On New Year’s Eve, the FAA published its long-awaited proposed rule on the tracking and identification of UAS. The publication of the rule had been delayed several times, and with nearly 1.5 million UAS and 155,000 remote pilots registered with the FAA, it is widely viewed as the lynchpin for enforcing all other UAS related rules.

The rule would apply to both commercial and recreational UAS users. All UAVs that require FAA registration will have to comply with the rule. Exemptions include amateur-built UAS, UAS of the United States government, and recreational UAS that weigh less than 0.55 pounds.

The rule proposes two categories of remote identification: standard remote identification and limited remote identification.

Under standard remote identification UAS would be required to transmit information through an internet connection and simultaneously transmit that same information via a radio frequency.  Under limited remote identification UAS “would be required to transmit information through the internet only, with no broadcast requirements; however, the unmanned aircraft would be designed to operate no more than 400 feet from the control station,” according to the proposal.

A UAS not equipped with remote ID would only be allowed to fly in "FAA-recognized" areas and would have to stay within visual line of sight.

The draft rule goes on to state: “Under this proposal, the vast majority of UAS would be required to comply with one of these two categories of remote identification. For those limited exceptions, which include certain amateur-built UAS and UAS manufactured prior to the compliance date, operators flying UAS without remote identification capabilities would be permitted to fly only at certain specific geographic areas established under this rule specifically to accommodate them.”

Click the graphic below to enlarge 

A weight-based threshold is welcome news, as NAAA was one of 10 members of the 2017 Unmanned Aircraft Systems Identification and Tracking Aviation Rulemaking Committee (UAS ID and Tracking ARC) to dissent from the ARC’s final report. In a dissenting letter, NAAA explained why lacking a weight-based threshold for compliance with the rules could “greatly undermine the value, benefits and utility of UAS ID and Tracking – not to mention, jeopardize the safety of the airspace and comprehensiveness of any future [unmanned traffic management system].” The dissent was also signed by the Commercial Drone Alliance, the General Aviation Manufacturers Association, the Aerospace Industries Association, X, GE, uAvionix, Ford Motor Co., AirMap, and General Atomics. 

The proposal would not allow any non-compliant UAS to be manufactured in the U.S. within two years of the effective date of the rule, and within three years all UAS operating in the national airspace would have to meet the rule requirements.