TOP 11 IMPACTS ON CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE UAS OPERATIONS - PART 108 NPRM
- Sep 8, 2025
- 6 min read
The Top 11 Impacts on Critical Infrastructure UAS Operations as per Part 108 NPRM
Understanding the FAA’s Part 108 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM)
The FAA’s Part 108 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) introduces a sweeping new framework for Beyond Visual Line of Sight (BVLOS) drone operations. While it creates opportunities for all sectors, this article focuses on the major questions raised from the perspective of operating such aircraft on critical infrastructure—powerlines, pipelines, and railways, etc.
The Importance of Engagement in the NPRM Phase
Now that we are in the NPRM phase, it is our collective chance to speak up and influence how these new requirements look and function in real-world scenarios. Our experience gives us a unique perspective, and it’s our responsibility to help shape the final regulations. We need to ensure they work—not just in theory, but in the daily reality of future UAS operations.
After reviewing the proposed rule in detail, I’ve put together my top ten “gotchyas”—the key issues that every infrastructure operator needs to consider. These points reflect both the opportunities and the challenges ahead. I believe they’ll significantly impact how we do business under Part 108, for better or for worse. Your feedback to the regulators is paramount. Together, we can help ensure these rules truly serve our industry's needs.
Key Provisions and Their Implications
Below are what I consider some of the most impactful provisions, what they mean, and my thoughts on their implications.
1. Declarative Compliance Approach
2. Airworthiness Acceptance vs. Type Certification
The utility industry is notoriously slow to adopt new technology. We are now asking utilities to adopt larger aircraft with presumably riskier CONOPS to fly their assets. This is based on the premise that the aircraft could have been certified to standards built in part by the same OEM. Is that not a conflict of interest?
3. Permits vs. Certificates
In general terms, the industry has become very proficient at operating lower-class (<55 pound) aircraft. UAS operations with heavier aircraft are almost incomparable in terms of complexity, competency requirements, and required technical aptitude. Certificates will be held only for those competent enough to be trusted with such aircraft. Most operations, to start, will be at the permit level.
4. Shift from Pilot-Centric to Corporate-Centric Model
The UAS industry is already in a financial race to the bottom. OEMs, providers, and service contractors are constantly looking for ways to cut costs, often claiming that “drones are always the cheaper method.”
If I oversee my company’s safety training requirements, does this not mean I will find ways to be “just good enough” from a compliance perspective? If I don’t, my competitors certainly will. This could make them a cheaper solution, allowing them to beat me in competition.
5. Automated Data Service Providers (ADSPs) – Part 146
6. Right-of-Way and Electronic Conspicuity (EC)
Furthermore, consider what this will do to the insurance premiums of manned operations that are affected. I suspect insurance carriers will have major concerns knowing that pilots under their insurance policy could now be liable for an incursion involving any manned operation that takes place in the same area as a “shielded” UAS operation.
Lastly, there is language stating that UAS right-of-way over a manned aircraft would be granted “only with infrastructure owner” approval. Is it wise to give aviation policy discretion to an individual infrastructure asset owner? Infrastructure owners should not have the authority to modify such policy at their discretion.
7. Maintenance & Airworthiness Lifecycle
8. Noise & Environmental Standards
9. Population Density Categories
10. Cybersecurity Requirements
11. Safety Management System (SMS) Mandate
Final Thoughts
Part 108 is an ambitious step toward normalizing BVLOS. However, for critical infrastructure operators, its current form introduces ambiguity and safety concerns that could undermine adoption. The rule needs sharper clarity on standardization, right-of-way authority, and performance benchmarks. Otherwise, we risk creating a system that slows or cripples the role of UAS in critical infrastructure resiliency.
Energy Utilities Impacts
From the perspective of energy utilities, Part 108 is poised to reshape operational risk paradigms for UAS operations. The rule will require utilities to invest in more sophisticated operational protocols, dedicated compliance staff, and robust technology solutions. Financially, these new requirements may drive up initial program costs—particularly in SMS implementation, regulatory reporting, and overall understanding of Part 108. Yet, they suggest longer-term reductions in risk exposure and financial ROI. The expected trend is the emergence of true enterprise-scale UAS programs, where utilities consolidate operations, automate compliance, and leverage data-driven safety performance as a strategic advantage in regulatory and public engagement.
Service Providers Impacts
Part 108 presents a double-edged sword for service providers, ranging from large enterprise operators to small contractors. While robust safety and cybersecurity mandates elevate the credibility of service offerings and open doors to higher-value contracts, they also introduce administrative and documentation burdens that may be prohibitive for smaller firms. Operationally, service providers must train staff on new compliance protocols and rethink risk mitigation at a level that few have experience in. Financially, the upfront investment could lead to a larger phase of industry consolidation, as smaller players either merge or specialize to survive. The anticipated trend is the emergence of tiered service markets, with contractors differentiating themselves based on compliance sophistication and technology integration. Meanwhile, most of the large routine inspection work migrates to larger, well-capitalized firms.
OEM Impacts
Manufacturers face both challenges and opportunities as Part 108 tightens security and performance standards for UAS hardware and software. Operationally, product development cycles will lengthen to accommodate cybersecurity, reliability, and safety benchmarks. This could potentially increase R&D expenditure and time-to-market. However, manufacturers able to meet or exceed regulatory standards will benefit from enhanced market access and stronger customer trust. The financial impact will be most felt by firms needing to redesign legacy platforms to comply. Those who succeed can capitalize on a trend toward “compliance-certified” products: platforms pre-approved for critical infrastructure use, commanding premium pricing and facilitating rapid adoption by utilities and service providers.
I do, however, fear a phase of “market adjustment.” Part 107 operations have crafted a narrative of price competitiveness. This has led to a spiral effect on bottom-dollar pricing for services. Part 108 and the suggested compliance requirements are ambiguous and leave much detail to be desired. I imagine that pricing for such systems will spike, creating an “expectation reset” as the industry grapples with the harsh financial and operational requirements to operate BVLOS routinely.
I implore you to take advantage of this NPRM to research the Part yourself and think about how it could affect your use of UAS. We, as citizens, have the authority to make our voices heard through every single comment submitted. Getting Part 108 wrong the first time could prove disastrous.
This is certainly an exciting time for UAS in the NAS. Just be thoughtful and safe.
Nate Ernst
President, The Tactien Group, LLC
About The Author
As Founder and President of The Tactien Group, Nate Ernst is dedicated to advancing the secure integration of unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) into critical infrastructure operations. He leverages a career that blends hands-on deployment experience with regulatory compliance, operating some of the largest and most complex UAS in the National Airspace commercially.
Drawing on years of experience at the intersection of aviation innovation and infrastructure risk management, Ernst has guided organizations through evolving regulatory landscapes and complex technology adoption. His work is driven by the conviction that robust safety management, operational agility, and compliance are not mutually exclusive but rather essential pillars for a resilient and future-ready infrastructure ecosystem.
About The Tactien Group
The Tactien Group is a leading advisory and technology partner at the crossroads of aviation innovation and critical infrastructure protection. With a mission to empower operators, regulators, and asset owners, Tactien delivers actionable intelligence, regulatory navigation, and operational advisory services tailored for unmanned systems and advanced airborne operations. Leveraging deep expertise in emerging aviation technologies and decades of experience in infrastructure risk management, Tactien guides stakeholders through complex regulatory changes—like those introduced by Part 108—ensuring safety and compliance without sacrificing operational agility.
Tactien’s value proposition lies in its unique ability to pragmatically translate the hypothetical into a positive ROI. The firm offers strategic consulting, operations optimization, safety management system development, and hands-on deployment support for utilities, energy companies, transportation agencies, and public entities.
Whether supporting the integration of UAS for powerline inspections, pipeline monitoring, emergency response, or advanced operations, Tactien acts as a trusted partner to de-risk innovation and enable resilient, future-ready solutions.
