In July 2026, Transport Canada hosted public information sessions to provide clarification and help stakeholders submit informed feedback on Notice of Proposed Amendment (NPA) 2026-005 RPAS: Remote Identification, Community-Based Organizations, and Designated Airspace.
The purpose of this webpage is to summarize the main discussion points covered in the information sessions. They are organized according to each theme of the NPA.
To access the presentation materials, please use the document requestor buttons below.
On this page
- Remote Identification (ID)
- Community-Based Organizations (CBOs)
- Designated RPAS Airspace and Geo-Awareness
Remote Identification (ID)
Request a copy of the presentation for the Remote Identification NPA Stakeholder Information Session:
Request a copy of the presentation
-
#1. What kind of drone would need to have Remote Identification (ID)? Would microdrones and First-Person View (FPV) drones need to be compliant?
The application of Transport Canada’s Remote ID requirements would be based on the weight of the drone, including FPV drones and model aircraft. The NPA proposes Remote ID for drones weighing 250 g up to and including 150 kg. Since microdrones fall below the 250 g cutoff for Remote ID, they would not require Remote ID; however, if the drone’s operating weight increases to 250 g or above after installing a payload or other configurable element (e.g., heavier battery), the microdrone would need to have Remote ID. Each drone would need to have Remote ID that is specific to that drone; the Remote ID information would be added to the registration information of the drone in the Drone Management Portal.
-
#2. Will there be any Remote ID carveouts? For example, will there be exemptions from Remote ID for first responders, firefighters, search and rescue, defense, and public safety?
The only proposed carveouts to Remote ID as presented in the NPA, are for pilots that operate on the fixed site of a community-based organization (CBO) and pilots flying a microdrone (drone weighing less than 250 g). The NPA proposes amending Subpart 3 of Part IX of the Canadian Aviation Regulations (CARs) to allow pilots to apply for a Special Flight Operations Certificate (SFOC-RPAS) to operate their drone without Remote ID.
-
#3. How would legacy drones and home-built drones be compliant with the proposed requirements?
Drone pilots with a legacy drone (older drone that is not Remote ID-compatible) or home-built drone (including model aircraft) would comply with Remote ID requirements by retrofitting a device onto the drone. The most common examples on the market are broadcast modules, which are small, add-on hardware devices currently in use internationally. -
#4. Would my Remote ID-compliant drone work in other countries? Would travelers coming to Canada with their drones be Remote ID-compliant?
Transport Canada wants to ensure that Remote ID requirements are as harmonized as possible with international standards in use in other countries. The intent is to ensure, as much as possible, that a Canadian drone pilot’s drone would be Remote ID compliant when they visit other countries and that a foreign drone pilot’s drone would be Remote ID compliant in Canada. TC will look to use internationally-recognized, industry consensus standards to support harmonization.
-
#5. How can I comply with Remote ID requirements if my ground control station or broadcast module doesn’t have a Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) or a way to broadcast the pilot location?
Since certain drone models do not have a GPS on the control station that can broadcast the pilot location, the Remote ID requirements would require the drone/equipped module to transmit the take-off location of the drone, not the pilot location.
-
#6. Since the NPA proposes performance-based technical requirements, would ADS-B be a viable means of compliance?
Due to the already-congested nature of ADS-B use in Canada, TC would prohibit manufacturers from using ADS-B to comply with Remote ID requirements. This is in line with international partners who also prohibit the use of ADS-B for standard Remote ID, including in the United States. However, drones weighing more than 150 kg may be required, as a condition of their Special Flight Operations Certificate (SFOC-RPAS), to use ADS-B or another identification / tracking technology like satellites and transponders. In the future, it is possible that ADS-B may be appropriate for certain complex operations. -
#7. Would drone pilots need to retake knowledge exams and flight reviews once Remote Identification is in force?
Transport Canada does not intend to propose the retaking of exams or flight reviews. TC will conduct education and outreach activities to ensure awareness of the new requirements. Currently, all Pilot Certificates have 24-month recency requirements, which is proposed to be sufficient for pilots to gain the needed knowledge for operating under the proposed Remote ID requirements. -
#8. Why is drone e-conspicuity being proposed before e-conspicuity for general aviation?
TC is working with each stakeholder group in the aviation system to address specific needs with respect to e-conspicuity (the ability for an aircraft to be detected via electronic systems). Remote ID is proposed to be the most appropriate form of e-conspicuity for small and medium drones with the objective of improving awareness and positioning during operations, which will enhance compliance and enforcement of existing regulations and set part of the foundation for enabling more complex drone operations. Other work is underway to assess a path forward for e-conspicuity among other participants in the aviation system. -
#9. Would crewed aircraft be able to detect or see drones with Remote ID?
The proposed Remote ID requirements in the NPA are not intended to provide air traffic management, deconfliction, or detect-and-avoid capabilities. Under the proposal, a drone would broadcast identification and location information that can be received by anyone in the vicinity with compatible receiving equipment or applications. While operators of crewed aircraft could choose to use third-party applications or systems capable of receiving and displaying Remote ID broadcasts, Transport Canada would not provide, mandate, or operate such solutions as part of the proposed Remote ID framework. -
#10. Will Transport Canada consider not mandating the pilot location or encrypt that information so that only authorized individuals (e.g., TC inspectors and delegated law enforcement partners) can access that information?
Anyone who uses an application on their phone or tablet to identify a drone with Remote ID would see the position of the drone, the position of the ground control station (or where the drone took off), and a unique identifier.
Only TC and delegated law enforcement would be able to link the identifier with drone registration information. The public would not have access to any registration information, including any associated personal information about the pilot.
Transport Canada will continue to examine available options regarding the inclusion of pilot location information as the regulatory proposal is developed. However, the proposed Broadcast Remote ID framework is based on the transmission of information over an unencrypted broadcast signal directly from the drone, either through Wi-Fi or Bluetooth. As a result, there are technical limitations on the extent to which broadcast information, including pilot location information (where applicable), can be protected from being received by compatible devices in the vicinity.
The location of the pilot would not be linked to any personally identifiable information. The location of the pilot, or take-off location of the drone, is an important piece of information for compliance and enforcement.
-
#11. Does TC anticipate any changes to spectrum allocation or equipage requirements that would require stakeholder consultations with the Department of Innovation, Science, and Economic Development (ISED)?
No changes to ISED regulations or requirements are anticipated. The proposed regulation for Remote ID, and Network Remote ID specifically, is not expected to require additional anticipated spectrum, equipment, or other regulatory requirements for service providers who want to provide Network Remote ID as a service.
ISED continues to examine broader remotely piloted aircraft systems (RPAS) spectrum policy issues, including the use of commercial mobile networks by RPAS aerial user equipment (UEs), through separate consultation and policy processes: Consultation on a Policy, Licensing and Technical Framework for Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems (RPAS) in the 5030-5091 MHz Band and Certain Bands Used to Provide Commercial Mobile Services.
Community-Based Organizations (CBOs)
Request a copy of the presentation for the Community-Based Organizations NPA Stakeholder Information Session:
Request a copy of the presentation
-
#12. Would a site survey and the use of NAV Drone be required each time someone operates on a CBO’s fixed site?
TC would consider that once a fixed site is declared, certain aspects of a site survey would have already been conducted for that specific area. This would eliminate the need for certain site survey requirements. TC will assess what specific provisions would no longer be required. TC is in preliminary consultations with NAV CANADA regarding the use of the NAV Drone app for CBOs and operations on fixed sites in controlled airspace.
-
#13. Are there any anticipated fees for CBOs and self-declared fixed sites?
There would be a one-time fee for establishing a CBO with no proposed renewals. Fees would apply if the CBO made substantive or administrative changes to their organization. Public consultations on this fee will occur at a later date. TC does not intend to introduce fees for self-declared fixed sites.
-
#14. Why is TC proposing to limit CBO eligibility to regional or national organizations and not an incorporated club that uses only one property?
TC is looking to balance access to CBOs with available resources for processing applications. Due to these constraints, the review and approval of local clubs for CBO status would likely be unfeasible. However, if the single-location clubs merged together to create a regional organization (e.g., a provincial or territorial organization), they would be eligible for CBO status. Future guidance on the definition or regional / national versus local will be provided as TC continues developing the regulations.
-
#15. Would a self-declared RPAS training provider delivering ground school, flight training and flight reviews, qualify for CBO status? Would flight reviews and ground schools fall under the proposed commercial air service prohibition?
The proposed CBO model was not designed for flight schools and training providers. However, TC will continue to explore this topic and will analyze the costs and benefits, as well as alignment with the rest of the aviation system.
-
#16. Would the prohibition for commercial air services also apply to CBO members?
Commercial air service prohibitions would only apply to activities carried out within a CBO’s fixed site. Individuals who are members of CBOs could carry out commercial operations outside of fixed sites as long as they meet all other necessary requirements for commercial activities and Part IX rules, since CBO rules apply to fixed sites exclusively.
-
#17. Would drones flying on a CBO’s fixed site still be required to track flight logs and keep maintenance records?
Drones flying under a CBO would still be responsible for logging flight details and keeping maintenance records. This is to ensure the continuity of records if an aircraft is flown outside a fixed site.
-
#18. Would it be possible to implement the CBO framework such that if rules governing CBOs are violated, the individual violating the rules is responsible rather than the CBO itself?
Appropriate enforcement action would be applied depending on where the violation took place and as determined by any follow-up investigation conducted by TC. If it is determined that the violation occurred because of individual actions, those individuals would be held responsible. By contrast, a fixed site found to be in violation of the rules would be held responsible, including possibly invalidating the fixed site’s declaration. CBOs in violation of the rules would be held responsible as organizations with the possibility of their CBO status being revoked.
-
#19. Would search and rescue organizations, law enforcement, and municipal, provincial, territorial or federal authorities be eligible for CBO status and to self-declare fixed sites to do their work?
At this stage, it is not intended that search and rescue, law enforcement, or other first responders would be eligible for CBO status or fixed site declarations. The CBO framework is not intended to apply to municipal, provincial, territorial, or federal authorities.
-
#20. Why is TC proposing consultation requirements for fixed site declarations?
As fixed sites would introduce additional flight activity that could impact the community, the proposed CBO consultation process would ensure the public’s perspective is considered when a CBO is intending to set up a fixed site. As such, TC proposes a modified version of current aerodrome requirements for public consultation under Subpart 7 Part III (Aerodromes, Airports and Heliports) of the Canadian Aviation Regulations (CARs). The intent is to ensure that the community is aware of the plans to establish a fixed site and flag any concerns that the CBO should mitigate.
-
#21. Would the CBO proposal come into force before or after the proposed Remote ID requirements?
The proposal anticipates that the CBO framework and the Remote ID requirements would come into force in stages, rather than at the same time. Following publication of the final Regulations in the Canada Gazette, Part II, TC would begin accepting applications from early CBOs during the first year, which is anticipated to be in 2028. A year after this initial implementation period, pilots would be able to conduct operations at a CBO's fixed site under the new framework, anticipated for 2029. The proposed Remote ID requirements would come into force later, with full implementation for drone pilots anticipated in 2030. As such, the ability to operate at a declared CBO fixed site is expected to be available before Remote ID becomes mandatory.
Designated RPAS Airspace and Geo-Awareness
Request a copy of the presentation for the Designated Airspace and Geo-Awareness NPA Stakeholder Information Session:
Request a copy of the presentation
-
#22. Would geo-awareness and digital airspace datasets allow conventional aviation to be aware of drones and provide detect-and-avoid (DAA) or deconfliction between conventional aircraft and drones?
The proposal does not provide aircraft deconfliction or serve as a means for detect-and-avoid (DAA). The objective of the proposal is to support drone pilot awareness through visual representation of the airspace and alerting function of potential breach of airspace, which is expected to enhance safety by directly communicating timely and accurate airspace information to drone pilots.
-
#23. Would conventional aircraft be required to have geo-awareness and upload the designated RPAS airspace datasets?
The proposed requirements are intended for drones and drone pilots only. A conventional aircraft pilot may download the data for general awareness, but TC does not intend to introduce any obligations to do so.
-
#24. What are the anticipated costs for manufacturers and drone pilots?
TC does not anticipate high costs for compliance. The geo-awareness requirement would be in line with international partners and industry standards, meaning that most drone models in Canada would already be compliant. TC also does not intend to introduce requirements that all drone models be geo-awareness-compliant, meaning that only compatible models would need to have the geo-awareness function active. TC would provide the geo-zone datasets for manufacturers, which means they would only need to establish workflows to provide the geo-zone updates to pilots from TC’s datasets. The design of the geo-zone datasets will be modeled closely after the standards established in EUROCAE ED318.
TC published preliminary cost assumptions in the Notice of Proposed Amendment (pages 32 to 34). During formal regulatory development, TC will undertake a cost-benefit analysis, which will be included in the Regulatory Impact Assessment Statement during the Canada Gazette, Part I process.
-
#25. Would designated RPAS airspace also apply to conventional aircraft? Is the new airspace mechanism meant to create airspace where only drones can operate?
The designated RPAS airspace would apply to drones only. Other mechanisms already exist to exclude conventional aircraft, such as Class F airspace designations and using section 5.1 of the Aeronautics Act. The designated RPAS airspace mechanism is not intended to create airspace that can be exclusively used by drones. The mechanism would provide TC with the means to create restrictions, prohibitions, caution areas, operational requirements, and/or equipage requirements for drones. The implementation of the proposed airspace mechanism will provide a permanent, enforceable regulatory framework for RPAS restrictions that will replace the current practice of using section 5.1 of the Aeronautics Act, which is intended for temporary restrictions.
-
#26. Who would be able to put in requests for designated RPAS airspace?
Anyone would be eligible to request the creation of an RPAS designated airspace restriction, including law enforcement and operators of critical infrastructure. For these requests to be eligible for consideration by TC, they would need to demonstrate that their airspace request is in the public interest and that the restriction is necessary to ensure safety and security. TC is developing internal processes to assess requests and would provide guidance once it is developed.
-
#27. What would be included in the geo-zone datasets? Would it include Class A-F airspace or national / provincial parks?
The intent is to include designated RPAS airspace into the geo-zone datasets since the proposed airspace mechanism would only be applicable to drones. Therefore, the geo-zones would not communicate existing airspace structures. National and provincial parks restrict drones through different legal frameworks, which prohibit taking off and landing in parks, rather than an airspace restriction. These would not be expressed as designated RPAS airspace. This information is available in the Drone Site Selection Tool and will continue to be available there following the publication of the NPA. In addition, drone pilots are responsible for understanding and following all applicable non-airspace rules/laws that may apply to their operations.
-
#28. What would the publication cycle be for the proposed geo-zone airspace updates? Would they coincide with the publication of the Designated Airspace Handbook (DAH)?
The Designated Airspace Handbook (DAH) is used to establish Class A-F airspace and contains a list of long-term Aeronautics Act section 5.1 restrictions. It is published on a 56-day cycle only. By contrast, TC is proposing near real-time distribution of geo-zone and RPAS designated airspace datasets through electronic means that can be downloaded via a firmware update to the drone pilot’s ground control station.
-
#29. Would the current section 5.1 drone restrictions in the DAH be transferred to the new Transport Canada publication?
We are anticipating a short transition period where the list of current RPAS restrictions would coexist in both the Designated Airspace Handbook and the Transport Canada publication, which may be a website, before fully transferring them. The intention in the future is for the list of RPAS restricted airspaces to exist exclusively in the new publication and geo-zone dataset.
-
#30. Would the proposed geo-awareness function and the proposed designated RPAS airspace restrict drones from flying or require permission from the drone manufacturer or others to take off?
The airspace mechanism and geo-awareness function being proposed is not intended to physically prevent drones from flying in designated RPAS airspace. Geo-awareness is not a “geofencing” mechanism, which require permissions before taking flight. Geo awareness would provide drone pilots with information, alerting, and additional awareness while flying their drones.
-
#31. How would drone pilots receive geo-zone datasets and updates?
TC is proposing requiring drone manufacturers with compatible drone models to provide drone pilots with up-to-date geo-zone data and updates exclusively using the airspace dataset created by TC.