[UAS] FW: Drone legislation

[Rahr, Matt - (rahr)]

>From Paul Brierley at the Yuma Center of Excellence for Desert Agriculture (YCEDA).

From: Brierley, Paul E - (paulbrierley)
Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 2016 5:17 PM
To: Rahr, Matt - (rahr)
Subject: Drone legislation

Hi Matt,

I know one of the concerns of those trying to promote the UAS industry in Arizona is that we need to remain very welcoming to UAS companies.  We have the weather that allows testing, will our regulations match that positive?  Here is some info from the Capitol Times Yellow Sheet Report (sorry about the formatting):


DRONES EVERYWHERE As noted yesterday by our sister publication, the Legislative Report, Borrelli is diving deep into the discussion over drones with his H2073 (unmanned aircraft systems; unlawful use). Borrelli said he doesn't want to ban them, but instead wants a state law instead of a patchwork of city rules, adding that he is trying to avoid "knee-jerk reactions" from municipalities. His measure would make it illegal for people to fly drones to "intentionally photograph, electronically record, collect information, conduct surveillance or gather evidence" near critical facilities without permission, or on someone else's property. His measure defines critical facilities to include petroleum and aluminum refineries, chemical manufacturing plants or nuclear power stations. Borrelli's bill provides exemptions for the federal and state governments, as well as for law enforcement and fire departments. He said there isn't an exemption for news organizations, but he's open to it. "Can you imagine the chaos of these things flying around? They can be a safety hazard, a nuisance," he said. For now, Borrelli is leaving the issue of penalties up for discussion, telling our reporter he doesn't want to make "some 17-year-old kid a felon because he's flying a toy around."

WHAT SAY YOU, UNCLE SAM? Borrelli isn't alone in wanting to regulate drones, but it's unclear how his proposal would interact with federal regulations. Last year, there were 168 bills introduced in 45 states on drones. They ranged from regulating their use for hunting to restricting their paparazzi applications, according to the National Conference of Legislatures. The Federal Aviation Administration regulates airspace, and under its current rules, people who fly drones as a hobby may only launch them during daytime and within their line of sight. They can't fly within five miles of an airport, go higher than 500 feet or go faster than 100 miles per hour, and the drone can't weigh more than 55 pounds. Commercial use of drones is illegal under FAA rules, unless the user has a special exemption from the agency. (Borrelli is anticipating a separate Senate bill on commercial drone use.) The FAA plans to finalize rules on drones' commercial use by late spring, according to spokesman Ian Gregor. Gregor, however, won't comment on Borrelli's bill and won't say whether anyone from Arizona had consulted with the FAA on the legislation.

BORRELLI: DON'T WAIT FOR UNCLE SAM When asked if he is wary about running afoul of federal rules, Borrelli said federal power is limited by the US Constitution. "We've surrendered most of our power to the federal government by not standing up," he told our reporter. Though the FAA won't comment on the bill, it sent out a fact sheet to state and local governments last month to give them an idea of what's kosher when it comes to drone regulations. According to the fact sheet, incidents of improper drone use have increased in the past year. Pilots reported interacting with 780 unmanned aircrafts through August 2015, up from 238 in 2014. The FAA said local and state governments need to be careful when attempting to regulate drones. If cities adopt ordinances on their use, it could create a "patchwork quilt" of restrictions, which would hinder the FAA's ability to regulate airspace and flight patterns, the agency said. "A navigable airspace free from inconsistent state and local restrictions is essential to the maintenance of a safe and sound air transportation system," the FAA wrote. The agency recommended consulting with it on potential restrictions on drone operations, particularly when it pertains to flight altitude, paths or bans. But, the FAA wrote, local and state jurisdictions are generally allowed to regulate drones related to "land use, zoning, privacy, trespass and law enforcement operations."
OR WAIT FOR UNCLE SAM Michael Drobac, a senior adviser at the Akin Gump law firm in Washington, DC, said it seems like Borrelli's bill has good intentions, but it is ill-advised. (The law firm represents about 20 companies in the drone industry.) The desire to protect critical facilities makes some sense and most drone operators would respect the idea, he said. But the state would be acting with "broad latitude" if they legislated where users can and can't fly drones, which falls under federal jurisdiction, Drobac said. Plus, other laws, such as those that govern trespassing, would already apply to people using drones improperly and there likely isn't a need for separate laws just for drones, he said. H2073 focuses only on drones and highlights their improper use, which is the exception, not the rule, Drobac said, adding he's not a fan of legislating for the exception. "I always take umbrage when you have lawmakers that are really focused on one technology because I can provide any number of scenarios... with boomerangs and footballs and cameras on sticks. The reality is, where do we stop? Where does this become about drones, specifically?" Drobac said. The multitude of proposals at the state and local levels probably stem from the slow federal process of creating commercial drone rules, but states and cities shouldn't be quick to jump in and adopt rules that could negatively affect their economies, Drobac said. He warned that companies that create or use drone technology may get word that Arizona wouldn't be a good place to do business if regulations are approved here. "What they risk doing is creating a patchwork of laws that eventually will not work... and they risk not getting development related to this technology," he said.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://list.cals.arizona.edu/pipermail/uas/attachments/20160128/15694edb/attachment.htm>