Does the $12 million award let a Part 107 pilot fly beyond visual line of sight?

No. The October 5 release funds research projects at designated test sites. It does not amend 14 CFR Part 107 and it does not publish a beyond-visual-line-of-sight operating rule.

Section 925 of the 2024 reauthorization already set aside $6 million a year for fiscal 2025 through 2028 as matching funds at designated UAS test ranges. Two years of that authorization equals the $12 million in the October 5 note.

Which test sites are on the current list?

The October 5 newsroom note names nine: Alaska, North Dakota, New Mexico, Nevada, New York, Texas A&M-Corpus Christi, Virginia Mid-Atlantic Aviation Partnership, the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma, and the Indiana Economic Development Corporation. The BAA page, last updated March 30, 2026, still said seven.

Can a contractor treat a BAA project as a Part 107 job?

Only if the flight itself is inside Part 107 and the client contract says so. Research demonstrations run on the range authorization. Ask for the approval number before travel.

FAA Puts $12 Million Into 19 Drone Test-Site Projects

The $12 million is two years of a line Congress already wrote. It is not a new way to fly.

By Robert Rahm October 7, 2026

On October 5, 2026, the Federal Aviation Administration said it had awarded $12 million to 19 drone research and testing projects. The money moves through the Unmanned Aircraft Systems Broad Agency Announcement Program. Each project is supposed to work with an FAA-designated UAS test site. Administrator Bryan Bedford said the program gives the agency another way to work with industry and the test sites on technologies “critical to safe drone integration,” and that the research should produce better data on operational challenges. He did not say it changes who may fly, or how.

That distinction is the whole story for a Part 107 remote pilot.

The money was already in the statute

Section 925 of the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024, Public Law 118-63, set aside $6 million for each of fiscal years 2025 through 2028. The FAA quotes the section on its BAA page. The money is for matching funds to commercial entities that contract with a UAS test range to demonstrate or validate technologies the FAA considers essential to safe integration, and for supporting that work at a designated range. The statute says the funding is divided evenly among designated ranges and remains available until expended.

Two years of that authorization is $12 million. The October 5 newsroom note is the award list, not a new appropriation. The BAA page, last updated March 30, 2026, still describes the program as funding Qualified Commercial Entities partnered with a designated test site. It also still says seven sites. The October 5 note lists nine.

Nine sites, not seven

The current newsroom list is:

Alaska Center for Unmanned Aircraft Systems Integration
Northern Plains UAS Test Site, North Dakota
New Mexico State University UAS Test Site
State of Nevada UAS Test Site
New York UAS Test Site
Texas A&M University–Corpus Christi Autonomy Research Institute
Mid-Atlantic Aviation Partnership, Virginia
Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma
Indiana Economic Development Corporation

A proposal that cites “the FAA test site” without naming which of those nine holds the flight is not specific enough to schedule crew. The March page and the October note do not agree on the count. Use the October 5 list until the BAA page catches up, and confirm the site on the FAA locations page before anyone travels.

What the 19 lines actually say

Fourteen organizations share the 19 projects. ANRA Technologies has four. SPS Aerial Remote Sensing has three. The FAA’s own descriptions are short. They are still specific enough to sort.

Detect-and-avoid and visibility: General Atomics, ground systems to help drones avoid other aircraft. OneRadio Corporation, passive radar for the same problem. Skydweller, onboard systems for large drones. SPS, a visibility-technology test and a separate tool to measure sensor performance. Oklahoma State University, visibility work under the Aero Aware project.

Identity and traffic: DroneUp, a secure way to verify drone identity and approval to fly. ANRA, a common altitude reference; tools to connect drone traffic systems with traditional air traffic at airports; AI tools to identify drone types; and tools tying air-taxi operations, vertiports, and flight procedures together. Aerial Vantage, tools to manage reserved airspace for drones in cities. ResilienX, software to coordinate missions and resources. SPS, a sensor system for traffic management and counter-drone operations.

Longer-range work: NAVMAR, systems to help large drones fly safely. Devorto Corporation, a long-range cargo drone service. Censys Technologies, satellite communications for long-range flights. Lighthouse Avionics, surveillance tools for long-range routes. Frequentis USA is listed only as “a drone technology demonstration.” The release does not name the technology. Do not invent one in a quote.

None of those lines is a waiver a certificate holder can download from DroneZone.

The flight approval does not travel with the card

A research flight at a designated test site runs on the range’s authorization. That is usually a certificate of authorization or another experimental approval held by the site or the qualified commercial entity, not the remote pilot’s routine Part 107 privileges. Part 107 still caps a standard civil small-UAS flight at visual line of sight, 400 feet above ground level except near a structure, and the rest of the operating rules in 14 CFR Part 107. An award announcement does not amend those sections.

Oregon is the current reminder. On October 1, Senators Ron Wyden and Jeff Merkley wrote the FAA that flights under University of Alaska Fairbanks certificates of authorization had been paused since September 11 at the Pendleton UAS Range, Northwest UAV in McMinnville, and the Tillamook UAS Test Range. A range that is dark on its COA is not a Part 107 job a contractor can reprice to fill the week. Say so in the quote. Name the approval number. Do not sell a 5,000-foot research run as a 107 flight because the site is in the news.

The SPS counter-drone line needs the same split. A sensor project is not mitigation authority. Accredited state and local agencies mitigate under the SAFER SKIES framework. The person who executes a mitigation still needs a current Part 107 certificate. A research trailer on a test range does not deputize the crew.

What to put on the proposal

If a client names General Atomics, DroneUp, Censys, ANRA, Skydweller, or any other company on the October 5 list, ask three questions before pricing travel.

Which of the nine sites holds the flight? What is the approval number, and does it cover the day you are being asked to stand visual observer, sensor operator, or launch crew? Is the work the research demonstration, or a separate Part 107 job on the same property?

Keep those answers in different columns. “FAA BAA award” is not a 107.31 or 107.39 waiver. Matching-fund language in Section 925 means the commercial entity is contracting with the range. A hired remote pilot is still a crewmember under whatever approval that contract uses.

The technologies on the list — detect-and-avoid, electronic visibility, identity, airport traffic exchange, satcom past radio line of sight — are the stack routine beyond-visual-line-of-sight was supposed to standardize. The October 5 release does not publish that rule. It funds tests. Bedford’s sentence is the operational limit: better data, then decisions about integration. Data is not a clearance.

The BAA page tells interested parties to watch SAM.gov for future calls. The October 5 note is awards already made. It is not an open solicitation with a deadline in the newsroom text.