Consultant Says Registration Will Not Significantly Enhance Safety

The new UAV registration rule is "more activity than action," according to at least one attorney-turned-consultant who has been through the 211 pages of the rule.

An article posted to the blog JDA Journal by Consultant Sandy Murdock, who lists "Former FAA Chief Counsel and Acting FAA Deputy Administrator" as part of his vitae, asserts that the process of registration will not enhance safety in the national air space.

By now, we're all aware that any UAV that weighs more than 250 grams must be registered with the FAA. According to the blog, the Interim Final Rule (IFR) is 211 pages of single-spaced small text ... and about 180 of those are an introduction and explanation of the rule. Overall, less than 5 percent of the verbiage in the document is the actual rule.

Murdock writes that the federal government has the authority to publish such an "Interim Final Rule" when it determines that there is "good cause" to dispense with the normal notice and comment period because those procedures are "impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest." The "Administrative Procedure Act" says "that an agency, upon finding good cause, may issue a final rule without seeking comment prior to the rulemaking."

Murdock indicates that some 30 pages in the final rule are used to prove that the FAA had "good cause" to proceed with the rule.

The FAA determined that in part, the "growth of UASs, the near miss incidents, the FAA’s generic power to regulate air traffic, the absence of aviation experience with these UAS 'pilots,' even the comparative ease of electronic filing, etc., as grounds for “good cause."

Murdock then goes on to list some of the rule's highlights, and what they mean to the drone operator or owner.

As a side note, the FAA has posted a page that includes examples of the kinds of UAVs that would nor would not require registration under the new rule.

FMI: Full Blog Post