Earlier this month Rep. Garamendi (D,CA) introduced HR 3669,
the Safety for Airports and Firefighters by Ensuring Drones Refrain from
Obstructing Necessary Equipment (SAFE DRONE) Act of 2015. The bill would make
it a Federal crime to operate a drone near a hub-airport or federal
firefighting scene.
The bill would add §40A
to 18 USC. It would make it a crime (punishable by fines and/or 1 year in
prison) to operate “a drone in a restricted area” {new §40A(a)}. The bill defines a drone as an unmanned
aircraft as defined in §331(8)
of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (PL
112-95); so this definitely includes both commercial and hobby unmanned
aerial vehicles.
The bill provides its own definition of ‘a restricted area’
{new §40A(c)(2)}:
• Within a 2-mile radius of a small
hub airport, medium hub airport, or large hub airport;
• Within 2 miles of the outermost
perimeter of an ongoing firefighting operation involving the Department of
Agriculture or the Department of the Interior; or
• In an area that is subject to a temporary flight
restriction issued by the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration.
There is no language in the bill that allows for authorized
use in restricted area except for operations by Federal, State, or local unit
of government (or their contractors) in support of firefighting activities.
This would seem to mean that drones could not be used, for instance, in
perimeter security operations at a hub airport.
Moving Forward
Garamendi is not a member of the House Judiciary Committee
(the committee of jurisdiction for this bill), but one of his co-sponsors, Rep.
Lofgren (D,CA) is a fairly influential member of that Committee. This means
that there may be enough political pull to get this to a Committee hearing. The
fact, though, that none of the ten cosponsors are Republicans tends to weigh against
that possibility.
It is not clear at this point how much opposition there
would be to this bill from commercial drone services or manufacturers. Any that
does arise may be able to be placated by the addition of the word ‘unauthorized’
as a modifier of ‘operation’.
Commentary
This bill is obviously a response to several reports of
interference in aerial firefighting operations by drones being sighted in the
area combined with vague FAA reports about drone operations around airports.
Something clearly needs to be done, but a tad bit more attention to detail
needs to be paid in the construction of criminal statutes. Why for example is
operation in an area covered by a temporary FAA flight restriction a crime
operation in an area covered by a permanent FAA flight restriction is not?
The way this bill is currently written a child playing with
a remote controlled helicopter in his yard within two miles of an airport could
be made a felon. While one would like to think that a prosecutor would have
more sense than that, stranger things have happened.
The one thing that does disturb me, however, is that there
are no provisions in the bill that would make unauthorized operation of a drone
over critical infrastructure facilities a crime. Again, some careful attention
to the wording would be required, but this is clearly an area that needs to be
addressed and a bill like this would seem to be the ideal vehicle.
Posts
