Utah registration bill SB0024

[Dmcvey]

(3) Beginning on January 1, 2024, a person may not operate in this state an unmanned
264 aircraft system or an advanced air mobility aircraft for commercial operation for which
265 certification is required under 14 C.F.R. Part 107 or 135 unless the aircraft has a current
266 certificate of registration issued by the department.

SB0024

le.utah.gov

Contact your UTAH representitive.

 

[Walleye Hunter]

(3) Beginning on January 1, 2024, a person may not operate in this state an unmanned
264 aircraft system or an advanced air mobility aircraft for commercial operation for which
265 certification is required under 14 C.F.R. Part 107 or 135 unless the aircraft has a current
266 certificate of registration issued by the department.

SB0024

le.utah.gov

Contact your UTAH representitive.

I thought this was federal territory.

 

[Dmcvey]

According to Singer it is but MN, WA require state registration and now Utah. I have emailed the authoring atty and bill sponser. No reply so far.

Having that discussion with MN. They require any commercial drone, even one from out of state, flown for a day be registered. If you don't have the sale receipt, they will try and charge MN sale tax.

 

[Deleted member 170519]

According to Singer it is but MN, WA require state registration and now Utah. I have emailed the authoring atty and bill sponser. No reply so far.

Having that discussion with MN. They require any commercial drone, even one from out of state, flown for a day be registered. If you don't have the sale receipt, they will try and charge MN sale tax.

This is just for commercial fleets, right?
Oregon has something like that. I called them and they said they only require registration in Oregon for commercial fleet drones. Recreational and small part 107 fliers need not state register.
But, I can see states doing this for all drones in order to regulate and define fly zones and basically ruin the hobby.

 

[AlanL]

Washington's rules are specific to commercial use and state the following:

Starting April 1, 2022, commercially operated drones in Washington state are required by law to register with our Aviation Division. Registration is necessary for drone owners who operate their systems under 14 CFR Part 107 rules for compensation or hire, or as an extension of a business activity (see exemptions below).

And the exemptions are:

Exemptions requiring no additional actions:​

• Drones used exclusively for hobby or recreation.
• An aircraft owned by and used only in the service of any government or local government which is not engaged in operations or the carriage of property for commercial purposes.
• An aircraft owned by an academic institution or its representative which operates the systems for the purpose of research or education covered under the rule exemption for Part 107 requirements (49 USC 44809).
• An aircraft registered under the laws of a foreign country.

I fly under 14 CFR Part 107 with a FAA part 107 registered drone but not for compensation or hire, or as an extension of a business activity so I am not required to register with the state.

 

[Dmcvey]

This is just for commercial fleets, right?
Oregon has something like that. I called them and they said they only require registration in Oregon for commercial fleet drones. Recreational and small part 107 fliers need not state register.
But, I can see states doing this for all drones in order to regulate and define fly zones and basically ruin the hobby.

They can't regulate the airspace just land usage.

 

[Dmcvey]

If the FAA allowed each state to require registration in each state, that would create an unreasonable patchwork of registrations. Companies such as ******* with a fleet of drones, would be required to register every drone in every state.

I also believe that the registration requirement is preempted by the FAA and a state cannot require registration.

Taylor v. Huerta (856 F.3d 1089 (D.C. Cir. 2017)) FAA “has explicitly indicated its intent to be the exclusive regulatory authority for registration of pilotless aircraft.” As a result, the judge decided the City’s registration requirement is conflict preempted.

Singer v. City of Newton, the judge found that the City of Newton’s local drone ordinance was preempted on all counts included in the challenge, while the unchallenged portions of the Newton ordinance remain in effect. Specifically, the judge found that the following provisions of the City’s drone ordinance were preempted: Local registration requirements applicable to owners of all pilotless aircraft. “ Because the Federal registration is the exclusive means for registering UAS for the purpose of operating an aircraft in the navigable airspace, no state or local government may impose an additional registration requirement on the operation of UAS in the navigable airspace without first obtaining FAA approval.” Singer v. City of Newton, 284 F. Supp. 3d 125, 131 (D. Mass. 2017)

 

[Deleted member 170519]

They can't regulate the airspace just land usage.

I misspoke. In oregon, "Public" drones need registering. The wording is a little confusing.
* Drone Registration only required for Public Bodies - State Registration not required for Private Use Drones