House Study Committee on the Use of Drones

Report of the Committee

December 1, 2015

Georgia House of Representatives

Members of the Committee

Representative Kevin Tanner, Chairman

Representative Dusty Hightower

Representative Eddie Lumsden

Representative Brian Prince

Representative Sam Watson

Staff

Abby Day

Research Analyst

House Budget and Research Office

Jill Travis

Office of Legislative Counsel

Introduction

Commonly referred to as drones or unmanned aircraft systems (UAS), this technology is

taking the nation by storm; however, regulations for their use have fallen behind. The mention of

drones generally stirs up thoughts of military use for most but the useful applications for this

ever changing technology are so much broader than air strikes and reconnaissance missions for

our nation’s armed forces. Drone technology can be used for search and rescue missions, news

gathering, crowd control, GIS mapping, monitoring utilities, storm assessment, film making, and

even agriculture. Many companies, law enforcement agencies, and local governments are

embracing the possibilities this valuable tool might mean for cost savings and improving safety.

It is projected that approximately one million unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) will be

sold during the holiday season this year. Daily we hear about near misses drones have had with

piloted aircraft, interference with helicopters working to put out wildfires, as well as privacy

concerns and infringement on civil liberties. In an effort to find a solution to such issues, the

General Assembly passed House Resolution 744 which established the House Study Committee

on the Use of Drones.

Hearings

The charge of the committee was to study areas of concern including the use of law

enforcement agencies in obtaining evidence in criminal matters as well as in emergency

conditions; the use of drones by state and local governing authorities and agencies; flying drones

over private property and over the property with or without permission; the use of drones to

photograph citizens in their private lives; and flying drones over public property. The committee

held four hearing to gather information and to make recommendations the members may feel the

House needs to consider.

The meetings were held as follows:

• September 30, 2015, Georgia Tech Research Institute

• October 14, 2015, Coverdell Legislative Office Building

• November 4, 2015, Coverdell Legislative Office Building

• November 16, 2015, Coverdell Legislative Office Building

Meeting I

Meeting I centered on presentations which explained the various applications of drones,

emerging and developing technologies, and research that universities in Georgia are conducting.

Don Davis, Cliff Eckert, and Miles Thompson briefed the committee on where the technology

stands today and where it is going. The research team is exploring technologies such as:

autonomy and collaborative control, sense and avoid capability, and various payloads. They also

led research on agricultural use which resulted in over twenty novel uses for drones in crops. The

committee also heard from Michael Wilson, unmanned aircraft manager for the southern region

at the Federal Aviation Administration, about their role in rule making and regulation of the new

popular technology. Mr. Wilson explained that there are government users, commercial users,

and the hobbyist or recreational user which must be regulated. Government users must get a

Certificate of Authorization while commercial users must obtain both a Certificate of

Authorization and a Section 333 Exemption. The rules for these users are outlined in their COAs.

Additionally, the government users self-certify their crew and equipment while the commercial

user must have a special air worthiness certificate. The hobbyist is expected to comply with

section 336 of FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012. They must generally operate within

line of sight, under 400 feet, avoid manned aircraft, fly only during daylight hours, and respect

community-based safety guidelines. The final speaker was Navy retired Rear Admiral, Wendi

Carpenter, who wanted to be sure to remind the committee to consider not only the possible

issues with drone technology but also the opportunities because the technology is not limited to

air. The uses for drones are widespread among air, land, and sea while air currently seems the

most popular.

Meeting II

Meeting II provided a forum for the committee to hear from local governments and the law

enforcement community. The local government representatives, the Association of County

Commissioners of Georgia and the Georgia Municipal Association, echoed one another in stating

that they would like to be able to use the technology for purposes of inspecting infrastructure,

surveying, GIS mapping, monitoring of water and sewer lines, city planning, traffic

management, search and rescue missions, and video production to market cities. They also

maintained the desire to retain control of ordinances to restrict certain flights and noted that they

would not like to see any unfunded mandates. Director of the Georgia Bureau of Investigation,

Vernon Keenan, testified that his department would not want to see any restrictions that would

hamper the ability of the agency to do their jobs. Director Keenan also had no problem with

requiring a warrant to go onto private property because this is already the law and simply adding

drones to that statute did not cause him any concern. The Georgia Chiefs of Police had no

problems with the requirement of a search warrant and stated that drones would allow them to

remain adequately staffed each shift. The Atlanta Police Department spoke on its own behalf and

Chief Jones stated the importance of drone technology in search and rescue missions, crowd

management, and hazmat missions. An additional concern voiced by Chief Jones was the lack of

enforcement of FAA prohibitions of flight around or over critical infrastructure. With the

absence of a physical presence by the FAA, local departments need approval from the state to

enforce the regulations and prohibitions set by the Administration. Chief Grogan with the

Dunwoody police echoed the Atlanta chief and added that the ability to restrict non law

enforcement drones from crime scenes was very important to local departments. He stated that

drones could be beneficial in training officers and community outreach programs. The

sentiments of these departments were reiterated by the Columbia County Sheriffs’ Office and a

presentation by Staff Sargent Harden argued that perhaps the public is generally uneducated

about FAA rules and regulations, that new models have GPS settings to stop drones within the

limits of an airport or the 400 foot ceiling set by the FAA for hobbyists. An additional concern

broached by members of law enforcement was the possibility of users weaponizing drones. The

representatives from these agencies highlighted the need for the explicit prohibition of putting a

weapon on a drone. The Prosecuting Attorneys’ Council highlighted cases regarding the fourth

amendment, expectation of privacy, search and seizure and legitimate uses for drones by law

enforcement.

Meeting III

Meeting III focused on industries currently using or interested in using drones for their

business practices. The Georgia Department of Natural Resources addressed the committee

regarding the desire to see a restriction put on individuals who may attempt to use drones to

harass hunters or who might attempt to weaponize a drone and hunt with it. They felt the

technology provided a good source to monitor docks and marshes, agency research including

monitoring eagle nests, turtle eggs, and activities on the barrier islands. CNN testified in favor of

using drones for the purposes of news gathering in instances of natural disasters, traffic incidents,

and aerial coverage of events. The representative stated that they employ different types of

drones that they have received their exemption from the FAA and they would not like to see

restrictions on those who have been in compliance all along. Phoenix Air testified on behalf of

their use of drones in film-making and explained how much regulation is involved in putting

together a file in order to get a 333 exemption to use a drone on a closed set. The University of

Georgia College of Agriculture and Environmental Sciences spoke to the applications of drones

in agriculture. The uses ranged from crop inspection to spraying to water stress detection to

maturity estimation. This ability was seconded by the co-founder of Agriview Systems based in

Georgia. He also stated that current regulations require line of sight flight and suggested that in

the future, for larger farms, technological monitoring should take the place of the line of sight

requirements. The company Dedrone specializes in drone detection technology and testified that

in order to attract more business to Georgia, a consortium of public private partnerships to

continue to develop and test technology and look into security. The Associated General

Contractors of Georgia suggested a slow pace in developing legislation so as not to get ahead of

the FAA rules that will come out in 2016. Their representative stated that the use of drone

technology in construction is still evolving. While originally used for surveying and inspection,

drone technology is now being considered for use on long duration projects to gather daily

benchmark photos rather than monthly benchmarks. He also noted that allowing drones to go

into a high rise to take these photos and do inspections would improve the safety of construction

personnel. This group prefers a uniform application and therefore hope the legislation would not

be a double mandate when the FAA rules come out. Southern Company emphasized their heavy

engagement with the FAA and their high priority on staying in compliance. The usefulness of

drone technology to the utility was highlighted by a list of practical applications that could prove

valuable to the industry. Drones could be used for storm assessment, lake management, coal pile

surveys, inspection of transmission lines, and other aerial inspections.

Meeting IV

Meeting IV, the final committee meeting, heard testimonies centered around what the

market for this booming technology looks like as well as what Georgia can do to nurture growth

and economic development around the industry. The presenters included a professor from the

School of Aerospace Engineering at Georgia Tech; the Director at the Center of Innovation for

Aerospace at the Georgia Department of Economic Development; the president of the volunteer

group AUVSI Atlanta Chapter; the founder of Guided Systems Technologies, Inc.; and the CEO

of AREA-I. Each of these speakers told the committee how ripe the environment in Georgia is

for this growing market. They praised the Center for Innovation for facilitating connections

between businesses, universities, and other diverse industries to all work together in growing the

workforce, applications, and research. The greatest concern was that too stringent regulation may

hinder those companies already playing by the rules. It was noted over the course of the

committee sessions that the novice users and hobbyists pose the greatest risk whether it be

because of misinformation or lack of education on the rules and regulations which already exist.

The committee was adamant in their recognition of the fact that the 333 Exemption holders and

the companies possessing COAs are maintaining compliance and thus do not need to be over

regulated at the state level. There was additional consensus that the State should avoid passing

legislation which might duplicate what the FAA requires and cause the process to be more

onerous and thus drive business to other states. Georgia’s goal is to remain competitive and to

allow for expansion of this industry and it was clear that as far as those who testified were

concerned, our state is already doing a good job of that. The committee discussed the idea of

forming a commission to help maintain the support and growth that this industry is seeing in

Georgia. The commission would be responsible for helping develop policy to encourage more

industry expansion within the state. Members would include legislators, industry experts, and

others deemed necessary to carry out the task given to the commission.

Committee Recommendations

1. Continue to monitor FAA Regulations with regards to registration requirements of hobbyist

operators. The committee does not want to duplicate the process or hinder the industry.

2. Form a commission made up of legislators, researchers, industry experts, and others deemed

appropriate to help develop policy and encourage industry expansion within the state.

3. Continue to encourage our universities and technical colleges to find ways to get involved by

offering classes, certifications, or any other opportunities that may be deemed necessary.

4. Encourage the state and its agencies to use drone technology in areas where it could provide a

cost savings or improve safety.

5. Look for opportunities to encourage venture capitalists to help with startups in Georgia.

6. Protect citizen privacy by making it unlawful to video or photograph another person’s property

without permission with limited exceptions to this.

7. Prohibit weaponizing a drone.

8. Make it a violation to fly in or around certain locations such as the capitol.

9. Allow local governments to restrict the use of drones on their publically owned land.

10. Make it unlawful to fly around or to interfere with an emergency scene or to interfere with public

safety personnel carrying out official duties.

11. Require law enforcement to have a search warrant to use drones in areas to collect evidence

where someone has a reasonable expectation of privacy.

12. Require any videos or photos taken of private property by a government entity without

evidentiary value to a specific case to be purged.

13. Make it unlawful to take off from or to recover a drone from private or public property without

permission.

14. Prohibit use of drones for hunting and fishing or to use a drone to interfere with someone else that

is hunting, fishing, or trapping.

15. Prohibit the use of drones within so many feet of a public road without permission.

Georgia General Assembly

House Budget and Research Office

This report is submitted pursuant to the following resolution:

HR 744

which created the House Study Committee on the Use of Drones,

to which members were appointed by the Speaker of the House of Representatives

Representative Kevin Tanner, Chairman

Representative Dusty Hightower

Representative Eddie Lumsden

Representative Brian Prince

Representative Sam Watson