8-16 Table 8-5. Maximum Impact Speeds (ft/sec) for a Given Weight and Impact Kinetic Energy Under FAA-Provided MOC Maximum speed (ft/sec) Weight (lbs) Category 2 (11 ft-lbs) Category 3 (25 ft-lbs)
1.0 26 40
1.5 22 33
2.0 19 28
2.5 17 25
3.0 15 23 Table 8-6. Maximum Impact Speeds (mph) for a Given Weight and Impact Kinetic Energy Under FAA-Provided MOC Maximum speed (mph) Weight (lbs) Category 2 (11 ft-lbs) Category 3 (25 ft-lbs)
1.0 18 27
1.5 15 22
2.0 13 19
2.5 11 17
3.0 10 16
8.6.1.7 If the small unmanned aircraft incorporates airspeed or altitude limiting systems or equipment that, when installed or enabled, restrict its forward airspeed or altitude in order to meet an impact kinetic energy requirement, then those systems or equipment should be installed or enabled when performing the tests described above. If compliance with the impact kinetic energy requirement depends on the proper function of those systems or equipment, then the applicant should provide in the remote pilot operating instructions information on the proper use of those systems or equipment, as well as any restrictions. The FAA anticipates applicants will implement these types of systems or equipment through hardware, software, or a combination of both. If the small unmanned aircraft can be operated with or without these systems or equipment enabled or installed, such as in a variable-mode small unmanned aircraft, then the applicant should provide information in the remote pilot operating instructions to ensure pilots understand any restrictions or limitations associated with the different modes.
8-17
8.6.1.8 This MOC does not account for the use or testing of design features such as parachutes, ballistic recovery systems, or other deployable devices that once deployed, reduce impact velocity. Such features can establish that a small unmanned aircraft would impact a person with a reduced amount of kinetic energy. Such design features will require the FAA’s review to determine whether they assist in achieving compliance with injury severity limitations.
Outside the scope of the FAA-provided MOC, an applicant may choose to demonstrate compliance with the injury severity limitations using deployable devices, as long as the applicant describes how the devices are used to meet the safety requirements in the proposed MOC.
8.6.1.9 The MOC detailed above does not take into account the effect of the small unmanned aircraft’s structural configuration or materials of construction during an impact with a person. It assumes that the total kinetic energy of the small unmanned aircraft would be transferred to the person upon impact. In reality, a small unmanned aircraft’s structural configuration, materials of construction, or other design features may reduce the amount of the total kinetic energy that is transferred to a person during an impact. The use of energy absorbing materials, or an energy absorbing protective cage, may reduce the transfer of kinetic energy during an impact with a person. Under these circumstances, an applicant may wish to establish the amount of kinetic energy transferred to a person during an impact based on the impact absorbing characteristics of the small unmanned aircraft. If an applicant shows the aircraft does not transfer more than the kinetic energy limit to a person upon impact, the aircraft may be eligible for Category 2 or 3 operations over people. This demonstration would require an MOC that is not provided in this AC.
8.6.1.10 The FAA acknowledges limitations associated with the FAA-provided MOC.
The FAA intended with this FAA-provided MOC to provide a test method that applicants could use to show compliance with the injury severity limitations, with the anticipation that industry can and will develop more flexible MOC through a voluntary consensus standards body or otherwise.
The FAA expects these industry standards to consider that small unmanned aircraft often have non-rigid structures, which can reduce the kinetic energy transferred to a person upon impact. The FAA encourages the development of such MOC. Please see paragraphs 8.7 and 8.8 below for information concerning other MOC.
8.6.2 E xposed Rotating Parts. One means, but not the only means, of complying with the requirement would be to manufacture the small unmanned aircraft so that it does not contain any exposed rotating parts. For example, if the propellers that provide lift and thrust for the small unmanned aircraft are internal to the unmanned aircraft, such as in a ducted fan configuration, and would not make contact with a person as a result of a typical impact, then the parts would not be exposed. Therefore, the small unmanned aircraft would satisfy this requirement. Testing and analysis may be required to determine that the rotating parts could not become exposed as a result of a typical impact with a
8-18 person. If the forces on the small unmanned aircraft during an impact with a person are likely to cause structural failures that cause the rotating parts to become exposed, then that design would not satisfy this requirement.
8.7 Voluntary Consensus Standards Body MOC. A voluntary consensus standards body incorporates openness, balance, due process, appeals process, and consensus. These characteristics result in a peer review of voluntary consensus standards. Voluntary consensus standards bodies are composed of a wide selection of industry participants, often including the FAA.
8.7.1 The FAA encourages industry stakeholders to develop additional test methods and analyses to provide multiple ways for applicants to comply with the applicable safety requirements. Two potential approaches for industry to consider are provided in the following paragraphs.
8.7.2 A person may develop a standard for small unmanned aircraft having rotating parts that are protected by safety features, such as propeller guards. The standard could require testing by the applicant to support the determination that the protective safety features accomplish their intended function of preventing rotating parts from contacting a person during impact. If the applicant has tested those safety features and demonstrated they would remain intact during impact, this could be one means of demonstrating that exposed rotating parts would not be capable of lacerating human skin upon impact.
8.7.3 If a small unmanned aircraft has rotating parts that are exposed without any protective safety features, it may be shown through testing and analysis that the rotating parts would not lacerate human skin upon impact. By analyzing test data that evaluates the size, shape, rotational speed, material, and orientation of the rotating parts, and the severity of injuries that would be caused by these parts under any impact scenarios, it can be determined that the rotating parts would not lacerate human skin upon impact.
8.7.4 The method of analysis or testing should be commensurate with the applicant’s means of compliance. If a small unmanned aircraft has propellers made out of flexible material, an applicant would likely not need to perform sophisticated analysis or testing to demonstrate that the exposed rotating parts would not cause lacerations to human skin upon impact. If an applicant chooses to design a small unmanned aircraft with exposed propellers with sharp leading edges made of a rigid material, such as a carbon fiber composite that are driven by high torque motors, that applicant would likely have to perform a more sophisticated analysis or testing. The objective of the analysis or testing is to demonstrate that the propellers would not cause lacerations upon impact. This testing standard requires the applicant to demonstrate it across a range of typical human encounters and unmanned aircraft operational scenarios. Categories 2 and 3 require the manufacturer to show the unmanned aircraft would not cause lacerations (emphasis added). Therefore, the FAA does not expect applications to test for every human encounter, merely the ones that are typical.
8.7.5 The unmanned aircraft may also have a rotor that does not have sufficient momentum to lacerate normal human skin, and may implement technology to stop the exposed rotating
8-19 part before it would lacerate skin. Another example of how an aircraft could comply with the prohibition on exposed rotating parts that would cause lacerations would be to use materials that are incapable of lacerating human skin. An example of this would be to use or design rotors or propellers with properties that break away or flex upon impact to eliminate lacerations without the use of guards or shrouds. For Categories 2 and 3, any method an applicant chooses to use to comply with the exposed rotating parts requirement must be demonstrated through an FAA-accepted MOC.
8.7.6 Exposed rotating parts may pose a significant laceration hazard if they contact human skin, which is unacceptable for the safety of the public. The FAA distinguishes between a laceration to mean a cut that goes all the way through the skin while an abrasion means a superficial injury to the skin. Additionally, the FAA uses the expression “typical human encounter” to describe normal impacts, such as unmanned aircraft impacting a human being due to a loss of control, small unmanned aircraft failures, or remote pilot error.
8.8 Means of Compliance. Any person may propose an MOC to satisfy the safety requirements of § 107.120(a) or § 107.130(a). A person would submit a proposed MOC to the FAA for review and acceptance, showing that its small unmanned aircraft would not exceed the applicable injury severity limit upon impact with a human being, does not contain any exposed rotating parts that would lacerate human skin, and does not contain any safety defects. The FAA must accept an MOC before an applicant can rely on it to declare compliance with the performance-based safety requirements of § 107.120(a) or § 107.130(a), or both.
8.8.1 An applicant requesting FAA acceptance of an MOC should carefully consider the additional time and effort that could be necessary to coordinate an MOC when scheduling its projects. FAA coordination may require the efforts of FAA technical specialists, Chief Scientific Technical Advisors, or other governmental agencies. The use of existing FAA-accepted MOC would be more expeditious because the FAA will already have reviewed such MOC. As with voluntary consensus standards bodies, some developers of an MOC may not be applicants also submitting a DOC to the FAA for acceptance.
Guidance for developing and submitting an MOC to the FAA for acceptance is provided below.
8.8.2 An applicant requesting FAA acceptance of an MOC should submit its proposed MOC at https://uasdoc.faa.gov. An acceptable MOC may be used to establish the small unmanned aircraft fulfills the safety requirements set forth in § 107.120(a) or § 107.130(a). The MOC must show, through test, analyses, inspection, or any combination of these options that the small unmanned aircraft meets the safety requirements for the respective category of operation over people. The proposed MOC must include a detailed description of the MOC and an explanation of how applying the MOC fulfills the safety requirements of § 107.120(a) or § 107.130(a), or both. The FAA will evaluate the testing procedure and substantiation documents on a case-by-case basis.
8.8.3 W hen reviewing an MO C, the FAA will utilize criteria that include, but are not limited to, the following:
8-20
8.8.3.1 To evaluate compliance with the appropriate safety requirements, the FAA will determine whether the applicant’s methods demonstrate the applicant has properly mitigated the severity of human injury that could occur to an acceptable safety level, as defined in the appropriate aircraft category.
8.8.3.2 The FAA will also determine whether the tests or analyses are performed in accordance with accepted methods used by the medical industry, consumer safety groups, or other peer-reviewed test methods.
8.8.3.3 In addition, the FAA will determine whether the proposed MOC requires unreasonable skill on behalf of the remote pilot or incorporation of mitigations to meet the requirements.
8.8.3.4 The FAA will determine whether the MOC addresses design features such as deployable devices (i.e., parachutes) or other features independent of the small unmanned aircraft to determine whether they assist in fulfilling the safety requirements.
8.8.4 The FAA will indicate acceptance of an MOC by publishing a Notice of Availability in the Federal Register identifying the MOC as accepted and notifying the applicant.
8.8.5 An MOC accepted by the FAA is considered valid whether it comes from a consensus standards body or a person. If a proposed MOC is not accepted by the FAA, the FAA will notify the applicant requesting acceptance of an MOC of any issues with the proposed MOC.
8.9 Declarations of Compliance. For a small unmanned aircraft to be eligible to conduct Category 2 or 3 operations over people, the person who designs, produces, or modifies the small unmanned aircraft must declare compliance with the appropriate performance-based safety requirements through use of an FAA-accepted MOC. The FAA will receive such DOCs via an electronic form available on the FAA’s website https://uasdoc.faa.gov. Submission of a DOC involves the applicant declaring the following information:
• The applicant has demonstrated that the small unmanned aircraft meets the performance-based safety requirements for the category or categories of operation through an FAA-accepted MOC;
• The applicant maintains a process to notify owners of small unmanned aircraft and the FAA of any unsafe conditions that render those small unmanned aircraft noncompliant with part 107 subpart D;
• The applicant verifies that the small unmanned aircraft does not contain any safety defects; and
• The applicant will allow the FAA access to its facilities and technical documents, records, or reports required or witness any test necessary to determine compliance with the DOC.
8-21
8.9.1 Contents of a DOC. An applicant intending to promote a small unmanned aircraft as eligible for operations over people in accordance with Category 2 or Category 3 must submit a DOC to the FAA for acceptance. An applicant submits the DOC through the FAA’s website https://uasdoc.faa.gov. A completed DOC will include information the FAA requires for both determining that a small unmanned aircraft complies with the applicable safety requirements and a means of tracking those models of small unmanned aircraft that were declared compliant. In accordance with § 107.160, applicants will declare they have met the requirements of the rule through an FAA-accepted MOC and include the following information:
1. FAA-accepted MOC used.
2. Name of the applicant.
3. Physical address of the applicant.
4. Email address of the applicant (used for correspondence with the FAA).
5. Small unmanned aircraft make and model, and series, if applicable.
6. Serial number or range of serial numbers for the small unmanned aircraft subject to the DOC (open-ended are permitted).
7. Whether the DOC is an initial or an amended DOC, and if amended, the reason for the resubmittal.
8. Declaration that the applicant:
• Has demonstrated the small unmanned aircraft meets the injury severity limits of Category 2, Category 3, or both, and the prohibition on exposed rotating parts that would cause lacerations;
• Has verified the small unmanned aircraft does not have any safety defects;
• Has satisfied the requirement to maintain a product support and notification process; and
• Will, upon request, allow the Administrator to inspect its facilities and its technical data.
9. Any other information as required by the Administrator.
8.9.2 Additionally, if an applicant resubmits an FAA-accepted DOC, the applicant must include the reason for the amendment. For example, the amendment could include additional serial numbers, document the correction of a safety defect, or correct the misspelling of the applicant’s name or an incorrect address. The FAA will maintain a list of FAA-accepted DOCs and make them publicly available on the FAA website. This allows the FAA and the public to determine which makes and models, and series, if applicable, of small unmanned aircraft are eligible to conduct Categories 2 and 3 operations over people.
8-22 Note: The Administrative function of the DOC Portal must be used to request a correction to an error or to change certain parts of an applicant’s information, such as a name or email address that is currently listed on the FAA-accepted DOC.
8.9.3 After an applicant declares a specific small unmanned aircraft meets the requirements of a particular category, the applicant should ensure the small unmanned aircraft continues to comply with the applicable requirements. By submitting the DOC to the FAA for acceptance, the applicant attests it meets the requirements for part 107 subpart D, including:
8.9.3.1 The applicant declares it has established and maintains a support and notification process to the public applicable to the small unmanned aircraft that are listed on the DOC. The product support and notification process exists to notify small unmanned aircraft owners, the public, and the FAA of safety issues that result in noncompliance with regulatory requirements. Notification to the small unmanned aircraft owners could take the form of a notice on a website or electronic notification to owners. Owners may register their small unmanned aircraft with the manufacturer under a warranty program, or to update the small unmanned aircraft’s software. Manufacturer registration may be used to advise the remote pilot that the small unmanned aircraft does not fulfill the safety requirements for eligibility in one or more categories of operations over people. The person who holds the FAA-accepted DOC should exercise due diligence to ensure the communications involving potential noncompliant conditions are communicated to the responsible individual.
Manufacturers are encouraged to design and utilize a system to facilitate communication between the applicant and the owners of the small unmanned aircraft. Manufacturers should implement their product support and notification system to communicate corrective actions for safety defects.
When the manufacturer can confirm that the safety defects have been corrected for specific serial numbers, a new DOC may be submitted. The manufacturer must verify that those serial numbered aircraft have no safety defects prior to submitting a new DOC.
8.9.3.2 The DOC includes an agreement indicating the person who holds the FAA-accepted DOC will allow the Administrator to inspect its facilities, technical data, and any manufactured small unmanned aircraft when a safety issue warrants that level of FAA involvement. Prior to inspecting the facilities, the FAA will coordinate with the holder of the DOC in advance of the FAA visit to explain the safety concerns. Upon receipt of the FAA notification, the responsible person should be prepared to discuss production and safety procedures, including engineering and quality systems, procedures manuals, and handbooks, when practical. The FAA will expect the responsible person who holds the DOC to be prepared to discuss an evaluation of and proposed solution to the safety concerns. This may include a review of:
8-23
• Critical processes (including special processes) and critical suppliers.
• Recent design changes.
• Significant changes in manufacturing personnel, procedures, or inspections.
• Quality issues or escapes.
• Witness any tests necessary to determine compliance with part 107 subpart D.
• Any additional relevant correspondence or data pertaining to issues discovered in the course of new product deliveries or acceptance.
• Service history data and service difficulties.
Note: The FAA expects the responsible person to be prepared with any necessary information regarding the items above and other relevant quality data, procedures, or records available to evaluate the safety concern.
8.9.4 FAA Acceptance of a DOC . If the FAA determines the applicant has demonstrated compliance with the requirements of part 107 subpart D, it will notify the applicant that it has accepted the DOC. All FAA-accepted DOCs will be made available on the FAA’s website.
8.9.5 Rescinding a DO C. In determining whether to rescind a DOC, the FAA will consider any safety defect, material, component, or feature on a small unmanned aircraft that increases the likelihood that the small unmanned aircraft could cause a serious injury to a person during an operation over people. If such a condition exists, the FAA will initiate contact with the person who holds the DOC by email notification to discuss resolution of the safety defect. The FAA could rescind a DOC if a small unmanned aircraft is no longer compliant with the applicable safety requirements or the prohibition on exposed rotating parts that would cause lacerations. Additionally, the FAA could rescind a DOC if a small unmanned aircraft contains a safety defect and the applicant is unable or unwilling to correct it or if the FAA finds a DOC is in violation of § 107.5.
8.9.5.1 I n a case where a person initially declared a small unmanned aircraft compliant with both Category 2 and Category 3, and the FAA finds it necessary to rescind the DOC for one of the categories, the FAA will take the following actions. First, the FAA will issue a notice to the applicant proposing to rescind the DOC. The notice would set forth the agency’s basis for the proposed rescission and provide the applicant 30 calendar-days to submit information to refute the proposed notice of rescission. If the holder of the DOC does not provide information demonstrating that the small unmanned aircraft meets the applicable safety requirements within 30 calendar-days, the FAA will issue a notice rescinding the DOC. In addition to publishing any final rescission of a DOC on the FAA website, the FAA may publish notification of any applicable safety defects in the Federal Register as a Notice
8-24 of Availability. Such a notice will inform remote pilots that the identified aircraft are no longer eligible to conduct operations over people.
8.9.5.2 If the FAA rescinds a DOC for a small unmanned aircraft because of a safety issue, a small unmanned aircraft can be modified such that the safety issue is resolved. The person may then seek acceptance of the modified small unmanned aircraft by submitting a new DOC. In a scenario in which the FAA previously rescinded a DOC due to a safety issue, the newly submitted DOC will be subject to review by the FAA. The applicant will receive notification from the FAA once the DOC is accepted.
8.9.5.3 If the FAA rescinds a DOC, the FAA will publish the rescission on the FAA website. If the person resolved the safety issue and submitted a new or amended DOC and the FAA determines the person has corrected the safety issue, the FAA will accept the resubmitted DOC.
8.9.6 E mergency Rescission . Prior to rescission of a DOC, the FAA will engage in the safety issue notification process with the person who holds the DOC. However, if the FAA determines an emergency exists and safety of persons requires an immediate rescission of a DOC, the FAA may rescind a DOC without a prior notification as provided in Title 49 of the United States Code (49 U.S.C.) § 46105(c). This emergency rescission would be a final agency action.
8.9.7 Petition for Reconsideration of a Rescission of a DOC. If the FAA rescinds a DOC due to an unresolved safety issue, the person who holds the DOC has the opportunity to petition the FAA for reconsideration. Within 60 days of the date of issuance of a notice of rescission, the person may seek reconsideration by submitting a request to the FAA. The petition for reconsideration must demonstrate that information was not present in the original response and an explanation for why the information was missing, that the FAA made a factual error in its decision to rescind, or that the FAA did not correctly interpret a law, regulation, or precedent. The FAA will consider this petition and issue a final decision either affirming the rescission or withdrawing the rescission. After the FAA issues its final agency decision, the person whose DOC was the subject of the rescission has the option to appeal the action as provided in 49 U.S.C. § 46110. A remote pilot is required to cease operations over people with a small unmanned aircraft listed on a rescinded DOC until final decision has been made on the appeal.
8.10 A ccountabili ty for Holders of DOCs. Any person who holds an FAA-accepted DOC under part 107 subpart D is accountable for the person’s products in several ways. First, applicants must have a way to track their products and to inform the public if their product is deemed unsafe to operate in a particular category for operations over people.
Additionally, applicants must allow the FAA access to technical data, as well as facilities, if the FAA determines an operational safety issue warrants that level of involvement. By submitting the DOC, the applicant declares its willingness to abide by these requirements.
The FAA may review small unmanned aircraft applicants’ procedures, processes, and facilities to determine compliance with this subpart. If the FAA identifies a safety issue that warrants review of an applicant’s data, records, or facilities, an applicant will be
8-25 required to grant access to the information. The FAA expects the holder of an accepted DOC to ensure the following:
• The validity of the MOC to ensure that any injury to a human being upon impact with small unmanned aircraft that is the subject of the DOC does not exceed established safety requirements;
• That the construction of the small unmanned aircraft, related safety analysis, and service history do not reveal the existence of any hazardous conditions or safety defects that could result in noncompliance with the safety requirements; and
• Monitor its manufacturing processes, operational usage, and accident and incident data to ensure the small unmanned aircraft continues to comply with the applicable performance-based safety requirements. This monitoring may also take the form of information received from owners and operators of the small unmanned aircraft.
8.10.1 S afety Defects. The FAA requires holders of an FAA-accepted DOC to comply with this rule by correcting safety defects that would cause a small unmanned aircraft to no longer meet the safety requirements for Categories 2 and 3 operations over people. Any defects identified after the DOC has been accepted must be resolved. If the unresolved safety defect results in the FAA rescinding the DOC, the person correcting the safety issue must submit a new DOC prior to being eligible to resume operations over people.
Alternatively, if the holder of the DOC does not correct the safety issue, the owner or operator of the aircraft could correct the safety issue and submit a new DOC, if they are capable and willing to satisfy all eligibility requirements of the DOC. Holders of an FAA-accepted DOC are required to establish and maintain a product support and notification process and provide remote pilot operating instructions for the respective small unmanned aircraft.
8.10.1.1 S afety defects may be identified through a variety of means. The safety defects may be identified through owner complaints, industry safety bulletins, or an individual manufacturer’s notification. If the safety defect has been identified by the FAA, we will notify the holder of the FAA-accepted DOC of the defect. The holder will have an opportunity to respond by either correcting the defect or demonstrating the small unmanned aircraft meets the safety requirements. Any rescission of a DOC will be made available on the FAA website. These actions serve to notify remote pilots that the identified aircraft is no longer eligible to conduct operations over people. The rescission of a DOC does not render a small unmanned aircraft inoperable, but rather unsafe and ineligible for operations over people.
8.10.2 O wner and FAA Notification Process . An applicant who seeks FAA acceptance of a DOC will declare on its DOC that it has a process in place to notify owners, the public, and the FAA of any defect of condition that causes the small unmanned aircraft to no longer meet the requirements of the subpart or that it contains any safety defects.
8-26
8.10.2.1 If, after submitting and receiving FAA acceptance of a DOC for a particular small unmanned aircraft, the applicant determines that the small unmanned aircraft no longer meets the safety requirements for the category declared, the person must notify the public and the FAA. The notification to the public and owners of the small unmanned aircraft should state that the small unmanned aircraft is not eligible for operations over people until the safety defect has been corrected. The notification to the FAA will describe the nature of the noncompliance and how the applicant will address it. If an applicant chooses to correct the safety defect and submits a new DOC that is reviewed and accepted by the FAA, the applicant should notify the public and owners of that make/model that the small unmanned aircraft is again eligible for operations over people in the respective category or categories.
8.10.2.2 Notification to the public could take several forms, as described in paragraph 8.10.2.1 above. The notice should advise remote pilots that the small unmanned aircraft is no longer eligible to operate over people pursuant to one or more of the specified categories. The FAA expects holders of an FAA-accepted DOC to exercise due diligence to ensure the intended audience receives the communications involving potential unsafe conditions.
Applicants should design and utilize a system that facilitates communication with the owners of the small unmanned aircraft. It is important for owners and operators of small unmanned aircraft to be advised that their aircraft may have a safety defect.
8.10.2.3 A holder of an FAA-accepted DOC must notify the FAA of any safety issues it identifies. Although the FAA could use sources other than reports to identify potentially hazardous products, reporting can provide the most timely and effective source of information about small unmanned aircraft.
Manufacturers of small unmanned aircraft eligible to conduct operations over people should develop a system for maintaining and reviewing information about their products that might identify when their product has a safety issue that may result in noncompliance for operations over people. This information includes, but is not limited to, consumer complaints, warranty returns, insurance claims or payments, product liability lawsuits, reports of production problems, product testing, or other critical analyses of products. Reporting a safety issue to the FAA would not automatically mean that the FAA would determine that the small unmanned aircraft is no longer eligible to operate over people, or that corrective action is necessary. The FAA would evaluate the report and work with holders of an FAA-accepted DOC to determine if corrective action is appropriate. Holders of an FAA-accepted DOC may notify the FAA of safety issues through the FAA website.
8.10.2.4 As part of the notification to the FAA, the holder of the DOC should include information regarding the nature of the safety issue, and how the manufacturer, the remote pilot, or another party will correct the issue. Once the safety issue is corrected, the applicant will submit a DOC to the FAA for acceptance. Once the DOC has been accepted, the remote pilot may operate
8-27 that small unmanned aircraft over people in the category or categories for which compliance was declared. If the holder is unable or unwilling to address the safety issue, the FAA may begin the rescission process as described in paragraph 8.9.5. This safety issue may not necessarily render the small unmanned aircraft incapable of operation under part 107; rather, it would only necessarily render the small unmanned aircraft ineligible to conduct Category 2 or 3 operations over people without a waiver, exemption, or corrective action provided by an applicant and accepted by the FAA.
8.10.2.5 If a holder of an FAA-accepted DOC identifies a corrective action to address the safety issue, the holder will provide information to the owners and operators and the FAA regarding how the safety issue may be resolved. If the person implements the corrective action to resolve the safety issue, they must use an FAA-accepted MOC to demonstrate the small unmanned aircraft satisfies the safety requirements to conduct Category 2 or 3 operations over people.
8.10.3 Declaring Compliance for Multiple Small Unmanned Aircraft with the Same Make, Model, and Series (If Applicable). The FAA encourages manufacturers to establish and maintain a production quality system or design configuration control system to provide for consistent repeatability of the small unmanned aircraft as identified on the DOC. A system may provide increased confidence that each small unmanned aircraft meets the safety requirements for the category of operation for which the applicant has declared compliance. With a system, an applicant can avoid testing every unit that it manufactures.
8.10.3.1 The FAA may request access to facilities for validation of compliance with applicable industry consensus standards and FAA regulations, as necessary.
As part of the DOC, the applicant who submits the DOC for FAA acceptance agrees to allow unrestricted access to its facilities upon request by the FAA.
8.10.3.2 It is the responsibility of the remote pilot to ensure a small unmanned aircraft is eligible for operations over people for the category declared before conducting such operations. Before conducting operations over people, the remote pilot must determine whether the aircraft is listed on an FAA-accepted DOC appropriate to the category of operations for the intended flight. The remote pilot may accomplish this by visiting the FAA’s website.
8.10.3.3 The FAA will maintain a website listing eligible small unmanned aircraft by make, model, series (if applicable), and category declared that are eligible for operations over people. This FAA website will also indicate those small unmanned aircraft by make, model, series (if applicable), and category that have been found to be in noncompliance with the regulatory requirements through the DOC rescission process. The FAA will publish the final rescission on the FAA website and specify the category of small unmanned aircraft that have been rescinded. If the FAA rescinds a DOC as a result of an unresolved safety issue, the FAA will allow an applicant to petition for reconsideration of