[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 182 (Friday, September 18, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 58251-58255]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-17882]
========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 182 / Friday, September 18, 2020 /
Rules and Regulations
[[Page 58251]]
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 21
[Docket No. FAA-2019-1038]
Type Certification of Certain Unmanned Aircraft Systems
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Notice of policy.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation Administration announces its policy for
the type certification of certain unmanned aircraft systems as a
special class of aircraft.
DATES: This policy is effective September 18, 2020.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrew Guion, Programs and Procedures
Section, AIR-694, Small Airplane Standards Branch, Policy and
Innovation Division, Aircraft Certification Service, Federal Aviation
Administration, 901 Locust St., Room 301, Kansas City, MO 64106,
telephone (816) 329-4141, facsimile (816) 329-4090.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
In 2012, Congress passed the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of
2012 (Pub. L. 112-95). Section 332 of Public Law 112-95 (codified at 49
U.S.C. 44802) directed the FAA to develop a comprehensive plan to
safely accelerate the integration of unmanned aircraft systems (UAS)
into the National Airspace System (NAS). As part of that plan, the FAA
issued the Operation and Certification of Small Unmanned Aircraft
Systems final rule (81 FR 42064, June 28, 2016), which added 14 CFR
part 107 to the FAA's regulations in Title 14 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (14 CFR).
Part 107 sets forth rules for the operation of small UAS \1\ that
do not require FAA airworthiness certification. Under part 107,
operations may not occur over persons,\2\ at night, generally above an
altitude of 400 feet above ground level, or beyond visual line-of-
sight, without a waiver issued by the FAA. UAS weighing 55 pounds or
more and small UAS operating outside the limitations imposed by part
107 must receive airworthiness certification, a waiver, or an exemption
as appropriate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See 14 CFR 107.3.
\2\ But see the FAA's proposed amendment to part 107 to allow
operations of small UAS over people in certain conditions (84 FR
3856, February 13, 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The FAA establishes airworthiness criteria and issues type
certificates to ensure the safe operation of aircraft in accordance
with 49 U.S.C. 44701(a) and 44704. Section 44704 requires the
Administrator to find an aircraft, aircraft engine, propeller, or
appliance is properly designed and manufactured, performs properly, and
meets the regulations and minimum standards prescribed under section
44701(a) before issuing a type certificate for it.
14 CFR part 21 contains the FAA's procedural requirements for
airworthiness and type certification. When the FAA promulgated part 21
as part of its recodification to combine and streamline the Civil Air
Regulations, it originally required applicants for a type certificate
to show that the product met existing airworthiness standards (29 FR
14562, October 24, 1964). Existing airworthiness standards for aircraft
and other products, issued as a separate part of the FAA's regulations,
are: Normal category airplanes under 14 CFR part 23, transport category
airplanes under 14 CFR part 25, normal category rotorcraft under 14 CFR
part 27, transport category rotorcraft under 14 CFR part 29, manned
free balloons under 14 CFR part 31, aircraft engines under 14 CFR part
33, and propellers under 14 CFR part 35.
The FAA subsequently amended part 21 to add procedural requirements
for the issuance of type certificates for special classes of aircraft
(52 FR 8040, March 13, 1987). In the final rule (amendment 21-60), the
FAA explained that it intended the special class category to include,
in part, those aircraft that would be eligible for a standard
airworthiness certificate but for which certification standards do not
exist due to their unique, novel, or unusual design features. The FAA
further stated that the ``decision to type certificate an aircraft in
either the special class aircraft category or under . . . the FAR is
entirely dependent upon the aircraft's unique, novel, and/or unusual
design features.'' (52 FR 8041).
Specifically, the final rule (amendment 21-60) revised Sec.
21.17(b) to include the certification procedure for special classes of
aircraft. For special classes of aircraft, for which airworthiness
standards have not been issued, the applicable airworthiness
requirements will be the portions of those existing standards contained
in parts 23, 25, 27, 29, 31, 33, and 35 found by the FAA to be
appropriate for the aircraft and applicable to a specific type design,
or such airworthiness criteria as the FAA may find provide an
equivalent level of safety to those parts.
An ``unmanned aircraft'' is an aircraft operated without the
possibility of direct human intervention from within or on the
aircraft. See 49 U.S.C. 44801(11); 14 CFR 1.1. Unmanned aircraft
include all classes of airplanes, rotorcraft, and powered-lift
aircraft. Many UAS elements, while essential for safe operation, are
part of the UAS system but are not permanent features of the unmanned
aircraft. For example, instead of traditional landing gear with wheels
and brakes, many UAS have a launch and recovery system. Additionally,
because the pilot is not situated within the aircraft, unique
configurations and applications of airframes, powerplants, fuels, and
materials are possible and can result in flight characteristics
different from those of conventional aircraft. These features specific
to UAS are the very unique, novel, and/or unusual features the special
class category was designed to accommodate.
A notice of policy and request for comments regarding the type
certification of certain UAS was published in the Federal Register on
February 3, 2020 (85 FR 5905). The public comment period for the notice
closed on March 4, 2020. The notice proposed that some UAS with no
occupants onboard may be type certificated as a special class of
aircraft under Sec. 21.17(b). The notice also proposed that for
airplane and rotorcraft
[[Page 58252]]
designs, when appropriate, the FAA may still issue type certificates
under Sec. 21.17(a).
Discussion of Comments
The FAA received 66 comments. The majority of the commenters were
individual UAS operators. The remaining commenters included UAS
manufacturers, the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma (CNO), the People's
Republic of China (PRC), and organizations such as the Aerospace
Industries Association (AIA), the Aircraft Owners and Pilots
Association (AOPA), Airlines for America (A4A), the Air Line Pilots
Association (ALPA), the Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems
International (AUVSI), the Commercial Drone Alliance (CDA), the
National Agricultural Aviation Association (NAAA), SAE International
(SAE), and the Small UAV Coalition. The following summarizes the
comments received and the FAA's response.
AIA, AOPA, A4A, Amazon Prime Air, the Choctaw Nation, the
Commercial Drone Alliance, SAE, and twelve other commenters expressed
support for the policy.
A. Certification Process
An anonymous commenter requested the FAA publish a timeline for the
certification process. FAA Order 8110.4C, Type Certification, dated
March 28, 2007,\3\ contains procedures and policy for the type
certification of products. This order describes the FAA and applicant
responsibilities in establishing a project schedule. The certification
timeline for each project will vary significantly depending on the
project details, scope, and complexity. Due to these many variables,
the FAA is unable to publish a timeline specific to the type
certification of UAS that would be widely applicable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ You can find this order at http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/orders_notices.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
An individual requested that the FAA establish a less restrictive
process for UAS type certification for first responders and emergency
management operators for State agencies and subdivisions. The commenter
suggested that because the primary job of emergency responders is
public safety, the type certification process was burdensome and
unwarranted. Certain FAA civil certification and safety oversight
regulations do not apply to public aircraft. Aircraft that do not meet
the qualifications for public aircraft status are civil aircraft.\4\
UAS operated by government agencies, law enforcement, and State public
safety entities may qualify as public aircraft, as defined by statute
under 49 U.S.C. 40102(a)(41) and 40125.\5\ This policy for type
certification of certain UAS only applies to civil aircraft.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ 49 U.S.C. 40102(a)(16).
\5\ Title 49 U.S.C. 40102(a)(41) provides the definition of
``public aircraft'' and Sec. 40125 provides the qualifications for
public aircraft status. Additional information on public aircraft is
provided in Advisory Circular (AC) 00-1.1B, Public Aircraft
Operations--Manned and Unmanned. This AC is available at https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/AC_00-1.1B.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aero Systems West requested the FAA provide an accelerated process
for small UAS with parachute safety systems installed. The commenter
stated that controlling descent rate is the most important contributor
to decreasing the probability of human injury during a UAS flight
mishap. The FAA disagrees that a different process is appropriate for
designs that incorporate a parachute system. While a parachute recovery
system may mitigate some risks for a UAS, it is, by itself, unlikely to
provide comprehensive mitigation of all potential risks such that an
accelerated type certification process would be suitable.
Another individual questioned how the public could provide
meaningful comments on the particularized airworthiness criteria for
each applicant when the applicant's proprietary operational and design
data are normally withheld by the FAA. Under the process for
certification as a special class of aircraft, the FAA will publish a
notice for public comment on the particularized airworthiness criteria
for each applicant. The commenter is correct that the FAA cannot
disclose proprietary or confidential design data from manufacturers in
these notices because such disclosure is prohibited by the Trade
Secrets Act, 18 U.S.C. 1905 (1979). Instead, the FAA will provide a
general description of the product, similar to what will be shown on
the type certificate data sheet (TCDS). This is the same process the
FAA has followed for the certification of special class aircraft such
as gliders, airships, and very light airplanes.
The CNO and the CDA requested that the FAA clarify the effect of
this policy on other rules. This request was specific to a statement in
the proposed policy that the policy would apply only to the procedures
for the type certification of UAS and is not intended to establish or
impact other FAA rules (operations, pilot certification, or
maintenance) regarding UAS. These commenters agreed that a type
certificate will not provide a UAS operator with operational authority,
but stated the FAA should clarify that the operating limitations in the
TCDS will address, and therefore impact, issues such as operations,
pilot certification, or maintenance. The FAA agrees that type
certification of individual UAS may include operating limitations that
impact operations, pilot certification, or maintenance. The purpose of
the statement in the proposal was to advise the public that the FAA
does not intend for this policy to overrule FAA regulations regarding
UAS, particularly other FAA rules outside of part 21.
B. Applicability of This Policy
An individual and AOPA requested that the FAA exempt model aircraft
from this policy, and fifteen individual commenters objected to the
policy contending that it would have a negative impact on hobbyists.
The CNO and the CDA stated the policy should apply to all UAS
regardless of weight. Several commenters requested that the FAA clarify
the types of advanced operations, in addition to package delivery,
affected by the policy and which UAS may require type certification.
This policy addresses the process the FAA will use to establish
airworthiness standards for type certification of some UAS with no
occupants onboard, when a UAS manufacturer requests type certification.
Whether a UAS requires a type certificate depends upon the weight of
the UAS, the purpose of the operations, and the particular operating
rules under which the UAS is expected to operate.\6\ This policy does
not apply to UAS that are operated under the exception for limited
recreational operations, as they are not required to meet airworthiness
requirements or apply for type certification.\7\ Small UAS operating
under part 107 do not require a type certificate.\8\ UAS weighing 55
pounds or more and small UAS operating under the requirements of 14 CFR
parts 91 or 135 require either a type certificate, a waiver, an
exemption, or a special airworthiness certificate, as appropriate.
Package delivery, for example, and other complex operations such as
agricultural, inspection, monitoring, infrastructure surveillance,
pseudo-satellites, or those involving carriage of other property for
compensation or hire may be affected by this policy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Additional information about the rules for each type of UAS
user can be found at https://www.faa.gov/uas/.
\7\ See 49 U.S.C. 44809.
\8\ See 14 CFR 21.1(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
One commenter requested the policy not apply to UAS carrying
occupants, as
[[Page 58253]]
any occupant-carrying UAS should be certificated under the same process
as manned aircraft. The FAA agrees. This policy addresses type
certification of some UAS with no occupants onboard.
AIA requested that the scope of the policy also include optionally
piloted aircraft. The commenter stated that optionally piloted aircraft
are becoming increasingly possible as technology continues to mature.
The FAA disagrees. An optionally piloted aircraft (OPA) is a manned
aircraft that can be flown or controlled by the onboard pilot in
command or by another individual from a location not onboard the
aircraft.\9\ Although the method of controlling the aircraft is
optional, in either case the pilot in command always remains onboard
the aircraft. Thus, OPA are beyond the scope of this policy because
they are not unmanned aircraft as defined by 49 U.S.C. 44801(11) and 14
CFR 1.1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See Appendix F of FAA Order 8130.34D, Airworthiness
Certification of Unmanned Aircraft Systems and Optionally Piloted
Aircraft, dated September 8, 2017. You can find this order at http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/orders_notices.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. Requests for Changes to the Policy
The CNO and the CDA requested that the type certification policy be
streamlined, flexible, and account for changing technologies. The
commenters stated that the type certification process should take
months instead of years and should accommodate innovation. The FAA
responds that this policy provides a flexible type certification
process that allows particularized airworthiness criteria for each
product design. Under this policy, as technologies change and
applicants propose innovative and unique type designs, so too may the
airworthiness criteria evolve. The FAA further notes that the pace of
any certification program is driven by many factors, including the
complexity of the project and the applicant's development and testing
timelines.
Joby Aviation requested the FAA prioritize using existing
airworthiness standards under the process in Sec. 21.17(a) when a
product closely matches the characteristics of the airplane or
rotorcraft class and where special conditions (under Sec. 21.16) can
be reasonably used to address differences. The commenter stated the
approach of using the flexibility of the special class process in Sec.
21.17(b) makes sense for certain UAS or products where it is not
reasonable to apply existing airworthiness standards. The purpose of
this policy is to use the flexibility provided in the Sec. 21.17(b)
certification process to address the unique configurations and
innovative applications of airframes, powerplants, fuels, and materials
found in most UAS designs. For unmanned airplane and unmanned
rotorcraft designs where the airworthiness standards in part 23 or 27,
respectively, are appropriate for the certification basis, the FAA may
still issue type certificates under the processes in Sec. Sec. 21.16
and 21.17(a). The certification path for each individual UAS project
will be based on applicability, relevance, appropriateness, and
suitability.
Joby Aviation also requested that the FAA certificate passenger-
carrying UAS under the existing, proven standards in part 23 or part
27, as appropriate to the individual aircraft design, under the process
in Sec. 21.17(a). Kilroy Aviation suggested a multi-tiered
certification approach for UAS, with a tier for passenger-carrying UAS.
These comments are beyond the scope of this policy, which does not
apply to UAS that carry occupants.
Another commenter requested that the FAA define the certification
types, methods, and timeline more thoroughly before issuing this
policy. This commenter stated that the widely varying types and uses of
UAS make one blanket type of certification ineffective, or even
meaningless. The FAA notes that this policy is only a procedural policy
for establishing the airworthiness standards for the type certification
of some UAS. The notice of proposed policy requesting comments for the
type certification of unmanned aircraft systems, which published in the
Federal Register on February 3, 2020 (85 FR 5905), explained the
legislative and regulatory history, background, and the FAA's reasons
for type certificating certain UAS as a special class of aircraft under
Sec. 21.17(b). The purpose of this policy is to provide a flexible
process until generally applicable UAS airworthiness standards are
identified and established. Under the process for certification as a
special class of aircraft, the FAA will publish a notice seeking public
comment on the particularized airworthiness criteria for each
applicant. The particularized airworthiness criteria will not become
final until the FAA considers any public comments and publishes the
airworthiness criteria as the certification basis for the applicant's
design.
The PRC requested that the FAA's policy use the three UAS
categories (open, specific, and certified) proposed by the Joint
Authorities for Rulemaking on Unmanned Systems (JARUS) and issued by
the European Union.\10\ This commenter also requested that the FAA
timely inform international aviation partners of its UAS type
certification standards. The FAA notes that this policy is only a
procedural policy for establishing airworthiness standards for the type
certification of certain UAS. If the FAA determines it appropriate, as
UAS technology develops and generally applicable standards are
identified, the FAA may establish standards through rulemaking. During
those activities, the FAA would further evaluate the UAS categories
established by the European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) and the
diversity of UAS designs to help inform future agency action. The FAA
will continue its collaboration with international partners in
government and industry on UAS certification requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ https://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/40525/delegated-act_drones.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kilroy Aviation, the CNO, and the CDA commented on FAA resources
for UAS certification projects. The CNO and the CDA requested the FAA
allocate sufficient personnel to support the exponential increase in
UAS certification projects. Kilroy Aviation requested the FAA delegate
UAS compliance findings to designees. The FAA is committed to the safe
and efficient integration of UAS into the NAS, and type certification
of UAS is an important step in that process. The FAA will continue to
assess its resources and make any necessary adjustments to process
certification projects of UAS and other aircraft. However, comments
regarding the delegation of UAS certification findings to designees are
beyond the scope of this policy.
One commenter requested the policy prohibit UAS manufacturers from
self-certifying their designs. This comment is beyond the scope of this
policy. This policy outlines only the process for how the FAA will
establish airworthiness standards for the type certification of certain
UAS. FAA Order 8110.4C contains procedures and policy for the type
certification of products, including how an applicant for a type
certificate demonstrates compliance.
The CNO and the CDA requested the FAA ensure early and frequent
coordination among FAA offices. These commenters stated that inter-
office coordination between those responsible for issuing the type
certificate and those responsible for issuing operational authority was
critical, so that applicants have the authority to operate the UAS when
its type certificate is issued. The FAA agrees. A type certificate is a
design approval and only one of several
[[Page 58254]]
requirements (airworthiness, pilot certification, registration, air
traffic control authorization, air carrier certification, etc.) that
must be met for an aircraft to operate in the NAS. The FAA established
the UAS Integration Office to facilitate coordination amongst FAA
offices on UAS activities.
ALPA requested the FAA limit the duration of the policy to not more
than two years, as the process should only be interim until the FAA
develops certification regulations specifically designed for UAS. The
FAA does not agree. At this time, it is not possible to foresee when
generally applicable airworthiness standards for UAS would be
established or what form they may take. The FAA may supersede this
policy at any time by issuing generally applicable standards through
rulemaking.
An individual requested the policy define unmanned aircraft using
consistent taxonomy. This commenter noted that many common UAS designs
are not easy to categorize as an airplane, rotorcraft, or hybrid lift.
This commenter also requested that the policy define the term
``unmanned aircraft system,'' as that term is not defined in 14 CFR
1.1. The FAA agrees that UAS designs are diverse. However, this policy
only addresses the process for how the FAA will establish airworthiness
standards for the type certification of certain UAS as a special class.
Although there is no corresponding definition in 14 CFR part 1, the
term ``unmanned aircraft system'' is defined by statute at 49 U.S.C.
44801(12) as an unmanned aircraft and its associated elements
(including communication links and the components that control the
unmanned aircraft) that are required for the operator to operate safely
and efficiently in the NAS.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See also 14 CFR 107.3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
E. Airworthiness Criteria for UAS
ALPA, the CNO, the CDA, NAAA, Wing Aviation LLC (Wing Aviation),
Kilroy Aviation, Valqari LLC, and six individual commenters requested
the FAA adopt specific airworthiness criteria for UAS. These criteria
included subjects such as weather, collision avoidance, marking and
coloring, strobe lighting, system safety assessments, payload, weight,
software, propeller shrouds and other safety equipment, noise,
batteries, public safety, and control stations. Kilroy Aviation
requested the FAA consider using the certification criteria for ``small
category VTOL aircraft'' adopted by EASA. Amazon Prime Air requested
that, while the FAA uses the process under Sec. 21.17(b) for type
certification, the agency also form a working group to evaluate and
create new rules for UAS airworthiness standards. These comments are
beyond the scope of this policy. This policy outlines only the
procedures for how the FAA will establish airworthiness standards for
the type certification of certain UAS. The particularized airworthiness
criteria for each applicant will vary as appropriate and applicable to
the specific UAS design. The FAA will announce and seek public comment
on the airworthiness criteria for each applicant. The FAA will also
continue to work with the public, industry, other civil aviation
authorities, and standards development organizations to create and
refine standards and policy for UAS.
Wing Aviation and other commenters requested the airworthiness
criteria for UAS be performance-based. The FAA agrees and anticipates
issuing performance-based airworthiness criteria based on each
applicant's design when possible. The FAA will announce and seek public
comment on these criteria for each applicant.
Kilroy Aviation, the CNO, and the CDA requested the FAA harmonize
UAS certification standards with EASA and other foreign civil aviation
authorities. The FAA agrees that having harmonization and consistency
on UAS policy and requirements with foreign authorities is prudent;
however, the implementation of this comment is beyond the scope of this
policy.
F. Operational Rules for UAS
The CNO, the CDA, Valqari LLC, and three individual commenters
requested the FAA adopt specific criteria and rules for UAS based on
operational factors. These factors included beyond visual line of sight
(BVLOS) operations (especially in rural areas), designated airspace
below 400 feet for agricultural drone use, night operations, and
location of the UAS operation. Operational considerations, such as
BVLOS and detect and avoid requirements, are beyond the scope of this
policy.
Several commenters also requested that the policy be risk-based and
account for the specific risks encountered by each UAS within its
operating environment. The FAA agrees and plans to use a risk-based
approach for UAS type certification. The FAA anticipates issuing
performance-based airworthiness criteria for each individual
applicant's design. For example, some applicants will demonstrate
compliance with the criteria by durability and reliability (D&R)
testing at a level tailored for the design based on its risk. The D&R
testing would result in an acceptable number of successful flight
hours, representative of mission cycles to substantiate the overall
reliability of the UAS.
Several commenters requested that the FAA restrict UAS operations
over residential areas and schools and provide protections for
citizens' right to privacy. The operational issues raised by these
comments are beyond the scope of this policy, which is limited to the
process for establishing airworthiness standards for type
certification.
The CNO, the CDA, and an individual requested that the FAA combine
operational authority with the issuance of the type certificate. These
commenters suggested that since the airworthiness criteria for each
type-certificated UAS will go through the public notice and comment
process, that process should include any exemptions from parts 91 and
61 (general operating and flight rules and flight crew certification
requirements) necessary to operate. These commenters further suggested
that the conditions and limitations typically included in the grant of
an exemption could then be incorporated on the TCDS as operating
limitations. This policy outlines the process for how the FAA will
establish airworthiness standards for the type certification of certain
UAS. The process for granting relief from operational and airmen
certification rules is addressed in 14 CFR part 11.
G. Request for Generally Applicable Standards
Kilroy Aviation, the CNO, the CDA, and an individual requested that
the FAA issue additional guidance or rulemaking or recognize standards
for UAS certification in a timely manner. The FAA is committed to
developing the regulations, policy, procedures, guidance material, and
training requirements necessary to support the safe and efficient
integration of UAS into the NAS. The implementation of these activities
is beyond the scope of this policy.
H. Comments Regarding Airmen
Droneport Texas LLC requested the FAA update remote pilot training
requirements and study aids so pilots are aware of the distinctions for
type-certificated UAS. This commenter also requested the FAA create
specialized training for maintainers, operators, and remote pilots of
UAS type certificated as a special class of aircraft. One individual
requested the FAA develop
[[Page 58255]]
different classes of recreational UAS pilots. Another individual
requested the FAA create specific aircraft type ratings for remote
pilots. However, the airmen training and certification issues raised by
these comments are beyond the scope of this policy, which is limited to
the process for type certification.
I. Requests for the FAA To Withdraw the Policy
An anonymous commenter opposed the policy and stated it will stifle
innovation, limit recreation, and unnecessarily intrude on personal
freedoms. Fifteen individual commenters opposed the policy based on
concerns it would overburden hobbyists and negatively impact the model
aircraft community. The FAA infers that these commenters would like the
FAA to withdraw the policy. This policy will not burden or negatively
impact a person conducting limited recreational operations with a small
unmanned aircraft under 49 U.S.C. 44809, because type certification is
not required for these operations. For other UAS, type certification
may be required, depending on the weight of the UAS, the purpose of the
operations, and the operating rules to which the UAS is subject. This
policy provides a timely and flexible type certification process to
ensure that a UAS design complies with appropriate safety standards.
J. Requests for an Extension of the Comment Period
Two individual commenters requested that the FAA extend the comment
period in order to solicit additional input and define additional
requirements. These comments noted that the comment period for this
notice overlapped with the comment period for the FAA's proposed
rulemaking on remote identification of UAS (84 FR 72438, December 31,
2019). The FAA has considered the request and determined that 30 days
provided an appropriate time for comment on the proposed policy, as
sufficient feedback on the policy was provided by the public during the
comment period.
K. Comments on Other FAA Rules
Some commenters expressed concerns about the FAA's proposed remote
identification rule. Other commenters stated opposition to FAA's rules
for small UAS in part 107. DJI Technology, Inc., commented on
operations and associated waivers under part 107. Because these
comments concern FAA rulemakings on other issues, they are outside the
scope of this policy.
L. Other Out of Scope Comments
Two commenters requested the FAA address UAS-related products (3-D
printed parts, test benches). DJI Technology, Inc., requested that the
FAA revise its regulations to allow American companies to manufacture
UAS at facilities outside the United States. An individual commenter
requested that the FAA revise 14 CFR 21.25(a)(1) to allow UAS as a
special purpose operation for issuance of a restricted category type
certificate. These comments are outside the scope of this policy, which
specifies a process for establishing airworthiness standards for type
certification of certain UAS.
The FAA also received and reviewed several comments that were very
general, stated the commenter's viewpoint without a suggestion specific
to the policy, or did not make a request the FAA can act on. These
comments are outside the scope of this policy.
Policy
The FAA has determined that some UAS may be type certificated as a
``special class'' of aircraft under Sec. 21.17(b). The FAA will issue
type certificates for UAS with no occupants onboard under the process
in Sec. 21.17(b). However, the FAA may still issue type certificates
under Sec. 21.17(a) for airplane and rotorcraft UAS designs where the
airworthiness standards in part 23, 25, 27 or 29, respectively, are
appropriate for the certification basis. This policy applies only to
the procedures for the type certification of UAS, and is not intended
to establish policy impacting other FAA rules pertaining to unmanned
aircraft, such as operations, pilot certification, or maintenance.
The FAA will seek public comment on the particularized
airworthiness criteria for each applicant as certification standards
for this new special class evolve. Once generally applicable standards
are identified, the FAA may conduct rulemaking.
The FAA's part 107 rulemaking on small UAS was only the first step
in the FAA's plan to integrate UAS into the NAS. Many long-term
activities are required for full integration of present and future UAS
operations, which will include the delivery of packages and
transportation of people. The UAS affected by this policy will include
those used for package delivery. Future FAA activity, through either
further policy or rulemaking, will address type certification for UAS
carrying occupants.
The contents of this document do not have the force and effect of
law and are not meant to bind the public in any way. This document is
intended only to provide clarity to the public regarding existing
requirements under the law or agency policies.
Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on August 11, 2020.
Pat Mullen,
Manager, Small Airplane Standards Branch, Policy and Innovation
Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2020-17882 Filed 9-17-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P