Brussels, 15/09/2015 (Agence Europe) - European legislation that provides a framework for the activities of civilian drones should be flexible and should adopt an approach based on risk assessment, say MEPs on the European Parliament transport committee (TRAN) in a report adopted on Tuesday 15 September.
The report by Jacqueline Foster (ECR, UK), which was adopted almost unanimously (45 votes for and one against), seeks, in line with the principles of the Riga Declaration on remotely piloted aircraft (see EUROPE 11269), to avoid imposing overly strict rules on companies in the sector which could damage development and stifle investment in research and development.
Rather than having restrictive legislation, it should be for the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) to set standards and rules for the use of drones. It would thereafter be for national aviation authorities to authorise which drones could be put on national markets, in light of the operating characteristics proposed by the constructors, a source close to the matter has indicated.
The report proposes that the assessment be based on the “concept of operations” drafted by EASA. This will focus on the use to which the drone will be put rather than on the characteristics of the drone - whether it is for recreational use or not. On this latter point, some MEPs proposed adopting two separate legislative acts but, ultimately, they agreed to incorporate differentiated conditions, depending on the type of activity, into the same regulatory framework.
A further important point is the removal of the 150 kilogramme threshold for determining how responsibilities for the certification of drones are shared between EASA (150 kg and above) and national authorities (up to 150 kg). This threshold is currently set by Regulation No 2016/2008. In addition, MEPs say that it should be the JARUS (Joint Authorities for Rulemaking on Unmanned Systems) that should determine the international standards governing the use of civilian drones. JARUS brings together experts from member regional and national aviation authorities. There are currently around 40 members.
MEPs also discussed concrete measures, such as the installation of detection and collision avoidance devices to prevent collisions with aeroplanes, which would take account of air exclusion zones, around airports, for example, and areas of national security, such as around nuclear power stations.
Lastly, they call for full compliance with Directive 95/46/EC on the treatment of personal data, with Article 7 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights on respect for private and family life and with Article 16 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU on the protection of personal information.
The growth in the use of drones presents a major economic, safety and security challenge and is an issue for national security. For several years, civilian drone manufacturers have been calling for clear EU-wide legislation to replace the current 28 separate regulatory frameworks.
On 25 September, EASA will close the consultation on the so-called A-NPA proposal, which sets out 33 proposals on putting in place common security rules for the use of drones across the whole of the EU, no matter their weight (see EUROPE 11275). The draft resolution is likely, for its part, to be adopted during the plenary session of 26-29 October. And the European Commission is expected to present a strategy for the European air sector before the end of the year.
Drone manufacturers happy.
The European Small UAV Coalition, which brings together the manufacturers of small drones, welcomed the resolution. “This is an important and timely report. The European industry leads the world in innovation and in business development. … It is essential that the regulatory framework the report proposes is developed through EASA, to ensure a consistent pan-European approach”, said Andrew Charlton, executive director of the Coalition. He told EUROPE that the 150 kg threshold was an “anachronism” which should be discarded and was pleased that the measures proposed by MEPs are proportionate and based on risk assessment and performance level, “offering a flexible and adaptable framework”. Charlton played down the risks posed to air safety by small drones (see EUROPE 11364), arguing that planes regularly hit geese without their being brought down. In terms of respect for privacy, he said that the issues raised by drones were similar to those with smart phones and CCTV cameras. “The problem is not so much the possibility of filming or photographing as the use to which these recordings are put.” (Pascal Hansens)