Notice2026-06297
Implementing Section 927 Waiver Process for Certain Unmanned Aircraft Operations
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
April 1, 2026
Issuing agencies
Transportation DepartmentFederal Aviation Administration
Abstract
As a part of the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024, Congress authorized FAA to enable unmanned aircraft operations through waivers to applicable federal aviation regulations instead of initiating regulations or requiring operators to seek regulatory exemptions. This notice explains how FAA will implement that authority.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 91 Issue 62 (Wednesday, April 1, 2026)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 62 (Wednesday, April 1, 2026)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16276-16278]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2026-06297]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
[Docket No. FAA-2026-1100]
Implementing Section 927 Waiver Process for Certain Unmanned
Aircraft Operations
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: As a part of the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024, Congress
authorized FAA to enable unmanned aircraft operations through waivers
to applicable federal aviation regulations instead of initiating
regulations or requiring operators to seek regulatory exemptions. This
notice explains how FAA will implement that authority.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: General Aviation and Commercial
Branch, Emerging Technologies Division (AFS-700), 800 Independence Ave.
SW, Washington, DC 20591, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#3a03080d4d5b534c5f48497a5c5b5b145d554c"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="330a010444525a45564140735552521d545c45">[email protected]</span></a>.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Operations involving UAS that do not fit within the parameters of
FAA regulations for unmanned aircraft must operate subject to FAA
regulations that apply broadly to all aircraft. Many of these
regulations are either not appropriate for unmanned aircraft or are
impossible for unmanned aircraft operators to comply with because they
were designed to apply to traditional, manned aircraft. To enable these
unmanned aircraft operations, the FAA must grant regulatory relief.
In the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (Pub. L. 112-95),
Congress enacted Section 333, which directed the Secretary of
Transportation to determine whether certain unmanned aircraft systems
(UAS) could safely operate in the national airspace and to decide if a
certificate of waiver, certificate of authorization, or airworthiness
certification under 49 U.S.C. 44704, was necessary for their operation.
FAA issued the first approval under Section 333 in 2014.
In 2016, FAA issued part 107 authorizing certain routine civil
operations for unmanned aircraft weighing less than 55 pounds at
takeoff, including payload. FAA expanded that authority to allow
routine operations over people and at night, subject to certain
requirements. UAS also sometimes operate under part 91 with waivers.\1\
These regulatory paths remain available to operators but are not the
subject of this notice. Therefore, this notice will not discuss them
further.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Sec. Sec. 91.903 (Policy and procedures) and 91.905
(List of rules subject to waivers).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 (Pub. L. 115-254), Congress
replaced Section 333 with Sec. 44807, Special authority for certain
unmanned aircraft systems. This first iteration of Sec. 44807 was
similar to Section 333. Congress codified FAA's ability to authorize
unmanned aircraft operations without issuing airworthiness or airman
certificates, using a risk-based approach. FAA has used the 44807
exemption authority extensively to enable UAS operations that do not
fit neatly within existing regulatory frameworks or to grant relief
from statutory airworthiness or airman certificate requirements.
Congress enacted Section 927 of the Reauthorization Act of 2024
(Pub. L. 118-63), to give FAA a new tool for granting regulatory
relief. Section 927 waiver authority provides an additional tool to
complement--not replace--the exemption process to further integrate
unmanned aircraft safely into the national airspace system (NAS). As
UAS technologies mature, the framework for granting regulatory relief
to enable them must also evolve and adapt. To that end, this notice
describes the process FAA uses to determine whether a waiver under
Section 927 is appropriate and, if appropriate, how FAA would process
the request. This notice also explains FAA's rationale for determining
whether relief should be granted as an exemption or a Section 927
waiver.
Discussion
Section 927 waivers and exemptions present two different paths to
achieve the same objective: obtaining regulatory relief from
regulations that would otherwise apply, to the extent consistent with
aviation safety. Both pathways will result in a safety-based decision.
To request an exemption, an operator must follow the process
described in 14 CFR part 11. Among other things, the petitioner must
identify why the requested relief would not adversely affect safety or
how it would provide a level of safety equal to the rule from which
they are seeking relief. The petitioner must also demonstrate why the
relief is in the public interest, that is, how it would benefit the
public as a whole. FAA gives the public notice of the request for
relief and offers an opportunity to comment.
When Congress enacted Section 927, it gave FAA authority to grant
regulatory relief through waivers, irrespective of whether the
regulation specifically authorized waivers or not. FAA's commitment to
ensuring safety through Section 927 waivers remains the same as it does
under its exemption authority. For that reason, FAA is adopting the
same safety standard for section 927 waivers as it uses for exemptions:
petitioners for a 927 waiver must show that operations under the waiver
would not adversely affect safety or would provide a level of safety
equal to the rule. However, a practical difference is that FAA may
grant regulatory relief without requiring the petitioner to show that a
specific petition's requested relief would benefit the public as a
whole.
Notably, Congress did not repeal or eliminate FAA's authority to
issue exemptions to enable unmanned aircraft operations. These
alternate avenues for regulatory relief, with the particularities of
their processes, remain available to UAS operators. For instance,
exemptions, including the requirements to provide notice and
opportunity for public comment, remain important tools for enabling
certain unmanned aircraft operations. However, as explained in more
detail below, stakeholders -- including the public -- do not always
derive benefits from the notice, comment, and public interest
requirements. In some cases, FAA can address the appropriate safety
concerns more efficiently and effectively through the Section 927
waiver process without affecting safety. The purpose of this notice is
to describe the process FAA uses when evaluating whether a Section 927
waiver or a traditional exemption is the appropriate tool for granting
regulatory relief.
[[Page 16277]]
Process
FAA identified four considerations to use when evaluating whether
the Section 927 waiver process is the appropriate path for relief.
Safety, efficiency, and enabling innovation form the bedrock of these
eligibility considerations. Some scenarios could present all four
considerations, while others could present just one.
1. Minimal Impact
Operations with minimal public impact or that are unlikely to
garner significant public interest may be better handled through the
Section 927 waiver process. Some unmanned aircraft operations would not
significantly affect the public or other airspace users. The reasons
can vary. They can be time-limited, geographically constrained, or
minimally intrusive. For example, aircraft operating in a closed
testing environment are unlikely to affect the public or other
stakeholders. Similarly, operations to test new equipment or components
can be limited in scope and duration to avoid having an impact on the
public or other stakeholders.
When considering whether an operation would have minimal impact,
the following questions would be relevant to FAA's analysis:
<bullet> Would the operation generate significant public interest?
Equipment, operating procedures, timing, location, and duration of
operations could be factors.
<bullet> Would the operation affect public stakeholder equities?
For example, would the public or other airspace users have to adjust or
change routine activities?
<bullet> Is the purpose of the operation to demonstrate or test new
products or operating procedures?
<bullet> Are public stakeholders likely to provide useful
information to inform FAA's decision? For example, public engagement
during research and development may be premature. Similarly, public
engagement might not be necessary because limited operations may be
unlikely to affect the public or other stakeholders.
2. High-Value, Limited Use Case
High-value, limited use cases are those that are used infrequently
but nonetheless provide important societal benefits. These use cases
typically involve activities that do not require broad regulatory
change, but the societal value they bring merits regulatory
flexibility. For example, an operator could seek regulatory relief to
conduct important public safety operations such as disaster relief,
first responder, or search and rescue missions. These types of
operations tend to be limited to specific situations and provide an
overwhelming benefit to members of the public when they are most
vulnerable and in need. In those circumstances, FAA would consider--
based on the safety case presented and the high value benefits--whether
public stakeholders would be likely to provide information that would
help inform FAA's decision.
3. Emerging Use Case
Emerging use cases are those that introduce new technologies or
types of operations, often without precedent. These use cases play a
role in supporting industry-led, U.S.-based emerging technology
innovation. American drone dominance depends on U.S. agencies
accelerating testing and safe commercialization of drone technology.
See Executive Order 14307, Unleashing American Drone Dominance, June 6,
2025. To meet these policy objectives, FAA would consider--based on the
safety case presented and the benefits to domestic drone dominance--
whether public stakeholders would be likely to provide information to
help inform FAA's decision.
FAA would also consider whether an iterative authorization process
would help incubate innovative safety concepts for the emerging use
case. For example, for FAA to learn from and to keep pace with the
constantly evolving and iterative technology cycle, FAA's authorization
cycle will also have to be iterative. In these cases, public input
might not provide information likely to inform FAA's decision without
unduly delaying the technological innovation cycle. In these cases, the
Section 927 waiver process would balance the need for flexibility to
keep pace with technological adjustments with the benefits of public
input.
The following questions would be relevant to FAA's consideration:
<bullet> Does the operation involve new technologies or operations?
<bullet> Does the operation require an iterative approach to
authorizations to incubate innovative technologies?
<bullet> Would the operation play a role in developing the domestic
drone industry by keeping research, developing, and testing in the
United States, or for other reasons?
<bullet> Would it be possible to solicit meaningful public input
without releasing proprietary information?
<bullet> Would public input otherwise be premature at this stage?
4. Other Safety Considerations
Safety is FAA's highest priority. Accordingly, FAA will consider
whether the Section 927 waiver process would contribute to a better
safety outcome. FAA does not expect these cases to arrive frequently;
however, the agency would be remiss if it did not account for them. To
be clear, FAA's process for analyzing the safety of a particular
operation remains the same irrespective of whether an applicant pursues
a Section 927 waiver or an exemption: either case would result in
specific conditions and limitations to mitigate risk. Safety
considerations may come into play in certain circumstances, however,
such as when an operator needs a significant amount of lead time to
prepare after receiving authority to operate.
For example, some operations have complex concepts of operations or
safety protocols that may require more than the average lead time to
set up or establish proficiency. Often, there is a correlation between
the complexity of an operation, the risks involved, and the amount of
time needed to prepare. In these cases, safety dictates that the
operator receives its operating authority well in advance of their
planned operating date so that all crew members have adequate knowledge
of and experience with the operating protocols they need to comply with
the conditions and limitations.
FAA advises operators to petition for exemption at least 120 days
in advance. Ideally, a petitioner would account for preparation time
when deciding how far in advance to submit an exemption request.
However, factors outside of the petitioner's control may limit their
ability to build in that lead time. For example, an operator might
accept a contract to provide services for a major concert or sporting
event with a fixed date. Even if the event is more than 120 days away,
the operator may need a significant portion of that time to prepare for
a safe operation. In these circumstances, Section 927 waivers may be in
the interest of safety because FAA would provide the same level of
safety analysis while allowing the operator more time to prepare for
safe operations.
Timing of relief is only one example of a potential safety issue
that could benefit from a Section 927 waiver. At this point in time,
FAA cannot foresee all possible scenarios under which pursuing a
Section 927 waiver would be in the interest of safety. Prudence
dictates that FAA account for unforeseen circumstances that may arise
as unmanned aircraft technology and use cases evolve.
[[Page 16278]]
The following questions would be relevant to FAA's consideration:
<bullet> Does the exemption process timeline allow for a decision
at least two weeks before the operation commences?
<bullet> How much preparation time does the operator require to
safely implement the anticipated conditions and limitations?
<bullet> Are there operational factors that increase risk--such as
operations over people, size of the aircraft, airspace considerations--
that necessitate additional planning?
<bullet> Do other safety considerations suggest that a waiver would
be more appropriate than an exemption?
Submitting a Request
To request a Section 927 waiver, an applicant should provide a
robust explanation of why the request for regulatory relief is eligible
for the Section 927 waiver process. The application should describe
specific aspects of the proposed operation that align with one or more
of the eligibility criteria and include facts, data, or examples that
support eligibility. The applicant should also identify the specific
regulations from which it seeks relief and provide a well-documented
safety case to support the request.
To avoid delays in processing, the application should include the
following:
<bullet> The extent of relief requested, and the reason the
applicant seeks the relief.
<bullet> The reasons why granting the waiver would not adversely
affect safety.
<bullet> The reasons why the request meets the requirements of
Sec. 44807(b), including how such unmanned aircraft systems, if any,
as a result of their size, weight, speed, operational capability,
proximity to airports and populated areas, operation over people, and
operation within or beyond the visual line of sight, or operation
during the day or night, do not create a hazard to users of the
national airspace system or the public.
In addition, before submitting the waiver request, applicants
should ensure the request contains the following information, if
relevant:
<bullet> Concept of Operations
<bullet> Operations Manual
<bullet> Emergency Procedures
<bullet> Checklists
<bullet> Maintenance Manual
<bullet> Training Program
<bullet> Flight History (flight hours, cycles, accidents, etc.)
<bullet> Safety Risk Analysis
FAA always conducts a safety risk analysis and may also require
applicants to submit their own safety risk analysis. Additional
information about safety risk analysis is available at FAA Order
8040.4, Safety Risk Management Policy and FAA Order 8040.6 UAS Safety
Risk Management Policy. For more information on UAS, see: Unmanned
Aircraft Systems (UAS) [verbar] Federal Aviation Administration.
Submit Section 927 waiver requests via email directly to:
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#f9c0cbce8e98908f9c8b8ab99f9898d79e968f"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="0138333676606877647372416760602f666e77">[email protected]</span></a>. Applicants can expect an initial response informing
them whether their application is appropriate for the Section 927
waiver pathway. The FAA evaluation team may contact applicants for
further information as needed. If at any point in the evaluation
process, FAA determines the request is not eligible for a Section 927
waiver, FAA will redirect the applicant to an appropriate pathway to
request regulatory relief. If FAA determines the request is eligible
for a Section 927 waiver, FAA will conduct a safety evaluation and
provide applicants with a final decision (approval or denial).
Frequently Asked Questions
1. May I apply for an exemption and for a Section 927 waiver at the
same time to see which pathway provides an approval more quickly?
No, applicants must select either the exemption pathway or the
Section 927 waiver.
2. If I have already applied for an exemption, may I withdraw my
exemption and apply for a Section 927 waiver instead?
Yes; however, applicants enter the Section 927 waiver process on a
first-come, first-served basis and would not receive priority or
expedited treatment.
3. Will FAA conduct an abbreviated safety analysis for Section 927
waivers?
No, the safety analysis conducted for exemptions and for Section
927 waivers will remain identical.
4. Will both pathways provide similar types of relief, i.e., will
the operational Conditions and Limitations posed by an exemption versus
a Section 927 waiver be similar?
Yes, both pathways--irrespective of whether an exemption or Section
927 waiver--will provide regulatory relief based on the safety case.
The safety analysis and resulting operational parameters, including
Conditions and Limitations, would not depend on the pathway for
regulatory relief.
Issued in Washington, DC, on March 30, 2026.
Hugh Thomas,
Acting Executive Director, Flight Standards Service.
[FR Doc. 2026-06297 Filed 3-31-26; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on April 1, 2026.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.