While many thought the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) was turning a blind eye to unauthorized use of Drones/UAVs(Unmanned Aerial Vehicles)/UASs(Unmanned Aircraft Systems) in the US, on October 6, 2015 the FAA announced the most substantial civil penalty the FAA has proposed to date against a Drone/UAV/UAS operator citing endangerment to the safety of US airspace in the amount of 1.9 million dollars.
The proposed $1.9 million civil fine is against SkyPan International, Inc. based in Chicago, Illinois. The FAA alleges that between March 2012 and December 2014, SkyPan conducted 65 illegal flight operations in some of the most congested airspace and densely populated cities in the US. The FAA contends SkyPan violated US airspace regulations and FAA operating rules and further asserts the flight operations were illegal and risky.
Perhaps the most damning allegation made against SkyPan by the FAA is that SkyPan operated the aircraft carelessly or recklessly which posed a danger people or property.
The FAA cited to flight operations, involving aerial photography, in various parts of New York City and Chicago. The FAA states 43 of the 65 flights occurred in New York’s “Class B” airspace. According to the FAA, Class B airspace is airspace from the surface to 10,000 feet mean sea level (MSL) surrounding the nation’s busiest airports regarding airport operations or passenger enplanements.
“Flying unmanned aircraft in violation of the Federal Aviation Regulations is illegal and can be dangerous,” said FAA Administrator Michael Huerta. “We have the safest airspace in the world, and everyone who uses it must understand and observe our comprehensive set of rules and regulations.”
The FAA contends SkyPan operated the 43 flights in the New York Class B airspace without air traffic control authorizing the flight operations. The FAA also states that Drone/UAV/UAS utilized by SkyPan was not equipped with a two-way radio, transponder, and altitude-reporting equipment.
The FAA further alleges that on all 65 flights, the aircraft lacked an airworthiness certificate and active registration, and SkyPan did not have a Certificate of Waiver or Authorization (COA) for the operations. SkyPan has 30 days, after receiving the FAA’s enforcement letter, to respond to the agency regarding the 1.9 million dollars fine. Id.
For a US Drone/UAV/UAS operator to legally perform flight operations for commercial purposes, the process must be compliant under the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012. The United States Congress mandated that the FAA regulate Drones/UAVs/UASs in the US and the only manner in which an operator may fly a Drone/UAV/UAS for any commercial purpose is to apply for successfully and received an FAA Section 333 exemption.
A Section 333 exemption provides explicit permission to fly a Drone/UAV/UAS for commercial purposes in US airspace with stringent guidelines including altitude limitation and line of sight operation. If the allegations by the FAA that SkyPan operated the aircraft carelessly or recklessly which posed a danger people or property is found to be true, it is unlikely the granting of a Section 333 exemption would have insulated SkyPan from liability.
While the Drone/UAV/UAS industry is one of the most exciting emerging industries in the world, it is in uncharted territory as the FAA is working desperately to develop regulations which protect US airspace without crushing the financial and efficiency opportunities for US businesses.
Enthusiasm for the industry is natural to see as financial analysts project the Drone/UAV/UAS business will have an economic impact of 13 billion dollars by 2017 and 82 billion dollars by 2025 in the United States alone! The same analysts also project 103,000 new US jobs will be created by 2025.
With that being said, anyone considering operating a Drone/UAV/UAS in the US without a Section 333 exemption must consider the financial consequences of operation as the FAA is now aggressively enforcing regulations.
Many ask if the FAA monitoring and possible fines will harm the industry and the answer is probably not – unless the FAA grounds all Drone/UAV/UAS operations. The industry is still vibrant and primed to grow; the key is responsible use which is more straightforward in concept than application. The FAA has discussed allowing non-pilots to act as the Pilot in Command (PIC) for Drone/UAV/UAS operations but this has not been well received by licensed pilots and the pilot unions. The argument, which is legitimate, is that a licensed pilot not only understands the rules of the sky but has heightened awareness and respect for flight and the possible dangers of negligent actions. If the PIC has not operated an aircraft, and a Drone/UAV/UAS is considered an apparatus by the FAA, the operator may not anticipate the consequences of specific actions which appear initially benign but can become very dangerous in the blink of an eye.
In summary, the FAA is the IRS of US airspace, with extensive powers, and SkyPan may pay 1.9 million dollar lesson in this far-reaching power if the proposed fine is upheld.