Drone Regulations

3. Is there a distinction between “State UAS” and “Private UAS”?

Bahamas

Under Bahamian law there is presently no distinction between “State RPAs” and “Private RPAs”.

Bolivia

“State UAS” (Armed Forces, Customs and Police) are regulated by Regulatory Bulletin Nº AAP0149/2019 (Nº DGAC/042/2019) dated 30 April 2019; however, these must adjust their operations to what is established under Law Nº 2902 (Civil Aviation Law).

Brazil

There is a distinction for remote piloted aircraft for State use (considered for military use) and private use. The specific legislation in Brazil issued by ANAC (RBAC-E n. 94) does not apply to military unmanned aerial vehicles (VANTs) but only to private VANTs. The rules for the use of VANTs for military purpose are not controlled by ANAC but by DECEA who is the military body liable for private and military use of VANTs. In case of a conversion of an unmanned aerial vehicle originally authorized for military use to civil use then specific ANAC legislation (RBAC-E n. 21) would apply.

Canada

Yes

Colombia

UAS are controlled and supervised by different authorities, as we explain before, State UAS are those that require a special permit and supervision of AAES and Private UAS are define as every UAS used in civil activities which operations required being supervised and regulated by UAEAC.

Costa Rica

The Operational Directive does not distinguish between private and state UAS but establishes that it does not apply to State-owned RPAS for safety operations. However, public institutions that operate RPAS must obtain an operating authorization by DGAC.

El Salvador

Yes. The RAC-VANT is not applicable to State-owned UAS such as those used for activities and operations from the Armed Forces, National Police, and International Airports.

Germany

Yes, there is a clear distinction between State UAS and Private UAS with a completely different set of rules. The Chicago Convention already established a clear distinction between “civil” and “state” aircraft, article 3(a).

Similarly, according to article 2(3) Regulation (EC) No 2018/1139, the Basic  Regulation  shall  not  apply  to  products,  parts, appliances, personnel and organizations referred to in  (1)  (a) and (b) while carrying out military, customs, police, search and rescue, firefighting, coastguard or similar activities or services. The Member States therefore remain responsible to regulate the aforementioned services on a national basis.

German law does not provide separate “military air law” provisions. Section 30 (1) German Aviation Act (Luftverkehrsgesetz/LuftVG) rather allows for military and the police to deviate from the German civil air law regime with some minor exceptions.

Moreover, section 21a (2) German Air Traffic Regulation (Luftverkehrs-Ordnung/LuftVO) expressly states for publicly used UAS, i.e. UAS operated by or under the supervision of authorities when performing their duties and organizations executing security tasks in relation to emergencies and disasters, that no permission and no proof is required. Furthermore, the restrictions for the use of UAS under section 21b German Air Traffic Regulation (Luftverkehrs-Ordnung/LuftVO) do not apply.

Guatemala

RAC-101 does not distinguish between state or private UAS.

India

While the CAR does not specifically distinguish between State UAS and Private UAS, UAS owned/operated by the National Technical Research Organization, the Aviation Research Centre and Central Intelligence Agencies are exempted from obtaining Unique Identification Number (UIN) and Unmanned Aircraft Operator Permit (UAOP).

Israel

Yes, the operation of private UAS is regulated within the framework of the Air Navigation Law and regulations enacted thereunder. On the other hand, the Air Navigation Law and associated regulations do not apply to State-owned UAS, operated by either of Israel’s security bodies (the National Intelligence Agency (Mossad) and the Israel Security Agency (Shin Beit)). Instead, the security body itself is responsible for the airworthiness of its UAS and the professional knowledge and proficiency of the UAS operator. Nonetheless, several provisions in the Air Navigation Law, particularly those regarding Israel’s flight information region (FIR) and the fees payable for services rendered by the CAAI, do apply to State-owned UAS. Further, the Air Navigation Law and the Air Navigation Regulations do not apply to police aircraft and army aircraft.

Italy

Yes, according to Article 744 of the Italian Navigation Code, “State UAS” are the military UAS, those owned by the State and engaged in institutional services of Police, Customs, Fire Corps and Civil Protection Department. Any other UAS is considered to be “Private UAS”.

Kenya

State aircraft are excluded from the application of the CAA and the Rules of the Air Regulations[5]. The Draft Regulations also exclude state aircraft from its application and prohibits any person other than the national government from owning, registering or operating an UAS with military specifications[6].

[5] Section 3(2) of the Civil Aviation Act No. 21 of 2013

[6] Regulation 6 (3) of the Draft Civil Aviation (Unmanned Aircraft Systems) Regulations, 2019

Mexico

Yes. State RPAS and RPA include military, police, border patrol, marine patrol, among others and are regulated through the provisions established on article 37 of the Civil Aviation Law. Private RPAS are classified by a weight and type of use criteria and are regulated through mandatory rules “CO AV23/10 R4”.

Nicaragua

The Regulation does not make a distinction between State UAS and Private UAS.

Norway

According to Section 69 of the UAS Regulations, the UAS Regulations (except for section 18 on insurance coverage) do also apply for civil aviation with a governmental purpose in connection with police work, customs, public search and rescue services, firefighting, coast- and border patrol, or similar activities and services.

The UAS Regulations do not apply to the Norwegian Armed Forces’ use of UAS, cf. Section 3.

Pakistan

No.

Panama

Yes, there is a distinction in the Regulations. The State RPAs are used for state or governmental operations, and the Private RPAs are used for civil or private operations.

Philippines

Yes.  The Act provides the following classification:  ”Civil aircraft” refers to any aircraft other than a State or public aircraft; “Public aircraft” refers to an aircraft used exclusively in the service of any government or of any political jurisdiction thereof, including the Government of the Philippines, but not including any government-owned aircraft engaged in operations which meet the definition of commercial air transport operations.  By definition, aircraft includes a UAS/RPA.   

For an RPA, the PCAR does not provide for a “State UAS” or a Private “UAS.” Instead, it only classified RPA as commercial and non-commercial.  

The nationality and registration marks borne by aircraft shall consist of the following: 

(1) “RP” immediately preceding identification number for aircraft used solely for governmental purposes and/or belonging to the Philippine government 

(2) “RP-C” will classify aircrafts 

(3) “RP-U” will classify RPAs 

Portugal

Yes, there is. State UAS are used for military, customs, or police services and they are subject to special regulation. Only Private UAS are subject to the rules of ANAC’s Regulation nr. 1093/2016.

Puerto Rico

Yes, FAA regulations apply.

Romania

There is a distinction between the state aircraft and private aircraft, in general, but no legal distinction regarding precisely the UAS. The State aircraft are defined at Art. 3 para. 3.8 form Aerial Civil Code, respectively: “state aircraft – the aircraft used by state institutions for services regarding defense, public order, national security and also for custom services”.

South Africa

A private operation is defined as the use of a UAS for an individual’s personal and private purpose where there is no commercial outcome, interest, or gain. Private operations are subject to specific restrictions. The CARs specifically apply to private operations and are silent on state-owned UAS and UAS intended for state use.

Spain

Yes, it is. From EU Regulations’ perspective, Regulation 2018/1139 considers “State UAS” those unmanned aircraft operated by a public authority when military, customs, police, Search and Rescue, firefighting, border, forestry and coastal surveillance or similar activities are performed. To said activities, European regulation will defer legal requirements to the domestic laws of the Member States.

Particularly in Spain, Royal Decree 601/2016, of 2 December, is the specific regulation for UAS with military purposes. Furthermore, non-military public state drones, are subject to RD 1036/2017 (the section not repealed by the EU regulations). For said public operations (i.e., the various police national or regional bodies, traffic surveillance, National Intelligence Centre activities and Customs Authority’s activities) operational restrictions applicable to private operators shall not apply and, conversely, their own internal safety protocols will apply to adjust their activities to the scope of the public body that is providing the service or carrying out the relevant flight. Therefore, it would be the relevant public body (e.g., the police) and not AESA the entity responsible for the operational authorisation and establishing the requirements but obliged to comply with certain minimum safety measures.

Besides, as happens with manned aircraft, in the case of anti-drug, anti-terrorism or where there are severe public threats, the state security forces shall not be obliged to issue a NOTAM for the specific operations carried out in the airspace.

Everything falling outside the limits of what is considered a public or state UAS activity (professional and recreational UAS operators, for example) will be then subject to said EU regulations. Recently the Ministry of Transport of Spain has released a first draft of a Project of Royal Decree which will develop the requirements and safety and operational process for those state UAS activities, which is intended to entry into force on 2021.

Switzerland

There is a special regulation for military and other state UAS (i.e., the use of UAS by authorities). The applicable regulation must be determined according to the planned operation and the respective UAS used.

Turkey

Yes; UAS’s which are used by the Turkish government for military, security, customs and wildfire suppression are denominated “State UAS’s” under the Directive.

United Kingdom

United States of America

Yes, operators of privately owned UAS and operators of UAS owned by government entities or organizations have different requirements for operations, pilot qualifications, and registration.  These distinctions are discussed further below.