BILL ANALYSIS Ó
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 1662|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 1662
Author: Chau (D)
Amended: 3/3/16 in Assembly
Vote: 21
SENATE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE: 6-1, 6/21/16
AYES: Hancock, Glazer, Leno, Liu, Monning, Stone
NOES: Anderson
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: Senate Rule 28.8
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 67-2, 5/19/16 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT: Unmanned aircraft systems: accident reporting
SOURCE: Author
DIGEST: This bill requires 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.
ANALYSIS:
Existing law:
1)Requires, in federal regulations, 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.
AB 1662
Page 2
2)Establishes a Division of Aeronautics within the California
Department of Transportation (Caltrans). (Public Utilities
Code §§ 21001 et seq)
3)Requires, in federal law, under the Aviation Administration
Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, 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.)
4)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 six months in jail, a $1,000
fine, or both. (Vehicle Code § 20002)
5)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))
This bill:
1)Requires the operator of the UAS involved in an accident
resulting in injury to an individual or damage to property to
immediately land the aircraft at the nearest location that
will not jeopardize the safety of others.
2)Requires the operator to present his or her valid
identification and his or her name and current residence
address to the injured individual.
3)Requires the operator to locate and notify the owner or person
AB 1662
Page 3
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.
4)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.
5)Makes a violation of these requirements a misdemeanor,
punishable by up to six months in jail, a $1,000 fine, or
both.
6)Exempts from these requirements law enforcement and a UAS
operated under specific authorization from the FAA, in
accordance with the terms and conditions of that
authorization.
7)Defines "unmanned aircraft" and "unmanned aircraft system"
consistent with federal law.
Background
This bill requires 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.
UASs 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
AB 1662
Page 4
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
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 appears 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.
FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal
Com.:YesLocal: Yes
SUPPORT: (Verified8/2/16)
Association of California Water Agencies
AB 1662
Page 5
California Fire Chiefs Association
California Police Chiefs Association
DJI
Fire Districts Association of California
San Diego International Airport
OPPOSITION: (Verified8/2/16)
Electronic Frontier Foundation
ARGUMENTS IN 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.
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION: 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"). (See, e.g., http://aerialsports.tv/combat/)
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.
AB 1662
Page 6
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
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.
AB 1662
Page 7
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 67-2, 5/19/16
AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Arambula, Atkins, Baker, Bloom,
Bonilla, Bonta, Brough, Brown, Burke, Calderon, Campos, Chau,
Chiu, Chu, Cooley, Cooper, Dababneh, Dahle, Daly, Dodd,
Eggman, Frazier, Gallagher, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo Garcia,
Gatto, Gipson, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gray, Grove, Roger
Hernández, Holden, Irwin, Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Kim, Lackey,
Levine, Linder, Lopez, Low, Maienschein, Medina, Mullin,
Nazarian, O'Donnell, Olsen, Patterson, Quirk, Ridley-Thomas,
Rodriguez, Salas, Santiago, Steinorth, Mark Stone, Thurmond,
Ting, Wagner, Waldron, Weber, Wilk, Wood, Rendon
NOES: Travis Allen, Harper
NO VOTE RECORDED: Bigelow, Chang, Chávez, Beth Gaines, Hadley,
Mathis, Mayes, McCarty, Melendez, Obernolte, Williams
Prepared by:Mary Kennedy / PUB. S. /
8/3/16 18:49:54
**** END ****