The Commercial Drone Alliance, an independent non-profit organization that brings together industry leaders to advance commercial drone operations, recently hosted a BVLOS Stakeholder Summit in Washington, DC. The closed-door session on September 8 offered an opportunity for drone manufacturers, utilities, public safety representatives, and other stakeholders to exchange views on the FAA’s Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) for Part 108, which would establish rules for flight beyond visual line of sight (BVLOS).
The meeting was conducted under Chatham House Rules, so no specific names or companies are disclosed. However, the discussion highlighted several important perspectives on how the rule could impact the industry.
Balancing Waivers and New Regulatory Requirements
Participants noted a potential disconnect between what is currently authorized under waivers and what the NPRM as written would allow. Several panelists emphasized that the FAA has been highly responsive in issuing waivers for advanced operations, sometimes in less than a week. These waivers have supported public safety agencies and infrastructure operators conducting BVLOS flights.
The concern expressed was that the NPRM could impose new certification burdens that may limit flexibility compared to today’s waiver-driven framework. Attendees stressed the importance of ensuring that rulemaking does not reduce existing operational capability or slow down progress, especially as automated and dock-based solutions such as “drone-in-a-box” continue to expand.
Organizational Oversight and Training Flexibility
Another recurring theme was the shift from individual pilot certification toward organizational oversight. Several participants welcomed this change, pointing out that it places responsibility on organizations rather than individuals. For companies with established safety systems, this approach was seen as more practical and scalable.
The NPRM’s provisions on training were also discussed. Stakeholders highlighted the value of allowing organizations to design training programs tailored to the scope and scale of their operations. Simplified medical requirements for operators were also viewed as a step forward, aligning with the increasing use of automation.
Questions Around Shielded Operations and Right-of-Way
The definition of shielded environments sparked considerable discussion. While current waivers have authorized operations at higher altitudes near infrastructure—sometimes up to 200 feet above pipelines—the NPRM proposes more restrictive definitions. Some participants felt that the rule should reflect real-world experience with infrastructure inspections, where broader shielded environments have proven both safe and effective.
Right-of-way rules also raised questions. Panelists noted that under the proposed framework, drones must yield unless operating in shielded environments, with ADS-B In as a core requirement. While ADS-B was recognized as cost-effective and practical for many aircraft, participants questioned how to manage non-cooperative traffic, such as aircraft not equipped with ADS-B. Non-cooperative detection remains a technological challenge, with radar-based solutions seen as difficult and expensive to implement.
Security and Population Density Considerations
The NPRM’s proposed security requirements drew some criticism. Attendees suggested that additional TSA screening requirements for personnel involved in drone operations might not provide meaningful security benefits and could create unnecessary burdens. In particular, concerns were raised about duplicative requirements for individuals who already undergo security checks through their primary employment.
Population density restrictions also surfaced as an area of concern. Stakeholders argued that rigid density categories may not reflect practical realities of drone operations, particularly for long linear infrastructure inspections where population levels can vary dramatically along a single route. Participants also highlighted the importance of accounting for mitigations such as parachute systems, which were not fully incorporated into the proposed rule.
Moving Forward
Across the discussion, a common theme emerged: stakeholders are eager for a rule that expands operational capability without undoing the progress made through waivers and exemptions. While many praised the positive elements of organizational responsibility, training flexibility, and recognition of automation, they also flagged areas where the NPRM could be refined.
Ultimately, the BVLOS Summit underscored the importance of continued collaboration between industry and regulators to ensure that the final rule supports safe, scalable, and practical drone operations in the United States.
Comments are closed.