BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY
Senator Loni Hancock, Chair
2015 - 2016 Regular
Bill No: AB 1662 Hearing Date: June 21, 2016
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Author: |Chau |
|-----------+-----------------------------------------------------|
|Version: |March 3, 2016 |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Urgency: |No |Fiscal: |Yes |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Consultant:|MK |
| | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Unmanned Aircraft Systems: Accident Reporting
HISTORY
Source: Author
Prior Legislation:SB 167 (Gaines) not heard 2015
SB 170 (Gaines) Vetoed 2015
SB 262 (Galgiani) Failed Senate Judiciary 2015
SB 263 (Gaines) not heard 2015
SB 271 (Gaines) Vetoed 2015
AB 56 (Quirk) inactive Senate Floor
SB 15 (Padilla) failed Assembly Public Safety
2014
AB 1327 (Gorell) Vetoed 2014
Support: Association of California Water Agencies; California
Fire Chiefs Association; California Police Chiefs
Association; DJI; Fire Districts Association of
California; San Diego International Airport
Opposition:Electronic Frontier Foundation
Assembly Floor Vote: 67 - 2
AB 1662 (Chau ) PageB
of?
PURPOSE
The purpose of this bill is to require the operator of any
unmanned aircraft system (UAS) involved in an accident resulting
in injury to an individual or damage to property to perform
certain duties.
Existing federal regulations require all drone owners to
register their drones with the Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA). Commercial drone operators, but not recreational drone
operators, must also obtain FAA authorization, which is granted
on a case-by-case basis.
Existing law establishes a Division of Aeronautics within the
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). (Public
Utilities Code §§ 21001 et seq)
Existing federal law, the Aviation Administration Modernization
and Reform Act of 2012, requires the Secretary of Transportation
to develop a comprehensive plan to safely accelerate the
integration of civil unmanned aircraft systems into the national
airspace system. The plan is required to provide for safe
integration of civil UAS into national airspace as soon as
practicable, not later than September 30, 2015. (112 P.L. 95,
332.)
Existing law 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 safety and do the following: locate and notify the
owner of the property; provide his or her name and address; and
present identification, if requested. If the property owner
cannot be found, then the driver must 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 notify the
police. A violation of these requirements is a misdemeanor,
punishable by up to 6 months in jail, a $1,000 fine, or both.
(Vehicle Code § 20002)
Existing law requires a person who parks and leaves a vehicle
which then becomes a runaway vehicle involved in an accident
causing property damage to follow the same provisions that apply
to other vehicle accidents causing property damage. (Vehicle
Code §20002(b))
AB 1662 (Chau ) PageC
of?
This bill requires the operator of the UAS involved in an
accident resulting in injury to an individual or damage to
property shall immediately land the aircraft at the nearest
location that will not jeopardize the safety of others.
This bill requires the operator to present his or her valid
identification and his or her name and current residence address
to the injured individual.
This bill requires the operator to locate and notify the owner
or person in charge of the damaged property of the name and
address of the operator and, upon being requested to do so,
present his or her valid identification and his or her name and
current residence address to the other property owner or person
in charge of the damaged property.
This bill requires the operator to leave a written notice in a
conspicuous place on the damaged property giving the name and
address of the operator and a statement of the circumstances of
the accident and notify the police department or the sheriff's
department of the jurisdiction where the damage occurred.
This bill makes a violation of these requirements a misdemeanor,
punishable by up to 6 months in jail, a $1,000 fine, or both.
This bill exempts from these requirements law enforcement and a
UAS operated under specific authorization from the Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA), in accordance with the terms and
conditions of that authorization.
This bill defines "unmanned aircraft" and "unmanned aircraft
system" consistent with federal law.
RECEIVERSHIP/OVERCROWDING CRISIS AGGRAVATION
For the past several years this Committee has scrutinized
legislation referred to its jurisdiction for any potential
impact on prison overcrowding. Mindful of the United States
Supreme Court ruling and federal court orders relating to the
state's ability to provide a constitutional level of health care
to its inmate population and the related issue of prison
overcrowding, this Committee has applied its "ROCA" policy as a
content-neutral, provisional measure necessary to ensure that
AB 1662 (Chau ) PageD
of?
the Legislature does not erode progress in reducing prison
overcrowding.
On February 10, 2014, the federal court ordered California to
reduce its in-state adult institution population to 137.5% of
design capacity by February 28, 2016, as follows:
143% of design bed capacity by June 30, 2014;
141.5% of design bed capacity by February 28, 2015; and,
137.5% of design bed capacity by February 28, 2016.
In December of 2015 the administration reported that as "of
December 9, 2015, 112,510 inmates were housed in the State's 34
adult institutions, which amounts to 136.0% of design bed
capacity, and 5,264 inmates were housed in out-of-state
facilities. The current population is 1,212 inmates below the
final court-ordered population benchmark of 137.5% of design bed
capacity, and has been under that benchmark since February
2015." (Defendants' December 2015 Status Report in Response to
February 10, 2014 Order, 2:90-cv-00520 KJM DAD PC, 3-Judge
Court, Coleman v. Brown, Plata v. Brown (fn. omitted).) One
year ago, 115,826 inmates were housed in the State's 34 adult
institutions, which amounted to 140.0% of design bed capacity,
and 8,864 inmates were housed in out-of-state facilities.
(Defendants' December 2014 Status Report in Response to February
10, 2014 Order, 2:90-cv-00520 KJM DAD PC, 3-Judge Court, Coleman
v. Brown, Plata v. Brown (fn. omitted).)
While significant gains have been made in reducing the prison
population, the state must stabilize these advances and
demonstrate to the federal court that California has in place
the "durable solution" to prison overcrowding "consistently
demanded" by the court. (Opinion Re: Order Granting in Part and
Denying in Part Defendants' Request For Extension of December
31, 2013 Deadline, NO. 2:90-cv-0520 LKK DAD (PC), 3-Judge Court,
Coleman v. Brown, Plata v. Brown (2-10-14). The Committee's
consideration of bills that may impact the prison population
therefore will be informed by the following questions:
Whether a proposal erodes a measure which has contributed
to reducing the prison population;
Whether a proposal addresses a major area of public safety
or criminal activity for which there is no other
reasonable, appropriate remedy;
AB 1662 (Chau ) PageE
of?
Whether a proposal addresses a crime which is directly
dangerous to the physical safety of others for which there
is no other reasonably appropriate sanction;
Whether a proposal corrects a constitutional problem or
legislative drafting error; and
Whether a proposal proposes penalties which are
proportionate, and cannot be achieved through any other
reasonably appropriate remedy.
COMMENTS
1. Need for This Bill
According to the author:
Drones are widely available to the public. Retail
recreational drones can be outfitted with cameras and
currently range from roughly $300 to $1,500. The
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) estimates that
nearly one million drones (also known as unmanned
aircraft systems (UAS)), were sold during the holiday
season. In December 2015, in anticipation of an influx
of drones in the skies, the FAA issued new rules
requiring hobbyists to register their drones.
Useful commercial applications for drones are growing
exponentially. Drones 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.
Drones are being used in the agricultural industry to
observe and measure crops while conserving resources
and avoiding the use of heavy equipment. They also
show great promise for use in commercial delivery and
communications.
Despite the myriad practical applications for UAS,
there is an undisputed need for clear rules to protect
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
AB 1662 (Chau ) PageF
of?
use them irresponsibly over crowded public areas, such
as city streets, parks and public events.
With the increasing usage of drones we are seeing more
drone accidents. For, example, a drone crashed into a
power line near Sunset Boulevard in West Hollywood
which knocked out power to 600-700 homes. In September
2015, an 11-month-old baby was injured in Pasadena,
California after she was struck on the head by shrapnel
from a hobbyist's drone that crashed near her stroller.
According to news reports, the 24-year-old drone
hobbyist, who was using his drone to view a nearby
public screening of The Princess Bride, did the right
thing by rushing over to the accident scene to help.
But such a response was not required by law, and the
incident was only one of many drone crashes and near
misses reported in recent months. The Democrat &
Chronicle, part of the USA Today Network, maintains a
public database of drone incidents throughout the
United States:
http://rochester.nydatabases.com/map/domestic-drone-acci
dents .
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.
AB 1662 applies the "hit and run" law to drones since
they are just as capable as cars are of causing
personal injury and property damage when they fall out
of the sky or hover too close to people.
2. Federal Law
Existing federal law vests FAA with the authority to regulate
airspace in all states. In 2012, FAA was required by Congress to
plan for the safe integration of UAS operation into the national
airspace system by September 30, 2015, and to develop and
AB 1662 (Chau ) PageG
of?
implement certification requirements
for the operation of UASs in the national airspace system. A UAS
includes both an unmanned aircraft, commonly referred to as a
drone, and all of the associated support equipment, control
stations, data links, telemetry, and communications and
navigation equipment necessary to operate the unmanned aircraft.
A UAS can be flown either by a pilot via a ground control system
or autonomously through use of an on-board computer.
3. Notification if UAS Causes Injury or Damage
This bill would require the operator of a UAS involved in an
accident to land the vehicle and provide specified information
to other parties involved in the accident, consistent with the
current requirements placed on a driver involved in a motor
vehicle accident. The requirements and penalties associated with
this bill mirror existing statutes relating to hit-and-run
accidents, such as the requirement to leave a note with
identifying information if the accident results only in property
damage.
Unmanned aircraft systems are widely available to the public,
and retail systems outfitted with cameras now range from roughly
$300 to $1,500. The FAA estimates that nearly one million UASs
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 one
half pound and 55 pounds, including payloads such as on-board
cameras, to be registered with the FAA by February 19, 2016. UAS
owners must be at least 13 years old to register and must
provide their name, home address, and email address. Upon
registration under this requirement, 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 unmanned aircraft. This unique identifier can
then be used to look up the UAS owner in the event of an
accident. These registration rules apply only to "model
aircraft," i.e., recreational UASs not used for any commercial
purpose. The FAA is currently in the process of adopting rules
regulating the use of commercial UASs, which currently may only
be authorized by the FAA on a case-by-case. According to FAA
AB 1662 (Chau ) PageH
of?
Administrator Michael Huerta, the FAA now has more than 400,000
UAS registrants in the model aircraft category, which surpasses
the 320,000 piloted airplanes currently registered with the FAA.
While there is little existing law at the state level governing
the use of UAS, it is unclear what effect upcoming FAA
regulations will have on California's ability to regulate
drones. Once the FAA has finished promulgating regulations, a
future court may find that those regulations preempt certain
state laws. The FAA recently issued a document on state and
local regulation of UASs, and stated that laws 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.
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 involving drones.
4. Support
DJI, a manufacturer of consumer and commercial unmanned
aircraft, supports this bill stating:
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 law regarding similar
incidents involving ground-based vehicles, establishing
consistent and predictable policy for operators and
local law enforcement alike.
5. Opposition
AB 1662 (Chau ) PageI
of?
The Electronic Frontier Foundation Opposes this bill stating:
To begin with, we agree that in most cases having a
reporting requirement for accidents involving UAS
(commonly known as drones) is in the public interest.
However, there are scenarios where such a reporting
requirement does not make sense. For example, many
Californians participate in recreational drone combat
competitions (sometimes referred to as "Game of
Drones").<1> In these competitions, the goal is to
damage the other person's drone so that it can no
longer fly, while ensuring that your own drone stays in
the air. These competitions typically take place in
controlled indoor or outdoor environments, between
individuals who are well aware of the risk of damage to
their property (specifically their drones) and for whom
doing quick repairs to fix damage is actually part of
the fun of the competition.
Therefore, we suggest that AB 1662 be amended so that
damage done to property during recreational drone
activities does not trigger its reporting requirement.
To be clear, such a carve-out should only apply if the
damage is done to property-not persons-and only when
the damaged property belongs to someone affiliated with
or taking part in the recreational activity (i.e. not
the property of mere spectators or passersby).
The second flaw in the bill is section 24455(c)(1),
which excludes law enforcement officers and first
responders from the bill's reporting requirements (i.e.
section 24455(a)(1)-(3)). While we understand that in
some situations, it may be necessary for this class of
public servants to continue operating their drone
without interruption, even after causing damage to
people or property, we feel that a total exclusion is
unwarranted and unnecessary.
Therefore, we suggest that AB 1662 be amended so that
the same reporting requirements apply to law
enforcement and first responders as all others, except
-----------------------
<1> See, e.g., http://aerialsports.tv/combat/
AB 1662 (Chau ) PageJ
of?
that they may delay complying with the reporting
requirements if doing so immediately would directly
lead to additional damage to property or injury to
people. In other words, a law enforcement officer could
continue flying his drone if he were using it to track
an armed suspect, and wait to find the injured party
until after the suspect was apprehended. Such a carve
out should not hinder law enforcement or first
responders in any way, while still preserving their
duty to find and exchange information with people
injured by their UAS operations.
Finally, the exception for people operating UAS
pursuant to specific FAA authorizations should also be
removed, as having an authorization from the FAA does
not change the fact that the onus to report the
accident and provide identifying information should be
on the UAS operator, not the person who suffered injury
or whose property was damaged.
Should this bill be amended to make it clear that people
participating in a drone combat competition does not have to
report damage to another drone?
Should this bill be amended to delete the exemption for law
enforcement and fire departments in this bill and require them
to report damage or injury once the official use of the UAS has
been completed?
-- END -
AB 1662 (Chau ) PageK
of?