The FAA's Proposed Part 74 Rule: What Critical Infrastructure Operators Should Watch

The FAA's proposed Part 74 rule would create a process for eligible fixed-site facilities to request UAS Facility Restrictions, known as UAFRs. The proposal implements Section 2209 of the FAA Extension, Safety, and Security Act of 2016. It is a proposed rule, not current operating law.

For inspection, survey, and patrol teams, the useful work now is understanding how a future site-specific restriction could affect mission planning and access. That is different from assuming a facility can immediately create its own airspace rule.

What the proposal would do

Under the proposal, a UAFR could define a three-dimensional area around an eligible facility. The FAA would review applications and publish notices as part of the process. The proposed rule does not give a facility independent authority to create a physical boundary or geofence on its own.

The details matter because the framework would be tied to specific facilities, dimensions, and access conditions. A broad label such as critical infrastructure would not tell an operator whether a particular flight is affected.

How access could work

The proposal describes conditions for operations that may be permitted within a UAFR, including compliance with applicable operating rules, Remote ID requirements where applicable, and the shortest practicable transit for an authorized activity. Some operations may also require facility or agency coordination described in a notice.

That means the normal preflight question would become more precise: Is there a published restriction for this exact site, and if so, what does its notice require for this mission?

Monitor notices, not headlines

A proposed rule can change before it is finalized, and a future framework would still need specific designations to affect particular sites. Teams should keep their airspace and client-intake process ready to check official FAA notices, identify the facility contact where appropriate, and build time for access questions before mobilization.

For facility owners, the same discipline applies. Security objectives, authorized work, and communication paths should be documented before a restriction becomes the only answer to an access question.

Prepare without treating the proposal as final

The sensible response is to learn the proposed process and keep current procedures grounded in the rules that are actually in force. That approach keeps operators prepared without turning an NPRM into a present-day prohibition.

Source: Federal Aviation Administration proposed Part 74 rule.