The National Academies of Science (NAS) released a report saying the FAA is being too conservative when developing risk-based UAV regulations. The report says because the FAA requires UAV operators to show a near-zero level of risk, the agency is hampering industry innovation and needs to shift its approach to balancing the risks and benefits of UAVs.  

The report reads, in part, "The focus of the FAA is often solely on what might go wrong, and the dialogue now needs to shift toward balancing risks with potential advantages of drone operations, developing a holistic picture on overall risk and benefit.”

NAAA strongly opposes loosening safety standards for UAVs and believes regulations that apply to manned aircraft should also apply to UAVs. The FAA’s approach to developing these standards have created the safest airspace in the world, and it would be a mistake to scrap existing risk-based standards, putting the public, and low-flying aviators in particular, at risk.

A recent Government Accountability Office Report found the FAA lacked effective UAV oversight due to its lack of reliable data and deficiencies in its risk management approach. The FAA is currently working on establishing new ways to collect the necessary data to refine its risk-management methods. This surgical approach to tweaking risk-management standards is far more appropriate, particularly because it will be based on sound data.

Additionally, the UAV pilot program allowing for expanded UAV operations at 10 different sites across the U.S. should result in a trove of data to make the integration of UAVs into the national airspace safer and efficient.