Blog Viewer

Maryland Passes Pro-UAS Legislation; AUVSI Defeats 12th Anti-UAS Bill in 2015

By AUVSI Advocacy posted 09-06-2015 10:50

  


An effort that began as a brainstorming session with Senator Jim Rosapepe (D-21st)  and his staff in July 2014, ultimately resulted in the passage of pro-UAS bill in the Maryland General Assembly. Matt Scassero, director, University of Maryland Unmanned Aircraft Systems Test Site, associate director for Maryland Mid-Atlantic Aviation Partnership (MAAP) and Anthony Pucciarella, director of operations, University of Maryland Unmanned Aircraft Systems Test Site, approached AUVSI on taking an active role and advancing pro-UAS legislation that would incentivize users and researchers into the field and possibly include language that would specify existing programs, funding, and tax provisions for UAS by name.

On 6 February, Sen. Rosapepe introduced the Unmanned Aircraft Systems Research, Development, Regulation, and Privacy Act of 2015. Scassero and Pucciarella testified on behalf of the research/industry partnership and in support of SB 370 and on 20 March, SB 370 passed on the Senate floor (46-0) with a few amendments, most of which they checked back through the University of Maryland at various points. SB 370 pre-empts local government so they cannot enact their own UAS ordinances, creates one law for all of Maryland, includes "surveying" as one of the applications for UAS and rather than enacting any limitations, the bill calls for a study of UAS. Specifically, the UAS provision reads as follows:

(B) ONLY THE STATE MAY ENACT A LAW OR TAKE ANY OTHER ACTION TO PROHIBIT, RESTRICT, OR REGULATE THE TESTING OR OPERATION OF UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS IN THE STATE.

(C) SUBSECTION (B) OF THIS SECTION:

(1) PREEMPTS THE AUTHORITY OF A COUNTY OR MUNICIPALITY TO PROHIBIT, RESTRICT, OR REGULATE THE TESTING OR OPERATION OF UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS; AND (2) SUPERSEDES ANY EXISTING LAW OR ORDINANCE OF A COUNTY OR MUNICIPALITY THAT PROHIBITS, RESTRICTS, OR REGULATES THE TESTING OR OPERATION OF UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS.

(D) THIS SECTION DOES NOT AFFECT FEDERAL PREEMPTION OF STATE LAW

On 10 April the House passed the measure (136-1) with a few amendments from the Environment and Transportation Committee and the Senate concurred with the House amendments on 13 April. Gov. Hogan signed the SB370 into law on 12 May and the act will take effect July 1, 2015.

HB3510, a restrictive UAS bill that was introduced on 4 February and referred to the House Committee on Judiciary has died as the bill did not make it out of committee. The bill by the same number in the 2014 legislative session had the same fate and after discussions with House Committee on Judiciary staff, AUVSI expects the measure to be reintroduced in the 2016 legislative session.

To date, AUVSI has been able to defeat 12 legislative measures (Arkansas, Colorado, Georgia, Maryland., Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Vermont and Wyoming). There are eight legislative bills still in play (California, Michigan, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Oregon, and Washington) and five bills have passed in Florida, Minnesota, Nevada, North Dakota and Virginia.

Below are the legislative end dates for active bills. We highly encourage you to contact your state elected officials and request they oppose legislation that adversely affects unmanned systems and the unmanned systems community:

California – September 11
Michigan – December 31
New Hampshire – July 1
New Jersey – December 31
New York – December 31
Ohio – December 31
Oregon – July 11
Washington – On 29 May Second Special Session began and will end in 30 days

2 comments
337 views

Permalink

Comments

12-06-2015 12:20

Thanks for the question, Chad. I am the Director of the UMD UAS Test Site. The larger germane text of the bill as signed is as follows:
“The Department of Business and Economic Development, in consultation with the University of Maryland in its role as a member of the Mid–Atlantic Aviation Partnership and with other interested parties, shall:
(5) as a way to provide certainty to companies that want to use unmanned aircraft systems in the State, develop qualification guidelines for companies to follow when applying to the Federal Aviation Administration for a Section 333 exemption.”
The key part is that "...as a way to provide certainty to companies that want to use...". This means that MD DBED in consultation with others, will provide guidelines for companies to help them attain 333 exemptions, not limit them, and not waste the company's or anybody else's (FAA) time. Some companies approach the 333 process with little to no knowledge; some are very knowledgeable. By gaining from the experience of others and receiving this aid from those who have been involved the learning curve is flattened and accelerated, and companies can get busy faster.
The comment as to cost is off mark, at least for the MAAP and UMD. Nobody is required to use our services to get a 333 exemption. That said, we do offer valuable service and expertise in the process and can advise folks looking to go that route. We have also been told by those who have compared costs that our rates are VERY reasonable for the services we provide. Anybody wishing to find out need only contact us at our websites, http://www.maap.ictas.vt.edu/ or www.uas-test.umd.edu.
Thanks for the opportunity to assist!

11-06-2015 09:04

I would like greater clarification on the following line from SB370-line 21: "develop qualification guidelines for companies to follow when applying to the Federal Aviation Administration for a Section 333 exemption". Is the state setting standards/guidelines that companies must meet to apply/exercise a 333 exemption in the state of Maryland? If so, will these guidelines force companies to utilized designated test sites (at great expense) to qualify aircraft or operators? Just curious