Analysis of the 2018 FAA Reauthorization Act

/0 Comments/in /by

Analysis of the FAA Reauthorization Act
PDF Download

Does not cover recreational UAS

By Kenji Sugahara, Ariascend

Section 342 Update of FAA Comprehensive Plan (H.R. 302 pages 102-103)

This section of the law instructs the FAA to update the FAA comprehensive plan that considers:

  • the potential use of UTM and other technologies to ensure the safe and lawful operation of unmanned aircraft in the national airspace system;
  • the appropriate roles, responsibilities, and authorities of government agencies and the private sector in identifying and reporting unlawful or harmful operations and operators of unmanned aircraft; 
  • the use of models, threat assessments, probabilities, and other methods to distinguish between lawful and unlawful operations of unmanned aircraft; and
  • appropriate systems, training, intergovernmental processes, protocols, and procedures to mitigate risks and hazards posed by unlawful or harmful operations of unmanned aircraft systems.

This is important as it updates the roadmap to integrate drones into the national airspace.  Why is this significant?  It will explore the usage of UTM for operations and may require participation in UTM down the road.

Section 345 Small Unmanned Aircraft Safety Standards (H.R. 302- pages 106-108)

This section deals with the FAA creating a process for the acceptance of risk-based consensus safety standards for sUAS.  This section is important for manufacturers, custom builders, and homebuilders. 

  • This process will authorize manufacturers to self-certify sUAS. 
  • Before accepting the safety standards, the FAA will need to take into consideration technologies such as;
    • geo-fencing, altitude limiters, sense and avoid,RTH, Remote ID, and tamper/modification resistance. 
  • The FAA will also need to consider using performance-based requirements to mitigate risk based on varying levels of risk posed by different sUAS.
  • One very important feature of this section is that it includes a requirement that cost-benefit and risk analyses must be considered for newly designed sUAS. This is important as it should help keep costs down.  What is good enough?  As an analogy- do we need Fort Knox cybersecurity or just a firewall for something like a 300 gram FPV racer? 
  • The FAA will also need to take a look at the applicability of the consensus safety standards for homebuilt sUAS and whether any category of UAS should be exempt from safety standards based on risk factors. 
    • In the exclusions section, the law specifically states that the FAA may exempt sUAS that are “not capable of navigating beyond visual line of sight of the operator through advanced flight systems and technology” as long as the exemption does not pose a risk to the safety of theNAS.
  • There are other compliance requirements and those can be found on page 107.

Section 346 Public UAS (H.R. 302- pages 109-110)

This section deals with public unmanned aircraft systems and instructing the FAA to make it easier for public bodies to use sUAS. The actively tethered sUAS exemption is new and very interesting.  Some of the highlights are listed below:

  • The FAA has been instructed to enter into agreements with each appropriate public agency to simplify the process for public agencies to get COAs or COWs.  The agreements will:
    • Provide expedited review and require approval/disapproval within 60 business days after submission of the application.
    • Allow for expedited appeal on disapproval.
    • Allow public safety agencies to operate sUAS;
      • that are 4.4 pounds or less;
      • flown within LOS;
      • at less than 400 feet AGL;
      • during daylight;
      • within class G; and,
      • flown outside of 5 statute miles from any location with aviation activities.
  • The FAA is required to (within 180 days of passage) to allow actively tethered public use sUAS without a COA, COW, or other approval by the FAA, without an airman certification, and without an airworthiness certification.  Tethered systems are specifically exempt from the consensus safety standards in section345.  However, this does not preclude theFAA from issuing regulations to ensure the safety of the NAS.
    • Meaning of actively tethered
      • The term ‘actively tethered unmanned aircraft system’ means an unmanned aircraft system in which the unmanned aircraft component—
        • weighs 4.4 pounds or less, including payload but not including the tether;
        •  is physically attached to a ground station with a taut, appropriately load-rated tether that provides continuous power to the unmanned aircraft and is unlikely to be separated from the unmanned aircraft; and
        • is controlled and retrieved by such ground station through physical manipulation of the tether.
    • Requirements for operation
      • They must be operated at less than 150 feet AGL;
      • Within Class G or at or below the ceiling published UAS facility maps for class B, C, D, or E surface airspace;
      • Not flown directly over non-participating people;
      • Operated with VLOS of operator; and,
      • Operated in a way that does not interfere with and gives way to any other aircraft.

Section 347 Special Authority for Certain UAS (H.R. 302- page 111)

Section 347 simply replaces Section 333.

Section 348 Carriage of Property by sUAS for Compensation or Hire (H.R. 302- pages 111-112)

Addresses drone delivery. Requires that rulemaking provide for performance-based standards, risk analysis, consider unique characteristics of autonomous sUAS, requirements for safe operation.

Section 350 Use of UAS at Institutions of Higher Ed. (H.R. 302- pages 115-116)

This is significant for educators.  sUAS use by an institution of higher education for educational or research purposes is now considered a“recreational purpose”.  Thus, instructors no longer need to have a Part 107 certificate as long as they adhere to the new Sec. 349.  However, there are limitations and considerations. (read the entire section if you are in education)

  • Definitions
    • Educational or research purposes includes:
      • instruction of students at the institution;
      • academic or research related uses of unmanned aircraft systems that have been approved by the institution, including Federal research;
      • activities undertaken by the institution as part of research projects, including research projects sponsored by the FederalGovernment; and
      • other academic activities approved by the institution.

Section 351 UAS IPP (H.R. 302- pages 116-119)

Codifies the IPP.

Section 352 Part 107 Transparency and Technology Improvements (H.R. 302- page 119)

Instructs the FAA to publish on the FAA website representative samples of safety justifications offered by applicants for waivers and authorizations for each regulation waived or class of airspace authorized. Section B is very welcome- It instructs the FAA (within 90 days of enactment) to revise Dronezone to provide real-time confirmation that an application that has been filed has been received- and to provide the status of the application.

Section 356 Authorization of Appropriations for Know Before You Fly Campaign (H.R. 302-page 120)

Gives $1 million per year for 5 years to the campaign.

Section 357 UAS Privacy Policy (H.R. 302- page 120)

States that it is the policy of the US that the operation of any UAS shall be carried out in a manner that respects personal privacy consistent with the Constitution along with federal, state, and local laws.

Section 357 UAS Privacy Review (H.R. 302- page 120)

The review authorized by this section should be something that the industry keeps a very close eye on. It instructs the Comptroller of the US in consideration of efforts by the NTIA to carry out a review of privacy issues and concerns associated with the operation of UAS in the NAS.  In essence unless, we provide consistent and positive feedback- it may end up either creating recommendations for NFZs, altitude limits, or create huge headaches for operators such as those proposed by the Uniform LawCommission.  It will be critical to ensure that the process is not hijacked. The Comptroller will:

  • examine and identify the existing Federal,State, or relevant local laws that address an individual’s personal privacy;
  • identify specific issues and concerns that may limit the availability of civil or criminal legal remedies regarding inappropriate operation of unmanned aircraft systems in the national airspace system;
  • identify any deficiencies in Federal, State, or local privacy protections; and
  • provide recommendations to address any limitations and deficiencies identified in paragraphs (3) and (4).

Section 359 Study on Fire Department and Emergency Service Agency Use of UAS (H.R. 302- page 121)

If your interest is in fire department and emergency service agency use of UAS, take a look at this section. You may be able to provide feedback or get involved if you are involved with national fire and emergency service organizations. 

Section 360 Study on Financing of Unmanned Aircraft Services (H.R. 302- page 122)

This is another study that the industry must keep an eye on.  It instructs the Comptroller General to initiate a study on the appropriate fee mechanisms to recover the costs of the regulation and safety oversight of sUAS and the provision of air navigation services.  E.g. How to cover the costs of Dronezone, LAANC, etc.  While theComptroller is instructed to look at a variety of factors, they are specifically instructed to take into consideration the recommendations of Task Group 3 of the Drone Advisory Committee.  While TaskGroup 3 did not make a specific set of recommendations, they outlined a number of ideas.

  • User Fees- (page 19 TG3 report)
    • For example- airman certificate fee, renewal fees, etc.
  • Point of Sale Tax- (page 20 TG3 report)
    • Sales tax on UAS either at wholesale or retail level.
  • Business Use or Transaction Tax- (page 21 TG3report)
    • Business or use tax imposed on the purchase of a drone service.
    • Operator would be responsible for collecting and remitting tax.
  • Public Private Partnership- (page 21 TG3 report)
    • Public entity would be responsible for setting policy.
    • Private entity would be responsible for administering and charging for system.
  • Auction of Lease of Airspace- (page 21 TG3report)
    • Allow companies and others to bid for airspace rights. 
    • Could be very problematic for small operators.
    • UTM providers could buy airspace then lease to users.
  • Airspace Access Charges- (page 22 TG3 report)
    • Charge to use airspace
    • UTM or LAANC could be used to charge for access airspace.
  • Report website:
  • https://www.rtca.org/sites/default/files/dac_tg3_funding_report_long_term_final.pdf

Section 361 Report on UAS and Chemical Aerial Application (H.R. 302- page 122)

This may give a sliver of hope to those who want to use UAS to spray crops and are flummoxed by Part 137. While it is only a report- it’s a start.

Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of thisAct, the Administrator shall submit to the appropriate committees of Congress a report evaluating which aviation safety requirements under part 137 of title14, Code of Federal Regulations, should apply to unmanned aircraft system operations engaged in aerial spraying of chemicals for agricultural purposes.

Section 362 Sense of Congress Regarding UA Safety (H.R. 302- page 122-123)

While only a sense of Congress and not law- this one will likely have an impact on FAA operations. This section encourages the FAA to pursue all available civil and administrative remedies including referrals to other government agencies for criminal investigations with respect to persons who operate UAS in an unauthorized manner. Says that FAA should still prioritize education.  Also encourages the FAA to partner with state and local agencies to enforce laws in regard to interference with emergency responders.

Section 363 Prohibition Regarding Weapons (H.R. 302- page 123)

Prohibits operation of UAS that is equipped or armed with a dangerous weapon unless authorized by the FAA.

Section 372 Enforcement (H.R. 302- page 127)

This section deals with the creation of a 5-year pilot program to use remote ID and tracking technologies for safety oversight including enforcement actions against operators not flying in compliance with federal regulations and laws.  Part of the pilot program includes the establishment of a mechanism for federal, state, and local law enforcement to report suspected violations of federal laws and regulations.

Bottom line:  Remote ID is coming. 

Section 373 Federal and Local Authorities (H.R. 302- page 128)

This is another study to keep a close eye on.  This section instructs the ComptrollerGeneral of the US to study the relative roles of all levels of government in the regulation and oversight of low-altitude operations of UAS in the NAS.  This is another ULC potential.  The report will review:

  • The current state of the law with respect toFederal authority over low-altitude operations of unmanned aircraft systems in the national airspace system.
  • The current state of the law with respect toState, local, and Tribal authority over low-altitude operations of unmanned aircraft systems in the national airspace system.
  • Potential gaps between authorities under paragraphs (1) and (2).
  • The degree of regulatory consistency required among the Federal Government, State governments, local governments, and Tribal governments for the safe and financially viable growth and development of the unmanned aircraft industry.
  • The interests of Federal, State, local, andTribal governments affected by low-altitude operations of unmanned aircraft systems and the authorities of those governments to protect such interests.
  • The infrastructure requirements necessary for monitoring the low-altitude operations of small unmanned aircraft and enforcing applicable laws.

Section 375 Federal Trade Commission Authority (H.R. 302- page 129)

If you fly for compensation or hire and you have a privacy policy and violate it- it becomes an unfair and deceptive practice subject toFederal Trade Commission penalties. 

Section 376 Plan for Full Operational Capability of UAS Traffic Management (H.R. 302- page 129-130)

Begins setting the stage for UTM services- allows testing, blanket waivers, etc.  Will eventually have an impact on commercial operations but some UTM services probably still away off.  Includes establishment of an implementation plan that requires the development of safety standards, establishment of roles and responsibilities, and assessment of UTM technologies.

  • UTM subjects that were listed include
    • Remote ID of both UTM and non-UTM users
    • Deconfliction between UTM users
    • Collaboration and coordination with ATC
    • Cybersecurity
    • Flying taxis, cargo
    • Standards for UTM providers
    • Protection of people and property on the ground
    • Collision avoidance
    • Other

Section 377 Early Implementation of Certain UTM Services (H.R. 302- page 132)

Allows for early implementation of certain UTM services. 

Section 378 Sense of Congress (H.R. 302- page 133)

Sense of Congress that each person or business that uses UAS for business purposes should have a privacy policy.  As noted, if you have one and violate it-then you are subject to FTC penalties. Note that this has a potential to create headaches and hassles depending on your operation.  Note- a privacy policy is NOT required by law.

Section 379 Commercial and Governmental Operators

Generally deals with governmental actors but includes a section that requires that the FAA create a spreadsheet of UAS registration, including the city, state, and zip code of each registered drone owner. It is unclear whether what, if any other information would be included. 

The DOT is required to publish the following- if it is made available to them- for all UAS that collect personally identifiable information– the DOT must make available on the website information for each UAS:

  • circumstances under which the UAS will be used
  • the specific kinds of personally identifiable information collected
  • how the collection or retention of such information that is unrelated to the specific use will be minimized
  • under what circumstances such information might be sold, leased, or otherwise provided to 3rd parties
  • the period during which such information will be retained
  • when and how such information, including information no longer relevant to the specific use will be destroyed
  • and steps that will be used to protect against the unauthorized disclosure of any information of data, such as the use of encryption methods or other security features.

Section 380 Transition Language (H.R. 302- page 134)

Addresses the transition.

All orders, determinations, rules, regulations, permits, grants, and contracts, which have been issued under any law described under subsection (b) of this section before the effective date of this Act shall continue in effect until modified or revoked by the Secretary ofTransportation, acting through the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration, as applicable, by a court of competent jurisdiction, or by operation of law other than this Act.

Section 383 Airport Safety and Airspace Hazard Mitigation and Enforcement (H.R. 302- pages 135-137)

Title 18- Aircraft Sabotage Act, Computer Fraud and AbuseAct, Wiretap Act, Pen/Trap Statute no longer apply to counter UAS when systems are used by the FAA, DoD, Homeland Security, and other federal security agencies (DOJ). Provides that FAA work with above agencies to develop a plan and test around C-UAS.  Recommend reading very closely if you are interested in C-UAS.

Section 384 Unsafe Operation of Unmanned Aircraft (H.R. 302- pages 137-138)

Heads up- this section authorizes criminal penalties including jail time.

Knowingly or recklessly interfering with or disrupting the operation of an aircraft carrying one or more persons in a manner that poses an imminent safety hazard to such occupants shall be a fine or imprisonment for not more than 1 year. 

Creates runway exclusion zone around class B, C, D at the surface- anyone who, without authorization knowingly operates a UAS within a runway exclusion zone is subject to penalties. Runway exclusion zone stretches one statute mile along the direction of the runway from the end of the runway with a width of ½ statute mile.  This exclusion zone includes ½ mile width from the runway itself.

Any person who causes serious bodily injury or death through reckless flying shall be fined and/or imprisoned for up to 10 years.

Any person who causes, attempts, or conspires to cause serious bodily injury or death by knowingly interfering or disrupting a flight or knowingly flying in runway exclusion zone shall be fined and/or imprisoned for any terms of years or for life.