Part 108 is here, but it needs your help: why you must comment on the FAA's BVLOS proposal

The future of drone operations is on the horizon. The Federal Aviation Administration’s proposed Part 108 rule is the single most important piece of aviation regulation for our industry since Part 107 created the commercial drone market. It promises a scalable, nationwide framework for Beyond Visual Line of Sight (BVLOS) operations, moving us beyond the current system of one-off waivers. However, Part 108 could unintentionally ground programs that are flying safely today and stifle future innovation.

This is our chance to unlock the true potential of docked drones, automated inspections and large-area surveys. However, the rule as written contains several critical flaws that could hinder your operations, limit your hardware choices and create unnecessary red tape.

The FAA is listening, but only until October 6, 2025. It is crucial that they hear from you – the operators on the front lines. Your comments can directly shape the final rule and ensure it reflects the realities of your business.

The good: what Part 108 gets right

Let's be clear: Part 108 is a massive step in the right direction. We're excited about several key proposals:

• BVLOS by rule: It creates a clear, standardized pathway for BVLOS, which is essential for scaling operations.
• Organizational responsibility: It shifts the compliance burden from individual pilots (RPICs) to the operator organization. This aligns with how modern, corporate drone programs are actually managed with robust safety systems.
• Clear right of way: The rule establishes who has the right-of-way between drones and manned aircraft, a foundational element for safe, integrated airspace.

The problems: key flaws that need your voice

While the framework is promising, the details matter. Here are the most pressing issues that you should address in your comments to the FAA.

1. Risk assessment is too simplistic

The rule determines your operational requirements based almost entirely on the population density of the area you're flying in. This ignores a critical reality of commercial drone use: on-site safety mitigations.

A construction site, mine or energy facility – even if it's in a dense urban area – can be closed to the public. With geofencing, on-site personnel wearing hard hats, and controlled access, the actual risk to people on the ground is very low – certainly much lower than the surrounding population density might suggest. The current proposal doesn't adequately account for these private "controlled environments" and may force you into a more burdensome approval process (a certificate or even Part 108 waiver) for an operation that is demonstrably safe.

2. "Nationwide" approvals aren't practical

Many of you operate under waivers that grant permission for specific types of sites, like "any closed-access construction site in the United States". This is efficient and scalable. The new rule, however, requires operators to define their "areas of operation" by specific geographic coordinates. This would bury both you and the FAA in duplicative paperwork for every new job site, defeating the purpose of a scalable rule.

3. Hardware and technology restrictions

The proposal contains several technical requirements that could severely limit your options:

• Shielded operations: The definition of a "shielded operation" (flying near a structure) is too narrow. It's limited to just 50 feet away from structures like bridges and pipelines. Many existing waivers safely allow for operations up to 200 feet from a wider variety of structures, including buildings and cranes.
• Foreign-made drones: The rule would create a backdoor ban from BVLOS operations on the world's most popular and technologically advanced drones (including DJI) by requiring complex international agreements between the U.S. and the drone's country of origin. This would cut off access to the best technology and harm American businesses. The FAA should allow for more practical compliance paths, like direct agreements between a manufacturer and the FAA.

4. Uncertainty for existing waivers

If you've already gone through the difficult process of securing a Part 107 BVLOS waiver, the rule provides no clear path for what happens next. Operators need assurance that their existing, proven-safe operations will be grandfathered into the new system and can be renewed once their original time period expires.

‍

How to submit your comments (it's easier than you think)

Your personal story is powerful. You don't need to be a lawyer to explain how these issues will impact your business. The FAA needs to hear from operators about the real-world consequences of their proposal.

Step 1: Copy the template below. We've created a template based on the key issues.

Step 2: Customize it. Add a sentence or two about your company and the work you do. Personalize the points that matter most to you. The more unique your submission, the more weight it carries.

Step 3: Submit online. Go to the Federal Register website and Docket No. FAA-2023-1499. Click "Comment" and paste your letter into the text box, or add it on company letterhead as a PDF. 

The deadline is October 6, 2025. Don't wait.

‍

Copy this template

[Your Name/Company Name]

[Your City, State]

[Date]

To the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA),

RE: Docket No. FAA-2023-1499; Comments on Part 108 NPRM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing on behalf of [Your Company Name], a [describe your business, e.g., construction, energy, surveying] company that relies on drone technology for our operations. We are a customer of DroneDeploy and are excited about the FAA’s work to create a scalable framework for Beyond Visual Line of Sight (BVLOS) operations under the proposed Part 108. A clear path for BVLOS is critical for safety, efficiency, and American competitiveness.

While we support the intent of Part 108, we have significant concerns about several provisions that would negatively impact our business and the drone industry as a whole. We urge the FAA to consider the following revisions:

1.  **Risk Assessment Should Credit On-Site Mitigations.** The NPRM’s reliance on population density as the primary determinant of risk is insufficient. Many commercial operations occur at sites that are closed to the public, such as construction sites, mines, or energy facilities. We recommend the FAA amend the rule to allow an operator to treat an area as a lower risk category if effective safety mitigations (e.g., controlled site access, geofencing, personnel wearing PPE) are in place.

2.  **Allow Operational Areas to be Defined by Characteristics.** Section 108.165 requires defining an "area of operation" by specific geographic coordinates. This is a step backward from current, efficient waivers that define areas by characteristics (e.g., “any controlled-access solar farm”). To avoid duplicative and burdensome applications, the FAA should continue to allow this practice for scalable nationwide operations.

3.  **Expand and Clarify Technical Definitions.**

   * **Shielded Operations (108.205):** The proposed 50-foot limit from a structure is too restrictive. Many existing waivers safely permit operations up to 200 feet away from structures, and the definition should be expanded to include all types of vertical infrastructure, including buildings.

   * **Hardware Accessibility (108.700):** The requirement for a BAA or BASA with a drone’s country of origin could create a de facto ban on the most widely used and advanced drones. We urge the FAA to remove this section. An alternative is to require  alternative compliance mechanisms, such as firewall secuirty use with Chinese-made drones for BVLOS opeartions. This will ensure U.S. businesses have access to the best available technology.

4.  **Provide a Clear Transition Plan for Existing Waivers.** The final rule must include a provision to grandfather existing Part 107 BVLOS waivers. These waivers represent proven-safe operations and should be renewable under Part 108, provided the operational circumstances have not changed.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this crucial rulemaking. We believe these changes will help the FAA achieve its goal of creating a safe, efficient, and scalable framework for BVLOS operations in the United States.

Sincerely,

[Your Name]

[Your Title/Company]

‍

Learn more

For a deeper analysis of the Part 108 proposal, including a panel discussion with regulatory experts from DroneDeploy, Censys Technologies, Hogan Lovells and FlyGuys, watch the full webinar replay:

‍