faa registration lawsuit one

ORIGINAL

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OFFOR IHF DISTRIC) OF flLUMBTA ‘iTR,iuFcoLUMBIAcIRCUIT

JOb A. TAYLOR FILED[EC42O1

fjEO 4 Z015 Petitioner

_________________

RECEIVEDCLERK

Petition for Reviewvs. Case No.

_______

MICHAEL P. HUERTAAs Administrator?EDERAL AVIATION 5ADMINTSTRATION,

Federal Aviation AdministrationServe:

Mchael P. Huerta, Administratorecieral Aviation Administration

800 Independence Avenue, SWWashington, DC 20591

£ulorney General of the United StatesMain Justice Building10th and Constitution Avenue, NWWashington. DC 20530

U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia4h St., NW

‘Washington, DC 20530

Respondent

PETITION FOR REViEW

l-euioner, John A. Taylor,pro se, hereby petitions the court for review of an interim Final ie

(SO FR 7)3) issd by the Federal Aviation Administraiion (“FAA”) on Deemher 16. 2i

and ftr iiS cause of action states as follows:

USCA Case #15-1495 Document #1590543 Filed: 12/24/2015 of 71

JURISDICTION

1. This Court has jurisdiction and over this matter pursuant to 49 U.S.C. §46110(a).

FACTS COMMON TO ALL COUNTS

2. Petitioner is a citizen of the United States.

3. Petitioner is a model aircraft hobbyist.

4. Petitioner is the owner of one or more small unmanned hobby aircraft that were operated

by Petitioner prior to December 21, 2015.

5. Petitioner is the owner of a small unmanned hobby aircraft that was acquired subsequent

to December 21, 2015.

6. Petitioner desires to acquire additional small unmanned hobby aircraft.

7. The FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (“the Act”) was enacted by Congress

and signed by the President on February 14, 2012.1

8. Sec. 336(a) of the Act provides that “... the administrator of the Federal Aviation

Administration may not promulgate any rule or regulation regarding a model aircraft, or

an aircraft being developed as a model aircraft if. . .“ the aircraft is “flown strictly for

hobby or recreational use...” and meets other safety criteria.

9. Petitioner’s aforesaid aircraft meet the definition established by Sec. 336(a) of the AcE

aircraft that are not subject to regulation by the FAA.

10. On December 16, 2015, the FAA issued an Interim Final Rule (80 FR 78593), which

amends Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations.

H.R. 658/P.L. 112-95, Feb. 14, 2012, 126 Stat. ii.

2


ii. The function of the Interim Final Rule is to create a registry for small unmanned aircraft.

14 CFR 48.1(b), created by the Interim Final Rule, provides, “Small unmanned aircraft

eligible for registration in the United States must be registered and identified...” pursuant

to specified requirements.

12. The Interim Final Rule sets a trigger date of December 21, 2015 for the requirement that

newly-acquired small unmanned aircraft be registered prior to operation.

13. The aforesaid trigger date was timed knowingly and intentionally to coincide with the

timing of gifts exchanged for Christmas.

14. Petitioner’s aforesaid aircraft meet definition of aircraft eligible for registration pursuant

to 14CFR48.1(b).

15. Under the terms of the Interim Final Rule, Petitioner would be required to register his

aforesaid aircraft and affix a registration number assigned by Respondent.

16. Petitioner’s aforesaid aircraft are unmanned aircraft that are capable of sustained flight in

the atmosphere.

17. Petitioner’s aforesaid aircraft are unmanned aircraft that are flown within visual line of

sight of the person operating the aircraft.

18. Petitioner’s aforesaid aircraft are unmanned aircraft that are flown for hobby or

recreational purposes.

19. Petitioner’s aforesaid aircraft are, or will be, part of small unmanned aircraft systems.

20. Prior to adoption of the Interim Final Rule, the FAA’s longstanding rule, articulated on

their website, was that, “Registration is not required for model aircraft operated solely tr

hobby or recreational purposes.” Under to mandates of the Rule, such model aircraft

niust be registered.

3


21. The Interim Final Rule, in its entirety, constitutes a violation of Sec. 336(a) of the Act.

COUNT I(Declaratory Relief)

22. Petitioner incorporates by reference the preceding allegations of fact contained in the

Complaint.

WHEREFORE, Petitioner demands that the Court issue an order declaring that the Interim Final

Rule is void as a violation of Sec. 3 36(a) of the Act. Petitioner further requests that he be

awarded costs and reasonable attorney’s fees pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. §24 12.

COUNT!!(Permanent Inj unction)

23. Petitioner incorporates by reference the preceding allegations of fact contained in the

Complaint.

24. Petitioner will suffer irreparable harm in the absence of a permanent injunction.

25. The balance of equities tips in Petitioner’s favor.

26. A permanent injunction is in the public interest.

WHEREFORE, Petitioner demands that the Court issue a stay enjoining Respondent from:

A. Enforcing upon or further implementing the provisions of the Interim Final Rule (80 FR

78593).

B. Requiring or accepting registrations for model aircraft operated by Petitioner or others

solely for hobby or recreational purposes that meet the use criteria set forth in Sec. 336(a)

4


of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (H.R. 658/P.L. 112-95, Feb. 14,

2012, 126 Stat. 11).

C. Taking enforcement action regarding Petitioner or other persons who fail to comply with

the registration or other requirements of the Interim Final Rule (80 FR 78593).

D. Disseminating any registration information received by Respondent from Petitioner or

others pursuant to the registration process established by the Interim Final Rule (80 FR

78593).

E. Continuing to maintain any registration information received by Respondent from

Petitioner or others pursuant to the registration process established by Interim Final Rule

(80 FR 78593).

Petitioner further requests that he be awarded costs and reasonable attorney’s fees pursuant to

28 U.S.C.A. § 2412.

Submitted,

I

Maryland 20906

5


AFFIDAVIT

I, JOHN A. TAYLOR, HEREBY CERTIFY, under penalty of perjury, that the representations

contained herein are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief.

John

6


ORIGINALSEC. 336. SPECIAL RULE FOR MODEL AIRCRAFT.

(a) In Genera/.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law relating to the incorporation ofunmanned aircraft systems into Federal Aviation Administration plans and policies, includingthis subtitle, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration may not promulgate anyrule or regulation regarding a model aircraft, or an aircraft being developed as a model aircraft.if-(1) the aircraft is flown strictly for hobby or recreational use:(2) the aircraft is operated in accordance with a community-based set of safety guidelines andwithin the programming of a nationwide community-based organization:(3) the aircraft is limited to not more than 55 pounds unless otherwise certified through a design,construction. inspection, flight test, and operational safety program administered by acommunity-based organization:(4) the aircraft is operated in a manner that does not interfere with and gives way to any mamiedaircraft; and(5) when flown within 5 miles of an airport, the operator of the aircraft provides the airportoperator and the airport air traffic control tower (when an air traffic facility is located at theairport) with prior notice of the operation (model aircraft operators flying from a permanentlocation within 5 miles of an airport should establish a mutually-agreed upon operatingprocedure with the airport operator and the airport air traffic control tower (when an air trafficfacility is located at the airport)).(b) Statutoiy Construction.--Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit the authority ofthe Administrator to pursue enforcement action against persons operating model aircraft whoendanger the safety of the national airspace system.(c) Model Aircraft Defined.--In this section, the term model aircraft” means an unmannedaircraft that is--(1) capable of sustained flight in the atmosphere;(2) flown within visual line of sight of the person operating the aircraft; and(3) flown for hobby or recreational purposes.


FEDERAL REGISTERVoL 80

No, 241

F art ‘J

Wednesday,

December 16, 2015

Department of Transportation

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Parts 1, 45, 47, et al.Registration and Marking Requirements for Small Unmanned Aicraft; F’naiRule


78594 Federal Register/Vol. 80, No. 241 /Wednesday, December 16, 2015 /Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Parts 1,45,47,48,91, and 375

[Docket No.: FAA—2015—7396; Amdt. Nos.1—68, 45—30, 47—30, 48—1, 91—338]

RIN 2120—AK82

Registration and MarkingRequirements for Small UnmannedAircraft

AGENCY: Federal AviationAdministration (FAA), Department ofTransportation (DOT).ACTION: Interim final rule.

SUMMARY: This action provides analternative, streamlined and simple,web-based aircraft registration processfor the registration of small unmannedaircraft, including small unmannedaircraft operated as model aircraft, tofacilitate compliance with the statutoryrequirement that all aircraft registerprior to operation. It also provides asimpler method for marking smallunmanned aircraft that is moreappropriate for these aircraft. Thisaction responds to public comments.ceived regarding the proposed

registration process in the Operationand Certification of Small UnmannedAircraft notice of proposed rulemaking,he request for information regardingnm anned aircraft system registration,

and the recommendations From theUnmanned Aircraft System RegistrationTask Force. The Department encouragespersons to participate in this rulemakingby submitting comments on or beforethe closing date for comments. TheDepartment will consider all commentsreceived before the closing date andmake any necessary amendments asappropriate.

DATES: This rule is effective December21, 2015. Comments must be receivedon or before January 15, 2016.

ADDRESSES: Send comments identifiedby docket number FAA—2015—7396using any of the following methods:

Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go tohttp://www.regu]ations.gov and followthe online instructions for sending yourcomments electronically.

Mail: Send comments to DocketOperations, M—30; U.S. Department ofTransportation (DOT), 1200 New JerseyAvenue SE., Room W12—140, WestBuilding Ground Floor, Washington, DC20590—0001.

Hand Delivery or Courier: Takecomments to Docket Operations inRoom Wi 2—140 of the West BuildingGround Floor at 1200 New JerseyAvenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9

a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday throughFriday, except Federal holidays.

Fax: Fax comments to DocketOperations at 202—493—2251.

Privacy: In accordance with 5 U.S.C.553(c), DOT solicits comments from thepublic to better inform its rulemakingprocess. DOT posts these comments,without edit, including any personalinformation the commenter provides, tohttp://www.regulations.gov, asdescribed in the system of recordsnotice (DOT/ALL—14 FDMS), which canbe reviewed at http://www.dot.gov/privacy.

Docket: Background documents orcomments received may be read athttp://www.regulations.gov at any time.Follow the online instructions foraccessing the docket or go to the DocketOperations in Room W12—140 of theWest Building Ground Floor at 1200New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington,DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Mondaythrough Friday, except Federal holidays.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: EarlLawrence, Director, FAA UASIntegration Office, 800 IndependenceAvenue SW., Washington, DC 20591;telephone (202) 267—6556; [email protected] INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Executive SummaryA. Purpose of the Regulatory ActionB. Summary of the Major ProvisionsC. Summary of Costs and Benefits

II. ComplianceIII. Good Cause for Immediate AdoptionIV. Comments InvitedV. Authority for this RulemakingVI. Background

A, Statutory Requirements Related toAircraft Registration

B. Regulatory Requirements Pertaining toAircraft Registration and Identification

C. Related FAA and DOT Actions1. Operation and Certification of Small

Unmanned Aircraft Systems notice ofproposed rulemaking

2. Clarification of the Applicability ofAircraft Registration Requirements forUnmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) andRequest for Information RegardingElectronic Registration for UAS

3. Registration Task Force (Task Force)VII. Discussion of the Interim Final Rule

A. Applicability1. Small unmanned aircraft2. Public Aircraft Operations3. Trusts and voting trusts4. Operations in U.S. AirspaceB. Definitions1. Unmanned Aircraft2. Small Unmanned Aircraft3. Small Unmanned Aircraft System (small

UAS)4. Model aircraftC. Exclusion from the Requirement to

RegisterD. Eligibility to register

1. Citizenship2. Commercial activity conducted by non-

U.S. citizens3. Minimum Age to RegisterE. Registration Required Prior to Operation1. Registration Prior to Operation2. Registration of each aircraftF. Registration Process1. Design of Registration System2. Web-Based Registration Application3. Information required4. Fee for registrationC. Certificate of Aircraft RegistrationH. Registration MarkingI. Transfer of OwnershipJ. EducationK. Compliance Philosophy and

EnforcementL. PrivacyM. Other Methods To Encourage

Accountability and Responsible Use ofthe National Airspace System

N. Legal Implications of the RegistrationRequirement

1. Comments addressing Section 336 of theFAA Modernization and Reform Act of2012

2. Comments addressing requirementsunder the Administrative Procedure Act

3. Comments addressing other legal issueswith the proposed registrationrequirement

0. Alternatives to RegistrationP. Comments Beyond the ScopeQ. Miscellaneous

VIII. Section-by-Section Discussion of theinterim Final Rule

IX. Regulatory Notices and AnalysesA. Regulatory EvaluationB. Regulatory Flexibility DeterminationC. International Trade Impact AssessmentU. Unfunded Iviandates AssessmentE. Paperwork Reduction ActF. International Compatibility and

CooperationC. Environmental Analysis

X. Executive Order DeterminationsA. Executive Order 13132, FederalismB. Executive Order 13211, Regulations that

Significantly Affect Energy Supply,Distribution, or Use

C. Executive Order 13609, PromotingInternational Regulatory Cooperation

XI. How To Obtain Additional InformationA. Rulemaking DocumentsB. Comments Submitted to the DocketC. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement

Fairness Act

I. Executive Summary

A. Purpose of the Regulatory Action

This interim final rule (IFR) providesan alternative process that smallunmanned aircraft owners may use tocomply with the statutory requirementsfor aircraft operations. As provided inthe clarification of these statutoryrequirements and request for furtherinformation issued October 19, 2015, 49U.S.C. 44102 requires aircraft to beregistered prior to operation. See 80 FR63912 (October 22, 2015). Currently, theonly registration and aircraftidentification process available to


Federal Register/Vol. 80, No. 241/Wednesday, December 16, 2015 /Rules and Regulations 78595

comply with the statutory aircraftregistration requirement for all aircraftowners, including small unmannedaircraft, is the paper-based system setforth in 14 CFR parts 45 and 47. As theSecretary and the Administrator notedin the clarification issued October 19,2015 and further analyzed in theregulatory evaluation accompanyingthis rulemaking, the Department and theFAA have determined that this processis too onerous for small unmannedaircraft owners and the FAA. Thus, afterconsidering public comments and therecommendations from the UnmannedAircraft System (UAS) Registration TaskForce, the Department and the FAAhave developed an alternative process,provided by this IFR (14 CFR part 48),for registration and marking availableonly to small unmanned aircraft owners.Small unmanned aircraft owners mayuse this process to comply with thestatutory requirement to register theiraircraft prior to operating in theNational Airspace System (NAS).

The estimate for 2015 sales indicatesthat 1.6 million small unmanned aircraftintended to be used as model aircraft areexpected to be sold this year (includingapproximately 50 percent of that totalduring the fourth quarter of 2015). Withthis rapid proliferation of new sUASwill come an unprecedented number ofnew sUAS owners and operators whoare new to aviation and thus have nounderstanding of the NAS or the safetyrequirements for operating in the NAS.

The risk of unsafe operation willincrease as more small unmannedaircraft enter the NAS. Registration willprovide a means by which to quicklyidentify these small unmanned aircraftin the event of an incident or accidentinvolving the sUAS. Registration ofsmall unmanned aircraft also providesan immediate and direct opportunity forthe agency to educate sUAS owners onsafety requirements before they beginoperating.

All owners of small unmannedaircraft, including small unmanned

aircraft operated as a model aircraft inaccordance with the statutoryrequirements for model aircraftoperations in section 336 of the FAAModernization and Reform Act of 2012,Public Law 112—95, may take advantageof the new registration process in part48. The part 47 paper-based registrationprocess will remain available for ownersto register small unmanned aircraft dueto financing requirements, ownershiparrangements, or intent to operate asUAS outside of the United States. Formore information regarding both thestatutory requirements for model aircraftoperations and the authorizations thatmay be needed for operations that donot satisfy the requirements for modelaircraft, please consult the materialsavailable on the FAA Web site,including the Know Before You Flymaterials, available at www.faa.gov/uas.

B. Summary of the Major Provisions

Table 1 provides a brief summary ofthe major provisions of this IFR.

TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF MAJOR PROVISIONS.

Issue

Unmanned aircraft covered by theregistration requirement.

Timing of registration

Compliance dates

Minimum age to register a smallunmanned aircraft.

Registration platform

Registration number

Registration information

Interim final rule requirement

Unmanned aircraft weighing less than 55 pounds and more than 0.55 pounds (250 grams) on takeoff, including everything that is on board or otherwise attached to the aircraft and operated outdoors in the national airspace system must register.

§48.15Owners of small unmanned aircraft must register their aircraft prior to operation of the sUAS.§48.15December 21, 2015• Any small unmanned aircraft to be used exclusively as model aircraft that have never been operated.• Small unmanned aircraft to be used in authorized operations as other than model aircraft continue to

use part 47 registration process.February 19, 2016• Small unmanned aircraft to be used exclusively as model aircraft and have been operated by their

owner prior to December 21, 2015.March 31, 2016• Small unmanned aircraft to be used in authorized operations other than as model aircraft continue to

use part 47 registration process or use part 48 process.§48.5Persons 13 years of age and older are permitted to use the part 48 process to register a small unmanned

aircraft. If the owner is less than 13 years of age, then the small unmanned aircraft must be registeredby a person who is at least 13 years of age.

§48.25Registration will occur through an online web-based system.§48.100(c)Each small unmanned aircraft intended to be used other than as a model aircraft and owned by individuals

or other persons, including corporations, will be issued a Certificate of Aircraft Registration with a uniqueregistration number.

§48.110(a)A Certificate of Aircraft Registration and registration number issued to an individual intending to use small

unmanned aircraft exclusively as model aircraft, constitutes registration for those small unmanned aircraft owned by that individual that are intended to be used exclusively as model aircraft.

§48.115(a)Required information from persons registering small unmanned aircraft intended to be used as other than

model aircraft.• Applicant name or name of authorized representative.• Applicant physical address (and mailing address if different than physical address).• Applicant e-mail address or email address of authorized representative.• Aircraft manufacturer and model name, and serial number, if available.• Other information as required by the Administrator.Required information from individuals registering small unmanned aircraft intended to be used exclusively

as model aircraft.• Applicant name.• Applicant physical address (and mailing address if different than physical address).


78596 Federal Register/Vol. 80, No. 241/Wednesday, December 16, 2015/Rules and Regulations

TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF MAJOR PROvtSIONS.—Continued

Issue

Registration fee

Delivery of Certificate of AircraftRegistration.

Information contained on the Certificate of Aircraft Registration.

Registration renewal and fee

Marking

Interim final rule requirement

• Applicant e-mail address.• Other information as required by the Administrator.§48.100Persons intending to use the small unmanned aircraft other than as model aircraft.• $5 to register each aircraft.Individuals intending to use the small unmanned aircraft exclusively as model aircraft.• $5 to register an individual’s fleet of small unmanned aircraft.§48.30Upon completion of the registration process, the Certificate of Aircraft registration will be delivered to the

aircraft owner via the same web-based platform used to register the aircraft.§ 48.100(d)Small unmanned aircraft owner name, issue date and registration number.

A Certificate of Aircraft Registration issued in accordance with part 48 is effective once the registrationprocess is complete and must be renewed every three years.

The fee for renewal of a Certificate of Aircraft Registration is $5.§48.110(c), 48.115(c)All small unmanned aircraft must display a unique identifier.• A unique identifier is the FAA-issued registration number.• The Administrator may authorize the use of the small unmanned aircraft serial number.§48.200

C. Summaiy of Costs and Benefits

In order to implement the newstreamlined, web-based systemdescribed in this IFR, the FAA willincur costs to develop, implement, andmaintain the system. Small UAS ownerswill require time to register and marktheir aircraft, and that time has a cost.The total of government and registrantresource cost for small unmannedaircraft registration and marking underthis new system is $56 million ($46million present value at 7 percent)through 2020.

In evaluating the impact of thisinterim final rule, we compare the costsand benefits of the IFR to a baselineconsistent with existing practices: formodelers, the exercise of discretion byFAA (not requiring registration) andcontinued broad public outreach andeducational campaign, and for non-modelers, registration via part 47 in thepaper-based system. Given the time toregister aircraft under the paper-basedsystem and the projected number ofsUAS aircraft, the FAA estimates thecost to the government and non-modelers would be about $383 million.The resulting cost savings to societyfrom this IFR equals the cost of thisbaseline policy ($383 million) minus thecost of this IFR ($56 million), or about$327 million ($259 million in presentvalue at a 7 percent discount rate).These cost savings are the net quantifiedbenefits of this IFR.

II. Compliance

Any small unmanned aircraftoperated exclusively as a model aircraftby its current owner prior to December21, 2015 must be registered no later than

February 19, 2016. The delayedcompliance date provides a period oftime to bring the existing population ofsmall unmanned aircraft owners intocompliance as it is not reasonable toexpect that all existing small unmannedaircraft owners will register their aircraftimmediately upon the effective date ofthis rule.

All other small unmanned aircraftintended to be used exclusively asmodel aircraft (i.e., for hobby andrecreational purposes in accordancewith the requirements of section 336 ofPub. L. 112—95)—newly purchased ornever before used—must be registeredprior to the first operation outdoors.Thus, any small unmanned aircraftpurchased, received as a gift, orotherwise acquired on or after December21, 2015, and intended to be usedexclusively as a model aircraft must beregistered prior to operation.

Currently, small unmanned aircraftoperated as other than model aircraft(i.e., for operations for non-hobby ornon-recreational purposes or as a publicaircraft) must continue to complete thepart 47 registration process inaccordance with the conditions andlimitations of exemptions issued undersection 333 of Public Law 112—95. Asexemplified by the growing number ofpetitions for exemption, the agencyexpects to see a continued high level ofdemand for registration of aircraft usedfor purposes other than model aircraftonce the Operation and Certification ofSmall Unmanned Aircraft Systemsnotice of proposed rulemaking (the“sUAS Operation and Certification

NPRM”) is finalized.1 The smallunmanned aircraft registration systemestablished by this final rule will be ableto receive and process applications forCertificates of Aircraft Registration foraircraft operating pursuant to anexemption issued under section 333 ofPublic Law 112—95 beginning March 31,2016. Thus, beginning on March 31,2016, the agency will allow smallunmanned aircraft operating pursuant toan exemption to use the new part 48registration requirements in place ofpart 47, as well as aircraft used inoperations authorized under the sUASOperation and Certification rulemaking,once the rule is finalized.

III. Good Cause for ImmediateAdoption

Section 553(b)(3)(B) of theAdministrative Procedure Act (APA) (5U.S.C.) authorizes agencies to dispensewith notice and comment proceduresfor rules when the agency for “goodcause” finds that those procedures are“impracticable, unnecessary, or contraryto the public interest.” Under thissection, an agency, upon finding goodcause, may issue a final rule withoutseeking comment prior to therulemaking.

The Secretary and the Administratorrecently affirmed that all unmannedaircraft, including model aircraft, areaircraft consistent with congressionaldirection in Title III, Subtitle B of PublicLaw 112—95 and the existing definitionof aircraft in title 49 of the United StatesCode. 49 U.S.C. 40102. As such, inaccordance with 49 U.S.C 44101(a) and

180 FR 9544 (Feb. 23, 2015).



as further prescribed in 14 CFR part 47,registration is required prior tooperation. See 80 FR 63912, 63913(October 22, 2015). Aircraft registrationis necessary to ensure personalaccountability among all users of theNAS. See id. With the currentunprecedented proliferation of newsUAS, registration allows the FAA adirect and immediate opportunity toeducate sUAS owners. Aircraftregistration also allows the FAA andlaw enforcement agencies to addressnon-compliance by providing the meansby which to identify an aircraft’s ownerand operator.

Congress has also directed the FAA to“develop plans and policy for the use ofthe navigable airspace and assign byregulation or order the use of theairspace necessary to ensure the safetyof aircraft and the efficient use ofairspace.” 49 U.S.C. 40103(b)(1).Congress has further directed the FAAto “prescribe air traffic regulations onthe flight of aircraft (includingregulations on safe altitudes)” fornavigating, protecting, and identifyingaircraft; protecting individuals andproperty on the ground; using thenavigable airspace efficiently; and

preventing collision between aircraft,between aircraft and land or watervehicles, and between aircraft andairborne objects. 49 U.S.C. 40103(b)(2).

The FAA estimates that in calendaryear 2014, 200,000 small unmannedaircraft were operated in the NAS inmodel aircraft operations. During thisperiod, the FAA received 238 reports ofpotentially unsafe UAS operations. Theestimate for 2015 sales indicates that 1.6million small unmanned aircraftintended to be used as model aircraft areexpected to be sold this year (includingapproximately 50 percent of that totalduring the fourth quarter of 2015).

For 2016, the FAA estimates sales ofmore than 600,000 sUAS intended to beused for commercial purposes.2Additionally, as evidenced by recentFAA enforcement action against SkyPanInternational, the Department and theFAA have become aware that there maybe commercial operators who may berisking operating without the requisiteauthority.

Since February 2015, reports ofpotentially unsafe UAS operations havemore than doubled, and many of thesereports indicated that the risk tomanned aviation or people and propertyon the ground was immediate. For

example, the agency has receivedreports of unmanned aircraft at highaltitudes in congested airspace,unmanned aircraft operations nearpassenger-carrying aircraft or majorairports,4and interfering withemergency response operations such asefforts to combat wildfires.5As recentlyas August 2015, the FAA investigatedreports by four pilots who spotted anunmanned aircraft flying between eightand thirteen miles from the approach toNewark Liberty International Airport.6The FAA also investigated a similarincident at John F. KennedyInternational Airport in August.7Therisk of unsafe operation will increase asmore small unmanned aircraft enter theNAS, and are flown by individuals whohave little to no knowledge of airspacerestrictions or safety implications.

Over the past several months, thereports of unauthorized and potentiallyunsafe UAS operations have escalated atan increasing rate. There is good reasonto believe that the numbers of incidentswill continue to rise substantially withthe projected rapid rise in UAS sales inthe coming months. The followingtables show the number of reportsreceived during 2014 and 2015.

TABLE 2—UNMANNED AIRCRAFT REPORTS, 2014

2014 Unmanned aircraft reports

Month Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Total

Count 0 1 2 5 11 16 36 30 41 41 33 22 238

TABLE 3—UNMANNED AIRCRAFT REPORTs, 2015

2015 Unmanned aircraft reports

Month Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Total

Count 26 50 85 64 95 132 128 193 127 137 96 1133

‘As of December 9, 2015.

Specific examples of UAS eventsinclude:

June 17, 2015: Near the surroundingarea of Big Bear City, CA, a fire erupted,quickly spreading and causingsignificant damage. By June 24, 2015, allsurrounding affected areas wereevacuated, 20,875 acres of land hadbeen destroyed, and the fire was only

2 This forecast is based on a largely unconstrainedoperating environment.

Press Release, “FAA Proposes $1.9 MillionCivil Penalty Against SkyPan International forAllegedly Unauthorized Unmanned AircraftOperations,” available at http://www.faa.gov/news/press releases/news stoiy.cfm?newsld= 19555.

‘ See, e.g., Keith Laing, Feds investigating dronesighting near Newark airport, The Hill, Aug. 10,2015, http://thehill.com/policy/transportation/250731 -feds-investigating-drone-sighting-near-newark-airport; FAA Investigating Close Calls with

26% contained. Although the FAAissued a temporary flight restriction forthe area surrounding the fire, unmannedaircraft penetrated the airspace andgrounded all airborne firefighting effortsin support of continued firecontainment. This event resulted in tworeported evasive-action events, andforced the grounding of 4 responding

Drones Near JFK Airport, Albany Business Review,Nov. 20, 2014, available at 2014 WLNR 32783307.

See, e.g., Associated Press, Drones Interferingwith Emergency Wildfire Responders,CBSNEWS.com, Aug. 10, 2015, http://wwsv.cbsnews.cam/news/drones-interfering-withemergency-wildfire-responders (“The U.S. ForestService has tallied 13 wildfires in which suspecteddrones interfered with firefighting aircraft this year

up from four fires last year. . . .); PollyMosendz, Drones Interfere With Firefighters BattlingCalifornia Wildfire, Newsweek, June 26, 2015,

aircraft over a period of two and a halfhours before airborne firefighting effortscould resume. Before landing, a DC—btanker plane diverted to a separate firein Nevada to drop its fire retardant,while the remaining smaller planeswere forced to dump fire retardantaround the immediate area due tolanding weight restrictions.8Officials

http://www.newsweek.cam/drones-interferefirefighters-battling-california-wildfire-34 7774.

See Keith Laing, Feds investigating dronesighting near Newark airport, The Hill, Aug. 10,2015, http://thehill.com/policy/transportation/250731-feds-investigating-drone-sighting-near-newark-airport.

See FAA Investigating Close Calls with DronesNear JFK Airport, Albany Business Review, Nov. 20,2014, available at 2014 WLNR 32783307.5Lake Fire Crew After Private Drone Flight

Disrupted Air Flights. Las Angeles Times, June 25,continued



said the failed mission cost between$10,000 and $15,000. This estimate onlyreflects operational costs and does notreflect the additional damage caused toproperty by the delay in being able tocombat the fires.

• July 17, 2015: A fire began inCalifornia near Interstate 15, a highwaythat runs between Los Angeles and LasVegas. Due to hot, 40 mile per hourwinds, the fire spread at a rapid pace.The Air Attack Officer, upon arrival,observed small unmanned aircraftactivity operating contrary to atemporary flight restriction in the area.This resulted in aircraft being removedfrom the area for a period of twentyminutes. The delay of 20 minutes inaircraft response was critical in thegrowth of the fire. With the heavyaviation response on the scene of thefire, Air Attack Officers estimate thisfire could have been stopped at lessthan 100 acres if the small unmannedaircraft had not interfered bypenetrating the airspace.9A total ofeighteen vehicles and two trucks weredestroyed by fire.

• September 3, 2015: An unmannedaircraft was flown into Louis ArmstrongStadium, which is located within 5miles of LaGuardia Airport, during aU.S. Open tennis match. The unmannedaircraft crashed in an empty section ofthe stands.lO

• October 26, 2015: An unmannedaircraft flew into primary conductorsbringing down one span of power linein West Hollywood, California. Theincident report from Southern CaliforniaEdison indicates that initially 640customers were impacted.11

• January 26, 2015: An unmannedaircraft operator crashed his unmannedaircraft on the grounds of the WhiteHouse. The flight occurred in the WhiteHouse prohibited flight zone, P56.12

• September 5, 2015: A University ofKentucky student flew an unmannedaircraft directly into the campus’stadium during the school’s season-

2015, available at http://www.latimes.com/locol/lanow/la-me-ln-wildfires-southern-california201 50625-stary.html.

°SAFEC0M (2015, July 18). Incident Report.Retrieved November 13, 2015 from https://www.safecom.gov/searchone.asp?ID=1 9694.

‘°Drone Crash at U.S. Open, New York CityTeacher Arrested, NPR, September 4, 2015,available at http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwoway/201 5/09/04/437539727/drone-crash-at-u-s-open-new-york-city-teacher-arrested.

11 Incident report from Robert Laffoan-Villegas,media relations, Southern california Edison,provided November 13, 2015.‘2A Drone, Too Small for Radar to Detect, Rattles

the White House. New York Times, Jan. 26, 2015,available at http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/27/us/white-house-drone.html.

opening football game.13 No injurieswere reported. The unmanned aircraft,which had hovered near parachutingmilitary skydivers, crashed in the suitelevel of Commonwealth Stadium. TheKentucky campus police chief told anews conference that the same studentoperated an unmanned aircraft over asoccer match the previous week.

• September 12, 2015: Debris from anunmanned aircraft that had fallen nearbystanders cut and bruised an 11-month-old girl in a stroller during anoutdoor movie screening in Pasadena,California. The Pasadena PoliceDepartment said a 24-year-old man lostcontrol of his small unmanned aircraft,causing it to crash to the ground. The11-month-old received injuries to herhead. She was treated at HuntingtonMemorial Hospital and then released.’4

During the last quarter of thiscalendar year, approximately 800,000new sUAS are expected to enter thesystem and begin operating. In 2016, theFAA expects sales of an additional 1.9million small unmanned aircraft used asmodel aircraft. The FAA also expectssales of 600,000 aircraft used for otherthan model purposes, after theOperation and Certification of SmallUnmanned Aircraft Systems notice ofproposed rulemaking (the “sUASOperation and Certification NPRI\4”) isfinalized. Model aircraft sales aloneare expected to grow by 23 percent eachyear for the next 5 years.’6Sales forsUAS used for commercial applicationswill rapidly accelerate as well, withdifferent growth rates in differentapplications. Sales are forecast to growfrom very few sUAS employedcommercially today, to nearly 11million units by 2020 (about 40% oftotal units sold that year).

Many of the owners of these newsUAS may have no prior aviationexperience and have little or nounderstanding of the NAS, let aloneknowledge of the safe operatingrequirements and additionalauthorizations required to conductcertain operations. Aircraft registrationprovides an immediate and directopportunity for the agency to engageand educate these new users prior tooperating their unmanned aircraft andto hold them accountable for

13 Charged with Endangerment AfterDrone Crashes into Stadium, Ars Technica,September 11, 2015, available at http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/201 5/09/student-charged-with-endangerment-after-drone-croshes-into-footbalistadium!.

14 Fallen Drone Injures 11 -mointh old nearPasadena City Hall, Pasadena Star News, September15, 2015 available at http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/general-news/201 50915/falling-drone-injures-Il -month-old-near-pasadena-city-hall.

‘80 FR 9544 (Feb. 23, 2015).

noncompliance with safe operatingrequirements, thereby mitigating therisk associated with the influx ofoperations. In light of the increasingreports and incidents of unsafeincidents, rapid proliferation of bothcommercial and model aircraftoperators, and the resulting increasedrisk, the Department has determined itis contrary to the public interest toproceed with further notice andcomment rulemaking regarding aircraftregistration for small unmanned aircraft.To minimize risk to other users of theNAS and people and property on theground, it is critical that the Departmentbe able to link the expected number ofnew unmanned aircraft to their ownersand educate these new owners prior tocommencing operations.

In addition to the safety justificationsthat support the immediate adoption ofthis rule, the FAA Aircraft RegistrationBranch (the Registry) will be unable toquickly process the total volume ofexpected small unmanned aircraftregistration applications for existingunmanned aircraft and the proliferationof newly purchased unmanned aircraft.Thus, the FAA must implement aregistration system that allows theagency greater flexibility inaccommodating this expected growth.

In addition, the existing registrationsystem requirements are incongruouswith the characteristics of many of thesmall unmanned aircraft, smallunmanned aircraft ownership, andsmall unmanned aircraft operations. Forexample, small unmanned aircraft arenot required to be type certificated, maycost very little, making them widelyaccessible, and may have operatinglimitations that could affect the range oftheir operations. As reflected in greaterdetail in the regulatory evaluationsupporting this rulemaking, the totalcosts for using the paper-based registry,for both the small unmanned aircraftowners and for the FAA, were projectedto exceed $775M over a 5-year period.The Department has determined itwould be impracticable to require allsmall unmanned aircraft owners to usethis system and that a stream-lined,web-based alternative is necessary toaccommodate this population andensure operations may commence in asafe and timely manner.

The streamlined registration processprovided in this IFR will allow theagency to complete in the near-term theregistration of existing and new smallunmanned aircraft to be operatedexclusively as model aircraft, where theFAA expects the largest growth in thecoming months. In the spring of 2016,the FAA will open the streamlinedregistration process to small unmanned


Federal Register/Vol. 80, No. 241/Wednesday, December 16, 2015/Rules and Regulations 78599

aircraft used for purposes other than asmodel aircraft. By first addressing theregistration of new small unmannedaircraft to be operated exclusively asmodel aircraft, the FAA expects toprovide relief from the existingregistration process to the largestpopulation of new small unmannedaircraft operators while still realizingthe fundamental goal of identification ofsmall unmanned aircraft ownersresponsible for the aircraft operation.

Therefore, the FAA has determinedthat it is impracticable and contrary tothe public interest in ensuring the safetyof the NAS and people and property onthe ground to proceed with furthernotice and comment on aircraftregistration requirements for smallunmanned aircraft before implementingthe streamlined registry systemestablished by this rule. As more smallunmanned aircraft enter the NAS, therisk of unsafe operations will increasewithout a means by which to identifythese small unmanned aircraft in theevent of an incident or accident.Registration will also provide animmediate and direct avenue foreducating users regarding safe andresponsible use of sUAS. The publicinterest served by the notice andcomment process is outweighed by thesignificant increase in risk that thepublic will face with the immediateproliferation of new small unmannedaircraft that will be introduced into theNAS in the weeks ahead.

In developing the IFR, the Departmenthas considered the public commentsregarding UAS registration received inresponse to the Operation andCertification of Small UAS NPRM, theRequest for Information published inthe Federal Register on October 22,2015, and the recommendations fromthe UAS Registration Task Force.Although we have considered thesecomments in developing this IFR, theDepartment will consider additionalcomments received followingpublication of this IFR and make anynecessary adjustments in the final rule.At this time however, due to the reasonsset forth above, providing anotheropportunity for notice and comment inadvance of this rule going into effectwould be contrary to the public interestand impracticable.

Additionally, the APA requiresagencies to delay the effective date ofregulations for 30 days after publication,unless the agency finds good cause tomake the regulations effective sooner.See 5 U.S.C. 553(d). Good cause existsfor making this regulation effective lessthan 30 days from the date ofpublication because it relieves asignificant number of owners from the

burden of complying with the paper-based, time-consuming part 47registration process. It also is necessaryto address immediate and ongoingsafety risk identified in the discussionof above regarding good cause forforgoing notice and comment.

IV. Comments Invited

Prior to the issuance of this IFR, theDepartment and the FAA solicitedpublic comment on the aircraftregistration process for small unmannedaircraft through the sUAS Operation andCertification NPRM and a request forinformation issued on October 19, 2015.In developing this IFR, the agency hasconsidered comments received inresponse to these requests.

In addition, consistent with theRegulatory Policies and Procedures ofthe Department of Transportation (DOT)(44 FR 11034; Feb. 26, 1979), whichprovide that to the maximum extentpossible, operating administrations forthe DOT should provide an opportunityfor public comment on regulationsissued without prior notice, theDepartment requests comment on thisIFR. The Department encouragespersons to participate in this rulemakingby submitting comments containingrelevant information, data, or views.The Department will considercomments received on or before theclosing date for comments. TheDepartment will consider late filedcomments to the extent practicable. ThisIFR may be amended based oncomments received.

V. Authority for This Rulemaking

The FAA’s authority to issue rules onaviation safety is found in Title 49 of theUnited States Code. Subtitle I, Section106 describes the authority of the FAAAdministrator. Subtitle VII, AviationPrograms, describes in more detail thescope of the agency’s authority.

This rulemaking is promulgatedunder the authority described in 49U.S.C. 106(f), which establishes theauthority of the Administrator topromulgate regulations and rules; and49 U.S.C. 44701(a)(5), which requiresthe Administrator to promote safe flightof civil aircraft in air commerce byprescribing regulations and settingminimum standards for other practices,methods, and procedures necessary forsafety in air commerce and nationalsecurity.

This rule is also promulgatedpursuant to 49 U.S.C. 44101—44106 and44110—44113 which require aircraft tobe registered as a condition of operationand establish the requirements forregistration and registration processes.

Additionally, this rulemaking ispromulgated pursuant to the Secretary’sauthority in 49 U.S.C. 41703 to permitthe operation of foreign civil aircraft inthe United States.

VI. Background

A. Statutoiy Requirements Related toAircraft Registration

For purposes of the statutoryprovisions in part A (Air Commerce andSafety) of subtitle VII (AviationPrograms) of title 49 of the United StatesCode (49 U.S.C.), title 49 defines“aircraft” as “any contrivance invented,used, or designed to navigate or fly inthe air.” 49 U.S.C. 40102(a)(6). Since asmall unmanned aircraft is acontrivance that is invented, used, anddesigned to fly in the air, a smallunmanned aircraft is an aircraft undertitle 49.

In Public Law 112—95, Congressconfirmed that unmanned aircraft,including those used for recreation orhobby purposes, are aircraft consistentwith the statutory definition set forth in49 U.S.C. 40102(a)(6). See Public Law112—95 sections 331(8) and 336(defining an unmanned aircraft as “anaircraft that is operated without thepossibility of direct human interventionfrom within or on the aircraft” and amodel aircraft as “an unmanned aircraftthat is capable of sustained flight in theatmosphere, flown within visual line ofsight of the person operating the aircraft,and flown for hobby or recreationalpurposes.”); see also Administratorv.Pirker, NTSB Order No. EA—5 730 at 12(Nov. 17, 2014) (affirming that thestatutory definition of aircraft is clearand unambiguous and “includes anyaircraft, manned or unmanned, large orsmall.”).

Subject to certain exceptions, aircraftmust be registered prior to operation.See 49 U.S.C. 44101—44103. Uponregistration, the Administrator mustissue a certificate of registration to theaircraft owner. See 49 U.S.C. 44103.Because small UAS, including modelaircraft, involve the operation of“aircraft,” the Secretary and theAdministrator clarified that thestatutory and regulatory aircraftregistration requirements apply. See 80FR 63912, October 22, 2015.

B. Regulatory Requirements Pertainingto Aircraft Registration andIdentification

The regulatory requirementspertaining to aircraft registration serveseveral purposes. In order to operate inthe NAS, the FAA must ensure not onlythat aircraft operators are aware of thesystem in which they are operating, but



also that the agency has a means toidentify and track an aircraft, includingunmanned aircraft, to its operator. Onemeans to accomplish this is throughaircraft registration and marking.

Aircraft registration and marking areessential elements in the regulatorystructure that provides for safe andorderly aircraft activity within the NASbecause registration ensuresaccountability among its users. Theregistration number provides a link toinformation about the aircraft and theowner responsible for its operations.

Aircraft registration information oftenhas a direct and immediate impact onsafety-related issues. For example,aircraft registration provides the FAAand law enforcement agencies aninvaluable tool during inspections andinvestigations of inappropriate orprohibited behavior, during emergencysituations and for purposes of sharingsafety information. The Registry alsoserves as a valuable tool in enablingfurther research and analysis.

Additionally, the aircraft registrationrequirements in part 47 together withthe requirements pertaining to therecording of aircraft title and securitydocuments in part 49 coalesce toestablish a filing and recording systemfor the collection of ownership andfinancial interests in aircraft. Thissystem supports the aviation industryby providing public notice of interestsin aircraft in a reviewable format,generally to support the confidence orwillingness of banks and others toprovide financing for the developmentof the U.S. aviation industry and topromote commerce.

Part 47: Part 47 of 14 CFR implementsthe statutory requirements for aircraftregistration by providing a registrationprocess applicable to aircraft that arenot registered under the laws of aforeign country and that meet one of thefollowing ownership criteria:

• The aircraft is owned by a citizen ofthe United States;

• The aircraft is owned by apermanent resident of the United States;

• The aircraft is owned by acorporation that is not a citizen of theUnited States, but that is organized anddoing business under U.S. Federal orState law and the aircraft is based andprimarily used in the United States; or

• The aircraft is owned by the UnitedStates government or a state or localgovernmental entity.

This process is entirely paper-basedand begins when a person who wishesto register an aircraft in the UnitedStates submits an Aircraft RegistrationApplication (AC Form 8050—i) to theRegistry. At a minimum, under part 47,applicants for a Certificate of Aircraft

Registration must provide evidence ofownership, an application forregistration, which includescertification as to eligibility forregistration, and a registration fee.Evidence of ownership may include, butis not limited to, a traditional bill ofsale, a contract of conditional sale, alease with purchase option, or an heir-at-law affidavit. Many applicants arerequired to provide additionaldocumentation for aircraft importedfrom a foreign country, built from a kit,or that qualify as amateur built aircraft.Additional documentation may includea certification from the builder as to thetype of aircraft and a completedescription, to include information suchas make, model, serial number, enginemanufacturer, type of engine, number ofengines, maximum takeoff weight, andnumber of seats. An applicant whoapplies as a limited liabilitycorporation, a trustee, a non-citizencorporation, or submits documentationsigned by “authorized signers,” mustsubmit additional documentation tosupport registration. For amateur builtaircraft, the owner or builder designatesthe aircraft model name and serialnumber. An applicant pertaining to animported aircraft must provide evidenceshowing the aircraft has been removedfrom a foreign registry.

Once registered, the Registry issues aCertificate of Aircraft Registration (ACForm 8050—3) to the aircraft owner andmails it to the address on record. TheRegistry experiences a range in theamount of time required to issue aCertificate. While it typically takes 12—15 business days for the registry to issuea Certificate after an owner submits anapplication, due to an increase inregistration applications, it currentlytakes approximately 22 business daysfor the registry to issue the certificate.The aircraft owner will typically receivea Certificate approximately 4 days afterit is issued as a result of the timerequired for printing and mailing thecertificate. The estimated times areextended if the application is rejectedfor document correction.

The certificate of registration must becarried in the aircraft and must be madeavailable for inspection upon request.Upon registration, an aircraft is alsoeligible to apply for an airworthinesscertificate for operational purposes.When applying for registration of anaircraft that is already on the U.S. civilregistry, and has a valid airworthinesscertificate, an owner may use the second(carbon) copy of the application astemporary operating authority for up to90 days pending receipt of the “hardcard” certificate. For aircraft not already

on the U.S. civil registry, there is notemporary operating authority.

An aircraft registration must berenewed every three years by eithersubmitting a renewal application orusing an online renewal process, andpaying the renewal fee. The certificateof registration is generally valid untilthe owner’s address changes, the aircraftis sold or destroyed, it has expiredunder the three-year renewal period, theowner’s eligibility status changes, or theowner registers the aircraft in a foreigncountry.

Placing an aircraft on the U.S. civilaircraft registry in accordance with thepart 47 process affords the aircraft theopportunity to operate within theUnited States and in most foreigncountries.

Part 45: Under part 45 of Title 14CFR, aircraft must display the uniqueregistration number that correspondswith the number on the registrationcertificate. Part 45 prescribes therequirements for identification of U.S.registered aircraft and the display of theregistration number. The number mustgenerally be: (i) Painted on the aircraftor affixed to the aircraft by some otherpermanent means; (2) have noornamentation; (3) contrast in color withthe background; and (4) be legible. See14 CFR 45.21(c).

Currently, small unmanned aircraftauthorized to operate in the NAS underan exemption issued pursuant to theauthority in section 333 of the FAAModernization and Reform Act of 2012must register in accordance with thepaper-based process in 14 CFR part 47.Owners of unmanned aircraft withspecial airworthiness certificates andunmanned aircraft used bygovernmental entities in public aircraftoperations also register via the part 47registration process.

C. Related FAA and DOT Actions

In the FAA Modernization andReform Act of 2012 (Pub. L. 112—95),Congress mandated that the DOT, inconsultation with other governmentpartners and industry stakeholders,develop a comprehensive plan to safelyaccelerate the integration of civil UASin the NAS. Since 2012, the Departmentand the Federal AviationAdministration have made progress inenabling UAS operations, by issuingexemptions per part 11 in conjunctionwith the authority of section 333 ofPublic Law 112—95 to permitcommercial operations; creating a UAStest site program to encourage furtherresearch and testing of UAS operationsin real-world environments; anddeveloping a Pathfinder program toencourage research and innovation that


Federal Register/Vol. 80, No. 241 /Wednesday, December 16, 2015 /Rules and Regulations 78601

will enable advanced UAS operations.The Department requires UAS operatorsauthorized under each of theseintegration programs to register theirunmanned aircraft through the existingFAA paper-based registration processunder 14 CFR part 47.

The Department and the FAA havetaken several other related actions asprovided in the preamble discussionsthat follow.

1. Operation and Certification of SmallUnmanned Aircraft Systems Notice ofProposed Rulemaking

The Secretary and the Administratorissued an NPRM, “Operation andCertification of Small UnmannedAircraft Systems” (80 FR 9544 (Feb. 23,2015)) (sUAS Operation andCertification NPRM),’7that proposed aframework for integrating small UASoperations in the NAS. Specifically, theproposal would address the operation ofsmall UAS, certification of small UASoperators, small UAS registration, anddisplay of registration markings. Theagency also proposed to exclude smallUAS operations from the requirementsfor airworthiness certification under theauthority of section 333 of the Actbecause the safety concerns related toairworthiness of small UAS would bemitigated by the other provisions of thatproposed rule.

In the sUAS Operation andCertification NPRM, the Secretary andthe Administrator asserted that smallunmanned aircraft satisfy the statutorydefinition of “aircraft” and thus must beregistered prior to operation. For thisreason, the NPRM proposed to clarifythe applicability of the part 47 aircraftregistration requirements to sUASexpected to be operated under proposedpart 107. See 80 FR at 9574. The NPRMalso clarified that small unmannedaircraft must display a registrationnumber in accordance with part 45. Theagency proposed, however, to excludesmall unmanned aircraft from therequirements in part 45, subpart B forfireproof marking. See 80 FR at 95 74—9575.

The comment period for the sUASOperation and Certification NPRMclosed April 24, 2015. The FAAreceived more than 4,500 comments onthis proposal; of those, approximately125 commenters addressed the issue ofsmall unmanned aircraft registrationand the registration process, andapproximately 110 addressed markingrequirements. This IFR addresses thecomments received regarding theregistration, identification, and markingrequirements as well as certain

‘7RIN 2120—AJ60.

definitions relevant to the registrationprocess and proposed in the NPRM.

2. Clarification of the Applicability ofAircraft Registration Requirements forUnmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) andRequest for Information RegardingElectronic Registration for UAS

On October 19, 2015, the Secretaryand the Administrator issued a noticeclarifying the applicability of thestatutory requirements for aircraftregistration to small unmanned aircraft(the “Clarification/Request forInformation”) (80 FR 63912, October 22,2015), In addition, the Clarification/Request for Information announced theformation of a UAS Registration TaskForce (Task Force) to explore anddevelop recommendations to streamlinethe registration process for smallunmanned aircraft to ease the burdenassociated with the existing aircraftregistration process. To facilitate thework of the Task Force, the Secretaryand the Administrator soughtinformation and data from the publicthrough a number of questionsidentified in the Federal Registernotice. Specifically, the Secretary andthe Administrator sought informationon the following questions:

1. What methods are available foridentifying individual products? Doesevery UAS sold have an individualserial number? Is there another methodfor identifying individual products soldwithout serial numbers or those builtfrom kits?

2. At what point should registrationoccur (e.g. point-of-sale or prior tooperation)? How should transfers ofownership be addressed in registration?

3. If registration occurs at point-ofsale, who should be responsible forsubmission of the data? What burdenswould be placed on vendors of UAS ifDOT required registration to occur atpoint-of-sale? What are the advantagesof a point-of-sale approach relative to aprior-to-operation approach?

4. Consistent with past practice ofdiscretion, should certain UAS beexcluded from registration based onperformance capabilities or othercharacteristics that could be associatedwith safety risk, such as weight, speed,altitude operating limitations, durationof flight? If so, please submitinformation or data to help support thesuggestions, and whether any othercriteria should be considered.

5. How should a registration processbe designed to minimize burdens andbest protect innovation and encouragegrowth in the UAS industry?

6. Should the registration beelectronic or web-based? Are there

existing tools that could support anelectronic registration process?

7. What type of information should becollected during the registration processto positively identify the aircraft ownerand aircraft?

8. How should the registration data bestored? Who should have access to theregistration data? How should the databe used?

9. Should a registration fee becollected and if so, how will theregistration fee be collected ifregistration occurs at point-of-sale? Arethere payment services that can beleveraged to assist (e.g. PayPal)?

10. Are there additional meansbeyond aircraft registration to encourageaccountability and responsible use ofUAS?

See 80 FR at 63914. The commentperiod on the Clarification/Request forInformation closed November 6, 2015.As of November 6, 2015, the FAAreceived over 4,500 comments on theClarification/Request for Information. Inthe Clarification/Request forInformation, the DOT stated, “[Tihedocket will remain open after this timeand the Department will consider allcomments received in developing aregistration process.” The FAAconsidered more than 175 additionalcomments submitted after the close ofthe comment period. The FAA hasconsidered the Clarification/Request forInformation comments in thedevelopment of this IFR.

3. Registration Task Force (Task Force)

The Administrator chartered theUnmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS)Registration Task Force (Task Force)Aviation Rulemaking Committee (ARC)on October 20, 2015. The Administratorselected Task Force members based ontheir familiarity with UAS, aircraftregistration policies and procedures,retail inventory control and tracking,and electronic data capture. Themembership was comprised of a diversegroup of representatives from tradegroups representing manned andunmanned aviation, UAS manufacturersand retailers, and law enforcement.

The Task Force was tasked with thefollowing three objectives:

1. Develop and recommend minimumrequirements for UAS that would needto be registered.

2. Develop and recommendregistration processes.

3. Develop and recommend methodsfor proving registration and marking.

On November 21, 2015, the TaskForce provided a final report with



recommendations pertaining to these The following table, taken from thethree objectives.1B Task Force report, describes the Task

Force’s recommendations.

TABLE 4—SMALL UAS REGIsTRATION TASK FORCE AvIATION RULEMAKING C0MMrrrEE REcOMMENDATIONs SUMMARY

Issue Task force recommendation

What category of UAS is covered by the reg- UAS that weigh under 55 pounds and above 250 grams maximum takeoff weight, and are opistration requirement? erated outdoors in the NAS.

Do owners need to register each individual UAS No. The registration system is owner-based, so each registrant will have a single registrationthey own? number that covers any and all UAS that the registrant owns.

Is registration required at point-of-sale’? No. Registration is mandatory prior to operation of a UAS in the NAS.What information is required for the registration Name and street address of the registrant are required.

process? Mailing address, email address, telephone number, and serial number of the aircraft are optional.

Is there a citizenship requirement’? No.Is there a minimum age requirement’? Yes. Persons must be 13 years of age to register.Is there a registration fee’? No.Is the registration system electronic or web- The system for entry of information into the database is web-based and also allows for mul

based? tiple entry points, powered by an API [application programming interface] that will enablecustom apps [applications] to provide registry information to the database and receive registration numbers and certificates back from the database. Registrants can also modify theirinformation through the web or apps.

How does a UAS owner prove registration’? A certificate of registration will be sent to the registrant at the time of registration. The certificate will be sent electronically, unless a paper copy is requested, or unless the traditionalaircraft registration process is utilized. The registration certificate will contain the registrant’sname, FAA-issued registration number, and the FAA registration website that can be usedby authorized users to confirm registration information. For registrants who elect to providethe serial number(s) of their aircraft to the FAA, the certificate will also contain those serialnumber(s). Any time a registered UAS is in operation, the operator of that UAS should beprepared to produce the certificate of registration for inspection.

Does the registration number have to be affixed Yes, unless the registrant chooses to provide the FAA with the aircraft’s serial number. Whethto the aircraft? er the owner chooses to rely on the serial number or affix the FAA-issued registration num

ber to the aircraft, the marking must be readily accessible and maintained in a condition thatis readable and legible upon close visual inspection. Markings enclosed in a compartment,such as a battery compartment, will be considered “readily accessible” if they can beaccessed without the use of tools.

In its report, the Task Force stated,“[Tihe general consensus view of theTask Force is that the recommendationson the three objectives are to bepresented together as a unifiedrecommendation, with each of theindividual recommendations dependentupon elements in the others.Compromises in positions were madewhenever possible to obtain a generalconsensus, and changes to any of thecomponents could further dilutesupport among the Task Force membersand their constituencies for the finalrecommendations.”

The agency has assessed therecommendations within statutorylimitations provided for aircraftregistration and with this final rule, willmove forward with the elements of theTask Force report that support the bestpublic policy for registering smallunmanned aircraft.

VII. Discussion of the Interim FinalRule

This IFR adds part 48 to title 14 toallow for a web-based registrationprocess and marking appropriate for

18 Task Force final report can be found in thedocket for this rulemaldng and at https://

small unmanned aircraft. For theseaircraft, part 48 may be used in place ofthe paper-based, registration process inpart 47 and the marking requirements inpart 45 that would otherwise berequired.

Unlike manned aircraft, smallunmanned aircraft cost significantly lessthan manned aircraft and are availablethrough a variety of different markets forpurchase by individuals who may notbe familiar with the federal safetyrequirements for operating in the NAS.As a consequence, small unmannedaircraft may become more common thanmanned aircraft, resulting in asignificant volume of new aircraftregistrations. This rule provides for astreamlined and simple registrationprocess that is commensurate to thenature of small unmanned aircraft, canaccommodate an expected high volumeof registrations, and will facilitatecompliance by using a web-basedplatform and limiting the information tothat which can identify the aircraft andits owner. Upon registration under newpart 48, the FAA will assign a uniqueregistration number and provide a

www.fao.gov/uas/publicotions/medicz/RTFARCFInaJReport_1 1-21 -15.pdf

registration certificate that can be storedelectronically or printed by the aircraftowner.

The FAA recognizes that some smallunmanned aircraft owners may chooseto continue to register small unmannedaircraft under part 47. For example,some small unmanned aircraft ownersmay choose to register their smallunmanned aircraft under part 47 due tofinancing requirements or if they wishto operate internationally, displayingregistration marks in accordance withpart 45. While this final rule does notrequire small unmanned aircraft ownersto use the part 48 registration process inplace of part 47, the agency stronglyencourages small unmanned aircraftowners to take advantage of the moreefficient part 48 method of aircraftregistration. The FAA also notes that anew part 48 registration does not limitan owner’s ability to later move to atraditional part 47 registration should itsoperational or financial interestschange. Conversely, a traditional part 47registration of small unmanned aircraftcan be moved to a new part 48



registration at the discretion of theowner if they wish to pursue that venue.

A. Applicability

1. Small Unmanned Aircraft

The registration requirements in part48 apply to small unmanned aircraftthat are part of a small unmannedaircraft system and that satisfy therequirements to register in § 48.15 andthe eligibility requirements in § 48.20.Although a small unmanned aircraftitself is one component of an sUAS, part48 requires the registration of theaircraft only.19 The registrationrequirement is limited to the smallunmanned aircraft for two reasons.First, the small unmanned aircraft is theonly part of the UAS that satisfies thedefinition of ‘aircraft” for purposes ofthe registration requirements in 49U.S.C. 44101—44103, and second,components that control the unmannedaircraft can be used to control multipleaircraft. As discussed in this document,the FAA would continue to exerciseenforcement discretion for aircraft thatweigh less than 0.55 pounds, such aspaper airplanes that are not linked to asystem.

Registration does not provideauthorization to operate any aircraft—and the same is true for smallunmanned aircraft. Currently,operations using small unmannedaircraft other than as model aircraftmust obtain authorization to operate inaccordance with section 333 of PublicLaw 112—95, or through issuance of aspecial airworthiness certificate. Smallunmanned aircraft operated exclusivelyas model aircraft may only be operatedin accordance with requirements ofsection 336 of Public Law 112—95 (Feb.14, 2012). See also Interpretation of theSpecial Rule for Model Aircraft, 79 FR36171 (June 25, 2014). Any operationthat does not follow the 336 frameworkneeds authorization from the FAA. Oncethe sUAS Operation and CertificationNPRIvI is finalized, operations intendingto use small unmanned aircraft as otherthan model aircraft, and those operatorswho choose not to operate inaccordance with the requirements ofsection 336 of Public Law 112—95, willneed to operate in accordance with thesUAS Operation and Certification rule’srequirements.

‘9Sec. 331(9) of Public Law 112—95. Public Law112—95 defines an “unmanned aircraft system” as“an unmanned aircraft and associated elements(including communication links and thecomponents that control the unmanned aircraft)that are required for the pilot in command tooperate safely and efficiently in the nationalairspace system.”

2. Operations in U.S. Airspace

The registration process for smallunmanned aircraft provided in part 48may be used only if the aircraft isintended for use within the UnitedStates during the period of registrationbecause this registration process is notintended to be consistent withInternational Civil AviationOrganization (ICAO) standardsaddressing registration and marking.The FAA notes that under PresidentialProclamation 5928, the territorial sea ofthe United States, and consequently itsterritorial airspace, extends to 12nautical miles from the baselines of theUnited States determined in accordancewith international law.

ICAO has stated that “[u]nmannedaircraft. . . are, indeed aircraft;therefore existing [ICAO standards andrecommended practices] SARPs applyto a very great extent. The completeintegration of UAS at aerodromes and inthe various airspace classes will,however, necessitate the development ofUAS-specific SARPs to supplementthose already existing.” 20 ICAO hasbegun to issue and amend SARPs tospecifically address UAS operations andregistration. Regarding registration,ICAO standards in Annex 7 (AircraftNationality and Registration Marks) tothe Convention require remotely pilotedaircraft to “carry an identification plateinscribed with at least its nationality orcommon mark and registration mark”and be “made of fireproof metal or otherfireproof material of suitable physicalproperties.” For remotely pilotedaircraft, this identification plate must be“secured in a prominent position nearthe main entrance or compartment oraffixed conspicuously to the exterior ofthe aircraft if there is no main entranceor compartment.”

The FAA agrees with ICAO thatunmanned aircraft are indeed aircraftand as such, must be registered andidentified. However, the agency hasdetermined that it is possible to registerand identify small unmanned aircraftusing in a less restrictive manner andwith more flexibility than current ICAOstandards allow. Additionally, the FAAhas determined that it can achieve thehighest level of compliance with aregistration requirement and thusidentify more small unmanned aircraftto their owners by using thestreamlined, web-based process in thisfinal rule.

The FAA emphasizes that utilizationof the registration process implementedby this final rule does not prohibit smallUAS operators from operating in

20 ico circular 328 (Unmanned AircraftSystems (UAS)) (2011).

international airspace or in othercountries; however, the rule also doesnot provide authorization for suchoperations.

UAS operations that do not take placeentirely within the United States willneed to obtain the necessaryauthorizations from the FAA and therelevant foreign aviation authority.

3. Public Aircraft Operations

Clarification/Request for Information:Several commenters addressed theapplicability of registrationrequirements to small unmannedaircraft used in public aircraftoperations. The Department of DefensePolicy Board on Federal Aviationrecommended the FAA “[cilearly statethat all public aircraft operators withself-certification authority, by statute,are exempt from this registration.”Aviation Management Associates alsosaid the FAA should exempt all publicaircraft from the registrationrequirement. Another commenter saidthat any UAS that are owned oroperated by the FAA Small UAS Centerof Excellence, any of the six FAA UASTest Sites or any other governmentagency or department, or are operatedunder a Certificate of Waiver orAuthorization (COA) should be exemptfrom the registration requirement. Incontrast, a few individuals specificallyrecommended that UAS operated bygovernment should be required toregister.

IFR Requirement: Under 49 U.S.C.44101, only certain foreign aircraft andaircraft of the national defense forces ofthe United States are eligible to operateunregistered aircraft in the UnitedStates, and any such unregisteredaircraft must be identified in a waysatisfactory to the Administrator.Section 44102(a)(2)(A) and (B) describethose aircraft that may be registered asthose of the United States Governmentand various state and localgovernments. This definition parallelsthe language used in 49 U.S.C.40102(a)(41) and 40125 to describepublic aircraft eligibility and operations.Accordingly, consistent with existingstatutory requirements for registration,the IFR will not apply to smallunmanned aircraft of the armed forcesof the United States. 49 U.S.C.44101(b)(2). Small unmanned aircraftused in non-military public aircraftoperations are subject to the registrationrequirements of 49 U.S.C. 44101 and assuch, must complete the registrationprocess provided in part 47. Theseaircraft may also be registered inaccordance with the part 48 process thatwill be available for aircraft used for



other than model aircraft operations inthe spring of 2016.

4. Trusts and Voting Trusts

The FAA requires that a personholding legal title to an aircraft in trustmust, when applying to register thataircraft in the United States, submit a“copy of each document legallyaffecting a relationship under the trust

.“ 14 CFR 47.7(c)(2)(i). The purposeof this requirement is to ensure the FAAhas access to all documents relevant tothe trust relationship when determiningwhether a trust provides an adequatebasis for registering an aircraft inaccordance with FAA regulations. Afundamental part of the registrationprocess for aircraft held in trust isdetermining whether the underlyingagreements meet and are not in conflictwith the applicable requirements andtherefore are sufficient to establish thetrustee’s eligibility to register theaircraft. The analysis of voting trusts issimilarly intricate.

Use of trusts and voting trusts involvecomplex relationships that have beenused to obscure the identity of thebeneficial owners of an aircraft. For thisreason, part 47 applies a higher level ofscrutiny when trusts and voting trustsseek to register aircraft. This higherlevel of scrutiny is inconsistent with thestreamlined registration processestablished under part 48. Accordingly,trusts and voting trusts must continue toregister small unmanned aircraft underpart 47 so that the FAA can identify andevaluate the applicants.

B. Definitions

The new part created by this final ruleincludes definitions of several termsthat are relevant to the registration ofsmall unmanned aircraft. Thedefinitions of “U.S. Citizen,” “residentalien,” and “Registry” have the samemeaning as provided in the aircraftregistration process provided by part 47.See §47.2. The definition of “modelaircraft” is identical to the definitionprovided in section 336(c) of Public Law112—95.

Additionally, the agency finds itnecessary to codify the statutorydefinitions of “small unmannedaircraft,” “unmanned aircraft,” and“small unmanned aircraft system” giventhe limited applicability of the newsubpart to small unmanned aircraft thatare an associated element of a smallUAS. The agency proposed definitionsof these three terms in the Operationand Certification NPRM. Thisrulemaking finalizes these proposeddefinitions because they are applicableto the small unmanned aircraftregistration process provided by this

final rule. The definitions will be addedto § 1.1 General definitions, because theagency expects them to be applicable toseveral parts throughout title 14.

1. Unmanned Aircraft

In the sUAS Operation andCertification NPRM, the FAA proposedto define “unmanned aircraft” as “anaircraft operated without the possibilityof direct human intervention fromwithin or on the aircraft.” 21 Thisproposed definition would codify thestatutory definition of “unmannedaircraft” specified in Public Law 112—9522

The Management Association forPrivate Photogrammetric Surveyors(MAPPS) stated that the definition of“unmanned aircraft” needs to beclarified because the current definitionleaves open the possibility that paperairplanes, model airplanes, modelrockets, and toys could be consideredunmanned aircraft. The Aviators ModelCode of Conduct Initiative stated thatthis definition and the definition ofsmall unmanned aircraft may permitinfant passengers and asked the FAA toamend the definition to categoricallyprohibit the carriage of passengers on anunmanned aircraft.

Lastly, an individual said that because14 CFR 1.1 defines aircraft as “a devicethat is used or intended to be used forflight in the air,” only a “whole” or“complete” aircraft can meet thisdefinition for registration purposes.

The definition of unmanned aircraftas “an aircraft operated without thepossibility of direct human interventionfrom within or on the aircraft” is astatutory definition, and as such, thisrule will finalize that definition asproposed.22

2. Small Unmanned Aircraft

In the sUAS Operation andCertification NPRM, the FAA proposedto define “small unmanned aircraft” as“an unmanned aircraft weighing lessthan 55 pounds including everythingthat is on board the aircraft.” 24 TheNPRM noted that Public Law 112—95defines a small unmanned aircraft as“an unmanned aircraft weighing lessthan 55 pounds.” 25 However, theNPRM pointed out that this statutorydefinition does not specify whether the55-pound weight limit refers to the totalweight of the aircraft at the time oftakeoff (which would encompass the

2180 FR at 9588.2280 FR at 9556 (citing Pub. L. 112—95, section

331(811.23 Pub. L. 112—95, section 331(8).2480 FR at 9586.2580 FR at 9556 (citing Pub. L. 112—95, section

331(6)1.

weight of the aircraft and any payloadon board) or simply the weight of anempty aircraft.26The NPRM proposed todefine small unmanned aircraft usingtotal takeoff weight because: (1) Heavieraircraft generally pose greater amountsof public risk in the event of an accidentas they can do more damage to peopleand property on the ground; and (2) thisapproach would be similar to theapproach that the FAA has taken withother aircraft, such as large aircraft,light-sport aircraft, and small aircraft.27

Commenters including the AircraftOwners and Pilots Association (AOPA),Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA),Helicopter Association International(HAT), the Small UAV Coalition, theNews Media Coalition, and theProfessional Photographers of America,expressed support for the proposeddefinition. The New England Chapter ofthe Association of Unmanned VehiclesInternational supported the weightlimitation as a reasonable starting point,but pointed out that there arecommercial applications beingdeveloped that will need to exceed 55pounds. Event 38 Unmanned Systems,Inc. stated that, rather than segregatesmall unmanned aircraft by total weight,FAA should use a “kinetic energy split”that combines weight and speed.

Several commenters asked that the 55-pound weight limit be lowered. Event38 Unmanned Systems recommendedan initial weight restriction of 10pounds, with adjustments based onsubsequent research. Prioria Roboticsstated that the weight limitation forsmall unmanned aircraft should be lessthan 25 pounds, and that the definitionshould include a requirement that theaircraft be “hand-launchable.” Anindividual commenter asked for theweight limit to be reduced to 33 pounds.

Green Vegans stated that FAA mustprovide test data on the collision impactof a 55 pound UAS, traveling at variousspeeds, on both humans and birds. Theadvocacy group argued that the publiccannot make informed comments on theproposed weight limitation withoutsuch data. The commenter also notedthat such data would be provided by aNational Environmental Protection ActEnvironmental Impact Statement, whichthe group stated FAA must do. CrewSystems similarly opposed themaximum weight limitation, arguingthat FAA provided no justification for it.The company asserted that a 55 poundlimit is large enough to be hazardouswhen operating in an urbanenvironment, even if care is taken.Although it did not expressly object to

8o FR at 9556.80 FR at 9556.



the weight limitation, the United StatesUltralight Association (UASA) alsoexpressed concern about the significantdamage that a 50-plus pound unmannedaircraft could do to light, open cockpitaircraft.

Other commenters asked the FAA toincrease the 55-pound weight limit.Consumers Energy Company objected tothe definition’s proposed weightlimitation as too light, arguing that a 55-pound weight restriction will negativelyimpact small UAS flight times and theusage of alternative fuel sources. Thecompany urged FAA to consider fuelloads and to increase the weightrestriction to 120 pounds. The companynoted that, if FAA has concerns aboutsafety, it could create subcategoriesunder which maximum weightrestriction is imposed on the fuel load,rather than adopt a blanket weightrestriction. Several individualcommenters also suggested higherweight limits, including: 80 pounds; arange of 30—100 pounds; and 150pounds. Another individual commentercalled the weight restriction “arbitrary,”and noted that other countries havedefined small UAS up to 150 kg.

An individual commenter suggestedthat the FAA amend the definition ofsmall unmanned aircraft to includeaircraft weighing exactly 55 pounds.Another individual commenter statedthat the definition of “small unmannedaircraft” must be clarified to account fordifferent types of UAS (e.g., fixed-wing,rotor-wing, small, medium, large).

The definition of “small unmannedaircraft” is a statutory definition.Specifically, Public Law 112—95 definesa small unmanned aircraft as “anunmanned aircraft weighing less than55 pounds.” 28 Accordingly, this rulewill retain the statutory definition,which includes 55 pounds as the weightlimit for a small unmanned aircraft.

However, as the FAA pointed out inthe sUAS Operation and CertificationNPRM, the statutory definition containsan ambiguity with regard to how the 55-pound weight limit should becalculated. The Small UAV Coalitionand Federal Airways & Airspacesupported the inclusion of payload inthe 55-pound weight limit. Conversely,DJI, the Associated General Contractorsof America, and an individualcommenter questioned whether the 55-pound weight limitation should includepayload that is carried by the smallunmanned aircraft. DJl argued that theFAA does not consider the weight ofpayload in its regulations governing theoperation of ultralights. Kapture DigitalMedia stated that the total weight limit

of a small UAS should not include theweight of the battery.

As noted in the sUAS Operation andCertification NPRM, the FAA uses totaltakeoff weight for multiple differenttypes of aircraft, including large aircraft,light-sport aircraft, and small aircraft.29One of the reasons that the FAA usestotal takeoff weight in all of theseregulations is because, in the event of acrash, a heavier aircraft can do moredamage to people and property on theground than a lighter aircraft. Inevaluating this type of risk for a smallUAS, it is the total mass of the smallunmanned aircraft that is important; themanner in which that mass is achievedis irrelevant. In other words, a 50-poundunmanned aircraft carrying 30 poundsof payload does not pose a smaller riskthan an 80-pound unmanned aircraftthat is not carrying any payload. Assuch, this rule will retain the proposedinclusion of everything onboard theaircraft in the 55-pound weight limit ofa small unmanned aircraft.

The General Aviation ManufacturersAssociation (GAMA) pointed out that,although FAA typically points toMaximum Takeoff Weight whenidentifying an aircraft’s weight andassociated mass, the proposed definitionof the small UAS does not include theterm “takeoff.” As such, the commenterrecommended FAA modify thedefinition to reference the point oftakeoff as follows: “Small unmannedaircraft means an unmanned aircraftweighing less than 55 pounds includingeverything that is on board the aircrafton takeoff.” An individual commenterstated that the choice of “on board” inthe definition of “small unmannedaircraft” will create confusion, becausethese aircraft routinely have “attached”external payloads because there is littleroom for internal “on board” payloads.

The FAA agrees with these commentsand has modified the proposeddefinition to refer to the total aircraftweight at takeoff and to include possibleexternal attachments to the aircraft inthe calculation of small unmannedaircraft weight. Accordingly, asprovided in § 1.1, small unmannedaircraft means an unmanned aircraftweighing less than 55 pounds ontakeoff, including everything that is onboard or otherwise attached to theaircraft. If the unmanned aircraft istethered by the cable in such a way thatthe cable, securely attached to animmoveable object, prevents theunmanned aircraft from flying away inthe event of loss of positive control,

29See 14 CFR 1.1 (referring to ‘takeoff weight”for large, light-sport, and small aircraft in thedefinitions for those aircraft).

only the portion of the cable which maybe lift aloft by the small unmannedaircraft must be added to the weight ofthe unmanned aircraft whendetermining total weight.

3. Small Unmanned Aircraft System(Small UAS)

Finally, the sUAS Operation andCertification NPRM proposed adefinition of “small unmanned aircraftsystem (small UAS)” as “a smallunmanned aircraft and its associatedelements (including communicationlinks and the components that controlthe small unmanned aircraft) that arerequired for the safe and efficientoperation of the small unmannedaircraft in the national airspace

30 The NPRM explained that,with one exception, this proposeddefinition would be similar to thestatutory definition of UAS specified inPublic Law 112_95.31 The differencebetween the two definitions is that theproposed definition of small UAS didnot refer to a “pilot in command,” asthat position did not exist under theNPRM.32

AirShip Technologies supported theproposed definition. Conversely,Transport Canada asked the FAA toconsider whether it would be better touse the ICAO terminology of remotely-piloted aircraft system (RPAS) instead ofsmall UAS. Foxtrot Consulting statedthat the inclusion of the phrase“associated elements (includingcommunications links and thecomponents that control the smallunmanned aircraft)” in the definition ofsmall UAS creates a “regulatorynightmare,” because it means cellularnetwork providers and theirinfrastructure are considered part of asmall UAS. The commenter pointed outthat small UAS can be controlled viaWi-Fi and cellular networks, whichopens enormous capabilities to smallUAS operations. The commenter wenton, however, to question whether, as aresult of the proposed definition, acellular provider is liable if a UAS beingcontrolled through their network causesdamage to property, serious injury, ordeath.

The proposed definition of small UASis derived from the statutory definitionof “unmanned aircraft system” in PublicLaw 112—95. As such, this rule willcodify the proposed definition.

Because Congress has selected theterm “unmanned aircraft system” to

°8O FR at 9586.31 80 FR at 9556 (citing Pub. L. 112—95, section

331(9)).

80 FR at 9556.33Pub. L. 112—95, section 331(9).28 Pub. L. 112—95, section 331(6).



describe this type of a system, the FAAmay not use a different term, such asRPAS, in this rule. In response toFoxtrot Consulting, the FAA notes thatthe requirements of this rule apply onlyto the sUAS operator, the owner of thesmall UAS, and people who may beinvolved in the operation of the smallUAS. As such, a cellular provider wouldnot be in violation of proposed part 107when their involvement in a small UASoperation is limited to the operator’s useof the provider’s infrastructure.Additionally, the FAA does not opineon liability issues that are beyond thescope of this rule such as whether theprovider may be liable to the sUASoperator or third parties under tort orcontract law.

The NextGen Air TransportationProgram at North Carolina StateUniversity and one individualcommenter recommended FAAspecifically state that tethered poweredsmall UAS are considered small UASunder proposed part 107. In response tothese comments, the FAA notes that thedefinition of small UAS in this ruleincludes tethered powered small UAS

4. Model Aircraft

This rulemaking includes thedefinition of the term “model aircraft”as it appears in section 336 of PublicLaw 112—95. Thus, in this IFR, “modelaircraft” means an unmanned aircraftthat is (1) capable of sustained flight inthe atmosphere; (2) flown within visualline of sight of the person operating theaircraft; and (3) flown for hobby orrecreational purposes.

C. Exclusion From the Requirement toRegister

Clarification/Request for Information:The DOT and the FAA posed thefollowing question in the October 22,2015 Clarification/Request forInformation document (80 FR at 63914):Consistent with past practice of discretion,should certain UAS be excluded fromregistration based on performancecapabilities or other characteristics that couldbe associated with safety risk, such as weight,speed, altitude operating limitations,duration of flight? If so, please submitinformation or data to help support thesuggestions, and whether any other criteriashould be considered.

The agency received many commentsresponding to this inquiry. A fewcommenters said this question ispremature because there is insufficientdata available to determine what, if any,safety risk is posed by various categoriesof UAS. One individual commenter saidthis question should not be asked untilafter there are “thorough, independentstudies available showing the effects of

different hobby aircraft on the nationalairspace and potential interference withfull scale aviation.” The commenterfurther stated that once the results ofthat research are available, the publicshould have an opportunity to commenton them. Another individual said theFAA cannot make a determination aboutexclusions from the registrationrequirement until testing is conductedto see what the actual damage would beto buildings, cars, people, and mannedaircraft from UAS of different sizes.

No unmanned aircraft should beexcluded from the requirement ofregistration: Some commenters said thatall unmanned aircraft should beregistered. One individual commenter,for example, asserted that if the intentof registration is to have the ability toidentify the operator of a UAS, thenthere is no logical reason to base therequirement to register on factors suchas the speed, performance, capability, orsize of a UAS. Another individualcommenter said all unmanned aircraftshould be registered because unmannedaircraft of any size or weight could posea safety threat to manned aircraft(including, for example, helicopters onemergency or rescue missions thatoperate at all altitudes and from areasother than certificated airports).Chronicled, Inc. said that if theregistration procedure is “efficient andseamless” then it should include allunmanned aircraft.

The National Association ofBroadcasters asserted that UASregistration is a reasonable step tomitigate the dangers posed by a smallminority of hobbyist UAS operators thatare flying in a careless and recklessmanner that endangers the public. TheCity of Arlington (Texas) PoliceDepartment stated that “the increasingpopularity of the recreational use ofUAS by model aircraft operators haspresented significant public safety andregulatory challenges in Arlington andour nation’s cities,” and strongly urgedthe FAA to require the registration of allUAS systems. The Air MedicalOperators Association stated that allUAS capable of entering the NAS andconflicting with manned aircraft inflight should be considered aircraft andbe subject to the registrationrequirement.

The Colorado Agricultural AviationAssociation (CoAAA) supported itsposition that all UAS need to beregistered by pointing out that lowaltitude airspace is already being sharedby manned and unmanned flightoperations “without any definitivesafety protocols beyond operate in a safemanner and yield to manned aircraft.”As the number of unmanned aircraft

using the airspace increases, thecommenter continued, so does thepotential for a mid-air collision whichcould lead to loss of the aircraft,injuries, or death. CoAAA and theNational Agricultural AviationAssociation (NAAA) further supportedtheir positions that there should be noexemption for light-weight UAS bypointing to bird-strike data from a jointreport by the FAA and the USDA.Comparing the dangers associated withcollisions between wildlife and civilaircraft to the dangers associated withcollisions between light-weight UASand civil aircraft, the commentersasserted that it does not take a very largebird to do significant damage to anairplane. By way of example, CoAAAnoted that mallard ducks (which weighbetween 1.6 and 3.5 pounds) and turkeyvultures (which weigh between 1.8 to5.1 pounds) can break through thewindshield of aircraft used foragricultural purposes.

The Electronic Privacy InformationCenter (EPIC) also opposed anexemption from the registrationrequirement for any UAS that operatesin the NAS. EPIC stated that the size ofa UAS is not strictly indicative of theprivacy risks it poses and, in fact, thatsmaller UAS can more easily conduct“surreptitious surveillance onunsuspecting individuals.”

Modovolate Aviation, LLC and anumber of individual commentersrecommended a limited exemption forunmanned aircraft that are operatedexclusively indoors.

All model aircraft should be excludedfrom the requirement of registration: Alarge number of commentersrecommended an exemption from theregistration requirement for mode]aircraft. These commenters includedmany individual members of theAcademy of Model Aeronautics (AMA),as well as other members of therecreational/hobby community. Amongthe reasons given by commenters forthis position were the facts thattraditional model aircraft have a longhistory of safe operations and that theFAA is not authorized to regulate modelaircraft. The Aerospace IndustriesAssociation said the exemption of“hobby platforms” from registrationwould enhance the viability of theregistration process by allowing thefocus of the registry to remain on“commercial use platforms.”

With respect to which aircraft wouldqualify as “model aircraft” for thepurposes of an exemption from theregistration requirement, somecommenters said that any model aircraftflown recreationally should be exempt.One individual commenter asserted that



other countries, such as Australia,Canada and the United Kingdom havemade this distinction betweenrecreational and commercial use andnot required registration of recreationaluse aircraft. The Minnesota Departmentof Transportation also stated that it hasnot required UAS operated solely forrecreational use to register. Many othercommenters specifically stated that anymodel aircraft operated within thesafety programming of the AMA shouldbe considered ‘model aircraft” and not“UAS” and therefore exempt from theregistration requirement. A largenumber of those commenters assertedthat the AMA has “an impeccable 80-year track record of operating safely,”and that requiring AMA members toregister their aircraft will have noimpact on that safety record. Severalcommenters recommended that the FAArequire model aircraft operators tobecome AMA members. Some othercommenters said that any model aircraftthat meets the definition of modelaircraft contained in the FAAModernization and Reform Act of 2012should be exempt from the registrationrequirement.

A number of individual commentershighlighted the distinction betweentraditional model aircraft that are homebuilt or assembled from kits (which theycharacterized as separate from UAS) andReady to Fly (RTF) aircraft that do notrequire assembly (which theycharacterized as UAS). Thesecommenters claimed that traditionalmodel aircraft do not pose a safety riskto the NAS because they are flownstrictly within the operator’s visual lineof sight, have no autonomous control,and have fairly limited ranges. Somecommenters also pointed out that modelaircraft that are operated within theauspices of the AMA can only be flownat AMA-sanctioned fields and mustalready display the owner’s AMAmember ID. Commenters contrastedthese models with ready-to-fly aircraft,which are easy to operate, capable ofvertical take-off, payload carrying andflying autonomously and beyond visualline of sight, and are often equippedwith other enhanced capabilities, suchas cameras, GPS systems, and remoteviewing electronics. Commentersasserted that the problems that haveprompted the FAA to requireregistration are due to the proliferationof these ready-to-fly aircraft that can beflown beyond visual line of sight. Onecommenter said “their ease of use,intuitive controls, and overallavailability have created a perfect storm,wherein inexperienced flyers are flying

in inappropriate and/or dangerousplaces.”

Some commenters recommended ablanket exemption for home-built modelaircraft. One commenter explained thathome-built models should be exemptfrom registration because individualswho build their own model aircraft“have the time, experience, personalinvestment and motivation to be awareof and observe safe modeling practices.”Another commenter asserted thatexempting home- or scratch-built modelaircraft “will allow experimenters,programmers, developers and betatesters to exercise their creativitywithout complicating or impeding thecreative process with unnecessaryrestrictions.” Other commenters did notrequest a blanket exemption for home-built model aircraft but insteadrecommended exemptions based onperformance capabilities, which wouldnecessarily exclude traditional modelaircraft. Those recommendations arediscussed below.

Unmanned aircraft under a certainweight should be excluded from therequirement of registration: Manycommenters recommended that the FAAcreate an exemption from theregistration requirement for UAS thatfall below a minimum weight threshold.One individual commenter said theFAA needs to collect some real data todetermine the weight below whichunmanned aircraft no longer pose athreat to people or manned aircraft.Another individual commenter statedany weight threshold chosen forexemption needs to be determinedbased on kinetic energy and lethalitystudies. Other commenters made bothgeneral and specific recommendationsfor a minimum weight threshold,

Some individuals based theirrecommendations on a comparisonbetween the risks to manned aircraftfrom bird strikes and the risks fromcollisions with unmanned aircraft. Onecommenter said that any aircraft overthe weight of a mallard duck should beregistered. Another commenterrecommended an exemption for UAS“which present a risk equivalent or lessthan an acceptable bird strike.” Anothercommenter recommended an exemptionfor UAS that weigh less than 1.5 timesthe heaviest flying bird’s weight.Another commenter noted that the FAAhas regulations that define therequirements for aircraft to withstandimpact from birds (14 CFR 25.631) andengine ingestion from birds (14 CFR33.76), and recommended the FAAexempt any unmanned aircraft thatwould have equal or less impact than abird with the characteristics describedin those existing regulations. Another

individual commenter said a thresholdweight of 2 pounds is “entirelyreasonable” because crows weighbetween 0.7 and 2.6 pounds. Anothercommenter stated that a weightthreshold of 1 kilogram (or 2.2 pounds)is appropriate because it represents asmall risk factor based on an FAAwildlife strike report that says “specieswith body masses < 1 kilogram (2.2 ibs)are excluded from database.” Anotherindividual commenter asserted that aweight threshold of 5 pounds isappropriate because damage is likely tobe minimal in an emergency event andbecause manned aircraft already musthave the ability to withstand a similarbird strike.

Some commenters based theirrecommendations on the weightthreshold proposed by the FAA in thesUAS Operation and CertificationNPRM for a possible micro UASclassification. The News MediaCoalition said that if the FAA adoptsspecial rules for micro UAS, then thosemicro UAS should be exempt from theregistration requirement. AviationManagement Associates, Inc. similarlystated that the weight threshold forregistration should be 4.4 pounds—theweight proposed in the sUAS Operationand Certification NPRM—”or lesserweight if it is determined vehicles ofless than 4.4 pounds create anunacceptable safety risk.” AviationManagement qualified itsrecommendation, however, by assertingthat no UAS that weighs less than 1.5pounds should be required to register. Afew individual commenters also statedthat the weight threshold for registrationshould be in line with the weightthreshold chosen for a micro UASclassification.

The Agricultural Technology Alliance(ATA) asserted that if the FAA issues ablanket exemption from the registrationrequirement for all micro UASregistration, it can better focus its effortson higher-risk UAS withoutcompromising safety. ATA also notedthat Canada has a similar exemption formicro UAS.

A number of commenters, includingAviation Management Associates, Inc.,the National Retail Federation andnumerous individuals, asserted that theFAA should exempt UAS that fit intothe “toy” category. Many of those

34Wildlife Strikes to civil Aircraft in the UnitedStates 1990—2014 (July 2015), available at http://www.faa.gov/airports/airport safety/wildlife!media/Wildlife-Strike-Report-i 990-201 4.pdf.

The sUAS Operation and certification NPRMconsidered the creation of a micro UASclassification for UAS weighing no more than 4.4pounds (2 idlograms) for purposes of operation andcertification requirements. 80 FR at 9556—9558.



commenters did not suggest a minimumweight threshold for a toy category.Several individual commenterssuggested the FAA use the AMA’sguidelines for the Park Flyer Program(i.e., aircraft weighing 2 pounds or less)to define what qualifies as a “toy” forpurposes of this exclusion.

The Toy Industry Association saidthat for purposes of defining productsthat should be exempt from theregistration requirement, it is notnecessary to create an independent “toyUAS” category that is separate from thecategory of unmanned aircraft thatshould be exempt from registrationrequirements “due to their lower risk.”Specifically, the association discouragedthe FAA from creating a “toy” categorybased on factors unrelated tooperational safety, such as cost of theUAS, how it is marketed, or where it issold, and encouraged the agency to“instead look at targeted UASperformance indicators that directlyspeak to the operational risk of theproduct and exempt all UAS that fit inthat category.” The Toy IndustryAssociation highlighted the weight ofthe UAS as “the most risk-related andmeasurable variable.” The commenternoted that most of its membersmanufacture UAS that are below 1kilogram, but that certain UAS thatweigh more than 1 kilogram should alsobe considered for exemption (i.e.,products intended to be flown indoors,products than can only fly relativelylow, and products that are equippedwith technology that makes the productsafer, such as crash avoidancetechnology or technology that limits theheight the UAS can fly).

Prox Dynamics stated that smaller andlighter air vehicles generally displayless risk than larger ones. The companyasserted, for example, that “a fly-sizedlow energy drone has negligible risk,even if a direct impact is considered.”The company further asserted that aclass of “inherently safe” aircraft existsthat should be exempt from theregistration requirement. Specifically,the company recommended anexemption for aircraft with a maximumweight of less than 60 grams. A fewindividual commenters suggested 3.3pounds because that weight is used asa threshold for regulating model rockets.Horizon Hobby recommended thatproducts with a gross weight of lessthan 2 kilograms be exempt from theregistration requirement, which thecommenter asserted is in line withcurrent FAA-approved exemption forhobby uses. An individual commenterstated that rules already exists for otherunmanned objects operating in the NAS,including kites, balloons and rockets (14

CFR part 101), and that the FAA shouldfollow the precedent set by those rulesand only regulate UAS heavier than 4 to6 pounds. Other commenters alsorecommended specific weightthresholds for exemption from theregistration requirement ranging from 60grams on the low end to 100—150pounds on the high end.

A few individual commenters framedtheir proposals in terms of payloadweight. One commenter recommendedan exemption for unmanned aircraft thatare not capable of carrying a payload ofmore than 1 or 2 pounds. Anothercommenter recommended thatregistration be required for unmannedaircraft that are capable of carrying morethan 10 pounds of payload. Anothercommenter said registration be requiredfor any unmanned aircraft that weighsmore than 8 or 10 pounds and can carrya load of its weight or higher. Anindividual commenter asserted thateven small, relatively light-weightmodels have dangerous rotors and cancarry a risk of doing damage if theycollide with, or are ingested into theengine of, a full-scale aircraft. Thiscommenter further asserted thattechnology is advancing to enable asingle control station to operatemultiple UAS in a coordinate way, anda “swarm” of otherwise light-weightUAS would be dangerous if flown intothe path of a full-scale aircraft.

Some commenters recommendedminimum weight thresholds for specifictypes of UAS. A number of commenters,for example, said model aircraft that donot operate within existing AMA rulesshould be above 5 pounds to trigger theregistration requirement. Anotherindividual commenter said that onlymodel aircraft that are one-half scale orlarger should be subject to registration.One individual commenterrecommended a 1 kilogram (2.2 pound)threshold for multicopters. Thecommenter noted that this threshold iscommonly used in Europe and theUnited Kingdom. Another individualcommenter recommended a weightthreshold of 25 pounds for fixed-wingUAS and 10 pounds for non-fixed-wingUAS. One individual commenterrecommended an exemption forquadcopters under 1,500 grams, whileanother individual commenterrecommended an exemption forquadcopters under 20 pounds. Oneindividual commenter recommended anexemption for “toy” unmanned aircraftthat are 1 pound or less and registrationonly if used above 300 feet for “mini”UAS weighing between 1 and 7 pounds.A few commenters recommended anexemption for small unmanned aircraftthat are made out of foam, although the

individual did not specify a weightthreshold for these aircraft.

Unmanned aircraft with certainperformance capabilities should beexcluded from the requirement ofregistration: A large number ofindividual commenters recommendedthat the registration requirement applyonly to UAS that possess certainperformance capabilities or aircraftspecifications. Many of thosecammenters, including individuals whosubmitted comments as part of an AMAform letter campaign, said theregistration requirement should applyoniy to unmanned aircraft that have theability to operate beyond the operator’svisual line of sight. Other commenters,including Aviation ManagementAssociates, Inc. and numerousindividuals, also said that unmannedaircraft that are capable of beyond visualline of sight operations should beregistered, but those commenters didnot say that such unmanned aircraft arethe only small unmanned aircraft thatshould be registered.

In addition to the ability to operatebeyond visual line of sight, commentersrecommended that the registrationrequirement apply only to unmannedaircraft that have one or more of thefollowing performance capabilities:

Have the ability to fly autonomously.Have automated control functions such as

“return-to-home.”Have RNAV capabilities (either through

satellite base navigation or through inertialnavigation).

Have first person view capabilities.Have an onboard navigational system.Are equipped with GPS.Take off vertically.Are capable of hovering.Are capable of hovering during normal

operation and are equipped with onboardphoto or video recording equipment.

Are capable of automated or remote-controlled pickup or drop-off of a payload.

Are equipped with an onboard camera oraudio recording equipment.

Can transmit a video signal at more than ¼mile.

Are capable of flight for longer than aspecified minimum period of time.

Have a range that exceeds a specifiedminimum distance. One commentercharacterized this as “electronic line ofsite.”

Have the ability to fly above a specifiedminimum altitude.

Are capable of entering controlled orrestricted airspace.

Some commenters suggested someminimum weight threshold incombination with one or more of theabove-listed capabilities.

A group of academics recommendedthe FAA adopt a progressive approachthat requires registration for only themost problematic technologies—which



they asserted to be long-range firstperson view and GPS waypointnavigation—and then “transparentlyassess” the results of this registration.These commenters noted that if the FAAdetermines that conventional modelaircraft are still creating an unduehazard for aviation, then additionalmeasures (such as a requirement forlow-cost pressure altimeters that limitmodel aircraft below 400 feet) could beimplemented.

The Aerospace Industries Associationsaid that only aircraft capable ofsustained, untethered flight should beregistered. A few individualcommenters similarly recommendedexemptions for aircraft that are control-line operated (i.e., tethered flight), thatare hand-thrown or rubber-bandpowered (i.e., “free flight” aircraft), andthat are unpowered (e.g., gliders).

Several members of the “free flight”community specifically recommendedthat the FAA create an exemption forlight-weight, free flight model aircraftthat weigh 10 ounces or less and haveno means of externally controlling theiraircraft while in flight.

Another individual similarly assertedthat speed, altitude, and flight durationwill depend on battery, motor, andpropeller size, and that weight shouldtherefore be used to determine whichUAS should be exempt from theregistration requirement. Thecommenter noted that consideration offactors such as speed, altitude, andflight duration raises the question ofwhat defines the actual UAS (e.g., thefuselage for a plane, the frame of aquadcopter). The commenter furthernoted that the same fuselage can havedramatically different performancecharacteristics if the battery, motor, orpropeller is changed. The commenterasserted that registering eachcombination “would be absurd,” andany change in propeller, motor, orbattery size would raise questions ofwhen an owner needs to re-register theaircraft.

There were commenters, however,who disagreed with a requirement toregister UAS that possess some of theabove-listed capabilities. An individualcommenter, for example, said thatenhanced capabilities such as firstperson view or flight controls capable ofautonomous flight should not be areason for requiring registration. Thecommenter claimed that an aircraft thatdoes not exceed safe mass/speed!altitude/duration thresholds is notautomatically a threat to mannedaircraft simply by virtue of beingequipped with enhanced capabilities.Another individual commenter said thatsmall UAS equipped with GPS should

not automatically be required to registerbecause some small UAS flown bybeginners use GPS to stabilize theaircraft, which increases their safetylevel. The commenter noted that theseUAS have controls that will not let theaircraft fly above a certain altitude.Several commenters said that anyrequirement to register all UAS thathave the ability to fly above a certainaltitude or to enter controlled airspaceshould exclude UAS that areprogrammed with geofencing or “SafeFly” technology, which limits altitudeand restricts flight into controlledairspace. The Toy Industry Associationcautioned against using altitude as athreshold for registration. Thecommenter noted that not all companiesuse technology that limits the height aUAS can fly and that it would bepremature to spell out specifictechnological requirement to ensure thatUAS fly below a certain altitude whenother technology advancements maydevelop that achieve the same purpose.The Toy Industry Association alsoasserted that the issue of whether a UASis equipped with a camera is notrelevant to registration. The associationstated that, while there are legitimateprivacy concerns to consider, “thisconversation should not take place inthe context of the aviation industrysafety at this time.”

The National Retail Federation saidthat unmanned aircraft “that aredesignated as ‘toys’ with limitedperformance capabilities” should beexempt from the registration process.The commenter did not, however,specify what qualifies as “toys,” or whatperformance capabilities would removean unmanned aircraft from the “toy”category. Rather, the commenter saidthe FAA should require registrationbased on potential safety and securityrisks associated with performancecapabilities or material specifications ofthe unmanned aircraft, or the age of theoperator.

Some commenters stated moregenerally that aircraft capabilitiesshould not be a consideration forexemption from registration. Oneindividual said speed, altitude, andflight duration should not be criteria forregistration because they can varydepending on a wide-variety of “user-selectable UAS components” such asprops choice, battery size, and flightmode, among others. Anotherindividual said that because unmannedaircraft are constantly changing andevolving, it would be a poor choice todevelop limitations based onperformance. Several other individualsstated that registration should only berequired if the operator intends to

operate in the same airspace as mannedaircraft. A few other individuals said allUAS flown in public spaces should beregistered, regardless of aircraftcapabilities. Another individual saidcapabilities of the aircraft have nothingto do with whether it is a safety risk ornot; rather, it is the practices of the pilotthat determine the safety risk.

Unmanned aircraft should beexcluded based on operationsconducted: Some commenters said thatunmanned aircraft should be excludedfrom the registration requirement basedon operations, rather than weight oraircraft specifications and capabilities.Modovolate Aviation, LLC and anumber of individual commentersrecommended a limited exemption forUAS that are operated exclusivelyindoors. As noted above, manycommenters said that small UAS thatare operated within the operator’s visualline of sight, or below a minimumaltitude, or below a certain speed,should be exempt from the registrationrequirement. Also noted above, someindividual c ommenters recommendedan exemption from the registrationrequirement for UAS that are flownunder AMA safety guidelines on AMA-sanctioned flying fields. A few otherindividual commenters recommendedan exemption for UAS that are operated,with permission, over private property.Another individual commenterrecommended an exemption for UASengaged in semi-commercial!agricultural operations that areconducted under 500 feet above groundlevel and over sparely populated areas.Another individual commenterrecommended an exemption for UASflying over “largely unpopulated areas.”Several individual commenters said theregistration requirement should notapply to UAS that are used at schoolsand institutions for educationalpurposes. Another individualcommenter recommended an exemptionfor UAS used for non-profit purposes.

The US Drone Racing Associationsaid that drones used for racing—whichgenerally stay under 100 feet and withinvisual line of sight—should not berequired to register, unless theiroperations exceed some minimumoperational thresholds such as beyondvisual line of sight, range over half mile,or above 400 feet.

An individual commenter noted that,due to radio restrictions for videotransmissions, first person view pilotsare required by law to have a FederalCommunications Commission (FCC)license for any transmitter over 25mW.Because those pilots are alreadyrequired to register and placeidentifying markings on the transmitter,



the commenter recommended anexemption from the FAA registrationrequirement for a first person view pilotwith an FCC license.

Other commenters phrased theirrecommendations in terms of UASoperations that should be included inthe registration requirement. A numberof commenters, including AviationManagement Associates, Inc. and manyindividuals, said any UAS used forcommercial purposes should beregistered. Several individualcommenters said UAS operated incontrolled airspace should be requiredto register. Another individualcommenter said registration should berequired for UAS that operate overprivate property, at altitudes over 400feet, over populated areas, and within 5miles of an airport.

Other comments on whether certainUAS should be excluded from theregistration requirement: Somecommenters recommended registrationrequirements based on aircraft type.Several individuals said that all fixed-wing UAS should be exempt fromregistration. A few other individualssaid that only multirotor UAS should berequired to register (because they areeasy to fly and can take off fromanywhere). Other categories of UAS thatcommenters said should be included inthe registration requirements were high-volume production aircraft (i.e., modelsproduced in volumes greater than aspecified value, such as 5,000 or 10,000units per year) and UAS powered bygas/oil mixes. Some commenterssuggested that UAS be excluded fromthe registration requirement based onframe size or prop size.

A number of commentersrecommended a combination of factorsto consider when determining what, ifany, category of UAS should beexcluded from the registrationrequirement.

Aviation Management Associates,Inc., said the FAA should exempt “anysmall UAS regardless of weight that islimited by manufacturing firmware orother acceptable means to operatingbelow 500 feet above ground level, willnot exceed a 1/2 range mile from theoperator and the associated groundcontrol station, as well as provides geofencing and altitude limitations thatmeets FAA exclusionary airspace.”

The Property Drone Consortiumstated that micro-drones of somemaximum weight, speed, and altitudeshould be exempt from registration. Thecommenter suggested the followingpossible thresholds: Weight under 1pound, 15—20 mph maximum flightspeed, and an altitude of under 100 feet.The commenter also stated that an

assessment could be made based onjoules of imparted energy. Thecommenter further stated that region ofoperation should also be a point ofconsideration for a possible exemptionfrom the registration requirement.

The Retail Industry LeadersAssociation said the FAA should adopta risk-based approach and only requireregistration of UAS that present thegreatest safety risks, based onconsideration of factors including:Product weight and overall size,operating range, maximum speed,maximum altitude, fragility, and GPSand other navigation capability.Travelers Insurance Company similarlyasserted that any unmanned aircraft thatthe FAA determines poses a risk to thenational airspace or causes seriousbodily injury or property damage shouldbe registered. The commenter went onto say that the FAA should exercisediscretion with respect to unmannedaircraft “that are so light in weight andlacking in capabilities so as to pose nomeaningful threat to persons, propertyor the national airspace.” Thecommenter did not, however, specifywhat weight or what limited capabilitiesshould be used as a threshold forregistration.

Latitude Engineering, LLC assertedthat “there exists a threshold of massand speed under which the riskassociated with the flight of anunregistered commercial UAS is morethan offset by the value returned to thepublic.” The company stated that itreached this conclusion after evaluatingthe kinetic energy of various UASairframe configurations from firstprincipals and drawing from studiessuch as “UAS Safety Analysis” byExponent (Dec. 16, 2014). Thecompany’s specific recommendationwas to exempt UAS that are near thefollowing values: Mass of an upper limitof 1 pound, speed limited to 50 knots,and altitude limited to 200 feet aboveground level or 100 feet from the highestobstacle within 200 lateral feet. Thecompany also asserted that nounregulated flights should be allowedwithin 5 miles of an airport.

Delair-Tech asserted that it wouldmake sense for a category of unmannedaircraft associated with a low risk ofaccidental damage to be exempt fromregistration. The company defined thiscategory as unmanned aircraft thatweigh less than 1 kilogram and have aflight performance that is limited to 50meters in height. The company based itsrecommendation on the “toys and mini-drones” category defined by theEuropean Aviation Safety Agency in Ref5, Proposal 14.

ATA stated that the FAA shouldexempt from the registrationrequirement any UAS that is to be usedsolely in rural areas, which thecommenter said should be defined as acertain distance from an airport or amajor population center. ATA notedthat Canada also has an exemption foroperations in low-risk rural areas.

EPIC noted that the registrationscheme, as currently envisioned, doeslittle to solve the problem of identifyinga UAS or UAS operator because the onlyUAS that will be identifiable are thosethat are recovered after a crash. EPICalso noted that the current registrationplan does nothing to inform the publicof surveillance capabilities of the drone,which is necessary to make UASoperators accountable to the public.

Another individual said the importantcriteria for a registration determinationare wingspan dimensions, propellerdiameter and type, energy source, andweight. Another individual stated thatexemptions should be based on weight,speed, and operating height. Thiscommenter suggested the FAA use aformula to calculate a UAS’s impactenergy, where “E” is the impact energy,‘rn” is the mass, “v”is the maximumflight speed, “g” is gravitationalacceleration (constant), and “h” is theheight. This commenter stated that FAAcould conduct a comprehensive study todetermine the critical value of impactenergy, and users could calculate theimpact energy of their UAS, simply byfilling the mass, maximum flights speed,and maximum height into an onlineformula available on the FAA Web site.Another individual said most “hobbyclass UAS” should be excluded fromregistration based on the empty weightof the aircraft and the potential kineticenergy of the unit. This commenterasserted that there is precedent for thismethod and that it has workedreasonably well with part 103 ultralightvehicles and light sport aircraft. Thiscommenter claimed that a 55-poundmodel aircraft flown at 60 mph hasaround 12% of the kinetic energy of apart 103 vehicle traveling at the samespeed, even with a payload of 40% ofthe empty weight. This commenterfurther claimed that a typicalmotorcycle driven at 40 mph wouldhave nearly 4 times the kinetic energyof a 55-pound UAS flying at 60 mph.This commenter asserted that societyaccepts this level of risk for pedestrians,and questioned why one-quarter of thatlevel of risk posed by an out-of-controlUAS would also not be acceptable.

Task Force Recommendation: TheTask Force accepted as a baseline thatthe registration requirement will onlyapply to small unmanned aircraft (i.e.,



aircraft weighing less than 55 pounds)that are operated outdoors in the NAS.Beyond that baseline, however, the FAAasked the Task Force forrecommendations regarding additionalminimum requirements for smallunmanned aircraft that would need tobe registered. In particular, the agencyasked the Task Force to consider factorsincluding, but not limited to, technicalcapabilities and operational capabilitiessuch as size, weight, speed, payload,equipage, and other factors such as theage of the operator.

The safety of the non-flying publicand of other users of the NAS wascentral to the Task Force’sdetermination of what category of smallunmanned aircraft to recommend forexemption from the registrationrequirement. With considerations ofsafety in mind, the Task Forceaddressed the possibility ofrecommending an exclusion based onvarious factors, including: Weight (aloneand in combination with altitude orkinetic energy), mass, speed, kineticenergy, payload, equipage (e.g., camera,GPS), and operational capabilities, suchas the ability to navigate the airspace,the ability to operate above a certainaltitude above ground level, the abilityto operate beyond the visual line ofsight of the operator, the ability tooperate autonomously, and flightduration.

The Task Force ultimately agreed touse a mass-based approach to determinean appropriate category of smallunmanned aircraft to recommend forexclusion from the registrationrequirement. This was based upon theprobability of a catastrophic eventoccurring (i.e., death or serious injury)due to a collision between a smallunmanned aircraft and a person on theground. The Task Force further statedthat because of the lack of data onunmanned aircraft-aircraft collisions,engine ingestion, and propeller impactsby unmanned aircraft, the probability ofa catastrophic event occurring due tothose events was not part of itsconsideration. Rather, the task forcenoted that research in this areacontinues and as it becomes available,this threshold should be evaluated andadjusted accordingly. This approachbest satisfied the Task Force’s concernsabout safety and provided a minimumweight threshold for registration that iseasy to understand and apply andwould therefore encourage compliance.

The formula considered by the taskforce is a standard aviation riskassessment formula used inconsideration of manned aircraft safety.For ease of administration and smallunmanned aircraft owner

understanding, the Task Force stronglyadvised a mass-based approach fordetermining the generally safe thresholdbelow which a small unmanned aircraftsystem would not need to be registered.

The Task Force recommended that theFAA should exempt from theregistration requirement any smallunmanned aircraft weighing 250 grams(g) or less. The 250 grams or lessexclusion was based on a maximumweight. The Task Force assumedmaximum weight was defined as themaximum weight possible including theaircraft, payload, and any otherassociated weight.

The Task Force proposed this mass byconsidering: The maximum free-fallkinetic energy of a small unmannedaircraft from 500 feet (ft) above groundlevel; research papers assessing thelethality of inert debris based on kineticenergy; and a determination of theprobability that a small unmannedaircraft with potentially lethal kineticenergy would strike a person on theground. The Task Force’srecommendation assumed populationdensity for a densely packed urbanenvironment, as well as a conservativeestimate of the percentage of people inthat crowded environment who may beunprotected and susceptible to injuryfrom a falling small unmanned aircraft.To determine the probability of anaccident, the Task Force provided anestimate of the mean time betweenfailure (MTBF) for small unmannedaircraft. Mathematically, the Task Forcepredicts that the likelihood of a fatalaccident involving a small unmannedaircraft weighing 250g or less is 4.7 x108, or less than 1 ground fatality forevery 20 million flight hours of smallunmanned aircraft 250g or less. TheTask Force noted that the acceptablerisk level for commercial airtransportation is on the order of 1 x10, and general aviation risk levelsare on the order of 5 x 0—0.

The Task Force emphasized that thisrecommendation is conditioned on thepremise that this and the Task Force’sother recommendations will beaccepted, without alteration. Certainmembers of the Task Force asked that itbe noted that this is a nascent industrywith very little experiential data toinform the assumptions and thatperiodic review of the data may bewarranted. Certain Task Force membersnoted that the FAA’s 25 years of birdstrike data show that fatal aircraftaccidents caused by small and mediumbirds (weighing four pounds on average)are extremely rare despite the presenceof billions of birds within the lowaltitudes where small UAS typically fly,and urged the FAA to select a weight

that posed a similar safety risk. TaskForce members representing mannedaircraft organizations expressed specificconcerns that data on UAS-aircraftcollisions, engine ingestion, propeller,and rotor impacts by UAS was notavailable when determining the weightthreshold. All members urged the FAAto expedite its work currently underwayin this area. The Task Force alsoemphasized that 250-gram weightthreshold was agreed to for registrationpurposes only and was not a validationof the underlying assumptions for anypurpose other than the registrationrequirement. All Task Force membersagreed that the threshold should not beused by the FAA as an index foroperational restrictions or categories inany future rulemaking unless safetyconcerns require the FAA to takeappropriate action.

IFR Requirement: The FAA hasconsidered the comments received tothe Clarification/Request forInformation and the Task Forcerecommendations. As noted above, theformula considered by the Task Force isa risk assessment approach that resultsin a method to determine which smallunmanned aircraft are required to beregistered. In recognition of thepotential risks posed by smallunmanned aircraft highlighted by theTask Force’s work, the FAA agrees withthe Task Force recommendation andgenerally agrees with its approach forpurposes of aircraft registration only.The Task Force recommendation resultsin a simple, straight forward method todetermine which aircraft should beregistered. Accordingly, this rulemakingadopts the Task Force recommendationto exclude small unmanned aircraftweighing an equivalent of 250 grains orless. (FAA is using the poundequivalent of 250 grams—0.55 pounds.)The agency emphasizes, however, thatthe Task Force approach may bedifferent from the approach that will beused in the sUAS Operation andCertification rulemaking to developoperating requirements.

The FAA recognizes that the TaskForce recommendation strikes a balancebetween many stakeholders, includingmodelers, unmanned aircraftmanufacturers, operators, retailers, andthe manned aviation community. Asthis aviation sector continues todevelop, operating experience and newtechnologies may compel the agency toreconsider the appropriate weightthreshold for unmanned aircraftregistration. Additionally, new researchmay necessitate a change from theweight-based approach recommendedby the Task Force. Since the TaskForce’s methodology only assessed the



risk to individuals on the ground, theagency recognizes that additionalresearch is necessary to evaluate the riskof collisions between small unmannedaircraft and manned aircraft. The FAAhas several tests, both in-progress andplanned, in collaboration with our UASTest Sites and UAS Center ofExcellence.

The FAA considered comments thatadvocated for the use of weight incombination with other factors anddetermined that these scenarios wouldbe more difficult to implement andcould cause confusion. The FAA alsoconsidered comments thatrecommended exclusions from theregistration requirement based onoperational limitations, e.g., altitude,speed, visual line of sight operationsonly. However, at this time, the FAA isconcerned that these approaches couldstifle innovation in the ongoing andrapid development of sUAS technology.Thus, the FAA determined that thesewere not viable methods to createexclusions.

Regarding commenters whorecommended that the FAA excludecertain aircraft from the requirement ofregistration based on the locations atwhich those aircraft would be operated(e.g., private property), such anapproach would defeat the purpose ofregistration, which is to identify aircraftthroughout the NAS and the owners ofsuch aircraft. Registration based onintended location would not addressthat intent because the NAS extendsover private property. In response to thecomments urging the exclusion of someor all model aircraft from theregistration requirement, the FAA hasdetermined that doing so would becontrary to the policy adopted in theOctober 22, 2015 Clarification/Requestfor Information.

In response to the comments urgingthe exclusion of some or all modelaircraft from the registrationrequirement, as stated in theClarification/Request for Information,model aircraft are indeed aircraft andthus they are subject to the statutoryrequirement of aircraft registration. 80FR at 63913—63914.

In response to the commenters whoadvocated for a limited exemption forunmanned aircraft operated exclusivelyindoors, the FAA reiterates that therequirement of registration pertains toaircraft operated in the NAS, thusoutdoors. An exception is not requiredto stipulate that small unmannedaircraft operated exclusively indoors arenot required to register with the FAA.

Regarding comments received to theClarification/Request for Informationpertaining to the micro UAS proposal

contained in the sUAS Operation andCertification NPRM, the FAA notes thatissues pertaining to weightclassifications for purposes of sUASoperation and certification purposes areoutside of the scope of this rulemaking.

Regarding comments pertaining toprivacy and operational concerns, theagency clarifies that this rulemaking isintended only to provide relief from theexisting part 47 registrationrequirements. Pursuant to thePresidential Memorandum issued onFebruary 15, 2015, Promoting EconomicCompetitiveness While SafeguardingPrivacy, Civil Rights, and Civil Libertiesin Domestic Use of UAS, the NationalTelecommunications and InformationAdministration (NTIA) is leading amulti-stakeholder engagement processto develop and communicate bestpractices for privacy, accountability,and transparency issues regardingcommercial and private use of UAS inthe NAS, and will address these issuesthrough that process.

D. Eligibility To Register

1. Citizenship

This final rule includes the statutoryeligibility requirements for aircraftregistration as required by 49 U.S.C.44102. An aircraft may be registeredunder 49 U.S.C. 44103 only when theaircraft is not registered under the lawsof a foreign country and is owned by (1)a citizen of the United States; (2) anindividual citizen of a foreign countrylawfully admitted for permanentresidence in the United States; or (3) acorporation not a citizen of the UnitedStates when the corporation isorganized and doing business under thelaws of the United States or a State, andthe aircraft is based and primarily usedin the United States. The FAA may alsoregister aircraft owned by the UnitedStates government or a State or localgovernmental entity. See 49 U.S.C.44102. Part 47 includes these statutoryeligibility requirements.

sUAS Operation and CertificationNPRM: The sUAS Operation andCertification NPRM addressed theapplicability of the statutory aircraft-registration requirement by proposing torequire all small unmanned aircraftsubject to the proposal to be registeredpursuant to the existing registrationprocess of part 47. See 80 FR 9574. TheNPRM did not address issues pertainingto the eligibility to register (includingcitizenship).

Although the sUAS Operation andCertification NPRM did not address theissue of aircraft owner citizenship as itrelates to small unmanned aircraft inpart 47, one commenter to the NPRM

raised the issue. DJl acknowledged theconstraints the statutory aircraftregistration requirements place on theFAA, but believed that those restrictionsprevent most foreign citizens fromoperating a small UAS commercially inthe United States. DJT presumed thattourists operating small UAS as modelaircraft would be allowed to do so. DJIurged the FAA to consider askingCongress either to drop the aircraftregistration requirement for all smallUAS altogether or to withdraw thecitizenship requirement (including itslimited exceptions).

Clarification/Request for Information:Rotor Sport recommended againstrequiring U.S. citizenship forregistration of small UAS because itwould be “severely detrimental” to therotor sport industry. In particular, RotorSport stated that requiring citizenshipfor small UAS that are already governedby the Amateur Competitive Sportregulations of the AMA “would severelyand financially impact internationaldrone racing events, including the 2016World Drone Racing Championshipbeing held in Hawaii.”

Task Force: As part of its discussionsregarding who should register a smallunmanned aircraft, the Task Forceaddressed the issue of citizenship statusof applicants for registration.Considering the goals of encouraging thegrowth of the UAS industry andcompliance with the registrationrequirement, the Task Forcerecommended there be no U.S.citizenship or residency requirement forregistration eligibility. If, however, theFAA does include a U.S. citizenshiprequirement, the Task Forcerecommended that the agency use itsdiscretion to permit non-citizen ownersto operate in the U.S. by applying for awaiver from the registration requirementfor a specified period of time (consistentwith 49 U.S.C. 41703(a)(4)). The TaskForce believed that eliminating thecitizenship requirement would helpachieve the goal that small unmannedaircraft owners are known to the FAAfor safety purposes.

IFR Requirement: While the FAA canmake certain changes to the registrationsystem regarding the types ofinformation to be collected, and howthat information is collected, thestatutory requirements pertaining tocitizenship in 49 U.S.C. 44102 are clear.The statutory citizenship criteria mustbe satisfied in order to obtain acertificate of U.S. registration.

As noted above, registration is justone requirement that must be satisfiedin order to operate an aircraft in the U.S.With respect to the operation ofunmanned aircraft, Article 8 of the



Convention on International CivilAviation, signed at Chicago on 7December 1944 and amended by theICAO Assembly (Doc 7300) addresses‘pilotless aircraft’ and states that:No aircraft capable of being flown without apilot shall be flown without a pilot over theterritory of a contracting State withoutspecial authorization by that State and inaccordance with the terms of suchauthorization. Each contracting Stateundertakes to insure that the flight of suchaircraft without a pilot in regions open tocivil aircraft shall be so controlled as toobviate danger to civil aircraft.

For those that do not satisfy thecitizenship requirements for U.S.registration, consistent with theauthority in 49 U.S.C. 41703, theSecretary may authorize certain foreigncivil aircraft to be navigated in the U.S.only (1) if the country of registry grantsa similar privilege to aircraft of the U.S.;(2) by an airman holding a certificate orlicense issued or made valid by the U.S.government or the country of registry;(3) if the Secretary authorizes thenavigation; and (4) if the navigation isconsistent with the terms the Secretarymay prescribe. See also 14 CFR part 375,Navigation of Foreign Civil Aircraft inthe United States.

In this instance, with respect to thoseindividuals who do not satisfy thecitizenship requirements and yet wishto conduct model aircraft operations inthe U.S., the Secretary has determined,consistent with Article 8, and theauthority under 49 U.S.C. 41703, asimplemented in 14 CFR part 375, that itis appropriate to allow these operationsto occur provided that individualscomplete the process set forth in 14 CFRpart 48 and comply with the statutoryrequirements for conducting modelaircraft operations in Public Law 112—95, section 336 (Feb. 14, 2012). Forthese individuals, recognizing that mostICAO member states have not imposeda registration or airworthinessrequirement for these small unmannedaircraft, we will recognize these aircraftas “other foreign civil aircraft” asdefined in 14 CFR 375.11. Consistentwith the Secretary’s authority in section333 of Public Law 112—95, provided theaircraft are operated exclusively asmodel aircraft in accordance withsection 336 of Public Law 112—95, anairworthiness certificate will not berequired. Section 375.38 will requireindividuals to comply with § 48.30 andpay a $5 fee, complete the applicationand the registration process in§ 48.100(b) and (c), 48.105, and 48.115;mark the aircraft in accordance with theprovisions in § 48.200 and 48.205, andcomply with the statutory model aircraftrequirements in section 336 of Public

Law 112—95. The agency will considerthe certificate that is issued to be arecognition of ownership rather than acertificate of U.S. aircraft registration.These conditions are consistent withand impose no greater burden than therequirements imposed on U.S. citizensconducting model aircraft operations inthe U.S.

2. Commercial Activity Conducted byNon-U.S. Citizens

A corporation that is not a citizen ofthe United States may register anaircraft in the United States when thecorporation is organized and doingbusiness under the laws of the UnitedStates or a State, and the aircraft isbased and primarily used in the UnitedStates. 49 U.S.C. 40102(a)(1)(C). Thisstatutory limitation exists in order toprevent the United States registry from“becoming an international registry”and “United States aircraft registrationfrom becoming a so-called ‘flag ofconvenience.’” See 44 FR 61937,61937—61938 (October 29, 1979).

Part 47 implements the requirementto define “based and primarily used inthe United States.” Under part 47,aircraft are deemed to be “based andprimarily used in the United States” ifone of the following conditions issatisfied: (1) The aircraft is usedexclusively in the United States duringthe period of registration; or (2) theaircraft flight hours accumulated withinthe United States amount to at least 60percent of the total flight hours of theaircraft, measured over six monthintervals. § 47.9. Because operations bysmall unmanned aircraft registered inaccordance with part 48 are limited tooperations within the United States, it isnot necessary to further define “basedand primarily used in the UnitedStates” as provided in part 47.

With respect to foreign-owned orcontrolled entities or individuals whowant to conduct non-recreational UASoperations but who do not satisfy thedefinition above and thus cannotregister their aircraft in the UnitedStates under either 14 CFR part 47 orpart 48, the Department and the FAAmay consider allowing these operationsto occur with additional authorizationunder the authority of 49 U.S.C. 41703,the provisions of 14 CFR part 375, andother safety authorizations as deemednecessary by the FAA. Comments arerequested on what factors the FAA orthe Department should consider indetermining whether and when to grantsuch authorizations. The Departmentwill address these authorizations inmore detail in the sUAS Operation andCertification final rule, the final rule onsUAS registration, or other rulemaking

as appropriate. For more informationand guidance regarding authorities fornon-U.S. citizens, please contact theDepartment’s Foreign Air CarrierLicensing Division.

3. Minimum Age To Register

Clarification/Request for Information:In the Clarification/Request forInformation document, the agencysought comments on whether thereshould be a minimum age at which aperson would be permitted to register asmall unmanned aircraft. An individualcommenter opposed a minimum agerequirement, noting that a 10 year oldcan be safer than a 30 year old. A fewother individual commenters did,however, recommend a minimum agerequirement to register and operate aUAS—one commenter recommended 21years old (to purchase and operate aUAS), two commenters recommended18 years old (to register a UAS), and onecommenter recommended 16 years old(to register a UAS). Another individualcommenter said there should be an agerequirement to purchase UAS weighingmore than 4 pounds. That commenterdid not, however, suggest an age atwhich this requirement should be set.One commenter pointed to the existenceof child protection laws and questionedhow the FAA will protect privacyinterests in the registration process.

Task Force: Due to the anticipated useof a Web-based application process forpart 48, the Task Force considered age-related limitations applicable to Web-based information collection. Consistentwith the Children’s Online PrivacyProtection Act (COPPA), 15 U.S.C.6501—6505, the Task Forcerecommended a requirement thatindividuals be 13 years or older toregister a UAS.

IFR Requirement: In response to thecomments from the Clarification/Request for Information, the agencynotes that the comments did not providejustification for an age restriction forpurposes of registration given that thereis no minimum age for the operation ofsome sUAS and the agency proposed aminimum age of 17 for operation ofsUAS used for commercial (non-hobbyor non-recreational) purposes. Althoughone commenter proposed that theregistration age should be linked to theweight of the aircraft, given that theregistration process provided by thisfinal rule is exclusively Web-based,protections for minor registrants mustcontrol. The FAA agrees with the TaskForce recommendation to limit Webbased small unmanned aircraftregistration to persons age 13 and olderand has included this requirement inthis IFR.



As a matter of policy (0MB Guidancefor Implementing the Privacy Provisionsof the E-Government Act of 2002), allWeb sites and online services operatedby the federal government andcontractors operating on behalf offederal agencies must comply with thestandards set forth in the Children’sOnline Privacy Protection Rule (16 CFRpart 312). COPPA applies to Web siteoperators (including mobile apps)directed to children under 13 thatcollect, use, or disclose personalinformation from children. It alsoapplies to operators of general audienceWeb sites or online services with actualknowledge that they are collecting,using, or disclosing personalinformation from children under 13.COPPA also applies to Web sites oronline services that have actualknowledge that they are collectingpersonal information directly from usersof another Web site or online servicedirected to children. Operators who arecovered by COPPA must:

1. Post a clear and comprehensiveonline privacy policy describing theirinformation practices for personalinformation collected online fromchildren;

2. Provide direct notice to parents andobtain verifiable parental consent, withlimited exceptions, before collectingpersonal information online fromchildren;

3. Give parents the choice ofconsenting to the operator’s collectionand internal use of a child’sinformation, but prohibiting theoperator from disclosing thatinformation to third parties (unlessdisclosure is integral to the site orservice, in which case, this must bemade clear to parents);

4. Provide parents access to theirchild’s personal information to reviewand/or have the information deleted;

5. Give parents the opportunity toprevent further use or online collectionof a child’s personal information;

6. Maintain the confidentiality,security, and integrity of informationthey collect from children, including bytaking reasonable steps to release suchinformation only to parties capable ofmaintaining its confidentiality andsecurity; and

7. Retain personal informationcollected online from a child for only aslong as is necessary to fulfill thepurpose for which it was collected anddelete the information using reasonablemeasures to protect against itsunauthorized access or use.

The Registry, through the smallunmanned aircraft registration Web site,is expected to gather personalinformation as defined by COPPA, such

as first and last name, a physical ormailing address and online contactinformation. In light of theserequirements, the registration Web sitewill require a responsible person age 13or over to complete the registrationapplication, providing their name inplace of the child’s name when theaircraft owner is a child under 13, asrequired by § 48.15.

All aircraft owners who are age 13and older will be required to register intheir name as the aircraft owner. Theagency does not expect a person whoturns 13 after the date on which theCertificate of Aircraft Registration isissued but before renewal is required, toreregister their small unmanned aircraftin their own name. The agency expectsthis change to take place at the time ofregistration renewal. Until such time,the responsible person can continue tomeet the obligations of the owner forpurposes of device identification.

We recognize that in order to registerin the system, the payment of the feerequires the use of a credit, debit, gift,or prepaid card using the Visa,MasterCard, American Express, JCB,Discover, or Diners Club network. Forowners who are age 13 and older whodo not have access to one of thesepayment methods, a parent, guardian, orresponsible person could submitpayment on their behalf using one ofthese options.

E. Registration Required Prior toOperation

1. Registration Prior to Operation

Clarification/Request for Information:The FAA requested comments on thepoint at which registration should occur(e.g., point-of-sale or prior to operation).Several trade associations whosemembers use UAS (News MediaCoalition, Air Medical OperatorsAssociation, Aerospace IndustriesAssociation (AlA), and Property DroneConsortium), Modovolate Aviation,LLC, and Morris P. Hebert, Inc.supported point-of-sale registration. Anumber of individuals stated thatregistration at point of sale was the onlyapproach that would ensure thatregistration would occur at least forready-to-fly UASs. These commentersstated that many operators would notregister later. Some of thesecommenters, however, questionedwhether point-of-sale registration couldbe applied to home-built or tradedUASs. A few commenters compared theregistration process to that which occursfor car and gun sales. Some commentersstated that an unlock process should beincluded so that the UAS could not beused until registration was complete.

Another suggested registering thebeacon, not the UAS. Commentersstated that point-of-sale registration,with the seller handling theinformation, would reduce the burdenon buyers. Some individuals stated thatpurchasers should have to demonstratethat they were familiar with the rules foroperation.

Chronicled, Inc. stated that aregistration system should be designedto integrate all POS systems thatcurrently exist; this commenter assumedthat each buyer would have an emailaddress and government ID number thatcould be used to set up a registrationaccount by downloading a mobile app.This company also assumed that theproduct would include a public keyinfrastructure (PKI) chip. The Real TimeTechnology Group stated that vendorscould easily verify IDs presented bychecking public records, andgovernment watch lists.

The National Agricultural AviationAssociation (NAAA), the ColoradoAgricultural Aviation Association, andan individual stated that the burden onvendors would be no greater thansubmitting credit card charges. NAAArecommended that initial registrationoccur at the manufacturers, with allsubsequent sales involving a transfer ofownership. A law firm and individualcommenters generally supported havingthe vendor submit the informationbecause, they argued, this would ensurethat the registration occurred. Onesuggested that the vendor submit atemporary registration with thepurchaser required to submit a finalversion.

Most commenters that addressed thisissue expressed either opposition to theapproach or concerns about the viabilityof point-of-sale registration for somesales. AT&T Services, Inc. questionedthe FAA’s legal authority to impose aregistration requirement at the point-of-sale, given that the statutory authorityunderlying the UAS registrationrequirement, as well as itsimplementing regulation, applies topersons who “operate” aircraft. In thiscase, AT&T asserted, it is the owner ofthe UAS who “operates” it, and shouldtherefore be responsible for registeringit.

The Retail Industry LeadersAssociation (RILA) stated that point-of-sale registration would require the FAAto build new information technologysystems to collect the information andretail outlets would have to build andtest systems to link to the FAA. RILAstated that this was unlikely to happenin the short timeframe the FAA isproposing. RILA further stated that thepractical realities of implementing a



point-of-sale registration system in timefor this holiday season would imposeheavy and costly administrative burdenson the FAA and retailers while at thesame time raising serious consumerprivacy concerns.

The National Retail Federation (NRF)stated that many retail point-of-salesystems are not configured to captureindividual product identifyinginformation. From a product’s TJPCcode, many point-of-sale systems willidentify the type of item, but cannot beconfigured to automatically captureinformation identifying each uniqueinstance of an item type, such as a serialnumber. NRF stated that point-of-saleregistration would require retailers tobuild a manual intervention processinto their point-of-sale systems; cashierswould have to manually capture theserial number of the UAS and otherrequired registration information. Thecommenter said this process wouldrequire training sales personnel, whichimposes labor costs.

RILA and NRF stated that collectingpersonal information in a checkout linewas problematic and presented datasafety issues. RILA stated that it wouldcause significant delays in checking outfor both UAS buyers and othercustomers. For both store and onlinesales, RILA stated that the retailerwould have to explain the requirementsto the customers because many wouldnot be aware of the FAA rule. RILA alsostated that point-of-sale registrationwould not capture the neededinformation for those UAS that arebought as gifts. Finally, RILA stated thata point-of-sale requirement wouldregulate sales rather than operations andquestioned whether the FAA has theauthority to regulate sales.

A number of individual commentersstated the point of sale would not workfor people who build their own modelsfrom purchased parts or 3D-generatedparts, for many online sales, and forpurchases from foreign Web sites. Onecommenter stated that he bought partswithout necessarily knowing exactlywhat kind of model he will build.Another commenter stated that somekits are sold by individuals operatingsmall businesses from their homes.Several individuals suggested that theFAA provide identification numbers topurchasers so that the seller would onlyneed to record the numbers. Othercommenters recommended that AMAmembership or proof of registrationwith the FAA be required at point ofsale.

RILA, Horizon Hobby, and manyindividual commenters supportedregistration prior to operation. Theystated that this approach would make it

possible to capture the many UAS thatare purchased as gifts, from foreign Websites, or sold privately and those that areconstructed by the operator. A numberof commenters suggested that thiswould allow the operator to affix theregistration number on the UAS. Othercommenters stated that they ownmultiple aircraft and asked that theoperator, rather than the aircraft, beregistered. A few individuals stated thatthe registration process could behandled when the owner filed thewarranty card. One commenter statedthat a prior to operation placement ofname and contact information in theaircraft would be a more efficient meansof ensuring the identity of the personpiloting the aircraft is tied to theaircraft. Another individual stated thatin some cases models are started by oneperson, passed on to others, andperhaps never finished or flown;including such models would serve nopurpose.

The NRF stated UAS should bemanufactured so that they can only beturned on and operated after theconsumer registers the UAS andreceives and applies an activation code.A manufacturer, Drone House JointStock Company, stated that thisapproach is its model for registration.

Another individual questioned howthe FAA has authority to requireregistration of UAS that are “on theground, not being flown, with the dronebeing turned off, in a box, and inside abuilding.” This commenter assertedthat, consistent with 14 CFR parts 1, 47,and 91 and 49 U.S.C. 44101(a), the FAAonly has jurisdiction over a UAS that isin operation.

Task Force: The Task Forceapproached its discussions of theregistration process with two goals inmind—to ensure accountability bycreating a traceable link between aircraftand owner, and to encourage themaximum levels of regulatorycompliance by making the registrationprocess as simple as possible. Toachieve the twin goals of accountabilityand compliance, the Task Forcerecommended the FAA institute asimple, owner-based registration systemin which the FAA issues a singleregistration number to each registrantwhich covers all unmanned aircraftowned by that registrant.

The Task Force also addressed thequestion of registration process design.Because 49 U.S.C. 44101(a) stipulatesthat a person may only operate anaircraft when it is registered with theFAA, the majority of Task Forcemembers believed the FAA cannotrequire registration of unmannedaircraft at the point-of-sale. Some

members of the Task Force expressedthe opinion that maximum compliancecan best be achieved with point-of-saleregistration and those memberstherefore encouraged the FAA toinclude it as one of several options forregistration. Several other members ofthe Task Force pointed out that, becausethe FAA’s authority extends only tooperation of aircraft, point-of-saleregistration cannot be mandated.

IFR Requirement: The FAA agreeswith the Task Force recommendationand comments stating that registrationshould be required prior to operation ofthe small unmanned aircraft, as opposedto at the point of sale. As referenced bythe Task Force report, 49 U.S.C.44101(a) stipulates that a person mayonly operate an aircraft once it isregistered with the FAA.

Registration prior to operation asopposed to point-of-sale registrationalso avoids a number of logisticalconsiderations associated withconsumer product purchases identifiedby commenters, such as distinguishingthe purchaser from the ultimate owner,and the burden placed on retailers whensuch a transaction occurs at a cashregister in a store.

The agency emphasizes, however, thatconformance to the statutoryrequirement to register prior tooperation does not foreclose theopportunity for the development of apoint-of-sale web-based application forregistration that relieves the associatedburdens identified by commenters. Theagency encourages innovation in point-of-sale registration as it may provide theagency with a means by which toreceive information regarding smallunmanned aircraft in a seamlessfashion, and hopes to work withretailers and manufacturers in the Futureto make the process as simple aspossible.

In response to commenters’ concernabout whether a small unmannedaircraft that is not used in the NAS (i.e.indoors) would be inadvertentlyregistered via point-of-sale registration,the agency confirms that only thosesmall unmanned aircraft that areoperated outdoors must register.Further, there is no obligation to registera small unmanned aircraft that will notbe operated outdoors.

2. Registration of Each Aircraft

Clarification/Request for Information:Most commenters favored a requirementto register the owner36 of the UAS

commenters said the registrationrequirement should apply to the “owner” whileother commenters said it should apply to the

continued



instead of a requirement to register theUAS itself. Under this registrationscheme, each owner would receive asingle, unique registration number thatwould cover every UAS that personowns. Many commenters pointed outthat this is how the AMA handlesregistration. Commenters asserted that arequirement to register each individualUAS is impractical and overlyburdensome, particularly in light of thefact that most recreational users ownmultiple (often many) UAS.Commenters also pointed out that manyUAS owners, especially those who buildtheir own aircraft, regularly replaceparts, as well as trade and sell theiraircraft with other UAS owners. Thosecommenters asserted that a requirementto register the owner instead of theaircraft would alleviate the burdensassociated with re-registering an aircrafteach time such an event occurs.Commenters also claimed thatregistration of the owner of a UAS is allthat is necessary to satisfy the DOT andFAA goals of traceability andaccountability.

EPIC stated that a UAS registrationrequirement is an “absolutely essential”requirement to establish accountabilityfor use of “autonomous surveillancedevices” in the United States. EPICfurther stated, however, that to ensurethat the registry fosters accountabilityand responsibility among UASoperators, the registry must includeprovisions addressing privacy issues “toensure a comprehensive baseline set ofprotections that facilitate the safeintegration of drones.”

Union Pacific Railroad similarlystated support for “reasonable measuresby the FAA to encourage accountabilityand responsibility among all UASoperators, including recreational usersof sUAS.”

A number of commentersrecommended that the FAA implementa licensing system like the FCC uses toregister amateur radio operators.Commenters drew comparisons betweenamateur radio operators, most of whomown many different pieces of radioequipment, and hobby aircraft modelers,many of whom own many differentmodel aircraft. Commenters explainedthat under the FCC licensing system theoperator, not the equipment, is licensedfor non-commercial operations afterpassing a safety test. Commentersasserted that registration alone does notguarantee a model aircraft operatorunderstands the rules of safety for

“pilot” or “operator.” Because these commenterswere largely members of the model aircraftcommunity, and therefore both the owners andoperators of their aircraft, this seems to be adistinction without a difference.

operating in the NAS, so a licensingsystem with a testing component may bethe best way to ensure safe operationsin the NAS. One commenteracknowledged that licensing modelaircraft operators would require achange in the law, but stated his beliefthat there is wide support for this inboth Congress and the modelingcommunity.

One commenter recommended thatindividuals be required to pass abackground check before getting alicense for UAS operations. Othercommenters said the registration systemshould be more like the systems toobtain a license to hunt or to operate aboat, and less like firearm registration.

In contrast to those commenters whoadvocated for an owner-basedregistration system, Delair-Tech statedthat each entry in the registrationdatabase “should be attached to exactlyone UAV.” Aviation Management saidthe FAA should consider independentregistration for a UAS operator inaddition to registration of the unmannedaircraft and all of its support systems,including the ground control station.

The National Air TransportationAssociation expressed its support of theregistration requirement, butacknowledged the ability to track anunsafe or noncompliant UAS back to theoperator is limited to incidents in whichthe UAS is disabled, but not toodamaged to obtain registrationinformation. Several commenters,including the Competitive EnterpriseInstitute, questioned the usefulness of aregistration number for identificationpurposes asserting a registration numberwould be impossible to read duringflight, would only be useful after anincident has occurred and only if theUAS is recovered. Some commenterssaid affixing the name and contactinformation of the owner to or in theaircraft will serve the same purposewith much less expense. Othercommenters said because it will be veryeasy for an individual to ignore theregistration requirement, the smallbenefit of registration will be greatlyoutweighed by the burden placed on themodel aircraft industry and the cost ofimplementing and maintaining thesystem.

NAAA and CoAA said registrationwill help track down who is responsibleafter an accident, but noted that FAAwill not be able to enforce illegal andunsafe operations without requiringUAS to be equipped with an ADS—B likesystem through which to trace them.

Task Force: The Task Forcerecommended an owner-basedregistration system to achieve the goalsof accountability and compliance.

Under the Task Force scheme, the FAAwould issue a single registration numberto each registrant that would be used toidentify all unmanned aircraft ownedand operated by that registrant.

IFR Requirement: The FAA sought tointegrate the Task Forcerecommendation and commentsregarding an owner registrationapproach while also considering thebest public policy with respect to smallunmanned aircraft registration. Asaddressed in the preamble discussion“Registration Process,” the registrationsystem will differentiate between smallunmanned aircraft intended to be usedexclusively as model aircraft and smallunmanned aircraft intended to be usedas other than model aircraft in thatdifferent information will be collectedfor each population.

Small unmanned aircraft intended tobe used exclusively as model aircraftwill be registered with a singleCertificate of Aircraft Registrationissued to the aircraft owner. As with allother small unmanned aircraft,registration must be completed prior tooperation of a small unmanned aircraftexclusively as a model aircraft. Ownersof small unmanned aircraft intended tobe used as model aircraft must completethe registration application process bysubmitting basic contact information,such as name, address, and emailaddress. The owner will receive aCertificate of Aircraft Registration witha single registration number thatconstitutes the registration for each ofthis particular owner’s aircraft. Therewould be no limit to the number ofsmall unmanned aircraft registeredunder the owner’s registration. Thisapproach serves the purpose of thestatutory aircraft registrationrequirement because each smallunmanned aircraft must bear theowner’s registration number, thusallowing for the aircraft and its ownerto be identified.

The agency notes that, once an aircraftis no longer exclusively used as a modelaircraft, then the owner must completea new registration application inaccordance with the requirements foraircraft used as other than modelaircraft.

The owner of a small unmannedaircraft intended to be used as otherthan a model aircraft must complete theregistration application by providingaircraft-specific information in additionto basic contact information. The ownerwill receive a Certificate of AircraftRegistration with a registration numberfor each individual aircraft registered.

The agency determined that thisregistration approach is necessary forentities intending to use small



unmanned aircraft as other than modelaircraft because, based on the agency’sexperience with exemptions issuedunder section 333 of Public Law 112—95, these entities are expected toconduct a higher volume of operations,utilize multiple aircraft and at timesconduct multiple simultaneousoperations across the country, whichintroduces more risk into the NAS. Incontrast, a small unmanned aircraftowner who operates small unmannedaircraft exclusively as a model aircraft isexpected to use only one of his or heraircraft at a time and to do so on a lessfrequent basis than a person conductingoperations with small unmannedaircraft intended to be used as otherthan as a model aircraft.

Components of the owner registrationapproach will still be available for smallunmanned aircraft used as other thanmodel aircraft in that the agency willutilize an owner profile for theregistration Web site under whichmultiple aircraft can be registered.Owners will have a single profile thatcontains all of their aircraft, andalthough they may register multipleaircraft under that profile, each aircraftmust have a unique number that existsunder that profile. The FAA notes thatpersons using small unmanned aircraftother than as model aircraft will not beable to use the part 48 registrationsystem until March 31, 2016.

The FAA notes that commenterscomparing the registration requirementto licensure misconstrue the purpose ofregistration. While registration allowsthe agency an opportunity to educatesUAS operators, the primary purpose ofregistration is to identify the aircraftowner.

F. Registration Process

1. Design of Registration System

sUAS Operation and CertificationNPRM: The sUAS Operation andCertification NPRM requestedcomments on the registration process.Both supporters and opponents of theproposed registration provision saidFAA should take steps to ease theregistration process. The Property DroneConsortium stated that a streamlinedregistration process was necessary toensure growth in the UAS industry.Amazon, Association of UnmannedVehicle Systems International, theAmerican Farm Bureau Federation, andseveral others urged FAA to allowonline registration of aircraft. Similarly,Small UAV Coalition and AUVSI,among other commenters, urged FAA toestablish an electronic UAS registrationdatabase.

Clarification/Request for Information:In the Clarification/Request forInformation, the Administrator and theSecretary requested information relatedto the logistics of the small unmannedaircraft registration process.Specifically, the FAA and DOTrequested comments on how theregistration process should be designedto minimize burdens and best protectinnovation and encourage growth in theUAS industry. The FAA and DOT alsorequested comments on whetherregistration should be electronic or web-based, and whether there were existingtools that could support an electronicregistration process.

In response to issues raised in theOctober 22, 2015 Clarification/Requestfor Information, commenters providednumerous suggestions for designing theregistration process to minimizeburdens and best protect innovation andencourage growth in the UAS industry.Suggestions included: Registeringoperators instead of individual aircraft;providing a variety of ways to register,including online, via telephone, througha mobile application, or at variouslocations, such as post offices or retailoutlets; implementing a licensureprocedure similar to that required byFCC for ham radio operators; allowingaircraft that already comply with AMAor FCC labeling practices to meet thelabeling requirements to avoidconflicting requirements; and permittingoperation of UAS upon submission ofregistration information rather thaninstituting a waiting period. Somecommenters recommend that smallunmanned aircraft manufacturersprovide information to the FAA or assistowners in providing information to theFAA.

A law firm recommended the agencyuse the same registration system it usesfor registering manned aircraft. Thecommenter noted the currentregistration system requires thefollowing information: A notarizedstatement by the builder, manufacturer,or applicant for registration describingthe UAS in detail, evidence ofownership, and an Aircraft RegistrationApplication (FAA AC Form 8050—1),which identifies UAS and the owner.This commenter suggestedmanufacturers provide the informationregarding the UAS and its capabilities,which would reduce burdens onretailers and consumers and result in ahigh degree of compliance.

Comments submitted as part of theAMA form letter campaign stated thatthe registration process should be asautomated as possible and minimallyintrusive. Those commenters stated thatthe system of aircraft identification used

by AMA members (i.e., where membersplace their names and addresses orAMA numbers on their model aircraft)should be acceptable for AMA membersas an alternative means of complyingwith the registration requirement. TheExperimental Aircraft Associationagreed that the identification used byAMA members could be allowed tomeet the UAS registration requirements,which would alleviate some of theburden on the FAA while maintainingthe accountability that DOT seeksthrough registration. However, EAAexpressed doubts about the practicalityof requiring registration of millions ofUAS and model aircraft currently in usein the United States and feared themagnitude of the system wouldovershadow other safety measures.

An individual stated the mainproblem registration is intended to solveis the unsafe use of UAS byinexperienced or uninformed operators;therefore, the commenter recommendedregistrants be required to pass a test aspart of the registration process.

The National Agricultural AviationAssociation and the ColoradoAgricultural Aviation Association statedFAA should focus on its aviation safetymission, including focusing on thesafety of manned aircraft even if thatresulted in requiring registration andmore safety equipment for unmannedaircraft. These commenters saidrequiring items, such as indestructibledata plate, ADS—B, and visible strobes,in addition to registration wouldencourage growth of the industrythrough accident prevention. Incontrast, several individual commenterscontended any registration requirementwill stifle innovation and discouragegrowth.

Several individual commentersquestioned whether the agency canhandle the registration of millions ofrecreational UAS. One commenter notedthat the registration database couldbecome overloaded and unmanageableif every person registers every modelaircraft they purchase or receive—manyof which will not last past a singleflight—but then fail to notify the FAAwhen a model is lost, destroyed, or sold.Also pointing to the short life span ofmost small UAS, another commentersimilarly said the registration systemwill become overwhelmed ifrecreational users are required toregister and re-register each modelaircraft they obtain. Another commentersaid that requiring UAS owners torenew their registration will“complicate everything” and lead topeople involuntarily breaking the lawwhen they forget to re-register theirUAS.



Task Force: The Task Force broadlyagreed that in order to promote greateracceptance of the registrationrequirement, the registration processshould be as quick and easy as possible.The Task Force encouraged the FAA toconsider implementing additionalmethods and strategies to maximizecompliance with the registrationrequirement but without addingcumbersome steps into the process.

IFR Requirement: As has been notedpreviously, the FAA has developed and,by this rule, is creating an alternative,web-based registration system to registersmall unmanned aircraft prior to theiroperation. This web-based registrationsystem is responsive to commentsseeking an automated approach that iscapable of managing the expectedvolume of registration. The agencyexpects that the web-based registrationsystem will facilitate compliance withthe aircraft registration requirementbecause of its accessibility and ease ofuse. Additionally, an electronicregistration system complies fully withthe Government Paperwork EliminationAct, Public Law 105—277, whichrequires that when practicable, federalagencies use electronic forms, filing,and signatures to conduct officialbusiness with the public.

As has been noted, the agencyconsidered a point-of-sale registrationapproach, but ultimately determinedthat it would be not be feasible formanufacturers, retailers, and the agencyto implement at this time. As discussedearlier in this preamble, the agency isevaluating how to address the burdensassociated with point-of-sale registrationidentified by commenters.

2. Web-Based Registration Application

The FAA received many commentsregarding whether or not the agencyshould create an online registrationsystem to register UAS or theiroperators. The vast majority ofcommenters were supportive of the useof an electronic or web-basedregistration system to collect registrationinformation. However, commentersarticulated significant differences inhow they preferred the system beestablished, implemented, and enforced.Several commenters said that web-basedregistration would be the least intrusiveand burdensome method of registration.These commenters also suggested thatan online system may be the cheapestway to register individuals, reducingpaperwork and processing time.

Clarification/Request for Information:In responding to the Clarification!Request for Information, multiplecommenters, including Horizon HobbyLLC, recommended that FAA create a

registration platform that would beaccessible from anywhere and any web-based device, including mobile devices.As stated by commenters, this platformcould then be accessed repeatedly byindividuals, allowing them to updateregistration information as their devicespecifications change. Commenters saidthat this type of online system wouldallow individuals to add new smallunmanned aircraft to the registry easilyand in a minimally burdensome fashion.

ATA stated that an electronicregistration system would dramaticallyshorten the registration process andmake it more manageable for the FAA.ATA also noted that any cost associatedwith updating the FAA’s system islikely to be fairly minimal and could beoffset by charging a small registrationfee.

Other commenters suggested thatweb-based registrations be integratedinto online points of sale to ensure thatthose devices purchased from kits areregistered without placing an outsideburden on operators. Commenters saidthat this registration would be a part ofthe retailer’s sale process and would bea requirement of purchase; however,registration and approval would beinstantaneous. These commenters,including Aviation ManagementAssociates, indicated that this type ofonline registration could also includeeducational material and a quiz thatmust be passed as a condition ofregistration. According to thecommenters, the educational materialand quiz could serve as a mechanism toensure that operators understand basicaviation laws and safety guidelines.

While most commenters weresupportive of electronic or web-basedregistrations, some expressed concernwith an entirely electronic system.Many commenters expressed concernfor the registration needs of thosewithout consistent internet access. Theyinstead recommended a paperalternative, in conjunction with onlineregistration, be implemented to ease theregistration burden of some operators.

Multiple commenters suggested thatoutside of new technologies, the agencycould use existing electronic registrationsystems as a template from which tocraft a specific FAA registrationprogram. For example, a fewcommenters recommended usingexisting e-commerce registrationtemplates as a model. One commentersuggested that FAA work withcommercial retailers like DJl to use theircurrent registration platforms as a basisfor point of sale registration. Othercommenters suggested that FAAimplement the registration proceduresof the AMA for all operators, or use the

AMA system as a template upon whichthe FAA can develop an equivalentsystem.

NetMoby and other commenterssuggested that FAA leverage existingFAA and other Federal agencies’electronic registration systems to builda registration system unique to UASs.Examples provided by thesecommenters included creating aregistration system similar to the onecurrently in place for FAA tail numbers,or developing a registration Web sitewith similar functionality to radiolicensing sites. Skyward mc, forexample, recommended that FAAleverage its current FAA IT systems thatit uses for other programs for use withUAS.

Several commenters remarked thatthere are multiple available technologiesthat FAA could use to aid an electronicregistration process. Some of theseincluded QR codes and RFIDtechnologies. Commenters stated thatboth could be used to register and trackthe flight paths of UAS in the NAS.They said an RFID can be placed onaircraft that can then be read byinterested parties from long distances.However, these same commentersindicated that there are potentialsecurity concerns with using RFIDtechnology as well. Along with thesetechnologies, commenters asserted thatthere are several private softwaredevelopment companies in operationthat could produce a sufficient web-based registration product for FAA touse and implement. Two individualsnoted the cost to design, implement,and maintain a centralized registrationsystem will be significant, without anincrease the safety of the NAS. Anotherindividual said the cost of theregistration program will hurt smallbusinesses by adding an externalexpense to their operations.

Task Force: The Task Force alsoaddressed the question of whetherregistration should be electronic or web-based, and what tools exist to supportan electronic registration process. TheTask Force believed the registrationprocess should be web-based, and thatthe FAA should create an onlineregistration system that allows formultiple entry points through anapplication programming interface(API). This would allow, for example, asUAS manufacturer or tradeorganization to develop an applicationthat communicates through an API bywhich it can register its customers ormembers by submitting registrationinformation directly to the FAAdatabase on their behalf. Theregistration information required andthe certificate of registration received



would be the same regardless of whatpoint of entry is used into theregistration system. The onlineregistration system should provide foran option for owners to edit and deletetheir registration information, as well asto view and print physical copies oftheir registration certificates throughaccess to a password-protected web-based portal.

IFR Requirement: In § 48.30, the FAAsets out a process for streamlinedregistration of small unmanned aircraft.This streamlined process is exclusivelyweb-based. The FAA agrees withcommenters and the Task Force that aweb-based system is much morefunctional than a paper system wouldbe, and also agrees that registrationcompliance rates will increasedramatically when registration can beaccomplished through a simple, web-based system. Additionally, the currentFAA Registry would be unable toquickly process the dramatic increase inpaper volume that the FAA wouldreceive from small unmanned aircraftregistration. With the implementation ofthe small unmanned aircraft registrationprocess, small unmanned aircraftregistration will be fully automated,allowing for the registration of smallunmanned aircraft without delay.Therefore, a web-based system benefitsboth applicants and the FAA. Thepaper-based part 47 process will remainavailable for those applicants who areunable to avail themselves of the part 48process.

The web-based registration systemitself will be simple, easy to use, andmobile friendly. To complete theregistration process, the owner of asmall unmanned aircraft will enter theinformation identified in § 48.100(identified within the registrationsystem as data fields) and pay a feethrough the web-based registrationsystem. A Certificate of AircraftRegistration will be available to printwithin the registration system or sent tothe registrant via email following theinitial registration and subsequentrenewals. The applicant will have 24hours to correct registration informationafter the initial payment without havingto pay a second time.

Once registered, owners will be ableto access the registration Web site toupdate the information provided toregister the aircraft as well as cancelregistration as circumstances require(e.g., aircraft destruction, transfer, sale,change in owner eligibility to register).Aircraft owners may also view and printphysical copies of their registrationcertificate through access to thispassword-protected web-based portal,but must only pay a fee for the initial

registration and renewals. There is nofee for updating personal information oraccessing the registration certificate. Forthe initial release the user can add analternate email address which can beused to reset the account password andall functionality of the system could stillbe utilized if the user lost access to theirprimary email address. For futurereleases we will have the ability tochange the primary email address onfile and revalidate the new one.

Canceling a registration would changethe state of the registration in thedatabase to “cancelled” or another statethat is not associated with an activeregistration. Aircraft registration recordsare permanent records and would not bedeleted or destroyed. Please refer to theNARA schedule for additional details

With respect to Task Force andFederal Register comments regardingdifferent technical aspects the databaseshould contain, the agency expects tocontinuously evaluate the database andthe web-based registration process andlook for opportunities to further developthe technical functionality of both. TheFAA’s goal in utilizing the leastburdensome approach is to encourageprompt compliance by removingbarriers. As with other aspects of sUASintegration into the NAS, our approachto registration will be incremental. TheAdministrator may authorize expandedtechnical capabilities going forward, butthe initial goal is to make this processas minimally burdensome as possible toencourage compliance with theregistration requirement, and providethe FAA and law enforcement theability to quickly connect individuals totheir aircraft with the least amount ofsteps possible.

With regard to comments addressingthe use of RFI technology or use of smallunmanned aircraft beacons to assistwith registration and identification, theFAA believes that RFI and othertechnology could be cost prohibitive,and could add weight to smaller aircraft.The FAA believes that the same goal—identification of small unmannedaircraft and their owners—can beachieved through an online registrationprocess with less expense and lesstechnological investment.

3. Information Required

sUAS Operation and CertificationNPRM: The sUAS Operation andCertification NPRM requestedcomments on what information shouldbe required for registration. A fewcommenters provided feedback as towhether small UAS owners should berequired to provide additionalinformation during the registrationprocess so that UAS could be

categorized. Amazon, American FarmBureau Federation and an individualstated that small UAS owners shouldnot be required to provide anyadditional information beyond what iscurrently required of manned aircraft.The University of North Dakota’s JohnD. Odegard School of AerospaceSciences recommended that FAA adopta simplified information-gatheringprocess to include the following data:Manufacturer identification (ifapplicable); known performance andlimitations; physical size, weight, andcharacteristics; and, if self-built, a list ofmajor components similar to thatprovided by commercial manufacturers.The commenter stated that this minimalinformation would allow for futuresafety-related research by establishingbase categories from which comparisonscould be made. NOAA and SchertzAerial Services, Inc. suggested that FAAimpose similar requirements as thoseimposed on amateur-built aircraft.According to NOAA, UAS ownersshould be required, at a minimum, todescribe the aircraft by class (UAS),size, color, number of motors/props!wings, serial number, make, and model.Predesa, LLC recommended that digitalphotos or video recordings of theaircraft, as well as written records ofmanufacturers’ part numbers ofsupporting equipment used by theoperator, can satisfy the need foradditional information to accuratelydescribe a non-standardized small UAS.

Clarification/Request for Information:A majority of commenters stated thatonly basic information should becollected during the registration processbecause of commenters’ concerns aboutdata security. Several commenterssuggested that commercial UASoperators should provide more in-depthinformation than recreational operators.The vast majority of commenters,including individuals andorganizational stakeholders, stated thatowner/business name, address,telephone number, email address, anddescription of the UAS should becollected during the registrationprocess. Some commenters furtherbroke down the UAS’s description toinclude make, model, manufacturer’sserial number, weight, range,performance capability, flight controllerserial number and whether the UAS waspurchased or home-built. Manycommenters also suggested thatregistrants should upload a picture ofthe UAS. Several commenters suggestedthat date of sale/purchase, point of sale,date of operation, intended use andgeographic location of primary usewould also be helpful information.


78620 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 241 / Wednesday, December 16, 2015 / Rules and Regulations

AMA members also stated that theirAMA member numbers should becollected.

To provide further information aboutthe aircraft owner, many commenterssuggested that the operator’s date ofbirth, driver’s license, Social SecurityNumber, and number of aircraft ownedshould be provided during theregistration process. Other commentersspecifically objected to providing theirSocial Security Numbers because ofconcerns about data security. A fewindividuals who identified as hobbyistsstated that insurance information andprofessional license numbers shouldalso be collected during registration. Asmall number of commenters suggestedregistrants should provide their passportnumbers, credit card numbers,nationality, and proof of citizenship.

EPIC stated that the FAA should limitthe collection of registrant informationto what is necessary to maintain theaircraft registry and UAS safety. Inparticular, EPIC stated that the FAAshould not collect “highly restrictedpersonal information,” including “anindividual’s photograph or image, socialsecurity number, medical or disabilityinformation.”

EPIC also recommended that the FAArequire disclosure of each UAS’stechnical and surveillance capabilities,including data collection and storage.EPIC asserted that UAS are“surveillance platforms” that are able tocarry a multitude of different data-collection technologies, including high-definition cameras, geolocation devices,cellular radios and disruptionequipment, sensitive microphones,thermal imaging devices, and LIDAR.EPIC further asserted that UAS ownersshould be required to make clear atregistration the specific capabilities ofany video or audio surveillancetechnologies the UAS is carrying. EPICstated that the public should not be leftto wonder what surveillance devices areenabled on a UAS flying above theirheads. EPIC further stated that theregistration framework the FAA isconsidering does not go far enough, andshould include a requirement that aUAS broadcast its capabilities and itsregistration number during operation, toallow members of the public and lawenforcement officials to easily identifythe operator and responsible party.

EPIC also suggested that the FAAconsider collecting aggregate data to

37To support its position, EPIC cited to andquoted from 18 U.s.c. 2725(4). Title 18 of theUnited States Code covers Crimes ond Crimino]Procedure. Section 2725 covers the definitions usedin Chapter 123—Prohibition on Releose ond Use ofCertoin Personol Informotion from Stote MotorVehicle Records.

assist research into UAS flights andusage. EPIC clarified, however, thatsuch research data should not includepersonal information.

Task Force: To ensure accountability,the Task Force recommended the FAArequire all registrants to provide theirname and street address, with theoption to provide an email address ortelephone number. While the TaskForce recognized that a registrant’semail address and telephone numbermay be useful for the FAA todisseminate safety-related informationto UAS owners, the Task Forcenevertheless believed disclosure of suchinformation should be optional.

Because the Task Force recommendedthe FAA institute an owner-basedregistration system, it believedregistrants should not be required toprovide any vehicle information, suchas serial number or make and model ofthe UAS, during the registrationprocess. Registrants should, however,have the option to provide the aircraft’smanufacturer serial number, so that theserial number can then be used tosatisfy the marking requirement.Additionally, to ensure the broadestpossible participation, this registrationsystem should make no distinction for,or impose additional requirementsupon, sUAS manufactured or purchasedoutside the United States.

IFR Requirement: For smallunmanned aircraft used exclusively asmodel aircraft, the FAA adopts the TaskForce recommendation to provide onlybasic contact information (name,address, and email address) for thesmall unmanned aircraft owner. Thisbasic contact information is appropriatefor registration of small unmannedaircraft intended to be used exclusivelyas model aircraft because ownerstypically only operate one aircraft at atime, which limits the variables in termsof owner identification. Accordingly,the FAA is requiring an applicant’sname, physical address, mailing addressif the applicant does not receive mail attheir physical address, and emailaddress. An accurate mailing address isnecessary because the FAA often relieson regular mail via the United StatesPostal Service to provide notice ofadministrative actions, serveenforcement documents and provideother information. Although email willreduce the agency’s reliance on regularmail for certain purposes such as theprovision of educational material, amailing address is still required tosupport the agency’s compliance andenforcement actions.

At this time, the FAA will not beaccepting manufacturer name, modelname, and serial number from

individuals registering small unmannedaircraft intended to be used exclusivelyas model aircraft. However, as discussedin the preamble discussion onregistration marking, the Administratorwill continue to evaluate whether serialnumber can serve the purpose of aircraftidentification and in the future, mayrequire use of serial number for aircraftmarking purposes in place of an FAA-issued registration number. In that case,this information would be acquired atpoint of sale by a manufacturer.

The agency considered commentspertaining to the use of a membershipnumber issued by an aeromodeling clubsuch as the AMA as the registrationnumber for an individual. Afterconsidering the design of the web-basedinformation system, which willautomatically assign a registrationnumber to each individual applying forregistration, the FAA determined thatuse of an aeromodeHng club registrationnumber would add unnecessarycomplexity.

For persons expecting to operatesmall unmanned aircraft as other thanmodel aircraft, in addition to the samebasic contact information required formodel aircraft, registrants must provideaircraft-specific information. Amanufacturer and model name, andserial number must be provided for eachaircraft being registered. As previouslynoted, based on the agency’s experiencewith exemptions issued under section333 of Public Law 112—95, personsseeking to operate small unmannedaircraft other than as model aircraft areexpected to conduct a higher volume ofoperations, utilize multiple aircraft andat times conduct multiple simultaneousoperations across the country, whichthereby introduces more risk into theNAS. Moreover, these entities mayoperate multiple identical smallunmanned aircraft at one time indifferent locations, with differentpersons operating the owner’s aircraft.Accordingly, the FAA has determinedthat aircraft data is necessary to identifyaircraft used as other than model aircraftdue to the range of variables withrespect to the operations they conduct.The aircraft-specific data will also allowthe agency to assess the demand of thesesmall unmanned aircraft on the NASand whether additional safety-relatedactions are necessary as the FAA worksto integrate sUAS into the NAS.

With respect to the Task Force’srecommendation that the provision ofan email address should be optional, theFAA generally agrees that personalinformation that is not necessary for lawenforcement and FAA to identify anowner should not be a mandatory entry.However, in this instance, an email



address is necessary to create anaccount for a web-based registrationsystem that includes email delivery ofthe Certificate of Aircraft Registration.Additionally, email allows for targeteddelivery of educational other safety-related materials directly to smallunmanned aircraft owners. Thus, theFAA has determined that an emailaddress will be required for registrationunder part 48. However, individual’semail addresses would not be releasedto the general public. For moreinformation regarding the privacyprotections afforded to this system andintended use of the data, please reviewthe privacy impact assessment for thisrulemaking, as well as theaccompanying System of Records Notice(SORN), available for review in DocketNo. DOT—OST—2015—0235.

Regarding other suggestedinformation, such as date of birth, SocialSecurity number, driver’s licensenumber, or specific information aboutcomponents or capabilities of smallunmanned aircraft being registered, theFAA believes the data identified in newpart 48 is sufficient for the purposes ofthis registry and is the minimum thatwould be necessary for connecting anindividual to their aircraft.

4. Fee for Registration

Currently, the FAA assesses a fee of$5 for a Certificate of Registration foreach aircraft. See 14 CFR 47.17(a). TheFAA has not updated this fee since itwas initially established in 1966. See 31FR 4495 (Mar. 17, 1966).

sUAS Operation and CertificationNPRM: The sUAS Operation andCertification NPRM did not differentiatethe process of registering a smallunmanned aircraft from that of amanned aircraft and thus did notdirectly address fees. Under thatproposed rule, an applicant registering asmall unmanned aircraft would pay thesame $5 fee as an applicant seeking aCertificate of Registration for a mannedaircraft.

Three commenters responded to theissues related to fees for aircraftregistration. One individualrecommended FAA require all “amateurenthusiasts” to pay a fee to use the NAS.Another individual argued that the feesassociated with any licensing, requiredyearly maintenance, and registry shouldbe kept affordable for the small businessoperator.

Clarification/Request for Information:Commenters also responded to the issueof a registration fee and how the feeshould be collected based on questionsposed in the Clarification/Request forInformation. Of the commenters thatsupported a registration fee, the majority

stated that the fee should be nominaland suggested between $1 and $40.Other commenters suggested fees ashigh as 8250 for hobbyists and 81,000for commercial users. Severalcommenters stated that the amount ofregistration fee should be based uponthe value of the UAS e.g., a moreexpensive UAS would necessitate ahigher registration fee. The MinnesotaDepartment of Transportation statedthat its department charges registrationfees commensurate with the base priceof the aircraft. This commenterexplained that it charges $100 forregistration for UASs valued less than$500,000. Other commenters proposedthat only commercial operators shouldpay a registration fee. Several AMAmembers stated that registration shouldbe free for AMA members. Manycommenters stressed that the fee shouldonly be used for maintenance of theWeb site, education, and enforcementactions.

Many commenters said registrationshould be free. A number ofcommenters participating in a formletter campaign stated that a registrationfee “would place an unfair burden onthose who may barely be able to affordto purchase model aircraft in the firstplace and may place barriers tocontinued education and technologicaladvancement.”

A large number of commenters wereconcerned that registration fees for eachindividual UAS would be undulyburdensome because many hobbyistsown several UASs and the cumulativecost of registration would beprohibitively expensive. As analternative, many commenters suggestedthat the FAA should charge oneregistration fee per operator and allowthe operator to register multiple UASs.

The vast majority of commentersobjected to the imposition of anyregistration fee. Many commentersexpressed concern that imposition of afee would only serve to increase the sizeof the Federal Government and notcontribute in any way to the safeoperation of UASs. Commenters statedthat a fee will deter registration andplace an unnecessary financial burdenon hobbyists. Several commenterssuggested that instead of charging aregistration fee, the FAA should collectfines from operators who fail to register.

The majority of commenters suggestedthat if registration occurs at point ofsale, the cost of registration should becollected in the same manner as a salestax. Other commenters suggested thatregistration fees should be collected bythe retailer or built in to the purchaseprice. Retail Industry LeadersAssociation and National Retail

Federation expressed opposition topoint of sale registration and collectionof registration fees by retailers. Theycited concern about collecting personalinformation from customers in acheckout line and the complexity ofrefunding the registration fee if the UASis returned by the customer.Commenters also expressed concernsthat foreign vendors would not complywith registration requirements andconsumers would be adverselyimpacted.

Many commenters commentedgenerally on the collection of aregistration fee and expressed that UASoperators should be able to pay theregistration fee online. Commentersspecifically identified support for onlinepayments via PayPal, Amazonpayments, and Bitcoin. Commentersalso stated that mailing in checks ormoney orders should also be supported.

Skyward, Inc. and individualcommenters said the system must havesafeguards against false registrations,unauthorized ownership transfers, andother malicious activity.

Task Force: The Task Force believedthe FAA should not impose aregistration fee so as to encourage thehighest level of compliance with theregistration requirement. In the eventthat the FAA must charge a fee, the TaskForce suggested a fee of 1/10th of onecent ($0001).

IFR Requirement and Responses toComments/Recommendations:Although the Task Force and somecommenters recommended no fee forsmall unmanned aircraft registration forvarying reasons, the FAA is required bystatute to charge a fee for registrationservices. Section 45305 of title 49 U.S.C.directs the FAA to establish and collectfees for aircraft registration and airmancertification activities to recover the costof providing those services.Accordingly, the revenue streamgenerated by the fees collected underthis IFR support the development,maintenance and operation of theRegistry. The agency notes that section45305 also directs the FAA to adjustthese fees when the Administratordetermines that the cost of the servicehas changed.

Given that the registration processestablished under part 48 differentiatesbetween registration of small unmannedaircraft used exclusively as modelaircraft and registration of smallunmanned aircraft used as other thanmodel aircraft, registration fees alsodiffer between the two populations.

An individual owner registering smallunmanned aircraft operated exclusivelyas model aircraft must pay a single feeof S5 for the issuance of a Certificate of



Aircraft Registration and registrationnumber and an additional S5 fee everythree years for renewal of theregistration. As previously noted, forowners of small unmanned aircraft usedexclusively as model aircraft, thisregistration constitutes registration forall small unmanned aircraft of a singleowner, provided those aircraft are allused exclusively as model aircraft.Thus, for this population, part 48provides cost reduction as compared topart 47, which requires aircraft ownersto submit a separate application and $5fee for each aircraft the owner wouldlike to register.

The FAA will require persons owningsmall unmanned aircraft used as otherthan model aircraft (e.g., for acommercial purpose) to pay a fee of $5to register each aircraft in accordancewith part 48, and a $5 fee every threeyears for renewal of each aircraftregistration. The fees for smallunmanned aircraft registration andrenewal for this population is the sameas that currently required by part 47.

This fee structure is in line with therecommendations from commenterswho believed that the FAA shouldcharge one fee for individuals who ownsmall unmanned aircraft for hobby orrecreational purposes. As sought bycommenters, the registrationrequirement and fee structure for smallunmanned aircraft used exclusively asmodel aircraft alleviates the need forthese owners to complete frequent,multiple registration applications andsubmit a new fee each time they buildor rebuild an aircraft or change outparts.

The fee for small unmanned aircraftregistration must be submitted throughthe web-based registration applicationprocess. The registration system willpermit the use of any credit, debit, giftor prepaid card using the Visa,MasterCard, American Express, JCB,Discover, or Diners Club network. Ifnone of these methods of payment areavailable to the small unmanned aircraftowner, that owner may register theaircraft using the existing paper-basedsystem under 14 CFR part 47, whichallows payment by check or moneyorder. Credit card payment is one of theattributes of the part 48 registrationprocess that streamlines the registrationprocess. Consistent with therequirements of 49 U.S.C. 45305, thefees are based on the estimated costs todevelop and maintain the registry under14 CFR part 48. The FAA will adjustthese fees based on the actual costs ofthe system.

Regarding the Minnesota Departmentof Transportation’s recommendation fora fee structure based on the value of the

small unmanned aircraft, FAA’sstatutory authority for charging a fee forthe registration of a small unmannedaircraft relates to the amount it costs forthe FAA to maintain the registry, andnot the value of an unmanned aircraft.

In response to comments stating that,in place of the registration fee, the FAAshould collect fines for failure tocomply with registration requirements,the FAA clarifies that such a fine wouldconstitute a civil penalty. Civil penaltiesfor failure to register are discussed inthe Enforcement section of thispreamble. In addition to civil penalties,however, the law requires the FAA tocollect a fee for registration of aircraft.49 U.S.C. 45305. Congress requires thisfee assessment in order for the agencyto offset the cost of registration. Theagency does not have authority to usecivil penalties to offset its costs.

5. Transfer of Ownership

Clarification/Request for Information:Commenters to the Clarification/Requestfor Information responded to the FAA’srequest for input on transfer of smallunmanned aircraft.

The Aerospace Industries Associationstated that transfer of ownership wouldrequire that the new end-user registershis or her identification and theplatform registration. This would allowa re-check of intended use, changes/modifications to the platform, and theindication that the new user is aware ofthe rules of use. Delair-Tech stated thatthe seller should surrender ownershipby deactivating the ground controlsoftware; the new owner would thenregister to reactivate it.

A law firm stated that the existingFAA Aircraft Bill of Sale and AircraftRegistration Application would beequally applicable to UAS. The firmalso said that the current regulatoryframework contains an aircraftregistration renewal requirement thatwould be beneficial for updating recordsregarding ownership of UAS. The firmwent on to say that the regulatoryobligation to collect and submit theregistration information should beplaced on the seller who would have anincentive to properly transfer theregistration, or otherwise risk facingcertain penalties or fines related to theillegal operation of the UAS by a futureowner.

Individual commenters stated that ifthe registration database is availableonline, the seller could easily recordtransfers of registration. A fewcommenters stated that the FAA shouldimpose a fee for transfers. Individualsdiffered on whether the seller or buyershould be responsible for registering thetransfer. A few commenters stated that

the seller could remove theidentification markings before sale. Onesuggested that the seller remove thebeacon before sale. Another stated thatthe only registration should be the nameand contact information placed on theUAS.

Modovolate Aviation stated thatrecording transfers would beburdensome and unenforceable. Anindividual stated that UASs are oftenaltered after purchase so thattransferring a registration for theoriginal UAS may not accurately reflectthe UAS that is being resold. Thecommenter also stated that there is noway for the seller to ensure that thebuyer will register.

Task Force: Because the Task Forcerecommended an owner-basedregistration system, it believed thatquestions concerning how to deal withtransfers of ownership are easilyaddressed by the registrants’ markingmethods.

IFR Requirement: The registrationrequirements in part 48 do notdifferentiate between methods of aircrafttransfer. The registration requirementsare the same whether a person or otherentity acquires an aircraft by gift,purchase or other method.

The FAA agrees in part with thecommenters who state that the sellershould register or take other action upona transfer and in part with thecommenters who state that the buyermust register. Different actions will benecessary upon transfer or sale of asmall unmanned aircraft, because theregistration system differentiatesbetween aircraft used exclusively asmodel aircraft and aircraft used otherthan as model aircraft and thus collectsdifferent information for eachpopulation.

As discussed elsewhere in thepreamble, individual owners of smallunmanned aircraft used exclusively asmodel aircraft are not required to submitaircraft-specific information. Thus, thereis no need to update the registrationsystem upon a transfer or sale. Theowner, however, should remove his orher unique identifier from the aircraftbefore transfer or sale. The buyer orrecipient of a transfer must create a newregistration prior to operation only ifthat buyer does not already have anowner registration number. A buyer orrecipient of a transfer of a smallunmanned aircraft who wishes to usethe aircraft as other than a modelaircraft must register that aircraft andobtain a registration number specific tothat aircraft. The oniy time a fee wouldbe required is if the buyer or recipientmust create a new registration.



Part 48 requires owners of smallunmanned aircraft used other than asmodel aircraft to update the registrationsystem upon transfer of ownership,destruction or export of a registeredsmall unmanned aircraft. Thus, once atransfer of ownership has taken place,the aircraft owner must access theirprofile on the registration system andupdate the aircraft information toindicate that the aircraft has beentransferred. By indicating that theaircraft has been transferred, theregistration of that aircraft will becancelled in its entirety.

Any new owner, who acquires a smallunmanned aircraft by any means, andintends to use the aircraft other than asa model aircraft must register thataircraft prior to operation and mark thedevice with the appropriate informationas discussed in the preamble discussionentitled, “Marking.” Consistent with thecomment on the payment of a fee for atransfer, a new owner intending to usea small unmanned aircraft other than asa model aircraft must register theaircraft and thus pay the sameregistration fee as any other person whoacquires such a device and wishes tooperate it in the NAS.

In response to commenters’ concernsabout the identification of a transferredaircraft, owners may determine the bestapproach for ensuring that once theytransfer an aircraft, that they are nolonger identified as the owner. Onecommenter noted that the seller maywant to remove the registrationinformation from the aircraft. Theagency supports this as a best practicebut it is not required.

The agency considered commentssuggesting other methods to approachthe registration of transferred smallunmanned aircraft (e.g., deactivation ofground control software), but hasdetermined that this approach willensure complete and current registrationinformation for each aircraft in the leastburdensome manner.

G. Certificate of Aircraft Registration

sUAS Operation and CertificationNPRM: The agency received commenton issues pertaining to certificates ofregistration from commenters to thesUAS Operation and CertificationNPRM. In the sUAS Operation andCertification NPRM, the agencyproposed to extend the part 47registration process to sUAS but did notpropose any changes to the delivery,content, or duration of registration. Inthe NPRM preamble, however, theagency specifically addressed its intentto retain the existing requirement forregistration renewal every three yearsfor small unmanned aircraft registration

because it would increase the likelihoodthat the FAA’s registration databasecontains the latest information on smallunmanned aircraft and aircraft owners.

An individual recommended thataircraft registration for small UASexpire after a period of 12 to 24 months,reasoning that an annual or bi-annualrenewal of registration will ensure theregistration system does not becomebogged down with UAS’s that are nolonger in operation. Furthermore, thecommenter argued that the renewalprocess would give FAA a secondarymeans of verifying that operators arecurrent and/or maintaining theirlicensing requirements to operate. TheKansas Farm Bureau suggestedlengthening the time before aregistration would expire to 6 years toassist in managing program costs fromboth the FAA and the small UASoperator standpoint. The News MediaCoalition encouraged FAA to considerrequiring re-registration only upon thesale of a UAS.

Another individual commentersuggested that UAS operators berequired to store their “officialregistration document” on the cardreader contained in the UAS’s camera.That commenter also recommended thatthe “official registration document”contain the registrant’s name,registration number, date of registration,and type of operator license (i.e.,commercial or hobby).

Clarification/Request for Information:Commenters to the Clarification/Requestfor Information also provided commentsrelated to the Certificate of AircraftRegistration. One individual commenterrecommended that UAS operatorsshould be issued a registration card thatcontains basic safety information andUAS rules and regulations. Anotherindividual suggested that UAS operatorsbe required to store their “officialregistration document” on the cardreader contained in the UAS’s camera.This commenter also recommended thatthe “official registration document”contain the registrant’s name,registration number, date of registration,and type of operator license (i.e.,commercial or hobby).

Task Force: The Task Forcedeveloped and recommended methodsfor proving registration and marking ofsmall unmanned aircraft. In doing so, itaddressed the issue of how Certificatesof Aircraft Registration would be issued.The Task Force recommended that theFAA issue a certificate of registration toeach registrant at the time of registrationand that the certificate should be issuedelectronically (perhaps in PDF form),unless the registrant specificallyrequests a paper copy.

The Task Force also providedrecommendations regarding the contentof the certificate. The certificate shouldcontain the registrant’s name, theregistrant’s FAA-issued registrationnumber, and the address of the FAAregistration Web site that is accessibleby law enforcement or other authoritiesfor the purposes of confirmingregistration status. For registrants whoelect to provide the serial number(s) oftheir aircraft, the certificate should alsocontain those serial number(s). The TaskForce encouraged the FAA to includesafety and regulatory information withthe certificate of registration. Any timea registered sUAS is in operation, theoperator of that sUAS should beprepared to produce a legible copy ofthe certificate of registration forinspection, in either electronic orprinted form.

IFR Requirement: The agency agreeswith Task Force recommendations andcomments recommending delivery andavailability of the Certificate of AircraftRegistration. Since the part 48registration process is exclusively web-based, the FAA can immediately issuean electronic Certificate of AircraftRegistration, an efficiency not availableunder part 47.

Recognizing the prevalence ofhandheld electronic devices, once theregistrant completes the part 48registration process, the Certificate willbe available for download. Owners mayalso print a hard copy of the Certificateif they wish. The applicant will alsoreceive a copy of the Certificate viaemail, with accompanying educationalinformation. Although somecommenters addressed certificatestorage options, the final rule does notrestrict how the Certificate is stored aslong as the certificate is readilyavailable to the owner or operator, asapplicable. See § 91.9(b) and91.203(a)(2); see also LegalInterpretation from Mark W. Bury toJohn Duncan, August 8, 2014. Personsoperating a small unmanned aircraft arerequired under 49 U.S.C. 44103(d) topresent the certificate of registrationwhen requested by a United StatesGovernment, State, or local lawenforcement officer.

The Certificate of Aircraft Registrationwill include information that will allowthe FAA and law enforcement agenciesto identify the owner of each smallunmanned aircraft registered under part48. As a result, although the FAAreceived comments suggesting varyinginformation that should appear on theCertificate, the FAA has determined thatthe Certificate will include the smallunmanned aircraft owner name andFAA-issued registration number. At this


78624 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 241 / Wednesday, December 16, 2015 I Rules and Regulations

time, these two pieces of informationsuffice to identify the small unmannedaircraft and its owner. The agency doesnot agree with the comment suggestingthat the Certificate include informationpertaining to the “type of operatorlicense” because this information is notrelevant to the identification of theaircraft’s owner and notes that at thetime of this rulemaking, there is no“license” required for sUAS operations.Additionally, the FAA emphasizes thatthe Certificate does not implyauthorization to operate.

Certificates of Aircraft Registrationissued to owners who are using theirsmall unmanned aircraft exclusively asmodel aircraft constitute validregistration for all of the smallunmanned aircraft owned by theindividual specified on the application,regardless of how many smallunmanned aircraft the owner owns,though all being operated are requiredto be marked with the registrationnumber. Certificates of AircraftRegistration issued to owners who arenot using their aircraft exclusively asmodel aircraft constitute validregistration only for the specific aircraftidentified on the Certificate of AircraftRegistration.

A Certificate of Aircraft Registrationissued in accordance with part 48 willbe effective once the registration processis complete and must be renewed everythree years to provide for regularvalidation of aircraft registration andowner contact information. To facilitatethe identification of a valid Certificate ofAircraft Registration, each Certificatewill contain the issue date.

The agency agrees with commentssuggesting that aircraft registrationsshould be renewed but does not agreewith the purpose of the renewal and thetime frame for renewal provided bycommenters. The registration processdoes not collect information on airmanqualifications so it may not be used tovalidate any related requirements. ACertificate of Aircraft Registrationissued to a person using their smallunmanned aircraft as a model aircraftmust simply be renewed by the ownerevery three years, regardless of whenaircraft are added to the owner’sregistration. Certificates of AircraftRegistration issued for aircraft used forother than model aircraft purposes mustbe renewed for the specific aircraftdesignated on the Certificate every threeyears.

Further, the agency has determinedthat three years is the appropriateduration of a certificate. This period oftime is consistent with the aircraftregistration renewal requirement in part47. It also balances the cost concerns

raised by the Kansas Farm Bureau withthe individual’s comments suggestingrenewal on 12—24 month intervals.

The renewal process consists of asimple verification of existingregistration information. The renewalmust be completed through the web-based registration system at any timewithin 6 months prior to the expirationdate. The system will send out areminder at 6 months prior tocertification expiration. Oncecompleted, the Certificate will beextended for three years from theexpiration date. The agency expectsrenewal to be efficient, particularly ifthe aircraft owner has ensured that theinformation provided to the Registry inaccordance with the final ruleregistration process remains currentduring the term of the registration. If theinformation provided to register theaircraft changes during the period ofregistration, the aircraft owner mustupdate the Registry through the web-based registration system within 14 daysof the change. No fee is charged forupdating information during the periodof registration.

The agency agrees with the intent ofthe recommendation from the TaskForce and the commenter to theClarification/Request for Informationregarding owner and operatoreducation. One of the purposes of smallunmanned aircraft registration is toeducate sUAS owners regarding safeoperations within the NAS as well asother safety information relevant to UASoperations and equipment. As discussedlater in this preamble, the agencyexpects to accomplish its sUASeducation goals by providinginformation to the aircraft owner duringthe registration process and throughfollow-up email communication.

Although the News Media Coalitionsuggested reregistration only upon asale, there are other circumstances thatwould result in a need to re-register anaircraft (e.g., expiration of registrationdue to failure to renew) and have beencaptured in the final rule.

H. Registration ?vlarking

The purpose of aircraft registrationmarking is to provide a means forconnecting an aircraft to its owner. Theagency received comments on theinformation that should be used toidentify that the aircraft is registered aswell as the methods by which to displaythe identifying information.

sUAS Operation and CertificationNPRM: The sUAS Operation andCertification NPRM proposed arequirement for small unmannedaircraft to be marked in accordance withpart 45, subpart C. Subpart C provides

requirements for size, spacing, andlocation of nationality and registrationmarks.

Many commenters, including theSmall UAV Coalition, Aircraft Ownersand Pilots Association, CaliforniaAgricultural Aircraft Association,Aerospace Industries Association,Modovolate Aviation, LLC, ProfessionalPhotographers of America, Airlines forAmerica, National Association ofMutual Insurance Companies, NationalAssociation of Realtors, DJI, and Google,generally supported the markingrequirement as proposed in the NPRIvI.

Information that may be used foraircraft identification: Othercommenters suggested alternatives tothe marking requirement proposed inthe NPRM. Commenters including theAssociation of Unmanned VehicleSystems International, AssociatedGeneral Contractors of America, theUniversity of North Carolina System,Property Drone Consortium andCherokee Nation Technologiessuggested the FAA require registrationbased only on the manufacturer’s serialnumbers, instead of requiring an “N”registration number. Several individualsproposed the use of cell phone numbersin lieu of, or to augment, the registrationnumber. The Virginia Department ofAviation supported the use of a bar codesystem, while Schertz Aerial Services,Inc., favored a parts-trackingrequirement to facilitate a more efficientand accurate assessment ofresponsibility in the event of anaccident. An individual commenterrecommended a labeling requirementfor all UAS, similar to the labeling theFCC requires for all transmitters that canbe purchased at electronic outlets.Another individual commenter said thatinstead of requiring small unmannedaircraft to be registered with “N”numbers, the aircraft should beidentified with an exterior label withthe owner/operator’s name, address, andphone number, as well as an operatorcertificate number where appropriate.Several other individual commenterssuggested that affixing operator nameand phone number to a small unmannedaircraft is a more efficient way toidentify the aircraft in the event of anincident.

The New Jersey Institute ofTechnology and the Kansas StateUniversity UAS Program recommendedthe FAA add a unique designator to the“N” registration number (e.g., “NX”) toclearly identify the aircraft as a UAS.ASTM pointed out that it is in theprocess of developing consensuspractice standards for the registrationand marking of unmanned aircraftsystems, which an individual


Federal Register/Vol. 80, No. 241 /Wednesday, December 16, 2015/Rules and Regulations 78625

c ommenter recommended the FAAfollow.

Methods to display aircraftidentification: Another individualcommenter said the markingrequirement should be consistent withrecent certificates of waiver orauthorization provided to personsissued exemptions under section 333 ofthe FAA Modernization and ReformAct, which allow for “appropriate”sized markings, or as large as practicablefor the particular aircraft. Othercommenters, including a jointsubmission from the State of Nevada,the Nevada Institute for AutonomousSystems and the Nevada FAA-designated UAS Test Site, similarly saidsmall unmanned aircraft should berequired to display registration numbersin the largest size that is appropriate. Anindividual commenter questionedwhether the markings should be on theunderside of the small unmannedaircraft to increase visibility from theground. The University of NorthDakota’s John D. Odegard School ofAerospace Sciences urged the FAA torequire small UAS manufacturers toprovide at least one additional mannerof identifying a device other than theregistration number. The commentersuggested a VIN-type system or simplyetching the manufacturer’s serialnumber on a substantial component ofthe small UAS.

Several commenters proposed variouselectronic means to aid in smallunmanned aircraft identification.Washington State Department ofTransportation, Aviation Division andDrone Labs proposed having theregistration numbers transmitted as partof the transponder signal or othermeans. The Center for Democracy andTechnology advocated for an unmannedaircraft to emit a signal, such as a radiosignal, to aid in identification. SkyViewStrategies, Inc., recommended amicrochip on each unmanned aircraftprogrammed with the registrationnumber so that a device, such as a smartphone app, could read the microchipand display the aircraft’s registrationnumber. SkyView recognized thisrequirement could not go into effectuntil it is technologically feasible.

Several commenters opposed therequirement that small unmannedaircraft display their registrationnumbers because it would beimpractical due to the small size of theaircraft. Some of those commenters,including the Association forUnmanned Vehicle SystemsInternational, noted that many smallunmanned aircraft have limited surfacearea available and often have noadequate fuselage for placement of

registration markings. Thosecommenters said the FAA shoulddevelop alternative means of displayinga registration number more conducive tosmall unmanned aircraft. An individualcommenter pointed out that for smallunmanned aircraft with no “hull” orfuselage, the only place available formarkings is on the booms, which are notpermanently attached to the hub plate.Thus, the commenter noted, themarking would not be permanent, but,rather, on an “easily removed and easilyreplaced” component. AssociatedGeneral Contractors of America said therequirement “would serve little or nouseful purpose” because even whendisplayed in the “largest practicablemanner” such numbers would beinvisible from anything more than a fewfeet away.

Kansas State University UAS Programsaid the final rule should describeacceptable means for locatingregistration markings for nontraditionalaircraft (or reference an industryconsensus standard that does so) thatcannot meet current subpart C in part 45requirements. Prioria Robotics, Inc. alsoexpressed concern about theapplicability of the markingsrequirement to certain small unmannedaircraft airframes, and questionedwhether, if a vehicle undergoes repairand a fuselage is changed, the operatorwill need to re-register the aircraft.

Several commenters recommendedthe sUAS operator make the aircraft’sregistration number visible to others onthe ground. Trimble Navigation Limitedand Federal Airways & Airspace favoredhaving the sUAS operator display an IDbadge with the registration number ofthe aircraft on their person. TrimbleNavigation clarified that a badge displaywould be helpful if the FAA intends touse registration of an aircraft to identifythe operator, but that visual orelectronic identification of the aircraft isappropriate if the intent is to assist inthe investigation of accidents. FederalAirways & Airspace clarified that thismay be useful for very small unmannedaircraft but may not be necessary if theunmanned aircraft is large enough todisplay markings to the standard size.Predesa, LLC stated that the sUASoperator should be required to postaircraft registration information in theirvicinity on the ground.

Regarding whether the rule shouldrequire small unmanned aircraft to havea fireproof identification plate, asrequired by part 45 subpart B, the SmallUAV Coalition, Aviation ManagementAssociates, Predessa, LLC, and theUniversity of North Dakota’s John D.Odegard School of Aerospace Sciencesagreed with the FAA that a requirement

for small UAS manufacturers to installa fireproof identification plate wouldnot be cost-effective. The NationalBusiness Aviation Association, DJI,Modovolate Aviation, LLC, and severalindividual commenters also agreed thatfireproof plating should not be required.

Crew Systems, on the other hand, saidsmall unmanned aircraft should have adata plate installed, as required by 14CFR 45.11. Aerospace IndustriesAssociation also said UASmanufacturers should install fireproofidentification information on everyunmanned aircraft, “[plerhaps throughan electronic device (i.e., imbeddedchip) or other easy-to-read and damage-resistant means of identification.”

Other commenters addressed the needfor “indestructible” identificationplates, although they did not commentspecifically on whether small UASmanufacturers should be required toattach fireproof identification plates incompliance with subpart B of part 45.The Air Line Pilots Association said afire proof plate should be attached to thesmall UAS “as a permanentidentification of the registration of thesUAS.” The Civil Aviation Authority ofthe Czech Republic said a fireproofidentification plate should be requiredand enforced according to ICAO Annex7, which requires the nationality,registration mark, and operator nameand phone number. The NationalAgricultural Aviation Association,Colorado Agricultural AviationAssociation, and CropLife America saidsmall UAS should have a registered N-number on “an indestructible andunmovable plate” attached to the UASfor identification in case of an accidentor incident. Reabe Spraying, Inc. saideach UAS should have an“indestructible and non-removable datatag with a unique lID code.” Texas A&MUniversity Corpus Christi/LSUASC saidthat if the registration number is noteasily displayed on the aircraft, then an“identifying tag” should be permanentlyattached to the small UAS. The AircraftOwners and Pilots Association said theFAA should implement “additionalrequirements” to ensure that a UAS canbe identified in the event of an accident,incident, or violation, but thecommenter did not specify what thoseadditional requirements should be.

The Motion Picture Association ofAmerica, Inc., the National Associationof Broadcasters, National Cable &Telecommunications Association, andRadio Television digital NewsAssociation, and the InternationalAssociation of Amusement Parks andAttractions favored not havingregistration marks on small unmanned



aircraft that will be seen in theatricaland television productions.

Clarification/Request for Information:In addition to the comments onidentification and marking provided inresponse to the sUAS Operation andCertification NPRM, the agency alsoreceived comments on aircraftidentification and marking in responseto the clarification/Request forInformation. The Clarification/Requestfor Information sought specificinformation pertaining to aircraftidentification and marking. Specifically,the document asked for informationregarding methods currently availablefor identifying unmanned aircraft,whether every unmanned aircraft soldhas an individual serial number, andmethods to identify unmanned aircraftsold without serial numbers or thosebuilt from kits.

Information that may be used foraircraft identification: Commenters saidthat no standard method of aircraftidentification exists for UAS and theyrecommended ways to identify UAS forregistration purposes. Chronicled, Inc.,wrote that it explored several optionsfor including unique identifiers inconsumer products, including serialnumber, radio frequency identification(RFID), near field communication(NFC), Bluetooth low energy (BLE), QRcode, and DNA marker. This commenterdetermined that serial number orencrypted (PKI) microchips are the bestoptions currently available andrecommended the agency initiallyrequire the use of serial numbers forregistration and then over a two yearperiod, require PKI microchips to beincluded in all UAS. AerospaceIndustries Association said variousmethods to identify platforms exist, butrecommended that FAA seek to collectas much information as possible.According to this commenter, highvalue commercial platforms have aserial number to manage warrantyclaims while other commercialplatforms, at a minimum, have a stockkeeping unit (SKU) that can be used toidentify the product model number.Morphism, LLC recommended usingidentifiers that encode informationregarding the type of airframe, operatinglimitations and operators’ contactinformation. Researchers at theUniversity of California, Berkeley saidUAS should receive and display anidentification code to enable people andother aircraft to identify them. Theseresearchers developed an identificationsystem based on LEDs and unique colorsequences. NetMoby, Inc. recommendedthat FAA adopt the FederalCommunications Commission’s

registration process and tailor it to meetFAA’s needs.

Several commenters noted that manyUAS are assembled by consumers usingparts from a range of sources, whichpresents a challenge for identifyingindividual products. Additionally, UAScomponents are frequently modified,replaced or upgraded. Somecommenters recommended that theregistration system require use of eithera serial number for UAS that have serialnumbers, or an FAA-generatedidentification number that can beapplied to the UAS for those withoutserial numbers. Other commentersrecommended that FAA issue a singleregistration number to the UAS operatorrather than to each aircraft becausehobbyists often have dozens of aircraftand it would be too burdensome toregister every aircraft they buy or build.Several AMA members suggested theagency allow AMA members to placetheir names and addresses or AMAnumbers on their aircraft as analternative means of complying with theregistration requirement.

Another individual suggestedidentifying consumer grade UAS byserial number and hobby built UAS byradio transmitter and receiver. Anumber of commenters participating ina form letter campaign stated that “thereis fundamentally no way to define anymajor component on a model aircraftthat could reasonably be registered.”

Commenters addressing whether eachunmanned aircraft sold has a uniqueserial number generally stated that everyunmanned aircraft sold does not haveindividual serial numbers, though someUAS do. The University of Illinois atUrbana-Champaign said serial numbersare not required on UAS and they arenot required to be distinct acrossmanufacturers, so the agency could notrely on them for identifying UAS.Modovolate Aviation, LLC said mostUAS have serial numbers and assertedit would impose a relatively smallburden on manufacturers to imprint aserial number as part of themanufacturing process. A law firmsuggested the agency requiremanufacturers assign a serial number toall UAS operated in the United States.This commenter also said that productsmanufactured before this requirementand other UAS without serial numberscould be assigned a registration numberby FAA and the number would beaffixed to the UAS. Delair-Techsuggested if no serial number isavailable for the UAS, the serial numberof the autopilot module should be used.The Retail Industry Leaders Associationsaid most UAS models on the markettoday do not contain product-specific

unique identification numbers thatconsumers can use when registeringUAS. This commenter notedmanufacturers will need time toimplement process changes toincorporate identification numbers andurged the agency to take the time towork with manufacturers with respectto this requirement. The commentercautioned that if FAA adopts theregistration requirement withoutwaiting for manufacturers to make thenecessary process changes, the onlyinformation consumers will be able toprovide during registration is the modelor inventory number of the UAS, whichwill not be helpful to identify a UASowner involved in an incident.

Commenters suggested variousmethods for identifying UAS soldwithout serial numbers or those builtwith kits. The Wireless Registrysuggested including a UAS’ wirelesssignal identifier as part of theinformation collected as part of theregistration process. The commenterexplained the UAS’ MAC address, awireless identifier that cannot bealtered, tied to a specific device wouldenable FAA to match the UAS to otherinformation in the registry, includingoperator information. An individualstated the FCC already requires that allmodel aircraft operate on a very narrowfrequency band and UAS manufacturersadhere to those rules. This commentersuggested FAA and FCC work togetherto establish a method of encoding eachradio system with an identifier thatwould enable the FAA to monitorairspace in which UAS are not allowed.The Air Medical Operators Associationsaid any UAS with the potential toconflict with a manned aircraft in flightmust possess a unique identificationthat can allow for registration. Thiscommenter also recommended thatproduct packaging should clearlyinform the consumer of his orresponsibilities as operator. Othercommenters suggested the followingmethods for identifying UAS soldwithout serial numbers or those buildfrom kits:Digital photo.Detailed description of aircraft (e.g.,

black quadcopter, white hexcopter).QR code with 8-digit unique

alphanumeric identifier that can beaffixed to aircraft.

RFID tags or transponders.FAA-issued registration number.Name and address or AMA number

affixed to the inside or outside of theairframe.?vlethods to display aircraft

identification: Several peoplecommented on how operators should



display markings of their registrationnumber on the UAS. Commenters’recommendations included: registrationnumbers should be prominentlydisplayed on the exterior of theunmanned aircraft and be sized basedon the largest single dimension of theunmanned aircraft; the markings shouldbe visible from the ground; registrationnumbers should be displayed using aplacard of some sort, or bar code, placedon the aircraft; and registrationmarkings should be replaceable becauseUAS operators change parts on a regularbasis. A number of commenterssuggested using a sticker similar toautomobile registration tags, whichwould provide visual confirmation ofcompliance and allow for consistency ofdata. Other commenters expressedconcern about required markings addingweight to their unmanned aircraft orruining the appearance of their scalemodels of real aircraft.

One commenter recommended aregistration system in which individualscan request from the FAA a reasonablenumber of stickers that are pre-printedwith successive serial numbers, and theFAA will then record to whom thosestickers were sent in a publiclyaccessible database. The individuals canthen apply those serial-numberedstickers to any model aircraft they own.The commenter contemplated that thestickers will self-destruct if the ownerattempts to remove them to reuse themon a different aircraft. The commenteralso suggested that if an aircraft isdestroyed or sold, the original ownercan log onto the FAA database to updatethe information associated with thataircraft’s serial number.

Several other commenters noted thata marking system is problematicbecause many aircraft do not have alarge enough area on which to place anidentifier that would be visible from adistance. Some of these commentersstated the only reason for a unmannedaircraft to carry a registration number isto identify the owner after a crash.These commenters asserted that itwould make more sense to require UASoperators to affix a label with theircontact information inside their aircraftthan to develop and implement aregistration system. Noting markingswill not be visible on most unmannedaircraft during flight, Delair-Techrecommended using a position reportingmechanism to enable authorities toaccess information on in-flight devices.This commenter said following anaccident, a marking of the manufacturername, serial number and typedesignator, designed to withstand acertain degree of damage, would enable

authorities to find the UAS ownerthrough the registration system.

Comments on the use of the N-numbering system to register UAS: Afew commenters recommended that theregistration system for UAS be separatefrom the current N-numbering systemused for manned aircraft. To ensure thatthe FAA does not run out of N-numbers,one individual suggested moving to a 6-or 7-digit number for UAS, whileanother individual suggested the FAAopen up the first 3 spaces to allow theuse of letters, which the commenterasserted will increase the availability ofthe numbers by 44,279,424 spaces.Another individual said the registrationnumber should be “sufficiently long!random” to prevent people fromcreating registration numbers withoutactually registering.

One individual commenter suggestedthat the registration numbering systemdelineate between commercial users (forwhich the N-numbering system could beused) and private users. Anotherindividual said the N-number given tosmall UAS intended for commercial useshould be followed by a “- C”designation to clearly show that thisaircraft is going to be usedcommercially. Several other individualsrecommended the FAA use alternateprefixes for the registration number(e.g., “U,” “UX,” “UAS,” “UAV,”“NQ,” or “M” for model aircraft).

The Property Drone Consortiumpointed out that an N-number on a UASwill not be visible to observers while theUAS is in flight, and will therefore onlybe used to identify the owner of a UASthat has been involved in an incidentand recovered. This commenter alsoquestioned whether it will be sufficientto self-register based on a serial number,requiring an FAA assigned N-numberonly when a serial number is notavailable or easily accessible. Anindividual commenter said themanufacturer serial number should besufficient for identification purposes,instead of a separate N-number. Anotherindividual also supported the use of amanufacturer serial number, but said an“N” should still be placed in front of theserial number to show that it isregistered.

One individual commenter stated thatbecause some UAS are too small toeffectively display an N-number, anelectronic version of an N-numbershould be used. This commenterasserted that the electronic serialnumber (ESN) can be encoded into thereceiver!transmjtter used to control theUAS, and then broadcast whenever thetransmitter commands the aircraft. Thecommenter suggested that authoritiescould then identify the UAS in

question, and that that interceptionwould be legal as the ESN is broadcastover the 2.4 GHZ publicly sharedfrequencies.

One individual commenterrecommended a separate category of N-numbers for historic airplanes, similarto what has been done for full-scalehistoric cars and aircraft.

A few individual commenterssupported the use of the current N-numbering system for UAS, with onecommenter asserting that it is alreadyworking well for commercial UASoperations.

Task Force: The FAA asked the TaskForce to develop and recommendmethods for proving registration andmarking. Factors to consider included,but were not limited to, how a smallunmanned aircraft will be able to beidentified with the registered owner(i.e., a marking requirement).

Information that may be used foraircraft identification: Because the maingoal of registration is to create aconnection between the aircraft and itsowner, the Task Force recognized that itis necessary to mark each registeredsmall unmanned aircraft with a uniqueidentifier that is readily traceable backto its owner. The Task Forcerecommended two options forcomplying with this markingrequirement. Specifically, registrantscan either affix a single FAA-issuedregistration number to all the aircraftthey own or they can rely on amanufacturer’s serial number that isalready permanently affixed to theaircraft. A small unmanned aircraftowner may only rely on themanufacturer’s serial number, however,if the owner provided that serial numberto the FAA during registration and if itappears on the owner’s certificate ofregistration.

Ivlethods to display aircraftidentification: The Task Force furtherrecommended a requirement that theowner and operator ensure that allmarkings are readily accessible andmaintained in a condition that isreadable and legible upon close visualinspection prior to any operation. TheTask Force believed that markingsenclosed in a compartment, such as abattery compartment, should beconsidered “readily accessible” if theycan be easily accessed without the useof tools.

IFR Requirement: Information thatmay be used to identify an aircraft. TheIFR requires all small unmanned aircraftto display a unique identifier. Asdiscussed throughout this preamble,individuals registering aircraft that willbe used exclusively as model aircraftwill receive a Certificate of Registration



with a single registration number thatconstitutes registration of all of theindividual’s small unmanned aircraft.This number must be displayed on eachsmall unmanned aircraft owned by thisindividual and used exclusively asmodel aircraft as proof of registrationand to connect the small unmannedaircraft with an owner.

Each aircraft used as other than amodel aircraft will receive a Certificateof Aircraft Registration with a uniqueregistration number that must bedisplayed on the aircraft.

The FAA received a variety ofrecommendations pertaining to theinformation that should be affixed to thesmall unmanned aircraft for purposes ofidentification (e.g., phone numbers, barcodes, QR codes, operator contactinformation and AMA number). In somecases, commenters recommendedinformation in addition to a registrationnumber. The agency considered theserecommendations but determined thatonce an aircraft is registered, theregistration number provides sufficientinformation to locate the aircraft’sowner in the FAA’s registrationdatabase. Therefore, requiring the ownerto display additional contactinformation on the aircraft would createan unnecessary burden.

Regarding the comment seeking todisplay an AMA number in particular,the Civil Aircraft Registry and theregistration system implemented in thisIFR are premised on the ability touniquely identify and owner and theiraircraft. The FAA does not govern themembership structures of section 336organizations and cannot be assured ofthe uniqueness of those organizations’identification systems. Therefore, theFAA has no assurance that such amember number will provide therequisite unique identifier. Thus, theFAA will maintain an FAA-issuedregistration number for the markingscheme for small unmanned aircraftused as model aircraft.

With regard to ASTM consensus andmarking standards, the FAA notes that,as of this writing, those standards arestill in development, and thus, theycannot be used for this rulemaking.

Finally, a number of commentersassumed that an FAA registrationnumber would include the “N” prefixthat is used for identification of U.S.registered aircraft. The agency clarifiesthat the registration numbers issued tosmall unmanned aircraft under the IFRare not intended to be used fornationality identification and thus willnot include the “N” prefix because thepart 48 registration process is availableonly to small unmanned aircraftoperating within the United States.

?vlethods to display aircraftidentification: To ensure that the smallunmanned aircraft can be identified, theFAA will require that the uniqueidentifier must be maintained in acondition that is legible. The uniqueidentifier must be affixed to the smallunmanned aircraft by any meansnecessary to ensure that it will remainaffixed to the aircraft during routinehandling and all operating conditions.

For small unmanned aircraftregistered under this part, the FAA doesnot specify a particular surface uponwhich the unique identifier must beplaced. Rather, recognizing commenters’concern about the small size of many ofthe small unmanned aircraft that mustbe registered, the FAA simply requiresthat the unique identifier must bereadily accessible and visible uponinspection of the small unmannedaircraft.

In accordance with Task Forcerecommendations, a unique identifier isdeemed readily accessible if it can beaccessed without the use of any tools(e.g., battery compartment). Thisflexibility is expected to resolve theconcerns of the television and motionpicture industry and preserve theauthenticity of a replica if so desired,given that the unique identifier need notbe displayed on the exterior of the smallunmanned aircraft.

Additionally, the flexibility withrespect to the location of the uniqueidentifier will facilitate the use of asmall unmanned aircraft serial numberas the unique identifier at such time asthe Administrator determines that serialnumbers can be effectively used toidentify aircraft owners within the smallunmanned aircraft registration system.The FAA notes that, currently, serialnumbers may be repeated since there isno mechanism in place formanufacturers to ensure that a givenserial number is unique to a specificaircraft. However, the FAA supports anyefforts by sUAS manufacturers tocollectively standardize aircraft serialnumbers, such that each smallunmanned aircraft will receive a uniqueserial number in production.

With regard to comments on thevisibility of the markings, the FAAcannot require all small unmannedaircraft to display a registration numbervisible to people on the ground becausesome small unmanned aircraft may betoo small to satisfy this requirement.The agency notes, however, that duringoperation of the sUAS, a Certificate ofAircraft Registration must be readilyavailable to the person operating thesUAS, so that they may provide it tofederal, state, or local law enforcementwhen requested. See 49 U.S.C. 44103(d);

14 CFR 91.9(b) and 91.203(a); see alsoLegal Interpretation from Mark W. Buryto John Duncan, August 8, 2014. TheCertificate of Registration can be alegible paper copy (or photocopy), or itmay be provided by showing it in alegible electronic form, such as on asmartphone. Thus, while the agencyconsidered comments suggestingadditional documentation requirementssuch as an ID badge or placard on ornear the sUAS operator, the FAA hasdetermined that such requirementswould not serve a valid purpose.

Additionally, commenters’recommendations pertaining to arequirement to identify a smallunmanned aircraft using certainequipment are beyond the scope of thisrule. Neither the sUAS Operation andCertification NPRM nor this rule containminimum equipage requirements forsmall UAS, such as a transponder. Thus,small unmanned aircraft may not havethe equipage necessary to electronicallytransmit a registration number.

Regarding comments related to theinstallation of fireproof plates,Executive Order 12,866 prohibits anexecutive agency from adopting aregulation unless the agency determines“that the benefits of its intendedregulation justify its costs.” 38 In thesUAS Operation and CertificationNPRM, the FAA explained its belief thatrequiring the installation ofidentification plates would not be cost-justified. None of the commentersadvocating for the use of fireproofidentification plating or other forms offireproof marking submitted data thatwould allow the FAA to find thatadopting this requirement would resultin benefits sufficient to justify the costsof this requirement. Additionally, theFAA notes that for some of the smallerand lighter weight unmanned aircraftthat operate under this rule, anidentification plate would addadditional weight, which could result inreduced flight performance and/orendurance. Accordingly, the FAA hasdecided against including a requirementfor a fireproof identification plate in thisrule.

I. EducationsUAS Operation and Certification

NPRM: Availability of educationmaterials was addressed in the sUASOperation and Certification NPRIvI. TheNational Association of REALTORS,SkyView Strategies, Inc., and othersrecommended that FAA initiate acampaign to educate the general publicon UAS due to the abundance ofmisinformation currently available. TheAir Line Pilots Association urged FAAto take advantage of internet-based



communication of safety material,training resources, databases of airportlocations and airspace restrictions, bestpractices, in-service irregularity reportsand the like, because this is possibly theonly practical means of reaching thesmall UAS pilot population.

Clarification/Request for Information:Many commenters, including theNational Air Transportation Association(NATA) and the National RetailFederation, stated that a publiceducation campaign and thedevelopment of guidance materials andhandbooks to ensure users know therules for flying UAS is essential topromote responsible use of UAS. Othercommenters said that requiringmanufacturers to include a pamphletwith each aircraft that describes theserules would also be effective. Anothercommenter suggested that onlineretailers require purchasers to navigateto a page describing UAS safetyrequirements before completing thepurchase. Many commenters, includingthe Experimental Aircraft Association,lauded FAA’s existing Know Before YouFly program and recommendedcontinuing to expand it. Somecommenters suggested creating a GPSenabled app that would identify safeand unsafe areas for flying, while otherssaid FAA should further develop itsexisting B4UF1y app for all mobileplatforms. A commenter said that off-limit areas should be marked oradvertised as such. Some commenterssaid that operators should be required topass a training course, a practical exam,or obtain an operator certificate beforeflying a UAS.

Task Force: Recognizing howimportant it is that all users of the NASreceive information on safety in theNAS, the Task Force recommended theregistration process contain some sort ofeducation component andacknowledgment, with controls in placesuch that the registration process wouldbe incomplete until the registrant hasacknowledged receipt of thisinformation. The information providedcould be similar to the existing contentin the Know Before You Fly program.

IFR Requirement: The FAAestablishes regulatory standards toensure safe operations in the NAS. TheFAA’s safety system is largely based on,and dependent upon, voluntarycompliance with these regulatorystandards. An essential element of thisstrategy is FAA’s effort to encourage asafety culture, and, to that end, ensurecomprehensive educational material isreadily available to every user of theNAS. The FAA agrees with commentersand the Task Force with respect to the

importance of educational informationin the registration process.

The small unmanned aircraftregistration platform described in thisrule will require the registrant to reviewa summary of sUAS operationalguidelines before completing smallunmanned aircraft registration. TheFAA believes this is an invaluableaccess point to deliver sUAS operationalsafety information. The information willalso direct registrants to additionalsources of safety information generatedby the FAA and other stakeholders,such as faasafety.gov andknowbeforeyoufly. org.

To reach registrants after theycomplete the registration process, theFAA will develop a process to use thesmall unmanned aircraft registryinformation (such as email and mailingaddress) to offer safety-relatedinformation. Delivering post-registrationsafety information to registrants on acontinuing basis will help to remind theregistrant of their safety-of-flightobligations and help reduce sUAS risksin the NAS. The FAA will develop,maintain, and deliver easily-accessiblesafety information directed specificallyto sUAS owners and operators. Tomaximize usage of the information bythe recipient, the FAA will carefullymeter its delivery of information viathese access points to maximizeeffective consumption.

J. Compliance Philosophy andEnforcement

Clarification/Request for Information:The FAA received several commentsabout enforcement. ModovolateAviation, LLC expressed support ofFAA’s proposed registrationrequirement of UAS stating it willimprove the ability for law enforcementofficials “to investigate unsafe andreckless practices and to takeenforcement action when appropriate.”

The Minnesota Department ofTransportation’s (MnDOT) Office ofAeronautics, the Arlington PoliceDepartment (APD) and severalindividual commenters raised concernsabout enforcing a registrationrequirement. MnDOT Office ofAeronautics noted one challengeassociated with enforcement of thecurrent program is a general lack ofawareness of the State’s role inregulating UAS and aviation, as well asa lack of awareness among operators,airports, law enforcement and thegeneral public of the aircraft registrationrequirements and commercial operatorslicensing requirements. This commenternoted that registration could be used asa vehicle for providing information tothe public about program requirements

and the States in regulating UAS andaviation

APD said it and other local lawenforcement agencies across the countrydo not have the capacity or the authorityto enforce FAA’s UAS rules andregulations. While APD will assist theFAA as witnesses or reporting entitiesfor UAS rules violations, the commentersaid the FAA must retain theresponsibility for enforcement.

A number of individual commentersraised general concerns about theenforceability of a registrationrequirement. Several commentersasserted extending registrationrequirements to recreational users willbe difficult to enforce and will not beworth the expense required to developand implement the program, includingthe cost to train local law enforcementofficials. Others noted no Federal, Stateor local law enforcement agency has thebudget or work force to enforce aregistration requirement for all aircraft,including model aircraft. Onecommenter compared this registrationrequirement to the FederalCommunications Commission’s effort torequire Citizen Band radio users toapply for a license to operate, which,according to the commenter, ultimatelywas too costly to enforce. Othercommenters questioned whether theFAA has sufficient manpower to enforcethe registration requirement and howenforcement responsibilities will beshared with local law enforcement.

Some individuals provided generalcomments about penalties for failing toregister a UAS. One commenterrecommended a one-time allowance foranyone caught violating the registrationrequirement and a large fine forsubsequent violations, while othercommenters suggested a large fine for alloffenses.

Several commenters addressed theissue of penalties. One commenterremarked that registration will beworthless unless there are negativeconsequences (e.g., fines or revocationof registration certificate) for operatorswho fail to register or mark theiraircraft. Another commenter suggestedthat a penalty similar to the penalty fordriving an unlicensed car be imposedfor operating a UAS without the properregistration.

Task Force: The Task Forcerecommended that the FAA establish aclear and proportionate penaltyframework for violations. It cited theFAA’s current registration-relatedpenalties and stated they wereestablished in order to deter suspecteddrug traffickers and tax evaders whofailed to register aircraft as part of largernefarious schemes. The Task Force



recommended a separate FAA policydriving a proportionate response forinadvertent sUAS registrationviolations, without which operatorscould find themselves exposed toaggressive enforcement.

FAA Response: The FAAAdministrator has the authority toprescribe, revise, and enforce standardsin accordance with Title 49 of theUnited States Code, Subtitle VII,Chapter 447, Safety Regulation. Thisauthority is used to protect the public’ssafety and the agency’s enforcementauthority is exercised to obtaincompliance with applicable aviationsafety and security requirements.

Earlier this year, the FAA announceda new compliance philosophy that usesa strategic approach to safetyoversight.39The FAA believes that itscompliance philosophy, supported byan established safety culture, isinstrumental in ensuring bothcompliance with regulations and theidentification of hazards andmanagement of risk. If an individual orentity is found to have not registered theaircraft prior to its operation, the FAA’scompliance philosophy will be appliedappropriately.

To mitigate risks in the NAS andensure compliance FAA has used andwill continue to use outreach andeducation to encourage compliance withregulatory requirements that pertain tothe registration of unmanned aircraft.The FAA may also use administrativeaction or legal enforcement action togain compliance. Failure to register anaircraft can result in civil penalties upto $27,500. Criminal penalties for failureto register can include fines of up to$250,000 under 18 U.S.C. 3571 and/orimprisonment up to 3 years. 49 U.S.C.46306.

K. Privacy

sUAS Operation and CertificationNPRM: In the NPRM for the sUASOperation and Certification rule, onecommenter addressed databaseaccessibility. Event 38 UnmannedSystems suggested that FAA create adatabase of registered operators, butlimit accessibility to FAA and lawenforcement.

Clarification/Request for Information:The Clarification/Request forInformation requested informationabout the storage of registration data.

Registration Data Storage Method:Many commenters expressed concernabout the security of personalidentifying information in light of recent

See FAA Order 8000.373 available at http://w’.vw.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Order/FAA_Order_8000.373.pdf

breaches, and recommended that databe stored in some sort of secure database(e.g., encrypted database, securedserver, database under the control ofFAA, central database with 256 bit AESdigital encryption, protected withHIPAA-type controls) in compliancewith government requirements. Severalcommenters noted the data should bestored in a nationally accessibledatabase so that it can be shared withlocal law enforcement agenciesresponsible for enforcing the rules.Other commenters recommended theFAA store registration data the sameway the FCC stores amateur (HAM)radio licenses. Another commentersuggested registration data for modelaircraft should be maintained by theAMA. Some commenters said thereshould not be a central registry due todata security concerns, while othersrecommended storing the registrationinformation on paper to reduce thepossibility of personal informationbeing hacked or stolen.

EPIC stated that recreational UASoperators have an expectation ofprivacy, so the FAA should adoptsafeguards to protect those registrants’information from improper release anduse by both the public and othergovernment agencies.

Multiple commenters, includingSouth Florida UAV Consortium andMorris P. Hebert, Inc., expressedconcern with the security of onlineregistration systems. Some c ommentersindicated that they would be supportiveof electronic or Web-based registration ifthe agency could guarantee that theregistration site would be secure. Acommenter also suggested to ensure thatan electronic signature be included inthe registration process to increasesecurity. Along with adding securitymeasures to any online site, anindividual expressed concern with theauthentication process of onlineregistrations. A few commenterssuggested that it would be difficult forthe agency to create and implement anauthentication program sufficient toverify the identity of those registeringprior to the proposed December 2015deadline.

The Air Medical OperatorsAssociation and the ColoradoAgricultural Aviation Association saidthe data should be stored andmaintained by the FAA and easilyaccessible to the agency and lawenforcement agencies for enforcementpurposes. The National RetailFederation asserted retailers should notbe required to store any kind of UASregistration information; the systemshould be maintained by the FAA foruse by the FAA and local law

enforcement agencies. Similarly, theToy Industry Association saidmanufacturers should not be required tomaintain UAS registration information.

Chronicled, Inc. suggested using adistributed blockchain based system inwhich the FAA would not own the data,but would have complete access to thedata. In a blockchain-based system, theregistrants would o’vn their registrationdata and the UAS product historywould pass on to any subsequentowners of the UAS. Travelers InsuranceCompany recommended the data bestored in a searchable database thatwould allow for data mining withrespect to all the registrationinformation, including manufacturer,type, serial number, vendor andpurchaser with protections forpersonally identifiable information.

Registration Data Accessibility: In theClarification/Request for Information,DOT and FAA asked who should haveaccess to the registration data. Manycommenters, including ModovolateAviation, LLC, and NetMoby, said thatthe UAS registration data should beavailable to the public via the samesearch methods as the current mannedaircraft registration data. Manycommenters noted the data must beavailable to the public in order for thepublic to identify the owner of a UASinvolved in an incident and to notify theappropriate government authority.NetMoby also said State laws requirethe exchange of information forautomobile accidents and asserted thesame should be required for UASincidents.

Aerospace Industries Association,Property Drone Consortium, Real TimeTechnology Group and individualc ommenters suggested all stakeholdersrequire access to the data, but differentstakeholders have different informationneeds. These commenters said the typeof information each stakeholder shouldhave access to should be controlled ona need to know basis. AerospaceIndustries Association also cited FAA’sFederal Records Center (FRC) as anexample of how the data could bemanaged. The commenter explainedlicensees are registered and have accessto their detailed information, whilethird parties have access to a limitedamount of the information necessary toconduct business, but not to all of thedetailed information. A law firm notedconcerns about confidential proprietaryinformation could be addressed byallowing for redaction of certainconfidential financial information, as iscurrently done with the FAA CivilAircraft Registry.

Several commenters said only theregistrant and authorized government



agencies, including DOT, FAA, theNational Transportation Safety Board,and Federal Bureau of Investigation, andlocal law enforcement officials shouldhave access to the registration databecause of privacy concerns. Onecommenter said the data should only beavailable to law enforcement and FAApersonnel via the existing NationalCrime Information Computer datalinks.Some commenters said law enforcementofficials should have access to this dataonly when there is an activeinvestigation into a particularregistration and registrants should beinformed when their data is accessed.Many commenters said the data shouldbe treated as confidential informationand a few suggested DOT or FAApersonnel should have the ability toaccess the data only with a court order,warrant or FOIA request. A fewcommenters expressed concern that ifthe registration data were publicallyavailable, owners of expensive UASwould be targets of robbery.

EPIC stated that there must be strictrestrictions against the generaldisclosure of registrants’ personalinformation to government agencies andprivate entities, except as necessary topromote the FAA’s mission ofestablishing safety and privacy in UASoperations. Noting that privacy concernsare greater for hobbyists (who are morelikely to register with private homeaddresses) than for commercialoperators, EPIC recommended that theregistration database of commercialoperators be publicly accessible, but thedatabase of recreational operators onlybe accessible for limited purposesrelated to protecting the safety andprivacy of the public. EPIC claimed that,given the fast-growing market for UAS,a publicly accessible database ofoperators would implicate privacy andsafety concerns comparable to those thatinspired the Driver’s Privacy ProtectionAct, which generally prohibits therelease and use of registered drivers’personal information except for limitedpurposes. As such, EPIC asserted thatUAS registration information should betreated the same as the driver recordscollected by state departments of motorvehicles

The Arlington, Texas, PoliceDepartment said that local lawenforcement agencies should be givenreal-time access to the database toenable them to seek information abouta specific UAS registration and toprovide notification about unregisteredUAS.

Usage of Registration Data: Many ofthe commenters who responded to thisquestion, including the National RetailFederation and individuals, said the

data should only be used for lawenforcement purposes. Othercommenters suggested additional usesof the data. For example, Travelersinsurance company recommended thedata be available for use forunderwriting, risk assessment, and forestablishing loss history. AlA saidregulators could use the metadata todetermine market size, concentrationand type and volume of operations.Aerospace Industries Association alsosaid registration should not promptadditional State tax collection processesas it does with manned aircraftpurchases. Real Time Technologysuggested the data could be used atFAA’s discretion for a number ofpurposes, including: To maintain anaccurate association of UAS withmultiple users over time; to compileaccurate records of corporate UASassets; to assure compliance withregistration requirements for UASoperations; to authenticate registrationfor operational integrity in the field; totrack incidents associated with UAS orowners; and to collect operational flightdata from participating facilities. Anindividual said FAA could use the datato generate aggregate statistical data oncommercial UAS activities to gaugecommercial UAS impact on the NAS. Afew commenters noted registration datacould be used to recover stolen or lostproperty, alert owners of recalls, or todisseminate safety information,including Notices to Airmen, toregistrants. Some commenters expressedconcern that registration data could beused to abuse or harass UAS owners.Others expressed concern that in askinghow the data should be used, the agencydoes not seem to know why it is seekingto collect the data.

EPIC stated its position thatrecreational operators have a legitimateprivacy interest in avoiding thedisclosure of their names, addresses,and telephone numbers, and that itwould serve no legitimate purpose tomake such personal informationavailable beyond the scope of aparticular privacy or security threat.4°As such, EPIC stated the FAA shouldadopt a general prohibition against the

° Epic cited legal precedent to support thepropositions that individuals have a legitimateprivacy interest in avoiding disclosure of theirnames, addresses, arid telephone numbers (seeDep’t of Defense v. Fed. Labor Relations Auth., 510

U.S. 487. 500 (1994)) and that this privacy interestremains intact even when the information isproperly disclosed to the public under certaincircumstances (see U.S. Dept. of Justice v. ReportersComm. for Freedom of the Press, 489 U.S. 749, 767,

770 (1989)). EPIC further stated that limiting the usearid disclosure of personal information submittedby registrants is consistent with their expectationsof privacy.

disclosure of personal information,including the name, address, andnumber of the registration. EPIC furtherstated that permitted uses of the registryshould be limited to serve the FAA’sstated purposes of allowing“individuals and title search companiesto determine the legal ownership of anaircraft” and to “provide aircraft ownersand operators information aboutpotential mechanical defects or unsafeconditions of their aircraft in the formof airworthiness directives.” To thatend, EPIC suggested that appropriateuses of registration data by the FAAwould include providing information toidentify the operator of a UAS that hascaused injury, or in connection with alegal proceeding, and providing UASowners and operators information onany relevant mechanical defects orunsafe aircraft conditions.

Other Genera] Comments:Commenters raised additional concernsregarding a UAS registration system.Skyward, Inc. said in 2013 the DOT’sOffice of the Inspector General foundthat the aircraft registration system hadexperienced significant data quality andsecurity issues. The commenter noteddata quality and security issues areexacerbated when data are hard toupdate or there is little incentive forindividuals to provide updatedinformation. Skyward, Inc. was“concerned (1) that the Department’sfocus on enforcement may alienatepotential registrants, (2) about questionsrelated to managing registration ofaircraft owned by individuals who arenot US citizens or are not permanentresidents, and (3) about how such aregistration system may manage [sIUASthat are passing through the US byvisitors who bring drones into the UStemporarily.”

Skyward, Inc. also expressed concernabout unintended consequences thatcould result from “hastyimplementation” of the registrationsystem. Similarly, an individual statedthat based on the questions posed in theClarification/Request for Information, itappears “the FAA has not done thenecessary preparation to stand-up aregistration system to handle thenecessary volume of registrants.”

Task Force: The Task Forcerecommended that the FAA collect onlyname and street address of applicantsfor registration. While the Task Forcerecognized that a registrant’s emailaddress and telephone number may beuseful for the FAA to disseminatesafety-related information to UASowners, the Task Force neverthelessbelieved disclosure of such informationbe optional. With the exception ofinformation released to law



enforcement, the Task Force urged theFAA to prevent the release of anypersonal information that the agency isnot specifically required by law todisclose. Because this new requirementwill impact unmanned aircraft ownerswho do not have the means to protecttheir identities and addresses behindcorporate structures (as some mannedaircraft owners currently do), the TaskForce believed that it is important forthe FAA to take all possible steps toshield the information of privatelyowned aircraft from unauthorizeddisclosure, including issuing anadvance statement that the informationcollected will be considered to beexempt from disclosure under theFreedom of Information Act.

IFR Requirement: This rule provides aWeb-based process for registration ofsmall unmanned aircraft and issuance ofCertificates of Aircraft Registration. Theprivacy impacts have been analyzed bythe FAA in the Privacy ImpactAssessment (PTA) for the Civil AviationRegistry Applications (AVS Registry)and the Privacy Act System of RecordsNotice (SORN) DOT/FAA 801 AircraftRegistration System has been updatedaccordingly.

The FAA conducted a PTA of this ruleas required by section 522(a)(5) ofdivision H of the FY 2005 OmnibusAppropriations Act, Public Law 108—447, 118 Stat. 3268 (Dec. 8, 2004) andsection 208 of the E-Government Act of2002, Public Law 107—347, 116 Stat.2889 (Dec. 17, 2002). The assessmentconsiders any impacts of the rule on theprivacy of information in an identifiableform. The FAA has determined that thisrule would impact the FAA’s handlingof personally identifiable information(PH). As part of the PTA that the FAAconducted as part of this rulemaking,the FAA analyzed the effect this impactmight have on collecting, storing, anddisseminating PIT and examined andevaluated protections and alternativeinformation handling processes indeveloping the rule in order to mitigatepotential privacy risks. The PTA hasbeen included in the docket for thisrulemaking.

The FAA agrees with the Task Forcethat accessibility of this information tolaw enforcement and the FAA is theutmost priority in establishing thisregistry. As such, the security,simplicity, and accessibility of thesystem to those groups were theforemost goals in the FAA’sdeterminations of system design.

Routine uses are described in theSORN.41

Commenters were mainly concernedwith two issues; information securityand access to the registry information.First, regarding the security of theregistry information, the FAA developedthis Web-based registration system incompliance with all federal informationtechnology requirements and guidelinesregarding security and protection ofinformation including the FederalInformation Security Management Actof 2002 as amended by the FederalInformation Security Modernization Actof 2014 and 0MB and National Instituteof Standards and Technologyguidelines. Access to the systemdepends on a validated email addressand a password created by the user. Thesystem is identified by a digitalcertificate so that the public hasconfidence that they are interacting withthe authentic registration site. Thesystem encrypts all of the informationprovided by the users while they use thesystem as well as user informationstored within the system. The systemhas also been designed to protectinformation based on the potential forserious impact from a securitycompromise. In addition, the systemprotects credit card information inaccordance with PCI Data SecurityStandards.

Second, regarding the accessibility ofthe system data, the Privacy Act Systemof Records Notice DOT/FAA 801Aircraft Registration System, providesnotice to the public of the agency’sprivacy practices regarding thecollection, use, sharing, safeguarding,maintenance, and disposal ofinformation that affects individuals andtheir personally identifiable information(P11). The SORN identifies the routineuses for the P11 collected for smallunmanned aircraft registration. TheSORN has been published in theFederal Register and addresses thedisclosure of the small unmannedaircraft owner’s name and address.

The FAA disagrees with commenterswho say that the Registry should residewith the AMA or any otherorganization. By statute, the FAA ischarged with establishing such aregistry.

As provided in the SORN, allinformation in the database will beavailable to law enforcement in order toachieve one of the FAA’s primarypriorities in creating this system, whichis to ensure a safe and secure NAS.Accomplishing this goal involves

41 Persons wishing to access or comment on theSystem of Records Notice should consult docketNo. DOT—OST—2015—0235.

prioritizing the ability of lawenforcement to help us identify theowner of a sUAS that has violated anoperating rule or has been used to eitheraccidentally or intentionally endangerother NAS users or people on theground.

Additionally, as provided in theSORN, the general public will be able tosearch the part 48 registry database bythe unique identifier. The name andaddress associated with that uniqueidentifier will populate in accordancewith that search.

L. Other Methods To EncourageAccountability and Responsible Use ofthe National Airspace System

Clarification/Request for Information:The FAA received comments from manyorganizations and individuals onadditional means beyond aircraftregistration to encourage accountabilityand responsible use of UAS.

The agency received commentsaffirming the registration requirement asa method to encourage accountabilityand responsible use of UAS. The Airand Surface Transport NursesAssociation said that a registrationrequirement would be a “step in theright direction in terms of safety.” EAAstated that while registration will createa system of accountability, safety isdependent on the knowledge anddecisions made by UAS users. Anindividual commenter noted registrationwould help recreational operators totake UAS use seriously. Anotherindividual stated requiring all operatorsto register their UAS and to obtain apilot license are both necessary todocument the aircraft are airworthy andthe operators are properly trained insafe operation. Rotor Sport and othercommenters recommended the FAAlook to the AMA for guidance andcounsel so that the agency can createpolicies that foster acceptable use andsafety for the public while at the sametime are intelligent and flexible to meetthe needs of all model aviationstakeholders.

Most of the commenters addressingthis issue asserted that a registrationrequirement would not encourageaccountability and responsible use ofUAS. Two of the main reasons given forthis assertion were that registrationwould only be useful in rare cases whena registered UAS is recovered after anincident, and “bad actors” will simplynot register. Several c ommenters,including the Competitive EnterpriseInstitute, noted registration numbers ona UAS would be invisible to thoseobserving a reckless or malicious UASoperation, thereby limiting theenforcement benefits. These



commenters said FAA has not providedany evidence to demonstrate thatregistration of these aircraft willimprove safety of the NAS or people onthe ground. They believe the safety rulesare important, but a registrationrequirement would have no effect onsafety. One commenter notedregistration of UAS will enable FAA toidentify the operator in case of anaccident, but it does not address theactual problem: untrained pilotsoperating in the NAS. This commenterstressed the importance of a typecertificate stating, “It certifies that theUAS is airworthy, and also requires atrained pilot to operate in the NAS.”

A few commenters asserted FAA hasnot been able to accurately track manyof the 357,000 aircraft registered underthe current registration program, andquestioned the agency’s ability tomanage the registration of hundreds ofthousands of UAS. A number ofcommenters participating in a formletter campaign stated that registrationof model aircraft, in particular, “wouldhave had little to no effect on the fewrogue pilots that have caused concernwith the FAA and DOT and would onlyserve to prevent law abiding citizensfrom enjoying the freedom and libertyset forth by the US Constitution.” Manycommenters said instead of encouragingaccountability and responsible use, aregistration requirement would increaseburdens on responsible operators, wastetax payer dollars, and punish those whofollow the rules.

Several individual commentersasserted that the proposed registrationrequirement is unnecessary as theregistration issue is already beingaddressed in the current section 333exemption process and proposed part107 (the sUAS Operation andCertification NPRM).

A few commenters proposing othermethods to encourage accountabilityand responsible UAS use said thatmanufacturers should be required toinstall geo-fencing software in theirmodels to prevent UAS from flying inrestricted areas. Other commenters saidthey should be required to installtransponders that would transmit theregistration number.

Modovolate Aviation said thefollowing would encourageaccountability and responsible use ofUAS: “(1) Prompt promulgation of ageneral rule for sUAS, following theFAA’s 25 February 2015 proposal; (2)streamlining and acceleration of thesection 333 exemption process; and (3)eventual replacement of this system ofregulation with one requiring vendorself-certification of specific

technological safety features as acondition of sale.”

Delair-Tech recommended variousoptions that would require themanufacturer to install software thatwould trigger the need to register beforethe UAS would be operational. TheSouth Florida UAV Consortiumrecommended that UASs be restricted toa limited operation until the operatorcompletes a training course and receivesa code to unlock the software to allowit to fly its full range. An individualcommenter said there should be anidentification process that requires aname and address to be registered to aserial number before electronicoperating software can be downloadedto the UAS.

Skyward, Inc. said the Task Forceshould examine approaches thatpromote safety “by providing opt-inconduits for registrants to receiveeducational material, safety/recallinformation from manufacturers,insurance discounts, and otherbenefits.” In addition, Skywardsuggested that the proposed registrationsystem serve as a facilitator forsubsequent services such as automateddelivery of temporary flight restrictions.Other commenters similarlyrecommended the registration systemcontain some sort of educational ortraining component. AviationManagement Associates said the FAAshould encourage registration of all UAS(including those that are not required toregister) by providing information andservices of value, such as enablingoperators to receive discountedinsurance rates by virtue of meetingeducational requirements that qualifyfor registration.

EPIC recommended that any UASoperating the NAS include a mandatoryGPS tracking feature that wouldbroadcast the location, course, speedover ground, and owner identifying andcontact information, similar to theAutomated Identification System (AIS)for commercial vessels. EPIC noted that,unlike with aircraft that are equippedwith ADS—B, aircraft information aboutaircraft equipped with AIS is availableto the public through freely availableapps.

Union Pacific Railroad stated that itsupports other reasonable measures toencourage accountability andresponsibility in small UAS operations,including restrictions on anyunauthorized commercial orrecreational operations over certainsafety-sensitive locations, such asrailroad facilities.

Task Force: While the Task Force didnot make a specific recommendation onencouraging accountability and

responsible use of UAS outside theregistration process, it asserted withinits report that operator accountabilityand responsible use were its principalgoals of registration. The NPRM did notrequest comment on this issue.

IFR Requirement: Accountability andresponsible sUAS operation along withidentification of the aircraft owner arethe desired outcomes for this rule.While commenters provided a numberof recommendations for further actiontoward these goals that are outside ofthe scope of this rulemaking, the FAAfound that one predominant recurringtheme addressed education regardingsafe sUAS operations. As described inthe preamble discussion pertaining toeducation, the FAA agrees thateducation is a key component forreaching the agency’s aircraftregistration goals and is an overarchingtenet in ensuring the safety of the NAS.The FAA will continue to evaluate theseadditional methods recommended bythe commenters for encouraging safeand responsible use among sUASoperators for future guidance materialand rulemaking.

M. Legal Implications of the RegistrationRequirement

A number of comments were receivedto the Clarification/Request forInformation regarding the legalimplications of the registrationrequirement.

1. Comments addressing Section 336 ofthe FAA Modernization and Reform Actof 2012

Many commenters stated that theFAA’s decision to require registration ofmodel aircraft is in violation of section336 of the FAA Modernization andReform Act of 2012, Public Law 112—95,which stipulates that the FAA “may notpromulgate any rule or regulationregarding a model aircraft” that meetscertain criteria. Commenters pointed outthat one such criterion is that the modelaircraft be operated “in accordance witha community-based set of SafetyGuidelines and within the programmingof a nationwide community-basedorganization.” Commenters stated thatthe AMA is one such organization, andthat the FAA must therefore exemptAMA members from the registrationrequirement. Other commenters statedmore generally that FAA must identifyall nationwide community-basedorganizations and exempt theirmembers from any rule or regulation(including registration) when theaircraft is operated in accordance witha community-based set of safetyguidelines.



The Competitive Enterprise Instituteasserted that the FAA conceded in itsinterpretation of section 336 that “amodel aircraft operated pursuant to theterms of section 336 would potentiallybe excepted from a UAS aircraft rule,”an interpretation that the commentersaid “would logically lend itself to aUAS aircraft registration rule as well.”This commenter accused the FAA ofignoring both the plain language of thestatute and its own interpretation of it,and asked the FAA to explain how ithas the jurisdiction to regulate smallUAS operated by hobbyists.

Several commenters found fault withthe FAA’s justification for requiringregistration of model aircraft—i.e., thatit is applying existing law that appliesto all “aircraft” and not promulgatingnew regulations regarding modelaircraft. The Mercatus Center at GeorgeMason University asserted that thecurrent proceeding “relied quite directlyon laws that by statute may not be usedas justification for an expansion of theregulatory obligations of model aircraftoperators;” namely, its UAS integrationmandate under the FAA Modernizationand Reform Act. This commenterfurther asserted that if the FAA does notrestart the process without references tothat mandate there is a possibility thatregistration of non-commercial UASwill be overturned if challenged incourt. An individual commenter statedthat if, as the FAA asserts, the definitionof model aircraft as “aircraft” meansthat all existing federal aviationregulations retroactively apply to modelaircraft, the congressional prohibitionon regulating them would be pointless.This commenter further stated that theclear intent of Congress was to prohibitthe FAA from regulating model aircraftat all, and that if Congress meant insteadto apply the full array of existingaviation regulations to model aircraft, itwould have said so. This commenteralso asserted that, even if the FAA iscorrect that all existing aviationregulations apply to model aircraft, it isnot acting consistently with thatprinciple because it is picking only oneof the many regulations that apply tomanned aircraft and arbitrarily applyingit to model aircraft. This commenterfurther asserted that this “is the veryepitome of arbitrary and capricious, andclearly shows that the FAA is beingdisingenuous when it claims it is merelyapplying existing regulations.” Thiscommenter went on to say that “[tihefact that the FAA finds it necessary torequest public comments in a sort ofexpedited unofficial NPRM, followed byassembling a special Task Force(somewhat like an Advisory Rulemaking

Committee (ARC) to determine whatsteps are necessary to implement theregistration process, clearly reveals theFAA’s proposal to be in fact a newregulation regarding model aircraft indirect contravention of [FAAModernization and Reform Act) Sec.336.”

Another individual stated that theFAA is not being forthright in averringthat its decision not to register modelaircraft until now was “discretionary.”This commenter expressed doubt that aregulatory document exists in which theagency explicitly stated that “modelaircraft need not be registered, as adiscretionary exclusion from 49 U.S.C.44101,” and that if such a documentdoes exist it should have beenreferenced in the Clarification/Requestfor Information. This commenter furtherasserted that the absence of such adocument destroys the premise of the“clarification” the FAA has now putforth.

Two individual commenterschallenged the agency’s reliance on theNTSB ruling in Administrator v. Pirker(NTSB Order No. EA—5739), noting thatthe ruling only held that model aircraftqualify as “aircraft” as the term is usedin 14 CFR 9 1.13(a), which prohibitscareless and reckless operation.42

Two individual commenters statedthat the FAA’s authority to pursueenforcement action against persons whoendanger the safety of the NAS (undersection 336(b) of Public Law 112—95)cannot reasonably be interpreted tomean the agency has the blanketauthority to mandate registration ofmodel aircraft.

The FAA disagrees with thecomments asserting that the registrationof model aircraft is prohibited bysection 336 of Public Law 112—95.While section 336 bars the FAA frompromulgating new rules or regulationsthat apply only to model aircraft, theprohibition against future rulemaking isnot a complete bar on rulemaking anddoes not exempt model aircraft fromcomplying with existing statutory andregulatory requirements. As previouslyaddressed, Public Law 112—95 identifiesmodel aircraft as aircraft and as such,the existing statutory aircraftregistration requirements implementedby part 47 apply.

This action simply provides a burden-relieving alternative that sUAS ownersmay use for aircraft registration. Modelaircraft operated under section 336 aswell as other small unmanned aircraftare not required to use the provisions of

42 The comrnenter cited to Administrator v.Pirker, NTSB Order Na. EA—5739 at 12 (Nov. 17,2014).

part 48. Owners of such aircraft have theoption to comply with the existingrequirements in part 47 that governaircraft registration or may opt to usethe new streamlined, web-based systemin part 48.

2. Comments Addressing RequirementsUnder the Administrative Procedure Act

A number of commenters questionedthe FAA’s approach to rulemakingpertaining to small unmanned aircraftregistration. Several commenters saidthe FAA does not have good cause toissue a rule without notice andcomment. The Competitive EnterpriseInstitute (CEI) stated that under section553(b)(3)(B) of the APA, agencyrulemakings are required to include anotice and comment period of at least30 days unless “the agency for goodcause finds (and incorporates thefinding and a brief statement of reasonstherefor in the rules issued) that noticeand public procedure thereon areimpracticable, unnecessary, or contraryto public interest.” Citing to a legaltreatise on administration law, CEIasserted that the good cause exception“is not an escape clause,” and “shouldbe narrowly construed and onlyreluctantly countenanced,” with “theagency bear[ing] the burden ofdemonstrating the ground for goodcause.” CEI further asserted that noticeand comment in this case is not“impractical,” because “[ilmpracticalityexists when the agency cannot bothfollow the notice-and-commentprocedure and execute its statutoryduty.” CEI stated that in this case theFAA is arguably proceeding with a UASregistration mandate in directcontradiction of its statutory duty “not[to] promulgate any rule or regulationregarding a model aircraft.” CEI alsostated that the notice and commentprocess cannot be said to be“unnecessary,” because a rule thatmandates hobbyists register their modelaircraft creates a substantial new burdenon the public. Finally, CEI stated thatnotice and comment is not “contrary topublic interest.” CEI claimed that,although the FAA will presumablyargue that providing notice andcomment would result in significantharm to the public interest by failing toimmediately mitigate UAS safety risksthat only mandatory registration canaddress, “there is little evidence thatregistration will, on its own, do much ofanything to mitigate UAS safety risk,which itself is likely very low relativeto other aircraft safety risks, such asbirds.”

The Mercatus Center at George MasonUniversity stated that “agency inactionleading to perceived deadline pressure



does not constitute good cause todispense with public notice andcomment.”43The Mercatus Centerasserted that a public notice-and-comment period is necessary and in thepublic interest because any requirementto register UASs potentially adverselyaffects numerous non-commercialoperators. The Mercatus Center furtherasserted that the issuance of a final rulewithout notice and comment opens upthe registration requirement to reversalif challenged in court.

A number of individual commenterssimilarly asserted that the FAA has notpresented any data to substantiate theneed to proceed with this rulemaking onan emergency or expedited basis. LikeCET, these commenters pointed to a lackof data showing either that there is anincreased safety risk that needs to beaddressed or that registration will, on itsown, adequately address that risk. Somecommenters specifically found faultwith FAA’s reliance on increasednumber of UAS ‘incidents” reported tothe FAA by manned aircraft pilots.Several commenters noted that theAMA analyzed those reported“incidents” and found that out of the764 reported records, only 27 (or 3.5%)were identified as a near mid-aircollision, with nearly all of thoseinvolving government-authorizedmilitary drones. The commentersnoted that most of the “incidents” havemerely been sightings of UAS. Oneindividual pointed out that the FAA haspublished no analysis of its own“sightings” data; nor has it disputed theAMA’s analysis of that data. Thisindividual also asserted that a doublingin the rate of UAS “sightings” in 2015is consistent with the rate of growth ofconsumer small UAS, and is not causefor overreaction.

Another individual claimed that FAAstatistics show that birds are far more ofa threat to air traffic than toyhelicopters, and that not one singleincident of a toy model causing anaccident has been reported, while birdstrikes number over 7,000 a year.Several other commenters noted thatthere has only been one recordedcollision between a manned aircraft anda model aircraft. One such individualstated that it was a well-known incident

43The commenter cited Air TransportAssociation ofAmerica v. Department ofTransportation, 900 F.2d 369 (D.c. cir. 1990(“Insofar as the FAA’s own failure to act materiallycontributed to its perceived deadline pressure, theagency cannot now invoke the need for expeditiousaction as ‘good cause’ to avoid the obligations ofsection 553(b)).

44A few cammenters provided a link to the AMAreport. http://wwsv.madelaircraft.org/gav/dacs/AivlAAnalysis-Closer-Laak-at-FAA-Drane-Data_0914 15.pdf.

in which a biplane struck a large modelairplane that was hovering over arunway at an air show. This individualfurther stated that even though thatmodel airplane was larger than the vastmajority of models most hobbyists fly,the biplane received only a minor dentto its wing. Another individualquestioned whether the FAA hasexamined empirical evidence from themillions of model flight operations todetermine if lack of compliance with thelabeling requirement had anycorrelation to the frequency or severityof mishaps. Another individual pointedto a recent NTSB interpretation (NTSB—AS—2015—0001) that clarifies that“model aircraft” do not fall within thedefinition of unmanned aircraft foraccident notification/investigationpurposes. Quoting that interpretation,this commenter stated that the NTSB“has historically not investigated therare occasions in which a model aircrafthas cause serious injury or fatality,” andclearly does not believe unregisteredsmall UAS to be a significant threat tothe NAS.

A number of commenterscharacterized the registrationrequirement as a “knee jerk” reaction toa perceived problem based solely onanecdotal evidence, which will punishthe many for the acts of a few. Othercommenters said that any UAS-relatedincidents can easily be remedied bystricter enforcement of existing laws.

In contrast to those commenters whoclaimed that the FAA does not havegood cause to issue a rule without goingthrough notice and commentrulemaking, Modovolate Aviation, LLCthat the FAA does have good cause toissue a rule without notice andcomment, and should therefore set up asimple database and registrationinterface immediately and issue anemergency rule requiring compliance.This commenter asserted that suchauthority comes from both the APA (5U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B)) and the FAA’s ownrules (14 CFR 11.29(a)), and that theFAA’s statements that the growingnumber of pilot reports of UAS sightingsreveals an imminent problem and servesas an appropriate basis for such an“emergency rule.” This commenter alsoasserted that the FAA will not achieveits goals by engaging in anotherprotracted rulemaking process that takestwo years.

In the preamble discussion of theagency’s good cause for proceeding withan IFR, the agency explains its rationalefor forgoing notice and comment priorto the effective date of this rulemakingand issuing this immediately effectiveIFR. The agency also notes that it isseeking comment on this rulemaking

and may modify the rule based oncomments received.

3. Comments Addressing Other LegalIssues With the Proposed RegistrationRequirement

The Mercatus Center at George MasonUniversity stated that under ExecutiveOrder 12866, a rule on non-commercialUAS registration may be economicallysignificant and therefore require a cost-benefit analysis. The Mercatus Centerclaimed that past experience withnational registry systems suggests thatthere will be dramatic implementationand compliance costs that the DOT maybe systematically underestimating. TheMercatus Center further claimed thatthese costs will be exacerbated byfactors such as fast UAS depreciationand replacement rates, difficulty ofenforcing retroactive compliance, andthe sheer volume and speed at whichUASs are being produced, among otherfactors.

Several other commenters also statedthat the FAA needs to conduct cost-benefit analysis before proceeding withthis rulemaking. For example, oneindividual stated that a cost benefitanalysis “based on a scientificcollection of unbiased safety data”should be conducted before any newregistration program is put in place.This individual asserted that the FAAhas not provided a convincing case thatsmall UAS pose a safety risk to the NAS,or that that a registration program willbe any more successful than anapproach, such as the AMA’s SafetyCode, that requires owners to put theirname and address on the aircraft. A fewother individuals said the FAA needs toconsider that a registration requirementmay expose UAS owners to additionalstate-imposed taxes and fees. Anotherindividual pointed to the potentialeconomic impact a registrationrequirement may have on smallbusinesses. This individual asserted thatthe requirement may impact smallhobby shops, as well as majordistributors like Horizon Hobby andHobbico, because people will not wantto register their aircraft with the FAAand will therefore choose to participatein other consumer hobbies that do notrequire registration with thegovernment. The News Media Coalitionstated that any registration processestablished by the FAA “must avoidplacing undue burden on the FirstAmendment right to gather anddisseminate news.”

Several individual commenters statedthat a registration requirement is aninvasion of privacy. EPIC discussed itsconcerns about the privacy and civilliberty risks posed by the use of UAS in



the United States, and asserted that theenhanced surveillance capabilities ofUAS raise significant FourthAmendment implications.45

Consistent with comments regardingExecutive Order 12866, the FAA hascompleted an economic analysis of thisrulemaking. The economic analysis forthis rulemaking can be found in thedocket with the IFR.

Regarding comments pertaining tofree speech and privacy, the agencyclarifies that this IFR does not provideoperating restrictions. Rather, thisrulemaking is intended only to establisha streamlined approach for smallunmanned aircraft registration.

N. Alternatives to Registration

The FAA received a number ofcomments recommending alternatives toa requirement of registration.

Clarification/Request for Information:Several commenters suggested arequirement for small UAS operators tobecome members of a community-basedorganization, instead of a registrationrequirement. One commenterrecommended that an organizationsimilar to the USPA (United StatesParachute Association) be formed tomanage UAS training, licensing, andregistration. Another commenter said itwould make more sense for the DOTand FAA to mandate that small UASpilots join any community-basedorganization that follows a set ofstandardized rules. Several commentersrecommended that the FAA specificallyrequire model aircraft operators tobecome AMA members. One commentersuggested that AMA be put in charge ofthe registration of small UAS users, withthe registration database maintained bythe AMA independently, or with asubsidy from the DOT/FAA. Severalother commenters, however, opposedthe idea of requiring AMA membershipor allowing the AMA to be any part ofthe official registration requirement.One individual stated that registration isan inherently governmental functionthat should not be ceded to any duescollecting organization. This commenterpointed out that neither theExperimental Aircraft Association northe Aircraft Owners and PilotsAssociation register manned aircraft.Another individual said the AMAshould not be part of the registration

EPIC made reference to its 2012 petition to theFAA to undertake a rulemaking to establish privacyregulations prior to the deployment of commercialdrones in the national airspace, and its lawsuitagainst the FAA for denying that petition. EPIC alsomade reference to its testimony before Congressregarding the need to adopt comprehensivelegislation to limit drone surveillance in the UnitedStates,

process because it is “a privately runoptional insurance consortium forhosting a common airfield,” not anauthority regarding model aircraftdesign, standards, and practices. TheDrone User Group Network said that theAMA “while a venerable association,does not have the interests ofresponsible and dedicated UASoperators at the core of its mission.”Another individual listed a number ofconcerns about the AMA’s safetyprogramming (e.g., failure to enforcetheir own requirement to have AMAnumber and/or address in theirmember’s aircraft) and said that he isnot comfortable with the AMA beingpermitted to manage the inherentlygovernmental function of registration.

Several commenters who opposed aregistration requirement said the FAAshould review the FCC’s experiencewith the explosive growth of mobileCitizen Band radios some years ago,which ultimately resulted inabandoning the licensing requirementfor those radios. One commenterrecommended that driver’s licenses beused for registration, instead of creatinga new registry system. Anothercommenter said recreational operatorscould be required to carry a currentdriver’s license and a safety card, whichwould be issued after the operatorwatched an FAA video on proper flyingprocedures.

A number of commenters said theFAA needs to clarify what it willconsider to be a UAS for purposes of theregistration requirement. Somecommenters asserted that relying on theFAA’s definition of “aircraft” isproblematic because that definition canbe construed to mean any device whichtakes to air, including, for example, aFrisbee, a paper airplane, a foamairplane, or a balsa wood rubber-bandpowered airplane. As discussed above,many commenters urged the agency toexclude traditional model aircraft fromthe definition of UAS for purposes ofthe registration requirement. Some ofthose commenters questioned whymodel aircraft would be included in aregistration requirement while othertypes of “aircraft,” such as ultralights,model rockets and kites, would not.Several commenters pointed out thatultralights can weigh up to 249 pounds,carry up to 5 gallons of flammable fuel,carry an unlicensed pilot, beunregistered, and still operate in theNAS (in many, but not all areas).

Several individual commentersquestioned whether the agency canhandle the registration of millions ofrecreational UAS. One commenter notedthat the registration database couldbecome overloaded and unmanageable

if every person registers every modelaircraft they purchase or receive—manyof which will not last past a singleflight—but then fail to notify the FAAwhen a model is lost, destroyed, or sold.Also pointing to the short life span ofmost small UAS, another commentersimilarly said the registration systemwill become overwhelmed ifrecreational users are required toregister and re-register each modelaircraft they obtain. Another commentersaid that requiring UAS owners torenew their registration will“complicate everything” and lead topeople involuntarily breaking the lawwhen they forget to re-register theirUAS. Several commenters wonderedhow the registration process will befunded.

Several commenters addressed theeffect of a registration requirement oninnovation and growth. The NationalAssociation of Mutual InsuranceCompanies (NAMIC) encouraged theFAA and the Task Force to considerhow the registration system will beintegrated into or used in conjunctionwith the commercial development ofUAS. Specifically, NAMIC said the FAAand Task Force should consider howindustries that are critical to UASdevelopment will depend on or requireUAS registration. NAMIC asserted that“streamlining requirements for UASregistration would certainly be in theinterest of avoiding duplication,minimizing burdens, and best protectinginnovation and encouraging growth inthe UAS industry. Similarly, TIA saidthe FAA must implement UASregulations that do not inhibitadvancement but rather spur growthand inspire future innovators. TheUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign urged the FAA and DOT toconsider alternatives to a registration(which is said is likely to prove bothburdensome and ineffective) because“onerous regulations applied to UASresearch will stifle innovation and putthe United States at a competitivedisadvantage.” An individualcommenter similarly said thatregulation “will increase costs, drivepeople from the activity, and retardinnovation.” One individual commenterargued that model aircraft “represent ahuge employment, technological, andeconomic opportunity for our country(and world), and we cannot afford tosquash this potential with more laws.”A group of academics noted thattraditional model aircraft have inspiredgenerations of our scientists, engineers,and inventors. A number of othercommenters also expressed concern thata registration requirement will



discourage young people from becominginvolved in model aviation which, inturn, will discourage them from enteringcareers in STEM-related fields.

A commenter who had been issued anexemption under section 333 of PublicLaw 112—95 questioned whether he orshe would have to re-register their UAS,and what the time-frame for that wouldbe. Another commenter questioned howthe registration requirement wouldapply to UAS that are flowninfrequently or not at all. Anotherindividual commenter questioned whatthe process would be for removing nonfunctional UAS from the registrationsystem. Another commenter workingoverseas wondered whether he wouldhave to register his UAS to be permittedto operate it during visits to the UnitedStates.

Delair-Tech recommended thefollowing registration process formanufactured UAS: (1) Each UASproduced is assigned an aircraft typedesignator (assigned by ICAO) and aunique serial number (assigned by themanufacturer); (2) the user manual foreach UAS instructs its owner to turn onthe UAS and its ground control station!software within internet connectivitycoverage; (3) the ground controlsoftware detects an unregistered UASand opens a registration window, whichprompts the owner to enter their contactinformation (including phone number);(4) the registration information istransmitted to the national registrationsystem, which sends a verification codeto the owner via text message; (5) theowner enters the code through theground control software and then theregistration system verifies the code andsends a registration number to theground control station; (6) the groundcontrol software programs theregistration number into the UAS,which enables the owner to fly the UAS.As an alternative to using the groundcontrol software to connect directly tothe national registration system, DelairTech suggested the owner be given theURL of the registration system, throughwhich the owner would input contactinformation and receive a verificationcode. The owner would also receive theregistration number through the webapplication, which they would theninput into the UAS through the groundcontrol software.

An individual commenter suggestedthat as an alternative to issuing anexpedited registration rule the agencyissue a temporary, immediately effectiverule mandating point-of-saledistribution of agency materialssummarizing the operational restrictionsfor model aircraft. This commenterstated that acting promptly to require

retailers to communicate the coreregulatory message would more directlyaddress the fear of improperly operatedUAS becoming a safety risk as more aresold to hobbyists. The commenter alsostated that such materials largelyalready exist and the requirement fordistributing the information could besatisfied, particularly by online retailers,by a check-box acknowledgment or anemailed link to existing FAAeducational Web sites. The commentercited legal authority that would supportan exercise of authority to compelcommercial speech when it is in theservice of a significant public interest.

RILA urged the establishment of apreemptive federal standard for UAS toallow for uniformity, consistency, andalleviate potential burdens on bothretailers and consumers if states are leftto legislate potentially inconsistent UASsafety.

Some commenters said an educationprogram, geo-fencing, and strictenforcement of the safety rules would bemore effective than requiringregistration of these aircraft.

A few commenters advocated for atiered licensing process, allowingoperators who have qualified for highertiers (e.g., through additional training ortesting) to operate UAS with advancedcapabilities. Several commenters saidthat FAA should regulate UAS operatorsin the same way the FCC licensesamateur (ham) radio operators, and onecommenter also said that retailers ofcertain UAS should require proof ofFCC licensing before purchase.

The Mercatus Center at George MasonUniversity stated that the DOT and FAAshould define a threshold “thatliberalize most small UASs, requiringregistrations for only the largest andhighest-powered UASs, whilecontinuing to focus on integrating allnongovernmental UASs within aframework based on the principles ofpermissionless innovation.” Thiscommenter went on to say that, insteadof an “impractical” registration scheme,the FAA should adopt TransportCanada’s model and require simpleonline notification for commercialoperations within a middle weight class.Other commenters said that operatorsshould have to abide by the AMA safetycode.

The South Florida UAV Consortiumrecommended that UASs be restricted toa limited operation until the operatorcompletes a training course and receivesa code to unlock the software to allowit to fly its full range.

One commenter recommended twocategories of licenses—one forcommercial products that can bepurchased off the shelf (with limitations

on the degree to which they can bemodified) and one for home-built orsubstantially modified aircraft. Thecommenter asserted that this secondcategory of licenses “would address theimpossibility of implementing a per-device registration scheme in a world ofimported electronics and homebrewexperimentation.” Within the twocategories of licenses, the commenterrecommended different classes based onthe available power carried on theaircraft.

IFR Requirement: The FAA disagreeswith commenters who stated that allsmall unmanned aircraft should beregistered with the AMA and that AMAshould be exclusively responsible forthe registry. The FAA is specificallydirected by statute to develop andmaintain an aircraft registry.Accordingly, the FAA cannot abdicateits responsibility to AMA or any otherorganization outside the FAA.

Some commenters on this topicaddressed the need for a clear definitionof which aircraft require registration andwhich do not; the FAA has addressedthat definition in an earlier section. Inresponse to the comments aboutcapacity issues and streamliningregistration, the web-based registrationsystem established by this rule willallow the Registry to betteraccommodate the aircraft registrationrequired for owners of small unmannedaircraft.

0. Comments Beyond the Scope

The nature of the FAA’s request forcomment in the Clarification/Requestfor Information resulted in somecommenters providing information thatdid not fall within the twelve commentareas. The FAA is summarizing thosecomments that were outside the scopeof the twelve questions in this section.

A few commenters remarked on themake-up of the Task Force. Oneindividual stated that the presence ofAmazon, Walmart and Best Buy, amongother major corporations, “gives theimpression, as face value, of beingpolitically driven by major corporationsto restrict tax paying citizens in thiscountry from using their airspace andthe enjoyment of flying their modelaircraft in favor of a major corporation.”This individual asserted that thesecorporations would prefer to eliminatemodel aviation in order to have openskies to operate their delivery service.Two other commenters similarly saidthat the UAS industry representativeson the Task Force “have a penchant forregulations and may actually benefitfrom such regulation given that theyhave the resources to cover the costrequired by such regulation and that



inevitably such regulation will limit freeenterprise.” These commentersquestioned why the FAA did not invitegrass-roots small UAS organizations,such as the Small UAV Coalition.

A commenter suggested reducing riskto aviation by permitting localauthorities to utilize a transmitter toelectronically disable UAS that arebeing flown illegally. The commenteralso suggested developing a means toreport illegal UAS operation. Anothercommenter said that law enforcementshould be able to confiscate UAS thatare flown illegally. The NationalAssociation of Mutual InsuranceCompanies, Minnesota Department ofTransportation, and other commenterssuggested requiring UAS operators topurchase liability insurance.Additionally, NetMoby and othercommenters remarked that FAA shouldimpose significant fines and other civilor criminal penalties on operators whofail to register or fly in a dangerous orillegal manner.

The Toy Industry Association urgedFAA to implement an IFR instead of afinal rule at this point. The commentersaid that an interim rule would permitthe agency and UAS Task Force tocreate a pilot registration system thatwould include only UAS that have“high risk” capabilities, and study thissystem before implementing a final rule.Other commenters, including the NewsMedia Coalition, encouraged FAA tofinalize the small UAS rule proposed forcommercial users to provide an exampleof clear guidelines for all users.

Skyward, Inc. recommended that FAAdevelop a more comprehensiveapproach to UAS management,including technical standards for a UASsystem for the NAS, and said that FAAshould review NASA’s UAS TrafficManagement program and theDepartment of Homeland Security’sSTIX and TAXTI standards as examplesof technical standards development.Skyward said that, for example, acomprehensive UAS system couldinclude “detection capabilities that areable to detect and localize nonparticipating or malfunctioning aircraftas part of expanded airspace radar andsurveillance systems.”

Many commenters expressed concernabout the expedited timeframe in whichthe DOT and the FAA plan toimplement the registration system.UAVUS said the plan to create aregistration system this holiday seasonis “overly ambitious, and could add tothe confusion created by the absence ofthe FAA’s final rulemaking for thecommercial use of small UASs.” RILAstated its appreciation for the agency’sgoal of increasing safe and responsible

UAS use, but asserted that the logisticalchallenges in implementing such asystem within the current expeditedtimeframe “make doing so responsiblyand coherently impossible.” Given theexpedited timeframe, RILA, NRF, andTIA encouraged the FAA to consider theuse of an interim final rule instead of adirect final rule. NRF alternativelysuggested a pilot program to evaluatethe operational needs of a registrationsystem.

The National Agricultural AviationAssociation (NAAA), ColoradoAgricultural Aviation Association, andAlaska Legislative Task Force onUnmanned Aircraft Systemsrecommended that UAS should berequired to be more visible to mannedaircraft to avoid collision by requiringUAS to be equipped with strobe lightsand painted conspicuous colors.

Two commenters suggested that as analternative to registering individualUAS, that owners be required to registertheir transmitters. One of thosecommenters asserted that thetransmitter registration would providean easy way to identify operatorswithout having to physically locatethem or their UAS because transmittersbroadcast a radio signal that can bepicked up by anyone in the vicinity.This commenter further asserted thatrelying on markings on the aircraft willdo nothing to identify a problem unlessthe UAS crashes, but, as technologyadvances, transmitters can transmit apersonal ID that can be read withreceiver equipment. A few otherindividual commenters recommended arequirement to register the flightcontroller instead of the aircraft.

P. Miscellaneous

The FAA has updated § 91.203(a)(2)to allow the Certificate of AircraftRegistration issued under part 48 tosatisfy the requirements of thatparagraph.

The FAA has also made the followingtechnical amendments to part 47: TheDepartment of Homeland Securitycurrently exercises the oversightresponsibilities of the formerImmigration and Naturalization Service.Part 47 has been updated to reflect thischange.

The agency has also clarified that thereference to “armed forces” includesonly those armed forces of the UnitedStates.

VIII. Section-by-Section Discussion ofthe Interim Final Rule

In part 1, definitions andabbreviations, definitions for “modelaircraft,” “small unmanned aircraft,”

“small unmanned aircraft system,” and“unmanned aircraft” are added.

In part 45, identification andregistration marking, § 45.1 is revised toadd a specific cross-reference to 14 CFRpart 47 to indicate that the markingrequirements of part 45 only relate toaircraft registered under part 47.

In part 47, aircraft registration, in§ 47.2 the definition of “resident alien”is revised to remove the reference to theImmigration and Naturalization Serviceand replace it with a reference to theDepartment of Homeland Security. Theterm “U.S. citizen” is revised to read“Citizen of the United States or U.S.citizen” to conform to other uses of thisterm.

Section 47.3 is revised to make clearthat, when stating that no person mayoperate an aircraft that is eligible forregistration under 49 U.S.C. 44101—44104, Armed Forces refers to ArmedForces of the United States.

Section 47.7 is revised to remove thereference to the Immigration andNaturalization Service and replace itwith a reference to the Department ofHomeland Security.

The FAA is adding new 14 CFR part48, registration and markings for smallunmanned aircraft.

Section 48.1 provides theapplicability for the part. It states thatsmall unmanned aircraft eligible forregistration in the United States must beregistered and identified in accordancewith either the registration andidentification requirements in part 48,or the registration requirements in part47 and the identification andregistration marking requirements insubparts A and C of part 45. Section48.1 also explains that small unmannedaircraft intended to be operated outsideof the territorial airspace of the UnitedStates, or registered through a trust orvoting trust, must be registered inaccordance with part 47 and satisfy theidentification and registration markingrequirements of subparts A and C of part45.

Section 48.5 provides the compliancedates for small unmanned aircraft usedexclusively as model aircraft, and thecompliance dates for small unmannedaircraft used as other than modelaircraft.

Section 48.10 provides definitions of“Citizen of the United States or U.S.citizen,” “Registry,” and “residentalien.” These are the same definitionsfound in part 47,

Section 48.15 provides that no personmay operate a small unmanned aircraftthat is eligible for registration under 49U.S.C. 44101—44103 unless the ownerhas registered and marked the aircraft inaccordance with the requirements of



part 48; the aircraft weighs 0.55 poundsor less on takeoff, including everythingthat is on board or otherwise attached tothe aircraft; or the aircraft is an aircraftof the Armed Forces of the UnitedStates.

Section 48.20 provides the criteria foreligibility of the small unmannedaircraft for registration.

Section 48.25 describes therequirements for applicants wishing toregister a small unmanned aircraft usingpart 48. Applicants must provide therequired information, and must meetother ownership requirements listed inthe section.

Section 48.30 provides the fees forsmall unmanned aircraft registration.

Section 48.100 describes informationapplicants must submit whenregistering a small unmanned aircraftintended to be used as other than amodel aircraft, and the informationapplicants must submit whenregistering a small unmanned aircraftintended to be used exclusively as amodel aircraft.

Section 48.105 requires smallunmanned aircraft owners to maintaincurrent information in the registrationsystem.

Section 48.110 provides theCertificate of Aircraft Registrationinformation for small unmanned aircraftintended to be used other than as modelaircraft. It provides the effective date ofthe Certificate, information regardingregistration renewal, and describesevents affecting the effectiveness of theCertificate of Aircraft Registration.

Section 48.115 provides theCertificate of Aircraft Registrationinformation for small unmanned aircraftintended to be used exclusively asmodel aircraft. It provides the effectivedate of the Certificate, informationregarding registration renewal, anddescribes events affecting theeffectiveness of the Certificate ofAircraft Registration.

Section 48.120 discussescircumstances in which a smallunmanned aircraft registration isinvalid. Circumstances include whenthe aircraft is registered in a foreigncountry; the applicant is not the owner,except when the applicant registers onbehalf of an owner who is under 13years of age; the applicant is not eligibleto submit an application under part 48;or the interest of the applicant in theaircraft was created by a transaction thatwas not entered into in good faith, butrather was made to avoid (with orwithout the owner’s knowledge)compliance with 49 U.S.C. 44101—

44103.Section 48.12 5 explains that for those

persons who do not meet the citizenship

requirements for U.S. registration, thecertificate issued under part 48constitutes a recognition of ownership.

Section 48.200 contains generalprovisions for small unmanned aircraftmarking.

Section 48.205 provides therequirements for the display andlocation of the unique identifier.

In part 91, general operating and flightrules, § 91.2 03 is revised to referenceCertificates of Aircraft Registrationprovided in part 48.

In part 375, navigation of foreign civilaircraft within the United States,§ 375.11 is clarified to note that thisincludes a small unmanned aircraft.

Section 375.38 authorizes owners offoreign civil aircraft that are smallunmanned aircraft used exclusively asmodel aircraft to operate within the U.S.and requires owners of aircraft engagedin such operations to complete the part48 registration process prior tooperation.

IX. Regulatory Notices and Analyses

A. Regulatozy Evaluation

Changes to Federal regulations mustundergo several economic analyses.First, Executive Order 12866 andExecutive Order 13563 direct that eachFederal agency shall propose or adopt aregulation only upon a reasoneddetermination that the benefits of theintended regulation justify its costs.Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Actof 1980 (Pub. L. 96—3 54) requiresagencies to analyze the economicimpact of regulatory changes on smallentities. Third, the Trade AgreementsAct (Pub. L. 96—3 9 as amended)prohibits agencies from settingstandards that create unnecessaryobstacles to the foreign commerce of theUnited States. In developing U.S.standards, the Trade Agreements Actrequires agencies to considerinternational standards and, whereappropriate, that they be the basis ofU.S. standards. Fourth, the UnfundedMandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L.104—4) requires agencies to prepare awritten assessment of the costs, benefits,and other effects of proposed or finalrules that include a Federal mandatelikely to result in the expenditure byState, local, or tribal governments, in theaggregate, or by the private sector, of$100 million or more annually (adjustedfor inflation with base year of 1995).This portion of the preamblesummarizes the FAA’s analysis of theeconomic impacts of this IFR. Wesuggest readers seeking greater detailread the full regulatory evaluation, acopy of which we have placed in thedocket for this rulemaking.

In conducting these analyses, FAAhas determined this IFR has benefitsthat justify its costs, and is a “significantregulatory action” as defined in section3(f) of Executive Order 12866 because itraises novel policy issues contemplatedunder that executive order. The rule isalso “significant” as defined in DOT’sRegulatory Policies and Procedures. TheIFR will have a positive economicimpact on a substantial number of smallentities, will not create unnecessaryobstacles to international trade, and willnot impose an unfunded mandate onstate, local, or tribal governments, or onthe private sector. These analyses aresummarized below.

Total Benefits and Costs

There are problems arising from therapid proliferation of small unmannedaircraft and these problems areoccurring more frequently. Salesprojections show the number of smallunmanned aircraft continuing toincrease dramatically, and thusaddressing the problem is urgent.Registration provides an immediate anddirect opportunity to educate new usersof unmanned aircraft who may have noknowledge of the system in which theyare operating, and thus, no knowledgeof how to operate safely within it.Registration and marking of smallunmanned aircraft will provide ownerseducation regarding operating in theNAS and will promote accountability inthose operations, at a minimal cost tooperators and the government.

Currently aircraft registration is apaper-based process defined in part 47.

Under current statutory and regulatorypolicy, the FAA could require UASmodel aircraft owners,46 at a significantcost, to register their small unmannedaircraft under part 47 using the legacypaper-based system. Commercialowners47 that have been grantedexemptions or certificates ofauthorization to operate smallunmanned aircraft in the NAS havebeen required to register their aircraftunder part 47. Also, the sUAS Operationand Certification NPRM would requirenon-model aircraft owners (e.g.,commercial and public owners of sUAS)to register their aircraft under part 47 asoutlined in the NPRM. The agencyexpects to finalize that rulemaking in2016.

46 for purposes of the economic analysis of thisIFR, the term “modeler” means the owner of a smallunmanned aircraft that satisfies the definition of“model aircraft” added to 14 CFR 1.1

“ For purposes of the economic analysis of thisIFR, the term “commercial owners” or “non-modeler” means the owner of a small unmannedaircraft used for non-model purposes.


78640 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 241 / Wednesday, December 16, 2015 / Rules and Regulations

The FAA has used agency discretionin the past by not requiring owners ofsmall unmanned aircraft intended to beused as model aircraft in accordancewith section 336 of Public Law 112—95to register their aircraft although asnoted commercial operators of smallunmanned aircraft have been requiredto register their aircraft. Due to the rapidincrease in sUAS for hobby use (andsoon at much greater volumes forcommercial purposes), the FAA iscreating an alternative simple, web-based registration process tosignificantly reduce the time to registersmall unmanned aircraft. In addition, toease the burden to modelers thisregulation will allow those owners toregister once and use the sameidentification number for all theiraircraft, instead of registering each of

their small unmanned aircraftseparately.

In order to implement the newstreamlined, web-based systemdescribed in this IFR, the FAA willincur costs to develop, implement, andmaintain the system. Small UASoperators will require time to registerand mark their aircraft, and that timehas a cost. The total of government andregistrant resource cost for smallunmanned aircraft registration andmarking under this new system is 556million ($46 million present value at 7percent) through 2020.

In evaluating the impact of this rule,we compare the costs and benefits of theIFR to a baseline consistent withexisting practices: for modelers, theexercise of discretion by FAA (notrequiring registration), and for non-

modelers, registration via part 47 in thepaper-based system. We also calculatethe costs of the rejected alternative:requiring modelers and non-modelersalike to register aircraft via the paper-based system.

In order to compare the costs of thisrule to this baseline, the FAA estimatedthe costs of registering sUAS aircraftunder the web-based registration systemresulting from this part 48 rulemaking(the IFR). The two populations,modelers and non-modelers, haveslightly different processes as noted inthis evaluation. In all of these scenarios,sUAS weighing 0.55 pounds or less areexcluded from registration. In theseanalyses, we estimate the private-sectorcompliance costs and government costsfor each scenario.

TABLE 5—SUMMARY OF QUANTIFIED COSTS AND BENEFITS ($M)

Total costYear Calendar year Difference 7% P.V.

Baseline FR

2015

$ 0.0 $ 5.5 —$ 5.5 —$ 5.471 2016 21.3 6.3 15.0 14.00

2017

86.5 8.3 78.1 68.25

2018

89.0 12.1 76.9 62.77

2019

91.6 11.6 80.0 61.03

2020

94.2 11.8 82.5 58.79

Total 382.5 55.6 327.0 259.4

Note: numbers may not add due to rounding.

Who is potentially affected by this rule?

All owners of small unmannedaircraft which weigh more than 0.55pounds and less than 55 pounds ontakeoff.

Assumptions and Data

The benefit and cost analysis for theregulatory evaluation is based on thefollowing factors/assumptions.Technology, markets, and uses for smallunmanned aircraft are evolving rapidlyand there is a high degree of uncertaintyhow the future will unfold and so theFAA requests comments (supportedwith data) on these assumptions.

• The period of the regulatory impactanalysis begins in 2015 (denoted Year 0)and ends in 2020 (denoted Year 5).

• This analysis considers the benefitsand costs of requiring the registrationsof sUAS weighing less than 55 poundsand more than 0.55 pounds on takeoff.

We use a seven percent discount rate forthe benefits as prescribed by 0MB inCircular A—4.

Population and Forecast

• Most of these assumptions, unlessotherwise noted, were based on

interviews with manufacturers, retailers,and other industry experts.

• Estimates of small unmannedaircraft registrations are based onprojections of sUAS sales for the periodof analysis. A sales forecast wasdeveloped based on use cases and likelyadoption rates by commercialapplication and consumer electronic scurve analysis for non-commercialapplications. This forecast was thenadjusted to obtain the number ofmodelers and the number of non-modeler sUAS units.

• Two basic populations areestimated: (1) Model aircraft owners andtheir sUAS units and (2) the number ofcommercial/public owners and theirsUAS units. In this document, the term“modeler” means the owner of a smallunmanned aircraft that satisfies thestatutory definition of “model aircraft”now codified in 14 CFR 1.1. The term“commercial owner” or “non-modeler”means the owner of a small unmannedaircraft used for non-model aircraftpurposes.

• For non-modelers, we assume thaton average, all sUAS fail within a yearand are replaced in the next year. Formodelers we use the assumption that an

average of ten percent of the modelers’sUAS survive into a second year,because they are used less intensively.These assumptions are based onmanufacturers’ information.

• Unmanned aircraft weighing 0.55pounds or less are excluded from theregistrations forecast. We assume 20percent of the sales forecast will beunmanned aircraft weighing 0.55pounds or less. This analysis is based onan examination of the current unit sizedistribution. While there may be someincentive for manufacturers to increasethe number of aircraft produced belowthe registration size cut-off, the FAAbelieves the inherent limitations of theweight and available technology willnot drive large shifts during analysisperiod. SUAS flown exclusively indoorsneed not be registered. FAA assumesmost sUAS over 0.55 pounds will beflown outdoors and must be registered.

• The entire existing fleet of modelaircraft and 2015 fourth quarter sales areassumed to be registered in Period 0 or2015.

• Most non-modelers will registertheir aircraft after the FAA has finalizedthe sUAS Operation and Certification

0

2345



NPRM, anticipated to go into effect inJune 2016.

• On average, model aircraft ownersare assumed to own an average fleet sizeof 1.5 sUAS.

• 80 percent of model aircraft ownersreplace each aircraft as it is destroyed.(In other words, 20 percent of modelersdrop out of the hobby each year).

• On average, non-model sUASowners are assumed to own 2 aircraft ata time. Every year all of the non-modelsUAS owners go through the registrationsystem replacing their two aircraft.

Time

• The estimated time to register anaircraft via the part 47 (paper-basedsystem) system is 30 minutes.48

• The estimated time for a modelaircraft owner to establish an onlineaccount and register an aircraft, underthis rulemaking, is estimated to take 5

minutes; a registration renewal for theseowners is also estimated to take 5minutes. The bulk of this time includesreading and acknowledging basic safetyinformation presented during theregistration process.

• The estimated time for a non-modeler registrant to establish an onlineaccount and register two smallunmanned aircraft is 7 minutes; 5minutes to establish an account plus 1

minute per small unmanned aircraft.• The estimated time for a non-

modeler registrant to de-register eachaircraft is three minutes.

• The time for an owner to mark anaircraft with its registration number isde minimis.

• The analysis assumes that all sUASowners will comply with theregistration processes considered in theregulatory analysis (part 47 baselinesystem and the web-based systemsresulting from this part 48 rulemaking).

Costs

• The FAA assigns an hourly value of$19.13 per hour for the value of time formodel aircraft registrants and $24.89 perhour for the value of time for non-

modeler registrants in 2015. Thesehourly values are in 2013 dollarsadjusted to reflect the growth of realchanges in median household incomeover the analysis interval.

• FAA estimates that its costs are $22for the registration of an aircraft in thecurrent paper-based system. Thisestimate is based on an internal costmodel developed by FAA’s CivilAviation Registry for managerialpurposes.

• FAA cost information for thestreamlined, web-based registrationswas developed based on cost modelsand FAA data. Costs for the web-basedsystem include startup costs, costs toprovide interfaces for retailers andmanufacturers, the cost of providing forpublic search function based on theunique identifier, the cost of providingfor law enforcement access, andmaintenance costs, whether incurred byFAA personnel or FAA’s contractors.We do not include costs formanufacturers or retailers to provideinformation to the registration system orto change packaging as those arevoluntary actions. FAA expects thatretailers will make point-of-saleinterfaces available in the future.

• As is standard practice, FAA doesnot include costs of enforcement of thisrule.

Safety

• We assume this regulation does notaffect the levels of FAA manpower orresources expended on UAS safetyeducation and outreach but it will allowthe FAA to target those efforts, makingthose on-going efforts more effective.

• We do not attempt to quantify anysafety benefit from this regulation. (See“Qualitative Benefits” section in theRegulatory Evaluation for furtherdiscussion).

Fees

• The fee to register an aircraft underpart 48, as well as in the current paper-based system in part 47, is $5. This feeis required by statute and is based on an

estimate of the costs of the system andservices associated with aircraftregistration. If actual costs for the web-based system are known before a finalrule is issued, we will adjust the feeaccordingly in the final rule. If not, wewill continue to monitor and determinethe actual costs and adjust the fee in asubsequent rulemaking. FAA notes thatunder part 47, the registration fee usingthe paper-based system is $5 peraircraft. FAA has begun a rulemaking toupdate this fee based on current costs.(Aircraft Registration and AirmenCertification Fees, RIN 2120—AK3 7).

We have estimated the registrationfee for the new web-based system to be$5, based on the projected costs to buildand maintain the system and providethe registration service. Model aircraftowners will pay $5 to register and willbe assigned a unique identifier that canbe marked on the owner’s entire fleet ofmodel aircraft. Model aircraft ownerswill be required to renew theirregistration every 3 years and pay a $5

fee. There would be no charge for deregistration. Fees will be adjusted basedon actual costs.

• Non-modeler aircraft owners willalso pay a $5 fee to establish an onlineaccount and register an initial aircraft inthe new web-based system. They willalso pay a $5 fee to add each additionalsUAS to their existing account, Aircraftmust be re-registered after three years,but as noted above, FAA expects veryfew, if any, sUAS to last that long. Non-modeler aircraft owners will not pay afee to de-register a sUAS.

• Government fees and taxes areconsidered transfers and, by Office ofManagement and Budget guidance,transfers are not considered a societalcost. These transfers are estimatedseparately from the costs and benefits ofthis IFR. The FAA acknowledges feesand transfers can create incentives forbehavior change.

Costs of This Rule

TABLE 6—COST SUMMARY

48See Supporting Statement, 0MB 2120—0042Aircraft Registration Including Assignment andcancellation of U.S. Identification Marks

49 hourly opportunity cost for modelers isbased on the mid-point estimate of the range values

as specified in Section 1.2.3 of FAA’s Treatment ofTime: Economic Values for Evaluation of FAAInvestment and Regulatory Decisions (http://www.foo.gov/regulotions_policies/policy_guidorzce/benefit_cost!). The hourly opportunity cost for non-modelers is estimated as the median gross

compensation which is the sum of median hourlywage and an estimate of hourly benefits. Thisestimate is reported in DOT guidance titled RevisedDepartmental Guidance on Valuation of TravelTime in Economic Analysis (Washington DC. 2015).

[$Mj

Total cost Total costs 7% P.V.CalendarYear year Baseline Interim final Rejected Baseline

I Interim final I Rejectedrule alternative rule alternative

0 2015 $ 0.0 $ 5.5 $ 44.2 $ 0.0 $ 5.5 $ 44.2

1 2016 21.3 6.3 65.1 19.9 5.9 60.9



TABLE 6—COST SUMMARY—Continued

[$M]

Total cost Total costs 7% P.V.Calendarear year Baseline Interim final Rejected Baseline Interim final Rejected

rule alternative rule alternative

2 2017 86.5 8.3 140.6 75.5 7.3 122.83 2018 89.0 12.1 155.7 72.6 9.9 127.14 2019 91.6 11.6 173.9 69.9 8.8 132.75 2020 94.2 11.8 195.9 67.2 8.4 139.6

Total 382.5 55.6 775.4 305.1 45.7 627.3

Totals may not add due to rounding.

Benefits of This Rule with modelers and non-modelers shows the total costs to FAA andreoisterina aircraft in the streamlined reGistrants (modelers and non-modelers)

In this section, we discuss beneficial Wb-baseI system. of the new web-based system. Table 7impacts to the non-modeler from the The baseline column in Table 7 shows shows the significant cost savings ofcost savings of this rule over registering the total costs for non-modelers to subtracting the costs of registrationsUAS aircraft using the baseline system. register their aircraft using the paper- between the baseline system from theThe cost savings offsets, by an order of based system, while modelers do not registration costs imposed by thismagnitude, the new costs associated register their aircraft. The IFR column rulemaking.

TABLE 7—COST SAVINGS OF THE BASELINE VERSUS THE PART 48 RuLEMAKING

[$M]

Total CostYear Calendar year Difference 7% P.V.

Baseline IFR

0 2015 $ 0.0 $ 5.5 —$ 5.5 —$ 5.51 2016 21.3 6.3 15.0 14.02 2017 86.5 8.3 78.1 68.33 2018 89.0 12.1 77.9 62.84 2019 91.6 11.6 80.0 61.05 2020 94.2 11.8 82.5 58.8

Total 382.5 55.6 327.0 259.4

Note: numbers may not add due to rounding.

This IFR also brings qualitativebenefits. Registrants will be required toread and acknowledge some basic safetyinformation during the registrationprocess. The email and mailingaddresses provided during theregistration process provides furtheropportunity for future targeted safetyeducation and information.

This rulemaking will improve theeducation of recreational sUAS ownersand operators by making them aware ofthe regulatory and safety requirementsaffecting their activities. At the sametime, it will provide essentialeducational tools to the legions of newand current flyers that are taking to theskies, so that they can use theirunmanned aircraft safely.

The requirement to mark the aircraftwith the registration number links theowner to the aircraft; providingaccountability should an accident,incident, or regulatory violation occur.This IFR also has the potential to benefitsUAS owners. In the event of a mistake

where the aircraft flies away from theowner, the registration markingprovides a means for the aircraft to bereturned to its owner.

Requiring aircraft registration anddisplay of marking information oftenhas a direct and immediate impact onsafety-related issues. For example,aircraft registration and markingprovides the FAA and law enforcementagencies an invaluable tool duringinspections and investigations ofinappropriate or prohibited behavior, aswell as during emergency situations.One of the FAA’s goals is to provide theFAA and local law enforcementagencies the immediate ability toquickly connect individuals to theiraircraft with the fewest number of stepspossible.

B. Regulatozy Flexibility Determination

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980(Public Law 96—3 54) (RFA) establishes“as a principle of regulatory issuancethat agencies shall endeavor, consistentwith the objectives of the rule and of

applicable statutes, to fit regulatory andinformational requirements to the scaleof the businesses, organizations, andgovernmental jurisdictions subject toregulation. To achieve this principle,agencies are required to solicit andconsider flexible regulatory proposalsand to explain the rationale for theiractions to assure that such proposals aregiven serious consideration.” The RFAcovers a wide-range of small entities,including small businesses, not-for-profit organizations, and smallgovernmental jurisdictions.

The Regulatory Flexibility Actanalysis requirements are limited torulemakings for which the agency “isrequired by section 553 . . . or anyother law, to publish a general notice ofproposed rulemaking for any proposedrule.” 5 U.S.C. 603(a).In this instance,the agency has determined undersection 553(b)(3)(B) of the APA thatthere is good cause for forgoing noticeand comment for this rulemaking. Thus,


Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 241 / Wednesday, December 16, 2015 I Rules and Regulations 78643

compliance with the RFA is notrequired in this instance.

Nonetheless, the FAA believes thatthis IFR will have a positive economicimpact on a substantial number ofentities for the following reasons.Individuals using small unmannedaircraft exclusively as model aircraft arenot small business entities. For ownersof aircraft used for commercial or non-model purposes, the $5 registration feeper small unmanned aircraft under thisIFR is the same as what was proposedunder the sUAS Operation andCertification NPRM. However this IFRreduces the burden for these smallentities to register their small unmannedaircraft as compared to the currentpaper-based FAA registration system.Thus, due to the relieving nature of thisIFR, there will be a positive economicimpact on a substantial number of smallentities.

C. International Trade ImpactAssessment

The Trade Agreements Act of 1979(Public Law 96—3 9), as amended by theUruguay Round Agreements Act (PublicLaw 103—465), prohibits Federalagencies from establishing standards orengaging in related activities that createunnecessary obstacles to the foreigncommerce of the United States.Pursuant to these Acts, theestablishment of standards is notconsidered an unnecessary obstacle tothe foreign commerce of the UnitedStates, so long as the standard has alegitimate domestic objective, such asthe protection of safety, and does notoperate in a manner that excludesimports that meet this objective. Thestatute also requires consideration ofinternational standards and, whereappropriate, that they be the basis forU.S. standards. The FAA has assessedthe potential effect of this IFR anddetermined that it has a legitimate

domestic objective—the protection ofsafety—and does not operate in amanner that excludes imports that meetthis objective. Further, it is not anunnecessary obstacle because currently,there is no foreign registry that the FAAcan recognize and the otherrequirements (compliance withprovisions of part 48) impose no greaterburden than that which is imposed onU.S. citizens.

D. Unfunded ivlan dates Assessment

Title II of the Unfunded MandatesReform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104—4)requires each Federal agency to preparea written statement assessing the effectsof any Federal mandate in a proposed orfinal agency rule that may result in anexpenditure of $100 million or more (in1995 dollars) in any one year by State,local, and tribal governments, in theaggregate, or by the private sector; sucha mandate is deemed to be a “significantregulatory action.” The FAA currentlyuses an inflation-adjusted value of$155.0 million in lieu of $100 million.This IFR does not contain such amandate; therefore, the requirements ofTitle II of the Act do not apply.

E. Paperwork Reduction Act

The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995(44 U.S.C. 3507(d)) requires that theFAA consider the impact of paperworkand other information collectionburdens imposed on the public.According to the 1995 amendments tothe Paperwork Reduction Act (5 CFR1320.8(b)(2)(vi)), an agency may notcollect or sponsor the collection ofinformation, nor may it impose aninformation collection requirementunless it displays a currently validOffice of Management and Budget(0MB) control number.

This action contains the followingnew information collection. As requiredby the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995(44 U.S.C. 3507(d)), the FAA has

submitted this information collection to0MB for its review.

Summary: Persons owning smallunmanned aircraft, whether intended tobe used as model aircraft or as otherthan model aircraft, are required toregister those aircraft with the FAApursuant to 49 U.S.C. 44101—44103.Persons may register small unmannedaircraft pursuant to the requirements of14 CFR part 48 as an alternative to theregistration requirements of 14 CFR part47. Aircraft registration is necessary toensure personal accountability amongall users of the national airspace system.Aircraft registration also allows the FAAand law enforcement agencies toaddress non-compliance by providingthe means by which to identify anaircraft’s owner and operator.

Use: Information will be used toidentify small unmanned aircraftowners and to provide educationalinformation regarding use of smallunmanned aircraft in the nationalairspace system.

Respondents (including number of):See Table 8.

Frequency: As needed. Persons willregister small unmanned aircraft prior tooperation and, if they continue to ownthe aircraft, will renew registrationevery three years thereafter.

Annual Burden Estimate: For themodelers and non-modelers, thefollowing table shows the total numberof modelers, their time, and their coststo fill out the on-line system and registerplus the time to re-register and for thenon-modelers, the number of totalrespondents (small unmanned aircraft),their time to fill out the online systemand register, the time to register each oftheir small unmanned aircraft, and theirtime de-register their aircraft after theyretire their aircraft. There are no costsassociated with this informationcollection aside from the time spent tocomplete registration.

TABLE 8—AvERAGE ANNUAL BURDEN ESTIMATES[Years 0—5 (6 Years)]

Category responses Frequency

ModelerOwner Registration 0.57 5 1 time 47.8Owner Re-Registration 0.16 5 Every 3 years 12.9

Non-ModelerSmall Unmanned Aircraft Registration 1.82 3.5 1 Time 121.9Small Unmanned Aircraft De-Registration 1.66 3 1 Time 69.0

Rows may not sum due to rounding.

The agency is soliciting commentsto—

(1) Evaluate whether the proposed of the agency, including whether theinformation requirement is necessary for information will have practical utility;the proper performance of the functions



(2) Evaluate the accuracy of theagency’s estimate of the burden;

(3) Enhance the quality, utility, andclarity of the information to becollected; and

(4) Minimize the burden of collectinginformation on those who are torespond, including by using appropriateautomated, electronic, mechanical, orother technological collectiontechniques or other forms of informationtechnology.

Individuals and organizations maysend comments on the informationcollection requirement to the addresslisted in the ADDRESSES section at thebeginning of this preamble by January15, 2016. Comments also should besubmitted to the Office of Managementand Budget, Office of Information andRegulatory Affairs, Attention: DeskOfficer for FAA, New Executive OfficeBuilding, Room 10202, 725 17th StreetNW., Washington, DC 20503.

F. International Compatibility andCooperation

In keeping with U.S. obligationsunder the Convention on InternationalCivil Aviation, it is FAA policy toconform to International Civil AviationOrganization (ICAO) Standards andRecommended Practices to themaximum extent practicable. In theinstance of this rulemaking, the FAAdoes not intend to comply withinternational standards. The registrationand marking requirements in this IFRapply only to operations within theUnited States. The agency will filedifferences as is appropriate.

G. Environmental Analysis

FAA Order 1050.1F identifies FAAactions that are categorically excludedfrom preparation of an environmentalassessment or environmental impactstatement under the NationalEnvironmental Policy Act in theabsence of extraordinary circumstances.The FAA has determined thisrulemaking action qualifies for thecategorical exclusion identified inparagraph 5—6.6f and involves noextraordinary circumstances.

X. Executive Order Determinations

A. Executive Order 13132, Federalism

The FAA has analyzed thisimmediately adopted final rule underthe principles and criteria of ExecutiveOrder 13132, Federalism. The agencydetermined that this action will nothave a substantial direct effect on theStates, or the relationship between theFederal Government and the States, oron the distribution of power andresponsibilities among the various

levels of government, and, therefore,does not have Federalism implications.

B. Executive Order 13211, RegulationsThat Significantly Affect Energy Supply,Distribution, or Use

The FAA analyzed this immediatelyadopted final rule under ExecutiveOrder 13211, Actions ConcerningRegulations that Significantly AffectEnergy Supply, Distribution, or Use(May 18, 2001). The agency hasdetermined that it is not a “significantenergy action” under the executiveorder and it is not likely to have asignificant adverse effect on the supply,distribution, or use of energy.

C. Executive Order 13609, PromotingInternational Regulatory Cooperation

Executive Order 13609, PromotingInternational Regulatory Cooperation,(77 FR 26413, May 4, 2012) promotesinternational regulatory cooperation tomeet shared challenges involvinghealth, safety, labor, security,environmental, and other issues andreduce, eliminate, or preventunnecessary differences in regulatoryrequirements. The FAA has analyzedthis action under the policy and agencyresponsibilities of Executive Order13609, Promoting InternationalRegulatory Cooperation. The FAA hasanalyzed this action under the policiesand agency responsibilities of ExecutiveOrder 13609, and has determined thatthis action would have no effect oninternational regulatory cooperation.

XI. How To Obtain AdditionalInformation

A. Rulemaking Documents

An electronic copy of a rulemakingdocument may be obtained via theInternet by—Searching the Federal eRulemaking

Portal (http://www.regulations.gov);Visiting the FAA’s Regulations and

Policies Web page at http://urww.faa.gov/regulations_policies/ or

Access the Government PublishingOffice’s Web page at: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/.Copies may also be obtained by

sending a request (identified by notice,amendment, or docket number of thisrulemaking) to the Federal AviationAdministration, Office of Rulemaking,ARM—i, 800 Independence AvenueSW., Washington, DC 20591, or bycalling (202) 267—9677.

B. Comments Submitted to the Docket

Comments received may be viewed bygoing to http://wwriv.regulations.gov andfollowing the online instructions tosearch the docket number for this

action. Anyone is able to search theelectronic form of all commentsreceived into any of the FAA’s docketsby the name of the individualsubmitting the comment (or signing thecomment, if submitted on behalf of anassociation, business, labor union, etc.).

C. Small Business RegulatoryEnforcement Fairness Act

The Small Business RegulatoryEnforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of1996 requires FAA to comply withsmall entity requests for information oradvice about compliance with statutesand regulations within its jurisdiction.A small entity with questions regardingthis document, may contact its localFAA official, or the person listed underthe FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

heading at the beginning of thepreamble. To find out more aboutSBREFA on the Internet, visit http://www.faa .gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/sbre_act/.

List of Subjects

14 CFR Part I

Air transportation.

14 CFR Part 45

Aircraft, Signs and symbols.

14 CFR Part 47

Aircraft, Reporting and recordkeepingrequirements.

14 CFR Part 48

Aircraft, Reporting and recordkeepingrequirements, Signs and symbols, Smallunmanned aircraft, Unmanned aircraft.

14 CFR Part 91

Air traffic control, Aircraft, Airmen,Airports, Aviation safety, Reporting andrecordkeeping requirements.

14 CFR Part 375

Administrative practice andprocedure, Aircraft, Foreign relations,Reporting and recordkeepingrequirements.

The Amendment

In consideration of the foregoing, theFederal Aviation Administrationamends Chapter I of Title 14, Code ofFederal Regulations, as follows:

PART 1—DEFINITIONS ANDABBREVIATIONS

• 1. The authority citation for part 1 isrevised to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 401i3,44701.

• 2. In § 1.1, add the definitions of“Model aircraft”, “Small unmannedaircraft”, “Small unmanned aircraft



system”, and “Unmanned aircraft” inalphabetical order to read as follows:

§1.1 General definitions.* * *

Mode] aircraft means an unmannedaircraft that is:

(1) Capable of sustained flight in theatmosphere;

(2) Flown within visual line of sightof the person operating the aircraft; and

(3) Flown for hobby or recreationalpurposes.* * * * *

Sma]] unmanned aircroft means anunmanned aircraft weighing less than55 pounds on takeoff, includingeverything that is on board or otherwiseattached to the aircraft.

Sma]] unmonned aircraft system(sma]] U/iS) means a small unmannedaircraft and its associated elements(including communication links and thecomponents that control the smallunmanned aircraft) that are required forthe safe and efficient operation of thesmall unmanned aircraft in the nationalairspace system.* * * * *

Unmanned aircraft means an aircraftoperated without the possibility ofdirect human intervention from withinor on the aircraft.* * * * *

PART 45—IDENTIFICATION ANDREGISTRATION MARKING


Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40103,40113—40114, 44101—44105, 44107—44111,44504, 44701, 44708—44709, 44711—44713,44725, 45302—45303, 46104, 46304, 46306,47122.

• 4. In § 45.1, revise paragraph (b) toread as follows:

§45.1 Applicability.* * * * *

(b) Nationality and registrationmarking of aircraft registered in theUnited States in accordance with part47.

PART 47—AIRCRAFT REGISTRATION


Authority: 4 U.S.T. 1830; Public Law 108—297, 118 Stat. 1095 (49 U.S.C. 40101 note, 49u.s.c. 44101 note); 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g),40113—40114, 44101—44108, 44110—44113,44703—44704, 44713, 45302, 45305, 46104,46301.

• 6. Revise § 47.2 to read as follows:

§47.2 Definitions.The following are definitions of terms

used in this part:

Citizen of the United States or U.S.citizen means one of the following:

(1) An individual who is a citizen ofthe United States or one of itspossessions.

(2) A partnership each of whosepartners is an individual who is acitizen of the United States.

(3) A corporation or associationorganized under the laws of the UnitedStates or a State, the District ofColumbia, or a territory or possession ofthe United States, of which thepresident and at least two-thirds of theboard of directors and other managingofficers are citizens of the United States,which is under the actual control ofcitizens of the United States, and inwhich at least 75 percent of the votinginterest is owned or controlled bypersons that are citizens of the UnitedStates.

Registry means the FAA, CivilAviation Registry, Aircraft RegistrationBranch.

Resident a]ien means an individualcitizen of a foreign country lawfullyadmitted for permanent residence in theUnited States as an immigrant inconformity with the regulations of theDepartment of Homeland Security (8CFR Chapter 1).

K 7. In § 47.3, revise paragraph (b)(3) toread as follows:

§47.3 Registration required.* * * * *

(b) * * *

(3) Is an aircraft of the Armed Farcesof the United States.* * * * *

• 8. In § 47.7, Revise paragraph (b) toread as follows:

§47.7 United States citizens and residentaliens.* * * * *

(b) Resident a]iens. An applicant foraircraft registration under 49 U.S.C.44102 who is a resident alien mustfurnish a representation of permanentresidence and the applicant’s alienregistration number issued by theDepartment of Homeland Security.

• 9. Add part 48 to read as follows:

48.25 Applicants.48.30 Fees.

Subpart 8—Certificates of AircraftRegistration for Small Unmanned Aircraft

48.100 Application.48.105 Requirement to maintain current

information.48.110 Registration: Persons intending to

use small unmanned aircraft forpurposes other than as model aircraft.

48.115 Registration: Individuals intendingto use the small unmanned aircraftexclusively as a model aircraft.

48.120 Invalid registration.48.125 Foreign civil aircraft.

Subpart C—Aircraft Marking

48.200 General.48.205 Display and location of unique

identifier.

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40101,40103, 40113—40114, 41703, 44101—44103,44105—44106, 44110—44113, 45302, 45305,46104, 46301, 46306.

Subpart A—General

§48.1 Applicability.(a) This part provides registration and

identification requirements for smallunmanned aircraft that are part of asmall unmanned aircraft system asdefined in § 1.1 of this chapter.

(b) Small unmanned aircraft eligiblefor registration in the United Statesmust be registered and identified inaccordance with either:

(1) The registration and identificationrequirements in this part; or

(2) The registration requirements inpart 47 and the identification andregistration marking requirements insubparts A and C of part 45.

(c) Small unmanned aircraft intendedto be operated outside of the territorialairspace of the United States, orregistered through a trust or voting trust,must be registered in accordance withsubparts A and B of part 47 and satisfythe identification and registrationmarking requirements of subparts A andC of part 45.

§ 48.5 Compliance dates.(a) Sma]] unmanned aircraft used

exc]usive]y as mode] aircraft. For smallunmanned aircraft operated by thecurrent owner prior to December 21,2015, compliance with the requirementsof this part or part 47 is required nolater than February 19, 2016. For allother small unmanned aircraft,compliance with this part is requiredprior to operation of the smallunmanned aircraft.

(b) Sma]] unmanned aircraft used asother than mode] aircraft. Smallunmanned aircraft owners authorized toconduct operations other than modelaircraft operations must register thesmall unmanned aircraft in accordance

PART 48—REGISTRATION ANDMARKING REQUIREMENTS FORSMALL UNMANNED AIRCRAFT

Subpart A—General

Sec.48.148.548.1048.1548.20

Applicability.Compliance dates.

Definitions.Requirement to register.Eligibility for registration.



with part 47 of this chapter. BeginningMarch 31, 2016, small unmannedaircraft operated as other than modelaircraft may complete aircraftregistration in accordance with this part.

§ 48.10 Definitions.

For purposes of this part, thefollowing definitions apply:

Citizen of the United States or U.S.citizen means one of the following:

(1) An individual who is a citizen ofthe United States or one of itspossessions.

(2) A partnership each of whosepartners is an individual who is acitizen of the United States.

(3) A corporation or associationorganized under the laws of the UnitedStates or a State, the District ofColumbia, or a territory or possession ofthe United States, of which thepresident and at least two-thirds of theboard of directors and other managingofficers are citizens of the United States,which is under the actual control ofcitizens of the United States, and inwhich at least 75 percent of the votinginterest is owned or controlled bypersons that are citizens of the UnitedStates.

Registiy means the FAA, CivilAviation Registry, Aircraft RegistrationBranch.

Resident alien means an individualcitizen of a foreign country lawfullyadmitted for permanent residence in theUnited States as an immigrant inconformity with the regulations of theDepartment of Homeland Security (8CFR Chapter 1).

§48.15 Requirement to register.

No person may operate a smallunmanned aircraft that is eligible forregistration under 49 U.S.C. 44101—44103 unless one of the followingcriteria has been satisfied:

(a) The owner has registered andmarked the aircraft in accordance withthis part;

(b) The aircraft weighs 0.55 pounds orless on takeoff, including everythingthat is on board or otherwise attached tothe aircraft; or

(c) The aircraft is an aircraft of theArmed Forces of the United States.

§ 48.20 Eligibility for registration.

A small unmanned aircraft may beregistered under 49 U.S.C. 44103 andunder this part only when the aircraft isnot registered under the laws of aforeign country and is—

(a) Owned by a U.S. citizen;(b) Owned by an individual citizen of

a foreign country lawfully admitted forpermanent residence in the UnitedStates;

(c) Owned by a corporation not acitizen of the United States when thecorporation is organized and doingbusiness under the laws of the UnitedStates or a State within the UnitedStates, and the aircraft is based andprimarily used in the United States; or

(d) An aircraft of—(1) The United States Government; or(2) A State, the District of Columbia,

a territory or possession of the UnitedStates, or a political subdivision of aState, territory, or possession.

§ 48.25 Applicants.(a) To register a small unmanned

aircraft in the United States under thispart, a person must provide theinformation required by § 48.100 to theRegistry in the form and mannerprescribed by the Administrator. Uponsubmission of this information, the FAAissues a Certificate of AircraftRegistration to that person.

(b) A small unmanned aircraft mustbe registered by its owner using thelegal name of its owner, unless theowner is less than 13 years of age. If theowner is less than 13 years of age, thenthe small unmanned aircraft must beregistered by a person who is at least 13years of age.

(c) In accordance with 49 U.S.C.44103(c), registration is not evidence ofaircraft ownership in any proceeding inwhich ownership of an unmannedaircraft by a particular person is inissue.

(d) In this part, “owner” includes abuyer in possession, a bailee, a lessee ofa small unmanned aircraft under acontract of conditional sale, and theassignee of that person.

§48.30 Fees.

(a) The fee for issuing or renewing aCertificate of Aircraft Registration foraircraft registered in accordance with§48.100(a) is $5.00 per aircraft.

(b) The fee for issuing or renewing aCertificate of Aircraft Registration foraircraft registered in accordance with§48.100(b) is $5.00 per certificate.

(c) Each application for and renewalof a Certificate of Aircraft Registrationmust be accompanied by the feedescribed in paragraphs (a) and (b), asapplicable, paid to the Federal AviationAdministration through the web-basedaircraft registration system, or inanother manner if prescribed by theAdministrator.

Subpart B—Certificates of AircraftRegistration for Small UnmannedAircraft

§48.100 Application.

(a) Required information: Personsintending to use the small unmanned

aircraft as other than a model aircraft.Each applicant for a Certificate ofAircraft Registration issued under thispart must submit all of the followinginformation to the Registry:

(1) Applicant name and, for anapplicant other than an individual, thename of the authorized representativeapplying for a Certificate of AircraftRegistration.

(2) Applicant’s physical address and,for an applicant other than anindividual, the physical address for theauthorized representative. If theapplicant or authorized representativedoes not receive mail at their physicaladdress, a mailing address must also beprovided.

(3) Applicant’s email address or, forapplicants other than individuals, theemail address of the authorizedrepresentative.

(4) The aircraft manufacturer andmodel name.

(5) The aircraft serial number, ifavailable.

(6) Other information as required bythe Administrator.

(b) Required information: Individualsintending to use the small unmannedaircraft exclusively as a model aircraft.Each applicant for a Certificate ofAircraft Registration issued under thispart must submit all of the followinginformation to the Registry:

(1) Applicant name.(2) Applicant’s physical address and

if the applicant does not receive mail attheir physical address, a mailingaddress must also be provided.

(3) Applicant’s email address.(4) Other information as required by

the Administrator.(c) Provision of information. The

information identified in paragraphs (a)and (b) of this section must besubmitted to the Registry through theWeb-based small unmanned aircraftregistration system in a form andmanner prescribed by theAdministrator.

(d) Issuance of Certificate of Aircraftregistration. The FAA will issue aCertificate of Aircraft Registration uponcompletion of the applicationrequirements provided in paragraph (a)or (b) of this section as applicable.

§48.105 Requirement to maintain currentinformation.

(a) The holder of a Certificate ofAircraft Registration must ensure thatthe information provided under §48.100remains accurate.

(b) The holder of a Certificate ofAircraft Registration must update theinformation using the web-based smallunmanned aircraft registration systemwithin 14 calendar days of thefollowing:



(1) A change in the informationprovided under § 48.100.

(2) When aircraft registration requirescancellation for any reason includingsale or transfer, destruction, or export.

§ 48.110 Registration: Persons intendingto use small unmanned aircraft forpurposes other than as model aircraft.

(a) Certificate of Aircraft Registration.A Certificate of Aircraft Registrationissued in accordance with § 48.100 foraircraft used for purposes other than asmodel aircraft constitutes registrationonly for the small unmanned aircraftidentified on the application.

(b) Effective date of registration. Anaircraft is registered when the applicantreceives a Certificate of AircraftRegistration for the specific aircraft. Theeffective date of registration is shown bythe date of issue on the Certificate ofAircraft Registration issued for theaircraft.

(c) Registration renewal. A Certificateof Aircraft registration issued under thispart expires 3 years after the date ofissue unless it is renewed.

(1) The holder of a Certificate ofAircraft Registration must renew theCertificate by verifying, in a form andmanner prescribed by theAdministrator, that the informationprovided in accordance with § 48.100 ofthis subpart is accurate and if it is not,provide updated information. Theverification may take place at any timewithin the six months preceding themonth in which the Certificate ofAircraft registration expires.

(2) A certificate issued under thisparagraph expires three years from theexpiration date of the previouscertificate.

(d) Other events affectingeffectiveness of Certificate. EachCertificate of Aircraft Registrationissued by the FAA under this subpart iseffective, unless registration has endedby reason of having been revoked,canceled, expired, or the ownership istransferred, until the date upon whichone of the following events occurs:

(1) Subject to the Convention on theInternational Recognition of Rights inAircraft when applicable, the aircraft isregistered under the laws of a foreigncountry.

(2) The small unmanned aircraft istotally destroyed or scrapped.

(3) The holder of the Certificate ofAircraft Registration loses U.S.citizenship.

(4) Thirty days have elapsed since thedeath of the holder of the Certificate ofAircraft Registration.

(5) The owner, if an individual whois not a citizen of the United States,loses status as a resident alien, unless

that person becomes a citizen of theUnited States at the same time.

(6) The owner is a corporation otherthan a corporation which is a citizen ofthe United States and one of thefollowing events occurs:

(i) The corporation ceases to belawfully organized and doing businessunder the laws of the United States orany State thereof; or

(ii) The aircraft was not operatedexclusively within the United Statesduring the period of registration underthis part.

§48.115 Registration: Individualsintending to use small unmanned aircraftexclusively as a model aircraft.

(a) Certificate of Aircraft Registration:A Certificate of Aircraft Registrationissued in accordance with §48.100 forsmall unmanned aircraft usedexclusively as model aircraft constitutesregistration for all small unmannedaircraft used exclusively as modelaircraft owned by the individualidentified on the application.

(b) Effective date of registration. Anaircraft is registered when the applicantreceives a Certificate of AircraftRegistration. The effective date ofregistration is shown by the date ofissue on the Certificate of AircraftRegistration issued under this part.

(c) Registration renewal. A Certificateof Aircraft registration issued under thispart expires 3 years after the date ofissue unless it is renewed.

(1) The holder of a Certificate ofAircraft Registration must renew theCertificate by verifying, in a form andmanner prescribed by theAdministrator, that the informationprovided in accordance with § 48.100(b)and (c) of this part is accurate and if itis not, provide updated information.The verification may take place at anytime within the six months precedingthe month in which the Certificate ofAircraft registration expires.

(2) A certificate issued under thisparagraph expires three years from theexpiration date of the previouscertificate.

(d) Other events affectingeffectiveness of Certificate. EachCertificate of Aircraft Registrationissued by the FAA under this part iseffective, unless registration has endedby reason of having been revoked,canceled or expired, or until the dateupon which one of the following eventsoccurs:

(1) The holder of the Certificate ofAircraft Registration loses U.S.citizenship.

(2) Thirty days have elapsed since thedeath of the holder of the Certificate ofAircraft Registration.

(3) The owner, if an individual whois not a citizen of the United States,loses status as a resident alien, unlessthat person becomes a citizen of theUnited States at the same time.

§48.120 Invalid registration.

The registration of a small unmannedaircraft is invalid if, at the time it ismade—

(a) The aircraft is registered in aforeign country;

(b) The applicant is not the owner,except when the applicant registers onbehalf of an owner who is under 13years of age;

(c) The applicant is not eligible tosubmit an application under this part; or

(d) The interest of the applicant in theaircraft was created by a transaction thatwas not entered into in good faith, butrather was made to avoid (with orwithout the owner’s knowledge)compliance with 49 U.S.C. 44101—44103.

§48.125 Foreign civil aircraft.

Except for corporations eligible toregister under § 48.20(c), the FAA willissue a recognition of ownership topersons required to comply with theprovisions of this part pursuant to anauthorization to operate issued underpart 375 of this title. The recognition ofownership does not have the effect ofU.S. aircraft registration.

Subpart C—Aircraft Marking

§48.200 General.

(a) No person may operate a smallunmanned aircraft registered inaccordance with this part unless theaircraft displays a unique identifier inaccordance with the requirements of§ 48.205 of this subpart.

(b) A unique identifier is one of thefollowing:

(1) The registration number issued toan individual or the registration numberissued to the aircraft by the Registryupon completion of the registrationprocess provided by this part; or

(2) If authorized by the Administratorand provided with the application forCertificate of Aircraft Registration under§48.100 of this part, the smallunmanned aircraft serial number.

§ 48.205 Display and location of uniqueidentifier.

(a) The unique identifier must bemaintained in a condition that is legible.

(b) The unique identifier must beaffixed to the small unmanned aircraftby any means necessary to ensure thatit will remain affixed for the duration ofeach operation.

(c) The unique identifier must bereadily accessible and visible upon



inspection of the small unmannedaircraft. A unique identifier enclosed ina compartment is readily accessible if itcan be accessed without the use of anytool.

PART 91—GENERAL OPERATING ANDFLIGHT RULES

• 10. The authority citation for part 91

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.s.c. 106(f), 106(g), 1155,40101, 40103, 40105, 40113, 40120, 44101,44111, 44701, 44704, 44709, 44711, 44712,44715, 44716, 44717, 44722, 46306, 46315,46316, 46504, 46506—46507, 47122, 47508,47528—47531, 47534, articles 12 and 29 of theconvention on International civil Aviation(61 Stat. 1180), (126 Stat. 11).

• 11. In § 91.203, revise paragraph (a)(2)to read as follows:

§ 91.203 Civil aircraft: Certificationsrequired.

(a) * * *

(2) An effective U.S. registrationcertificate issued to its owner or, foroperation within the United States, thesecond copy of the Aircraft registrationApplication as provided for in

§ 47.31(c), a Certificate of Aircraftregistration as provided in part 48, or aregistration certification issued underthe laws of a foreign country.

PART 375—NAVIGATION OF FOREIGNCIVIL AIRCRAFT WITHIN THE UNITEDSTATES

• 12. The authority citation for part 375continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 40102, 40103, and41703.

• 13. Revise § 375.11 to read as follows:

§375.11 Other Foreign Civil Aircraft.

A foreign civil aircraft, includingunmanned aircraft as defined in § 1.1 ofthis title, other than those referred to in§ 375.10 may be navigated in the UnitedStates only when:

(a) The operation is authorized by theDepartment under the provisions of thispart, and

(h) The aircraft complies with anyapplicable airworthiness standards ofthe Federal Aviation Administration forits operation.

• 14. Add § 375.38 to subpartD to readas follows:

§ 375.38 Other foreign civil aircraft: Smallunmanned aircraft operated exclusively asmodel aircraft.

Foreign civil aircraft that are smallunmanned aircraft used exclusively asmodel aircraft may be operated in theUnited States only when the individual:

(a) Completes the registration processin accordance with § 48.30, 48.100(b)and (c), 48.105, and 48.115 of this title;

(b) Identifies the aircraft inaccordance with the aircraft markingrequirements in § 48.200 and 48.205 ofthis title; and

(c) Complies with the requirements ofSec. 336 of Pub. L. 112—95 (Feb. 14,2012).

Issued under the authority of 49 U.S.C.106(f), 41703, 44101—44103, in Washington,DC on December 14, 2015.

Anthony R. Foxx,Secretary of Transportation.Michael P. Huerta,Administrator.[FR Doc. 2015—31750 Filed 12—15—15; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910—13—P


12/16/2015 Aircraft Registry —Aircraft Registration: Unmanned Aircraft (UA)

Federal Aviation,,..1 Administration

Aircraft RegistryAircraft Registration: Unmanned Aircraft (UA)

Registration is not required for model aircraft operated solely for hobby or recreational purposes. Guidelines forresponsible hobby and recreational operations are available at http://www.faa.gov/uas/model aircraft!(httrx//www.faa.gov/uas/model aircraftñ.

Registration is required for all unmanned aircraft (UA) operated for non-hobby or non-recreational purposes.

Registration is also required for Government UA. All Aircraft owned by agencies, offices or subdivisions(httr://www.faa.gov/uas/rublic oerations/) of: the United States (other than aircraft of the U.S. Armed Forces), the States, theDistrict of Columbia, or a territory or possession of the United States are required to be registered.

UA Registration Assistance

Aircraft Registration requirements and directions are provided in 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 47(http://www.ecfr.Qov/cgi-bin/text-idx7SID=1 0f2c4539074face0af1 6e24e02809f8&node=t1 4.1 .47&rQn=div5htt://www.ecfr,gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?

SD=10f2c4539074face0af16e24e02809f8&node=ot14.1.47&rcin=div5). The basic steps that follow will assist most UA registrationapplicants complete registration requirements.

• To Register a New - Small Unmanned Aircraft (sUAWunder 55 lbs.)• To Register a New - Unmanned Aircraft (UA)• To Register a Used - sUA or UA Aircraft (of any size)• Sample Wording for sUA and UA Notarized Statements• Selling your U.S. registered sUA or UA

To Register a New - Small Unmanned Aircraft (sUA):

An unmanned aircraft is considered a new sUA when it has never been registered anywhere, and its maximum takeoff weightis less than 55 pounds.

To register the owner must provide the following:

1. A completed Aircraft Registration Application, AC Form 8050-1.

o An original Aircraft Registration Application, AC Form 8050-1 must be used. Photocopies or computer generatedcopies of this form will not be accepted. These forms may be obtained from the FAA Aircraft Registration Branch

or anyFlight Standards District Office. (http://www.faa.gov/aboutloffice org/field offices/fsdoI

o When a Limited Liability Corporation (LLC) is an applicant to register a sUA it also must provide information regardingits organization, how management authority is held, and how it meets the definition of a U.S. citizen for aircraftregistration. The Limited Liability Corporation Registration Information Sheet(http:/!www.faa.gov/licenses certificates/aircraft certification/aircraft registry/media/LLCINFO.PDF) (PDF) provides

http://www.faa.gov/licenses_certificates/aircraft_certification/aircratt_registry/UN 1/8


12116/2015 Aircraft Registry —Aircraft Registration: Unmanned Aircraft (UA)

instructions on meeting this requirement.o Form AFS-750-94 (http ://www.faa .ciov/licenses certificates/aircraft certification/aircraft recistry/med ia/AFS-750-

94.pdf) (PDF), Information to Aid in the Registration of U.S. Civil Aircraft, provides helpful information about eligibility,types of registration, the proper form of names, signatures, titles, and addresses plus other related issues.

2. A full description of the UA provided by the manufacturer, builder or applicant in a Notarized statement.sUA Required Description Items

o Full Legal Name of UA Manufacturer or Buildero sUA Model Designationo sUA Serial Numbero Class (Airplane, Airship, Rotorcraft, Gyroplane, Ducted Fan)o sUA Maximum Takeoff Weighto Category (Land, Sea, or Both)o Name of Engine Manufacturero Engine Model Designationo Engine Serial-Numbers (if none shown, enter ‘none’)o Number of Engineso Engine Power Output (given in HP or Lbs. Thrust)o Engine Type (2 or 4 Cycle Reciprocating, Electric,

Turbo - Fan/Prop/Shaft/Jet)

The notarized statement must also state “To the best of the undersigned’s knowledge the information provided above iscorrect, the described UA is not currently registered in another country, and the undersigned is the aircraft’s rightful owner”

3. Evidence of Ownership: An Aircraft Bill of Sale, AC Form 8050-2

(httix/!www.faa .gov/documentLibrary/media/form/ac8050-2. pdf) (PDF) ,or an equal transfer of ownership document isrequired for each change in ownership from the sUA manufacturer or builder through any intervening owner(s) to theowner making application for registration. However, the FAA recognizes that bills of sale may not be available for sUA thathave been in operation since before sUA registration became necessary or for sUA that were purchased as off-the-shelfitems from a retail shop, or internet retailer not associated with the builder or manufacturer.When a bill of sale or other transfer of ownership document is unobtainable, the applicant may provide for consideration anotarized statement that:

o identifies the subject sUA by the builder’s full name, its model designation and serial number,o identifies undocumented transfers to the extent possible by the date they occurred, the purchaser’s name, as well as

the name and location (city, state & country) of the person, company, or vendor that sold the sUA.o explains why any missing transfers of ownership are unavailable.o describes the other evidence provided with the notarized statement like an invoice, sales receipt or witness statement

that proves the transfer of ownership took place. This alternative evidence is especially important when documentingthe transfer of ownership to the applicant.

o certifies, to the best of the applicants knowledge that; the information provided is correct, the described UA is notcurrently registered in another country, and the undersigned is the aircraft’s rightful owner.Sample statements are available for review.

NOTE: Items 2 and 3 may be combined into one notarized affidavit.4. Confirmation the sUA is not registered in another country. When a 5UA is purchased from a manufacturer or seller

located in another country it is considered an import. This requires a statement from the Civil Aviation Authority of theexporting country confirming that the registration of the sUA in that country has been canceled or that the sUA was neverissued registration by that country.

5. An N-number to be assigned to the registered aircraft. If a special N-number

(http i/www.faa .ov/licenses certificates/aircraft certification/aircraft registry/n numbers!) was reserved in advance by thesUA owner for this registration, this number will be assigned if it is entered on the forms in the indicated blanks.

o A special N-number may be reguested (httn://www.faa.nov/Iicenses certificates/aircraft certification/aircraft registry/n numbers/)

when filing the application and other documents for registration. Include a letter that lists several N-number choices,and the $10.00 special number fee. The first listed number verified as available will be assigned to the aircraft.

http://www.taa.gov/Iicenses certificates/aircraft certification/aircraft registry/UN 218



o A random N-number will be assigned at no cost if the indicated blanks on the registration forms are left empty, or arandom number is requested.

6. The $5.00 registration fee by check or money order made payable to the Federal Aviation Administration. This fee iswaived when the applicant is a Federal, State or local government office, agency or institution.

Send your Registration documents to the FAA, Aircraft Registration Branch. Addresses for regular mail and overnightcourier deliveries are available through the Contact the Aircraft Registration Branch

menu item.

Once the sUA is registered, apply for the appropriate operational authority.The following links will take you to information and directions.

Operating for Non-Recreational Purposes (http:/!www.faa.gov/uas/civil_operations!)Aircraft Owned by Government Agencies or Offices (http:!!www.faa.gov/uas!public operations!)

To Register a New - Unmanned Aircraft (UA):A new unmanned aircraft is an UA that has not been registered anywhere and its takeoff weight is over 55 lbs.


1. A completed Aircraft Registration Application, AC Form 8050-1,

o An original Aircraft Registration Application, AC Form 8050-1 must be used. Photocopies or computer generatedcopies of this form will not be accepted. These forms may be obtained from the FAA Aircraft Registration Branch(http://www.faa .gov/licenses certificates/aircraft certification/aircraft registry/contact aircraft certificationh or anyFlight Standards District Office (http://www.faa.gov/about/office org/field offices/fsdo/)

o When a Limited Liability Corporation (LLC) is an applicant to register a UA it also must provide information regardingits organization, how management authority is held, and how it meets the definition of U.S. citizen for aircraftregistration. The Limited Liability Corporation Registration Information Sheet

(http://www.faa .gov!licenses certificates/aircraft_certification/aircraft registry/media/LLCINFO.PDF) (PDF) providesinstructions on meeting this requirement.

o Form AFS-750-94, Information to Aid in the Registration of U.S. Civil Aircraft

(http://www.faa .gov/licenses certificates/aircraft certification/aircraft_registry/media/AFS-750-94.pdf) (PDF), provides

helpful information about registration eligibility, types of registration, the proper form of: names, signatures, titles,

addresses plus other related issues.


2. A full description of the UA provided by the manufacturer or builder in a Notarized statement is required when the UA

model is not produced under a U.S. Type Certificate.UA Required Description Items

o Full Legal Name of UA Manufacturer or Buildero UA Model Designationo UA Serial Numbero Class (Airplane, Airship, Rotorcraft, Gyroplane, Ducted Fan)o UA Maximum Takeoff Weighto Category (Land, Sea, or Both)o Name of Engine Manufacturero Engine Model Designationo Engine Serial-Numbers (If none shown, enter ‘none’)o Number of Engineso Engine Power Output (Given in HP or Lbs. Thrust)o Engine Type (2 or 4 Cycle Reciprocating, Electric,

Turbo - Fan/Prop/Shaft/Jet)

http://www .faa.qov/Iicenses certificates/aircraft certification/aircraft registry/UN 3/8





(http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/form/ac8050-2.pdf) (PDF), or an equal transfer of ownership document isrequired for each change in ownership from the UA manufacturer or builder through any intervening owner(s) to the ownermaking application for registration.

When a bill of sale or other transfer document is unobtainable for one or more changes of ownership, the applicant mayprovide for consideration a notarized statement that:

o describes the subject UA by the builders name, its model designation, and serial number;o gives the history and whereabouts of the UA telling how the applicant became its owner and explains why the missing

transfer of ownership document is unavailable.o identifies undocumented transfers to the extent possible by the date they occurred, the purchaser’s name, the name

and location (city, state & country) of the person, company, or vendor that sold the UA.o describes the other evidence provided with the notarized statement like an invoice, sales receipt or witness statement

that proves the transfer of ownership took place. This alternative evidence is especially important when documenting

the transfer of ownership to the applicant.o certifies, to the best of the applicants knowledge, that the information provided is correct, that the described UA is not

currently registered in another country, and that the undersigned is the aircraft’s rightful owner.

Sample statements are available for review

NOTE: Items 2 and 3 may be combined into one notarized affidavit.

4. Confirmation the UA is not registered in another country. When a UA is purchased directly from a manufacturer or

seller located in another country it is considered an import. This requires a statement from the Civil Aviation Authority of

the exporting country confirming that registration for this UA has ended or that the UA was never issued registration in that

cou ntry.

5. An N-number to be assigned to the registered aircraft. If a special N-number

(http://www.faa .gov/Iicenses certificates/aircraft certification/aircraft registry/n numbers!) was reserved in advance by the

UA owner for this registration, this number will be assigned if it is entered on the forms in the indicated blanks.

o A special N-number (http://www.faa.gov/Iicenses certificates/aircraft certification/aircraft registry/n numbers/) may be requested

when filing the application and other documents for registration. Include a letter that lists several N-number choices.

The first listed number verified as available will be assigned to the aircraft. The special number fee is $10.00, payable

by check or money order payable to the Federal Aviation Administration.o A random N-number will be assigned at no cost if the indicated blanks on the registration forms are left empty, or a

random number is requested.

6. The registration fee of $5.00 per UA. Please pay all fees by check or money order made payable to the Federal Aviation

Administration. Multiple fees may be consolidated into a single payment. Registration and N-number fees are waived when

the applicant is a Federal, State or local government office, agency or institution.

Send your Registration documents to the FAA, Aircraft Registration Branch. Addresses for regular mail and overnight

courier deliveries are available through the Contact the Aircraft Registration Branch

(http://www.faa

menu item.

Once the sUA is registered, apply for the appropriate operational authority.

The following links will direct you to useful information and directions.

Operating for Non-Recreational Purposes (http://www.faa.gov/uas/civil_operations/)

Aircraft Owned by Government Agencies or Offices (http://.faa.gov/uasJpubiic_operations/)

To Register a Used - sUA or UA Aircraft:

A used sUA or UA is an unmanned aircraft that has been registered in the U.S. or another country, or operated by the military

forces of any country.

http://www.faa.gov/Iicenses_certificates/aircraftcertification/aircraft_registry/UN 4/8




1. A completed Aircraft Registration Application, AC Form 8050-1,

An original Aircraft Registration Application, AC Form 8050-1 must be used. Photocopies or computer generatedcopies of this form will not be accepted. These forms may be obtained from the FAA Aircraft Registration Branch

or anyFlight Standards District Office (httr:!/www.faa.oov/abouUoffice org/field offices/fsdoh.

o When a Limited Liability Corporation (LLC) is an applicant to register a used sUA or UA, it must provide informationregarding its organization, how management authority is held, and how it meets the definition of U.S. citizen for aircraftregistration. The Limited Liability Corporation Registration Information Sheet(http://www.faa.gov/licenses certificates/aircraft certification/aircraft registry/media/LLCINFO. PDF) (PDF) provides

instructions on meeting this requirement.o Form AFS-750-94, Information to Aid in the Registration of U.S. Civil Aircraft

(http://www.faa.gov/licenses certificates/aircraft certification/aircraft registry/media/AFS-750-94.pdf) (PDF), provideshelpful information about registration eligibility, types of registration, the form of: names, signatures, titles, andaddresses plus other related issues.


(http://www.faa .ov/documentLibrary/media/form/ac8050-2.pdf) (PDF), or an equal transfer of ownership document is

required for each change in ownership from the last registered owner or military owner through any intervening owner(s)

to the owner making application for registration.

If a bill of sale or other transfer document is unobtainable for one or more changes of ownership, the applicant may

provide for consideration a notarized statement that:

o describes the used sUA or UA by the builders name, its model designation, and serial number;o gives the relative history and whereabouts of the sUA or UA telling how the applicant became its owner and explains

why the missing transfer of ownership document is unavailable.o identifies undocumented transfers to the extent possible by the by the date they occurred, the purchaser’s name, the

name and address (with country) of the person, company, or vendor that sold the sUA or UA.o describes the other evidence provided with the notarized statement like an invoice, sales receipt or witness statement

that proves the transfer of ownership took place. This alternative evidence of ownership is especially important when

documenting the transfer of ownership to the applicant.o certifies, that to the best of the applicants knowledge, that the information provided is correct, the described sUA or UA

is not currently registered in another country, and that the undersigned is the aircraft’s rightful owner.o Sample statements are available for review.

3. Confirmation the used sUA or UA is not registered in another country. When a previously registered or military

operated sUA or UA is purchased from a manufacturer or other seller located in another country the sale is considered an

import. This requires a statement from the Civil Aviation Authority of the country where the aircraft was last registered or

operated that confirms the registration for this sUA or UA has ended or that the sUA or UA was never issued civil

registration in that country.

4. A full description of the sUA or UA: If the model of an imported or former military UA or sUA is not covered by a U.S.

Type Certificate, a full description of the aircraft is needed. The description elements listed below may be provided by the

builder, manufacturer or applicant in a Notarized statement provided with the aircraft’s registration documents. This item is

not required if the aircraft was last previously registered in the U.S.

Used sUA, UA Required Description Items

o Full Legal Name of UA Manufacturer or Buildero UA Model Designationo UA Serial Numbero Class (Airplane, Airship, Rotorcraft, Gyroplane, Ducted Fan)o UA Maximum Takeoff Weighto Category (Land, Sea, or Both)

o Name of Engine Manufacturer

o Engine Model Designation

http://www.faa.gov/licensescertificates/aircraft_certification/aircraftjegistry/UN 5/8



o Engine Serial-Numbers (if none shown, enter ‘none’)o Number of Engineso Engine Power Output (Given in HP or Lbs Thrust)o Engine Type (2 or 4 Cycle Reciprocating, Electric,

Turbo Fan/Prop/Shaft/Jet)

The notarized statement must also state “To the best of the undersigned’s knowledge the information provided above is

correct, the described UA is not currently registered in another country, and the undersigned is the aircraft’s rightful owner”

5. The N-number assigned to the registered aircraft. When a U.S. registered sUA or UA is sold to another U.S. owner, it

already has an assigned N-number. The new owner should show the assigned N-number in the indicated blanks on the

application and bill of sale forms. The aircraft will then be registered and a registration certificate issued using this N-

number.

o If a special N-number (http://www.faa .gov/licenses certificates/aircraft certification/aircraft registry/n numbers!) was

reserved or is desired by the new owner for use on this sUA or UA, we suggest that the new owner allow the

registration process to take place using the already assigned N-number to ensure continued operability of the aircraft.

Once registration is issued to the new owner an N-number chancie may be reguested.

(http://www.faa .gov/Iicenses certificates/aircraft certification/aircraft registry/n nu mbersi)

o A random N-number will be assigned at no cost to import and former military aircraft if the indicated blanks on the

registration forms are left empty, or a random number is requested.

6. The registration fee of $5.00 per aircraft. Please pay all fees by check or money order made payable to the Federal

Aviation Administration. Multiple fees may be consolidated into a single payment. Registration and N-number fees are

waived when the applicant is a Federal, State or local government office, agency or institution.

Send your Registration documents to the FAA, Aircraft Registration Branch. Addresses for regular mail and overnight

courier deliveries are available through the Contact the Aircraft Registration Branch

menu item.

Once the sUA or UA is registered, apply for the appropriate operational authority. The following links will direct you to useful

information and directions.

Operatinci for Non-Recreational Purposes (http:/!www.faa.gov/uas/civil operations!’

Aircraft Owned by Government Aciencies or Offices (http://www.faa.gov/uas/public_operations/)

Sample Wording for sUA and UA Notarized Statements

Describe the sUA or UA with complete name of the aircraft’s builder or manufacturer, its official model designation, and its

serial number.

(If the complete 12 item sUA or UA description statement is also needed, it may be combined here with the affidavit statement

for convenience.)

THE UNDERSIGNED OWNER CERTIFIES

1. For new retail purchased sUA only: I purchased the sUA described above as a new off-the-shelf item on (date) from

(name, city, state & country of retail shop or internet vendor)

A manufacturer’s bill of sale was not available at the time of purchase, and the (receipt / invoice / other evidence)(is

enclosed / is not available) to confirm the purchase.

2. For any size KIT built UA: I built the UA described above from a prefabricated kit. The kit bill of sale from the kit

manufacturer (and if applicable, evidence of ownership through all intervening owners) to the undersigned is enclosed.

3. For any size UA: I built the UA described above using salvaged, fabricated, or miscellaneous spare parts.

4. For manufacturers, any size UA: The UA described above is newly manufactured using standard parts in a proprietary

design by the undersigned manufacturer.

5. For Used UA of any size: The UA described above was purchased used. My evidence of ownership from the previous

http://www.faa.gov/Iicensescertificates/aircrafLcertification/aircraftjegistry/UA/ 6/8


1J16/2O15 Aircraft Registry —Aircraft Registration: Unmanned Aircraft (UA)

owner is attached. A good taitri ettort was made to obtain eVidence ot ownership trom the UAs (builder/manutacturer/last

registered owner/other) through all intervening owners to the previous owner. (Enter explanation of aircraft’s history and

whereabouts, why any ownership change is not documented by a bill of sale and what evidence of the transaction(s) is

provided.)

To the best of the undersigned owner’s knowledge, the information provided above is correct, the described UA is not

registered in another country, and the undersigned is the aircraft’s rightful owner.

Name(s) of Owner(s):

__________________ ________________________

Signature(s):

________________________ ___________________________

Title of Signers:

______________________ ____________________________

Address:

________________________________________________________

Telephone:

___________________

NOTARY PUBLIC

State:

________________

County:

_______________

Country:

_____________________

Subscribed and sworn before me this:

______

day of:

Signature:

_______________________________________

(Signature of individual authorized under local law to administer oaths)

My Commission Expires:

___________________

(Seal as required by State or local law.)

Selling your US. registered sUA or UA:

• The seller should execute a bill of sale transferring all or a specific portion of their right, title and interest in the sUA or UA

to the purchaser. Provide the original signed bill of sale to the purchaser. Use the aircraft description shown on the

registration certificate or the Search Aircraft Registration Information (http:/!registrv.faa .gov/aircraftingu iry/) website to correctly

describe the sUA or UA on the bill of sale.

• The seller should also retain their Certificate of Aircraft Registration, AC Form 8050-3, complete the applicable items on

the reverse side, and return it to the FAA Aircraft Registration Branch

(htt:!/www.faa .gov/Iicenses certificates/aircraft certification/aircraft reQistrv/contact aircraft certification!).

• The purchaser should forward the bill of sale with the seller’s original signature, a completed Aircraft Registration

Application, AC Form 8050-1, and the $5.00 registration fee to the FAA Aircraft Registration Branch

(http://www.faa .gov/licenses certificates/aircraft certification/aircraft registry/contact aircraft certification!).

• All signatures on all forms must have the typed or printed name of the signer next to their signature in the signature block.

• All fees should be paid by check or money order made payable to the Federal Aviation Administration.

Helpful links for sUA and UA registration.

Aircraft owned by a Limited Liability Corporation, LLC

(Http://www.faa .gov/licenses certificates/aircraft_certification/aircraft_registrv/media/LLCINFO.pdf) (PDF)

Aircraft Registration Forms

Information to Aid in the Registration of U.S. Civil Aircraft

(http://www.faa.gov/licenses_certificates/aircraft_certification/aircraft_registry/media/8050-94.pdf) (PDF)

Information to Aid in The Recording of Aircraft Ownership and Security Documents

(http://www.faa .Qov/licenses certificates/aircraft_certification/aircraft_registry/media/AFS-750-93.pdf) (PDF)

About Aircraft Registration Renewal

(http://www.faa.gov/Iicenses certificates/aircraft certification/aircraft_registry/reregistration!)

Contact the Aircraft Registration Branch, by telephone or e-mail for assistance

http://www.faa.gov/licenses_certificates/aircraft_certification/aircraftjegistry/UN 7/8


12/16/2015 Aircraft Registry — Aircraft Registration: Unmanned Aircraft (UA)jfltp://www.Taa.gov/IIcensescertIncates/aircrattcerti1ication/aircratt reo istry/contact_aircratt_certitication/teIepnoneNumbers)Operating Hobby or Recreational sUA and Model Aircraft (http://www.faa.gov/uas/model aircraft!)FAA UAS Interation Office webpage (http://www.faa.Qov/uas!)14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 47 - Aircraft Registration Regulations (http://www.ecfr.gov/ci-bin/text-idx?SID=1 Of2c4539O74faceOafl 6e24e02809f8&node=ptl 4.1 .47&rgn=d iv5httD:J/wwwecfr.clov/cQi-bin/text-idx?SID=1 Of2c4539O74faceOafl 6e24e02809t8&node=ntl 4.1 .47&rcindiv5)

Page last modified: August 21,2015 9:45:12 AM EDT

This page was originally published at: http://www.faa.gov!licenses_certificates!aircraft_certification/aircraft_registry/UAI

http:llwww.faa.gov/licenses_certificates/aircraft_certificationlaircraft_registry/UN 8/8
