HOUSE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION NO. 15 Relating to the continuation of the Task Force on Unmanned Aircraft Systems. 8:33:57 AM GINGER BLAISDELL, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE SHELLY HUGHES, reported that HCR 15 extended the Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) for an additional three years. The extension coincided with the University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF) campus selected as a UAS test site. She described the composition of the task force. The task force was comprised of seven members; state employees, legislators, one member from the Aviation Advisory Board, and one member form the Academy of Model Aeronautics [Alaska Chapter]. She detailed that the sponsor added the commissioner [or designee] of the Department of Transportation and Public Facilities (DOT) because of the departments role as the liaison between the state and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), and one additional public member. In addition, an amendment that was adopted in the House Labor and Commerce Committee added three seats; two industry professionals from unmanned aircraft systems, and the commissioner or designee from Department of Commerce, Community and Economic Development. Ms. Blaisdell elaborated that the legislation expanded the duties of the task force to include investigating complaints and concerns regarding unmanned aircraft and identification of potential privacy problems. She relayed that safeguarding Alaskans privacy was a main focus of the task force. Public education regarding unmanned aircraft was another expanded role hoped to allay the public's fears of the new technology. Part of the university's role as a test site would be to hold public hearings as per agreement with the federal government. The task force previously held meetings two that included public testimony. Co-Chair Stoltze expressed concern that the two additional industry members were considered public members. He wanted to avoid public misperception about their role in the industry. REPRESENTATIVE SHELLEY HUGHES, SPONSOR, agreed. She voiced that the amendment was made in the House Labor and Commerce Committee. She suggested that one member could be designated as a public member and the other member could be chosen from industry. Co-Chair Austerman revealed that he flew model airplanes. He asked how the legislation would affect the public's use of model aircraft. Representative Hughes answered that different rules applied to the flying of model aircraft which fly under 400 feet. The task force was concerned with the integration of unmanned aircraft allowed into national airspace by 2016. She noted that an unmanned aircraft can also fly under 400 feet but would be differentiated for public or commercial purposes where model aircraft was considered recreational. The same UAS technology could be used by hobbyist. Co-Chair Austerman expressed additional concern about the legislation affecting recreational users. Representative Hughes stated that the legislative task force would have no jurisdiction over hobby aircraft. Representative Costello asked about the fiscal note, FN1 (LEG). She cited the analysis that listed numerous commission meetings and public hearings in addition to new members. She wondered whether the fiscal note appropriation was sufficient to cover expenses and member's travel. Representative Hughes replied that last year's task force costs were absorbed by the members. She mentioned that her legislative account covered the refreshments. The members of the task force were willing to continue to serve and absorb the costs. Ms. Blaisdell stated that the only costs incurred last year were two mileage tickets used for staff participation. The current legislation costs were calculated based on last year and additional funds were added for a potential bush or Fairbanks member. Most members were from the Anchorage area. The sponsor anticipated holding only two or three in- person meetings, which involved travel. Representative Costello expressed additional concern. She wondered whether new public members would be aware of accepting the financial costs of travel and expenses. She thought that the fiscal note was inadequate for the potential costs of the task force expansion and the public hearing. She wished to further address the costs and fiscal note. Co-Chair Stoltze applauded the task force for cutting the corners and saving money. Representative Hughes stated that last year she intentionally kept costs low. 8:45:13 AM Co-Chair Stoltze OPENED public testimony. STEVE COLLIGAN, ALASKA PRESIDENT OF ACADEMY OF MODEL AERONAUTICS (via teleconference), supported the legislation. He stated that he was a member of the task force. The academy was in existence for 78 years and guided self-regulation of recreational model aeronautics. Over the years many technological changes had taken place. His mission was to separate recreational and commercial use and protect model aeronautics. The academy fostered youth and student interest in technology, science, and math. He noted that little distinguished a model from a commercial unmanned aerial. The intent or operation of the unmanned aircraft typically differentiated recreational unmanned aircraft. He related that unmanned autonomous systems were once very expensive but currently could be built for several thousand dollars. The academy was on a mission to provide the instruction and self-regulation of unmanned aircraft. The academy wanted to ensure that "best practices" were being followed responsibly by the user. He noted that the organization was proactive in helping the recreational operator know the airspace rules and FCC regulations. Mr. Colligan voiced that last year the task force addressed public safety and privacy. The task force examined the state's laws related to privacy concerns over unmanned aircraft and felt the laws were adequate except for a few minor administrative issues. He qualified that the unmanned aircraft technology would continue to evolve. He saw the task force as a common sense approach to filter new information and coordinate the activities at the university. He discussed that new small unmanned aircraft were used to develop three dimensional models used for surveying and mapping and augmented aerial photography and satellite imagery. The use of unmanned aircraft in mapping was cost effective but was currently illegal for profit. He mentioned the use of unmanned aircraft equipped with cameras for commercial film or sports use. The academy established rules for personal use of unmanned aerial cameras within a controlled line of sight. He thought that the task force would monitor evolving technology and develop parameters in the same way as the academy. He reported that the technology had evolved beyond the point that the FAA could keep pace. Adding industry members to the task force that had current experience was a responsible approach. He reported that he had a mapping company and was also performing testing and research and development and hoped he was operation under legal parameters. He felt that as the technology evolved it was important to have a forum like the task force to "communicate and address" privacy and public safety issues. Mr. Colligan replied, in response to a question by Co-Chair Stoltze, that the FAA was concerned with regulating 7,500 large unmanned drones in the airspace. He expressed concern about the safety of general aviation. He also expressed concern regarding the large number of small unmanned aircraft from one vendor that was selling 15,000 UAS per month in the United States (US) market at a cost of $450. He anticipated rapid growth in the number of UAS coming into private use. Co-Chair Austerman agreed with the privacy issues involved. He wished to avoid overregulation for recreational use. 8:55:24 AM Mr. Colligan agreed. He explained that under new rules, the academy was preparing to receive certification from the FAA through a provision called community based organization (CBO) for the self-regulation of recreational use. Representative Edgmon appreciated the testimony. He supported the bill. He thought that the task force was needed in the formative stages of unmanned aircraft use to sift through the issues and make recommendations. He wondered how a person with questions on unmanned aircraft use would get answers. Mr. Colligan replied that the issue was not clear and rules needed to be outlined. The task force first addressed public use and required each state agency involved to find a lead contact to field public inquiry. The university was becoming a resource for UAS operational standards. He was not sure that the issue was fully defined. RO BAILEY, ALASKA CENTER FOR UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS INTEGRATION, UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA FAIRBANKS (via teleconference), expressed support for the legislation. She reported that she was a member of the task force. She relayed the importance of the formation of the task force. She related that the public appreciated the task force for sharing citizens' concerns. The tasks force's ability to resolve concerns and complaints presented a "valuable bridging" to a future where unmanned aircraft systems were understood, properly managed, and controlled through regulation. She noted that the task force's outreach was appreciated by the public and organizations that fear government overreach. She recalled an article stating that Alaska had the most progressive laws in the country for UAS use. She stated that as the industry grew the potential for complaints grew. She noted much interest from outside companies and agencies who want to test systems in Alaska. A growing group of inexperienced people were also purchasing drones that were unaware of the rules. Separating inappropriate behavior from responsible, professional operation was the key to establishing "common sense" rules. She supported the expansion of the task force to include members of the public, industry and the commissioner of DCCED. JOHN BINDER, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC FACILITIES, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference), testified in support of the legislation and the expansion of the task force. He remarked that the task force was primarily focused on privacy and law enforcement concerns but that the matter was rapidly expanding beyond those concerns. He reminded the committee that DOT only dealt with the ground aspects of unmanned vehicles but was the primary liaison between the agencies and the FAA, who was responsible for the airspace coordination. The department was concerned about the growing use of UAS and how they interact with the public and general aviation around airports. The department was "very interested" in developing an integrated and collaborative role in the task force as UAS capabilities expanded. He applauded the efforts of the task force especially as more issues would impact the public and state owned airports. Representative Holmes asked whether the travel costs would be absorbed by the department. Mr. Binder replied in the affirmative. Most meetings would take place in Anchorage and costs would be minimal. Co-Chair Stoltze CLOSED public testimony. Representative Hughes responded to Representative Edgmon's prior question. She stated that the task force meetings were publicly noticed and her office was acting as a point of contact. She expressed the need for the task force to become a central point of contact. She noted that the next issue the taskforce would address was the integration of commercial UAS users related to first amendment rights. She thanked her staff and the members of the task force for their efficiency and achievement in establishing the legislation related to law enforcement and HCR 15. She remarked that the state's approach to UAS regulation fixed a problem as it arose. The industry viewed Alaska as a place to "set up shop" which was a reason for the task force to continue to address new issues as they arise. 9:07:38 AM Co-Chair Stoltze recently heard about a Board of Game regulatory process regarding UAS. He requested additional information. Representative Hughes replied that the Board of Game had added the following proposed regulations to exclude: " any devise that has been airborne controlled remotely and used to spot or locate game with the use of a camera or a video devise…" Representative Hughes reported that the Department of Fish and Game (DFG) was aware of use of a drone during a moose hunt in 2012 and wanted to prevent a reoccurrence. She added that if the prohibition was not specified in the regulations the practice would be allowed. Representative Gara mentioned another aspect of unmanned aircraft. Sometimes the planes crash and injure people. He wished to address the need for public safety in the resolution. Representative Hughes replied that the FAA addressed the safety aspects of UAS and the issue was outside of the task force's purview. Representative Gara requested language that the task force could address minimizing public safety risks. Representative Hughes replied that the task force reviewed FAA regulations as part of its duties and would continue the practice. Co-Chair Stoltze wanted to change the language regarding public members to include their role in industry. He stressed the importance of accuracy when communicating to the public. HCR 15 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further consideration. 9:13:57 AM AT EASE 9:15:20 AM RECONVENED