New FAA Drone Rules – BVLOS and Part 108 Explained

The proposal to fly a drone beyond visual line of sight (BVLOS) is out, and it’s 650 pages long, complex, and written by a government agency. So, we went through all the head-banging, the hair-pulling, the highs, and the lows so you don’t have to. And we compiled this deep dive into what it likely will look like to fly a drone beyond visual line of sight in the United States around 2027 probably. Let’s get to it.

So all the information I’m about to explain is available in this 647-page notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM for short), and that thing is published in the Federal Register. Now it contains a lengthy explanation of what is being proposed and also why, and that is called a preamble. Now toward the end of the document, you can actually find the proposed regulation, and it would look more like something from ecfr.gov—something that you might be more familiar with. Now, please keep in mind here—this is important—that this is proposed regulation.

Now, the reason for this notice of proposed rulemaking is to allow the general public and industry partners to leave their comments and let the FAA know what they probably should be changing in this. And you might be saying, “What’s the point? Government never listens.” We actually have seen the FAA make a lot of changes to previous NPRMs, including Part 107 and then also Remote ID. And yes, the results are not always everything that people asked for, but some significant changes—like not including network remote ID, for example—were in the NPRM for remote ID, and that was actually a big win for all users all over the United States. Now, to be clear here, this is a video that is only designed to educate you on the proposed Part 108. I’m restraining from infusing my personal opinion right now. Now, we are going to have a full dedicated video on what we think is good, bad, and ugly about this proposal and then also how to submit your comments, which are due by October 6 of 2025.

Relationship to Existing Regulations

Now, I want to make a couple things very clear here. Number one, there’s absolutely no relationship between the proposed Part 108 and Part 107 that you might be familiar with. Now, you’re going to say, “How is that even possible?” Well, the short answer is that Part 107 is not required to operate a drone that is going to be flown beyond visual line of sight under Part 108. So, which certificate do you actually need to fly under Part 108? Well, that’s kind of a good question, and the answer is none. And yes, we’re going to talk about this in the video, but this really takes me to my second point. I want you to think about all the different ways that we can currently operate a UAS in the United States at the moment. You can obviously fly under Part 107 and then under the recreational rules (49 USC 44809). Those are the most common ones, but if you’re in public safety, you can also operate under Part 91 using what we call a COA (certificate of waiver or authorization). And you can also operate with more complex operations like drone delivery under Part 135. This is all at the moment right now. And if you fly large drones over 55 lbs—like in some agricultural settings, for example—you can fly under 49 USC 44807. And now there’s a new way, and that’s Part 108. Part 108 is going to be for flying a drone—any UAS—beyond visual line of sight. Now, the FAA envisions that Part 108 will be primarily autonomous flights. This is important. There will be very little to no involvement from the person supervising the flight. And I want to read you this section of the preamble because I think it summarizes this very well:

“Airman certification should not be required because certification is not consistent with the envisioned UAS and operation subject to this proposed rule. That’s Part 108. On manned aircraft, the pilot is responsible for operational control and safety of the flight from the flight deck. With the increased autonomy of UAS, the role of the pilot has and will continue to decrease. The UAS industry has increasingly come to rely on technology rather than human interaction or intervention to ensure safe flight. Industry reliance on technology rather than on human interaction is driven in part by the fact that UAS do not carry a responsible person that can control and ensure the safety of flight from within the aircraft.”

Now you might have noticed here that there is a lack of mention of the word “pilot.” As a matter of fact, it’s nowhere really in this entire document. And that’s because the FAA is not envisioning that a pilot is going to operate drones under Part 108. I know it’s kind of a head-scratcher. Instead, there will be a supervisor that will oversee and supervise the operation. Their job is simply to make sure that the automation is doing its job. And if it’s not, they will actually have very little control over the aircraft. More on that in the video. The other big shift here is obviously the aircraft. Because the FAA expects that these flights are going to be mostly autonomous, it is going to require that an aircraft has special equipment. And there are a few terms here that are mentioned in this document. Again, we’re going to come back to all of these: detect and avoid (or DAA for short), strategic deconfliction, and even conformance monitoring. And yes, like I said, we will define all these terms in the video.

So, at this point, you’re probably saying, well, this is only going to be good for package delivery, right? Not necessarily, actually. The FAA has an entire list of operations that they expect will be conducted under this new proposal. And yes, package delivery is one of them. But there’s also agricultural application, aerial surveying, civic interest, UAS training, demonstration, flight tests, and even recreational flying. And I’m not saying that this is going to be easy because, well, let’s be clear, it’s not. It will require a lot of paperwork, and I don’t really expect the average user to be able to utilize this rule or fly under this rule, at least not the way that it’s currently written. And yes, there are still weight limits, and they depend actually on the type of operation that you plan on doing. But drones could actually be as big as 1,320 lbs. And to be clear, for the rest of the video, I’m going to be saying BVLOS for beyond visual line of sight and NPRM for notice of proposed rulemaking.

Proposed Changes to Existing Regulations

Before we get into the details of Part 108, the FAA is proposing some changes to a few different parts of the Code of Federal Regulations. That’s existing regulation. And let me tell you, not all of them are really all that interesting. A notable change here is in 14 CFR Part 48, which has to do with registration and markings for your drone. Remember how right now under Part 107, you cannot reuse a remote ID module on multiple drones? You have to have one registered technically for each of them. Well, in this NPRM, the FAA is proposing that now they can allow you to use the same remote ID module on any of your drones, just like it is for recreational users. It sounds like a small win, but you know, hey, we’ll take a win.

There’s also a few proposed changes to Part 107 itself. And the main one is that you will no longer be able to fly BVLOS at all under Part 107. And you might say, “Well, I could never really do that anyway.” That’s partly true because you could actually request to fly BVLOS using a waiver. But now with this new proposal, you actually will no longer be able to apply for a waiver to fly BVLOS under Part 107. And yes, that is kind of a big deal because the only avenue now to fly BVLOS is going to be under Part 108. A nice little addition that is in Part 107 that is proposed is language that would prohibit anyone from interfering with a remote pilot in command or a visual observer who is operating under Part 107. That language actually also exists under Part 108. Two additional proposed changes to Part 107: The carriage of property for compensation or hire is no longer going to be covered under Part 107. That’s your drone delivery if you want. And yes, that’s a big deal because you won’t be able to do any sort of drone delivery at all under Part 107, even if it was something not related to package delivery necessarily in the grand scheme of things, the way that we think about them. And of course, there are some serious proposed changes to the right-of-way rules that are contained in 14 CFR Part 91.113 if you’re familiar with this. But we have a full explanation of this in a few minutes because, well, this is going to affect not only drone pilots but especially manned aircraft pilots as it is proposed right now.

Key Players in Part 108

So now that we have looked at all of the changes and you have somewhat of a better understanding of the big picture hopefully, let’s take a look at the key players that we’re going to talk about individually in this video. And if you want to follow along, click on the link in the description to get a PDF that breaks down everything. And we’re starting with the operator. Okay. Unlike Part 107 where you have a remote pilot in command, the FAA here imagines that there will be an operator. Think of this as like the company behind operating an entire fleet of aircraft to fly beyond visual line of sight. The operator would be required to have a few key positions in place, and it’s really not as many as you might think.

The FAA also needs to approve the area of operation. And this is not going to be a free-for-all like I can fly anywhere I want beyond visual line of sight. It’s going to be more two different types of operation that can be conducted. And the FAA looks at these from a risk-based perspective. For simpler operations, you’re going to be receiving a permit to operate. For complex operations, you’re going to be receiving a certificate. And of course, as you can imagine, there are different types of requirements in order to conduct certificated operations than it would be for permitted operations. Another key player here is the aircraft and of course the aircraft manufacturer as well. And there are a lot of requirements here that are going to need to be met, including special technology that needs to be available in order to avoid midair collisions.

And the final key player here is what the FAA refers to as an automated data service provider. These were also called in the past third-party service suppliers or UTM service providers. Uh, these are terms that we’ve seen in previous FAA documentation. A lot of what these providers are going to do is conceptual at the moment, but the idea is that they will provide a service to operators in order to help them detect and avoid other aircraft in the airspace.

The Operator

So I mentioned the operator earlier. This is the person, but really the company that is going to be held responsible for operating these drones under Part 108. And there is somewhat of a big shift here from the FAA with this. Peppered throughout this entire document is the notion that the FAA is shifting responsibility from themselves to really the operator. To me, this is a really interesting approach, especially after the fallout that we’ve seen with the entire Boeing controversy the last couple years. And here’s a quote from the preamble that I think puts it in perspective:

“Given the shift from human-controlled unmanned aircraft to systems-controlled unmanned aircraft intended to be operated under this rulemaking, FAA proposes to shift certain operating responsibilities from individuals to organizations. This proposed corporate responsibility model requires operators to satisfy the regulatory requirement for safe operation, which includes ensuring that the personnel they employ must meet the requirements.”

And as you can imagine, to become an approved operator, you are going to need to fill out quite a bit of paperwork, and you will need to have key personnel in place. The first one, which is required for pretty much any sort of operation except for recreational, is called the operations supervisor. Think about this as the chief of operations. This is the person in charge of everything that happens with the Part 108 program.

Now according to the preamble, the supervisor is, and I quote, “directly responsible for and the final authority as to the safe and secure operation of all unmanned aircraft.” The FAA here proposes that the operations supervisor be qualified. Now, that qualification can be received via training, experience, or expertise. Now, note again that this position here is not officially certificated by the FAA. Instead, the FAA is going to rely on the operator to make sure that this person is qualified. If you’re wondering if the operations supervisor is the person operating the aircraft itself, they actually are not. That’s what the flight coordinator is for. And there is a big caveat here: only if it is required by the manufacturer’s operating instructions. This means that if the manufacturer decides—and the FAA approves it—that the aircraft they built does not need to have a flight coordinator, then it would mean that this aircraft could be flown without a human monitoring anything that it does.

Now, interestingly, the flight coordinator position would have limited access to manually controlling the aircraft. I’m going to say that again: the flight coordinator would have limited access to manually controlling the aircraft. And I’m going to read you a portion here of the preamble that is related to that concept, and it’s called simplified user interaction (or SUI for short): “This requirement for SUI features would not permit pilot-in-the-loop designs that rely on manual control where the flight coordinator is responsible for providing input through devices such as rudder pedals, a stick, yoke, or throttle to include hand controllers with joysticks that are popular among hobbyists.

Pilot-in-the-loop controls such as push buttons, knobs, or touchscreens would only be permitted to enable the flight coordinator to execute simple commands such as changes in air speed, altitude, and heading.” Now, the flight coordinator here would need to have at least 5 hours of operating experience within the last 12 calendar months in a specific make and model of the aircraft to be operated. Now that experience would be received under either direct supervision from a flight coordinator (another one), an operations supervisor, or a person that is qualified and designated by the operator. There would actually be no specific FAA medical certificate required for any of these positions in case you were wondering. Also, an interesting nugget here: The flight coordinator could be allowed to supervise more than one aircraft at the same time. But this would have to be dictated by the aircraft manufacturer. And technically, these are the only two positions that would be required for operation under Part 108. Although the FAA does mention that there are a few optional other positions that could appear inside of an operation, such as maintenance and alteration, ground handling, loading and unloading of the aircraft, servicing and upkeep of the systems, and then a position that would establish flight paths and emergency procedures inside of the operational parameters. This is more like a dispatcher, I think, is what they have in mind. But all of these would actually be tailored depending on the operation, and it would be up to the operator to set them up.

The FAA is proposing to require operators to make sure that all of the personnel that is involved receive the applicable training. Now, there’s a list of topics, many of which are the same as the topics that are covered in Part 107. Keeping in mind that while there is no pathway right now to credit any Part 107 holders with the training, it would actually be up to the operator to do that. And to go back to the difference between Part 107 and Part 108 and why they are not linked, here’s a little bit of an excerpt from the preamble that I think explains it: “There are fundamental differences between the existing Part 107 and the proposed Part 108. Under Part 107, most of the operators are hobbyists, recreational, and individual flyers who are less likely to know and understand the necessary regulations. For example, airspace designation, operations over people without having a testing requirement to do so. Therefore, it is important to verify that Part 107 operators understand these important restrictions. Thus, the prerequisite of a Part 107 remote pilot certificate is a knowledge test focusing on regulations and basic aviation knowledge and does not include a skills test like traditional manned aircraft certificates under Part 61. Part 107 operations are primarily designed for individuals, i.e., the remote pilot.

Accordingly, the FAA’s approach to mitigating risk of Part 107 operations is focused on the remote pilot’s knowledge of the regulations and less on the remote pilot’s overall skills and reliability of the specific unmanned aircraft. Despite their size, small unmanned aircraft operated under Part 107 are much like traditional aircraft in that they rely heavily on user input and hand flying. These circumstances are dissimilar to the heavier, diverse, and more autonomous UAS that are reliant on technology and programming to a greater degree as envisioned under Part 108. To account for these differences, this proposal would reassign most functions performed by a pilot in traditional manned aircraft or similar or analogous functions performed by remote pilots under Part 107 to technology and to autonomous systems.” Something else here about operations personnel: They would be required to go through TSA approval, including getting fingerprinted and having a background check. And they would also need to meet rest requirements. That includes a few things: a maximum of 14-hour duty day, 50-hour duty week, 10-hour continuous rest within a 24-hour period prior to reporting for duty, and then one day off per week.

Right-of-Way Rules

Next up, I want to talk about an important operational concept to operate in the national airspace. And that really right now has nothing to do with Part 108 just yet. Let me just explain this. That’s the concept of right-of-way. Let me give you a picture of how right-of-way rules are structured right now at the moment as we’re recording this pre-Part 108. Drones have the lowest level of priority in the airspace, meaning that they have to give way to all other aircraft that are flying in the national airspace system. There are currently two different methods to identify aircraft in the airspace. Manned aircraft use ADS-B. All right, drones are going to use remote ID. ADS-B Out is going to send the location and the altitude of the aircraft to ground bases. And these ground bases are going to share the information with air traffic controllers, with all other users in the airspace.

UAS pilots are able to receive that ADS-B information using what’s called ADS-B In. ADS-B Out from the aircraft, ADS-B In into other aircraft and into drones potentially. ADS-B Out is only required in what equates to busy airspace. An important note: most law enforcement aircraft and most government aircraft at the moment do not broadcast ADS-B when they’re flying in public airspace, including when they’re flying below 500 ft AGL. UAS are going to broadcast their location using remote ID, but manned aircraft don’t have a way to receive that information. Historically, UAS have not been allowed to broadcast their location using ADS-B Out. There are some technology restrictions, but with this proposal, the FAA is envisioning something that has never been seen before. They’re proposing that manned aircraft that do not broadcast their position via ADS-B Out give way to unmanned aircraft that are flying BVLOS under Part 108.

I’m going to say that again: They are proposing that manned aircraft that do not broadcast their position via ADS-B Out will give way to unmanned aircraft that are flying BVLOS under Part 108. And there are certain obvious restrictions here that are not going to apply, especially if you’re close to an airport, for example, or if you’re in busy airspace, then that right-of-way would not apply. Now, this proposed change here would be made in 14 CFR Part 91.113.

Area of Operations

Next up, let’s go ahead and talk about the area of operations. The FAA will need to approve each area of operations where the drones are going to be flown beyond visual line of sight. Now, because this type of operation will require flying over people, the FAA came up with five classifications of population density, and they are called—guess what?—categories. Just like we had in Part 107, but they’re different—different meaning. The higher the population density, the more restrictions there will be on the type of operations that can be conducted. I’m going to put a graph right here on the screen that shows you what the categories are and how they are defined and what the limitations are for each. I’m not going to go through the details of each. I recommend that you pause right now and that you get familiar with all of them.

In this section, we also see the creation of shielded operations. Don’t get too excited. It’s actually fairly limited at the moment. It’s basically an area where no manned aircraft are expected, but it is defined. With that being said, there is no requirement for detect and avoid, and there are no right-of-way rules when you’re flying in shielded operations. It is defined as within 50 ft of power lines or substations, railroad tracks, bridges, and pipelines. That’s it at the moment. A big caveat here is that you will need to obtain permission from the infrastructure owner first before you fly.

Now, you might be wondering about operations over moving vehicles. There’s currently almost no language regarding flying over moving vehicles in Part 108, which leads us to believe that there are no restrictions to flying over moving vehicles. But there is a mention for more complex operations: the FAA is going to require a specific analysis to review the risk associated with operating over moving vehicles. But that’s only for complex operations. Another interesting nugget in this area here is the introduction of 14 CFR Part 74, which does not exist yet, but it’s called unmanned aircraft flight restrictions. From the look of it, it looks to me like this is going to be related to Section 2209 of the 2016 FAA Reauthorization Act. This could lead to creating areas where drones would not be able to operate. This is actually something we’ve been waiting for for a very long time. There will be another NPRM specifically for Part 74.

Types of Operations

Next on the docket, let’s talk about the types of operations that can be conducted under Part 108. The FAA is proposing two different methods of approval here: a permit and a certificate. I mentioned that in the intro. The permit would allow for simpler, less risky operations, while the certificate would be for more complex flying. For permitted operations, you will need to apply and receive a permit. It’s going to be valid for two years, and that permit is specific to one of eight types of operations. That’s right. You can get that permit only for that one of eight types of operations. And within each type of operation, there are additional restrictions like the maximum number of registered aircraft that you can have in your fleet, a maximum aircraft weight, and restrictions on operations over people based on that population density category that I talked about earlier. For package delivery, that’s kind of self-explanatory what that is. The limit is 100 active aircraft and then no more than 55 pounds of maximum takeoff weight—same kind as Part 107—and then only flying over Category 3 or less population densities.

There’s also going to be a TSA requirement here regarding applying for a limited security program approval. Then we have agricultural operations, which are needed for aerial seeding, dusting, spraying, fertilizing, crop improvement, or pest control. And there’s no more than 10 active aircraft here. And the maximum weight is 1,320 pounds and then only over Category 1 population areas. That’s it. Next is aerial surveying operations. This would be needed for photography, videography, mapping, inspection, or patrolling operations. Fewer than 25 aircraft in this case, 110 lbs maximum takeoff weight, and Category 3 population density or lower. And then there’s civic interest operations. This is interesting. This consists of forest and wildlife conservation or operations in support of public safety, including fire, accident, and disaster response. The key here: the operator must coordinate and deconflict operations with law enforcement or the government.

The fleet size here must be less than 25 aircraft, 110 pounds maximum takeoff weight. An operation must be conducted by an entity that is contracted to a federal, state, local, tribal, or territorial government. Also, Category 3 population or lower for density—or really any category to the extent necessary to safeguard life in imminent threat. That’s what it says here. An important note here: it does not look like this section would apply to public safety agencies and does not intend to replace the COAs that are currently issued under Part 91. The next one is UAS training. This one is pretty straightforward. Fewer than 10 aircraft, 1,320 pounds maximum takeoff weight, and Category 1 population density only. Then we have demonstration operations. This would apply to air races, air shows, sales demonstrations or exhibitions, or the practice in preparation for related events.

The limitations here are fewer than 50 aircraft, 110 lbs maximum takeoff weight, Category 2 population or lower, and at least 500 ft away from non-participating people. Then we have flight test operations. This would apply to flight testing of unmanned aircraft design modifications or any kind of other development-related operations. This would only apply to qualified manufacturers or to accredited educational institutions. 1,320 lbs of maximum takeoff weight, Category 1 population only, and then no airworthiness acceptance would be needed because, well, they’re doing testing. And then the last one: recreational operations. You might be excited about this one, but only one active aircraft, a maximum of 55 lbs, Category 3 or lower population density, and no more than 10 nautical miles from the flight coordinator.

There is relief from some of the requirements that other permits would need to have. For example, there is no 5-hour experience required. There is no base of operations needed. There’s no operations supervisor needed. There’s no cybersecurity policy needed. And there’s no duty and rest requirements. And if the limitations in permitted operations are too tight for you, then you could apply for conducting operations under certificated operations. That’s what it’s called. Now for that, you are going to need to have a training program. You need to have communications and ground risk assessment. You would need a safety management system (SMS for short). You need to have hazardous materials training. You would need to have a procedure to deal with inoperative equipment. Now in return, there won’t be as many restrictions.

For example, they would remove the restrictions on the number of active aircraft. And there’s only four ways that you can operate under a certificate under certificated operations: package delivery, with the main difference here from the permitted operation is that the weight goes from 55 pounds to 110 pounds; agricultural operations, this would allow dispensing what’s called economic poison or substances that are intended for plant nourishment, soil treatment, propagation of plant life, or pest control. Now, if you’re in this field, you know what that means. If not, move on. Limitations here would include no dispensing over people, which kind of makes sense, and then Category 3 or lower density area. And then the last two are aerial surveying and civic interest. Same definitions as what we had before, but now they would have similar limitations for these two. It would allow for the aircraft to be up to 1,320 lbs, but if the aircraft weighs over 110 lbs, then it’s now limited to Category 4 or lower population density.

The Aircraft and Manufacturer

All right, time to maybe take a break if you haven’t taken one just yet. I know it’s a lot of information. Uh, but I’m going to move on into the next key player, which is the aircraft and the manufacturer. Now, from an aircraft perspective, the important thing here is to know that the manufacturer would need to receive an airworthiness acceptance. Now, this is not the same as an airworthiness certificate, which is traditionally the method that the FAA has used to approve aircraft in the past. This process would be more similar to getting an approval to fly over people, for example, meaning that you would need to get a declaration of compliance from the FAA. Note that at the moment you can only receive an airworthiness acceptance as a manufacturer if you are based in the United States or if you are part of a country that has a bilateral airworthiness agreement for unmanned aircraft. I don’t know how many of those exist at the moment. I could not find that information when I searched. Now, to qualify, the manufacturer will need to have a safety bulletin, implement and maintain a safety program, and it would need to provide unrestricted access to its facility and to all of its data and documentation to the FAA upon request.

Now, the manufacturer will also need to create operating instructions, which I’m excited about. I applaud this. This would contain information such as the procedures and the limitations, the designated operations that the aircraft is qualified to do—those eight different categories we talked about earlier—the ratio of aircraft to flight coordinator (how many aircraft can one flight coordinator fly), and then maintenance instructions. Now the manufacturer would also need to collect data for the aircraft and then retain that data for 2 years. Regarding the aircraft itself: no more than 25 ft of wingspan, 1,320 lbs of weight—we’ve said that before—and then a maximum ground speed of 87 knots, which is 100 mph. Now, to be operated at night, it would need to have an anti-collision light, which makes sense. And if it has a wingspan of 96 in or more, then it needs to have the red, green, white position lights that we see on manned aircraft.

And of course, going back to our discussion earlier in the video, it would need to be equipped with simplified user interaction (SUI), meaning that there would be minimal input from the flight coordinator for the aircraft to fly. There are some additional requirements in here in the design itself such as having redundancy for the power generation, power storage, and distribution system. They would also need to have redundancies for the propulsion system. And then also you need to have some cybersecurity requirements. Also it must have been test-flown for 150 hours without experiencing any kind of failures leading to unsafe conditions.

Automated Data Service Providers

Now the last piece of this complex puzzle are the automated data service providers. As I said earlier in the video, this is very much conceptual at the moment. Now, let me read you a portion of the preamble that captures the essence of what I think ADSPs—not ADS-B—are going to do. And I know it might be tempting this late in the video, but please, please don’t take a shot every time I say strategic deconfliction. Strategic deconfliction is one example of the automated data service that would be provided. Strategic deconfliction would significantly scale UAS BVLOS operations under proposed Part 108. Using strategic deconfliction, a UAS operator can strategically deconflict flight paths, thereby operating safely in the NAS (National Airspace System).

Automated data services may fulfill a variety of purposes, including mitigating risk depending on their exact functionality. For example, automated data services that provide strategic coordination for UAS operations reduce the risk of midair collision between a manned aircraft, thereby reducing the risk of harm to people and property due to falling debris from that mid-air collision. Other kinds of automated data services may support operators’ detect and avoid responsibilities, including by providing surveillance information and avoidance maneuvering instructions that could be more comprehensive or accurate than those the operator may provide using their own systems. Automated data services may also help operators avoid controlled flight into terrain or loss of control by providing operators with specialized data before and during flight operations to manage a variety of risk factors.

Wrapping Up The New FAA Drone Rules: BVLOS and Part 108

And there you have it, folks. You’ve made it all the way to the end. Yes, I know this is a lot of information, and I know it’s going to take time to absorb. It’s taking us a lot of time to absorb this and going through all this, taking notes, discussing this in the office. But remember, this is only proposed regulation. Now, you have a chance to submit comments and to provide your feedback. And as I said before, we’re going to be pushing a video to help you formulate these comments, what you should be commenting on, what the FAA is asking you to comment on as well. So, please subscribe if you want to get notified when that video comes out. And as always, thanks for watching. Fly safe and of course within visual line of sight for now.