AUVSI State Advocacy Update: May 19, 2015
AUVSI participated in a panel discussion hosted by the Las Vegas Metro Chamber of Commerce and moderated by Glenn Cook of the Review Journal. AUVSI Sr. Government Relations Manager Mario Mairena, was one of four panelists that discussed AB239, currently before the Nevada Legislature, and the issue of UAS and the implications for personal privacy. Mario Mairena highlighted the $38 million economic impact for Nevada within the first three years of UAS being integrated into the National Airspace System and the adverse impact the passage of AB239 could have on the state. Rounding out the panel was Jon Daniels, president of Praxis Aerospace Concepts International; Greg Friesmuth, founder and CEO of SkyWorks Aerial Systems, a Las Vegas-based aerial robotics startup; and Richard Jost, director with Fennemore, Craig, Jones and Vargas a legal and regulatory expert in aviation, aerospace and autonomous aerial vehicle industries.
AB239 which was voted favorably out of the Assembly Committee by 42-0 vote on April 21, also passed by the Senate Committee on Judiciary on 13 May and will likely be passed by the Senate in the immediate future. Although AB239 does not resemble the initial iteration, the bill still requires law enforcement to first obtain a search warrant prior to using a UAS. Despite AUVSI’s efforts with elected officials and representatives from the Governor’s office, the passage of AB239 was plagued by two factors, politics and the expedient state political process. From the moment the bill was dropped it moved expeditiously and industry was not afforded the opportunity to properly weigh in before the process began. Additionally, other than AUVSI, there were only a couple of submissions from industry that opposed this measure. AUVSI’s comments, although compelling and critical of AB239, were insufficient to deter legislators to oppose the measure. Politically, it is highly unlikely that the Governor will oppose AB239 as currently written and it will more than likely be signed into law in June.
On 14 May the New Jersey assembly passed A1039 by a 66-2-4 margin, which would set clear standards for the use of UAS in New Jersey. The bill (A-1039) sets forth certain guidelines to be followed by law enforcement agencies and fire departments in efforts to protect personal privacy.
As written, no law enforcement agency shall utilize an unmanned aerial vehicle to conduct surveillance or to gather any evidence or engage in any other law enforcement activity within this State unless:
(1) pursuant to the authority of a judicially authorized search warrant issued by a court of competent jurisdiction;
(2) the law enforcement agency has probable cause to believe that a person has committed a crime, is committing a crime, or is about to commit a crime, and exigent circumstances exist making it unreasonable for the law enforcement agency to obtain a warrant authorizing use of an unmanned aerial vehicle;
(3) the law enforcement agency has obtained the written consent of an individual or property owner about which the law enforcement agency seeks to gather information using the unmanned aerial vehicle.
A1039 does provide the use of UAS by the Missing Persons Unit, or other law enforcement agency for a search and rescue mission including, but not limited to, locating a high risk missing person or missing child, or following a notification that a person is abducted or missing by an Amber or Silver Alert, or by the State Office of Emergency Management to survey or monitor the extent of an emergency. Whenever a law enforcement agency utilizes an unmanned aerial vehicle in accordance with these exigent provisions, records a verbal or video communication that is unrelated to an ongoing criminal investigation, the contents of that verbal or video communication, and any information that is derived from that communication, shall be discarded within 14 days.
A1039 was received in the Senate and referred to Senate Law and Public Safety Committee.
