that person with the authority to
address issues affecting operational safety.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \47\ 14 CFR 91.3(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    An accountability system, such as the existing PIC concept, would
provide similar benefits for small UAS operations. Accordingly, the FAA
proposes, in Sec.  107.19(a), to make each operator: (1) Directly
responsible for the

small UAS operation, and (2) the final authority as to the small UAS
operation. To provide further clarity as to the operator's authority
over the small UAS operation, proposed Sec.  107.49(b) would require
that each person involved in the small UAS operation perform the duties
assigned by the operator.
    The FAA also considered providing the operator with the emergency
powers available to the PIC under 14 CFR 91.3(b). Under Sec.  91.3(b),
a PIC can deviate from FAA regulations to respond to an in-flight
emergency. However, the FAA does not believe that this power is
necessary for the operator because a small unmanned aircraft is highly
maneuverable and much easier to land than a manned aircraft. Thus, in
an emergency, an operator should be able to promptly land the small
unmanned aircraft in compliance with FAA regulations. Accordingly, the
FAA proposes not to provide an operator with the emergency powers
available to the PIC under Sec.  91.3(b). The FAA invites comments on
this issue.
    The FAA also does not believe that it is necessary to create a
separate ``operator-in-command'' position for small UAS operations. The
existing regulations create a separate PIC position because many manned
aircraft are operated by multiple pilots. Thus, it is necessary to
designate one of those pilots as the accountable authority for the
operation. By contrast, only one operator is needed for a small UAS
flight operation even though additional non-operator persons could be
involved in the operation. Thus, at this time, it is not necessary to
create an operator-in-command position. The FAA invites comments on
whether a separate operator-in-command position should be created for
small UAS operations.
    The FAA finally notes that the term ``operate'' is currently a
defined term in 14 CFR 1.1 that is used in manned-aircraft operations.
While, for purposes of proposed part 107, the proposed definition of
``operator'' would supersede any conflicting definitions in Sec.  1.1,
the FAA invites comments as to whether defining a new crewmember
position as an ``operator'' would cause confusion with the existing
terminology. If so, the FAA invites suggestions as to an alternative
title for this crewmember position.
ii. Visual Observer
    To assist the operator with the proposed see-and-avoid and visual-
line-of-sight requirements discussed in the next section of this
preamble, the FAA proposes to create the position of a visual observer.
Under this proposed rule, a visual observer would be defined as a
person who assists the small unmanned aircraft operator in seeing and
avoiding other air traffic or objects aloft or on the ground. The
visual observer would do this by augmenting the operator as the person
who must satisfy the see-and-avoid and visual-line-of-sight
requirements of this proposed rule. As discussed in more detail below,
an operator must always be capable of seeing the small unmanned
aircraft. However, if the operation is augmented by at least one visual
observer, the operator is not required to exercise this capability, as
long as the visual observer maintains a constant visual-line-of-sight
of the small unmanned aircraft.
    The FAA emphasizes that, as proposed, a visual observer is not a
required crewmember, as the operator could always satisfy the pertinent
requirements him- or herself. Under this proposed rule, an operator
could, at his or her discretion, use a visual observer to increase the
flexibility of the operation. The FAA notes, however, that as discussed
in III.D.3.i of this preamble, even if a visual observer is used to
augment the operation, a small unmanned aircraft would still be
required by Sec.  107.33(c) to always remain close enough to the
control station for the operator to be capable of seeing that aircraft.
    To ensure that the visual observer can carry out his or her duties,
the FAA proposes, in Sec.  107.33(b), that the operator be required to
ensure that the visual observer is positioned in a location where he or
she is able to see the small unmanned aircraft in the manner required
by the proposed visual-line-of-sight and see-and-avoid provisions of
Sec. Sec.  107.31 and 107.37. The operator can do this by specifying
the location of the visual observer. The FAA also proposes to require,
in Sec.  107.33(d), that the operator and visual observer coordinate
to: (1) Scan the airspace where the small unmanned aircraft is
operating for any potential collision hazard; and (2) maintain
awareness of the position of the small unmanned aircraft through direct
visual observation. This would be accomplished by the visual observer
maintaining visual contact with the small unmanned aircraft and the
surrounding airspace and then communicating to the operator the flight
status of the small unmanned aircraft and any hazards which may enter
the area of operation so that the operator can take appropriate action.
    To make this communication possible, this proposed rule would
require, in Sec.  107.33(a), that the operator and visual observer
maintain effective communication with each other at all times. This
means that the operator and visual observer must work out a method of
communication prior to the operation that allows them to understand
each other, and utilize that method in the operation. The FAA notes
that this proposed communication requirement would permit the use of
communication-assisting devices, such as radios, to facilitate
communication between the operator and visual observer from a distance.
The FAA considered requiring the visual observer to be stationed next
to the operator to allow for unassisted oral communication, but decided
that this requirement would be unduly burdensome, as it is possible to
have effective oral communication through a communication-assisting
device. The FAA invites comments on whether the visual observer should
be required to stand close enough to the operator to allow for
unassisted verbal communication.
    Under this proposed rule, the visual observer would not be
permitted to manipulate any controls of the small UAS, share in
operational control, or exercise operation-related judgment independent
of the operator. Because the visual observer's role in the small UAS
operation would be limited to simply communicating what he or she is
seeing to the operator, the visual observer would not be an ``airman''
as defined in the FAA's statute.\48\ Consequently, as proposed, the
visual observer would not statutorily be required to obtain an airman
certificate.\49\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \48\ 49 U.S.C. 40102(a)(8). This statute defines an ``airman''
as an individual: ``(A) in command, or as pilot, mechanic, or member
of the crew, who navigates aircraft when under way; (B) except to
the extent the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration
may provide otherwise for individuals employed outside the United
States, who is directly in charge of inspecting, maintaining,
overhauling, or repairing aircraft, aircraft engines, propellers, or
appliances; or (C) who serves as an aircraft dispatcher or air
traffic control-tower operator.'' The visual observer's limited role
in the operation of a small UAS would not meet any of these
criteria.
    \49\ See 49 U.S.C. 44711(a)(2)(A) (prohibiting a person without
an airman certificate from serving in any capacity as an airman with
respect to a civil aircraft used or intended to be used in air
commerce).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    While an airman certificate for a visual observer is not
statutorily mandated, the FAA considered requiring that the visual
observer obtain an airman certificate.\50\ However, due to the fact
that this proposed rule would not permit the visual observer to

manipulate the small UAS controls or exercise any independent judgment
or operational control, the FAA believes that certification of visual
observers would not result in significant safety benefits. Accordingly,
the FAA is not proposing to require airman certification for visual
observers. The FAA invites comments on whether an airman certificate
should be required to serve as a visual observer. If so, what
requirements should an applicant meet in order to obtain a visual
observer airman certificate? The FAA also invites comments regarding