Integration of Civil Unmanned Aircraft 

Systems (UAS) in the National Airspace 

System (NAS) Roadmap

A Five-year roadmap for the introduction of civil UAS into the NAS

Federal Aviation

Administration

Second Edition

July 2018
Version Date: July 30, 2018

1 

Final

Integration of Civil Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) into the National Airspace System (NAS) 

Roadmap

Second Edition

July 2018
Version Date: July 30, 2018

2

Table of Contents

Executive Summary.......................................................................................................................................4

Section 1: UAS Integration Accomplishments ..............................................................................................6

UAS Operations in the Arctic.................................................................................................................6

UAS Test Sites........................................................................................................................................7

Section 333 Exemption Process.............................................................................................................8

Small UAS Registration .........................................................................................................................8

Small UAS Rule (Part 107)...................................................................................................................10

Research and Development ................................................................................................................10

Focus Area Pathfinder Program..........................................................................................................12

UAS Detection near Airports...............................................................................................................14

Education and Outreach .....................................................................................................................15

Section 2: Integration through Collaboration.............................................................................................19

Cross-Government Partnerships .........................................................................................................19

Industry Relationships.........................................................................................................................22

International Collaboration.................................................................................................................23

Section 3: UAS Integration Challenges........................................................................................................25

Technology Challenges........................................................................................................................25

Public Policy Challenges......................................................................................................................28

Section 4: Ongoing Work and Next Steps...................................................................................................31

The Department Names Integration Pilot Program (IPP) Participants...............................................31

The Department Spurs Economic Innovation......................................................................................32

Rulemaking .........................................................................................................................................32

Authorization and Notification ...........................................................................................................33

R&D.....................................................................................................................................................35

Research Partnerships.........................................................................................................................38

NextGen and NAS Enterprise Architecture..........................................................................................40

Conclusion...................................................................................................................................................42

Appendices..................................................................................................................................................43

Appendix A: Commonly Used Acronyms and Glossary........................................................................43

Appendix B: FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, Sections 331-336.....................................47
Version Date: July 30, 2018

3

Appendix C: FAA Extension, Safety, and Security Act (FESSA) of 2016, Subtitle B – UAS Safety.........52
Version Date: July 30, 2018

4

Executive Summary

Unmanned aircraft system (UAS) operations are rapidly increasing in number, technical 

complexity, and sophistication. The growth in popularity of these new aircraft has presented 

the U.S. Department of Transportation (the Department) and the Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA) with a number of regulatory and technical challenges. This roadmap is 

intended to meet the requirement in Section 332 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 

2012 (FMRA). It provides an update on the progress to date in achieving UAS integration, the 

challenges we continue to face, and near-term strategies for addressing these challenges.

The Department’s vision for fully integrating UAS into the National Airspace System (NAS) 

entails UAS operating harmoniously, side-by-side with manned aircraft, occupying the same 

airspace and using many of the same air traffic management (ATM) systems and procedures. 

This vision goes beyond accommodation practices, which largely rely on operational 

segregation to maintain systemic safety. As we work to realize this vision, UAS must be 

introduced to the NAS incrementally to ensure the safety of people and property both in the air 

and on the ground.

The first section of this Roadmap outlines the great strides that have been made in the early 

stages of integration. The Department took a significant regulatory step forward with the 

publication of the first two UAS rules. In December 2015, an Interim Final Rule on Registration 

and Marking Requirements for Small Unmanned Aircraft was published, which applies to UAS 

weighing more than 0.55 pounds (250 grams) and less than 55 pounds. In June 2016, the small 

UAS rule (Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 107) was published, becoming

effective in August 2016. This rule enables routine small UAS operations conducted within 

visual line-of-sight (VLOS). Prior to the finalization of the small UAS rule, the FAA had only

authorized UAS operations on a case-by-case basis, allowing commercial UAS operations in 

specific, low-risk situations.

The second section of this Roadmap outlines the crucial relationships across government and 

industry that the Department relies on to ensure its UAS integration efforts are harmonized and 

consistent. The Drone Advisory Committee (DAC) and the Unmanned Aircraft Safety Team 

(UAST), as well as recommendations from several Aviation Rulemaking Committees (ARC), 

provide essential input to inform the FAA’s UAS integration activities. All the work needed to 

resolve our collective challenges requires collaboration between partners at local, tribal State, 

national, and international levels, as well as partners across the UAS industry and stakeholder 

community. 

The Department’s commitment to the safe and efficient integration of UAS also requires 

resolving several key challenges, as described in the third section of this Roadmap, to enable 

this emerging technology to safely achieve its full potential. Technical issues to ensure an 

unmanned aircraft (UA) maintains a safe distance from other aircraft and that the pilot retains 

control of the UAS and know its location at all times must be addressed before UAS operations 

beyond visual line-of-sight (BVLOS) can become routine. Much work must also be done to 
Version Date: July 30, 2018

5

develop the standards necessary to support UAS certification processes. In addition to the 

technological and operational challenges posed by UAS integration, there are additional policy 

questions raised by UAS use, including security — both physical and cyber — and privacy. 

Finally, the fourth section details the strategy for near-term UAS integration efforts over the 

next several years. The FAA’s rulemaking strategy and research priorities are crucial 

components to achieving a more enhanced UAS regulatory framework by 2020, which includes 

more complex UAS operations, such as over people and BVLOS. The safe integration of drones 

into the NAS will also require creating new partnerships across the federal government as well 

as among local governments and industry. In late 2017, the Secretary of Transportation 

announced the Integration Pilot Program (IPP) to streamline collaboration. The IPP allows state, 

local and tribal governments to partner with private sector entities (e.g., operators as well as

manufacturers), to accelerate the safe integration of UAS operations. In May 2018, the 

Secretary announced 10 Lead Participants from amongst a competitive group of 149 applicants.

While significant UAS integration progress has been made, the Department recognizes there is 

still work to do. UAS must be integrated into the NAS while maintaining existing operational 

capacity and safety and without introducing excessive risk to airspace users or persons and 

property on the ground. We are committed to striking the appropriate regulatory and oversight 

balance to ensure that American innovation is able to thrive without compromising the safest, 

most efficient aerospace system in the world.
Version Date: July 30, 2018

6

Section 1: UAS Integration Accomplishments

UAS integration has progressed significantly since the first edition of this Roadmap published in 

2013. This section describes integration accomplishments to date to set the stage for 

subsequent discussion of challenges and next steps. 

UAS Operations in the Arctic

Section 332(d) of the 2012 FMRA tasked the Secretary of Transportation with developing a plan 

to designate permanent areas in the Arctic where small UA could perform research and 

commercial operations. In 2012, the Department published the UAS Arctic Implementation Plan 

to inform interested parties, operators, Federal agencies, and international communities of its 

plans to establish permanent operational areas and corridor routes in the Arctic for the 

operation of small UAS. 

From 2013 to 2015, several UAS operations took place in the Arctic, carrying out surveys, 

environmental assessments, and infrastructure inspections. These operations were made 

possible through authorizations from the FAA and cooperation among other U.S. Government 

agencies, and the academic and private sectors. Highlights include:

• The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) funded the Marginal Ice 

Zone Observations and Ocean Experiment in the summer 2013. NASA’s Sensor 

Integrated Environmental Remote Research Aircraft, the ScanEagle UAS (University of 

Alaska), and the Data Hawk UAS (University of Colorado) flew under the first civilian 

Certificate of Waiver or Authorization (COA). The COA permitted ground-based radar in 

lieu of ground or air observers for BVLOS operations.

• ConocoPhillips began using Boeing/Insitu's ScanEagle in September 2013 to perform 

marine mammal and ice surveys. The FAA issued a restricted category type certificate to 

the ScanEagle X200, and signed an Other Transaction Agreement (OTA) with 

ConocoPhillips that authorized flights in the late summer under ideal weather 

conditions. 

• In 2014 the FAA issued a restricted category type certificate1 allowing commercial 

operations for AeroVironment’s Puma AE to perform pipeline and infrastructure surveys 

for BP — the first commercial UAS operation over land. The Puma was also used to 

conduct an oil spill exercise in the Beaufort Sea. 

• Also in 2014, the FAA issued a COA to Boeing/Insitu for commercial BVLOS operations in 

the Chukchi Sea flown on behalf of ConocoPhillips.

• In 2015, the U.S. Coast Guard and ConocoPhillips executed a multi-year Cooperative 

Research and Development Agreement (CRDA), facilitated by the FAA. Initial operations 

included an oil spill exercise and a search and rescue demonstration north of Alaska. The 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the U.S. Department of 

Energy (DOE) also participated in the simulated search and rescue exercise, which was 

the first joint manned/unmanned aircraft exercise. 

 1 The FAA issues type certificates to restricted category aircraft under 14 CFR part 21 for use only in those specialpurpose operations identified in the applicable type design. More information is available in FAA Order 8110.56.
Version Date: July 30, 2018

7

• Also in 2015, the FAA established 10 UAS Coastal Launch Sites and the Arctic UAS 

Permanent Areas were published in the Alaska Supplement, an FAA Airport Facilities 

Directory (now called FAA Chart Supplements). The FAA has also developed and 

published communication procedures for flying UAS BVLOS in the Arctic.

UAS Test Sites

In December 2013, the FAA Administrator announced the selection of six UAS test sites —

University of Alaska-Fairbanks, State of Nevada, New York’s Griffiss International Airport, North 

Dakota Department of Commerce, Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi, and Virginia 

Polytechnic Institute and State University. These test sites were established in accordance with 

the FMRA to support safe integration of UAS into the NAS. The test sites provide access to UAS 

flight testing opportunities for interested parties in a safe testing environment. The FAA

provides oversight to guarantee each site operates according to safety standards. The 

partnership between the FAA and the test sites was formalized via OTAs in December 2013.2 All 

six test sites were approved to conduct flight operations within nine months of selection. 

The FAA has given the test sites several capabilities to support UAS integration activities. In 

September 2014, the FAA issued an Order allowing Designated Airworthiness Representatives

(DAR) to be onsite to facilitate UAS Certification at the UAS test sites. This Order sets policy and 

provides training requirements limited to the issuance of special airworthiness certificates in 

the experimental category at UAS test sites. In December 2014, the State of Nevada was the 

first test site to use a DAR to issue an experimental certificate.

In May 2015, the FAA authorized test sites via COAs to conduct public aircraft operations 

throughout the NAS at or below 200 feet above ground level (AGL). In September 2015, this 

authority was expanded to 400 feet AGL. These new COAs allow small UAS (under 55 pounds) 

operated by the test sites to fly public aircraft operations anywhere in the country, except 

restricted airspace and areas close to airports and heliports. Operators must fly during daytime 

Visual Flight Rules (VFR) conditions and within VLOS of the pilot. These authorizations also allow 

the test sites to fly various types of UAS, making it easier for them to conduct research 

missions. 

The FAA Extension, Safety, and Security Act (FESSA) of 2016 directed the FAA to include test 

ranges established prior to 2009 in its Test Site Program, which enabled the inclusion of the 

New Mexico State University UAS Flight Test Center as the seventh test site. It also extends the 

program to September 30, 2019. 

UAS Test Site Privacy Policy

As privacy concerns have become part of the discourse on UAS operations, the FAA with public

input established a requirement for each test site to develop a privacy policy. Among other 

 2 OTAs enable entities to work with the Federal Government that would otherwise not wish to due to the 

complexity of the laws and regulations that cover contracts, grants, and cooperative agreements. The Department 

has used OTAs for projects ranging from construction of air traffic control towers to management of 

demonstration activities for emerging technologies.
Version Date: July 30, 2018

8

requirements, test site operators must attest that they have: complied with Federal, State, and 

other laws protecting an individual’s privacy; established publicly available privacy policies and 

a written plan for data use and retention; and conducted an annual review of privacy practices 

that allows for public comment.

These practices are expected to help facilitate dialogue among policymakers, privacy advocates, 

and the UAS industry. The end result should address broader questions concerning the use of 

UAS technologies and how privacy law, public policy, and industry practices should respond to 

those issues. Each test site agreed to comply with all requirements prior to conducting their 

first test flights.

For more information about the UAS test sites, contact the test sites directly.

Section 333 Exemption Process

By law, civil aircraft operations require a certified and registered aircraft, a certified pilot, and 

operational approval for certain types of commercial operations. Section 333 of the 

FMRA grants the Secretary of Transportation the authority to determine whether an 

airworthiness certificate is required for a UAS to operate safely in the NAS. Starting in 

September 2014, this authority was leveraged to grant case-by-case authorization for certain 

unmanned aircraft to perform commercial operations prior to the finalization of the small UAS 

rule, which is now the primary regulatory framework for small UAS operations.

The Section 333 exemption process provided operators who wished to pursue safe and legal 

entry into the NAS a competitive advantage in the UAS marketplace, thus discouraging illegal 

operations and improving safety. Since the first Section 333 exemptions were granted in 2014, 

the FAA issued more than 5,500 exemptions for commercial UAS operations such as closed-set 

filmmaking, aerial data collection, real estate photography, precision agriculture, and 

infrastructure inspections. 

To further facilitate civil UAS integration via Section 333, in March 2015 the FAA began issuing 

COAs to civil operators concurrently when granting Section 333 exemptions. These COAs 

authorize exemption holders to conduct nationwide UAS operations below 200 feet AGL and 

certain distances away from airports, and also alleviated the need to apply for a separate COA 

for each operating location, provided an operator complies with the parameters of the issued 

COA. In March 2016, the FAA raised the altitude to 400 feet AGL for all “blanket” COAs issued to 

Section 333 exemption holders. 

With the final small UAS rule (part 107) in effect as discussed below, moving forward, the FAA 

will only consider Section 333 exemptions for operations that cannot be conducted under part 

107.

Small UAS Registration

Aircraft registration is a foundational statutory requirement that applies to all civil aircraft. 

Industry estimates for small UAS sales over the past several years made it clear that the FAA’s 
Version Date: July 30, 2018

9

existing paper-based process put forth in 14 CFR part 47 was not feasible given the rapid 

proliferation of new small UAS owners. Additionally, growing concern about reports of UAS 

flying near airports and manned aircraft highlighted the need to educate these users before 

they begin operating small UAS in the NAS.

The Secretary of Transportation and the FAA Administrator announced the creation of a UAS 

Registration Task Force in October 2015. The Task Force, comprised of industry representatives 

with a range of stakeholder viewpoints, interests, and knowledge, submitted its final 

recommendations in November 2015. The Department evaluated recommendations and 

published an Interim Final Rule on Registration and Marking Requirements for Small Unmanned 

Aircraft the following month. The rule, which establishes an alternative, web-based process for 

small UA registration, took effect in December 2015.

This registration process serves two critical functions that foster a culture of safety and 

accountability in the emerging UAS community. First, it provides a means to associate an 

unmanned aircraft with its owner. Owners must register their unmanned aircraft online if it 

weighs more than 0.55 pounds and less than 55 pounds and is flown outdoors. Registrants must 

provide their name and address (mailing, physical and email), and are then given a certificate of 

registration containing a unique number to mark on each small UA they own and fly. The 

registration fee is $5 and registration is valid for three years. To date, more than one million

small UAS owners have registered using the online system. 

Second, the registration process provides an opportunity to educate users about how to safely 

operate UAS in the NAS. Prior to completing the process, registrants must read and 

acknowledge safety guidelines, which include instructions to not fly near manned aircraft and 

always fly within VLOS. This acknowledgement emphasizes the fact that using the nation’s 

airspace comes with certain responsibilities and expectations. Registration also helps law 

enforcement and regulators identify an operator more quickly in the event of an incident.

The FAA has also used the UAS registration database to notify registrants of important safety 

information several times since registration took effect. In June 2016, the system reminded 

registrants to stay away from wildfires and wildfire suppression efforts by first responders. The 

agency continued to spread this message during the devastating 2018 wildfire season. In 

October 2016, the FAA alerted registrants to a Temporary Flight Restriction established in 

Florida for Hurricane Matthew, and provided instructions for UAS operators who wanted to 

support emergency response activities. In February 2017, Alaska-based registrants were 

reminded about the rules for flying UAS around the Iditarod sled dog race. Finally, UAS 

registrants nationwide were reminded not to interfere with emergency response efforts during 

the 2017 hurricane season.

On December 24, 2015, John Taylor filed a petition for review challenging the FAA’s articulated 

good cause justification for immediate adoption of the registration and marking requirements 

for small unmanned aircraft and the rule’s applicability to small unmanned aircraft meeting the 

provisions of FMRA Section 336 – The Special Rule for Model Aircraft. In May 2017, a U.S. 
Version Date: July 30, 2018

10

Circuit Court of Appeals decision vacated the FAA’s unmanned aircraft registration rule to the 

extent that it applies to model aircraft operating in compliance with Section 336. However, in 

December 2017, the President signed the 2018 National Defense Authorization Act into law, 

which reinstated the registration requirement for model aircraft. The FAA plans to issue a final 

registration rule in 2018. 

Small UAS Rule (Part 107)

In June 2016, the FAA issued the final small UAS rule (14 CFR part 107). The rule’s provisions are 

designed to minimize risks to other aircraft and people and property on the ground. The 

regulations require pilots to keep a UA within VLOS. Operations are allowed during daylight and 

twilight hours if the UA has anti-collision lights. The new regulations also address operational 

limits such as altitude and speed restrictions as well as barring flights over people who are not 

operating the UAS or otherwise not protected (i.e., under structures safe from impact).

Some provisions of the rule are subject to waiver, which may be requested through the FAA’s 

new DroneZone online portal. Applicants must demonstrate that their proposed operation can 

be conducted safely outside of the provisions of part 107. Additionally, the rule allows for 

operations in Class G airspace without prior Air Traffic Control (ATC) authorization. Operations 

in Class B, C, D, and surface area of E designated for an airport may be permitted with 

authorization from the Air Traffic Organization using the DroneZone portal. 

Part 107 also created a UAS-specific airman certificate, called the Remote Pilot Certificate, 

which an individual can obtain by passing an aeronautical knowledge examination at an FAAapproved knowledge testing center. Alternatively, if a person holds a current non-student part 

61 pilot certificate, he or she may complete an online small UAS training course in lieu of the inperson knowledge test. Remote pilots must be 16 years of age, be able to read, speak, write, 

and understand English, and be in an adequate physical and mental condition to operate a 

small UAS safely. The certificate is valid for two years, after which the remote pilot must take a 

recurrent knowledge test or successfully complete training if the remote pilot holds a certificate 

under part 61 as described above. Individuals under the age of 16 may operate a small UAS 

under part 107 under the direct supervision of a certificated remote pilot, provided the remote 

pilot has the ability to immediately retake direct control of the UA.

Part 107 provides unprecedented access to the NAS while also ensuring safe skies. However, it 

is only the first step in the FAA’s plan to integrate UAS into the NAS; subsequent steps will 

facilitate UAS operations over people, BVLOS, and transporting people and property. A more 

detailed discussion of the FAA’s rulemaking plans can be found in a later section of this 

document. 

Research and Development

Research into gaps in current and new UAS technologies, as well as existing and future NAS 

automation systems, will support the development of policy and standards required to address 

new and novel aspects of UAS flight operations. The FAA’s research needs are coordinated

internally, as well as with partner agencies to provide opportunities for research collaboration 
Version Date: July 30, 2018

11

and avoid duplication of effort. The research and development (R&D) work done at the UAS 

test sites and the UAS Center of Excellence (COE) also advances the FAA’s UAS research goals.

Research, Development, Testing and Evaluation (RDT&E) at UAS Test Sites

The UAS test sites play a critical role in the safe and efficient integration of UAS into the NAS. 

One of the primary goals of the program is to help the FAA determine technical and operational 

trends that could support safety-related decision making for integration. In 2015, the FAA 

provided the test sites with a list of operational requirements, which they might use their 

diverse capabilities to help validate through research to advance integration. The FAA routinely 

reviews current operational and tactical matters with the test sites. Per their agreement with 

the FAA, all test sites participate in regular meetings and annual forums to exchange ideas 

among each other and the FAA on their research activities, accomplishments, and capabilities. 

The test sites continue to conduct research to validate key operational requirements for UAS 

integration, including research and testing into technology that enables UAS to detect and 

avoid (DAA)3 other aircraft and obstacles, investigation of lost link causes and resolutions, and 

evaluation of the adequacy of ATC and communications procedures with UAS. Test site 

activities have also explored industry applications of UAS, such as emergency response, utility 

company infrastructure inspection, wildlife census, and precision agriculture. From 2016 to 

2017, the test sites also provided support for the FAA’s UAS detection system evaluations 

conducted at four U.S. airports. Other government entities also direct research to the test sites, 

as NASA did in 2015 to support its UAS Traffic Management (UTM) research.

Selection of the UAS Center of Excellence (COE)

Congress mandated that the FAA establish the UAS COE under the Consolidated Appropriations 

Act of 2014. Like university think tank partnerships, the FAA’s COEs bring together some of the 

best minds in the nation to conduct research to educate, train, and work with the FAA to solve 

aviation related challenges. 

In May 2015, the FAA selected the Alliance for System Safety of UAS through Research 

Excellence (ASSURE), a Mississippi State University-led team, as the FAA's UAS COE. The COE is 

comprised of a core team of 15 of the nation’s leading UAS and aviation universities,

4 as well as 

an affiliate team of eight domestic and international universities, that have a proven 

commitment to UAS R&D and the necessary resources to provide the matching contribution to 

the government’s investment.

 3 For the purposes of this document, the terms “see and avoid” and “detect and avoid” are synonymous. 4 In addition to the COE lead, Mississippi State University, the other core COE members include: Drexel University, 

Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Kansas State University, Montana State University, New Mexico State 

University, North Carolina State University, Ohio State University, Oregon State University, University of AlabamaHuntsville, University of Alaska-Fairbanks, University of North Dakota, University of Kansas, University of CaliforniaDavis, and Wichita State University. Affiliate COE members include Louisiana Tech University, Concordia University 

(Canada), Auburn University, Indiana State University, Tuskegee University, University of Southampton (U.K.), 

Sinclair Community College, and Technion Israel Institute of Technology.
Version Date: July 30, 2018

12

The UAS COE model encourages a cost-sharing relationship between academia, industry, and 

government that focuses on research areas of primary interest to the FAA and the UAS 

community, where the private sector matches the public funding. The UAS COE brings together

public sector (FAA, NASA, the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD), State and local government, 

etc.), private sector, and academic institutions to create a consortium to identify solutions for 

existing and anticipated UAS-related issues. The COE began research in September 2015 and 

delivered initial research results in fall 2016.

Throughout 2017, ASSURE’s research teams released findings on ground and airborne collision 

risks with manned aircraft. In April the research consortium identified the risks of allowing small 

UA to fly over people. The most significant threats to people on the ground include blunt force 

trauma, penetration injuries and lacerations caused by hazardous drone features like 

unprotected rotors. In November ASSURE’S report concluded that drones that collide with large 

manned aircraft can cause more structural damage than birds of the same weight for a given 

impact speed. The FAA will use the research results to help develop operational and collision 

risk mitigation requirements for UA.

Focus Area Pathfinder Program

In May 2015, to meet growing demand from the public and industry, the FAA announced the 

UAS Focus Area Pathfinder Program, an industry partnership program to develop and validate 

operational concepts for certification, operations, and safety beyond established or proposed 

policies and procedures. The three industry partners — CNN, PrecisionHawk, and BNSF 

Railways — focused their work on operational expansion of: VLOS over people; extended and 

beyond VLOS in rural areas; and BVLOS over right-of-ways. The goal was to develop operational

concepts in manageable segments while providing the safety and validation of risk mitigation 

actions.

The FAA entered into Cooperative Research and Development Agreements (CRDA) with these

companies to assist in the development of Concepts of Operations (ConOps) and to look at 

potential risks and mitigations in each of their areas of interest. By the end of 2017, the 

program’s three focus areas (outlined below) had all met objectives spelled out at its inception, 

namely to: define the parameters to allow safe operation of UAS in the NAS; obtain operational 

approval for the Pathfinder industry stakeholder to perform routine, limited operations; and to 

define under what conditions and constraints similar operations may be approved for future 

applicants.

Focus Area One: VLOS Operations over People

CNN collaborated with the FAA to explore how UAS might be safely used for newsgathering 

over people. The network identified three types of operational scenarios for UAS for 

operations: planned event coverage, anticipated news, or breaking news. CNN acquired the 

UAS it planned to use, and then applied for multiple exemptions for both tethered and free 

flight (non-tethered) aircraft. CNN received Section 333 exemptions and conducted its first free 

flight UAS operations in December 2015. Since then CNN conducted multiple operations under 

their Section 333 exemption with contract operators. Examples include coverage of the Selma 
Version Date: July 30, 2018

13

march 50th anniversary in Alabama; the Oklahoma City bombing anniversary; and the 

anniversary of Hurricane Katrina. 

After the part 107 rule took effect in August 2016, CNN sought waivers to conduct operations 

over people under the new rule. For example, its Fotokite Pro tethered vehicle received 

approval for operations over people with restrictions (limiting flight over people to no higher 

than 21 feet AGL). The FAA also granted a part 107 waiver for small UAS operations over people 

for closed-set motion picture and television filming and production. In October 2017, the FAA 

granted CNN’s Vantage Robotics Snap Vehicle — a lightweight small UAS designed to break 

apart upon collision or impact — a waiver for operations over people up to 150 feet AGL. The 

FAA and CNN participated in multiple public forums to raise awareness, through meetings with 

the DAC and the ASTM. CNN now has a UAS unit with full-time UAS operators to fully integrate 

aerial imagery and reporting across all CNN networks and platforms. 

Focus Area Two: Extended and Beyond Visual Line-of-Sight in Rural Areas

PrecisionHawk USA Inc. entered into a partnership with the FAA in 2015 to explore Extended 

Visual Line of Sight (EVLOS) operations in sparsely populated rural fixed environment for 

application of agricultural aerial imagery. In EVLOS operations, the remote pilot in command

may not have the UA in visible sight at all times, but relies on one or more remote observers to 

keep the UA in visual sight at all times. This focus area took on a three-phase approach to 

develop a repeatable approval path for EVLOS moving toward eventual localized BVLOS 

operations.

Throughout 2015 and 2016 (phases I and II) PrecisionHawk developed a research plan outlining 

the steps for EVLOS field trials, which included a safety risk management (SRM) panel to obtain 

a COA. With FAA authorization, early flight tests examined visual and workload capabilities of 

the remote pilot in command to identify encroaching aircraft while managing a routine UAS 

flight. This early but important step clearly defined the EVLOS concept, establishing a 

preliminary distance for manned aircraft visual detection capability. Subsequent tests helped to 

better define pilots’ and observers’ performance under varying traffic and environmental 

conditions. Under a special airworthiness certificate (experimental), PrecisionHawk operated 

small UAS flight tests, which provided data that used for approval of the first part 107 waiver 

for EVLOS. 

Phase III (throughout 2017) departed from earlier operations reliant on human vision to explore 

operations within large areas exceeding EVLOS distances. These operations rely on technology 

to assist the pilot in detecting and selecting appropriate maneuvers to avoid manned aircraft. 

These operations used data from known traffic input (from ATC), as well as technology like LTE 

wireless communications networks to relay information to the remote pilot in command. 

PrecisionHawk’s tests helped identify minimum performance and capabilities of the system and 

assess pilot displays, assistive features, encounter conditions, and pilot responses, and to 

analyze performance of LTE communications in rural environments. 

Overall, Focus Area Two (FA2) provided the FAA significant knowledge to inform standards and 

future rules on the capabilities and limitations of human vision in aircraft detection and 
Version Date: July 30, 2018

14

decision making and the effectiveness of pilot assistive technologies. The part 107 waiver 

enabled the first commercial use of EVLOS operations nationwide, and data collected will help 

inform requirements, laying the groundwork for localized BLVOS operations beyond the EVLOS 

range.

Focus Area Three: BVLOS in Rural /Isolated Areas

While FA2 sought to explore operations exceeding EVLOS distances within sparsely populated

rural areas, BNSF Railways partnered with the FAA to take the concept even further. BNSF 

explored the BVLOS concept in extremely isolated areas for inspecting thousands of miles of rail 

infrastructure — some being hundreds of miles from any major population center. 

In August 2015 BNSF presented a safety case for rural area and identified hazards, including lost 

link and sustained loss of GPS and command and control (C2) link; inability of manned aircraft 

to see the UA; and inability to comply with right-of-way rules (14 CFR 91.113) to see and avoid 

other aircraft. An FAA SRM panel later approved BVLOS operations around Clovis, NM in class G 

(uncontrolled) airspace only. In October the same year, BNSF conducted five ScanEagle flights 

over a 130-mile segment of BNSF rail. By November, the COA was updated and approved to 

include three additional areas for operations while limiting the altitude to 400 feet AGL, in 

Playas, NM, and Laurel and Milk River in Montana. The FAA approved multiple vehicles for the 

research activities using a special airworthiness certificate in the experimental category for 

R&D. 

Test flights collected and evaluated data on C2 networks, ground based air traffic and radar 

capabilities to detect UAS, and onboard Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B). 

The ability to operate well beyond the pilot’s VLOS opens a wide range of commercial and other 

uses, for example other infrastructure inspections like electric transmission lines and pipelines, 

as well as emergency response and restoration. Much like the FA2 exercises, the FAA learned 

valuable lessons that are broadly applicable to a variety of other types of future BVLOS 

operations to further UAS integration into the NAS. BNSF is expanding upon its Pathfinder 3 

accomplishments through the CRDA to continue BVLOS activities. Future activities include 

expanded testing into seven additional research areas to assess flight corridor concepts, 

conducting airspace risk analysis, exploring performance of airborne DAA sensors, and flying 

BVLOS operations in controlled airspace, among others.

UAS Detection near Airports

In October 2015, the FAA announced a research partnership with CACI International Inc. to 

evaluate how the company’s technology can help detect UAS near airports.

Since that agreement was signed, Congress has passed legislation related to this research,5 and 

the FAA has expanded efforts to evaluate certain capabilities of UAS detection technologies 

 5 In House Report 114-129 to Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016 (Public Law No. 114-113) enacted in 

December 2015, the FAA was directed to: 

a. Assess the feasibility of integrating proven UAS mitigation technology with airport operations to detect, 

identify and track both the UAS and operator. 
Version Date: July 30, 2018

15

offered by additional manufacturers — for example, Sensofusion, Liteye Systems, and Gryphon 

Sensors. The Interagency UAS Detection at Airports Strategy Working Group used an evaluation 

protocol adaptable to each system’s unique detection capabilities to assess the safe and 

efficient integration of UAS detection technologies in airport operating environments. 

The CACI UAS detection system was installed at Atlantic City International Airport in January 

2016. In April 2017, the UAS Detection at Airports Strategy Working Group completed a 16-

month-long series of UA detection evaluations at airports within and outside of the United 

States and will use the data to draft recommendations for detection systems minimum 

performance standards. These standards are providing guidance in selecting UA-detection 

systems for airports nationwide.

Education and Outreach

Unmanned aircraft have become increasingly affordable and easy to fly. Unlike the traditional 

model aircraft user community, people with little or no aviation experience or knowledge are

beginning to fly UAS. The FAA is committed to an “education first” approach to integrating this

growing community of unmanned aircraft users, which has included dedicated outreach and 

public service campaigns, trade show and conference participation, and collaboration with 

industry partners to ensure the safety message reaches the user community.

Over the past several years, significant work has been completed to upgrade the FAA’s public 

UAS website, www.faa.gov/uas. This website is continually updated to ensure consistency and 

accuracy of all information provided to stakeholders and members of the public. The website 

also provides users an option to contact the UAS Integration Office for more information, and 

to subscribe for notifications and UAS news.

This commitment to consistency and accuracy also extends to the outreach the FAA does in

person. Every year, UAS subject matter experts from across the FAA regularly attend trade 

shows, symposiums, and conferences, participate on panels and discussions, give briefings and 

presentations, and provide guidance to numerous organizations, associations, companies, and 

government agencies. The primary focus of this work is to educate and inform the UAS 

industry, other stakeholders, and the general public on how to fly safely and responsibly, and 

what the FAA is doing to safely enable UAS operations. The FAA staffs informational booths at 

several events to interact with the public, answer questions, and provide educational materials. 

The FAA Safety Team, which is the FAA’s educational outreach arm to the private pilot 

community, also conducts regular outreach with the public and general aviation pilots

 

b. Review techniques to defeat an errant or hostile UAS without causing any collateral damage to essential 

navigation systems, wireless communications, the general public, or airport operations.

Additionally, Section 2206 of Public Law 114-190 directed the FAA to establish a pilot program for airspace 

hazard mitigation at airports and other critical infrastructure using UAS detection systems. The FAA has tested

several technologies for UAS detection and is currently analyzing the results and developing a report to 

Congress.
Version Date: July 30, 2018

16

regarding safe and responsible use of UAS and clarifies the FAA’s authority to regulate them as 

aircraft within the NAS.

Know Before You Fly

Faced with a growing community of new airspace users, the FAA partnered with several leading 

industry groups to establish Know Before You Fly, an educational campaign to inform UAS users 

about how to fly safely and responsibly. This campaign has been well received by most industry 

partners, and numerous UAS manufacturers now voluntarily include Know Before You Fly

educational materials in the packaging of their products. 

No Drone Zone

While Know Before You Fly focuses on safe and responsible operation of UAS, the objective of 

the FAA’s No Drone Zone outreach campaign is specifically to inform the public where not to fly 

a UAS. Originally established in conjunction with Super Bowl XLIX in 2015, this campaign has 

since expanded to focus on educating the public about other flight restrictions, such as in 

Washington, D.C., near wildfires, and around major sporting events. The FAA has marketed the 

campaign with YouTube videos, and now has a dedicated No Drone Zone webpage, including a 

digital toolkit of branded imaging for government and industry use.

B4UFLY Mobile Application

The United States has the most complex airspace in the world, and many people in this 

growing, non-traditional model aircraft community may be unfamiliar with aviation and 

airspace regulations and safe operating practices. To increase situational awareness for this 

burgeoning community, the FAA has developed a mobile application called B4UFLY. This 

application is aimed at helping recreational UAS operators and model aircraft users know 

whether there are any restrictions or requirements in effect at the location where they want to 

fly using their phone’s location services. The FAA released a full Apple version to the general 

public in January 2016, and a full Android version in March 2016.

Key features of the B4UFLY mobile application include:

• A clear “status” indicator that immediately informs operators about their current or 

planned location

• Information on the parameters that drive the status indicator

• A “Planner Mode” for future flights in different locations

• Informative, interactive maps with filtering options

• Links to other FAA UAS resources and regulatory information

More information about B4UFLY is available on the FAA’s UAS website.

UAS Symposium

In March 2018, the FAA hosted its third annual UAS Symposium in Baltimore, MD, collaborating 

with the Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International. Building off previous years’ 

momentum, the Symposium has become one of the nation’s biggest and most prestigious UAS 

events. The 2018 FAA UAS Symposium boasted attendance of 942 pilots, manufacturers, and 
Version Date: July 30, 2018

17

representatives of the UAS community, and millions more followed on FAA social media 

channels. This tally represented a nearly two-fold increase over the nearly 500 people who 

attended the first Symposium in 2016 with Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University in Daytona 

Beach, FL, and a 25 percent increase over the roughly 750 who participated in the second 

annual event co-hosted with AUVSI in Reston, VA in 2017.

The FAA UAS Symposiums were designed to address stakeholder issues and to provide access 

to FAA executives and decision makers. The agenda development considered stakeholder 

feedback from previous FAA UAS Symposiums and leveraged industry partnerships and 

experience for sessions that focused on overcoming the technical, policy, and public acceptance 

challenges associated with safe UAS integration. Speakers and panelists were selected from 

both government and industry based on their expertise in the topics that were in-demand: 

expanded operations, security, automation, public aircraft operations and flying for emergency 

response. At the 2018 Symposium the discussion with stakeholders centered on collaboration, 

moving away from segregated UAS operations and more toward integration — with a shared 

vision and building on each other’s successes.

Public Meetings

The FAA-affiliated test sites and UAS COE each hosted a public meeting, supported by the FAA, 

during August and September 2015 to discuss innovation and research opportunities. The 

meetings offered opportunities for public and private sector stakeholders to better understand 

the value the test sites and COE provide in advancing UAS integration through research, 

development, and operational testing.

Drone Advisory Committee (DAC)

The DAC is a broad-based, long-term advisory committee that provides the FAA with advice on 

key UAS integration issues by helping to identify challenges, prioritize improvements, and 

create broad support for an overall integration strategy and vision. Established in 2016, the 

DAC’s meetings are open to the public, and are generally well attended. The most recent 

meeting was held on July 17 in Santa Clara, CA. More on this advisory body can be found in the 

next section.

Security Sensitive Airspace Restrictions 

From April to December 2017, the FAA announced a series of Security Sensitive Airspace 

Restrictions that are UAS-specific and rely on existing regulations (14 CFR part 99.7, Special 

Security Instructions). These included 803 restrictions over Federal sites under three categories 

in agreement with the following agencies:

• The DoD, prohibiting unauthorized UA operations over 133 military facilities, mostly 

military bases

• The Department of the Interior (DOI) against unauthorized flights over national 

landmarks like the Statue of Liberty, Hoover Dam, and Mt. Rushmore (10 sites in all)

• The DOE, with restrictions over six sites, mostly over nuclear facilities 
Version Date: July 30, 2018

18

In June 2018, the list was expanded to include federal prisons and U.S. Coast Guard bases. To 

ensure the public is aware of these restricted locations, the FAA has created an interactive map 

online. The link to these restrictions is also included in the FAA’s B4UFLYmobile app. 
Version Date: July 30, 2018

19

Section 2: Integration through Collaboration

Integrating a new type of technology in unmanned aircraft into the NAS requires large-scale 

cooperation across government and industry to achieve practicable solutions. This section 

outlines the numerous partnerships the Department has forged as UAS integration efforts have 

progressed.

Cross-Government Partnerships

UAS Executive Committee

The UAS Executive Committee (ExCom) was formed in 2009 as a cross-government focal point 

for resolving issues on matters of policy and procedures relating to public UAS access to the 

NAS. The UAS ExCom comprises representatives from the FAA, DoD, U.S. Department of 

Homeland Security (DHS), and NASA. In February 2018, the ExCom voted to expand the charter 

to include the DOI, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), and the U.S. Department of Commerce

(DOC) and the DOE as members. This group provides leadership and direction to resolve issues 

and identify a path forward for cross-government UAS integration efforts. Its mission is to 

enable increased — and ultimately routine — access of Federal UAS engaged in public aircraft 

operations in the NAS. These operations are intended to support operational, training, 

developmental, and research requirements. 

The UAS ExCom has four goals:

1. Coordinate and align efforts among key Federal Government agencies to ultimately 

achieve routine safe Federal public UAS operations in the NAS

2. Coordinate and prioritize technical, procedural, regulatory, and policy solutions needed 

to deliver incremental capabilities

3. Develop a plan to accommodate the larger stakeholder community at the appropriate 

time

4. Resolve conflicts among Federal Government agencies as related to the previous three 

goals

The UAS ExCom recognizes that a key challenge to integrating UAS into the NAS is a means for 

UAS to DAA other aircraft. To ensure sound technical approaches to overcome this challenge,

the UAS ExCom Senior Steering Group (SSG) sponsors a Science and Research Panel (SARP) 

comprised of experts from organizations performing research related to safe UAS integration. 

One of the SARP’s primary purposes is to promote partnerships between U.S. Government 

agencies and the broader academic and science community on UAS integration science and 

research initiatives.

Research efforts are aligned with each agency’s capabilities, and collaboration in technical 

interchange meetings and standards development forums ensures an appropriate division of 

efforts. R&D funding prioritization is based on the availability of sufficient resources from each 

agency and an alignment with individual agency interests and agreed joint interests. The SARP 

holds quarterly forums to discuss the progress on joint research interests and to reprioritize 

research needs based on current progress and continuing needs of the partner agencies. 
Version Date: July 30, 2018

20

FAA R&D requirements are influenced by joint priorities discussed and agreed upon with the 

SARP. Researchers from the member agencies, as well as Federally-Funded Research and 

Development Centers (FFRDC), meet regularly to update research progress and document new 

research requirements for the military and civil aviation communities. 

NASA

The FAA partners closely with NASA on UAS R&D activities to ensure each agency’s expertise, 

capabilities, and research products are leveraged effectively. Since the inception of NASA’s UAS 

in the NAS research program, the FAA has been a key partner, collaborating on UAS simulations 

and flight tests, as well as providing operational expertise and support from air traffic 

controllers, pilots, and other subject matter experts. 

NASA and the FAA collaborate on research efforts through Research Transition Teams (RTT). 

RTTs ensure the R&D needs are identified, jointly conducted, and effectively transferred to the 

implementing agency. Members include key NASA and FAA stakeholders who are responsible 

for planning, conducting, receiving, and utilizing the research conducted by the RTT. Two RTTs 

have been established to ensure safe UAS access will be properly coordinated across the two 

organizations: The UTM RTT and the UAS Integration RTT. Generally, the RTTs respectively 

focus on “Low Altitude UAS Traffic Management” operations in low altitude, managed airspace, 

and UAS operating in higher altitude and controlled airspace.

NASA and the FAA, in concert with several business partners, are flying a series of flight tests at 

NASA’s Ames Research Center in Moffett Field, California. This series of tests builds upon the 

success of similar experiments conducted in late 2014, which demonstrated a proof-of-concept 

DAA system. The tests engage the core air traffic infrastructure and supporting software 

components through live and virtual environments to demonstrate how UAS with certain DAA 

and C2 equipment can safely interact with air traffic controllers and other air traffic. Engineers 

at the Ames Research Center are developing UTM software tools, concepts, and procedures in 

four segments of progressively more capable levels. With continued development, the UTM 

system would enable UAS operators to file flight plans reserving airspace for their operations 

and provide situational awareness about other operations planned in the area. In June 2018, 

NASA flew a large UAS in the NAS without a safety chase aircraft for the first time. The FAA 

granted NASA a Certificate of Waiver or Authorization for the flight, which relied on airborne 

DAA technology to mitigate hazards and sufficiently address FAA “see and avoid” requirements.

NASA has also entered into a research technology transfer teaming agreement with the FAA, 

DoD, DHS, and DOC for the exploration of its UTM concept, and is partnering with many 

industry stakeholders to ensure the low-altitude traffic management equipment and 

procedures are usable in both urban and rural low-altitude airspace. These technologies will be 

usable by other public agencies and for the public at large.

More details on this collaborative research are in Section 4 of this document under R&D. A link 

to download the January 2017 UTM RTT Plan is available on the FAA’s R&D online portal.
Version Date: July 30, 2018

21

National Association of State Aviation Officials (NASAO)

NASAO is an association formed to foster and encourage cooperation and mutual support 

among State, Federal, and local governments to be responsive to regional, State and national 

needs in support of the NAS. By coordinating various State laws, regulations, policies, and 

programs with Federal stakeholders, NASAO seeks to develop uniformity among the states, and 

to preclude conflict and minimize duplication of State and Federal efforts in the development of 

national and state air transportation systems. 

In September 2014, NASAO and the FAA established a committee on UAS to explore methods of 

working collaboratively to provide information on current and proposed UAS rules and 

authorization of UAS operations, enhance information sharing, and increase awareness of UAS 

activities. The partnership focuses on providing educational outreach and subject matter 

expertise to the aviation community regarding UAS operations, regulations, and related issues.

More information can be found on NASAO’s website. 

Common Strategy for Law Enforcement

In response to Section 334 of the FMRA, the FAA entered into a Memorandum of 

Understanding (MOU) with the DOJ’s National Institute of Justice to implement a streamlined 

training and authorization process to enable non-federal law enforcement agencies to operate 

UAS within the United States safely, effectively, and lawfully.

In 2018 there will be increased outreach and process improvement efforts targeted toward the 

public safety stakeholder community in general, and greater law enforcement engagement at 

the Federal, State, local and tribal levels, promoting intra-agency partnerships, and safe 

operation of UAS in public safety activities. Efforts for outreach will also focus on educating this 

large stakeholder community on the operational, legal, and regulatory issues associated with 

operating unmanned aircraft in the NAS, improving processes, and assisting them getting 

airborne quickly in emergencies. The FAA will continue to develop relationships, publish 

guidance and information on its website, and conduct outreach activities with the more than 

80,000 Federal, State, local, and tribal agencies who are discovering the utility and effectiveness 

of UAS, and who desire to include UAS into their tool kit for daily operations.

Other U.S. Government Partnerships

Over the last several years, the FAA has entered into Memoranda of Agreement (MOAs) and 

MOUs with several Federal agencies to further enable the use of UAS. As of 2016, agreements 

are in place with the DoD, DOJ, DOI, NASA, DHS (Customs and Border Protection) NOAA, and 

the U.S. Department of Agriculture (U.S. Forest Service). These agreements generally set forth 

provisions to enable each agency access to certain airspace for public aircraft operations in 

accordance with applicable laws and government agency policy. Additional MOAs with DOI also 

allow the Department to train and certify its own corps of airmen, and also enable BVLOS 

operations to support emergency management within a temporary flight restriction, thus 

streamlining the issuance of emergency COAs to support first responders.
Version Date: July 30, 2018

22

Industry Relationships

Collaboration between the FAA and UAS industry is essential to integrating UAS into the NAS 

safely and efficiently, as well as achieving overall support for integration priorities and 

solutions. The FAA has developed close working relationships with several stakeholder groups 

and standards development organizations to facilitate this critical engagement.

RTCA, Inc.

RTCA, Inc. (RTCA) is a private, not-for-profit association that manages the Program 

Management Committee as a private industry standards organization. The Program 

Management Committee seeks resolution of issues and challenges involving air transportation 

concepts, requirements, operational capabilities, and the associated use of technology and 

related considerations to aeronautical operations that affect the future ATM System. 

RTCA supports UAS standards development through two working groups established under the

Special Committee-228, “Minimum Operational Performance Standards for Unmanned Aircraft 

Systems.” These working groups focused on UAS C2 data links and DAA equipment, which the 

FAA is expected to incorporate into a Technical Standard Order. In the near term, the C2 efforts 

are working on terrestrial communication standards and a DAA function that will enable limited 

operations in Class D, E, and G airspace. Longer term, the committee is responsible for UAS 

satellite communication standards and expanded DAA standards, which will provide greater 

airspace access. RTCA deliberations are open to the public and products are developed by 

aviation community volunteers who function in a consensus-based, collaborative, peerreviewed environment. More information is available on RTCA’s Special Committee-228 

webpage.

Drone Advisory Committee (DAC)

The DAC is a broad-based, long-term advisory committee that provides the FAA with advice on 

key UAS integration issues by helping to identify challenges, prioritize improvements, and 

create broad support for an overall integration strategy and vision. Membership includes senior

executives from a cross-section of stakeholders representing a wide variety of UAS interests, 

including UAS manufacturers, operators, advocacy groups, research and academia, retail, 

technology, and State and local governments.

One of the DAC’s first actions in 2016 was to form the DAC Subcommittee with the ability to 

meet more frequently, debate initiatives, and form consensus to inform voting during full DAC 

meetings. The DAC also created three task groups (TG) to address three priority areas: 

1. (TG1) Roles and Responsibilities. Discussed aspects of enabling State and local 

governments to manage certain UAS operations in low-altitude airspace. 

2. (TG2) Access to Airspace. Provided recommendations concerning the safe access of a 

variety of UAS user groups into the NAS.

3. (TG3) UAS Funding. Provided recommendations for short and long-term funding 

mechanisms to pay for services required to integrate UAS operations safely into the 

NAS.
Version Date: July 30, 2018

23

As of July 17, 2018, the DAC has held seven public meetings and will plan to meet three times 

per year. More information and a list of Committee members are available at on the FAA’s 

website.

ASTM International

The FAA is also utilizing ASTM International, formerly known as the American Society for 

Testing and Materials, to develop and deliver international voluntary consensus standards for 

small UAS. ASTM F38 has produced several standards on UAS design, production, and 

operations that continue to evolve with the growing industry. Some standards prescribe 

technical requirements for specific pieces of equipment, such as a standard for lithium ion 

batteries for small UAS; others detail processes, such as the Operational Risk Assessment 

standard. The standards have the ability to be used in support of part 107 waiver requests, as 

well as in support of applicants seeking Type Certification of a UAS. The FAA is working with 

ASTM F38 to identify areas in which new standards could help further small UAS integration 

into the NAS.

Unmanned Aircraft Safety Team

The UAST is modeled after the successful Commercial Aviation Safety Team and the General 

Aviation Joint Steering Committee. It held its inaugural meeting in October 2016 in Washington, 

D.C., and continues to meet regularly. The group brings together a wide variety of stakeholders 

from the UAS community and uses a data-driven, consensus-based approach to analyze safety 

data, determine risks, and develop safety enhancements to address the increasing number of 

UAS entering the NAS.

The UAST has created five working groups to help develop a UAS-specific safety message based 

on communications, data, safety culture, loss of control, and injury prevention. Exact messaging

and the best means to reach UAS operators are still under consideration. An operator credit 

rating program for professional operators is also in the works, and the UAST is working on a 

curriculum that could be wrapped into the FAA’s WINGS Pilot Proficiency Program, an 

educational process that encourages a safer and more stress-free flying experience.

The UAST has published a report regarding the UAS sightings data, with plans to conduct 

further analysis and outreach on that topic. By the end of 2017, the FAA was receiving more 

than 100 UAS sightings per month. The UAST primary focus going forward is to analyze UAS 

incidents and accidents to identify common causes of accidents and develop safety 

enhancements to help prevent any similar events occurring in the future. The agency will 

continue to educate the public that operating UA around airplanes, helicopters and airports is 

dangerous and illegal.

International Collaboration

The integration of UAS into the existing aviation operational environment requires the 

development and introduction of new requirements to promote continued safety and efficiency 

around the world. Many countries are currently confronting the challenge of developing a 

regulatory framework, supported by effective program implementation and oversight, for the 
Version Date: July 30, 2018

24

safe integration of UAS into their respective domestic aviation systems. Collaboration with the 

international aviation community supports more seamless UAS operations across national 

boundaries and facilitates the cross-border movement of new products. The FAA continually 

develops relationships with other Civil Aviation Authorities and international organizations to 

encourage global cooperation and information sharing. These relationships will enable the FAA 

to develop and implement bilateral agreements and other cooperation mechanisms, 

encouraging harmonization of UAS certification, airworthiness, production and operational 

standards and oversight.

International Civil Aviation Organization 

The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) promotes global harmonization and 

interoperability for aviation through the publication of international standards and 

recommended practices and procedures for Air Navigation Services. Through active 

participation in ICAO panels and technical groups, the FAA works collaboratively with other 

ICAO Member States and industry representatives to identify and address emerging topics, and 

create a common global framework comprising both new SARPs and guidance material, as well 

as modifications to existing requirements, in support of UAS integration. 

Joint Authorities for Rulemaking of Unmanned Systems (JARUS)

Sponsored by the FAA, the European Aviation Safety Agency, and the European Organisation 

for the Safety of Air Navigation (EUROCONTROL), JARUS represents a group of regulatory 

experts from more than 50 countries worldwide, as well as industry representatives from 

communities of interest. JARUS activities focus on recommendations for a single set of 

technical, safety, and operational requirements encompassing all aspects linked to the safe 

operation of UAS. Aviation authorities may use the JARUS material to develop their own 

regulatory policies from a harmonized perspective. 

Canada-United States Regulatory Cooperation Council

In February 2011, the United States and Canada launched the Canada-United States Regulatory 

Cooperation Council (RCC) to facilitate closer cooperation between the two countries to 

develop smarter and more effective approaches to regulation. The goal of this Council is to 

make the U.S. and Canadian economies stronger and more competitive, while meeting the 

fundamental responsibilities to protect the safety and welfare of citizens. Both countries

recognized that regulatory differences and duplicative procedures might impose unnecessary 

requirements and costs to citizens, businesses, and economies. Through the RCC, the FAA and 

Transport Canada Civil Aviation collaborate in the area of aviation safety with a specific focus 

on UAS. Copies of work plans and partnership statements are available for review at the RCC 

website.

As a rapidly growing sub-sector of the aviation industry, UAS provide unique opportunities in 

technology and innovation, but also introduce new safety challenges to the aviation system. 

Going forward, the FAA will continue to identify opportunities to promote international 

collaboration and harmonization in the safe integration of UAS.
Version Date: July 30, 2018

25

Section 3: UAS Integration Challenges

To preserve the current level of NAS safety, integration of new and novel technologies, such as 

UAS, must be done incrementally. Each step provides the Department with new perspectives 

and approaches to accomplishing the overall goal, while further defining the obstacles ahead. 

This section outlines the primary challenges — from both technological and public policy 

standpoints — that the Department and other stakeholders face in working toward UAS 

integration.

Technology Challenges

Advancing UAS integration into the NAS requires the FAA to address key technological 

challenges to enable routine UAS operations, including those required to interact with ATC and 

others that do not. 

Detect and Avoid (DAA)

One of the key challenges to integrating UAS into the NAS is the development of DAA operating 

requirements applicable to UAS. These requirements are intended to ensure UAS maintain a 

safe distance from other aircraft, both manned and unmanned, and prevent mid-air collisions. 

While manned aircraft accomplish see and avoid through visual means, UAS are unable to rely 

on the vision of the pilot. In order to develop such requirements, minimum performance 

standards must be developed for UAS operating BVLOS of the pilot to ensure that they maintain 

a safe distance from all other aircraft and avoid mid-air collisions.

Both government and industry are conducting significant research into DAA methods through a 

variety of approaches and sensor modes. Airborne Sense and Avoid (ABSAA) concepts are a 

particular focus. Research goals for the near-term include a flight demonstration of various 

sensor modes, including electro-optic/infrared, radar, Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance 

System and ADS-B. Fielding a standardized ABSAA system is a long-term objective. Specific 

challenges the FAA is researching include:

• Establishment of DAA system definitions and performance levels

• Assessment of DAA system multi-sensor use and other technologies

• A minimum DAA information set required for collision avoidance maneuvering

Command and Control (C2)

The C2 link between a UAS and its pilot is critical to ensure the pilot can safely control the UAS 

during normal and emergency situations. The C2 link typically provides telemetry information, 

such as altitude, airspeed, and position. This enables the pilot to maintain control of the UAS 

during various operational scenarios, such as complying with ATC instructions, avoiding bad 

weather, or avoiding nearby air traffic. Because the C2 link is critical to the safety of a UAS 

operation, minimum performance standards are needed to ensure the link performs safely and 

reliably. For large UAS, the FAA has identified an additional safety need for UAS to use 

protected spectrum for the C2 link. Protected spectrum includes spectrum with aeronautical 

mobile (route) service, and aeronautical mobile satellite (route) service allocations (desired), or 

other appropriate primary allocations where an acceptable level of performance, preemption, 

and protection can be demonstrated. In order for these large UAS to share the limited amount 
Version Date: July 30, 2018

26

of protected spectrum available, a standard is necessary to coordinate spectrum sharing while 

ensuring safe and predictable UAS operations.

Some of the challenges associated with establishing UAS C2 include the following:

• UAS operational demand can vary significantly across geographical areas. As a result, C2 

demands and system requirements are very difficult to project with confidence.

• Growth projections for locations, aircraft types, and flight types are largely unknown, as 

are projections for daily, weekly, monthly, and seasonal flight activities.

• Developing C2 requirements involve trade-offs across available radio spectrum, 

additional spectrum needs, and highly variable operational performance features such 

as system integrity, availability, and security, among others.

• Engineering the most efficient use of UAS C2 radio spectrum allocations being made by 

international agreement(s) requires making difficult technical decisions about critical 

performance areas such as channel separations, compatibility, interoperability, and 

security. All of these areas affect current and future radio design.

• Coordination, rulemaking, and agreements are needed across the government to make 

way for a safe and efficient control system that can be accessed by qualified UAS 

operators.

• Determining which of many possible approaches should be used to fund and sustain the 

UAS C2 system, consistent with the overall goals of safe UAS flight in the NAS, must 

account for significant safety, financial, and business risks.

UAS contingency and emergency scenarios — for example, how a UAS in the NAS will respond 

when the command link is lost — also require research. This research will drive standards that 

are being established through: 

• Development and validation of a UAS control link prototype

• Vulnerability analysis of UAS safety critical communications

• Completion of large-scale simulations and flight testing of initial performance 

requirements

Spectrum Management

Appropriate management of radio frequency spectrum for UAS operations is crucial to the safe 

integration of UAS into the NAS. Without it, growth of the UAS industry could be significantly

constrained. Spectrum reserved for aviation safety communications is already a scarce 

commodity, so the allocation of spectrum to the UAS user community for Control and NonPayload Communications must be weighed against the needs of the rest of the aviation 

community, including civil manned aviation and the military.6 During the World Radio 

Conference in 2012, the 5030-5091 MHz band wasrepurposed to better enable sharing 

between UAS safety services and existing safety services. While this was a first step, an 

assignment function for specific frequency use by individual UAS operators is the subject of ongoing technical and policy discussion, and much work is needed in this area to enable safe 

 6 A Control and Non-Payload Communications link supports safety critical functions only. ICAO has determined that 

the link must operate over protected aviation spectrum. 
Version Date: July 30, 2018

27

integration of UAS. Specifically, the FAA is investigating a mechanism to get the maximum 

capacity (UAS density in the NAS) by efficient management of allocated spectrum. Additionally, 

as commercial applications for UAS grow, suitable frequency bands for real-time 

communication of payload data collected by UAS operations must also be allocated.

Standards Development

For UAS to operate routinely in the NAS beyond what is currently allowed, they must conform 

to an agreed-upon set of minimum performance-based standards to ensure safety, efficiency, 

and reliability. These standards will vary depending on the nature and complexity of the 

operation, aircraft or component system limitations, pilot and other crewmember 

qualifications, as well as the operating environment. 

Most UAS have not been designed to comply with existing civil airworthiness or operational 

standards. Beyond the problem of meeting existing aircraft certification standards, other 

components of the UAS, such as the equipment and software associated with the data link (C2), 

and the takeoff and recovery mechanisms, are not currently addressed in civil airworthiness or 

operational standards.

The FAA is undertaking certification activities using 14 CFR part 21 to gain certification 

experience to inform future rulemaking.7 Additional guidance outlining the Agency’s risk-based 

approach to UAS certification is also under development. The FAA is also working to develop

requirements for UAS that do not need to meet the stringent requirements of a type certificate 

or to be produced under a production certificate. This would allow operations not currently 

allowed under part 107 based on a finding that these operations can be conducted safely.

Additionally, since there are no specifications for size, weight, use, or other configurations that 

preclude UAS from qualifying as aircraft for airworthiness certification purposes, UAS that are 

type-certificated are required to comply with the noise certification requirements of 14 CFR 

part 36.8 Compliance with these procedures is difficult or impossible for some UAS, so the FAA 

is working to develop noise certification requirements and procedures that are appropriate for 

UAS. 

Airspace Management

The FAA continues to develop and mature operational concepts associated with ATM of UAS 

operations in the NAS. Efforts are currently underway to develop air traffic procedures and 

operational requirements for ATC/ATM automation systems and identify related policy issues 

that must be resolved to enable UAS integration. These concept development, maturation, and 

 7 14 CFR part 21 contains the certification procedures for products and articles. It identifies the procedures for 

obtaining type certificates, supplemental type certificates, production certificates, airworthiness certificates, and 

import and export approvals. UAS do not need to gain airworthiness certification to be operated under the Small 

UAS Rule (part 107); however, more advanced UAS operations, such as those operated BVLOS, may require a level 

of airworthiness certification that requires the FAA to update rules related to the airworthiness requirements for 

aircraft. 

8 14 CFR part 36 prescribes noise standards for aircraft with type certificates issued under 14 CFR part 21.
Version Date: July 30, 2018

28

validation efforts will ensure that NAS systems and stakeholders are sufficiently prepared to 

safely handle the expected increase of UAS operations in the NAS. 

In low altitude airspace where FAA air traffic services are not provided, the FAA and NASA, 

along with industry, are collaboratively exploring concepts of operation for enabling routine 

civil small UAS operations at low altitudes and BVLOS. UTM is a "traffic management"

ecosystem for UAS operations not under the control of ATC, and is separate but

complementary to the FAA's ATM system. UTM development will ultimately identify services,

roles/responsibilities, information architecture, data exchange protocols, software functions,

infrastructure, and performance requirements for enabling the management of low-altitude

UAS operations where ATC does not typically provide separation services. NASA’s UTM concept

specifically addresses small UAS operations primarily below 400 feet AGL, in airspace that 

contains low-density manned aircraft operations. NASA has developed a phased approach for 

its UTM platform, building from rural to urban and from low-density airspace to high-density 

airspace, through the previously mentioned RTTs. 

In addition to NASA’s research, the UAS industry more broadly is grappling with the traffic 

management challenges presented by a high volume of low-altitude UAS operations. This work 

also presents challenges with UAS operating in proximity to airports, which the FAA is working 

with airport industry stakeholders to address. Further discussion of the RTTs can be found later 

in this Roadmap under Section 4, under the R&D discussion.

Public Policy Challenges

In addition to technological challenges, there are a number of public policy challenges the UAS 

community must address to foster the expansion of safe UAS operations. The policy challenges 

described below are being addressed in a number of national and international committees and 

working groups, all of which are developing recommendations for UAS requirements and policy, 

as described under International Collaboration, Section 2.

Safety and Education

In the past few years, UAS have become increasingly affordable and available to the general 

public. Sophisticated unmanned aircraft, capable of flying as high as some manned aircraft, are 

ready to use right out of the box with little or no instruction required of their operators. The 

possibilities for, and applications of, this technology are infinite, but the dynamics of access to 

airspace present a fundamental shift in the unmanned and model aircraft community. An 

unmanned aircraft operated by someone with little or no aviation knowledge is now capable of 

occupying the same airspace as a manned aircraft that requires a certified pilot and 

airworthiness certificate to fly. 

The potential for conflicts between manned and unmanned aircraft has become a very real 

challenge in integrating these new technologies into the NAS. The FAA has received increasing

numbers UAS sightings from pilots — many at higher altitudes than authorized for commercial 

operations, and those recommended for recreational aircraft flights. As a result, some of these 

operations may pose an increased risk to the NAS.
Version Date: July 30, 2018

29

As the Federal agency responsible for the safety of the flying community, the increasing 

number of these reports is of great concern to the FAA. As a result, the FAA has actively 

engaged in public education and outreach efforts, such as the aforementioned Know Before You 

Fly campaign. The goal of the FAA’s partnership with industry through this initiative is to 

educate unmanned aircraft users about flying safely and responsibly. The FAA’s numerous 

public service announcements and social media campaigns have all sought to extend the reach 

of this safety message into the expanding UAS community.

While the FAA is committed to educating the UAS community first and foremost, the FAA’s 

Compliance Philosophy, FAA Order 8000.373, notes that intentional or reckless deviations from 

regulatory standards that pose a hazard to the NAS require strong enforcement. Additionally, 

the FMRA made clear that the FAA can take enforcement action against anyone who endangers 

the safety of the NAS, which includes flying carelessly or recklessly. The line between education 

and enforcement has been outlined in the FAA’s “Interpretation of the Special Rule for Model 

Aircraft,” FAA Order 8900.1, Volume 14 – “Compliance and Enforcement,” and FAA Order 

2150.3B, Change 6.

However, the FAA’s resources for actively pursuing UAS operators who endanger the safety of 

others are limited, and identifying operators is challenging. While UAS registration is a critical 

step forward, engagement with the law enforcement community is paramount to ensuring our 

airspace remains the safest in the world. In January 2015, the FAA published guidance for the 

law enforcement community on the UAS website, and has been actively engaging with law 

enforcement agencies at local, State, and Federal levels through a variety of channels. The goal 

of these efforts is to reduce confusion in the law enforcement community about how to 

respond to UAS events. The FAA encourages citizens to call local law enforcement if they feel 

someone is endangering people or property on the ground or in the sky. Local law enforcement 

will then work with local FAA field offices to ensure these safety issues are addressed.

Physical Security

As technology continues to improve and new uses for small UAS are identified, the FAA 

anticipates an increased demand for flexibility in operational restrictions under part 107. 

However, aviation security communities have expressed growing concerns that new or 

expanded operations may have public safety and national security risks that were not

anticipated or envisioned. These concerns involve two general scenarios: individuals operating 

without ill intent, but whose careless or reckless operation creates a physical security or safety 

risk; and individuals operating with the intent to cause harm, inflict damage, or otherwise 

disrupt lives of everyday Americans. 

The FAA is working extensively with our Federal partners to address these concerns. For 

example, in December 2015, the DHS and the FAA signed an MOU. The purpose of this MOU is 

to set forth terms by which DHS and the FAA will cooperate on various activities that support 

UAS integration into the NAS with an emphasis on enhancing both aviation safety and security 

through broad research and concept exploration projects. The FAA and DHS currently co-lead
Version Date: July 30, 2018

30

the Interagency UAS Detection at Airports Strategy Working Group, which includes the DoD, 

FBI, U.S. Secret Service, DOE, DOI, Federal Communications Commission, U.S. Army, NASA, and 

the U.S. Capitol Police. The group’s focus is on the implementation of the FAA Extension, Safety, 

and Security Act (FESSA) Section 2206, and it is currently analyzing and summarizing the results 

of the evaluation of several UAS detection technologies for potential use at airports for a report 

to Congress.

Cyber Security

Concerns about cyber security are also becoming increasingly prevalent in conversations about 

UAS. UAS-specific cyber security vulnerabilities are a subset of overall aviation cyber security

threat concern. The FAA is working with industry partners and Federal stakeholders to identify 

and address the cyber security risks associated with the overall NAS and highly networked 

avionics onboard aircraft. These efforts include identifying the security issues, defining the 

security requirements, and determining security mitigations for risks associated with systems 

specific to UAS, for example C2 links between unmanned aircraft and their control stations. The

FAA and its partners will draw guidance from the Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee’s 

(ARAC) Aircraft Systems Information Security Protection Working Group and RTCA Special 

Committee 228 recommendations to implement cyber security measures for UAS avionics. 

Privacy

In February 2015, then-President Obama signed a Presidential Memorandum entitled 

“Promoting Economic Competitiveness while Safeguarding Privacy, Civil Rights, and Civil 

Liberties in Domestic Use of Unmanned Aircraft Systems.” This memorandum directed the 

DOC’s National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) to initiate a multistakeholder engagement process to develop a framework for privacy, accountability, and 

transparency for commercial and private UAS use. The Presidential Memorandum also directed

Federal agencies that use UAS to develop privacy policies and take necessary action to ensure 

that their use of UAS takes into account the privacy, civil rights, and civil liberties concerns 

these systems may raise.

In March 2015, the NTIA initiated its stakeholder engagement with an announcement published 

in the Federal Register inviting public comments on the structure of the multi-stakeholder 

engagement and the substantive issues stakeholders will discuss. In August 2015, NTIA initiated

a series of public meetings as part of that process, and in May 2016, the NTIA published 

voluntary best practices for UAS operations. The guidance can be found on the NTIA website.

The FAA has supported this initiative by including privacy guidance on its UAS registration 

website and in its B4UFLY mobile app.

Funding

Integration of UAS into the NAS will require significant resources. The needs of this new user 

will compete with existing NAS resources for funding. UAS resource needs are expected to 

continue to grow. 
Version Date: July 30, 2018

31

Section 4: Ongoing Work and Next Steps

The previous sections of this Roadmap have outlined the integration progress already made by 

the Department and its partners, the importance of relationships across government and 

industry to ensure its UAS integration efforts are harmonized and consistent, and the

challenges that lie ahead. This section describes the FAA’s ongoing and forthcoming regulatory, 

operational, and R&D activities, which represent the Agency’s near-term strategy for UAS 

integration.

The Department Names Integration Pilot Program (IPP) Participants

Directed by Presidential Memorandum, the Secretary of Transportation unveiled the IPP in 

November 2017, providing State, local, and tribal governments an opportunity to collaborate 

with private sector entities to conduct more advanced UAS operations.

The application process for Lead applicants for IPP closed in early January 2018, and the FAA 

counted more than 2,800 interested parties that submitted proposals. Following a thorough 

review of a competitive group of 149 State, local, and tribal entities, the Secretary named the 

10 Lead Participants for the UAS IPP on May 9, 2018 at Department headquarters in 

Washington:

• Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma (Durant, Oklahoma)

• City of San Diego (San Diego, California)

• Virginia Tech – Center for Innovative Technology (Herndon, Virginia)

• Kansas Department of Transportation (Topeka, Kansas)

• Lee County Mosquito Control District (Ft. Myers, Florida)

• Memphis-Shelby County Airport Authority (Memphis, Tennessee)

• North Carolina Department of Transportation (Raleigh, North Carolina)

• North Dakota Department of Transportation (Bismarck, North Dakota)

• City of Reno (Reno, Nevada)

• University of Alaska-Fairbanks (Fairbanks, Alaska)

The Lead Participants will serve as the primary point of contact with the FAA, and will partner 

with private sector companies and organizations to carry out their operations. Marking a new 

milestone for unmanned aviation in the United States, the IPP will test and evaluate various 

models of involvement in the development and enforcement of Federal regulations for UAS 

operations. It will inform the development of future Federal guidelines and regulatory decisions 

on UAS operations nationwide.

The IPP will also foster a meaningful dialogue on the balance between local and national 

interests related to UAS integration.

The IPP will address ongoing concerns regarding the potential security and safety risks 

associated with UAS operating near people and critical infrastructure by ensuring that 

operators communicate more effectively with Federal, State, local and tribal authorities to 

enable law enforcement to determine if a UAS operation poses any risks. These operations will 
Version Date: July 30, 2018

32

focus on DAA technologies, C2 links, navigation, weather and human factors. Examples for uses 

in the program include agriculture, commerce, emergency management, human 

transportation, and other sectors. Part of the FAA’s role will be to emphasize a balance among 

the benefits of innovation, and the need to protect national security, public safety, critical 

infrastructure and the NAS.

The Department Spurs Economic Innovation

In April 2018, the Department of Transportation published a Federal Register Notice

announcing procedures that streamline economic authorization for drone delivery operations. 

The Notice stated that companies proposing to engage in certain air transportation operations 

with UAS may obtain economic authority using the existing air taxi registration process.

Companies proposing to operate UAS to engage in air transportation, including the delivery of 

goods for compensation, must obtain economic authority from the Department prior to 

engaging in the air transportation, in addition to meeting all applicable aviation regulatory 

requirements. The Department will use its existing regulatory procedures — specifically related 

to exemptions to air taxi operators from the certificate requirements — as the basis to grant 

UAS operators' requests for economic authority. 

UAS operators seeking air taxi authority must:

• Be a citizen of the United States as defined in 49 USC 40102(a)(15);

• maintains liability insurance required by Department rules in 14 CFR Part 205; and

• register with the Department.

The exemption authority conferred by 14 CFR part 298 is not available to air carriers that 

operate “large” aircraft. For UAS operators looking to transport goods for compensation, an 

exemption under part 298 is an appropriate form of economic authority. The Department will 

consider whether granting the exemption is appropriate based on the specific facts and 

circumstances of each proposed operation.

To become an air taxi operator, UAS operators must submit a registration application and a 

current aircraft liability insurance certificate. Additional instruction material concerning air taxi 

registration can also be found in the FAA's air taxi guidance handbook, “How to Become an OnDemand Air Carrier Operator.”

Rulemaking

The FAA is taking a risk-based approach to UAS integration by setting a framework for safety 

that opens the skies to the majority of UAS operations without unduly impeding innovation. 

The FAA will incrementally expand existing regulations allowing small UAS operations, 

concentrating initially on enabling operations with the least complexity. The FAA will gradually 

take actions and develop regulations to enable operations of greater complexity while fully 

maintaining critical safeguards for UAS and manned aircraft separation among existing users of 

the NAS. This approach will ultimately allow most UAS to conduct routine and safe operations 

under newly established rules and regulations, and reserve the need for case-by-case 
Version Date: July 30, 2018

33

evaluations for UAS activities that fall outside the scope of current regulations. Building on part 

107, which is the foundational operating rule for small UAS operations in the NAS, the FAA will 

use this phased approach to expand UAS operational access. 

Beyond the small UAS rule, the FAA will focus on a regulatory framework to address UAS 

operations at night and over non-participating people. Regarding operations of small UAS at 

night, the FAA has issued certificates of waiver under part 107 to permit operations at night. 

Based on the information received in waiver applications, research concerning human vision 

and observation of small UAS, and Focus Area Pathfinder Program participants, the FAA will 

develop an update to part 107 to permit operations of small UAS at night. As for operations of 

small UA over people, the FAA received recommendations from an ARC in April 2016 that 

included a proposed regulatory framework that would allow certain small UA operations over 

people not directly involved in the operation of the aircraft. Specifically, the ARC recommended 

the FAA adopt performance-based standards to which manufacturers would adhere, in addition 

to operational restrictions when the operations of UA aircraft over people would entail the 

highest level of risk. In addition to the ARC’s recommendations, the FAA will also leverage 

lessons learned from the Focus Area Pathfinder Program (detailed in the Accomplishments 

section) as it develops standards for safe operation of small UA over people. Lastly, the FAA will 

continue to derive valuable information from waivers issued for part 107 operations, as well as 

the documents and applications on which such waivers are based.

More long-term rulemaking will explore opportunities for full integration of UAS operations 

into the NAS, including issues such as certification of UAS operations to accommodate future 

business models involving the widespread transportation of property and delivery of packages 

and supplies. This may entail operations in controlled and uncontrolled airspace with 

UAS that contain appropriate equipage and are determined to be airworthy in accordance with 

an updated process that employs appropriate standards. 

Parallel, phased efforts in research, outreach, rulemaking, standards development, and 

planning will be necessary to achieve the FAA’s strategic plan for UAS. In addition, the FAA will 

continue to consider environmental regulations and laws, such as the National Environmental 

Policy Act, and engage in tribal consultation during each rulemaking effort. The pace of UAS 

integration will be determined by the combined ability of industry, the operator community, 

and the FAA to overcome technical, regulatory, and operational challenges.

Authorization and Notification

Communicating with ATC is a normal occurrence for manned aircraft pilots, and policies and 

procedures for doing so are well-documented. However, the growing community of UAS users 

makes the authorization request and Section 336 notification processes far more burdensome 

for both ATC and UAS pilots. The small UAS rule requires remote pilots to get authorization 

from ATC prior to operating in controlled airspace; meanwhile, the Special Rule for Model 

Aircraft (Public Law 112-95, Section 336) requires model aircraft operators to notify local ATC

facilities prior to operating within 5 miles of an airport.
Version Date: July 30, 2018

34

Future legislative, industry, FAA and interagency activities could mitigate a high percentage of 

errant or delinquent UAS operations. As a result, the FAA established processes to explore an 

identification system and a low altitude authorization and notification capability (LAANC) for UA 

and operators. By the end of 2017, the FAA created the UAS Identification and Tracking ARC to 

identify and recommend available and emerging technologies for the remote identification and 

tracking of UAS, and began to roll out LAANC in a phased approach.

Low-Altitude Authorization and Notification Capability (LAANC)

The FAA partnered with external service providers on developing LAANC. Beginning with a 2016 

Request for Information (RFI), the agency sought industry feedback on ways to replace a 

cumbersome authorization process with an automated one that was scalable to industry 

demand and leverages industry innovation. Specifically, the RFI intended to:

• Engage private entities (PEs) to lead the establishment of a practical approach to 

information and data sharing 

• Develop practical demonstrations of data sharing techniques for Notification and 

Authorization (N&A), beginning with basic initial N&A functionality and continuing to 

evolve the demonstrations over time through expanding capabilities and users

• Apply collaborative problem solving among the FAA and PEs (for example, virtual and inperson workshops) to identify small UAS information sharing needs, assess experience 

data collected from demonstrations, and recommend system enhancements

The RFI identified 12 participating vendors and service providers with the ability to develop 

near term capabilities. In October 2017, the FAA deployed a prototype LAANC system9 for UA

operators at several air traffic facilities during an evaluation period to last through January 

2018. A nationwide beta test of LAANC started April 30, 2018. LAANC will be deployed 

incrementally at nearly 300 air traffic facilities covering approximately 500 airports throughout 

2018.

Once fully developed, LAANC should foster equitable access for all users and service providers 

while ensuring critical ATC technical and safety requirements are met for NAS operations. 

Ultimately, this will enable a smoother transition to an eventual UTM capability. 

UAS Identification and Tracking Aviation Rulemaking Committee 

In 2017, the FAA formed the UAS Identification and Tracking ARC, comprised of members 

representing a diverse array of stakeholders that included the aviation community and industry 

member organizations, law enforcement agencies and public safety organizations, 

manufacturers, researchers, and standards entities involved with UAS. The ARC held its first 

meeting that June and considered existing regulations applicable to drone identification and 

tracking, UTM, concerns and authorities of local law enforcement, and potential legal 

considerations. 

 9 By the end of December 2017, these participating LAANC facilities had processed more than 1,500 airspace 

authorizations.
Version Date: July 30, 2018

35

In December, the committee issued its final report and recommendations, covering issues 

related to existing and emerging technologies, law enforcement and security, and 

implementation of remote identification and tracking. Highlights of the recommendations 

include:

• Consider two methods for remote ID and tracking UA: 1) direct broadcast (transmitting 

data in one direction only with no specific destination or recipient) and (2) network 

publishing (transmitting data to an internet service or group of services). Both methods 

would send the data to an FAA-approved internet-based database.

• Ensure that data collected must include a unique identifier for UA, tracking information, 

and drone owner and remote pilot identification.

• Promote fast-tracked development of industry standards while a final remote ID and 

tracking rule is developed.

• Implement a rule in three stages, with an ultimate goal that all drones manufactured or 

sold within the United States that comply with the rule must be so-labeled. 

• Coordinate any ID and tracking system with the existing ATC system.

The FAA will use the data and recommendations in the ARC report to draft a proposed rule for 

public comment.

R&D

With the exponential growth of UAS technologies and market applications over the past few 

years, it is necessary for research to keep pace to support full integration. The FAA conducts 

applied research and priorities R&D activities in support of its regulatory integration path, 

which is intended to enable increasingly more complex UAS operations over time:

• Operations Over People: Expansion of the part 107 rule to enable small UAS to operate 

over people not directly participating in the operation.

• Expanded Operations: Builds upon part 107 small UAS operations over people while 

expanding to BVLOS operations (such as infrastructure or agriculture inspection), 

swarms, and on-airport operations.

• Small UAS Package Delivery Operations: Enables small UAS fleet operators to conduct 

external load and agricultural operations that involve multiple launches and landings for 

transporting materials.

• Non-Segregated Operations: Enables restricted UAS operations to coexist in controlled 

airspace with manned aircraft. Includes UAS operations with large, properly equipped 

UAS at varying altitudes and on instrument flight rules flight plans. Includes interstate 

delivery and small cargo operations.

• Routine or Scheduled Operations: Enables regularly scheduled UAS arrivals and 

departures at Class B, C, and D airports and permits optionally piloted aircraft for large 

cargo operations. ATC services will be available to UAS operators filing instrument flight 

rules flight plans, and routine or scheduled operations will occur as the equipment and 

automation on the UAS and in the ATC infrastructure can accommodate them.

• Large Carrier Cargo Operations: Enables cargo transport by remote pilots in U.S. 

domestic airspace, and arrivals of remotely piloted cargo flights.
Version Date: July 30, 2018

36

• Passenger Transport Operations: Enables air taxi services conducted by remote pilot, 

based on vehicle performance requirements and type certification of the aircraft, its 

equipment, and the automation technology that replaces pilot functions on board the 

aircraft.

Operational capabilities associated with each step forward are defined to help prioritize R&D 

activities and funding (see Table 1 below). Safety remains the FAA’s first priority, and continued 

support for UAS research initiatives will ensure that UA are integrated into the NAS in a safe, 

secure, and efficient manner. The FAA’s safety-related work focuses on understanding the 

hazard severity from a UAS collision with other aircraft or people on the ground, as well as ways 

to mitigate the severity. Longer-term operations with increasing levels of automation for BVLOS 

flights will need to be validated and tested. Much like the driverless cars that are being tested 

today under specific conditions, UAS operational concepts where a pilot is not readily available 

to intervene will have to be carefully considered and developed so as not to increase risk to the 

aviation system or to people and property on the ground.

Research activities are coordinated across many different types of entities, including internal 

FAA organizations, different U.S. Government agencies, and nongovernmental entities that 

perform collaborative research to support the FAA’s overall UAS integration objectives. 

Coordination with each type of entity includes the identification of research needs and current 

research, governance for continuous coordination, and mechanisms for realizing the guidance 

generated as a result of the coordination. Issues and considerations being addressed include 

DAA standards and technologies, “well clear” definition and visual compliance, collision 

Table 1: Summary of Identified Needs for Operational Capabilities
Version Date: July 30, 2018

37

avoidance standards, C2 standards and technologies, human factors, severity thresholds (for 

example, impact effects), automation/autonomy, wake turbulence effects, and detection and 

tracking. The table above summarizes ongoing priorities for each of the operational capabilities 

outlined in the UAS IRP.

The FAA’s Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) has appointed a UAS portfolio 

manager to unify and manage all UAS R&D execution. The UAS R&D portfolio includes UAS 

research being conducted at the FAA’s William J. Hughes Technical Center, the UAS COE, 

interagency UAS partnerships (NASA, DoD, DHS, DOC, etc.), UAS flight demonstrations, and all 

aviation safety research defined by the FAA’s UAS Integration Office and funded by the FAA's 

UAS Research, Engineering and Development budget line item. Additionally, the FAA’s Air 

Traffic Organization is developing concepts and requirements to address FAA challenges 

associated with the provision of air traffic services to UAS airspace users.

UAS Traffic Management (UTM) Research Transition Team (RTT)

NASA’s efforts to overcome challenges of integrating low-altitude UAS operations into both 

controlled and uncontrolled airspace are coordinated with the FAA through the UTM RTT 

established in 2015. This UAS Integration RTT will ensure that FAA/NASA collaborative efforts to 

enable safe UAS access will be properly coordinated across the two organizations. For this RTT, 

NASA is leading two research programs: “UAS in the National Airspace System,” which is 

focused on UAS operating in higher altitude and controlled airspace, and “Low Altitude UAS 

Traffic Management” research, which focuses on operations in low altitude, managed airspace.

The FAA is actively working with NASA, DoD, and DHS to enable safe and efficient low-altitude 

UAS operations under the UTM paradigm. The RTT was established to enable the seamless 

transfer of all UTM research products from NASA. NASA’s role — in collaboration with industry, 

academia, FAA, and other Federal agencies — is to conduct UTM research and develop 

technologies and concepts of use for each of UTM’s incremental functional builds (more 

recently referred to as Technical Capability Levels). From a technical standpoint, capabilities 

must be developed to depict available airspace and airspace constraints, show where all aircraft 

are operating, depict relevant weather information, and provide continuous flight tracking. 

Geo-fencing, collision avoidance, and communication technologies must also be developed to 

support UTM operations. 

For example, work is underway to research, develop, and implement a comprehensive flight 

notification system for low altitude UAS operations. This system will allow UAS operators to 

submit their flight intent, and will allow other airspace users to access that information to 

support trajectory de-confliction through knowledge of flight intent. The system will initially 

focus on small UAS operations at or below 400 feet AGL. As the notification system evolves, it 

may extend to larger UAS, higher altitudes, controlled airspace, and possibly urban areas.

While NASA’s role is focused on UTM research and technology development, the FAA will focus 

on airspace management and operational implementation. Part of this effort includes the 

development of a UAS flight information management system. Under the UTM RTT, work 

groups have been established to address concepts and use cases, data and information 
Version Date: July 30, 2018

38

exchange, information architecture, performance requirements for communications and 

navigation, and DAA. More information is available at the FAA’s R&D online portal, as well as a 

link to download the UTM RTT Plan published in January 2017. 

Research Partnerships

The FAA has increased its efforts to define requirements for UAS integration in the NAS and is 

using research, policy-making, analyses, and system engineering to satisfy these requirements. 

FAA partners in government, industry (e.g. through the UAS test sites, as previously discussed), 

and academia (i.e. the UAS COE) have also increased their efforts in these areas and offer 

additional research and analysis to support joint needs. The FAA’s ability to define and use 

specific concept level requirements to validate UAS integration into the NAS is key to effective 

interaction with partners. These partnerships are necessary to maximize opportunities for 

transfer of technology.

UAS Center of Excellence

The UAS COE focuses on research, education, and training in areas critical to safe and successful 

integration of UAS into the nation’s airspace. The COE research areas are expected to evolve 

over time, but include: 

• Evaluating the sufficiency of existing airborne surveillance equipment for manned 

aircraft (for example, transponders and/or ADS-B) in providing separation and collision 

avoidance functions for UAS.

• Supporting the establishment of maintenance data requirements for UAS to include the 

collection and analysis of maintenance and repair data from multiple UAS platforms.

• Supporting the development of a BVLOS operation framework, minimum performance 

standards for DAA systems, and the proposed operating rules, limitations, and 

guidelines for small UAS.

• Informing airworthiness requirements for UAS by using analytical computer modelling 

to examine hazard severity thresholds for UAS collisions with property and people on 

the ground as well as UAS collisions with other aircraft in the NAS.

• Supporting the development of small UAS industry consensus standards for UAS 

airworthiness, maintenance, and flight proficiency requirements.

• Examining human factors considerations for UAS control station design, pilot 

training/certification requirements, and visual observer requirements to inform the 

development of standards.

• Supporting the collection of noise measurements of UAS using current noise standards, 

to begin the initial assessment of whether noise certification procedures designed for 

manned aircraft are appropriate for UA.

Per the 2017 Appropriations Act (H.R. 224 omnibus), the ASSURE alliance is establishing a UAS 

Safety Research Center (SRC), to serve as the COE’s operational testing and validation arm. The 

SRC will provide a unique ability to:

• Incrementally build specific, tailored RDT&E capability to support FAA goals.
Version Date: July 30, 2018

39

• Purchase specialized test/measurement equipment, develop tailored models and 

simulations, and to integrate capabilities into an on-demand, multi-discipline RDT&E 

facility.

• Accomplish additional RDT&E capability growth (equipment and staffing) resourced 

from industry and other government agencies through the ASSURE Research & 

Development Corporation.

The aim of the SRC is to conduct laboratory-based research modeling, simulation and testing in 

a controlled, repeatable, high fidelity and reliable environment. Additionally, flight tests of 

appropriate scale will be coordinated with FAA UAS test sites.

MITRE/CAASD

The FAA has partnered with the MITRE Corporation — an FFRDC — and its Center for Advanced 

Aviation System Development (CAASD) to produce many UAS integration-aligned outcomes.

Fiscal year (FY) 2017 outcomes and products were delivered in September 2017. Outcomes and 

products scheduled to be delivered throughout FY18 include a multitude of R&D activities. 

These products include a multitude of R&D activities. Objectives of these outcomes include:

• Supporting the implementation of standards for safe operation of UAS without 

compromising safety or efficiency of the NAS.

• Ensuring safety assurance and cyber security processes as an integral part of normal 

operations.

• Using metrics to proactively detect issues prior to incidents or accidents.

• Collecting and analyzing the FAA’s UAS evolving operational, functional, and roadmap 

products and detailed planning information from FAA lines of business (LOB) to ensure 

alignment with the overarching UAS Integration Strategy.

• Developing a test plan that identifies goals, milestones, and metrics for this feasibility 

study and that helps ensure alignment with the Air Traffic Organization’s evolving UAS 

Roadmap and the FAA’s UAS Implementation Plan. 

MITRE/CAASD will analyze and maintain currency with UAS research internal and external to 

the FAA to identify research gaps and the mapping of these research gaps and their 

requirements as milestones for UAS integration. MITRE CAASD must conduct analysis and 

coordinate the alignment and integrations of UAS research conducted internal and external to 

the FAA to support the UAS Implementation Plan to meet FAA's rulemaking and operational 

policy objectives. The scope of MITRE/CAASD's analyses may include NASA UTM and High 

Altitude research transition teams, EXCOM SSG Science and Research Panel, ASSURE UAS COE 

research and other efforts as identified.

In 2018, MITRE/CAASD continued to coordinate with the FAA to identify advances in research 

efforts, new initiatives, and the continued evolution of the small UAS Industry. This updated 

effort includes the coordination and the integration of small UAS research advancements and 

development activities, across the FAA LOBs, NASA, industry, and academia for the 

incorporation into the UAS IRP, and the analysis for the update and management of the UAS 

R&D efforts.
Version Date: July 30, 2018

40

MITRE/CAASD will provide the FAA an interactive planning, management, and analysis 

capability to identify the R&D critical path for implementing the UAS integration regulatory 

2020 framework. It will serve as a centralized source for managing the research that supports 

the implementation and rulemaking activities for UAS integration into the NAS. The UAS R&D

management capability must support the FAA in defining dependencies and critical path 

timelines, identifying research and policy gaps, and contingency analysis to identify cost and 

schedule risks. 

NextGen and NAS Enterprise Architecture

NextGen Implementation

NextGen proposes to transform the United States’ NAS from a radar-based system with radio 

communication to a satellite-based system, shortening routes, saving time and fuel, reducing 

traffic delays, increasing system capacity, and enabling better and safer ATM. NextGen 

improvements in technology and procedures represent a widespread, transformative change in 

the management and operation of air transportation. As the FAA continues to deploy NextGen 

programs and capabilities, apply lessons learned, and establish best practices, NextGen is 

delivering tangible benefits to users. The FAA has completed implementation of the majority of 

NextGen’s foundational infrastructure, including its En Route Automation Modernization 

(ERAM) and much of the Terminal Automation Modernization and Replacement (TAMR). While 

the automation and technology support FAA internal advancements, the upgrades were also

necessary to deploy enhancements that provide direct benefits to external aviation 

stakeholders. 

Currently, work is underway in several areas that are changing the way the NAS operates:

• ADS-B

• Data Communications (Data Comm)

• NAS Voice System (NVS)

• System Wide Information Management (SWIM)

These programs will be key to integrating UAS into the NextGen Air Transportation System. For 

more information on NextGen implementation, visit www.faa.gov/nextgen. 

National Airspace System Enterprise Architecture (NAS EA)

The NAS EA is the comprehensive, multiyear strategic plan and framework for improving and 

evolving the NAS from the current portfolio of fielded ATM services and capabilities through 

2025 and beyond.

The FAA communicates integration efforts such as these through the NAS EA’s Infrastructure 

Roadmaps. These roadmaps articulate a 15-year transition strategy that depict key acquisition 

and strategic milestones, system availability and enhancements, and associated supporting 

activities such as standards development, rulemaking, prototyping and demonstrations, and 

technical validation. The roadmaps highlight changes to the NAS through the perspective of 
Version Date: July 30, 2018

41

various infrastructure domains, such as automation, communication, navigation, surveillance, 

weather, facilities, aircraft, and others. 

The January 2015 edition of the NAS EA Infrastructure Roadmaps captured part of the UAS-NAS 

integration strategy, focusing only on basic UAS rulemaking and standards development, as part 

of the aircraft domain. To enhance the representation of the full UAS-NAS integration efforts, 

the FAA established a new domain within the NAS EA Infrastructure Roadmaps called “New 

Entrants.” The purpose of this domain is to provide a single, consolidated view of all supporting 

infrastructure, investments funding additional development, and a visual representation of how 

schedule deviations may impact the timeline for assimilating these new entrants into the 

current airspace. 
Version Date: July 30, 2018

42

Conclusion

The FAA has made significant progress in integrating UAS into the NAS since the last Roadmap 

was published. However, much more must still be accomplished to achieve the FAA’s vision for 

full integration. Tremendous growth has occurred in the UAS sector over the past several years, 

and the growing interest in using UAS for business applications will continue with the 

implementation of the small UAS rule. 

The path to UAS integration must be step-by-step and take into consideration that each novel 

aspect of an operation must be folded into routine operations. Lessons learned from each new 

stage must be continuously applied to make informed decisions for subsequent steps. UAS

integration must consider risk and mitigations, and above all, must ensure the safety of the 

current airspace system and its users is maintained as progress is made.

While finalizing the small UAS rule was an important first step, the FAA will gain valuable

experience from issuing waivers to the rule, as well as from continued work performed through

the Focus Area Pathfinder Program, the UAS Test Site Program, and the FAA’s R&D portfolio, as 

well as interagency coordination. The newly launched IPP sets the stage to move even closer to

expanded operations through enhanced partnerships among industry and State, local and tribal 

authorities. This experience will inform the next round of rulemaking, which will expand UAS 

operations BVLOS for new purposes and services. Recommendations made by the DAC will help 

the FAA focus and prioritize its integration activities.

The near-term challenges of UAS integration are significant. As a result, the FAA’s strategic

goals and activities are increasingly focused on bridging the knowledge and technological gaps. 

Establishing performance and design standards to inform rulemaking and policy development, 

as well as ensuring network, cyber and other security concerns are addressed, will be areas of 

intense focus over the coming years. The FAA will also continue to educate the general public, 

many of whom have little to no aviation experience, about how to safely operate UAS in the 

NAS. 

Solving these challenges requires flexibility and a willingness to consider new and novel 

approaches to shared challenges. The pace of UAS integration will require the FAA to be nimble 

and amenable to non-traditional thinking, while its commitment to safety remains steadfast. 

This burgeoning industry brings tremendous potential economic benefits, and as the global 

trailblazer in aviation innovation, the FAA is committed to ensuring that the U.S. paves the way 

in addressing the challenges of UAS integration without compromising our worldwide 

leadership role in aviation safety.
Version Date: July 30, 2018

43

Appendices

Appendix A: Commonly Used Acronyms and Glossary

ADS-B Automatic Dependent Surveillance–Broadcast

ARC Aviation Rulemaking Committee

ATC Air Traffic Control

BVLOS Beyond Visual Line-of-Sight

C2 Command and Control

COA Certificate of Waiver or Authorization

ConOps Concept of Operations

DAA Detect and Avoid

DHS Department of Homeland Security

DoD Department of Defense

DOE Department of Energy

DOJ Department of Justice

EVLOS Extended Visual Line-of-Sight

FAA Federal Aviation Administration

FMRA FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012

ICAO International Civil Aviation Organization

NAS National Airspace System

NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration

NextGen Next Generation Air Transportation System

NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

NTIA National Telecommunications and Information Administration

R&D Research and Development

RTT Research Transition Team

SARP Science and Research Panel

UAS Unmanned Aircraft System

UTM UAS Traffic Management

VLOS Visual Line-of-Sight

14 CFR Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations

The following definitions were obtained from several sources, including:

1. Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 1.1 

2. FAA Pilot/Controller Glossary 

3. RTCA DO-320: Operational Services and Environmental Definition for Unmanned Aircraft 

Systems

4. FAA Order 8900.1, Flight Standards Information Management System, Volume 16 -

Unmanned Aircraft Systems, July 30, 2014

5. FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, Section 336

6. Sense and Avoid (SAA) for Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) – Second Caucus Workshop 

Report 2013 

7. Detect and Avoid (DAA) White Paper RTCA Paper No. 074-14/PMC-1200

8. FAA Order 8130.34C, Airworthiness Certification of Unmanned Aircraft Systems and 

Optionally Piloted Aircraft
Version Date: July 30, 2018

44

Note: Applicable sources are shown at the end of each definition in parentheses ( (1), (2), etc.). Terms 

without a specific source definition are defined in this Roadmap.

Terminology Definition

Air Traffic Control A service operated by appropriate authority to 

promote the safe, orderly, and expeditious flow of air 

traffic. (1)

Aircraft A device that is used or intended to be used for flight 

in the air. (1)

Airspace Any portion of the atmosphere sustaining aircraft 

flight and which has defined boundaries and specified 

dimensions. Airspace may be classified as to the 

specific types of flight allowed, rules of operation, and 

restrictions in accordance with International Civil 

Aviation Organization standards or State regulation. 

(3)

Airworthy An unmanned aircraft system (UAS) is airworthy if the 

aircraft and all of the other associated support 

equipment of the UAS are in condition for safe 

operation. Special emphasis must be placed on the 

integrity of the data link. If any element of the systems 

is not in condition for safe operation, then the UA 

would not be considered airworthy. (8)

Airworthiness Certification A process that the FAA uses to ensure that an aircraft 

design complies with the appropriate safety standards 

in the applicable airworthiness regulations.

Certificate of Waiver or Authorization An FAA grant of approval for a specific flight 

operation.(4)

Civil Aircraft Aircraft other than public aircraft. (4) 

Collision Avoidance The Detect (Sense) and Avoid system function where 

the UAS takes appropriate action to prevent an 

intruder from penetrating the collision volume. Action 

is expected to be initiated within a relatively short 

time horizon before closest point of approach. The 

collision avoidance function engages when all other 

modes of separation fail. (6) 

Communication Link The voice or data relay of instructions or information 

between the UAS pilot and the air traffic controller 

and other NAS users.(3) 

Control Station The equipment used to maintain control, 

communicate with, guide, or otherwise pilot an 

unmanned aircraft.(3) 

Data Link A ground-to-air communications system which 

transmits information via digital coded pulses.(3) 

Detect and Avoid Per the RTCA SC-228 DAA Working Group, the 

term/phrase “Detect and Avoid” will be synonymous 

with “Sense and Avoid,” as defined below. It is further 
Version Date: July 30, 2018

45

recognized that ICAO makes a distinction between 

these two terms/phrases.

Ground Control Station A ground control station is a control center that 

provides the facilities for human control of unmanned 

vehicles.

Note: For this document, the term is used for all 

control stations, regardless of location. 

International Civil Aviation Organization A specialized agency of the United Nations whose 

objective is to develop the principles and techniques 

of international air navigation and to foster planning 

and development of international civil air transport.

(2) 

Manned Aircraft Aircraft piloted by a human onboard.(3) 

Model Aircraft An unmanned aircraft that is capable of sustained 

flight in the atmosphere; flown within visual line-ofsight of the person operating the aircraft; and flown 

for hobby or recreational purposes.(5) 

National Airspace System The common network of U.S. airspace; air navigation 

facilities, equipment and services, airports or landing 

areas; aeronautical charts, information and services; 

rules, regulations and procedures; technical 

information; and manpower and material. Included 

are system components shared jointly with the 

military.(2) 

Optionally Piloted Aircraft A manned aircraft that can be flown by a remote pilot 

from a location not onboard the aircraft. (8)

Pathfinder Pathfinder is a framework for the agency to work 

closely with industry to develop and validate 

operational concepts for certification, operations, and 

safety beyond those contained in established or 

proposed policies and procedures.

Pilot in Command The person who:

1) has final authority and responsibility for the 

operation and safety of the flight;

2) has been designated as pilot in command before or 

during the flight; and

3) holds the appropriate category, class, and type 

rating, if appropriate, for the conduct of the flight.(1) 

Public Aircraft An aircraft operated by a governmental entity 

(including Federal, state, or local governments, and 

the U.S. Department of Defense and its military 

branches) for certain purposes as described in 49 USC 

§§ 40102(a)(41) and 40125. Public aircraft status is 

determined on an operation-by-operation basis. See 

14 CFR part 1, § 1.1 for a complete definition of a 

public aircraft. (4) 
Version Date: July 30, 2018

46

RTCA, Inc. RTCA, Inc. is a private, not-for-profit association that 

develops consensus-based recommendations 

regarding communications, navigation, surveillance, 

and air traffic management system issues. RTCA 

functions as a Federal Advisory Committee. Its 

recommendations are used by the FAA as the basis for 

policy, program, and regulatory decisions and by the 

private sector as the basis for development, 

investment and other business decisions. 

(www.rtca.org)

See and Avoid When weather conditions permit, pilots operating 

instrument flight rules or VFR are required to observe 

and maneuver to avoid other aircraft. Right-of-way 

rules are contained in 14 CFR part 91.(2) 

Sense and Avoid The capability of a UAS to remain well clear from and 

avoid collisions with other airborne traffic. Detect and 

avoid provides the functions of self-separation and 

collision avoidance to establish an analogous 

capability to “see and avoid” required by manned 

aircraft.(3) 

Small Unmanned Aircraft An unmanned aircraft weighing less than 55 pounds. 

(5) 

Special Airworthiness Certificate –

Experimental Category (UAS)

Airworthiness certificate issued to UAS and optionally 

piloted aircraft for the purposes of R&D, crew training, 

and market survey.

Unmanned Aircraft An aircraft that is operated without the possibility of 

direct human intervention from within or on the 

aircraft.(5) 

Unmanned Aircraft System An unmanned aircraft and associated elements 

(including communications 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. (5) 

Visual Line-of-Sight Unaided (corrective lenses and/or sunglasses 

exempted) visual contact between a pilot-incommand or a visual observer and a UAS sufficient to 

maintain safe operational control of the aircraft, know 

its location, and be able to scan the airspace in which 

it is operating to see and avoid other air traffic or 

objects aloft or on the ground.(4) 
Version Date: July 30, 2018

47

Appendix B: FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, Sections 331-336

SEC. 331. DEFINITIONS.

In this subtitle, the following definitions apply: 

(1) Arctic.--The term ``Arctic” means the United States zone of the Chukchi Sea, Beaufort Sea, 

and Bering Sea north of the Aleutian chain.

(2) Certificate of waiver; certificate of authorization.— The terms “certificate of waiver” and 

“certificate of authorization” mean a Federal Aviation Administration grant of approval for a 

specific flight operation.

(3) Permanent areas.—The term “permanent areas” means areas on land or water that provide 

for launch, recovery, and operation of small unmanned aircraft.

(4) Public unmanned aircraft system.—The term “public unmanned aircraft system” means an 

unmanned aircraft system that meets the qualifications and conditions required for operation of 

a public aircraft (as defined in section 40102 of title 49, United States Code).

(5) Sense and avoid capability.—The term “sense and avoid capability” means the capability of 

an unmanned aircraft to remain a safe distance from and to avoid collisions with other airborne 

aircraft.

(6) Small unmanned aircraft.—The term “small unmanned aircraft” means an unmanned aircraft 

weighing less than 55 pounds.

(7) Test range.—The term “test range” means a defined geographic area where research and 

development are conducted.

(8) Unmanned aircraft.—The term `”unmanned aircraft” means an aircraft that is operated 

without the possibility of direct human intervention from within or on the aircraft.

(9) Unmanned aircraft system.—The term “unmanned aircraft system” means 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.

SEC. 332. INTEGRATION OF CIVIL UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS INTO NATIONAL AIRSPACE SYSTEM.

(a) Required Planning for Integration.—

(1) Comprehensive plan. –Not later than 270 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the 

Secretary of Transportation, in consultation with representatives of the aviation industry, 

Federal agencies that employ unmanned aircraft systems technology in the national airspace 

system, and the unmanned aircraft systems industry, shall develop a comprehensive plan to 

safely accelerate the integration of civil unmanned aircraft systems into the national airspace 

system.

(2) Contents of plan.—The plan required under paragraph (1) shall contain, at a minimum, 

recommendations or projections on—

(A) the rulemaking to be conducted under subsection (b), with specific recommendations on 

how the rulemaking will—

(i) define the acceptable standards for operation and certification of civil unmanned

aircraft systems;

(ii) ensure that any civil unmanned aircraft system includes a sense and avoid capability; 

and
Version Date: July 30, 2018

48

(iii) establish standards and requirements for the operator and pilot of a civil unmanned 

aircraft system, including standards and requirements for registration and licensing;

(B) the best methods to enhance the technologies and subsystems necessary to achieve the 

safe and routine operation of civil unmanned aircraft systems in the national airspace 

system;

(C) a phased-in approach to the integration of civil unmanned aircraft systems into the 

national airspace system;

(D) a timeline for the phased-in approach described under subparagraph (C);

(E) creation of a safe

(F) airspace designation for cooperative manned and unmanned flight operations in the 

national airspace system;

(G) establishment of a process to develop certification, flight standards, and air traffic 

requirements for civil unmanned aircraft systems at test ranges where such systems are 

subject to testing;

(H) the best methods to ensure the safe operation of civil unmanned aircraft systems and 

public unmanned aircraft systems simultaneously in the national airspace system; and

(I) incorporation of the plan into the annual NextGen Implementation Plan document (or 

any successor document) of the Federal Aviation Administration.

(3) Deadline.--The plan required under paragraph (1) shall provide for the safe integration of 

civil unmanned aircraft systems into the national airspace system as soon as practicable, but not 

later than September 30, 2015.

(4) Report to congress.--Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, the 

Secretary shall submit to Congress a copy of the plan required under paragraph (1).

(5) Roadmap.—Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall 

approve and make available in print and on the Administration's Internet website a 5-year 

roadmap for the introduction of civil unmanned aircraft systems into the national airspace 

system, as coordinated by the Unmanned Aircraft Program Office of the Administration. The 

Secretary shall update the roadmap annually.

(b) Rulemaking. –Not later than 18 months after the date on which the plan required under 

subsection (a)(1) is submitted to Congress under subsection (a)(4), the Secretary shall publish in the 

Federal Register--

(1) 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 section 333 of this Act;

(2) a notice of proposed rulemaking to implement the recommendations of the plan required 

under subsection (a)(1), with the final rule to be published not later than 16 months after the 

date of publication of the notice; and

(3) an update to the Administration's most recent policy statement on unmanned aircraft

systems, contained in Docket No. FAA-2006-25714.

(c) Pilot Projects.—

(1) Establishment. –Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the 

Administrator shall establish a program to integrate unmanned aircraft systems into the 

national airspace system at 6 test ranges. The program shall terminate 5 years after the date of 

enactment of this Act.

(2) Program requirements.--In establishing the program under paragraph (1), the Administrator 

shall—

(A) safely designate airspace for integrated manned and unmanned flight operations in the 

national airspace system;
Version Date: July 30, 2018

49

(B) develop certification standards and air traffic requirements for unmanned flight 

operations at test ranges;

(C) coordinate with and leverage the resources of the National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration and the Department of Defense;

(D) address both civil and public unmanned aircraft systems;

(E) ensure that the program is coordinated with the Next Generation Air Transportation 

System; and

(F) provide for verification of the safety of unmanned aircraft systems and related 

navigation procedures before integration into the national airspace system.

(3) Test range locations.—In determining the location of the 6 test ranges of the program under 

paragraph (1), the Administrator shall—

(A) take into consideration geographic and climatic diversity;

(B) take into consideration the location of ground infrastructure and research needs; and

(C) consult with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the Department of 

Defense.

(4) Test range operation.—A project at a test range shall be operational not later than 180 days 

after the date on which the project is established.

(5) Report to congress.—

(A) In general.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the termination of the program 

under paragraph (1), the Administrator shall submit to the Committee on Commerce, 

Science, and Transportation of the Senate and the Committee on Transportation and 

Infrastructure and the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology of the House of 

Representatives a report setting forth the Administrator's findings and conclusions 

concerning the projects.

(B) Additional contents.--The report under subparagraph (A) shall include a description and

assessment of the progress being made in establishing special use airspace to fill the 

immediate need of the Department of Defense—

(i) to develop detection techniques for small unmanned aircraft systems; and

(ii) to validate the sense and avoid capability and operation of unmanned aircraft

systems.

(d) Expanding Use of Unmanned Aircraft Systems in Arctic.—

(1) In general. <<NOTE: Deadline. Plans.>> --Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment 

of this Act, the Secretary shall develop a plan and initiate a process to work with relevant 

Federal agencies and national and international communities to designate permanent areas in 

the Arctic where small unmanned aircraft may operate 24 hours per day for research and 

commercial purposes. The plan for operations in these permanent areas shall include the 

development of processes to facilitate the safe operation of unmanned aircraft beyond line-ofsight. Such areas shall enable over-water flights from the surface to at least 2,000 feet in 

altitude, with ingress and egress routes from selected coastal launch sites.

(2) Agreements.—To implement the plan under paragraph (1), the Secretary may enter into an 

agreement with relevant national and international communities.

(3) Aircraft approval.—Not later than 1 year after the entry into force of an agreement 

necessary to effectuate the purposes of this subsection, the Secretary shall work with relevant 

national and international communities to establish and implement a process, or may apply an 

applicable process already established, for approving the use of unmanned aircraft in the 

designated permanent areas in the Arctic without regard to whether an unmanned aircraft is 

used as a public aircraft, a civil aircraft, or a model aircraft.
Version Date: July 30, 2018

50

SEC. 333. SPECIAL RULES FOR CERTAIN UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS.

(a) In General.—Notwithstanding any other requirement of this subtitle, and not later than 180 days 

after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Transportation shall determine if certain 

unmanned aircraft systems may operate safely in the national airspace system before completion of 

the plan and rulemaking required by section 332 of this Act or the guidance required by section 334 

of this Act.

(b) Assessment of Unmanned Aircraft Systems.—In making the determination under subsection (a), 

the Secretary shall determine, at a minimum—

(1) 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; and

(2) whether a certificate of waiver, certificate of authorization, or airworthiness certification 

under section 44704 of title 49, United States Code, is required for the operation of unmanned 

aircraft systems identified under paragraph (1).

(c) Requirements for Safe Operation.—If the Secretary determines under this section that certain 

unmanned aircraft systems may operate safely in the national airspace system, the Secretary shall 

establish requirements for the safe operation of such aircraft systems in the national airspace 

system.

SEC. 334. PUBLIC UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS.

(a) Guidance.—Not later than 270 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of 

Transportation shall issue guidance regarding the operation of public unmanned aircraft 

systems to—

(1) expedite the issuance of a certificate of authorization process;

(2) provide for a collaborative process with public agencies to allow for an incremental 

expansion of access to the national airspace system as technology matures and the necessary 

safety analysis and data become available, and until standards are completed and technology 

issues are resolved;

(3) facilitate the capability of public agencies to develop and use test ranges, subject to 

operating restrictions required by the Federal Aviation Administration, to test and operate 

unmanned aircraft systems; and

(4) provide guidance on a public entity's responsibility when operating an unmanned aircraft 

without a civil airworthiness certificate issued by the Administration.

(b) Standards for Operation and Certification.—Not later than December 31, 2015, the 

Administrator shall develop and implement operational and certification requirements for the 

operation of public unmanned aircraft systems in the national airspace system.

(c) Agreements With Government Agencies.—

(1) In general.—Not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary 

shall enter into agreements with appropriate government agencies to simplify the process for 

issuing certificates of waiver or authorization with respect to applications seeking authorization 

to operate public unmanned aircraft systems in the national airspace system.

(2) Contents.—The agreements shall—

(A) with respect to an application described in paragraph (1)—

(i) provide for an expedited review of the application;
Version Date: July 30, 2018

51

(ii) require a decision by the Administrator on approval or disapproval within 60 

business days of the date of submission of the application; and

(iii) allow for an expedited appeal if the application is disapproved;

(B) allow for a one-time approval of similar operations carried out during a fixed period of 

time; and

(C) allow a government public safety agency to operate unmanned aircraft weighing 4.4 

pounds or less, if operated—

(i) within the line-of-sight of the operator;

(ii) less than 400 feet above the ground;

(iii) during daylight conditions;

(iv) within Class G airspace; and

(v) outside of 5 statute miles from any airport, heliport, seaplane base, spaceport, or

other location with aviation activities.

SEC. 335. SAFETY STUDIES.

The Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration shall carry out all safety studies necessary 

to support the integration of unmanned aircraft systems into the national airspace system.

SEC. 336. SPECIAL RULE FOR MODEL AIRCRAFT.

(a) In General.—Notwithstanding any other provision of law relating to the incorporation of 

unmanned aircraft systems into Federal Aviation Administration plans and policies, including this 

subtitle, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration may not promulgate any rule or 

regulation regarding a model aircraft, or an aircraft being developed as a model aircraft, if—

(1) the aircraft is flown strictly for hobby or recreational use;

(2) the aircraft is operated in accordance with a community-based set of safety guidelines and 

within the programming of a nationwide community-based organization;

(3) 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;

(4) the aircraft is operated in a manner that does not interfere with and gives way to any 

manned aircraft; and

(5) 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 (model aircraft operators flying from a permanent 

location within 5 miles of an airport should establish a mutually-agreed upon operating 

procedure with the airport operator and the airport air traffic control tower (when an air traffic 

facility is located at the airport)).

(b) Statutory Construction.—Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit the authority of the 

Administrator to pursue enforcement action against persons operating model aircraft who endanger

the safety of the national airspace system.

(c) Model Aircraft Defined.—In this section, the term “model aircraft” means 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.
Version Date: July 30, 2018

52

Appendix C: FAA Extension, Safety, and Security Act (FESSA) of 2016, 

Subtitle B – UAS Safety

SEC. 2201. DEFINITIONS.

(a) DEFINITIONS APPLIED.—In this subtitle, the terms ‘‘unmanned aircraft’’, ‘‘unmanned aircraft 

system’’, and ‘‘small unmanned aircraft’’ have the meanings given those terms in section 331 of the 

FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (49 U.S.C. 40101 note), as amended by this Act.

(b) FAA MODERNIZATION AND REFORM ACT.—Section 331 of the FAA Modernization and Reform 

Act of 2012 (49 U.S.C. 40101 note) is amended—

(1) in paragraph (6) by inserting ‘‘, including everything that is on board or otherwise attached to 

the aircraft’’ after ‘‘55 pounds’’; and

(2) by striking paragraph (7) and inserting the following:

‘‘(7) TEST RANGE.—

‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—The term ‘test range’ means a defined geographic area where research 

and development are conducted as authorized by the Administrator of the Federal Aviation 

Administration.

‘‘(B) INCLUSIONS.—The term ‘test range’ includes any of the 6 test ranges established by the 

Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration under section 332(c), as in effect on 

the day before the date of enactment of this subparagraph, and any public entity authorized 

by the Federal Aviation Administration as an unmanned aircraft system flight test center 

before January 1, 2009.’’.

SEC. 2202. IDENTIFICATION STANDARDS.

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration, in consultation with the 

Secretary of Transportation, the President of RTCA, Inc., and the Director of the National Institute of 

Standards and Technology, shall convene industry stakeholders to facilitate the development of 

consensus standards for remotely identifying operators and owners of unmanned aircraft systems 

and associated unmanned aircraft.

(b) CONSIDERATIONS.—As part of any standards developed under subsection (a), the Administrator 

shall ensure the consideration of—

(1) requirements for remote identification of unmanned aircraft systems;

(2) appropriate requirements for different classifications of unmanned aircraft systems 

operations, including public and civil; and

(3) the feasibility of the development and operation of a publicly accessible online database of 

unmanned aircraft and the operators thereof, and any criteria for exclusion from the database.

(c) DEADLINE.—Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall 

submit to the appropriate committees of Congress a report on any standards developed under

subsection (a).

(d) GUIDANCE.—Not later than 1 year after the date on which the Administrator submits the report 

under subsection (c), the Administrator shall issue regulations or guidance, as appropriate, based on 

any standards developed under subsection (a).

SEC. 2203. SAFETY STATEMENTS.
Version Date: July 30, 2018

53

(a) REQUIRED INFORMATION.—Beginning on the date that is 1 year after the date of publication of 

the guidance under subsection (b)(1), a manufacturer of a small unmanned aircraft shall make

available to the owner at the time of delivery of the small unmanned aircraft the safety statement 

described in subsection (b)(2).

(b) SAFETY STATEMENT.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, the 

Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration shall issue guidance for implementing this 

section.

(2) REQUIREMENTS.—A safety statement required under subsection (a) shall include—

(A) information about, and sources of, laws and regulations applicable to small unmanned 

aircraft;

(B) recommendations for using small unmanned aircraft in a manner that promotes the 

safety of persons and property;

(C) the date that the safety statement was created or last modified; and

(D) language approved by the Administrator regarding the following:

(i) A person may operate the small unmanned aircraft as a model aircraft (as defined in 

section 336 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (49 U.S.C. 40101 note)) 

or otherwise in accordance with Federal Aviation Administration authorization or

regulation, including requirements for the completion of any applicable airman test.

(ii) The definition of a model aircraft under section 336 of the FAA Modernization and 

Reform Act of 2012 (49 U.S.C. 40101 note).

(iii) The requirements regarding the operation of a model aircraft under section 336 of 

the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (49 U.S.C. 40101 note).

(iv) The Administrator may pursue enforcement action against a person operating 

model aircraft who endangers the safety of the national airspace system.

(c) CIVIL PENALTY.—A person who violates subsection (a) shall be liable for each violation to the 

United States Government for a civil penalty described in section 46301(a) of title 49, United States 

Code.

SEC. 2204. FACILITATING INTERAGENCY COOPERATION FOR UNMANNED AIRCRAFT AUTHORIZATION 

IN SUPPORT OF FIREFIGHTING OPERATIONS AND UTILITY RESTORATION.

(a) FIREFIGHTING OPERATIONS.—The Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration shall 

enter into agreements with the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture, as 

necessary, to continue the expeditious authorization of safe unmanned aircraft system operations in 

support of firefighting operations consistent with the requirements of section 334(c) of the FAA 

Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (49 U.S.C. 40101 note).

(b) UTILITY RESTORATION.—The Administrator shall enter into agreements with the Secretary of 

Energy and with such other agencies or parties, including the Federal Emergency Management

Agency, as are necessary to facilitate the expeditious authorization of safe unmanned aircraft 

system operations in support of service restoration efforts of utilities.

(c) DEFINITION OF UTILITY.—In this section, the term ‘‘utility’’ shall at a minimum include the 

definition in section 3(4) of the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 (16 U.S.C. 2602(4)).

SEC. 2205. INTERFERENCE WITH WILDFIRE SUPPRESSION, LAW ENFORCEMENT, OR EMERGENCY 

RESPONSE EFFORT BY OPERATION OF UNMANNED AIRCRAFT.
Version Date: July 30, 2018

54

(a) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 463 of title 49, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the 

following:

‘‘§ 46320. Interference with wildfire suppression, law enforcement, or emergency response effort 

by operation of unmanned aircraft

‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in subsection (b), an individual who operates an 

unmanned aircraft and in so doing knowingly or recklessly interferes with a wildfire suppression, 

law enforcement, or emergency response effort is liable to the United States Government for a 

civil penalty of not more than $20,000.

‘‘(b) EXCEPTIONS.—This section does not apply to the operation of an unmanned aircraft 

conducted by a unit or agency of the United States Government or of a State, tribal, or local 

government (including any individual conducting such operation pursuant to a contract or other 

agreement entered into with the unit or agency) for the purpose of protecting the public safety 

and welfare, including firefighting, law enforcement, or emergency response.

‘‘(c) COMPROMISE AND SETOFF.—

‘‘(1) COMPROMISE.—The United States Government may compromise the amount of a civil 

penalty imposed under this section.

‘‘(2) SETOFF.—The United States Government may deduct the amount of a civil penalty 

imposed or compromised under this section from the amounts the Government owes the 

person liable for the penalty.

‘‘(d) DEFINITIONS.—In this section, the following definitions apply:

‘‘(1) WILDFIRE.—The term ‘wildfire’ has the meaning given that term in section 2 of the 

Emergency Wildfire Suppression Act (42 U.S.C. 1856m).

‘‘(2) WILDFIRE SUPPRESSION.—The term ‘wildfire suppression’ means an effort to 

contain, extinguish, or suppress a wildfire.’’.

(b) FAA TO IMPOSE CIVIL PENALTY.—Section 46301(d)(2) of title 49, United States Code, is amended 

by inserting ‘‘section 46320,’’ after ‘‘section 46319,’’.

(c) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The analysis for chapter 463 of title 49, United States Code, is 

amended by adding at the end the following:

‘‘46320. Interference with wildfire suppression, law enforcement, or emergency response effort by operation 

of unmanned aircraft.’’.

SEC. 2206. PILOT PROJECT FOR AIRPORT SAFETY AND AIRSPACEHAZARD MITIGATION.

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration shall establish a pilot 

program for airspace hazard mitigation at airports and other critical infrastructure using unmanned 

aircraft detection systems.

(b) CONSULTATION.—In carrying out the pilot program under subsection (a), the Administrator shall 

work with the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the heads of other 

relevant Federal departments and agencies for the purpose of ensuring that technologies that are 

developed, tested, or deployed by those departments and agencies to mitigate threats posed by

errant or hostile unmanned aircraft system operations do not adversely impact or interfere with 

safe airport operations, navigation, air traffic services, or the safe and efficient operation of the

national airspace system.

(c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized to be appropriated from the 

Airport and Airway Trust Fund to carry out this section $6,000,000, to remain available until

expended.

(d) AUTHORITY.—After the pilot program established under subsection (a) ceases to be effective 

pursuant to subsection (g), the Administrator may use unmanned aircraft detection systems to
Version Date: July 30, 2018

55

detect and mitigate the unauthorized operation of an unmanned aircraft that poses a risk to 

aviation safety.

(e) REPORT.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 18 months after the date of enactment of this Act, the 

Administrator shall submit to the appropriate committees of Congress a report on the results of 

the pilot program established under subsection (a).

(2) CONTENTS.—The report required under paragraph (1) shall include the following:

(A) The number of unauthorized unmanned aircraft operations detected, together with a 

description of such operations.

(B) The number of instances in which unauthorized unmanned aircraft were mitigated, 

together with a description of such instances.

(C) The number of enforcement cases brought by the Federal Aviation Administration for 

unauthorized operation of unmanned aircraft detected through the pilot program, together 

with a description of such cases.

(D) The number of any technical failures in the pilot program, together with a description of 

such failures.

(E) Recommendations for safety and operational standards for unmanned aircraft detection 

systems.

(F) The feasibility of deployment of the systems at other airports.

(3) FORMAT.—To the extent practicable, the report prepared under paragraph (1) shall be 

submitted in a classified format. If appropriate, the report may include an unclassified summary.

(f) SUNSET.—The pilot program established under subsection (a) shall cease to be effective on the 

earlier of—

(1) the date that is 18 months after the date of enactment of this Act; and

(2) the date of the submission of the report under subsection (e).

SEC. 2207. EMERGENCY EXEMPTION PROCESS.

(a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator 

of the Federal Aviation Administration shall publish guidance for applications for, and procedures for 

the processing of, on an emergency basis, exemptions or certificates of authorization or waiver for 

the use of unmanned aircraft systems by civil or public operators in response to a catastrophe,

disaster, or other emergency to facilitate emergency response operations, such as firefighting, 

search and rescue, and utility and infrastructure restoration efforts. In processing such applications, 

the Administrator shall give priority to applications for public unmanned aircraft systems engaged in 

emergency response activities.

(b) REQUIREMENTS.—In providing guidance under subsection (a), the Administrator shall—

(1) make explicit any safety requirements that must be met for the consideration of 

applications that include requests for beyond visual line of sight or nighttime operations, or the

suspension of otherwise applicable operating restrictions, consistent with public interest and 

safety; and

(2) explicitly state the procedures for coordinating with an incident commander, if any, to 

ensure operations granted under procedures developed under subsection (a) do not interfere

with other emergency response efforts.

(c) REVIEW.—In processing applications on an emergency basis for exemptions or certificates of 

authorization or waiver for unmanned aircraft systems operations in response to a catastrophe,

disaster, or other emergency, the Administrator shall act on such applications as expeditiously as 

practicable and without requiring public notice and comment.
Version Date: July 30, 2018

56

SEC. 2208. UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT.

(a) RESEARCH PLAN FOR UTM DEVELOPMENT AND DEPLOYMENT.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration (in this section 

referred to as the ‘‘Administrator’’), in coordination with the Administrator of the National

Aeronautics and Space Administration, shall continue development of a research plan for 

unmanned aircraft systems traffic

management (in this section referred to as ‘‘UTM’’) development and deployment.

(2) REQUIREMENTS.—In developing the research plan, the Administrator shall—

(A) identify research outcomes sought; and

(B) ensure the plan is consistent with existing regulatory and operational frameworks, and 

considers potential future regulatory and operational frameworks, for unmanned aircraft 

systems in the national airspace system.

(3) ASSESSMENT.—The research plan shall include an assessment of the interoperability of a 

UTM system with existing and potential future air traffic management systems and processes.

(4) DEADLINES.—The Administrator shall—

(A) initiate development of the research plan not later than 60 days after the date of 

enactment of this Act; and

(B) not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act—

(i) complete the research plan;

(ii) submit the research plan to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 

Transportation of the

Senate and the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology and the Committee on 

Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives; and

(iii) publish the research plan on the Internet website of the Federal Aviation 

Administration.

(b) PILOT PROGRAM.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 90 days after the date of submission of the research plan under 

subsection (a)(4)(B), the Administrator, in coordination with the Administrator of the National 

Aeronautics and Space Administration, the Drone Advisory Committee, the research advisory 

committee established by section 44508(a) of title 49, United States Code, and representatives 

of the unmanned aircraft industry, shall establish a UTM system pilot program.

(2) SUNSET.—Not later than 2 years after the date of establishment of the pilot program, the 

Administrator shall conclude the pilot program.

(c) UPDATES.—Not later than 180 days after the date of establishment of the pilot program, and 

every 180 days thereafter until the date of conclusion of the pilot program, the Administrator shall 

submit to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate and the 

Committee on Science, Space, and Technology and the Committee on Transportation and 

Infrastructure of the House of Representatives an update on the status and progress of the pilot 

program.

SEC. 2209. APPLICATIONS FOR DESIGNATION.

(a) APPLICATIONS FOR DESIGNATION.—Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this 

Act, the Secretary of Transportation shall establish a process to allow applicants to petition the

Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration to prohibit or restrict the operation of an 

unmanned aircraft in close proximity to a fixed site facility.
Version Date: July 30, 2018

57

(b) REVIEW PROCESS.—

(1) APPLICATION PROCEDURES.—

(A) IN GENERAL.—The Administrator shall establish the procedures for the application for 

designation under subsection (a).

(B) REQUIREMENTS.—The procedures shall allow operators or proprietors of fixed site 

facilities to apply for designation individually or collectively.

(C) CONSIDERATIONS.—Only the following may be considered fixed site facilities:

(i) Critical infrastructure, such as energy production, transmission, and distribution 

facilities and equipment.

(ii) Oil refineries and chemical facilities.

(iii) Amusement parks.

(iv) Other locations that warrant such restrictions.

(2) DETERMINATION.—

(A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall provide for a determination under the review process 

established under subsection (a) not later than 90 days after the date of application, unless 

the applicant is provided with written notice describing the reason for the delay.

(B) AFFIRMATIVE DESIGNATIONS.—An affirmative designation shall outline—

(i) the boundaries for unmanned aircraft operation near the fixed site facility; and

(ii) such other limitations that the Administrator determines may be appropriate.

(C) CONSIDERATIONS.—In making a determination whether to grant or deny an application 

for a designation, the Administrator may consider—

(i) aviation safety;

(ii) protection of persons and property on the ground;

(iii) national security; or

(iv) homeland security.

(D) OPPORTUNITY FOR RESUBMISSION.—If an application is denied, and the applicant can 

reasonably address the reason for the denial, the Administrator may allow the applicant to 

reapply for designation.

(c) PUBLIC INFORMATION.—Designations under subsection (a) shall be published by the Federal 

Aviation Administration on a publicly accessible website.

(d) SAVINGS CLAUSE.—Nothing in this section may be construed as prohibiting the Administrator 

from authorizing operation of an aircraft, including an unmanned aircraft system, over, under, or

within a specified distance from that fixed site facility designated under subsection (b).

SEC. 2210. OPERATIONS ASSOCIATED WITH CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE.

(a) IN GENERAL.—Any application process established under section 333 of the FAA Modernization 

and Reform Act of 2012 (49 U.S.C. 40101 note) shall allow for a person to apply to the Administrator 

of the Federal Aviation Administration to operate an unmanned aircraft system, for purposes of 

conducting an activity described in subsection (b)—

(1) beyond the visual line of sight of the individual operating the unmanned aircraft system; and

(2) during the day or at night.

(b) ACTIVITIES DESCRIBED.—The activities described in this subsection are—

(1) activities for which manned aircraft may be used to comply with Federal, State, or local laws, 

including—

(A) activities to ensure compliance with Federal or State regulatory, permit, or other 

requirements, including to conduct surveys associated with applications for permits for new 
Version Date: July 30, 2018

58

pipeline or pipeline systems construction or maintenance or rehabilitation of existing 

pipelines or pipeline systems; and

(B) activities relating to ensuring compliance with—

(i) parts 192 and 195 of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations; and

(ii) the requirements of any Federal, State, or local governmental or regulatory body, or 

industry best practice, pertaining to the construction, ownership, operation,

maintenance, repair, or replacement of covered facilities;

(2) activities to inspect, repair, construct, maintain, or protect covered facilities, including for the 

purpose of responding to a pipeline, pipeline system, or electric energy infrastructure incident; 

and

(3) activities in response to or in preparation for a natural disaster, manmade disaster, severe 

weather event, or other incident beyond the control of the applicant that may cause material 

damage to a covered facility.

(c) DEFINITIONS.—In this section, the following definitions apply:

(1) COVERED FACILITY.—The term ‘‘covered facility’’ means—

(A) a pipeline or pipeline system;

(B) an electric energy generation, transmission, or distribution facility (including a renewable 

electric energy facility);

(C) an oil or gas production, refining, or processing facility; or

(D) any other critical infrastructure facility.

(2) CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE.—The term ‘‘critical infrastructure’’ has the meaning given that 

term in section 2339D of title 18, United States Code.

(d) DEADLINES.—

(1) CERTIFICATION TO CONGRESS.—Not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this 

Act, the Administrator shall submit to the appropriate committees of Congress a certification

that a process has been established to facilitate applications for unmanned aircraft systems 

operations described in this section.

(2) FAILURE TO MEET CERTIFICATION DEADLINE.—If the Administrator cannot provide a 

certification under paragraph (1), the Administrator, not later than 180 days after the deadline

specified in paragraph (1), shall update the process under section 333 of the FAA Modernization 

and Reform Act of 2012 (49 U.S.C. 40101 note) to facilitate applications for unmanned aircraft 

systems operations described in this section.

(e) EXEMPTIONS.—In addition to the operations described in this section, the Administrator may 

authorize, exempt, or otherwise allow other unmanned aircraft systems operations under section

333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (49 U.S.C. 40101 note) that are conducted 

beyond the visual line of sight of the individual operating the unmanned aircraft system or during

the day or at night.

SEC. 2211. UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ROADMAP.

Section 332(a)(5) of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (49 U.S.C. 40101 note) is 

amended—

(1) by inserting ‘‘, in coordination with the Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration (NASA) and relevant stakeholders, including those in industry and academia,’’ 

after ‘‘update’’; and

(2) by inserting after ‘‘annually.’’ the following: ‘‘The roadmap shall include, at a minimum—
Version Date: July 30, 2018

59

‘‘(A) cost estimates, planned schedules, and performance benchmarks, including specific 

tasks, milestones, and timelines, for unmanned aircraft systems integration into the national 

airspace system, including an identification of—

‘‘(i) the role of the unmanned aircraft systems test ranges established under subsection 

(c) and the

Unmanned Aircraft Systems Center of Excellence;

‘‘(ii) performance objectives for unmanned aircraft systems that operate in the national 

airspace system; and

‘‘(iii) research and development priorities for tools that could assist air traffic controllers 

as unmanned aircraft systems are integrated into the national airspace system, as 

appropriate;

‘‘(B) a description of how the Administration plans to use research and development, 

including research and development conducted through NASA’s Unmanned Aircraft Systems 

Traffic Management initiatives, to accommodate, integrate, and provide for the evolution of 

unmanned aircraft systems in the national airspace system;

‘‘(C) an assessment of critical performance abilities necessary to integrate unmanned 

aircraft systems into the national airspace system, and how these performance abilities can 

be demonstrated; and

‘‘(D) an update on the advancement of technologies needed to integrate unmanned aircraft

systems into the national airspace system, including decisionmaking by adaptive systems, 

such as sense-and-avoid capabilities and cyber physical systems security.’’.

SEC. 2212. UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS-MANNED AIRCRAFT COLLISION RESEARCH.

(a) RESEARCH.—The Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration (in this section referred to 

as the ‘‘Administrator’’), in continuation of ongoing work, shall coordinate with the Administrator of 

the National Aeronautics and Space Administration to develop a program to conduct comprehensive 

testing or modeling of unmanned aircraft systems colliding with various sized aircraft in various 

operational settings, as considered appropriate by the Administrator, including—

(1) collisions between unmanned aircraft systems of various sizes, traveling at various speeds, 

and jet aircraft of various sizes, traveling at various speeds;

(2) collisions between unmanned aircraft systems of various sizes, traveling at various speeds, 

and propeller-driven aircraft of various sizes, traveling at various speeds;

(3) collisions between unmanned aircraft systems of various sizes, traveling at various speeds, 

and rotorcraft of various sizes, traveling at various speeds; and

(4) collisions between unmanned aircraft systems and various parts of the aforementioned 

aircraft, including—

(A) windshields;

(B) noses;

(C) engines;

(D) radomes;

(E) propellers; and

(F) wings.

(b) REPORT.—Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall 

transmit to the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology and the Committee on Transportation

and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 

Transportation of the Senate a report summarizing the costs and results of research under this

section.
Version Date: July 30, 2018

60

SEC. 2213. PROBABILISTIC METRICS RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT STUDY.

(a) STUDY.—Not later than 30 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the 

Federal Aviation Administration shall enter into an arrangement with the National Academies to 

study the potential use of probabilistic assessments of risks by the Administration to streamline the 

integration of unmanned aircraft systems into the national airspace system, including any research 

and development necessary.

(b) COMPLETION DATE.—Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, the 

Administrator shall provide the results of the study to the Committee on Science, Space, and 

Technology and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of 

Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate.