The U.S. Department of Transportation’s Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) today announces the largest civil penalty the FAA has proposed against a UAS operator for endangering the safety of our airspace.
The FAA proposes a $1.9 million civil penalty against SkyPan International, Inc. of Chicago. Between March 21, 2012, and Dec. 15, 2014, SkyPan conducted 65 unauthorized operations in some of our most congested airspace and heavily populated cities, violating airspace regulations and various operating rules, the FAA alleges. These operations were illegal and not without risk.
The FAA alleges that the company conducted 65 unauthorized commercial UAS flights over various locations in New York City and Chicago between March 21, 2012 and Dec. 15, 2014. The flights involved aerial photography. Of those, 43 flew in the highly restricted New York Class B airspace.
“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.”
SkyPan operated the 43 flights in the New York Class B airspace without receiving an air traffic control clearance to access it, the FAA alleges. Additionally, the agency alleges the aircraft 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 effective registration, and SkyPan did not have a Certificate of Waiver or Authorization for the operations.
SkyPan operated the aircraft in a careless or reckless manner so as to endanger lives or property, the FAA alleges.
SkyPan has 30 days after receiving the FAA’s enforcement letter to respond to the agency.
http://www.faa.gov/news/press_releases/news_story.cfm?newsId=19555
Comments
PS: "A huge blank space" ... when it came to listing what regulations were broken ...
@Thomas: Yes and no.
Yes: The FAA has been empowered by Congress to regulate the NAS
No: There's no publically published regulation that was violated, because there (still) is no applicable regulation applicable to SUAS. No applicable FAR apply, unless you believe that such regulations pertaining to full size aircraft, like "No flight *under* 500'", "seat belts required", etc ... are applicable to SUAS. There is also zero language in FAA regulations distinguishing commercial from recreational SUAS, so if there were applicable regulations (there isn't) they would apply to all UAVs including anything we fly. See also www.kramerlevin.com/files/upload/FAA-v-Pirker.pdf
I am willing to bet statistically the people getting sued by the FAA were more likely to kill, injure or damage people or property driving to work than what they are getting fined for. I don't buy that drones are dangerous based on past history, current statistics or even plausibility. Where is the evidence, I just se speculation and fear of what is new? But sadly in this day and age that is all that is needed, good think we have solved all the real problems.
"the largest civil penalty the FAA has proposed against a UAS operator" ...
Largest as in second one ever. The other one was $10,000 against Pirker, ultimately settled at $1,000 after FAA lost first round in court, appealed to NTSB, and Pirker decided to settle.
Looking forward to this one in court, although I would have preferred that the FAA actually work on, oh ... regulations ...
Not equipped with a two-way radio. Nnnnnkaaay.
@John,
I believe that an individual or entity can be fined (penalized) for violating a publically published regulation created by a Government Entity (FAA) which has been empowered by Congress to regulate the NAS?
Regards,
TCIII AVD
Not abiding by a regulation is illegal? Why is it called a regulation and not a law? Listen, obviously regulations and guidance are a good idea, but unfortunately Huerta's comments are a good reason folk don't take the FAA seriously.
-
1
-
2
-
3
of 3 Next