CS FOR HOUSE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION NO. 15(FIN) Relating to the Task Force on Unmanned Aircraft Systems. 2:12:16 PM REPRESENTATIVE SHELLEY HUGHES, SPONSOR, introduced the legislation. She explained that the legislation extended the length of the task force. She stated that in the United States one in four homes owned a drone because of the smaller size and affordability. As the use increased the public's concerns also increased. Setting "structures" in place with "inherent protections," reduced the impacts on the public. She detailed that Alaska was selected by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to be a test site. The FAA continued to address the safety conditions for the use of drones. The role of the task force was to examine th privacy issues and Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) applications. The task force was very concerned with privacy issues and misuse of UAS. She remarked on the state's vast roadless areas and noted the potential of UAS in the state. The task force performed will in the prior year and had issued a report to the legislature on January 14, 2014 and will issue a final report on July 1, 2014. The task force brought forward HB 255 (Unmanned Aircraft Systems) that set the parameters for law enforcement use. Representative Hughes related that the reason the task force should continue its work was further address concerns over privacy. The technology was fast growing and the integration of UAS into national air space was expected in late 2015. She anticipated additional issues emerging from the integration. One of the duties of the task force would be to continue to conduct public hearings and identify issues on privacy and data collection, evaluate and recommend solutions. The task force had spent much time focusing on law enforcement use and issues in the past year. Currently, commercial and business use was imminent. She anticipated that the impending use of commercial UAS would bring new challenges. The task force dealt with Fourth Amendment rights and would begin to First Amendment rights regarding business and media use. She believed the task force was "timely and necessary' and stressed the importance for Alaskans to know that the issue was being monitored and addressed through policy. The task force was comprised of 7 members and the legislation added a public member, two industry members, and the commissioners of DCCED, and Department of Transportation and Public Facilities (DOT). The task force wanted more industry members and the public to be more involved. She noted that Senator Olson had been on the task force. She believed that the task force needed to be "a central point of contact for the public." 2:17:46 PM Representative Hughes spoke to the desire for increased economic development in the state. She believed the state was a prime location for the UAS industry. Other states took a more restrictive and hesitant approach and the UAS industry was interested in the state. She shared that an individual in the industry was looking forward to growing his business to 100 people and felt the UAS industry provided more opportunity for Alaskans. She urged the committee to advance the legislation. Co-Chair Meyer asked for verification that one in four households owned a drone. Representative Hughes answered in the affirmative. Co-Chair Meyer pointed to the sponsor statement (copy on file). He asked about the single point of contact noted in the document. He inquired whether a single point of contact was currently in place. Representative Hughes answered that the single point of contact was not assigned to any specific department. The task force was the acting point of contact. Co-Chair Meyer asked whether the task force was expanding its membership. Representative Hughes replied in the affirmative; by 5 additional members. Senator Dunleavy questioned whether drones had the audio and visual capacity that caused concerns and how a drone was defined. 2:20:25 PM Representative Hughes responded that a UAS with a camera was unrelated. GINGER BLAISDELL, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE SHELLY HUGHES replied that the term "drone" had been adopted by the military for weaponized unmanned aircraft. She explained that more professional sounding names were in use; however, drone was easier to say. A drone was the same as an unmanned aircraft and was not related to weapons use. Senator Dunleavy elucidated that for many years individuals used recreational aircraft without weaponry. He wondered if the recreational individuals' rights were being rolled into the larger discussion on UAS. He wondered whether a distinction existed between model airplane enthusiast and the commercial and visual audio use of UAS. Ms. Blaisdell answered that one of the functions of the task force would define "where the line was drawn." Currently the FAA had rules stating that UAS use for commercial purposes a certificate of authorization was required. Most UAS operators with camera equipment were unaware that they may be operating illegally and received fines. Some of the fines had been dropped and some had been pursued. She indicated that another role of the task force was public education. Senator Dunleavy asked if he had a model airplane and was flying it on his property he wondered if he was violating any new laws since UAS came into use. Ms. Blaisdell replied in the negative. She reported that unless the individual wanted to sell and photography from unmanned aircraft the individual was not in violation of any law. The Academy of Model Aeronautics worked closely with the FAA and set out the guidelines and rules for hobbyists. She reiterated that most users were unaware of the rules. She believed that "mass education" was necessary. 2:24:36 PM Senator Olson commented that the FAA continued to revise regulations related to model aircraft and UAS in relation to sharing airspace with manned aircraft. He was in favor of the legislature. Co-Chair Meyer CLOSED public testimony. Vice-Chair Fairclough pointed to page 3 and noted the absence of the definition of a drone and what was regulated. She hoped that the task force developed recommendations concerning recreational and camera use. Representative Hughes replied that the issue had been discussed in the last report of the task force and discussions would continue along with implementation of public education. HCR 15 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further consideration.