HomeMy WebLinkAbout13 - Response to the OC Grand Jury — "Drones: Know Before You FlyP°R� CITY OF
ts
o e�n..RT " Otxy
NtW
�G1F0VL City Council Staff Report
August 9, 2016
Agenda Item No. 13
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: City Manager's Office
Dave Kiff, City Manager
949-644-3002, dkiff@newportbeachca.gov
PREPARED BY: Rob Houston, Assistant to the City Manager
TITLE: Response to the OC Grand Jury — "Drones: Know Before You Fly"
ABSTRACT:
The City of Newport Beach (City) is obligated to respond to a recent Orange County
Grand Jury report on the operation and oversight of drones. The response is due by
August 24, 2016.
RECOMMENDATION:
a) Determine that the action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) and 15060(c)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines
because it will not result in a physical change to the environment, directly or
indirectly; and
b) Authorize the Mayor to send a response to the Presiding Judge.
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
There is no fiscal impact related to this item.
DISCUSSION:
On May 26, 2016, the Orange County Grand Jury released a report entitled, "Drones:
Know Before You Fly." The purpose of the report was to examine the expanding use of
recreational drones and their potential impact to Orange County's emergency response
efforts. A complete copy of the report is included as Attachment B.
13-1
Response to the OC Grand Jury — "Drones: Know Before You Fly"
August 9, 2016
Page 2
The Orange County Grand Jury Report included the results of a survey conducted
among Orange County stakeholders including all 34 cities, John Wayne Airport,
Fullerton Municipal Airport, Orange County Fire Authority (OCFA), and Orange County
Sheriff's Department (OCSD). In addition, the report summarized research on the
current drone market, current trends in municipal, state and federal legislation, and
safety issues and incidents involving small drones. The report highlights several
incidents where drone encounters forced emergency response aircraft to suspend
operations.
The discussion and analysis included in the report focuses on the current lack of
education programs and regulation that could clarify safe recreational drone use.
Proposed legislation is pending at both the State and Federal level but the Grand Jury is
recommending that local Orange County Cities, including Newport Beach, adopt local
ordinances to guide the safe use of recreational drones. California Penal Code Sections
933 and 933.05 requires any public agency that the Grand Jury reviews respond to the
findings and recommendations of the Grand Jury Report. The City's proposed response
letter, Attachment A, outlines the City's response to the applicable findings and
recommendations contained in the report.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
Staff recommends the City Council find this action is not subject to the California
Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will
not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the
environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378)
of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it
has no potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or
indirectly.
NOTICING:
The agenda item has been noticed according to the Brown Act (72 hours in advance of
the meeting at which the City Council considers the item).
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A — Proposed draft response to the Grand Jury
Attachment B — Grand Jury Report
13-2
ATTACHMENT A
August 9, 2016
The Honorable Charles Margines
Presiding Judge of the Superior Court
700 Civic Center Drive West
Santa Ana, California 92701
RE: Report of the Orange County Grand Jury — "Drones: Know Before You Fly"
Dear Judge Margines:
The attached is the City of Newport Beach's formal response to the above -noted Grand Jury Report.
If you or any members of the Grand Jury have questions about our response, please do not hesitate to
contact City Manager Dave Kiff at dkiff@newportbeachca.gov or 949-644-3001.
Sincerely,
DIANE DIXON
Mayor of Newport Beach
13-3
RE: Report of the 2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury — "Drones: Know
before You Fly."
FROM: City of Newport Beach, California
DATE: August 9, 2016
The Orange County Grand Jury's recent report, "Drones: Know Before You Fly."
obligates the City to respond no later than August 24, 2016 to:
Findings: F1 to F7; and
Recommendations: R1 to R5, and R9.
City Manager Dave Kiff provides the following responses.
FINDINGS
F1: Recreational drones have greatly increased in number since December 2015
and it is probable their unregulated use will pose significant threats to public
safety and privacy in Orange County cities and unincorporated areas.
The City of Newport Beach disagrees partially with the finding. The City does not have
sufficient information to conclude that recreational drones currently pose a significant
threat to public safety and privacy in the City, in all other Orange County cities, and in
unincorporated areas of the County."
F2: With the exception of the recent Federal Aviation Administration registration
rule, recreational drone owners are largely self -policed, which leads to a wide
range of behavior.
The City of Newport Beach disagrees partially with the finding. In addition to existing
and proposed federal regulations and guidelines, the Governor of California recently
signed AB 856 into law to expand the invasion of personal privacy to include invasions
into the airspace above the land of another without permission. It is the City of Newport
Beach's understanding that the Governor felt that Penal Code sections 148, 148. 1,
148.2, and 402 addressed concerns about a drone's interference with first responders
during emergencies."
F3: Most of the cities and unincorporated areas of the County of Orange do not
have a drone ordinance, nor do they have any immediate plans to enact an
ordinance in the near future.
The City of Newport Beach agrees with the finding.
13-4
F4: Most of the cities provide no educational programs for public awareness of
the safety issues connected to recreational drones.
The City of Newport Beach agrees with the finding.
F5: Some Orange County cities, despite recognizing potential issues with
drones, are awaiting drone -related legislative action or other guidance by the
State of California or FAA before enacting local ordinances.
The City of Newport Beach agrees with the finding.
F6: The FAA -required registration of recreational drones provides a useful tool
for Local enforcement of drone ordinances.
The City of Newport Beach agrees with the finding.
F7: Orange County cities have not established a procedure for reporting drone
incidents, which results in under -reporting of drone safety and privacy events.
The City of Newport Beach disagrees partially with the finding.
This finding implies that all Orange County cities have not established a procedure for
reporting drone incidents, and we do not believe this is the case. For the City of
Newport Beach, the established procedure for reporting drone incidents is to notify the
police department. In the past, members of the public have called the police
department and reported drone incidents, causing the response of on -duty police
officers to investigate each of those incidents.
RECOMMENDATIONS
R1: Each City Council should direct its City Attorney to provide a report to the
city's police department and City Council on existing laws that can be applied to
the use of recreational drones in the city's jurisdiction by December 30, 2016. (F2,
F3, F5, F6)
The recommendation has not yet been implemented and requires further analysis
related to drone usage in the City of Newport Beach.
R2: Each City should adopt a recreational drone ownership and operation
ordinance, with regulations similar to those found in Los Angeles City ordinance
#183912, by March 31, 2017, to the extent not preempted or superseded by
Federal law or Federal regulations. (F1, F2, F3, F5, F6)
The recommendation has not yet been implemented and requires further analysis
related to drone usage in the City of Newport Beach.
13-5
R3: Each City should inform its citizens about laws and ordinances that apply to
recreational drone operators through print media, city -related web sites, social
media sites and/or public forums by March 31, 2017. (F4, F6)
This recommendation has not yet been implemented and requires further analysis
related to drone usage to determine whether additional local laws regulating drone use
are necessary.
R4: Each City should establish and publish on its website a point of contact for
drone -related citizen complaints by December 30, 2016. (F4)
This recommendation has not yet been implemented, but should be implemented by
December 30, 2016.
R5: Each City should post FAA drone ownership and operation educational links
on city -related websites, newsletters, and flyers by December 30, 2016. (F2, F3,
F6)
This recommendation has not yet been implemented, but should be implemented by
December 30, 2016.
R9: The County and each City should formally gather data on recreational drone
incidents within their jurisdictions and review these data annually and report the
results publicly. The first analysis and publication should occur within one year
of the publication of this report. (F1, F2, F3, F7)
This recommendation has not yet been implemented, but should be implemented by
May 27, 2017.
If the Grand Jury has any questions or concerns about this response, please contact
City Manager Dave Kiff at 949-644-3001 or dkiff(o-)-newportbeachca.gov
13-6
ATTACHMENT B
DRONES: KNOW BEFORE YOU FLY
GRAND JURY 2015-2016
13-7
Drones: Know Before You Fly
2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury Page 1
13-8
Drones: Know Before You Fly
Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.....................................................................................................4
BACKGROUND...................................................................................................................... 5
Scopeof this Report............................................................................................................. 5
TheMarket........................................................................................................................... 5
Reasons for the Current Focus on Drones.........................................................................5
METHODOLOGY.................................................................................................................. 6
INVESTIGATION AND ANALYSIS....................................................................................6
Who has Jurisdiction over Hobbyist-Drones?...................................................................7
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).............................................................................
7
California State Drone Laws..............................................................................................
9
Ordinances in Neighboring Communities..........................................................................
9
SafetyConcerns..................................................................................................................10
AirportSafety....................................................................................................................
10
Fire and Law Enforcement Safety....................................................................................
11
Personal Safety Concerns.................................................................................................
11
Drone Ordinance Survey...................................................................................................12
Responses from the Cities..................................................................................................13
Policy- Questions#1-5.....................................................................................................
13
Experience with Small, Privately Owned Drones- Questions#6-9..................................14
Educational Outreach to the Small Drone Community- Question#10 ............................15
KnowBefore You Fly.........................................................................................................16
FINDINGS..............................................................................................................................17
RECOMMENDATIONS.......................................................................................................18
REQUIRED RESPONSES....................................................................................................19
WORKSCITED.....................................................................................................................22
WORKSCONSULTED........................................................................................................24
2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury Page 2
13-9
Drones: Know Before You Fly
APPENDICES........................................................................................................................28
Appendix A: Los Angeles City Municipal Ordinance....................................................28
AppendixB: Acronyms/Glossary.....................................................................................33
Appendix C: CA Penal Code Section 148.1.....................................................................35
Appendix D: CA Penal Code Section 148.2.....................................................................36
Appendix E: CA Penal Code Section 402.........................................................................37
Appendix F: Model Aircraft Guidelines..........................................................................38
Appendix G: Academy of Model Aeronautics National Model Aircraft Safety Code. 39
2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury Page 3
13-10
Drones: Know Before You Fly
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Recent exponential growth in the purchase of low cost unmanned aircraft, popularly called
drones, has created new issues for all consumers and government entities regarding safety and
privacy. What was once a relatively small, build -it -yourself hobby segment has evolved into a
much larger population of consumers interested in using drones as platforms for low cost still
and video photography. In the past, the hobby community organized itself into self -policing
groups which functioned according to acceptable community standards. Now consumers
purchasing drones are much more likely to operate them outside any organized activity, and this
raises questions and concerns about safety and privacy.
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is responsible for all airspace in the United States,
and issues operational guidelines for aircraft. It has chosen to require registration of a drone
weighing more than 0.55 lbs. (8.8oz.), but less than 55 lbs., and used solely for outdoor hobby or
recreation. The FAA has not addressed the use of drones operated at altitudes below 400 ft. with
the exception of requiring operator registration. Registration creates a unique FAA identification
number which must be marked on the registered aircraft. The new FAA registration requirement
provides local law enforcement with the means for tracing ownership of drones and gives teeth
to any local ordinances that may be enacted in the future.
Concurrent with the publication of this report, legislation is going through Congress that could
affect local efforts to regulate the design, ownership, and operation of drones. This could affect
the recommendations of this report. As with all pending legislation, however, it could change
significantly prior to passage, or even fail to pass.
Governor Brown recently vetoed several drone bills that had bipartisan support citing existing
laws that already prohibit interference with first responder duties. Meanwhile, local communities
in California have experienced several serious incidents involving interference with fire -fighting
and law enforcement aircraft, as well as complaints regarding invasion of privacy. Since neither
the Federal nor California State governments have yet interceded, regulation falls to local
communities to enact ordinances tailored to local use of these drones.
In December 2015, the City of Los Angeles passed an ordinance, based upon FAA operational
guidelines, which could serve as a model for the County of Orange and its cities. As a result of
this investigation and in the interest of public safety, the Grand Jury recommends that cities and
the county develop local ordinances and promote drone education.
2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury Page 4
13-11
Drones: Know Before You Fly
BACKGROUND
Scope of this Report
The Grand Jury investigated the vulnerability of the Orange County Fire, Police, and
Sheriff/Coroner Departments to the anticipated increase in ownership of privately -owned hobby
drones, but restricted examination of the topic of drones to the expanding recreational/hobbyist
market and its consequences for Orange County's emergency responders. Therefore this
investigation does not include drones used for commercial purposes such as surveying,
entertainment industry activities and news gathering, or publicly owned drones, such as those
used by law enforcement and public safety entities.
The Market
Until recently, the remotely piloted aircraft community was a relatively small hobbyist group
primarily interested in building and piloting model aircraft. In the past, building a remote-
controlled aircraft entailed a large commitment of time and energy. Flying club enthusiasts
enforced piloting norms and behavior. However, as low-cost drones have become available, the
self-regulating influence of the hobbyist/modeling community has waned. In addition to
inexpensive drones, economical high resolution still and video cameras are available
everywhere. The public's coupling the two has led to a new and very large market — the
hobbyist/recreational user.
Reasons for the Current Focus on Drones
The publication Money Watch estimated that more than one million small drones were sold in
2015. Speaking at an industry conference, Rich Swayze, FAA Assistant Administrator for
Policy, International Affairs and Environment, predicted "a million drones under people's
Christmas trees." A senior industry analyst at Frost & Sullivan said the FAA's guess was fairly
accurate. Mr. Swayze estimated hobby drone sales of 714,000 and about 214,000 commercial
drone sales for 2015, for a total of slightly less than 1 million (Berr 1).
While most new owners will operate responsibly, rogue or careless users may become a problem.
In 2015, San Bernardino County had two incidents where a drone caused a fire -helicopter to stop
dropping water in order to avoid a collision (North Fire 1-2). A Los Angeles County police -
helicopter also had a similar experience (Sema 1-2).
Safety is a prime concern for other airborne vehicles, such as incoming and outgoing aircraft at
the Orange County airports, as well as fixed wing and rotary aircraft operated by the Orange
County Fire Authority, the Sheriff/Coroner's Department, and all first responders. Encounters
2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury Page 5
13-12
Drones: Know Before You Fly
with small drones that enter restricted airspace have the potential for causing lethal damage, and
county officials have expressed concern for the safety of the general public who may be hit by
drones flying at very low altitudes. The new market and the way consumer drones can be flown
raise an important question for Orange County municipalities: Are these consumer drones safe
for operation in a local setting?
The Grand Jury also recognizes, and briefly considered, the issue of privacy. Drones flying over
private property may lead to conflicts with property owners. Drones flying over public property,
such as beaches and parks, may also lead to conflicts over the public enjoyment of such venues.
Several cities reported concerns with privacy during this Grand Jury investigation. While these
concerns do not rise to the level of statistical evidence, they do raise awareness of the nature of
this new problem. Certainly, local municipalities may wish to create ordinances to address
specific issues involving these small drones. (Lawl). Privacy is a valid concern but the scope of
this investigation is focused on the safety issues for our first responders.
METHODOLOGY
The Grand Jury conducted research two ways:
1. Online and through print publications such as newspapers, professional journals, FAA
Press Releases and numerous web sites. In conducting online and print research, the
Grand Jury studied information about the consumer drone market, and current and
pending municipal, state and federal legislation. It also looked at safety issues and
researched incidents involving small drones.
2. Collection of original data from Orange County sources:
From September 21 to November 4, 2015, the Grand Jury conducted a survey among
Orange County stakeholders. This included all thirty-four cities and four additional
entities: John Wayne Airport, Fullerton Municipal Airport, the Orange County Fire
Authority and the Sheriff/Coroner Department. This survey and subsequent interviews
asked about experiences with drones, plans for any local legislation relating to small
drones and whether or not the entities had or contemplated plans to educate the public in
the use of small drones.
INVESTIGATION AND ANALYSIS
The FAA is responsible for all airspace, but, with the exception of requiring operator
registration, has not addressed the use of drones operated at altitudes below 400 ft.
A drone is any aircraft without an on -board pilot. Within this definition there is an incredible
range in shapes, sizes, and capabilities that characterize today's unmanned aircraft. Personal
2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury Page 6
13-13
Drones: Know Before You Fly
drones are currently a hobbyist's item most often used for simple entertainment or for aerial
photography.
A drone system generally consists of three elements: the platform, command and control, and the
payload.
Platform. The term refers to the actual aircraft. In general it may be fixed -wing or rotary.
Currently, consumers prefer various forms of rotary or helicopter platforms because of
their hovering ability. The platform is sometimes given the acronym UAV for Unmanned
Aerial Vehicle.
Command and Control. The term refers to the operator on the ground and the
equipment used to send signals to the platform, telling it what maneuvers to make, how to
navigate and how to operate the onboard sensors.
Payload. The term refers to any package mounted on the platform such as a still or video
camera or other sensor.
While all three elements are technically necessary for a complete system, the portion consisting
of the platform plus payload, namely, that part which is airborne, is generally called the drone.
There is, however, some confusion in terminology, as these systems have various acronyms
which are often used interchangeably. Terms, such as unmanned aerial systems (UAS) or small
unmanned aerial systems (sUAS) are good examples of interchangeable terms. The acronym
UAV (Unmanned Aerial Vehicle) is used for both the platform and payload or the entire system.
For clarity, the consumer must consider the context. For example, FAA regulations regarding
weight, which are concerned only with the airborne portion, may use only the acronym UAS.
Who has Jurisdiction over Hobbyist -Drones?
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
The Federal Aviation Act of 1958 established the FAA and made it responsible for the control
and use of navigable airspace within the United States. The FAA created the National Airspace
System (NAS) to protect persons and property on the ground, and to establish a safe and efficient
air space environment for civil, commercial, and military aviation.
In 2012 Congress passed the FAA Modernization and Reform Act (FMRA), which carved out a
special exemption for model aircraft. The FAA issued guidelines for model aircraft operations
which include the following requirements (Model, 1):
Fly below 400 Feet and remain clear of surrounding obstacle
Keep the aircraft within visual line of sight (VLOS) at all times
Remain clear of and do not interfere with manned aircraft operations
2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury Page 7
13-14
Drones: Know Before You Fly
Do not fly within 5 miles of an airport unless you contact the airport and control tower
before flying
Do not fly near people or stadiums
Do not fly an aircraft that weighs more than 55 lbs.
Do not be careless or reckless with your unmanned aircraft; you could be fined for
endangering people or other aircraft.
Hobby/recreational drones weighing less than 55 lbs. are currently exempt from the FAA
Certification of Authorization (COA) but must operate in accordance with community-based
safety guidelines such as those required by the Academy of Model Aeronautics (AMA), a
national organization recognized by the FAA. The AMA Safety Code allows the public to fly
radio -controlled models in First -Person View (FPV) mode and requires a "spotter" to avoid a
collision. The AMA prohibits public use of vision/video glasses or goggles while operating a
drone. AMA members can take advantage of training programs and mentorships, and these are
guided by best practices. The AMA has also recommended guidelines for selecting flying -sites
that have worked well for decades (Appendix G.)
Section 336 of the 2012 FMRA prohibits the FAA Administrator from promulgating rules or
regulations regarding model aircraft flown strictly for hobby or recreational purposes. There are
some however who believe other governmental agencies, including local jurisdictions, may issue
rules within this domain. Others believe that only the FAA may hold sway there. Both sides do
agree that other entities may impose rules related to takeoff and landing of drones.
In November 2015, the FAA began to require registration of the small systems classified as UAS
whose platform plus payload weighs between 0.55 lbs. (8.8 oz.) and 55 lbs. These specifications
are not related to altitude of operation, but are based solely on weight. Since these small drones
may be used for commercial purposes or recreation, there are different registration criteria for
each. This registration requirement is a powerful tool for identifying owners of drones who may,
intentionally or not, fly in restricted locations or who create a danger or nuisance to the public
(UAS 1-10). It provides a means for enforcing rules and imposing penalties. Registration data is
available to the public at http://registry.faa.gov/aircraftinquiry/ . As of December 21, 2015
registration is required (FAA Small 1-2). Requirements are listed below:
UAS that weighs 8.8 ounces to 55 pounds needs registration before operating;
Registration numbers must be affixed to aircraft and the number covers any/all UAS the
registrant owns;
Operators must be at least 13 years old; and
A fee of $5.00 must accompany online registration.
2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury Page 8
13-15
Drones: Know Before You Fly
Nearly 300,000 owners registered their small, unmanned aircraft in the first 30 days of the FAA
online registration requirement (Rosenberg 1).
Concurrent with the publication of this report, the United States Congress is considering the
Federal Aviation Administration Reauthorization Act of 2016. The legislation contains a
provision calling for federal pre-emption of State or local laws which may affect the ability of
local governments to regulate the design, ownership, and operation of drones. As with all
pending legislation, any of the provisions could change significantly before passage. Therefore,
the Grand Jury advises that the County and cities in Orange County monitor the legislation as
they consider responses to the recommendations of this report.
California State Drone Laws
Although a number of bills regulating the use of drones have passed in both houses of the
California legislature, Governor Jerry Brown signed only one: AB 856, which expands privacy
protections to prevent paparazzi from flying drones over private property. The Governor stated
that existing penal codes cover the criminality of any interference with emergency responders.
The two California laws he refers to are Penal Code 148, sections 148.1, 148.2 and Penal Code
402. Briefly stated, each code says every person who willfully resists or interferes with the
lawful efforts of any public officer, peace officer, fireman, or emergency rescue personnel in the
discharge or attempts to discharge an official duty is guilty of a misdemeanor (Appendix C,D,E).
The Governor did not rule out future legislation at the state level. He added that while drone
technology raises novel issues, it needs to be considered more carefully.
Ordinances in Neighboring Communities
While some states, including California, have taken a go-slow approach, other communities
within the state have recognized the inadequacy of this approach by enacting local drone
ordinances tailored to specific local conditions (State 1-3). On October 14, 2015, the Los
Angeles City Council approved Ordinance Number 183912 of the Los Angeles Municipal Code
covering hobbyist/recreational and commercial drones. This ordinance reflects FAA civilian
drone guidelines and makes, among other things, three salient points:
1. No Person shall operate any Model Aircraft within the City Los Angeles and within 5
miles of an airport without the prior express authorization of the airport air traffic control
tower.
2. No Person shall operate any Model Aircraft within the City of Los Angeles in a manner
that interferes with manned aircraft, and shall always give way to any manned aircraft.
2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury Page 9
13-16
Drones: Know Before You Fly
3. No Person shall operate any Model Aircraft within the City of Los Angeles more than
400 feet above the earth's surface.
Violation of this ordinance is a misdemeanor, punishable by up to $1,000 in fines and six months
in jail (Appendix A).
Another nearby locality that has enacted a drone ordinance is the city of Poway, in San Diego
County. On September 1, 2015 (later updated in October 2015) the Poway City Council
approved an ordinance that bans use of recreational drones in certain designated areas during
emergency situations, particularly brush fires (Jones, 1-2).
Safety Concerns
Airport Safety
The most serious safety concerns involve interaction between small drones and manned aircraft,
especially near airports. The Bard College Center for Study of the Drone report is a
comprehensive and detailed analysis of incidents involving unmanned aircraft and manned
aircraft in the U.S. National Airspace System. Bard College analyzed records from 921 incidents
involving drones and manned aircraft in the national airspace, dating from December 17, 2013 to
September 12, 2015 (Gettinger, 5). Two hundred forty six (246) of the 340 drones identified in the
Bard report were multirotor (i.e. quadcopters, hexacopters, etc.), which are currently the most
desirable for the consumer market. These multirotors represent nearly three quarters of the
drones involved and are indicative of the potential threat to manned aircraft.
Recent incidents involved a pilot or an air traffic controller spotting a drone flying within or near
the flight paths of manned aircraft but not posing an immediate threat of collision. Other
encounters involved incidents of manned aircraft traveling close enough to a drone to meet the
Federal Aviation Administration's definition of a "near midair collision" or close enough that
there was a possible danger of collision. It is important to note over 90% of all incidents occurred
above 400 feet, the maximum altitude at which hobby drones are allowed to fly.
The Bard College report noted that a majority of the incidents reported occurred within five
miles of an airport (prohibited airspace for all drones, regardless of the altitude at which they are
flying). While John Wayne Airport was not part of the report, the Bard College report does show
that there are a significant number of drones that violate FAA guidelines. With the number of
small drones increasing, the potential for lethal incidents also increases. Since Orange County is
home to one large, busy airport, John Wayne, and hosts another smaller airport, Fullerton
Municipal, this information is cause for local concern (Pilot, 1-2).
2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury Page 10
13-17
Drones: Know Before You Fly
Fire and Law Enforcement Safety
A drone in the immediate airspace of any aircraft is a serious, physical threat. In July 2015
firefighting aircraft were grounded for 26 minutes in Southern California because of fear of
collisions with five unmanned aerial vehicles that had been seen in the area. It was the fourth
time in as many weeks that drones had hampered firefighters in Southern California (Guttman,
July 2015). Public safety makes this a big issue. Our first responders need community support as
they perform their duties. Dodging drones should not be an obstacle to our county's emergency
professionals in how they conduct their business.
Orange County first -responders, Fire, Police and Sheriff, have the same safety concerns as
airports. They recognize when drones are encountered at an emergency incident, aircraft
operations must be suspended until the hazard can be mitigated. While assisting San Bernardino
with the Lake Fire, the Orange County Fire Authority experienced a "near miss." First
responders recognize the potential for danger. A police helicopter, tracking a stolen vehicle,
could be seriously challenged with a near -miss drone. The drone could be pulled into a helicopter
engine or collide with its windshield. A fire helicopter, facing the same danger, could be forced
off -course in order to avoid impact.
The Grand Jury learned another concern of custodial law enforcement is the potential use of
drones to smuggle contraband into detention facilities. One deputy described an incident in
which a drone was used to drop a tennis ball filled with drugs into the recreation area.
No one wants a mid-air collision to be the wake-up call for our communities. FAA Administrator
Michael Huerta said, "If you don't know the rules, how can you follow them?" Accidents are
inevitable in the absence of carefully considered local ordinances and educational opportunities
for hobbyist drone owners.
Personal Safety Concerns
Drones flying over large public gatherings at the beach or sporting events may also pose a
potential for injury or damage if the drone is operated improperly. On December 23, 2015, a
World Cup ski race was interrupted when a drone fell out of the sky just missing a racer during
his run (Associated Press). While this incident involved a commercial drone, it indicates the
potential threat drones pose to personal safety.
2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury Page 11
13-18
Drones: Know Before You Fly
Drone Ordinance Survey
The Grand Jury sent a ten question drone survey to all 34 cities in the County, as well as the
Orange County Fire Authority, John Wayne Airport, Fullerton Municipal Airport and the
Sheriff/Corner Department. The Grand Jury offered three fact-finding options: schedule a
personal visit; schedule a phone interview; or return a written response. The majority of cities
responded in writing. Four cities did not answer, creating a response rate of 88%.
The survey questions were divided into three areas: existing policy; experience; and education.
1. Does your agency/department have a policy for the operation of privately -owned drones?
2. Does your agency/department have a policy for the operation of Commercial drones?
3. If there are no policies, why not?
4. Do you feel creating or supporting a drone policy will have a financial impact on your
budget? How?
5. Does your agency/department allow first responders to use drones for emergency
response?
6. Have there been any reported drone accidents or "near misses" by your
agency/department?
7. Have there been any incidents or public complaints involving drones in your jurisdiction?
8. Has physical damage of property, resulting from drone use, been addressed?
9. If a city resident has concerns with a hovering drone, whom should they call or contact?
10. Are there agency -sponsored educational programs available for public awareness
regarding the safety and danger factors involved with operating a drone?
The survey used open-ended questions to allow each entity to share knowledge or concerns. The
Grand Jury reviewed and categorized all responses for analysis and statistical review. The
respondents were as follows: City Managers, Assistant City Manager, Senior Executive Airport
Personnel, Assistant Chief of Operations, Chief of Police, Sergeant, and Deputy Chief. An
Executive Secretary stated her boss answered "No to everything."
2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury Page 12
13-19
Drones: Know Before You Fly
Responses from the Cities
Policy- Questions #1-5
Does your agency/dept have a policy
for the operation of privately -owned
drones?
3.1% 9.4%
87.5%
Figure 1
M Yes
U No
w EvaluaUng
If there are no policies, why not?
6% 3%
KNon Issue
[Evaluating
31% u Await State/Fed
57% RMuni codes exist
iI N/A
3%
Figure 2
The first five survey questions related to the existence of any policy concerning drones. The
results show that the vast majority of Orange County cities have not addressed the presence of
small drones. The survey indicated 88% of responding Orange County cities do not have a policy
or ordinance that addresses the operation of privately -owned recreational drones (Figure 1).
Fifty seven percent (57%) of responding cities consider drones a non -issue. Examples of
comments received from some cities include: "our council has not given us direction"; "we have
not experienced any drone problems"; and "there is little to no issue with our police department."
However there are exceptions: Huntington Beach has a municipal code that restricts remote
controlled model aircraft, which they are updating to include both private and commercial
drones. Dana Point has a municipal code but only in relation to the protection of environmentally
sensitive habitat areas. Thirty one percent (31%) of responding cities are interested in a policy
while stating they are awaiting State or Federal guidelines (Figure 2). The Orange County Fire
Authority agrees a drone poses a collision risk to firefighting aircraft and, if spotted, air
operations must temporarily cease. In response to whether or not implementing a drone
ordinance would have a budgetary effect, half of those responding do not believe that it would
have a significant impact. Those concerned about the impact on their budget cite the following
reasons: staff and legal resources needed to create and enforce an ordinance, along with the costs
to update websites/newsletters, and creating and hosting community educational workshops.
2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury Page 13
13-20
Drones: Know Before You Fly
Experience with Small, Privately Owned Drones- Questions #6-9
Have there been any reported
Drone accidents or "near misses"
by your agency/Dept?
88%
Figure 3
Have there been any incidents or
public complaints involving drones
in your jurisdiction?
4 Yes
34%
r No 1A Yes
1) iNo
66%
Figure 4
If a city resident has concerns with a hovering drone,
whom should they call?
Figure 5
0 Local Police Dept
A Sheriff
a Don't Know
s Other
Four of the survey questions asked about experience with drones and whether there were
reported incidents or complaints. Eleven of the respondent cities reported complaints involving
small drones (Figure 4), including four respondents who reported accidents or near misses
(Figure 3).
The FAA now receives more than 100 UAS sightings each month from pilots, citizens, and law
enforcement. The Grand Jury survey revealed that Orange County cities received nearly 100
drone -related complaints over a period of one year. The Grand Jury feels it is short-sighted for
our county and cities to ignore this emerging concern.
2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury
Page 14
13-21
Drones: Know Before You Fly
To illustrate one such complaint, consider that Huntington Beach reported the Air Support Unit
of their police department employs a helicopter to assist with daily calls for service. This
helicopter has experienced several near misses with drones during routine air patrols and at
active crime scenes. Huntington Beach also noted that residents have complained about drones
hovering over their bedroom windows.
Another beach city also received reports of drones flying over the pier area and recording
sunbathers on the beach. On a different occasion, a Go -Pro camera fell from a drone during an
event and hit the ground near several people, including children. Consider too, that one city
manager reported 37 calls for service involving small drones while another city manager
reported 29 complaints. While hosting a large July 4th parade/festival, a city received several
complaints of nuisance drones in spite of an event flyer stating "NO DRONES."
Most respondents identified a law enforcement agency (police/sheriff) as the source to notify if a
resident has a drone concern. Other entities responded with answers as varied as Community
Services, Code Enforcement, Public Safety, City Manager, 911, and FAA. The Grand Jury noted
the lack of education and consistency in the responses. Members of the public who witness
potential incidents have no information about how and where to report. The OCSD Bomb Squad
said reporting a drone incident is a "major under -reported event." This failure to report indicates
a result of lack of educational information or policy.
Educational Outreach to the Small Drone Community- Question #10
Are there agency -sponsored educational programs
available for public awareness regarding the safety
and danger factors involved with operating a
drone?
6%
34%
Figure 6
rYes
Y No
a Evaluating
To provide guidance to hobbyists, the FAA has partnered with three of the largest hobby drone
manufacturers to create the Know before You Fly website www.knowbeforeyoufl.�org. This
website is heavily promoted by the FAA, hobby drone manufacturers, and responsible hobby
2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury Page 15
13-22
Drones: Know Before You Fly
drone owners (AMA 1-2). The B4UFLY smartphone application is another educational resource
(FAA Releases 1).
In addition to educational resources provided by the FAA, two of the cities reported having
educational resources available to educate operators of hobbyist drones. Costa Mesa has a
Video/TV production CMTV3. Huntington Beach plans to include drone safety information,
along with other safety programs, on their Facebook page. These two cities are the exception.
The majority of the cities responded to Question #10 on our survey to the effect that there are no
city sponsored educational programs available at this time for public awareness regarding the
safety and danger of operating a drone. The various explanations included:
"Educational materials are available with an online search"
"We can put an FAA flyer in each mailer that goes out to all residents"
"The Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) have excellent educational
materials"
"We have a bi-weekly newsletter online, but no drone info on it"
"Our goal is to distribute information from State and Federal sources"
"We could consider a quarterly newsletter"
"The schools should be teaching drone safety"
"We are a very small department"
The county and cities have a myriad of untapped, inexpensive options with which to speak to the
local residents. Notices delivered to residents via postal or electronic mail should contain
information on drone safety. FAA- Model Aircraft flyers should be available at libraries, city
buildings, police departments, and schools. County and city websites should address safety
issues. Parades, festivals and street fairs should promote drone safety.
Additionally, Orange County has nearly 5,000 Homeowners Associations. Most HOAs have a
website or newsletter. The Davis -Stirling Common Interest Act suggests each HOA board create
a rule to address drone noise, safety and privacy issues. If drones are flown by people outside the
association, the HOA would need to go to the city or county to seek a ban. (Davis -Stirling)
Know Before You Fly
Except for a small smattering of inconsequential incidents, there have been no major problems
reported. This is good news, considering that airports and fire/law enforcement departments
have the most at stake from drone mishaps. Hobby -recreational drones are the "new -kid on the
block." It is no surprise that 94% of our cities have no educational programs available for public
awareness regarding the safety and danger factors involved with flying a drone. Most drone
operators want to do the right thing but where are the guides, mentors or teachers? This is a new
2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury Page 16
13-23
Drones: Know Before You Fly
generation challenge. The safety issues that have surfaced world-wide should elevate this
concern to top of the "needs -attention" list. Having a drone ordinance on record would be saying
that this is what our community standards are. The public needs to know and our first responders
need to feel community support. No one should be at risk because somebody wants a video to go
viral.
FINDINGS
In accordance with California Penal Code Section 933 and Section 933.05, the 2015-2016 Grand
Jury requires (or, as noted, requests) responses from each agency affected by the findings
presented in this section. The responses are to be submitted to the Presiding Judge of the
Superior Court.
Based on its investigation titled "Drones: Know Before You Fly", the 2015-2016 Orange County
Grand Jury has arrived at seven principal findings, as follows:
F.1. Recreational drones have greatly increased in number since December 2015 and it is
probable their unregulated use will pose significant threats to public safety and privacy in Orange
County cities and unincorporated areas.
F.2. With the exception of the recent Federal Aviation Administration registration rule,
recreational drone owners are largely self -policed, which leads to a wide range of behavior.
F.3. Most of the cities and unincorporated areas of the County of Orange do not have a drone
ordinance, nor do they have any immediate plans to enact an ordinance in the near future.
FA. Most of the cities provide no educational programs for public awareness of the safety issues
connected to recreational drones.
F.S. Some Orange County cities, despite recognizing potential issues with drones, are awaiting
drone -related legislative action or other guidance by the State of California or FAA before
enacting local ordinances.
F.6. The FAA -required registration of recreational drones provides a useful tool for local
enforcement of drone ordinances.
F.7. Orange County cities have not established a procedure for reporting drone incidents, which
results in under -reporting of drone safety and privacy events.
2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury Page 17
13-24
Drones: Know Before You Fly
RECOMMENDATIONS
In accordance with California Penal Code Section 933 and Section 933.05, the 2015-2016 Grand
Jury requires (or, as noted, requests) responses from each agency affected by the
recommendations presented in this section. The responses are to be submitted to the Presiding
Judge of the Superior Court.
Based on its investigation titled "Drones: Know Before You Fly", the 2015-2016 Orange County
Grand Jury makes the following nine recommendations:
R.1. Each City Council should direct its City Attorney to provide a report to the city's police
department and City Council on existing laws that can be applied to the use of recreational
drones in the city's jurisdiction by December 30, 2016. (F.2., F.3., F.5., F.6.)
R.2. Each City should adopt a recreational drone ownership and operation ordinance, with
regulations similar to those found in Los Angeles City ordinance #183912, by March 31, 2017,
to the extent not preempted or superseded by Federal law or Federal regulations. (F.1., F.2., F.3.,
F.5., F.6.)
R.3. Each City should inform its citizens about laws and ordinances that apply to recreational
drone operators through print media, city -related web sites, social media sites and/or public
forums by March 31, 2017. (F.4., F.6.)
RA. Each City should establish and publish on its website a point of contact for drone -related
citizen complaints by December 30, 2016. (F.7.)
R.5. Each City should post FAA drone ownership and operation educational links on city -related
websites, newsletters, and flyers by December 30, 2016. (F.4.)
R.6. The Orange County Board of Supervisors should direct County Counsel to provide a report
to the Orange County Sheriff -Coroner Department and the Board of Supervisors on existing laws
that can be applied to the use of recreational drones in county -governed parks and
unincorporated areas by December 30, 2016. (F.2., F.3., F.6.)
R.7. The County should adopt a recreational drone ownership and operation ordinance similar to
Los Angeles City Ordinance #183912 for the parks and unincorporated areas under its
jurisdiction by March 31, 2017, to the extent not preempted or superseded by Federal law or
Federal regulations. (F.1., F.2., F.3., F.6.)
R.8. The County should inform its citizens about laws and ordinances that apply to recreational
drone operators through print media, County -related web sites, social media sites and/or public
forums by March 31, 2017. (F.4., F.6.)
2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury Page 18
13-25
Drones: Know Before You Fly
R.9. The County and each City should formally gather data on recreational drone incidents
within their jurisdictions and review these data annually and report the results publicly. The first
analysis and publication should occur within 1 year of the publication of this report. (F.1., F.2.,
F.3., F.7.)
REQUIRED RESPONSES
The California Penal Code Section 933 requires any public agency which the Grand Jury has
reviewed, and about which it has issued a final report, to comment to the Presiding Judge of the
Superior Court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of
the agency. Such comment shall be made no later than 90 days after the Grand Jury publishes its
report (filed with the Clerk of the Court); except that in the case of a report containing findings
and recommendations pertaining to a department or agency headed by an elected County official
(e.g. District Attorney, Sheriff, etc.), such elected County Official shall comment on the findings
and recommendations pertaining to the matters under that elected officials control within 60 days
to the Presiding Judge with an information copy sent to the Board of Supervisors.
Furthermore, California Penal Code Section 933.05, subdivisions (a), (b), (c), details, as follows,
the manner in which such comment(s) are to be made:
(a) As to each Grand Jury finding, the responding person or entity shall indicate one of the
following:
(1) The respondent agrees with the finding
(2) The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response
shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the
reasons therefore.
(b) As to each Grand Jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall report one of
the following actions:
(1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented
action.
(2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future,
with a time frame for implementation.
(3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and
parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame for the matter to be prepared for discussion
by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the
governing body of the public agency when applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six
months from the date of publication of the Grand Jury report.
2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury Page 19
13-26
Drones: Know Before You Fly
(4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not
reasonable, with an explanation therefore.
(c) If a finding or recommendation of the Grand Jury addresses budgetary or personnel matters
of a county agency or department headed by an elected officer, both the agency or department
head and the Board of Supervisors shall respond if requested by the Grand Jury, but the response
of the Board of Supervisors shall address only those budgetary /or personnel matters over which
it has some decision making authority. The response of the elected agency or department head
shall address all aspects of the findings or recommendations affecting his or her agency or
department.
Comments to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court in compliance with Penal Code Section
933.05 are required from:
Responses Required:
2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury Page 20
13-27
Required Respondent
Findings
Recommendations
F
1
F
2
F
3
F
4
F
5
F
6
F
7
R
1
R
2
R
3
R
4
R
5
R
6
R
7
R
8
R
9
1
City of Aliso Viejo
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
2
City of Anaheim
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
3
City of Brea
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
4
City of Buena Park
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
5
City of Costa Mesa
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
6
City of Cypress
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
7
City of Dana Point
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
8
City of Fountain Valley
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
9
City of Fullerton
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
10
City of Garden Grove
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
11
City of Huntington Beach
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
12
City of Irvine
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
13
City of La Habra
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
14
City of La Palma
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
15
City of Laguna Beach
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
16
City of Laguna Hills
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
17
City of Laguna Niguel
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
18
City of Laguna Woods
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
19
City of Lake forest
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
20
City of Los Alamitos
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
21
City of Mission Viejo
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
22
City of Newport Beach
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
�----X]
2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury Page 20
13-27
Drones: Know Before You Fly
2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury Page 21
13-28
Required Respondent
Findings
Recommendations
F
1
F
2
F
3
F
4
F
5
F
6
F
7
R
1
R
2
R
3
R
4
R
5
R
6
R
7
R
8
R
9
23
City of Orange
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
24
City of Placentia
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
25
City of Rancho Santa
Margarita
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
26
City of San Clemente
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
27
City of San Juan
Capistrano
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
28
City of Santa Ana
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
29
City of Seal Beach
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
30
City of Stanton
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
31
City of Tustin
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
32
City of Villa Park
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
33
City of Westminster
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
34
City of Yorba Linda
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
35
OC Board of Supervisors
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury Page 21
13-28
Drones: Know Before You Fly
WORKS CITED
AMA Joins AUVS1 and Small UAV Coalition in Launching "Know Before You Fly" Campaign.
Washington: amablog.modelaircraft.org/Mediaroom/2014/12/22.Web. Retrieved
10/13/2015.
Associated Press. Drones Banned at World Cup Races after Marcel Hirscher's Close Call. The
New York Times, December 23, 2015. Web. Retrieved 2/9/2016.
Berr, Jonathan. Drone for the Holidays? MONEYWATCH: Sept. 30, 2015.Web. Retrieved
1/24/16.
Current Unmanned Aircraft State Law Landscape. National Conference of State Legislation,
January 13, 2016. Web. Retrieved 2/9/2016.
Davis -Stirling. com/Mainlndex/HOADrones. Web. Retrieved 4/11/2016.
FAA Releases B4UFLYSmartphone App. FAA.gov/news/updates, Jan. 6, 2015. Web. Retrieved
1/12/2016.
FAA Small Unmanned Aircraft Registration Begins Dec. 21. FAA.gov/news/updates. Web 15.
Retrieved 12/21/2015.
Gettinger, Dan and Arthur H. Michel. Drone Sightings and Close Encounters: An Analysis.
Annandale -On -Hudson: Bard College Center for the Study of the Drones, 12-11-2015.
Paper. Retrieved 12/16/2015.
Jones, J. Harry. Poway bans drone use during emergencies. SanDiegoUnionTribune: Nov. 4,
2015.Web. Retrieved 1/24/2016.
Law Enforcement Resources. FAA.gov/uas/law enforcement, Aug. 2015. Web. Retrieved
10/9/2015.
Model aircraft Operations. FAA.gov/uas/model aircraft, March 2015. Web. Retrieved
10/9/2015.
North Fire. CAL FIRE, July 21, 2015. Web. Retrieved 1/21/2016.
Pilot Reports of Close Calls with Drones Soar in 2015. FAA.gov/news/updates, Aug. 2015.
Web. Retrieved 10/9/2015.
Rosenberg, Jenny and Laura Brown. FAA Registered More Than 250, 000 Unmanned Aircraft
Owners. Washington: FAA Press Release, January 22, 2016. Web. Retrieved 1/22/2016.
Serna, Joseph. Drone Pilots Could Get Jail Time. LA Times, Oct. 14, 2015. Web. Retrieved
1/21/2016.
State and Local Regulation of Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Fact Sheet. FAA -Office of the
Chief Counsel, Dec. 17, 2015. Web. Retrieved 12/17/2015.
2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury Page 22
13-29
Drones: Know Before You Fly
UAS (Unmanned Aircraft Systems) Registration Q & A, FAA.gov/uas/registration/fags. Web.
Retrieved 1/12/2016.
2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury Page 23
13-30
Drones: Know Before You Fly
WORKS CONSULTED
"AMA Introductory Pilot Program." Academy of Model Aeronautics. Web. n.d.
"AMA's Response to the U.S. DOT Announcement." AMA Government Relations Blog. Web.
29 Dec. 2015.
"Best Drones For Sale and Why." My First Drone. com. 1 Nov. 2015. Web. 19 Nov. 2015.
"Busting Myths About the FAA and Unmanned Aircraft." Federal Aviation Administration.gov.
Web. 7 Mar. 2014.20 Jul. 2015.
"Certificates of Waiver or Authorization (COA)." Federal Aviation Administration.gov. 14 Nov.
2014 1:20 p.m. EST. Web. 8 Jan. 2016.
"Clarification of the Applicability of Aircraft Registration Requirements for Unmanned Aircraft
Systems (UAS) and Request for Information Regarding Electronic Registration for
UAS." The Federal Register. 22 Oct 2015. Web. 8 Dec. 2015.
"Difference Between Fixed -Wing Aircraft and a Rotary Aircraft." Aerolink-Pilot School. 20 Jun.
2012. Web. 6 Dec. 2015.
"Domesticating the Drone." INSCT Syracuse University. Web.27 Jan. 2016.
"Drone Lands on White House Lawn." Orange County Register. Web. Reviewed 7 Dec. 2015.
"Drone sightings and Close Encounters: An Analysis." Bard College Weekly Roundup. Web.
7-13 Dec. 2015.
"Drones vs. Radio -Controlled Aircraft: Operation Oversight." RCFlightline.com. Web. 5 Dec.
2015.
"Drones, Drones, Drones." UAV Global. Unmanned Systems and Manufacturers. Web 22 Aug.
2015.
"Drones: Is California Law Ready?" Senate Committee on Judiciary Oversight Hearing. Web 17
Feb 2015.
"Editorial: Redlands City Council Should Adopt Drone Ordinance." Redlands CA Daily Facts.
29 Oct. 2015. Web. 2 Feb. 2016.
"Education, Compliance, and Enforcement of Unauthorized Unmanned Aircraft." Federal
Aviation Administration.gov. Web. 4 Aug. 2015.
"Fact Sheet -Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS)." Federal Aviation Administration.gov. Web. 26
Oct. 2015.
"First -Person View (FPV)." Wikipedia. Web. 13 Dec. 2015.
"History of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles." Wikipedia. Web. 18 Oct. 2015.
2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury Page 24
13-31
Drones: Know Before You Fly
"Model Aircraft Operating Standards." Federal Aviation Administration.gov. AC No. 91-57A.
Web. 2 Sep. 2015.
"Model Aircraft." Wikipedia. Web. 29 Oct. 2015.
"New Model Drone Legislation Produced by BORDC." War is a Crime. org. Web. 15 Dec.
2015.
"Orange County Register Drone Accidents." Orange County Register Web. Reviewed 7 Nov.
2015.
"San Bernardino County: $75,000. In Rewards Could be Offered in Drone Incidents." pe. com
Web. 29 Aug. 2015.
"The Threat of Hobby Drones." Los Angeles Times: Section A Editorial Web. 20 Sept. 2015.
"Unmanned Aerial Vehicles." The Senate Judiciary Committee. SB 142 (Jackson). Civil Law:
2015-2016 Regular Session. Hearing Date Web.7 Apr. 2015.
"Unmanned Aircraft Systems Frequently Asked Questions." Federal Aviation
Administration.gov. Web. 26 Oct.2015.
"Vancouver Airport Launches Drone Safety Campaign." sUAS News. Web. 16 Dec. 2015
Bachman, Justin. "With A Drone, Should You Get Insurance?" Orange County Register:
Business. 20 Dec.2015: Print.
Barry, Dave. "Drones: Safety Considerations and Potential Liability Concerns. Willis Wire. 8
Apr. 2015.Web. 8 May 2015.
Bigelow, William. "CA Considers Legislation to Shoot Down Drones." Breitbart. 19 Aug.
2015.Web. 20 August 2015.
Bowden, Mark. "How the Predator Drone Changed the Character of War." Smithsonian
Magazine Nov. 2013. Web. 27 Nov. 2015.
Brown, Edmund G. Jr. Veto letter for SB 168.Gaines. Office of the Governor. Web. 3 Oct. 2015.
Brown, Laura. "Drones Raise Privacy, Safety Concerns." hanfordsentinal.com. 9 Sept. 2015.
Web. 18 Oct. 2015.
Carr, David F. "Drone Operators Vs. RC Hobbiest." informationweek.com. 29 Ju1.2014, 10:25
a.m. Web.2 Dec. 2015. Tweet.
Davis, Kristina. "Laws on Drones a Murky Realm." The San Diego Union Tribune. 18 Oct.
2015. Web. 2 Feb. 2016.
Folven, Edwin. "FAA Launches Effort to Register Hobbyist Drone Operators."
beverlypress.com. Web. 28 Oct. 2015.
2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury Page 25
13-32
Drones: Know Before You Fly
Forrest, Connor. "12 Drone Disasters That Show Why the FAA Hates Drones." techrepublic.com
20 Mar. 2015 5:00 a.m. PST. Web 10 Oct. 2015.
Gonzales, Hector. "In Absence of Legislation, County Sheriff's Office Sets Own Drone
Protocol." Thousand Oaks Acorn. 3 Sept. 2015 Web. 6 Oct. 2015.
Huerta, Michael. "Registration Process Marks Significant Milestone in FAA's Safe Integration
of Small UAS." Fast Lane. 20 Nov. 2015. Web. 21. Nov. 2015.
Kennedy, Bruce. "5 Issues Drones Will Have to Navigate." Moneywatch. 20 Aug. 2015. Web. 10
Nov. 2015.
Kessler, Adams. "Hobby Exemption." Davis -Stirling Newsletter. Web. 27 Sept. 2015.
Koehler, Jason. "The FAA Has Missed Its Congressionally Mandated Deadline to Regulate
Drones." motherboard. vice.com. 10 Oct.2015. 09:11 EST. Web. 10 Oct. 2015.
Megerian, Chris. "A Ban on Snooping Drones." Los Angeles Times: B. 7 Oct. 2015. Print
Miller, Steven. "Update on California Legislative Action on Drone Use." hoverlaw.com Web. 28
August 2015.
Mitchell, Anthea. "Should America Be Worried About Police Drones?" cheatsheet. com. Web. 15
May 2015. 11 Oct. 2015.
Montagne, Renee. "California's Paparazzi Have Had Their Wings Clipped a Bit." npr.org. Web.
9 Oct. 2015.
Nicas, Jack. "Increase in Drones Spotted Near Aircraft." The Wall Street Journal. Updated 26
Nov. 2014.Web. 28 Oct.2015.
Peterson, Melody. "California Leads Nation in Near Misses with Drones, Aircraft." Los Angeles
Times. 9 Oct. 2015. Web. 10 Oct 2015.
Peterson, Melody. "More Drone Close Calls." Los Angeles Times :Business. 9.Oct. 2015. Print.
Pimentel, Joseph. "Disney Seeking to Use Drones in Fireworks Show." Orange County Register.
Local. 17 Jan. 2016.Print.
Pimentel, Joseph. "Why Aircraft and Drones Can't Fly Over Disneyland." Anaheim Bulletin E:
News. 24 Sept. 2015: Print.
Reagan, Jason. "Drone Sales Figure for 2014 Are Hard to Navigate." Dronelife. 24 Jan. 2015.
Web. 19 Nov.2015.
Sachs, Peter. "Current U.S. Drone Law". Drone Law Journal. 14 Dec. 2013. Web. 20 Dec. 2015.
Serna, Joseph. "Drone Pilots Could Get Jail Time, Fine for Violating New L.A. Ordinance." Los
Angeles Times: Local. Web. 21 Dec. 2015.
2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury Page 26
13-33
Drones: Know Before You Fly
Serna, Joseph. "LAPD Want to Crack Down on Civilian Drones After Police Station Incident."
Los Angeles Times: Local Web. 7 Aug. 2014. 10 Dec. 2015.
Stanley, Jay. "The Regulation of Private -Sector Drones." aclu. org. Web. 26 Aug. 2015.
Strange, Adario. "2016 Will be the Dawn of the Drone Age." mashable.com. 15 Dec. 2015 4:48
p.m. Tweet.
The Daily Journal of the United States Government 2015.The Federal Register Web 5 Aug.
2015.
Villasenor, John. "What is a Drone, Anyway?" Scientific American. 12 Apr. 2012. Web. 27 Oct.
2015.
Williams, Lauren. "Drone Privacy Law Sees Setback After California Governor Refuses to
Sign." ThinkProgress. hoverlaw.com. Web. 11 Oct. 2015.
Willon, Phil. "Brown Urged to Veto Drone Bill." Los Angeles Times: B5. 7 Sept. 2015: Print.
2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury Page 27
13-34
Drones: Know Before You Fly
APPENDICES
Appendix A: Los Angeles City Municipal Ordinance
ORDINANCE NO. i 6 J
An ordinance adding Section 56.39 to Article 6 of Chapter V of the Los Angeles
Municipal Code to impose community-based safety requirements on the operation of
Model Aircraft and to impose restrictions consistent with certain Federal Aviation Rules
on the operation of both Model Aircraft and Civil Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UASs)
commonly known as drones
WHEREAS, the operation of Unmanned Aircraft such as Model Aircraft and Civil
UASs can at times pose a hazard to full-scale aircraft in flight and to persons and
property on the ground; and
WHEREAS, imposing community-based safety requirements on the operation of
Model Aircraft and imposing restrictions on the operation of both Model Aircraft and Civil
UASs consistent with Federal Aviation Rules is necessary to mitigate such risks and to
protect the public from the hazards associated with the operation of Unmanned Aircraft.
NOW, THEREFORE,
THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES
DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1 A new Section 56.31 is added to Article 6 of Chapter V of the
Los Angeles Municipal Code to read as follows:
SEC. 56.31. UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS.
(a) For purposes of this section:
1. '"Unmanned Aircraft" shall mean an aircraft, including, but not
limited to, an aircraft commonly known as a drone, that is operated without the
possibility of direct human intervention from within or on the aircraft
2 "Unmanned Aircraft System" shall mean an Unmanned Aircraft
and associated elements, includingbut not limited to, any communication links
and components that control the Unmanned Aircraft
3. "Person" shall have the same meaning as set forth in Subsection
(a) of Section 11.01 of this Code.
4. "Model Aircraft" shall mean an Unmanned Aircraft or Unmanned
Aircraft System operated by any Person strictly for hobby or recreational
purposes.
5 "Civil UAS" shall mean an Unmanned Aircraft or Unmanned
Aircraft System operated by any Person for any purposes other than strictly
2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury Page 28
13-35
Drones: Know Before You Fly
hobby or recreational purposes, including, but not limited to, commercial
purposes or in furtherance of, or incidental to, any business or media service or
agency.
6. "Public UAS" shall mean an Unmanned Aircraft or Unmanned
Aircraft System operated by any public agency for government related purposes.
(b) The following shall apply to the operation of any Model Aircraft within the
City of Los Angeles:
1. No Person shall operate any Model Aircraft within the City of
Los Angeles and within 5 miles of an airport without the prior express
authorization of the airport air traffic control tower.
2. No Person shall operate any Model Aircraft within the City of
Los Angeles in a manner that interferes with manned aircraft, and shall always
give way to any manned aircraft.
3. No Person shall operate any Model Aircraft within the City of
Los Angeles beyond the visual line of sight of the person operating the Model
Aircraft. The operator must use his or her own natural vision (which includes
vision corrected by standard eyeglasses or contact lenses) to observe the Model
Aircraft. People other than the operator may not be used in lieu of the operator
for maintaining visual line of sight. Visual line of sight means that the operator
has an unobstructed view of the Model Aircraft. The use of vision -enhancing
devices, such as binoculars, night vision goggles, powered vision magnifying
devices, and goggles or other devices designed to provide a "first -person view"
from the model, do not constitute the visual line of sight of the person operating
the Model Aircraft.
4. No Person shall operate any Model Aircraft within the City of
Los Angeles other than during daylight hours defined as between official sunrise
and official sunset for local time.
5. No Person shall operate any Model Aircraft vvithin the City of
Los Angeles more than 400 feet above the earth s surface
6. Excluding takeoff and landing, no Person shall operate any Model
Aircraft within the City of Los Angeles closer than 25 feet to any individual,
except the operator or the operator's helper(s).
(c) The following shall apply to the operation of any Model Aircraft or Civil
UAS within the City of Los Angeles;
2
2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury Page 29
13-36
Drones: Know Before You Fly
1, No Person shall operate any Model Aircraft or Civil UAS within the
City of Los Angeles in a manner that is prohibited by any federal statute or
regulation governing aeronautics.
2. No Person shall operate any Model Aircraft or Civil UAS within the
City of Los Angeles in violation of any temporary flight restriction (TFR) or notice
to airmen (NOTAM) issued by the Federal Aviation Administration.
3. No Person shall operate any Model Aircraft or Civil UAS within the
City of Los Angeles in a careless or reckless manner so as to endanger the life or
property of another. The standard for what constitutes careless and reckless
operation under this section shall be the same as the standard set forth in any
federal statutes or regulations governing aeronautics including but not limited to
Federal Aviation Rule 91 13-
(d) It shall be unlawful for any Person to violate or fail to comply with this
section. Any Person violating the provisions of this section shall be guilty of a
misdemeanor and subject to the provisions of Subsection (m) of Section I1 00 of this
Code.
(e) This section shall not apply to any Public UAS operated pursuant to, and
in compliance with, the terms and conditions of any current and enforceable
authorization granted by the Federal Aviation Administration.
2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury Page 30
13-37
Drones: Know Before You Fly
Sec. 2. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage of this ordinance and have it
published in accordance with Council policy, either in a daily newspaper circuiated in
the City of Los Angeles or by posting for ten days in three public places in the City of
Los Angeles one copy on the bulletin board located at the Main Street entrance to the
Los Angeles City Ball: one copy on the bulletin board located at the Main Street
entrance to the Los Angeles City Hall East, and one copy on the bulletin board located
at the Temple Street entrance to the Los Angeles County Hall of Records.
I hereby certify that this ordinance was passed by the Council of the City of
Los Angeles, at its meeting of
HOLLY t_ WOLCOTT, City Clerk
By
Approved ('�ly2.trj
Approved as to Form and Legality
MtCHAEL N FEUER, City Attorney
By
lftkJANET KAKANEN
Deputy City Attorney
Date S=° ? 6 2J:5
File No I BJ— I ��
Deputy
Mayor
m 4proprielary_oCCta,rpoft%teports'draR ardmance regulating drones ireviaed 03-23-15).doc
4
2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury Page 31
13-38
Drones: Know Before You Fly
DECLARATION OF POSTING ORDINANCE
I, VERONICA COLEMAN -WARNER, state as follows. I am, and was at all times hereinafter
mentioned, a resident of the State of California, over the age of eighteen years, and a Deputy City
Clerk of the City of Los Angeles, California.
Ordinance No 183917 — Adding Section 56.31 to Article 6 of Chapter V of the Los Angeles
Municipal Code to impose community-based safety requirements on the operation of Model
Aircraft and to impose restrictions consistent with certain Federal Aviation Rules on the
operation of both Model Aircraft and Civil Unmanned Aircraft Systems, commonly known as
drones - a copy of which is hereto attached, was finally adopted by the Los Angeles City Council on
October 14. 2015, and under the direction of said City Council and the City Clerk, pursuant to
Section 251 of the Charter of the City of Los Angeles and Ordinance No. 172955, on October 23,
2015 1 posted a true copy of said ordinance at each of the three public places located in the City of
Los Angeles, California, as follows, 1) one copy on the bulletin board located at the Main Street
entrance to the Los Angeles City Hail; 2) one copy on the bulletin board located at the Main Street
entrance to the Los Angeles City Hall East; 3) one copy on the bulletin board located at the Temple
Street entrance to the Los Angeles County Hall of Records.
Copies of said ordinance were posted conspicuously beginning on October 23, 2015 and will
be continuously posted for ten or more days
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Signed this 23rd day of October, 2015 at Los Angeles, California
r [
eronica Coleman -Warner, Deputy City Clerk
Ordinance Effective Date December 2 2015 Council t=ile No. 15-0927
2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury Page 32
13-39
Drones: Know Before You Fly
Appendix B: Acronyms/Glossary
Air Space From the ground up. Hobby drones need to remain under 400 feet from
ground.
AMA Academy of Model Aircraft
Civil Aviation drones Numerous uses include surveying of crops, filmmaking, search and rescue,
inspecting power lines, counting wildlife, law enforcement, scientific
research, disaster relief and wildfires, to name a few.
Civil UAS Unmanned aerial system (drone) used by private sector (non-government)
for scientific research, company/business/non-profit, and private
university.
COA Certification of Authorization. FAA grants approval for specific flight
operation.
Commercial drone Drone used with the expectation of a sale, financial gain, or other
consideration.
Commercial operator Person who operates a drone for financial gain.
DOT Department of Transportation
Drone An unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV), without a human pilot aboard. Its
flight is controlled either autonomously -autopilot- by onboard computers
or by the remote control of a pilot on the ground or in another vehicle. The
typical launch and recovery method of an unmanned aircraft is by the
function of an automatic system or an external operator on the ground.
FAA Federal Aviation Authority regulates U.S. airspace and defines any
unmanned flying craft as a UAV. FAA is an agency of DOT.
First responder First member of emergency response team to be on the scene of an
accident or emergency.
FPV First Person View -controlling a UAV from operator's viewpoint.
FMRA FAA Modernization and Reform Act.
Hobbyist drone Used for hobby/ recreational purpose. Not flown for a profit endeavor.
Manned aircraft Human on board aircraft to operate it. (Pilot)
2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury
Page 33
13-40
Drones: Know Before You Fly
Model aircraft Unmanned aircraft that is capable of sustained flight in the atmosphere,
flown within visual line of sight of the person operating the aircraft and
flown for hobby or recreational purposes.
Municipal code Laws that are enacted and enforced by a city or county. Can be an
ordinance.
No -Fly fields/zones Air space off limits to all aircraft; when the Pope visited the USA,
numerous NO-FLY Zones were declared by FAA.
Public UAS Unmanned aerial system (drone) owned by our government and
commonly used by law enforcement, firefighting, border patrol, disaster
relief, search and rescue, Public University. Requires FAA certification.
RC A remote control. A device used to issue commands (wirelessly) from a
short distance.
RCA Radio -Controlled Aircraft is controlled with a handheld radio transmitter,
which communicates with a receiver abroad the aircraft
Recreational Drone Used for hobby purpose; not flown for a profit-making endeavor.
sUAS Small unmanned aerial system primarily used in civil and commercial
operations, due to versatility, low initial cost and operating expenses. They
weigh less than 55 pounds.
UAS Unmanned aerial system, an aircraft without a human pilot and
emphasizes other elements such as ground control stations, data links and
other support equipment; also known as a drone
UAV Unmanned aerial vehicle, an aircraft without a human pilot; commonly
known as a drone. Can be remotely piloted or on autopilot.
VLOS Visual line of site means keeping the UAS in visual -line -of -site at all
times; no flying into clouds, fog, behind buildings, trees, etc.; also means
unaided except for prescription glasses/contacts or sunglasses.
2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury
Page 34
13-41
Drones: Know Before You Fly
Appendix C: CA Penal Code Section 148.1
148.1. (a) Any person who reports to any peace officer listed in Section 830.1 or 830.2, or
subdivision (a) of Section 830.33, employee of a fire department or fire service, district attorney,
newspaper, radio station, television station, deputy district attorney, employees of the
Department of Justice, employees of an airline, employees of an airport, employees of a railroad
or bus line, an employee of a telephone company, occupants of a building or a news reporter in
the employ of a newspaper or radio or television station, that a bomb or other explosive has been
or will be placed or secreted in any public or private place, knowing that the report is false, is
guilty of a crime punishable by imprisonment in a county jail not to exceed one year, or pursuant
to subdivision (h) of Section 1170.
(b) Any person who reports to any other peace officer defined in Chapter 4.5 (commencing
with Section 830) of Title 3 of Part 2 that a bomb or other explosive has been or will be placed or
secreted in any public or private place, knowing that the report is false, is guilty of a crime
punishable by imprisonment in a county jail not to exceed one year or pursuant to subdivision (h)
of Section 1170 if (1) the false information is given while the peace officer is engaged in the
performance of his or her duties as a peace officer and (2) the person providing the false
information knows or should have known that the person receiving the information is a peace
officer.
(c) Any person who maliciously informs any other person that a bomb or other explosive has
been or will be placed or secreted in any public or private place, knowing that the information is
false, is guilty of a crime punishable by imprisonment in a county jail not to exceed one year, or
pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170.
(d) Any person who maliciously gives, mails, sends, or causes to be sent any false or facsimile
bomb to another person, or places, causes to be placed, or maliciously possesses any false or
facsimile bomb, with the intent to cause another to fear for his or her personal safety or the safety
of others, is guilty of a crime punishable by imprisonment in a county jail not to exceed one year,
or pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170.
(Amended by Stats. 2011, Ch. 15, Sec. 259. (AB 109) Effective April 4, 2011. Operative October 1, 2011, by Sec.
636 of Ch. 15, as amended by Stats. 2011, Ch. 39, Sec. 68.)
2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury Page 35
13-42
Drones: Know Before You Fly
Appendix D: CA Penal Code Section 148.2
148.2. Every person who willfully commits any of the following acts at the burning of a building
or at any other time and place where any fireman or firemen or emergency rescue personnel are
discharging or attempting to discharge an official duty, is guilty of a misdemeanor:
1. Resists or interferes with the lawful efforts of any fireman or firemen or emergency rescue
personnel in the discharge or attempt to discharge an official duty.
2. Disobeys the lawful orders of any fireman or public officer.
3. Engages in any disorderly conduct which delays or prevents a fire from being timely
extinguished.
4. Forbids or prevents others from assisting in extinguishing a fire or exhorts another person, as
to whom he has no legal right or obligation to protect or control, from assisting in extinguishing
a fire.
(Amended by Stats. 1973, Ch. 471.)
2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury Page 36
13-43
Drones: Know Before You Fly
Appendix E: CA Penal Code Section 402
402. (a) Every person who goes to the scene of an emergency, or stops at the scene of an
emergency, for the purpose of viewing the scene or the activities of police officers, firefighters,
emergency medical, or other emergency personnel, or military personnel coping with the
emergency in the course of their duties during the time it is necessary for emergency vehicles or
those personnel to be at the scene of the emergency or to be moving to or from the scene of the
emergency for the purpose of protecting lives or property, unless it is part of the duties of that
person's employment to view that scene or activities, and thereby impedes police officers,
firefighters, emergency medical, or other emergency personnel or military personnel, in the
performance of their duties in coping with the emergency, is guilty of a misdemeanor.
(b) Every person who knowingly resists or interferes with the lawful efforts of a lifeguard in
the discharge or attempted discharge of an official duty in an emergency situation, when the
person knows or reasonably should know that the lifeguard is engaged in the performance of his
or her official duty, is guilty of a misdemeanor.
(c) For the purposes of this section, an emergency includes a condition or situation involving
injury to persons, damage to property, or peril to the safety of persons or property, which results
from a fire, an explosion, an airplane crash, flooding, windstorm damage, a railroad accident, a
traffic accident, a power plant accident, a toxic chemical or biological spill, or any other natural
or human -caused event.
(Amended by Stats. 1989, Ch. 214, Sec. 1.)
2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury Page 37
13-44
Drones: Know Before You Fly
Appendix F: Model Aircraft Guidelines
Hobby / Recreational FMng
What Can 1 Do With
MY Model Aircraft?
Having fun means flying safely! Hobby or recreational flying doesn't
require FAA approval but you must follow safety guidelines.
Any other use requires FAA authorization.
DO fly a model aircraft/UAS at
the local model aircraft club
DO take lessons and learn
to fly safely
0 DON'T fly near manned aircraft
DON'T fly beyond line of sight
of the operator
DON'T fly an aircraft weighing
DO contact the airport or more than 55 lbs unless it's
control tower when flying certified by an aeromodelling
within 5 miles of the airport community-based organization
DO fly a model aircraft for
personal enjoyment
DON'T fly contrary to your aero -
modelling community-based
safety guidelines
DON'T fly model aircraft for
payment or commercial purposes
IL.
2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury Page 38
13-45
Drones: Know Before You Fly
Appendix G: Academy of Model Aeronautics National Model Aircraft Safety Code
Effective January 1, 2014
A. GENERAL: A model aircraft is a non -human -carrying aircraft capable of sustained flight in the atmosphere.
It may not exceed limitations of this code and is intended exclusively for sport, recreation, education and/or
competition. All model flights must be conducted in accordance with this safety code and any additional rules
specific to the flying site.
1. Model aircraft will not be flown:
(a) In a careless or reckless manner.
(b) At a location where model aircraft activities are prohibited.
2. Model aircraft pilots will:
(a) Yield the right of way to all human -carrying aircraft.
(b) See and avoid all aircraft and a spotter must be used when appropriate. (AMA Document #540-D.)
(c) Not fly higher than approximately 400 feet above ground level within three (3) miles of an airport without
notifying the airport operator.
(d) Not interfere with operations and traffic patterns at any airport, heliport or seaplane base except where there
is a mixed use agreement.
(e) Not exceed a takeoff weight, including fuel, of 55 pounds unless in compliance with the AMA Large Model
Airplane program. (AMA Document 520-A.)
(f) Ensure the aircraft is identified with the name and address or AMA number of the owner on the inside or
affixed to the outside of the model aircraft. (This does not apply to model aircraft flown indoors.)
(g) Not operate aircraft with metal -blade propellers or with gaseous boosts except for helicopters operated
under the provisions of AMA Document #555.
(h) Not operate model aircraft while under the influence of alcohol or while using any drug that could adversely
affect the pilot's ability to safely control the model.
(i) Not operate model aircraft carrying pyrotechnic devices that explode or burn, or any device which propels a
projectile or drops any object that creates a hazard to persons or property.
Exceptions:
Free Flight fuses or devices that burn producing smoke and are securely attached to the model aircraft
during flight.
Rocket motors (using solid propellant) up to a G -series size may be used provided they remain attached to
the model during flight. Model rockets may be flown in accordance with the National Model Rocketry Safety
Code but may not be launched from model aircraft.
Officially designated AMA Air Show Teams (AST) are authorized to use devices and practices as defined
within the Team AMA Program Document. (AMA Document #718.)
0) Not operate a turbine -powered aircraft, unless in compliance with the AMA turbine regulations. (AMA
Document #510-A.)
3. Model aircraft will not be flown in AMA sanctioned events, air shows or model demonstrations unless:
(a) The aircraft, control system and pilot skills have successfully demonstrated all maneuvers intended or
anticipated prior to the specific event.
(b) An inexperienced pilot is assisted by an experienced pilot.
4. When and where required by rule, helmets must be properly worn and fastened. They must be OSHA, DOT,
ANSI, SNELL or NOCSAE approved or comply with comparable standards.
B. RADIO CONTROL (RC)
1. All pilots shall avoid flying directly over unprotected people, vessels, vehicles or structures and shall avoid
endangerment of life and property of others.
2. A successful radio equipment ground -range check in accordance with manufacturer's recommendations will
be completed before the first flight of a new or repaired model aircraft.
2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury Page 39
13-46
Drones: Know Before You Fly
3. At all flying sites a safety line(s) must be established in front of which all flying takes place. (AMA Document
#706.)
(a) Only personnel associated with flying the model aircraft are allowed at or in front of the safety line.
(b) At air shows or demonstrations, a straight safety line must be established.
(c) An area away from the safety line must be maintained for spectators.
(d) Intentional flying behind the safety line is prohibited.
4. RC model aircraft must use the radio -control frequencies currently allowed by the Federal Communications
Commission (FCC). Only individuals properly licensed by the FCC are authorized to operate equipment on
Amateur Band frequencies.
5. RC model aircraft will not knowingly operate within three (3) miles of any pre-existing flying site without a
frequency -management agreement. (AMA Documents #922 and #923.)
6. With the exception of events flown under official AMA Competition Regulations, excluding takeoff and
landing, no powered model may be flown outdoors closer than 25 feet to any individual, except for the pilot and
the pilot's helper(s) located at the flightline.
7. Under no circumstances may a pilot or other person touch an outdoor model aircraft in flight while it is still
under power, except to divert it from striking an individual.
8. RC night flying requires a lighting system providing the pilot with a clear view of the model's attitude and
orientation at all times. Hand-held illumination systems are inadequate for night flying operations.
9. The pilot of an RC model aircraft shall:
(a) Maintain control during the entire flight, maintaining visual contact without enhancement other than by
corrective lenses prescribed for the pilot.
(b) Fly using the assistance of a camera or First -Person View (FPV) only in accordance with the procedures
outlined in AMA Document #550.
(c) Fly using the assistance of autopilot or stabilization system only in accordance with the procedures outlined
in AMA Document #560.
C. FREE FLIGHT
1. Must be at least 100 feet downwind of spectators and automobile parking when the model aircraft is
launched.
2. Launch area must be clear of all individuals except mechanics, officials, and other fliers.
3. An effective device will be used to extinguish any fuse on the model aircraft after the fuse has completed its
function.
D. CONTROL LINE
1. The complete control system (including the safety thong where applicable) must have an inspection and pull
test prior to flying.
2. The pull test will be in accordance with the current Competition Regulations for the applicable model aircraft
category.
3. Model aircraft not fitting a specific category shall use those pull -test requirements as indicated for Control
Line Precision Aerobatics.
4. The flying area must be clear of utility wires or poles and a model aircraft will not be flown closer than 50 feet
to any above -ground electric utility lines.
5. The flying area must be clear of all nonessential participants and spectators before the engine is started.
2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury Page 40
13-47