Single Market?

In principle, the regulations are clear. However, in practice, the “cross-border operation” of drones in the “specific” category is sometimes complicated. This is more than just a minor detail. On one hand, delays and additional requirements for “Cross-Border Operations” can hinder the scaling of business models. On the other hand, the issue highlights differences in how the European legal framework for drone operations is implemented.

Despite the binding legal framework under Article 13 of EU Regulation 2019/947, the cross-border execution of drone operations in the specific category remains a complex challenge in practice. This is partly due to bureaucratic friction and interface problems between the respective authorities. Language barriers also cannot be underestimated. The most fundamental difficulties, however, stem from national special procedures and differences in how uniform European regulations are implemented into national law.

In principle, the aviation authority responsible for the main residence (for natural persons) or the company headquarters (for legal entities) issues operating permits. This is intended to avoid duplicate processing and potentially differing assessments of the same applications, thereby accelerating procedures through established contacts. Once a permit is granted, the authority forwards it to the authority responsible for the specific operational location. Their task is no longer to evaluate the entire operational concept but merely to check whether adjustments to specific local conditions (Local Mitigating Measures) are necessary.

Discretionary Authority

What sounds like a mere formality in theory often becomes a real problem in practice. Because European regulations are interpreted differently across EU member states, national aviation authorities often exercise their discretionary authority to the point that the process amounts to a complete re-evaluation of the risk assessment. Long processing times, additional coordination obligations with local offices and authorities, and differing national regulations in telecommunications and insurance law further complicate the procedure.

EASA Opinion 6/2026 offers some improvement for cross-border operations by requiring geoinformation for flight zones in machine-readable form and making information and application materials available in English. However, the fundamental issue of differing interpretations of European regulations – such as for BVLOS flights – is unlikely to change with this initiative. Not to mention staffing shortages, complex procedures, and long processing times at the relevant authorities across Europe.

COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2019/947, ARTICLE 13

Cross-border operations or operations outside the state of registration

1. When an UAS operator intends to conduct an operation in the ‘specific’ category for which an operational authorisation has already been granted in accordance with Article 12, and which is intended to take place partially or entirely in the airspace of a Member State other than the Member State of registration, the UAS operator shall provide the competent authority of the Member State of intended operation with an application including the following information:

(a) a copy of the operational authorisation granted to the UAS operator in accordance with Article 12; and

(b) the location(s) of the intended operation including the updated mitigation measures, if needed, to address those risks identified under Article 11(2)(b) which are specific to the local airspace, terrain and population characteristics and the climatic conditions.

2. Upon receipt of the application set out in paragraph 1, the competent authority of the Member State of intended operation shall assess it without undue delay and provide the competent authority of the Member State of Registration and the UAS operator with a confirmation that the updated mitigation measures referred to in point (b) of paragraph 1 are satisfactory for the operation at the intended location. Upon receipt of that confirmation, the UAS operator may start the intended operation and the Member State of registration shall record the updated mitigation measures that the UAS operator has to apply in the operational authorisation issued in accordance with Article 12.

3. When an UAS operator intends to conduct an operation in the ‘specific’ category for which a declaration has been made in accordance with paragraph 5 of Article 5, and which is intended to take place partially or entirely in the airspace of a Member State other than the Member State of registration, the UAS operator shall provide the competent authority of the Member State of the intended operation with a copy of the declaration submitted to the Member State of registration, as well as a copy of the confirmation of receipt and completeness.