Small Unmanned Aircraft System Aviation Rulemaking Committee

230 Pages·2008·1.52 MB·English

r~'>m~,,
TERf~!I
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION "'.·; .,=1>1:;[;"0". 150 -..· ,
National Policy c",'-'%~ "'" ' ' ~ - "'
#t:--' ~:;,""" ' ' ' --~,'
04/10/08
SUBJ: Small Unmanned Aircraft System Aviation Rulemaking Committee
1. Purpose of this Order. This order creates the Small Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Aviation
Rulemaking Committee (ARC) according to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
Administrator's authority under Title 49 of the United States Code (49 U. S .C .) § 106(p) (5). In it,
we also outline committee organization, responsibilities and tasks.
2. Audience. We have written this order for FAA program managers and their staffs.
3. Where I can find this Order. You can find this order on the MyFAAEmployee website:
https://employees.faa.gov/tools_resources/orders_notices/ or the FAA Regulatory and Guidance
Library website at http://rgl.faa.gov.
4. New Analysis of Small UAS is Needed.
a. Based on the relatively low initial cost of small UAS, plus their low operating expense,
versatility for aerial photography, and other sensing applications, we expect that small UAS will
experience the largest near-term growth in civil/commercial UAS. Another catalyst for growth is the
interest of local law enforcement agencies in acquiring small UAS to either establish or augment their
aviation capabilities.
b. The law enforcement and aerial photography industries, plus others conducting remote sensing
activities, have mistakenly interpreted FAA advisory circular (AC) 91-57, Model Aircraft Operating
Standards, for pennission to operate small UAS for research or compensation or hire purposes.
To promote safety while updating and clarifying guidance, we at the FAA will conduct a formal safety
analysis of small UAS, and then promulgate federal regulations for their design, operation and
registration.
Issues the FAA will study include:
(1) Hazard and safety risk analysis,
(2) Registration process,
(3) Pilot training requirements,
(4) Crew medical requirements,
(5) Requirements for system certification and continuing airworthiness (includes both aircraft
and control station components),
(6) Economic impact,
(7) International harmonization, and
(8) Communications latency and vulnerability.
Distribution: A-W(VS/GC/RP/TO/IR/EP)-1 Initiated By: AIR-160
1110.150 04/10/08
c. Recommendations from the Small UAS ARC will be important to us as we establish the
regulatory basis allowing small UAS to operate in the National Airspace System (NAS) for
compensation or hire, and clarify the definition of model aircraft.
5. Small UAS ARC Committee Organization and Administration. We will set up a committee
of members of the aviation community, including the public, and or other federal government entities
representing diverse viewpoints. FAA participation and support will come from all affected lines-of
business. Where necessary, the committee may set up specialized work groups that include at least
one committee member and invited subject matter experts from industry and government.
a. The committee sponsor is the Associate Administrator for Aviation Safety, who:-
(1) Has sole discretion to appoint members or organizations to the committee,
(2) Will receive all committee recommendations and reports,
(3) Selects industry and FAA co-chairs for the committee, and
(4 ) Through the Aircraft Certification Service (AJR.), is responsible for administrative support
for the committee.
b. Co-chairs will:
(1) Detennine, (with other committee members) when a meeting is required,
(A quorum is desirable at committee meetings, but not required.),
(2) Anange notification to all members of the time and place of each meeting,
(3) Draft an agenda for each meeting and conduct the meeting, and
(4 ) Keep meeting minutes.
6. Committee Membership.
a. The committee will consist of about 20 members, representing aviation associations, industry
operators, manufacturers, employee groups or unions, FAA and other government entities, and other
aviation industry participants.
b. Membership will be balanced in points of view, interests, and knowledge of the committee
objectives and scope. Each committee member, or participant on the committee, should have the
authority to speak for the sector they represent. Committee membership is limited to promote
discussion. Active participation and commitment by members is essential for achieving committee
objectives. Attendance is essential for continued membership on the committee. The committee may
invite additional participants as subject matter expe1ts to support specialized work groups.
7. Public Participation. Persons or organizations outside this committee who want to attend a
meeting must get approval in advance of the meeting from the committee chair or designated federal
representative.
2
04/10/08 1110.150
8. Committee Procedures and Tasks.
a. The committee advises and makes recommendations to the Associate Administrator for
Aviation Safety.
b. The committee's initial task will focus on the applicability of our proposed integration
approach and related hazard/safety risk analysis. The committee will develop a work plan for each
task or issue, and an implementation plan for each recommendation. Recommendations should take
the forms of documented issue resolutions, recommended policy decisions, draft guidance material, or
proposed rulemaking, as needed.
c. Committee tasks include, but are not limited to:
(1) Reviewing the FAA's approach to integrating small UAS into the NAS,
(2) Validating that approach or recommending an alternate,
(3) Defining the risks and mitigations associated with small UAS operations,
(4) Identifying the costs associated with a proposed small UAS regulation,
(5) Identifying the economic and societal benefits of small UAS operations,
(6) Recommending rulemaldng necessary to meet objectives; and preparing a draft
proposal,
(7) Developing guidance and recommending the implementation processes,
(8) Considering global harmonization issues and recommending approaches,
(9) Documenting technical information to support recommendations,
(10) Establishing specialized work groups, as needed, to research, document, and make
recommendations on specific, assigned topics.
d. The committee will send written recommendations to the Administrator through the Associate
Administrator for Aviation Safety, as appropriate.
9. Cost and Compensation. The estimated cost to the federal government of the Small UAS
Aviation Rulemaking Committee is $100,000 annually. Non-government representatives serve
without government compensation and bear all costs of their committee participation.
10. Availability of Records. Under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 522, records,
reports, agendas, working papers, and other documents made available to, or prepared for, or by, the
committee will be available for public inspection and copying at the FAA Aircraft Certification
Service, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591. Fees will be charged for
information furnished to the public according to the fee schedule in Title 49 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (49 CPR) Part 7.
3
1110.150 04/10/08
11. Committee Term. This committee becomes an entity on the effective date of this order. The
committee will remain in existence for a term of 20 months unless its term is ended sooner or
extended by the Administrator.
12. Distribution. Distribute this order to the director level in the Office of the Associate
Administrator for Aviation Safety; the Office of the Chief Counsel; the Office of the Associate
Administrator for Airports; the Air Traffic Organization; and the Office of the Assistant Administrator
for Policy, Planning, and Environment.
13. Background.
a. On February 13, 2007, the FAA published a Notice ofP olicy for Unmanned Aircraft Systems
in the Federal Register. In it, we outlined the background of UAS development, highlighted the recent
growth in requested operations, and reiterated our current policy. Part of that policy included
AC 91-57, dating back to June 1981, which encouraged recreational users to voluntarily comply with
guidelines for safely operating remotely controlled aircraft, also called "model" airplanes. The AC
encouraged users to operate aircraft less than 400 ft above ground level and not closer than 3 miles
from airports. Subsequently, the Academy of Model Aeronautics (AMA) National Safety Code
defined model aircraft as weighing less than 55 lbs.
b. In the February 13, 2007, Federal Register Notice, we clarified our existing policies and
regulations. We received significant public feedback: proponents operating small UAS for
compensation or hire emphasized our need to issue minimally-restrictive regulation(s). At the same
time, we received criticism for not having more restrictive regulations to deal with the increasing
safety problems that small UAS may pose to general aviation. The Aircraft Owners and Pilots
Association (AOPA ), for example, urged us to develop rules for small UAS that require the same
operational safety as manned aircraft.
14. Suggestions for Improvement. If you find deficiencies, need clarification, or want to suggest
improvements on this order, send a copy of FAA Form 1320-19, Directive Feedback Information
(written or electronically) to the Aircraft Certification Service, Planning and Financial Resources
Management Branch, AIR-530, Attention: Directives Management Officer. You may also send a
copy to the Aircraft Engineering Division, AIR-100, Attention: Comments to Order 1110.150. If you
urgently need an interpretation, contact AIR-160 at [phone]. Always use Form 1320-19 to
follow up each verbal conversation.
15. Records Management. For guidance on keeping and disposing of records, see FAA
Orders 0000.1, FAA Standard Subject Classification System; 1350.14, Records Management, and
1350.15, Records, Organization, Transfer and Destruction Standards. Or, see your office Records
Management Officer or Directives Management Officer.
Robert A. Sturg
Acting Admini ator
4
April 1, 2009

Small Unmanned Aircraft System
Aviation Rulemaking Committee
Comprehensive Set of Recommendations
for sUAS Regulatory Development

April 1, 2009
Co-Chairs:
Bruce Tarbert, Federal Aviation Administration
Ted Wierzbanowski, AeroVironment, Inc
Aviation Rulemaking Committee Members
Ellis Chernoff, Air Line Pilots Association
Patrick Egan, Remote Control Aerial Photography Association
Mike Fagan, Association of Unmanned Vehicle Systems International
Carrie Haase, Auora Flight Sciences
Rob Hackman, Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association
Richard Hanson, Academy of Model Aeronautics
Andrew Lacher, The MITRE Corporation
Fred Marks, FMA
Douglas Marshall, University of North Dakota
Paul McDuffe, Boeing - Insitu
Tad McGeer, Aerovel Corporation
Mike O(cid:146)Shea, Department of Justice
Andrew Roberts, National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Don Shinnamon, International Association of Chiefs of Police
Dan Schultz, ASTM International
LTC Wade Wheeler, Department of Defense(cid:151)Policy Board for Federal
Aviation
Ardyth Williams, Federal Aviation Administration
David York, Helicopter Association International
April 1, 2009

Unless flagged with a solid dot (!), the material contained in this document represents
general consensus of the members of the Small Unmanned Aircraft System (sUAS) Aviation
Rule-making Committee. When there is less than general consensus, alternative views are
included along with their accompanying rationale.
Page ii
April 1, 2009
Forward
The Small Unmanned Aircraft System (sUAS) Aviation Rulemaking Committee (ARC) was
focused on making recommendations for Federal regulations for the operation of civil
(commercial) sUAS. However it was understood by the members of the ARC that a public
entity could fly under the provisions of any rule that might result from these
recommendations in lieu of flying under the provisions of a Certificate of Authorization
(COA) or in restricted, prohibited, or warning areas. In formulating the recommendations
contained in this document, sUAS ARC used the following guiding principles:
1. Enable the operation of sUAS by mitigating, to an acceptable level of risk, the
hazards posed to manned aircraft and other airborne objects operating in the National
Airspace System (NAS) as well as the public on the surface.
2. The development of regulations authorizing specific operations of certain sUAS
could provide a means for operators to request a waiver(s) from such a rule. Such an
option is not available to operators today.
3. Visual (cid:147)see and avoidance(cid:148) will be used by the sUAS flight crew to mitigate the risk
of collision with other aircraft and airborne objects.
4. The primary burden of maneuvering for potential collision risk avoidance should be
on the sUAS flight crew.
5. All other aircraft have the right-of-way over sUAS.
6. The above two principles do not relieve burden upon any pilot to see and avoid other
aircraft.
7. Operating limitations will be defined to reduce or minimize potential encounters
between manned and unmanned aircraft and reduce vulnerability of those on the
surface.
8. A formal Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) safety risk assessment will be used
to determine whether proposed regulations are acceptable to the FAA from a safety
perspective. If a specific recommendation is not acceptable from a safety perspective
then the FAA may require additional mitigations and/or controls.
9. Mitigations and controls should be tied to the level of risk to avoid being overly
burdensome on the application of sUAS technology. If a specific recommendation is
overly excessive or burdensome then the FAA may elect to modify the
recommendation in developing proposed regulations.
10. The recommended regulations should not be overly complex to facilitate analysis by
the FAA and other stakeholders.
11. Recommendations will leverage existing standards and regulations which govern the
operation of small unmanned and Model Aircraft.
12. Where feasible, the ARC will use existing definitions and regulations to develop
recommendations.
Page iii
April 1, 2009
13. sUAS ARC recommendations for an Special Federal Airworthiness Regulation
(sFAR):
• Are intended to enable some initial sUAS operations
• Are not intended to cover all potential applications or aircraft
- Existing processes such as COAs for public-use aircraft and Special
Airworthiness Certificate will remain options.
- Recommendations are directed at sUAS not necessarily all unmanned aircraft
systems.
Overall the committee was focused on a layered approach to ensuring that the potential risks
associated with mid-air collisions and/or injury to persons and property is within acceptable
levels. Many of the committee(cid:146)s recommendations were made based upon experience with
existing aviation operations and regulations and perceptions of risk. Overall, the committee
was equally focused on protecting existing air traffic and persons/property on the surface. In
general, the philosophy was to minimize encounters, keep sUAS separated from other
aircraft and surface risks, avoid collisions, and minimize the impact of collisions that may
happen. See Figure 1.
The committee perceives that the recommendations in this document combine together to
enable sUAS operations at an acceptable level of risk. As more experience with sUAS is
gained and more data generated, these recommendations should be revisited.
For the most part, the committee(cid:146)s recommendations are written in a language like proposed
regulations. Rationale and commentary which explain the recommended regulations are
imbedded throughout the document and appear inside boxes in italic text. Unless flagged
with a solid dot (!), the material contained in this document represents general consensus of
the members of the sUAS ARC. When there was less than general consensus, alternative
views are included inside boxes in italic text along with their accompanying rationale.

Page iv
April 1, 2009
Aircraft & Other People & Property
Airborne Objects on the Surface
(cid:149) Altitude limits Reduce Encounters
(cid:149) Take-off/Landing areas
(cid:149) Airspace class limits
(cid:149) Population density considerations
(cid:149) Fly-away protection / C2 link
(cid:149) Access controls
robustness
(cid:149) Buffer zones
(cid:149) Away from airports
(cid:149) Crew training
(cid:149) Crew training
Keep Separated
(cid:149) VMC/Day/VLOS
(cid:149) ATC Notifications (cid:149) VMC/Day/VLOS
(cid:149) System
(cid:149) Visual Observer (cid:149) Telemetry
design/testing
(cid:149) Comm monitoring (cid:149) Proximity to people/property
(cid:149) Crew training
(cid:149) Crew training
(cid:149) Telemetry
Avoid Collisions
(cid:149) Visual Observer
(cid:149) Visual Observer
(cid:149) Performance requirements
(cid:149) Crew training
(cid:149) Visibility (Paint, strobe,
(cid:149) System Design/testing
transponder)
(cid:149) Crew training
Minimize Impact
(cid:149) Physical size
(cid:149) Physical size
(cid:149) Frangibility
(cid:149) Frangibility
(cid:149) Airspeed limits
(cid:149) Airspeed limits
Acceptable Level of Risk

Figure 1. Layered Approach for Ensuring Safety

Page v
This page intentionally left blank