BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 1662
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 5, 2016
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON PRIVACY AND CONSUMER PROTECTION
Ed Chau, Chair
AB 1662
(Chau) - As Amended March 3, 2016
SUBJECT: Unmanned aircraft systems: accident reporting
SUMMARY: Protects people from "hit and run" unmanned aircraft
system (UAS) accidents by requiring UAS operators to remain at
the scene of an accident and provide their name and address
along with valid identification to the victim and the police.
Specifically, this bill:
1)Requires a UAS operator to stay at the scene of any accident
involving the UAS that results in personal injury or damage to
property;
2)Requires the UAS operator to immediately land the UAS at the
nearest location that will not jeopardize the safety of others
and specifies that moving the UAS does not affect the question
of who is at fault in the accident;
AB 1662
Page 2
3)In addition, requires the UAS operator to do one of the
following:
a) Show valid identification (e.g., driver's license or
passport), if available, as well as name and current
address to the injured person;
b) Locate and provide the owner of property damaged in the
accident the name and address of the UAS operator, and show
valid identification if the property owner asks the UAS
operator to show identification; or
c) Leave a written note on the damaged property that
includes the UAS operator's name, address, and a statement
of the circumstances of the accident as well as notify the
police or sheriff's office.
4)Makes violation of the bill subject to a misdemeanor penalty,
including up to six months in jail or a $1,000 fine, or both;
5)Exempts from the bill a UAS operated under specific
authorization from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA),
in accordance with the terms and conditions of that
authorization;
6)Exempts law enforcement from the bill, including police and
fire agencies; and
AB 1662
Page 3
7)Defines "unmanned aircraft" and "unmanned aircraft system"
consistent with federal law.
EXISTING LAW:
1)Vests the FAA with the authority to regulate airspace use,
management and efficiency, air traffic control, safety,
navigational facilities, and aircraft noise. (49 U.S.C. Sec.
40103, 44502, and 44701-44735)
2)Requires, under the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012
(Act), the FAA to integrate safely UAS operation into the
national airspace system by September 30, 2015, and to develop
and implement certification requirements for the operation of
UAS in the national airspace system. (Public Law Number
112-095)
3)Requires, under FAA rules, as of February 19, 2016, federal
registration of a UAS before first flight outdoors, for any
UAS weighing more than 0.55 pounds (250 grams) and less than
55 pounds (approx. 25 kilos), including payloads such as
on-board cameras, and requires UAS owners to be at least 13
years old to register and to provide name, home address, and
email address. Upon registration, UAS owners receive a
Certificate of Aircraft Registration/Proof of Ownership along
with a unique identification number, which must be marked or
affixed to the UAS. (14 CFR Parts 1, 45, 47, 48, 91, and 375)
4)Requires the driver of any vehicle involved in an accident
resulting in personal injury to stop the vehicle immediately
AB 1662
Page 4
at the scene of the accident and provide to the injured person
and any police at the scene of the accident: a) his or her
name and address; b) the name and address of any injured
passenger; c) the registration number of the vehicle; d) the
name and address of the vehicle owner (if different from the
driver); and e) present identification, if requested.
(Vehicle Code (VC) Sections 20001, 20003, 20004)
5)Requires the driver of any vehicle involved in an accident
resulting only in property damage to stop the vehicle
immediately at the nearest location that will not impede
traffic or jeopardize the safety and: a) locate and notify the
owner of the property; b) provide his or her name and address;
c) and present identification, if requested. If the property
owner cannot be found, then the driver must: a) leave a note
on the damaged property with his or her name and address along
with a statement of the circumstances of the accident; and b)
notify the police. (VC 20002)
6)Requires a person who parks and leaves a vehicle which then
becomes a runaway vehicle involved in an accident to follow
the same "hit and run" provisions that apply to other vehicle
accidents. (VC 20002(b))
7)Requires the driver of any vehicle involved in an accident
resulting in personal injury or death to report the accident
to the police within 24 hours, but if the vehicle is a common
carrier vehicle (i.e., bus, taxi, etc.) then the accident must
be reported on or before the 10th day of the month following
the accident. (VC 20008)
FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown
COMMENTS:
AB 1662
Page 5
1)Purpose of this bill . This bill seeks to protect people who
are injured or whose property is damaged in a UAS (or "drone")
accident by requiring UAS operators to remain at the scene of
the accident and provide their name and address along with
valid identification to the victim and to the police. Similar
to California's vehicular "hit and run" law, if the accident
involves property damage and the owner cannot be found, the
bill requires UAS operators to leave their contact information
on the damaged property. This bill is author-sponsored.
2)Author's statement . According to the author, "Despite the
myriad practical applications for UAS, there is an undisputed
need for clear rules to protect privacy and public safety as
more drones enter the skies."
"UAS equipped with cameras, microphones, Internet connections,
and remote controls have enormous potential to invade personal
space and cause personal injury and property damage if systems
fail or operators use them irresponsibly over crowded public
areas, such as city streets, parks and public events.
"Under current law, motor vehicle drivers are required to stop
and provide identification and their contact information if
they are involved in a vehicle accident that causes injury or
property damage. An involved driver who flees the scene of an
accident may also be charged with a misdemeanor if the
accident involved property damage or a felony if the accident
involved personal injury."
3)What are UAS? The FAA defines a UAS as an unmanned aircraft
system and all of the associated support equipment, control
stations, data links, telemetry, and communications and
navigation equipment necessary to operate the unmanned
aircraft. More commonly referred to as drones, a UAS is flown
either by a pilot via a ground control system or autonomously
AB 1662
Page 6
through use of an on-board computer.
4)Proliferation of recreational UAS and new FAA registration
rules . UAS are widely available to the public. Retail UAS
devices outfitted with cameras now range from roughly $300 to
$1,500. The FAA estimates that nearly one million UAS were
sold during the December 2015 holiday season. In anticipation
of the influx of UAS in the skies, the FAA issued new rules in
2015 requiring any UAS weighing between half a pound and 55
pounds to be registered with the FAA by February 19, 2016.
The new FAA registration rules apply only to "model aircraft,"
i.e., recreational UAS.
According to FAA Commissioner Michael Huerta, who led a March
2016 panel on the future of UAS at the SXSW "South by
Southwest" event in Austin, Texas, the FAA now has more than
400,000 UAS registrants, which surpasses the 320,000 piloted
airplanes currently registered with the FAA. Upon
registration, the FAA issues a unique identifier, which must
be affixed to the UAS in a "readily accessible and visible
manner." The unique identifier can then be used to look up
the UAS owner in the event of an accident, for example.
5)Future commercial UAS operation . While mostly still in the
experimental stages, the potential commercial applications for
UAS are growing exponentially. UAS can give the news media
economical and environmentally friendly access to aerial views
of traffic, storms, and other events when compared to the
current use of helicopters and other manned aircraft. UAS are
beginning to be used in the agricultural industry to observe
and measure crops while conserving resources and avoiding the
use of heavy equipment. UAS also show great promise for use
in commercial delivery and communications.
AB 1662
Page 7
6)FAA regulation of commercial UAS in development . In 2012,
Congress passed the Act which required the FAA to establish a
framework for safely integrating commercial UAS into the
national airspace no later than September 30, 2015, and
authorized the FAA to establish interim requirements for the
commercial operation of UAS. Under the interim rules, UAS
operators must meet certain standards and apply for a
commercial use exemption and an FAA Certificate of
Authorization in order to operate in in "navigable airspace,"
which is generally above 500 feet.
On February 15, 2015, the FAA proposed a new framework of
regulations to allow the use of small UAS in the airspace from
the ground up to 500 feet. If enacted, the proposed rules
would limit flights to non-recreational, daylight uses and
would require a commercial UAS pilot to maintain a visual line
of sight with the UAS. Congress is currently considering FAA
reauthorization legislation that contains a number of UAS
provisions, including a proposed requirement that UAS
operators pass an online test, a requirement that UAS contain
certain safety features, and a new program to fund
interception of UAS that fly to close to airports.
7)The federal preemption issue. Once the FAA has finished
promulgating regulations governing the commercial use of UAS,
a future court may find that those regulations preempt certain
state laws - such as this one, if passed - but much remains
uncertain.
For example, in Montalvo v. Spirit Airlines, the Ninth Circuit
held in 2007 that federal law preempts state law aviation
safety standards in areas in which the FAA has issued
"pervasive regulations." In discussing the Montalvo case, the
AB 1662
Page 8
Ninth Circuit found that the specific FAA regulations relevant
in the case were "pervasive" in that they were "specific,"
detail[ed]," "complete," "thorough" and "comprehensive" and
that this pervasiveness evidenced Congressional intent to
broadly preempt state law. The Montalvo court held that
"federal law occupies the entire field of aviation safety.
Congress' intent to displace state law is implicit in the
pervasiveness of the federal regulations, the dominance of the
federal interest in this area, and the legislative goal of
establishing a single, uniform system of control over air
safety." Montalvo v. Spirit Airlines, 508 F.3d 464, 473 (9th
Cir. 2007)
Two years later, in Martin ex rel. Heckman v. Midwest Express
Holdings, Inc., the Ninth Circuit limited the scope of FAA
preemption and held that state law was only preempted if the
specific area covered by the plaintiff's tort claim was the
subject of pervasive federal regulations. Martin ex rel.
Heckman v. Midwest Express Holdings, Inc. 555 F.3d 806, 811
(9th Cir. 2009)
The FAA itself recently took a more concrete position on the
issue of preemption of state UAS regulation. According to a
December 17, 2015 FAA white paper entitled, "State and Local
Regulation of Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS)," the FAA stated
that "[l]aws traditionally related to state and local police
power - including land use, zoning, privacy, trespass, and law
enforcement operations - generally are not subject to federal
regulation." The FAA cited the following as examples:
Requiring police to obtain a warrant before using
AB 1662
Page 9
UAS for surveillance;
Specifying that UAS may not be used for voyeurism;
Prohibiting the use of UAS to hunt or fish or
interfere with someone hunting or fishing; and
Banning the weaponization of UAS.
This bill would appear to fall within the police power,
because it establishes safety and accident reporting standards
to help law enforcement resolve personal injury and property
damage accidents that occur when a UAS crashes with people or
property on the ground. As such, the likelihood of federal
preemption of this bill would likely be minimal.
1)Recent amendments . The author recently amended the bill to
provide a specific exemption for fire agencies under the
bill's general exemption for law enforcement agencies.
2)Arguments in support . According to UAS maker DJI Technology,
"While injuries and property damage involving drones remain
quite rare, AB 1662 ensures that the operator of any drone
involved in such an incident can be held accountable.
Accountability is an important ingredient to safe and
responsible operation, and one that DJI fully supports.
Moreover, we applaud the author's approach of modeling
existing California law regarding similar incidents involving
ground-based vehicles, establishing consistent and predictable
policy for operators and local law enforcement alike."
AB 1662
Page 10
The San Diego County International Airport (SDIA) Board voted
to support AB 1662 because the bill "could assist airports by
expediting our ability to obtain drone operator/ownership
information, and to determine whether or not there may be a
threat to SDIA operations, if a drone is involved in an
incident at the airport. SDIA notes "several occurrences of
drone activity at, and in close proximity to, the airport" and
states "it is sometimes difficult to determine the origin of
drones and whether they were being operated by recreational
users or by individuals with criminal intentions."
3)Related legislation . AB 1680 (Rodriguez) makes it a
misdemeanor to operate a UAS in a way that interferes with
first responders. AB 1680 passed the Assembly Public Safety
Committee on a 7-0 vote and is pending the Assembly
Appropriations Committee.
AB 2320 (Calderon/Low) clarifies that using a UAS to enter the
airspace within which a person is prohibited from entering
under a given protective order is a violation of the
protective order. The bill also prohibits a registered sex
offender from operating a UAS; prohibits operating a UAS in a
way that interferes with emergency response in an emergency;
prohibits using a UAS to stalk another person; and prohibits
using a UAS to deliver contraband into a prison. AB 2320 is
pending before the Assembly Privacy and Consumer Protection
Committee.
AB 1662
Page 11
AB 2724 (Gatto) requires UAS makers to include with the UAS a
copy of FAA safety regulations, and if the UAS is required to
be registered with the FAA, a notice of the registration
requirement. The bill also requires UAS with GPS technology to
be outfitted with a geo-fencing feature and requires UAS
owners to have adequate liability insurance. AB 2724 is
pending before the Assembly Privacy and Consumer Protection
Committee.
SB 810 (Gaines) increases fines for UAS interference with
firefighting activities. SB 810 is pending before the Senate
Public Safety Committee.
SB 868 (Jackson) proposes the State Remote Piloted Aircraft
Act containing numerous UAS regulations. SB 868 is pending
before the Senate Transportation and Housing Committee (and
thereafter the Senate Public Safety Committee).
4)Prior legislation . AB 856 (Calderon), Chapter 521, Statutes
of 2015, expanded the scope of the cause of action in existing
law for physical invasion of privacy by making a person liable
for physical invasion of privacy when the person knowingly
enters "into the airspace" above the land of another person
without permission.
AB 1256 (Bloom), Chapter 852, Statutes of 2014, created a
cause of action for the capture of a visual image or sound
recording of another person with the use of an enhanced visual
or audio device liable for "constructive" invasion of privacy,
AB 1662
Page 12
and made it illegal, and subject to civil liability, to
attempt to obstruct, intimidate, or otherwise interfere with a
person who is attempting to enter or exit a school, medical
facility, or lodging, as defined.
AB 2306 (Chau), Chapter 858, Statutes of 2014, expanded a
person's potential liability for constructive invasion of
privacy, by removing the limitation that the person use a
visual or auditory enhancing device, and instead made the
person liable when using any device to engage in the specified
unlawful activity.
SB 15 (Padilla) of 2013 would have imposed a search warrant
requirement on law enforcement agency use of a UAS in certain
circumstances, would have applied existing civil and criminal
law to prohibited activities with devices or instrumentalities
affixed to, or contained within a UAS, and would have
prohibited equipping a UAS with a weapon, and would have
prohibited using a UAS to invade a person's privacy. SB 15
failed passage in the Assembly Public Safety Committee.
5)Double-referral . This bill has been double-referred to the
Assembly Transportation Committee, where it will be heard if
it passes this Committee.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
Support
Association of California Water Agencies
AB 1662
Page 13
California Police Chiefs Association
DJI Technology
San Diego County Regional Airport Authority
Opposition
None on file
Analysis Prepared by:Jennie Bretschneider / P. & C.P. / (916)
319-2200