With HR302 what are the changes that 107 operators must make to be in compliance? I haven't read the entire 100+ pages as of yet.
H.R. 302 and 107
- Thread starter philsmith76
- Start date
The first thing I saw of note for 107 pilots is you’ll have to add a privacy policy disclosure when doing commercial operations...
Section 379 (a):
https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th...02/text#toc-HD5E2721E527E4EA6B80231DCD6402ADB
Section 379 (a):
https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th...02/text#toc-HD5E2721E527E4EA6B80231DCD6402ADB
Last edited:
So from what I gather about section 379 is the faa has 270 days to gather from all 107s where/when/what we operate; how we handle the data and then they will have to make that publicly available. Do I have that right?
The way I read it the (FAA) Administrator must collect the data and make it available.
If that information is requested, compliance may be mandatory.
Considering the business environment today (regardless of the business) having a privacy policy is standard practice...how many time a year do you get snail mail/email from Apple, Paypal, banks, credit cards, merchants, etc. that inform you of their privacy policy?
I have a feeling as the new law is rolled out and the FAA develops mechanisms to deal with it we’ll see some standard privacy policy boilerplate appear on multiple websites you can incorporate in your operations.
Of course we’ll also see sites advertising these policy documents for a fee...
One thing of note is that privacy policies in this case deal with information that is ‘personally identifiable’ as gathered by an unmanned aircraft system; when you have contractual documents for an inspection job the clients’ names, address, phone number, etc. is not gathered by the UAS, but as a routine course of your business.
In this instance I believe Section 379 does not apply.
A system that uses facial recognition IS addressed on 379, but not many of us utilize that technology.
For me having a privacy policy is a normal business occurrence, but will have little/no additional reporting requirement to the FAA based on what I have read so far.
If that information is requested, compliance may be mandatory.
Considering the business environment today (regardless of the business) having a privacy policy is standard practice...how many time a year do you get snail mail/email from Apple, Paypal, banks, credit cards, merchants, etc. that inform you of their privacy policy?
I have a feeling as the new law is rolled out and the FAA develops mechanisms to deal with it we’ll see some standard privacy policy boilerplate appear on multiple websites you can incorporate in your operations.
Of course we’ll also see sites advertising these policy documents for a fee...
One thing of note is that privacy policies in this case deal with information that is ‘personally identifiable’ as gathered by an unmanned aircraft system; when you have contractual documents for an inspection job the clients’ names, address, phone number, etc. is not gathered by the UAS, but as a routine course of your business.
In this instance I believe Section 379 does not apply.
A system that uses facial recognition IS addressed on 379, but not many of us utilize that technology.
For me having a privacy policy is a normal business occurrence, but will have little/no additional reporting requirement to the FAA based on what I have read so far.
Last edited:
4.3 Locations of People and Property
Small unmanned aircraft operations over people are only permitted when they are directly participating in the operation or located under a covered structure or inside a stationary vehicle that can provide reasonable protection from a falling small unmanned aircraft.
People directly participating in the operation of the unmanned aircraft include the remote pilot in command, visual observer, and the payload operator (if applicable)[1]. People directly participating in small UAS operations must be briefed on the potential risks and must acknowledge and consent to those risks.
The remote pilot in command must ensure that non-participating persons remain under such protection for the duration of the operation. If a situation arises where the person leaves such protection, the flight operation must cease immediately in a manner that does not cause undue hazard to persons.
The remote pilot in command must make a safety assessment of the risk of operating closer to objects on the ground and determine that it does not present an undue hazard.
The operation of a small unmanned aircraft over a moving vehicle is not permitted because the moving vehicle is dynamic (not directly controlled by the remote pilot in command) and the potential impact forces of an unmanned aircraft impacting a moving road vehicle pose unacceptable risks.
In addition to FAA regulations regarding flight safety, the remote pilot must also consider privacy rights of non-participants in flight operations. The Texas Privacy Act HB 912 Chapter 423.002 states in part:
(a) It is lawful to capture an image using an unmanned aircraft in this state:
(1) for purposes of professional or scholarly research and development by a person acting on behalf of an institution of higher education, as defined by Section 61.003, Education Code, including a person who:
(a) is a professor, employee, or student of the institution; or
(b) is under contract with or otherwise acting under the direction or on behalf of the institution;
(2) if the image is captured by or for an electric or natural gas utility:
(a) for operations and maintenance of utility facilities for the purpose of maintaining utility system reliability and integrity;
(b) for inspecting utility facilities to determine repair, maintenance, or replacement needs during and after construction of such facilities;
(c) for utility routing and siting for the purpose of providing utility service;
(3) if the image is captured by the owner or operator of an oil, gas, water, or other pipeline for the purpose of inspecting, maintaining, or repairing pipelines or other related facilities, and is captured without the intent to conduct surveillance on an individual or real property located in this state.
Section 423.003 states that it is illegal to capture an image with an unmanned aircraft if:
(a) a person commits an offense if the person uses an unmanned aircraft to capture an image of an individual or privately owned real property in this state with the intent to conduct surveillance on the individual or property captured in the image.
(b) An offense under this section is a Class C misdemeanor.
(c) It is a defense to prosecution under this section that the person destroyed the image:
(1) as soon as the person had knowledge that the image was captured in violation of this section; and
(2) without disclosing, displaying, or distributing the image to a third party.
In order to comply with the Texas Privacy Law, a pilot in command will follow the below steps to ensure that no personally identifiable information is collected, and if said information is inadvertently collected during the normal course of operations, then that personally identifiable information will be destroyed or rendered safe by electronic means immediately upon discovery.
- [My business] remote pilots will make a reasonable effort to provide prior notice to non-participants of the general timeframe and area that sUAS data will be collected.
- No data collected by sUAS of private property will be retained by the [Us].
- No data will be collected or retained that is linked to an individual’s name or other personally identifiable information.
- If personally identifiable information is collected during flight operations by accident, that information will be rendered sterile by electronic means to the extent that the information or data can no longer be linked to any individual or destroyed.
If you are operating commercially then you need a privacy policy and you need to follow it. Some states are more strict than others about how personal information is handled. For us (Texas), the house crafted a pretty slick bill that protects the public but also protects the individual operator. Hopefully your state is the same.
NMUnmanned
Member
It says "should" not "shall". From my experience with federal regulations in the nuclear industry that means you better have one unless you have a good reason not to. Shall legally does not equal should in these regulations from what I have dealt with before. Is that different with the FAA and how they enforce?
A few things in the regs say should. Says you "should" keep records too. Of course you can ignore the suggestion until the FAA decides to perform an inspection and you don't have the records they are asking for. I'm sure it will be the same for a privacy policy. You can be part of the current problem or you can recognize that it makes good business sense to draft your own policy.....and follow it. But I am sure that there are enough people with a 107 that fail to take the hint and then force the government to restrict us all even further and legislate a solution.
As a new 107 holder. I'll give you a hint. Think of this as the FAA's way of asking you to draft a privacy policy in keeping with state and federal regs politely instead of just outright telling you to get your act together and do it.
New Posts
-
-
-
Sharing My Music and Sound Effects - Over 2000 Tracks- Latest: Eric Matyas
-
-
