This is the second FAA policy this year aimed at addressing Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) violations. Both were issued, at least in part, as a response to President Trump’s Executive Order “Restoring American Airspace Sovereignty.”
Already, the FAA established its no-nonsense Compliance and Enforcement Bulletin No. 2026-1 in January 2026, which with limited exceptions mandates FAA personnel to take legal enforcement action against most UAS operators alleged to have endangered the public, violated established airspace restrictions, or have operated UAS in furtherance of another crime. The Bulletin also clarified that violations demonstrating a lack of care, judgment, or responsibility by remote pilot certificate holders (i.e., Part 107 certificates) may be subject to both remedial enforcement action, including revocation of all airman certificates, and punitive enforcement action in the form of civil penalties.
The DETER policy is hailed by the FAA as means to more efficiently prosecute operational sUAS violations and deter future violations. In a normal regulatory violation, FAA Aviation Safety Inspectors investigate an alleged violation and compile evidence in an Enforcement Investigative Report (EIR). The EIR is eventually transmitted to the FAA’s Office of Chief Counsel, where FAA lawyers review the EIR to ensure evidentiary sufficiency and compliance with law and policy, among other things, before electing whether to proceed with legal enforcement action. Any legal enforcement action is subject to appeal, either before the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) or the Department of Transportation (DOT) depending on the manner of sanction and nature of the alleged violation. This process, admitted by the FAA as “necessary to ensure fairness and legal sufficiency,” consumes time and resources. The new DETER policy apparently skips this “necessary” process.
Instead, under the DETER policy, sUAS operators alleged to have violated the FARs are provided with a Violation Notice, which includes a proposed penalty. This could include a civil penalty or a certificate suspension. The Notice also includes certain corrective actions the UAS operator would be required to complete. The Notice then gives the operator a choice: either accept the proposed penalty or face a legal enforcement action. That’s the proverbial stick. The carrot is purportedly receiving “significantly reduced" penalties.
For the trouble, the sUAS operator admits to a regulatory violation, will forever have a violation history, and waives any right to appeal or pursue other legal action against the FAA.
On top of that, the operator must decide within 10 days of the Violation Notice whether to waive rights, admit defeat, comply with the proposed penalty (either pay the civil penalty or surrender the certificate), and provide proof that all corrective actions have been satisfied.
To start, DETER will initially be limited to select locations where high volumes of sUAS operations are expected. Presumably, this will include things like concerts, sporting events, air shows, and rallies. It may also include areas of disaster relief, aerial firefighting, or any other locations where high concentrations of sUAS activities are likely. It’s also important to note that DETER is generally intended to apply to operational violations. Certain other violations are categorically excluded, including alcohol or drug-related offenses, weaponized UAS, criminal activity, presidential Temporary Flight Restriction violations under FAR 91.141, lack of qualification, and other particularly egregious conduct.
As of the writing of this article, the DETER policy appears to raise more questions than it answers. How will the FAA satisfy the “necessary” process of ensuring fairness and legal sufficiency in alleged violations subject to DETER if the policy circumvents legal review? Are the proposed penalties under DETER truly “significantly reduced”? What manners of corrective action will the FAA require? Will sUAS operators willingly accept the proposed punishment and waive the right to have a case heard? Will the DETER policy have its intended effect to streamline regulatory enforcement and deter future violations?
Until more is known about the policy, sUAS operators issued a DETER Violation Notice will have to make a quick decision based on limited information: to DETER, or not to DETER.
