U.S. Geological Survey UAS Roadmap 2010-2025 by Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems Intl

United States Geological Survey Unmanned Aircraft Systems Roadmap 2010 - 2025

Version 1.0 ; Revision A

July 29, 2011

UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

ABOUT The “Unmanned Aircraft Systems Roadmap (UAS) 2010-2025” was developed under a contract awarded to OpusTek International Corporation, (www.OpusTek.com) in response to USGS Solicitation Number 10CRQQ0260, August 1, 2010. Our most sincere appreciation is extended to Mike Hutt and his team at the USGS Rocky Mountain Geographic Science Center; Harry Kieling and his associates from Department of the Interior’s National Business Center Aviation Management Directorate; and the many scientific, resource management, and law enforcement professionals who provided key input to help us understand the diversity of Interior’s mission requirements. Their expert advice and counsel during the development of this document was vitally important. Special recognition is extended to our good friend, Granville Paules (1937-2011) who played a central role in assembling the OpusTek / Kelly-Anderson team for this effort. His courageous spirit lives on in the vision of this Roadmap, and the countless Gran Paules (left) as Primary Guidance Officer lives he touched through his extraordinary (Flight Dynamics) during Apollo 11 Mission & career. Thank you, Gran. Lunar Landing (circa 1969 NASA)

For additional copies of this UAS Roadmap please contact: U.S. Geological Survey 1 Denver Federal Center Building 810, MS-516 Denver, CO 80225-0046

UAS Roadmap 2010-2025 Cover photographed near Kachemak Bay, Alaska by Dean Allman www.deanallman.com

PHONE: 303-202-4296

July 29, 2011 ii

UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

FORWARD

July 29, 2011 iii

UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

This page intentionally left blank

July 29, 2011 iv

Table of Contents

UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

TABLE OF CONTENTS About .................................................................................................................................... ii Forward ............................................................................................................................... iii Table of Contents .................................................................................................................. v List of Figures ....................................................................................................................... ix List of Tables ........................................................................................................................ xi Executive Summary .............................................................................................................xiii Airborne Remote Sensing Today............................................................................................................................ xiii UAS Benefits.................................................................................................................................................................... xiii Roadmap Focus ............................................................................................................................................................. xiii UAS Imperative .............................................................................................................................................................. xiv

Introduction ............................................................................................................. 15 1.1 1.2 1.3

Purpose ................................................................................................................................................................. 15 Scope and Diversity ......................................................................................................................................... 17 National Airspace System Interoperability ........................................................................................... 20 1.3.1 FAA: (Flight) “Data is Key” ......................................................................................................................... 20 1.4 Did You Know?................................................................................................................................................... 22 1.5 UAS Technical Maturity ................................................................................................................................. 24

U.S. Department of the Interior ................................................................................ 29 2.1

2.2

2.3

2.4

2.5

Bureau of Indian Affairs ................................................................................................................................. 32 2.1.1 Bureau of Indian Education ...................................................................................................................... 32 2.1.2 Bureau of Indian Affairs .............................................................................................................................. 32 2.1.3 Observations ..................................................................................................................................................... 33 2.1.4 Challenges .......................................................................................................................................................... 33 Bureau of Land Management....................................................................................................................... 34 2.2.1 Commercial Activities ................................................................................................................................... 34 2.2.2 Recreation .......................................................................................................................................................... 34 2.2.3 Conservation ..................................................................................................................................................... 35 2.2.4 Wildfire Management................................................................................................................................... 35 2.2.5 Law Enforcement............................................................................................................................................ 35 2.2.6 Observations ..................................................................................................................................................... 36 2.2.7 Challenges .......................................................................................................................................................... 37 Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement ........................................ 39 2.3.1 Oil and Gas Production ................................................................................................................................ 39 2.3.2 Renewable Energy.......................................................................................................................................... 39 2.3.3 Observations ..................................................................................................................................................... 39 2.3.4 Challenges .......................................................................................................................................................... 40 Bureau of Reclamation ................................................................................................................................... 42 2.4.1 Water Needs...................................................................................................................................................... 42 2.4.2 Hydroelectric Power...................................................................................................................................... 42 2.4.3 Observations ..................................................................................................................................................... 42 2.4.4 Challenges .......................................................................................................................................................... 43 National Park Service...................................................................................................................................... 45 2.5.1 Cultural Resources ......................................................................................................................................... 45 2.5.2 Natural Resource Stewardship and Science ...................................................................................... 46

July 29, 2011 v

Table of Contents

UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

2.5.3 Park Planning, Facilities, and Land ....................................................................................................... 46 2.5.4 Visitor and Resource Protection .............................................................................................................. 46 2.5.5 U.S. Park Police ................................................................................................................................................ 47 2.5.6 Observations ..................................................................................................................................................... 47 2.5.7 Challenges .......................................................................................................................................................... 48 2.6 Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement .................................................................. 49 2.6.1 Regulation Active Coal Mines.................................................................................................................... 49 2.6.2 Reclaiming abandoned mine lands ........................................................................................................ 49 2.6.3 Observations ..................................................................................................................................................... 50 2.6.4 Challenges .......................................................................................................................................................... 51 2.7 Fish and Wildlife Service ............................................................................................................................... 52 2.7.1 Endangered Species ....................................................................................................................................... 52 2.7.2 Migratory Birds ............................................................................................................................................... 52 2.7.3 Fisheries and Habitat Conservation ...................................................................................................... 53 2.7.4 Law Enforcement............................................................................................................................................ 53 2.7.5 National Wildlife Refuge System ............................................................................................................. 53 2.7.6 Observations ..................................................................................................................................................... 54 2.7.7 Challenges .......................................................................................................................................................... 55 2.8 U.S. Geological Survey ..................................................................................................................................... 56 2.8.1 Climate and Land Use Change .................................................................................................................. 56 2.8.2 Core Science Systems .................................................................................................................................... 57 2.8.3 Ecosystems ......................................................................................................................................................... 57 2.8.4 Energy and Minerals, and Environmental Health ........................................................................... 58 2.8.5 Natural Hazards ............................................................................................................................................. 58 2.8.6 Science Quality and Integrity .................................................................................................................... 59 2.8.7 Water ................................................................................................................................................................... 59 2.8.8 Observations ..................................................................................................................................................... 59 2.8.9 Challenges .......................................................................................................................................................... 62 2.9 The National Business Center Aviation Management Directorate .............................................. 64 2.9.1 Aviation Management Vision .................................................................................................................... 64 2.9.2 Aviation Management Mission ................................................................................................................. 64 2.9.3 Aviation Safety and Program Evaluation ........................................................................................... 65 2.9.4 Aircraft Fleet Program Management ...................................................................................................... 65 2.9.5 Aviation Training.............................................................................................................................................. 65 2.9.6 Aviation Commercial Flight Services Support ...................................................................................... 65 2.9.7 Aviation Policy Development, Implementation, & Oversight ..................................................... 65 2.10 Office of the Secretary ............................................................................................................................... 67 2.11 Summary of the Department of Interior Observation Requirements ................................... 68

Near-term (2010-2015) UAS Mission Operations ....................................................... 69 3.1

Vignettes............................................................................................................................................................... 69 3.1.1 Wildfires.............................................................................................................................................................. 69 3.1.2 Abandoned Mine Land ................................................................................................................................. 74 3.1.3 Wildlife Survey ................................................................................................................................................. 76 3.1.4 Law Enforcement............................................................................................................................................ 83 3.1.5 Volcanoes............................................................................................................................................................ 87 3.2 UAS Business Model ........................................................................................................................................ 90 3.2.1 Users ..................................................................................................................................................................... 90

July 29, 2011 vi

Table of Contents

UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

3.2.2 Mission Application ....................................................................................................................................... 90 3.2.3 Technology ........................................................................................................................................................ 91 3.3 Regulatory Challenges .................................................................................................................................... 92 3.3.1 NTSB § 830.2 Definitions: ‘‘Unmanned aircraft accident’’ .......................................................... 93 3.3.2 Complex COA Process Irrespective of UAS Size or Mission Operation.................................... 94 3.3.3 Conflicted Airspace Policy .......................................................................................................................... 95 3.3.4 Realistic Goal: Near Term Access to the NAS for Small UAS ..................................................... 95 3.4 Communication Challenges – Spectral Management......................................................................... 98 3.4.1 National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) - Office of Spectrum Management ............................................................................................................................................... 98 3.4.2 Department Manual 377 DM .................................................................................................................... 99

Mid-term (2016-2025) ConOps Upgrade ................................................................. 101 4.1

Vignettes............................................................................................................................................................ 101 4.1.1 Wildfire Communication Support ........................................................................................................ 101 4.1.2 Natural or Man-Made Disaster Recovery......................................................................................... 101 4.2 Mid-Term UAS................................................................................................................................................. 103 4.2.1 Lighter than Air ............................................................................................................................................ 103 4.3 Sensors ............................................................................................................................................................... 104 4.4 Regulatory ........................................................................................................................................................ 105

Far-term (2026- ) Next Generation UAS Operational Benchmarks............................ 107 5.1 5.2 5.3

FAA Regulatory Environment .................................................................................. 111 6.1

6.2 6.3 6.4

6.5

6.6 6.7

Fully DECONFLICTED 4DT / RTA interoperable NextGen / NAS airspace ........................... 107 Automated file and fly ................................................................................................................................. 108 Advanced Concept Communications and Cooperative UAS Operations................................. 110 Regulations....................................................................................................................................................... 111 6.1.1 Orders and Notices...................................................................................................................................... 111 6.1.2 Expanding regulations and participatory process ...................................................................... 111 6.1.3 Airspace Classes............................................................................................................................................ 112 USGS Objectives.............................................................................................................................................. 129 Some Challenges ............................................................................................................................................ 130 6.3.1 Sense and Avoid ............................................................................................................................................ 130 Safety Management System ...................................................................................................................... 133 6.4.1 Safety Policy ................................................................................................................................................... 134 6.4.2 Safety Risk Management Hazard Identification and Reporting Process .......................... 134 6.4.3 Safety Assurance .......................................................................................................................................... 135 6.4.4 Safety Promotion ......................................................................................................................................... 136 Aircraft ............................................................................................................................................................... 137 6.5.1 Aircraft categories ...................................................................................................................................... 137 6.5.2 Airworthiness Certification..................................................................................................................... 137 6.5.3 Continued Airworthiness.......................................................................................................................... 137 Human Interface ............................................................................................................................................ 138 6.6.1 Training ........................................................................................................................................................... 138 6.6.2 Certification ................................................................................................................................................... 138 Oversight ........................................................................................................................................................... 138

Policy Issues and Next Steps ................................................................................... 139 7.1.1 7.1.2

Inter-Agency Policy Deconfliction........................................................................................................ 139 FAA Policy Deconfliction .......................................................................................................................... 139

July 29, 2011 vii

Table of Contents 7.1.3

UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

Spectral Deconfliction ............................................................................................................................... 139

Appendices ............................................................................................................ 141 A.

Unmanned Aircraft Systems ..................................................................................................................... 141 Summary of DoI Observations................................................................................................................................ 141 Unmanned Aircraft Systems.................................................................................................................................... 144 Comparison of DoI observations with the current capability of today’s UAS .................................. 150 B. Unmanned Aircraft Systems Sensors .................................................................................................... 153 Sensors Types ................................................................................................................................................................. 154 Optical – Passive.......................................................................................................................................................... 154 Optical – Active ............................................................................................................................................................ 154 Radar................................................................................................................................................................................ 156 Sensor Payloads .......................................................................................................................................................... 158 Optical Sensors .............................................................................................................................................................. 158 Airborne Hyperspectral Sensors .......................................................................................................................... 160 Radar................................................................................................................................................................................ 161 Airborne Radar Sensors ........................................................................................................................................... 161 UAS Radar ...................................................................................................................................................................... 161 Future Sensing Advancements ............................................................................................................................... 161 Communications Relay Payloads .......................................................................................................................... 162 C. Analytic Tools.................................................................................................................................................. 163 Preprocessing ................................................................................................................................................................. 163 Image Analysis............................................................................................................................................................... 163 Geographic Information System (GIS) ............................................................................................................... 164 D. Concept of Operations for Data ............................................................................................................... 165 UAS Data Management ............................................................................................................................................. 165 UAS Data Processing................................................................................................................................................... 165 UAS Interoperability Standards ............................................................................................................................ 166 UAS Data Archiving ..................................................................................................................................................... 166 UAS Data Distribution................................................................................................................................................ 166 E. Concept(s) of Operations ........................................................................................................................... 167 DoI Operational Procedures Memorandum..................................................................................................... 167 Near Term........................................................................................................................................................................ 167 Budget ............................................................................................................................................................................. 167 Personnel ....................................................................................................................................................................... 169 Facilities.......................................................................................................................................................................... 169 Far Term........................................................................................................................................................................... 169 F. Questionnaire for USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 - 2025 ...................................................................... 171 Demographics ................................................................................................................................................................ 171 Your Mission and Existing Observation and Measurement Activities ................................................. 171 Your current instruments' capabilities to make observations or measurements .......................... 171 Your Current Instrumentation ............................................................................................................................... 173 The Unmanned Aircraft Systems Platform....................................................................................................... 175 Your Vision for the Future of UAS ......................................................................................................................... 178 G. Acronym List ................................................................................................................................................... 181 H. Other References ........................................................................................................................................... 189

July 29, 2011 viii

Table of Contents

UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1-1 Grand Teton National Park located ten miles south of Yellowstone National Park along the John D. Rockefeller, Jr. Memorial Parkway named in honor of the conservationist .......................................................................................................................................... 15 Figure 1-2 Scope of Mission: Roughly 20% of the landmass of the United States is under management by the Department of the Interior. (USGS).......................................................... 17 Figure 1-3 Mission Diversity: Terrain under management by the DoI extends from articpermafrost regions, mountains above the tree line to lower altitude forests, lakes, wetlands, shoreline, and in some cases the ocean floor. ........................................................... 18 Figure 1-4 Two Branta canadensis (Canada Goose) in formation flight executing their version of a CSPO “Paired Arrival” under deteriorating VMC ................................................. 21 Figure 1-5 Canada Geese, Tule Lake National Wildlife Refuge, California .................................. 23 Figure 1-6 US Air 1549 - An Airbus 320 with 155 on board lost power in both engines shortly after taking off from LaGuardia (LGA). The NTSB confirmed the aircraft was downed due to a loss of power in both engines following ingestion of Canada Geese at 3200' forcing it to ‘Ditch’ in the Hudson River (AP) ................................................................... 24 Figure 1-7 NASA Technology Readiness Levels (TRL's) 1 thru 9 .................................................. 25 Figure 1-8 AeroVironment’s Raven UAS was certified by the Italian Ministry of Defense in December 2008 for operations in Italian airspace. (Writers, 2008) By receiving the certification, the Raven demonstrated its performance reliability to fly over highly populated regions as well as its simple operational capacity. Over 13,000 have been sold to a dozen countries ....................................................................................................................... 26 Figure 1-9 Raven UAS with USGS Wings Installed (USGS)................................................................ 28 Figure 2-1 UAS could be employed in support of scientific assessments of large arctic mammal habitat and population (Polar Bears – AP) .................................................................. 41 Figure 2-2 The Teton Dam Collapses ........................................................................................................ 43 Figure 2-3 Teton Dam near Rexburg, Idaho suddenly failed on first filling of the reservoir in 1976. Today, Bureau of Reclamation engineers assess all Reclamation dams under strict criteria established by the Safety of Dams program instituted after this failure (USBR) .......................................................................................................................................................... 44 Figure 3-1 Wildfire image taken August 6, 2000 as several fires converged in the Bitterroot National Forest near Sula in western Montana (John McColgan BLM Alaska Fire Service) ......................................................................................................................................................... 69 Figure 3-2 Wildfires across the Balkans in late July 2007 (MODIS image) (Wikipedia) ....... 70 Figure 3-3 Relative Altitudes for Remote Sensing from Small UAS to Geosynchronous Weather Satellites (USGS Rocky Mountain Geographic Science Center) ............................ 71 Figure 3-4 By 2002, the Hobet-21 Mine (near Charleston, WV), had expanded across a large area on either side of the Mud River. At least one stream, Connelly Branch, was turned into a valley fill. (Landsat) ...................................................................................................... 74 Figure 3-5 Acid Mine Drainage (Ben Fertig-IAN Image Library ian.umces.edu/imagelibrary/) ............................................................................................................ 75 Figure 3-6 White Ibis Pair (USFWS Jim Mathisen @ J.N. ‘Ding’ Darling National Wildlife Sanctuary) ................................................................................................................................................... 76 July 29, 2011 ix

Table of Contents

UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

Figure 3-7 FWS Flyway Biologist ................................................................................................................ 77 Figure 3-8 Nesting Sandhill Crane .............................................................................................................. 78 Figure 3-9 Ground track of Sandhill Crane UAS aerial survey (USGS, USFWS, Google) ........ 79 Figure 3-10 Sandhill Crane Data Imagery from Raven (USGS) ....................................................... 81 Figure 3-11 A CBP Air unit Citation Jet patrols the waters off of a U.S National Park. .......... 83 Figure 3-12 The P-3 Airborne Early Warning Aircraft is utilized primarily for long-range patrols along the entire U.S. border, and in source and transit zone countries, throughout Central and South America (USCBP). ....................................................................... 83 Figure 3-13 DoI-AMD's Mission requires high-performance turbo Float Planes to support missions over a broad expanse of territory near the Arctic Circle........................................ 84 Figure 3-14 A pair of Customs and Border Protection UAS aircraft located at the southern border 05/19/2010 (USCBP) .............................................................................................................. 85 Figure 3-15 This Landsat 7 image was acquired using bands 3, 2, 1 and the panchromatic band on February 13, 2000. (Landsat) ............................................................................................ 87 Figure 3-16 Too hazardous for a human pilot: The drone used to take the pictures of the Fukushima Nuclear plant. The unmanned aircraft was deployed amid fears for the health of pilots sent over the plant after radiation reached unsafe levels nearby.......... 88 Figure 3-17 'Race is lost': Steam rises from the crippled reactors in another picture taken by the drone. Water in the plant is emitting radiation at a dangerous 1,000 millisieverts per hour ............................................................................................................................. 89 Figure 3-18 Mission Suitability test data developed from a Raven UAS equipped with a passive thermal imager(USGS)............................................................................................................ 91 Figure 3-19 UAS Business Model ............................................................................................................... 91 Figure 3-20 The COA Application Process as Modeled by the USGS in Compliance with FAA Requirements for UAS. The resulting requirements inhibit USGS / DoI data collection operations, confuse the NAS interoperability safety issues, and impede the FAAâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s own stated objective of collecting substantial quantities of data from UAS for the purposes of establishing operational benchmarks. ........................................................................................ 94 Figure 3-21 Airspace Management Policy for UAS is Incongruent ................................................ 95 Figure 3-22 FAA Advisory Circular (AC) 91-57 - Model Aircraft Operating Standards ........ 96 Figure 3-23 Academy of Model Aeronautics - Model Safety Code for models up to 55 pounds .......................................................................................................................................................... 97 Figure 4-1 Conceptual Framework for UAS Communications Relay (USGS)........................... 101 Figure 4-2 Photo-rendering of SkyLifter-delivered hospitals on Mt. Everest (SkyLifter) .. 103 Figure 5-1 Future Pseudo-Satellite UAS Concepts could stay aloft for years (DARPA)....... 107 Figure 5-2 Discrete Transistors (Wikipedia) ....................................................................................... 108 Figure 5-3 Semiconductor Packing Density.......................................................................................... 109 Figure 6-1 Airspace classes (FAA) ............................................................................................................ 113 Figure 6-2 FAA risk analysis matrix (FAA) ........................................................................................... 135 Figure A.1 Earth observation requirements (NASA) ........................................................................ 143 Figure A.2 Endurance versus ceiling for UAS from U.S. commercial vendors (NASA)......... 145 Figure A.3 Comparison of DoI observation requirements and UAS capability. ...................... 150

July 29, 2011 x

Table of Contents

UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

Figure B.1 Airborne Topographic Mapper. ........................................................................................... 155 Figure B.2 Uninhabited aerial vehicle synthetic aperture radar pod. ........................................ 157

LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Summary of the observations performed by the Bureaus ................................................ 68 Table 2 Class C Airspace Areas by State. ................................................................................................ 121 Table A.1 Earth science mission requirements. .................................................................................. 142 Table A.2 U.S. commercial vendors unmanned air systems. .......................................................... 147 Table B.1 Table B.2 Table B.3 Table B.4

Example Topographic LIDAR specifications. ................................................................... 156 UAVSAR instrument parameters. ......................................................................................... 158 Airborne Hyperspectral Systems .......................................................................................... 160 Airborne SAR systems ............................................................................................................... 162

Table E.1 Costs per Hour (from Customs and Border Protection Office) ................................ 168

July 29, 2011 xi

Executive Summary

UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of the United States Geological Survey (USGS) Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Roadmap 2010-2025 is to document a strategic framework by which UAS will contribute to the mission of the USGS and the Department of the Interior (DoI). The USGS formed the UAS Project Office following a Land Remote Sensing Program sponsored study initiative in 2002, on May 8, 2008. The Project is managed from the USGS Rocky Mountain Geographic Science Center in Denver. The initial purpose of the study was to evaluate potential technical solutions to observation- / data-gaps resulting from existing routine data collection and what was required to address the unique expanse of DoI reporting and management requirements.

AIRBORNE REMOTE SENSING TODAY The requirement for scientific data and information about our public lands, their ecosystems, and natural inhabitants has produced many innovative measurement strategies. Although the possibility exists for scientists to obtain high accuracy in situ data based on localized measurements and sample collections, the scale of public lands makes this approach unrealistic for a ‘global’ survey. Satellite measurements have been obtained and proven a vital resource through the Landsat missions and other Earth science remote data collection missions. However, airborne missions provide a greater field of view than ground-based assays in addition to having an extended range that can transit into more remote locations not easily accessible by conventional surface transportation. Avian population surveys, wildfire monitoring, and law enforcement mission support are but a few of the mission applications for remote sensing and data collection from airborne platforms.

UAS BENEFITS UAS have often been described as the ideal solution for airborne mission sets characterized as “Dull, Dirty, or Dangerous”. Certainly, patrol of vast expanses of public lands, low-level surveys of wildfires in progress, and remote sensing at low-altitude in rugged terrain coupled with turbulent wind fields share these characteristics and fall squarely within the mission requirements of USGS / DoI. In addition to serving these missions, the ability to employ a UAS with a substantially lower acoustic signature coupled with real-time scientific imagery to the science or mission-operations team has great potential benefit for real-time operations. The prospect for financial benefits, although substantial, has been left largely undocumented in this Roadmap pending actual mission operations performance and documented costs of these operations.

ROADMAP FOCUS Version 1 of the UAS Roadmap focuses on three primary areas. These are:

July 29, 2011 xiii

Executive Summary

UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

1. UAS access to the National Airspace System (NAS) and the Federal Aviation Administration’s regulatory environment. Particular attention is focused on the prospective path to full interoperability within the NAS for UAS and how the USGS and DoI can support the FAA’s requirement for safe operations and certification through an extensive data collection program on DoI / USGS UAS missions. 2. Prospective UAS Mission concepts. The UAS Roadmap includes several different mission scenarios / vignettes to serve as an aide for development of mission operational concepts in addition to providing a general scientific and technical basis for introduction of the UAS into the USGS / DoI mission planning profile. 3. Initial business model and framework for development of the mission operations business case to operate UAS by the USGS / DoI. This UAS business model and mission framework will be enhanced in future versions with heuristic information. Although these three areas provided the primary foci for this document they are not the only aspects covered herein. Moreover, as additional UAS operational data and scientific data products are obtained, considerably more emphasis will need to be placed on further development and refinement of the requisite business case(s) for procurement, operation, maintenance, and management of UAS to service the USGS and DoI mission sets.

UAS IMPERATIVE The UAS Roadmap compiles a list of current and potential applications of UAS Technology by DoI. These mission applications have been derived from a variety of in-person interviews and questionnaire methods. The UAS Roadmap provides an overview of current and planned UAS capabilities with special emphasis on U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) Programs of Record, e.g., Aerosonde, Wasp, Raven, Shadow, Predator, Global Hawk, Scan Eagle, and the Micro Air Vehicle / gMAV. Sensor capabilities will initially focus on full-motion video, thermal, synthetic aperture radar (SAR), chemical-biological-radiological, communication relays, LIDAR, hyperspectral, and multi-spectral imagers. Coupled to the discussion of sensor technologies, analytic tools available to exploit and analyze the information will also be addressed. Finally a high-level concept of operations for archiving and distributing the data acquired by the UAS technology is incorporated. Key to the discussion of data management is the pre-existing USGS and DoI policies and harmonization of UAS data management with that of other DoI data and information products. The UAS Roadmap provides an independent strategic assessment of UAS technology aimed at formulation of a framework for successful integration of UAS into the USGS / DoI mission requirement. Although the mission requirements are extraordinary, the prospect for leveraging UAS technology into the USGS and DoI solution sets holds great promise to advance data and information quality; reduce risk and improve safety; and with time and economies of scale- moderate the dollar cost-per-byte of mission critical data and information. July 29, 2011 xiv

I - Introduction

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 PURPOSE Following a Land Remote Sensing Program sponsored study in 2002 the USGS formed the UAS Project Office on May 8, 2008. The Project is managed from the USGS Rocky Mountain Geographic Science Center in Denver. The initial purpose of the study was to evaluate potential technical solutions to observation- / data-gaps resulting from existing routine data collection and what was required to address the unique expanse of DoI reporting and management requirements.

Figure 1-1 Grand Teton National Park1 located ten miles south of Yellowstone National Park along the John D. Rockefeller, Jr. Memorial Parkway named in honor of the conservationist Over the past several decades, numerous high-value data sets from Landsat (Thematic Mapper, etc.) have become routinely available via the internet from the USGS Center (http://eros.usgs.gov/) located in Sioux Falls, SD. The stated mission for the USGS Earth Resources Observation Systems (EROS) Data Center (EDC), “Providing science and imagery to better understand our Earth”2 would seem entirely congruent with the challenges associated with the DoI statutory mission. The refresh-rate for data from an orbiting payload is limited to the orbit-repeat cycle. For longer term observations this is adequate, but for observations requiring longer dwell times, more unpredictable refresh rates, or more dynamic accommodation of sensor advancements this data is lacking.

1 2

www.photobucket.com (Keith Rhody) http://eros.usgs.gov/#/Home

July 29, 2011 15

I - Introduction

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

The next logical step is to examine the prospect for collecting the “higher and more robust resolution” imagery through aerial surveys conducted by conventionally piloted or “manned” aircraft. In fact, these flights have been conducted extensively and yielded substantive results. While this data collection strategy has also been effective, data and information gaps have persisted here as well. In addition, there have been several instances where scientists have been seriously injured or lost their lives while conducting missions under less than ideal circumstances. Another serious, and potentially life-threatening scenario, can occur on public lands being used for illicit development of illegal drugsprincipally marijuana cultivation. Data and information aimed principally at filling operational, scientific, or law enforcement gaps establish the primary product foci of possible UAS mission candidates. When coupled with the USGS Science Strategic Plan, there are a range of mission capabilities that may be pursued in support of the USGS and other DoI Bureaus. Specifically, i.e. for these reasons, Climate Change Research, Water Resources Forecasting, Ecosystem Monitoring, Supporting Land Management Actions, and Natural Disaster Responses are the top priorities. This UAS Roadmap will consider five Vignettes for illustrative purposes to highlight both the operational capability in addition to the unique and complementary role that UAS will play. The Vignettes to be addressed are: 



 

Wildfires – Supporting management and prosecution of firefighting efforts in public parks and forests o Aerial sensor packages for ground and aerial combatant support o Aerial communications relay Abandoned Mine Land – Operational look at mine regulatory support o Supporting Land Management Actions o Ecosystems Monitoring o Water Resources Forecasting Wildlife Monitoring – Counting game & habitat o Ecosystem Monitoring o Supporting Land Management Actions o Responding to Natural Disaster Law Enforcement – Consideration of a broad range of support including inter-agency o Supporting Land Management Actions o Hi-resolution hyperspectral / LIDAR imagery for investigative / evidence Volcanic Activity – Airborne chemical assays, thermal deformation and hazardous terrain over-flight, o Responding to Natural Disasters o Supporting Land Management Actions o Ecosystems Monitoring o Climate Change Research

July 29, 2011 16

I - Introduction

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

1.2 SCOPE AND DIVERSITY It is anticipated that the use of UAS technology will significantly expand the ability of USGS and their partners to obtain the remotely-sensed, and in situ data critical to fulfilling their mission requirements. In many cases, operational scenarios for data collection and operations support with UAS will augment existing techniques. However, in others the UAS will provide a significant new resource to the user and deliver capability knowledge that does not currently exist. Mission requirements derive from the various statutory mandates against which the DoI performs on any given day. These mandates have traditionally continued to stretch resources and require that advanced technology be further leveraged to exploit new and more cost effective solutions to data collection.

Figure 1-2 Scope of Mission: Roughly 20% of the landmass of the United States is under management by the Department of the Interior. (USGS)

July 29, 2011 17

I - Introduction

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

The UAS Roadmap compiles a list of current and potential applications of UAS technology by the DoI. These mission applications have been derived from a variety of in-person and questionnaire methods. The UAS Roadmap will provide an overview of current and planned UAS capabilities with special emphasis on U.S. DoD Programs of Record, e.g., Aerosonde, Wasp, Raven, Shadow, Predator, Global Hawk, Scan Eagle, and the Micro Air Vehicle / gMAV.

Figure 1-3 Mission Diversity: Terrain under management by the DoI extends from articpermafrost regions, mountains above the tree line to lower altitude forests, lakes, wetlands, shoreline, and in some cases the ocean floor3. Sensor capabilities will focus on full-motion video, thermal, SAR, chemical-biologicalradiological, communication relays, LIDAR, hyperspectral, and multi-spectral imagers. Coupled to the discussion of sensor technologies, analytic tools available to exploit and analyze the information will also be addressed. Finally a high-level concept of operations for archiving and distributing the data acquired by the UAS technology will be incorporated. Key to the discussion of data management is the pre-existing USGS and DoI policies and harmonization of UAS data management with that of other DoI data and information products. 3

www.DeanAllman.com Along the Seward Highway heading into Seward, Alaska

July 29, 2011 18

I - Introduction

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

Advanced concept UAS capabilities are also considered. Consider that the FAA is actively engaged in development of the NextGen modernization program for the National Airspace System (NAS), and many of the capabilities and advanced aircraft operations for the NextGen NAS will be ideally suited for UAS. As an example, UAS would not be particularly well suited to perform the type of Closely Spaced Parallel Operation (CSPO) paired arrivals under Visual Meteorological Conditions (VMC) that are routinely performed today at certain airports including San Francisco (SFO). However, when fully implemented, the Operational Improvements (OI’s) that result from NextGen’s technological and procedural upgrades will facilitate these ‘paired aircraft’ 4-Dimensional Trajectory-based-operations, (4DT), during Instrument Meteorological Conditions (IMC) as well as VMC.

July 29, 2011 19

I - Introduction

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

1.3 NATIONAL AIRSPACE SYSTEM INTEROPERABILITY One need only read the following insert from the FAA’s Official Fact Sheet on UAS to arrive promptly at the “Catch-22” which results from the UAS system’s development and access to the National Airspace System (NAS) where it can operate.

1.3.1 FAA: (Flight) “Data is Key” “More safety data is needed before the FAA can make an informed decision to fully integrate UASs into the NAS, where the public travels each day. Continuing to review UAS operations will enhance the FAA’s ability to assess the safety and improve the use of this technology.” 4 The good news about this statement, and the underlying merits upon which it is based is that the DoI / USGS may well be better positioned than any other entity within the U.S. government, public or private to host an expansive data collection program to support the FAA while simultaneously addressing their statutory mission objectives for data collection, law enforcement, and scientific discovery. This approach to the problem would reflect the least exposure of the public to these systems as large volumes of routine operational data were collected. Initial operations within the DoI’s mission portfolio (See Section 2) would place these systems over remote public lands with very sparse population densities. Further, the altitude envelopes to be explored would initially be less than 400 feet with platforms weighing less than 20 pounds and operating at less than 30 knots. Per the FAA’s own AC 91-57, this concept of operations would seem to fall within the typical guidance offered for Model Aircraft operation (see Figure 3-17). Considering that a WASP UAS weighs about 1kg and a Raven UAS roughly 2-kg, the relative kinetic energy convolved with the probability of a mid-air collision over these isolated terrain operating less than 400’ would seem a lowenergy / low-probability risk factor in comparison to other currently existing aviation hazards.

http://www.faa.gov/news/fact_sheets/news_story.cfm?newsId=6287 FAA UAS Fact Sheet, December 1, 2010 4

July 29, 2011 20

I - Introduction

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

Figure 1-4 Two Branta canadensis (Canada Goose) in formation flight executing their version of a CSPO “Paired Arrival” under deteriorating VMC (Reprinted with Permission from Larry Ditto)

July 29, 2011 21

I - Introduction

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

Consider the potential impact to the NAS of large resident and migratory avian populations:

1.4 DID YOU KNOW?5 

Over 219 people have been killed world-wide as a result of bird strikes since 1988.



Bird and other wildlife strikes cost U.S. civil aviation over $600 million/year, 1990-2009.



About 5,000 bird strikes were reported by the U.S. Air Force in 2008.



Over 9,000 bird and other wildlife strikes were reported for U.S. civil aircraft in 2009.



From 1990-2004, U.S. airlines reported 31 incidents in which pilots had to dump fuel to lighten load during a precautionary or emergency landing after striking birds on takeoff or climb. An average of 11,600 gallons of jet fuel was released in each of these dumps.



Waterfowl (31%), gulls (25%), raptors (18%), and pigeons/doves (7%) represented 81% of the reported bird strikes causing damage to U.S. civil aircraft, 1990-2009.



Over 950 civil aircraft collisions with deer and 320 collisions with coyotes were reported in the U.S., 1990-2009.



In 1890, about 60 European starlings were released in Central Park, New York City. Starlings are now the second most abundant bird in North America with a late-summer population of over 150 million birds. Starlings are "feathered bullets", having a body density 27% higher than herring gulls.



The North American non-migratory Canada goose population increased about 4 fold from 1 million birds in 1990 to over 3.9 million in 2009. About 1,500 Canada geese strikes with civil aircraft have been reported in U.S., 1990-2009. About 42% of these strike events involved multiple birds.



A 12-lb Canada goose struck by a 150-mph aircraft at lift-off generates the kinetic energy of a 1,000-lb weight dropped from a height of 10 feet.



The North American population of greater snow geese increased from about 50,000 birds in 1966 to over 1,000,000 birds in 2009.



The nesting population of bald eagles in the contiguous U.S. increased from fewer than 400 pairs in 1970 (2 years before DDT and similar chlorinated-hydrocarbon insecticides were banned) to over 12,000 pairs in 2009. From 1990-2009, 125 bald eagle strikes with civil aircraft were reported in U.S. Mean body mass of bald eagles = 9.1 lbs. (male); 11.8 lbs. (female).



The Great Lakes cormorant population increased from only about 200 nesting adults in 1970 to over 240,000 nesting adults in 2008, a 1,000+-fold increase.



The North American white and brown pelican populations grew at average annual rates of 2.3% and 1.9%, respectively, 1966-2007.

BIRD STRIKE COMMITTEE USA; www.birdstike.org

July 29, 2011 22

I - Introduction

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025



At least 15,000 gulls were counted nesting on roofs in U.S. cities on the Great Lakes during a survey in 1994.



About 90% of all bird strikes in the U.S. are by species federally protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act.



From 1990-2009, 415 different species of birds and 35 species of terrestrial mammals were involved in strikes with civil aircraft in U.S. that were reported to the FAA.

Figure 1-5 Canada Geese, Tule Lake National Wildlife Refuge, California6

In addition to the threat from bird strikes, data between 1999 and 2010 shows that several scientists from the DoI and affiliated state agencies have been killed or seriously injured in aviation accidents while performing their assigned tasks. This may be an indication of the hazardous conditions within which these officials are tasked to perform. UAS can fulfill many of these missions and reduce the risk to scientists and other DoI aviation assets. 6

www.photobucket.com (Garlon 555)

July 29, 2011 23

I - Introduction

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

1.5 UAS TECHNICAL MATURITY Any discussion of UAS applications to the USGS or DoI mission set(s) must include consideration of system and technology maturity. For decades UAS have been the subject of active and spirited debate as to their viability in terms of basic operations, reliability, and safety. As the systems have seen greater acceptance in Figure 1-6 US Air 1549 - An Airbus 320 with 155 on board lost military applications, power in both engines shortly after taking off from LaGuardia questions about UAS (LGA). The NTSB confirmed the aircraft was downed due to a compatibility with existing loss of power in both engines following ingestion of Canada air and ground systems Geese at 3200' forcing it to ‘Ditch’ in the Hudson River (AP) have been hotly debated. Clearly, operations of UAS within the realm of military planning and Military Operational Airspace have become de rigueur. However, questions remain about maturity and suitability for civilian airspace and interoperability with manned systems operating under FAA Part 91, 121, and 135 among others.

The Fix-? The geese that brought down US Air 1549 were probably migratory given the altitude (3200’) of the encounter. However, in an attempt to prevent incidents similar to 1549, workers from the U.S. Department of Agriculture Wildlife Services and New York City’s Parks and Recreation Department and Environmental Protection Departments descended on 17 locations across New York capturing and gassing 1,235 resident Canada Geese in June and July 2009. The Agriculture Department undertook another goose control measure by coating 1,739 eggs with corn oil, which prevents goslings from developing by depriving them of air.

At the basic system level, (refer Figure 1-9) it can be seen that for all intents and purposes, UAS have progressed from subsystems and prototype aircraft based on technologies familiar to the weekend model aviation hobbyist to today’s highly automated, tested, and operational systems. It is a fair question to ask why then, are we unable to see these systems gaining more routine access to the NAS? The answer to that question, while nontrivial, is not intractable. However, if UAS are to “crossJuly 29, 2011

I - Introduction

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

the-chasm” that lies between the current state of the art and the ‘promised land’ of routine interoperability or “file and fly” then the consideration of the technology gradient must move beyond the singular-system considered in the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)’s Technology Readiness Level (TRL) map.

Figure 1-7 NASA Technology Readiness Levels (TRL's) 1 thru 97

To fully understand the difficulty of migrating UAS technology at its current level of system maturation into the NAS, a multi-dimensional “System of Systems” (SoS) framework is required. This moves beyond the realm of ‘clean sheet of paper’ engineering and systems development to take into account the reality that the NAS is already a busy place – accounting for roughly 10% of the U.S. Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Moreover, the tolerance for error, and the relative impact of a mishap in the NAS make the FAA’s relative appetite for risk nil. If it hasn’t been tested, proven safe, and certified thus- it cannot enter the operations realm of the NAS. The experimental class of operations is a first step. However, to achieve their full potential UAS will require an airworthiness type certificate. The path to attaining this degree of certification by the FAA will certainly require extensive data collection program.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technology_readiness_level

July 29, 2011 25

I - Introduction

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

Figure 1-8 AeroVironment’s Raven UAS was certified by the Italian Ministry of Defense in December 2008 for operations in Italian airspace. (Writers, 2008) By receiving the certification, the Raven demonstrated its performance reliability to fly over highly populated regions as well as its simple operational capacity. Over 13,000 have been sold to a dozen countries But with a domain as diverse as the NAS, policy inconsistencies will inevitably emerge from time to time as technology and utilization requirements evolve. One such inconsistency involves public use UAS operating requirements contrasted with model aircraft flown by hobbyists. Officially, the model aircraft guidance was issued in 1981 by the FAA under AC 91-57 “Model Aircraft Operating Standards”. Other than providing general guidance and limiting operating altitude for the models to 400’ above ground level (AGL), all other responsibility for safety is effectively delegated to the amateur model operator. If the modeler is a member of a flying club then there may be other requirements established by the club. However, if a modeler elects to go fly on his own then there would appear to be limited specific legal or regulatory restrictions placed between his desire to go fly and operating the model aircraft. A large model can have a gross take-off rate (GTOW) well in excess of 100 pounds. Some turbojet-powered models are capable of achieving airspeeds in excess July 29, 2011 26

I - Introduction

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

of 350 Miles Per Hour (MPH) (jetsinhd, 2009). In theory, as long as this is conducted by an amateur hobbyist the FAA asserts no specific regulatory authority, no airworthiness standards, no spectrum control, and does not require any coordination with FAA Air Navigation Service Provider (ANSP). Clearly, the kinetic energy developed by some of these “model airplanes” is a force to be reckoned with. An interesting real-world proof of this policy inconsistency can be openly viewed on the internet. Team Black Sheep (Team Black Sheep, 2010) flies an interesting demonstrator flight that is recorded and available online. In the video, they assert on the cover screen to have proven one point (presumably, that it can be done) while avoiding prosecution as they further assert it has resulted in no arrests. The camera-equipped model aircraft executes a takeoff and non-instrument departure from a park and proceeds to execute complex series of aerial maneuvers in reasonably close proximity to a major metropolitan area- New York City. In this particular video, Team Black Sheep maneuvers in close proximity to a barge, buildings, and bridges. As a crowning tribute to freedom, they take several close-in passes for an aerial vantage of Lady Liberty’s torch. By contrast, professionals operating sUAS for public use, irrespective of their mass and maximum speed are currently required to undergo an onerous, highly complex mission review process that may require several months and multiple application submissions against vague requirements. In some cases this has had the appearance of being inconsistent with other FAA safety and flight standard policies. In the case where missions would be conducted by sUAS at relatively low altitudes over remote, sparsely populated public lands the FAA’s policy requiring a Certification of Waiver or Authorization (COA) can seem overly restrictive and incongruent with FAA policy aimed at supporting aviation. Consider further, that nature in the form of bird strikes can pose every bit as much threat to operational safety in the NAS safety as would a sUAS. A cursory review of publicly available data readily establishes a prevalent risk issue relating to bird strikes in civil and commercial aviation. By contrast there are very few instances of model aircraft coming in contact with operational aircraft. Recent headlines have seen FAA clear a fully loaded commercial transport into an area known to have large flocks of Canada Geese only to see the pilot declare an emergency moments later as both engines were disabled through ingestion of these large birds. Furthermore, frequency space, or the requisite portions of the electromagnetic spectrum, will need to be de-conflicted as well. It is clear that there is an increasing demand being placed on the communications channels currently licensed. To ensure that safe operations are maintained within an increasingly complex and congested spatial and spectral environment will require more advanced automation. This automation push will appear both in the air and on the ground. These automation upgrades will require extensive testing independently followed by fully integrated SoS performance test and evaluation methods.

July 29, 2011 27

I - Introduction

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

With the general tolerance for any failure involving aviation at an extremely low level from the public’s perspective, the Government and Industry are left with a stiff challenge. But DoI’s unique mission, coupled to the vast expanse of its public land holdings, make it uniquely suited for this task. DoI can perform any number of scientific, operational, or law enforcement missions with UAS well away from most population centers while fulfilling a critically important data collection role for the FAA. This presents the public not with a problem- but with a classic win-win scenario.

Figure 1-9 Raven UAS with USGS Wings Installed (USGS)

July 29, 2011 28

II - U.S. Department of the Interior

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

2. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR The DoI manages the vast natural and cultural resources of the U.S. It employs approximately 70,000 people, including expert scientists and resourcemanagement professionals, at more than 2,400 operating locations, to perform its mission: Protecting America's Great Outdoors and Powering Our Future8 One-fifth of the land in the U.S., 35,000 miles of coastline, and 1.76 billion acres of the Outer Continental Shelf are managed by DoI. With a $12 billion total annual budget, its breadth of responsibilities includes: upholding the Federal government’s trust responsibilities to 562 Indian tribes, conserving fish, wildlife and their habitats, managing water supplies for more than 30 million people, and protecting the icons of national heritage. Additionally, DoI receives billions in revenue annually from energy, mineral, grazing, and timber leases, as well as recreational permits and land sales.9 DoI’s priorities include protecting U.S. public lands, climate change, Native Americans, responsible energy development, water challenges, and engaging young people. America's Great Outdoors. The DoI and the Department of Agriculture (USDA), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), with support from other agencies, are leading a new initiative to Develop a 21st Century Strategy for America’s Great Outdoors. The initiative supports a 21st century conservation agenda to initiate a national dialogue about conservation that supports the efforts of private citizens and local communities. The objective is to look for new approaches to address the serious challenges: climate change, air and water pollution, landscape fragmentation and loss of open space. An additional objective is to improve access to open areas and green space in urban communities.10 Climate Change. The DoI has developed a “coordinated strategy to address current and future impacts of climate change on U.S. land, water, wildlife, cultural-heritage and tribal resources.” The framework includes the creation of a Climate Change Response Council to coordinate response to impacts of climate change within DoI and eight regional Climate Science Centers. The Centers will analyze climate-change-impact data and strategies to U.S. Department of the Interior, “Who We Are,” Who We Are, undated. [Online]. http://www.doi.gov/whoweare/index.cfm [Accessed: November 30, 2010]. 9 U.S. Department of the Interior, “What We Do,” What We Do, undated. [Online]. http://www.doi.gov/whatwedo/index.cfm [Accessed: November 30, 2010]. 10 U.S. Department of the Interior, “President Obama Launches Initiative to Develop a 21st Century Strategy for America’s Great Outdoors” America’s Great Outdoors, April 16,2010. [Online]. Available: http://www.doi.gov/americasgreatoutdoors/Press-Release.cfm [Accessed: November 30, 2010]. 8

July 29, 2011 29

II - U.S. Department of the Interior

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

protect wildlife and habitat by forecasting changes to populations, assess vulnerability of species, linking climate change models to wildlife and habitat models, and develop monitoring approaches.11 Native American Nations. The DoI is “committed to partnering with American Indian and Alaska Native communities to help them prosper by expanding education and employment opportunities for youth and adults, protecting lives and property by strengthening law enforcement, and building strong, sustainable tribal economies.”12 New Energy Frontier. To reduce dependence on foreign fossil fuels specifically, and fossil fuels in general, the DoI is developing conventional and renewable resources on U.S. public lands. Currently it is responsible for the public lands that provide conventional energy resources—30 percent of natural gas production, more than 30 percent of oil production and 40 percent of coal production. Additionally, the public lands managed by the DoI provide an opportunity to increase the development of renewable-energy projects involving solar, wind and waves, geothermal, biofuels and hydropower.13 Water Challenges. Families, businesses, farms, industry and natural heritage rely on access to water. Yet population growth, development, and climate change are contributing to dwindling water supplies, lengthening droughts, and rising demand for water. The DoI, in partnership with the States, tribes and local communities, is exploring new ways to ensure stable, secure water supplies for future generations. To help the U.S. balance these and other growing demands for water resources, most of the DoI’s Bureaus have roles in water management. The approaches to water management include: water-resource planning, restoration, and research to stretch our nation’s limited water resources; reducing conflict and facilitating solutions to complex water problems; providing water resource scientific publications, data, maps and application software; and, managing water resources and water-dependent environments on public lands to promote healthy, productive ecosystems that support its multiple-use mission.14 Employ—Educate—Engage. The Youth in the Great Outdoors Initiative employs, educates, and engages young people from all backgrounds in exploring, connecting with and preserving U.S. natural and cultural heritage.15

U.S. Department of the Interior, “Climate Change,” What We Do, undated. [Online]. Available: http://www.doi.gov/whatwedo/climate/index.cfm [Accessed: November 30, 2010]. 12 U.S. Department of the Interior, “Empowering First Americans,” What We Do, undated. [Online]. Available: http://www.doi.gov/whatwedo/firstamericans/index.cfm [Accessed: November 30, 2010]. 13 U.S. Department of the Interior, “New Energy Frontier,” What We Do, undated. [Online]. Available: http://www.doi.gov/whatwedo/energy/index.cfm [Accessed: November 30, 2010]. 14 U.S. Department of the Interior, “Water Challenges,” What We Do, undated. [Online]. Available: http://www.doi.gov/whatwedo/water/index.cfm [Accessed: November 30, 2010]. 15 U.S. Department of the Interior, “Youth in the Great Outdoors,” What We Do, undated. [Online]. Available: http://www.doi.gov/whatwedo/youth/index.cfm [Accessed: November 30, 2010]. 11

July 29, 2011 30

II - U.S. Department of the Interior

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

Eight technical Bureaus carry out the broad mission of the DoI: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.

Bureau of Indian Affairs Bureau of Land Management Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement Bureau of Reclamation National Park Service Office of Surface Mining, Reclamation and Enforcement U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service U.S. Geological Survey

The following descriptions provide overviews of the roles and responsibilities of the Bureaus. During the course of preparing this Roadmap, interviews were conducted and several DoI employees were asked to respond to a questionnaire (Appendix F) to obtain a fuller understanding of their jobs and the operational and scientific observations (e.g., human eye, sensors) they make to accomplish their missions and the challenges, or constraints, they face in the performance of their jobs. Results of the interviews and questionnaire are summarized.

July 29, 2011 31

II - U.S. Department of the Interior

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

2.1 BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS Indian Affairs (IA) encompasses the Office of Assistant Secretary – Indian Affairs, the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), and the Bureau of Indian Education (BIE). Established in 1824, the oldest Bureau of the DoI provides services to approximately 1.9 million Native Americans that belong to 564 federally recognized American Indian tribes and Alaska Natives in the U.S. IA offers an extensive scope of programs that covers the entire range of Federal, State and local government services. Through these programs, Tribes improve their tribal government infrastructure, community infrastructure, education, job training, and employment opportunities along with other components of long-term sustainable development that work to improve the quality of life for their members.16, 17,

2.1.1 Bureau of Indian Education The BIE mission is to: "… provide quality education opportunities from early childhood through life in accordance with the tribes’ needs to cultural and economic wellbeing in keeping with the wide diversity of Indian tribes and Alaska Native villages as distinct cultural and governmental entities. BIE considers the whole person (spiritual, mental, physical and cultural aspects.)" Programs administered by either tribes or IA through BIE include an education system consisting of 183 schools and dormitories educating approximately 42,000 elementary and secondary students and 28 tribal colleges, universities, and post-secondary schools.

2.1.2 Bureau of Indian Affairs The BIA mission is to: "… enhance the quality of life, to promote economic opportunity, and to carry out the responsibility to protect and improve the trust assets of American Indians, Indian tribes, and Alaska Natives."

16 U.S.

Department of the Interior, “Who We Are,” Indian Affairs, October 2010. [Online]. Available: http://www.bia.gov/WhoWeAre/index.htm [Accessed: October 25, 2010]. 17 US. Department of the Interior, “Annual Performance and Accountability Report – Fiscal Year 2008,” Indian Affairs, 2008. [Online]. Available: http://www.bia.gov/idc/groups/public/documents/text/idc-002614.pdf [Accessed: October 25, 2010].

July 29, 2011 32

II - U.S. Department of the Interior

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

Programs administered through BIA include social services, natural resources management on trust lands representing 55 million surface acres and 57 million acres of subsurface minerals estates (held in trust by the U.S. for American Indian, Indian tribes, and Alaska Natives), economic development programs in some of the most isolated and economically depressed areas of the United States, law enforcement and detention services, administration of tribal courts, implementation of land and water claim settlements, housing improvement, disaster relief, replacement and repair of schools, repair and maintenance of roads and bridges, and the repair of structural deficiencies on high hazard dams, the BIA operates a series of irrigation systems and provides electricity to rural parts of Arizona.

2.1.3 Observations Several of the responsibilities of BIA listed in the previous paragraph are similar to the missions of the other Bureaus within DoI. Dam inspection. BIA has responsibility for the repair and maintenance of 131 high and significant hazard dams. The Safety of Dams program identified 54 high-risk (i.e., high probability of failure and high consequence) defects on 23 dams. The challenge is significant. In support of the BIA 24/7 National Monitoring Center, surveys of the dams are conducted and their condition monitored to provide data for an early warning system. Road inspection. To “advance quality communities for Tribes and Alaska Natives,” BIA is responsible for repair and maintenance of roads and bridges. To determine their condition, photographs are taken to assist in the establishment of priority repairs and to track the change in condition over time. Archaeological inventory. To “protect cultural and natural heritage resources,” the BIA maintains an inventory of archaeological sites and historic structures located on Native American land, often in wilderness areas of desert, forests, and canyons.

2.1.4 Challenges BIA is responsible for the administration and management of 55 million surface and 57 subsurface acres. With few BIA agents patrolling the sites, they are vulnerable to damage, particularly by looters.18

Wagner, Dennis, “Stolen artifacts shatter ancient culture,” The Arizona Republic, November 12, 2006. [Online]. Available: http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/1112lootersmainbar1112.html [Accessed October 27, 2010]. 18

July 29, 2011 33

II - U.S. Department of the Interior

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

2.2 BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT The Bureau of Land Management (BLM)19 is responsible for the management and conservation of resources on about 245 million surface acres, as well as 700 million acres of subsurface mineral estate. Located primarily in the western continental U.S. and Alaska, these public lands make up about 13 percent of the total land surface of the U.S. and more than 40 percent of all land managed by the Federal government. These diverse and remote public lands—grasslands, forests, high mountains, arctic tundra, and desert landscapes—are managed for multiple uses. BLMʼs activities fall into three broad categories: commercial activities, recreation, and conservation.20 BLM is also responsible for wildfire management and law enforcement on its lands.

2.2.1 Commercial Activities The BLM administers mineral leasing and oversees mineral operations on Federal mineral estates underlying other State, private, or Federally-administered land, and manages most mineral operations on Indian lands. BLM lands are important providers of energy resources, including renewable energy. The lands account for a significant portion of U.S. energy: 40 percent of national coal production, 11 percent of national gas, and 5 percent of oil production. Plus, the lands provide 48 percent of the U.S. geothermal production and 15 percent of its installed wind power. Significant revenue comes from forage for livestock through BLM’s management of grazing permits or leases on 160 million acres of land. Forest products come from approximately 57 million acres of commercial forests and woodlands. BLM also manages rangelands and facilities for 57,000 wild horses and burros.

2.2.2 Recreation BLM is responsible for administrating the 245 million acres of public lands used for outdoor activities: hunting, fishing, boating, rafting, hang gliding, birding, among many others. There are 16,000 miles of multiple use trails on these lands. The BLM has more than 200,000 miles of fishable streams, 2.2 million acres of lakes and reservoirs, 14,000 miles of floatable rivers, more than 500 boating access points, and 55 National Back Country Byways. BLM manages the impact to soil, water and air from off-road vehicles and mountain bikes. Bureau of Land Management, “About the BLM,” National, August 19, 2010. [Online]. Available: http://www.blm.gov/wo/st/en/info/About_BLM.html [Accessed: October 25, 2010]. 20 Bureau of Land Management, BLM General Brochure,” General Publications of Interest, June 3, 2010. [Online]. Available: http://www.blm.gov/pgdata/etc/medialib/blm/wo/Communications_Directorate/general_publications/gen eral.Par.46489.File.dat/HighResBLMbro.pdf [Accessed: October 25, 2010]. 19

July 29, 2011 34

II - U.S. Department of the Interior

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

2.2.3 Conservation BLM has an active program of soil and watershed management on 175 million acres in the lower 48 States and 86 million acres in Alaska. Practices such as rangeland health monitoring, re-vegetation, management of riparian areas, protective fencing, and water development are designed to conserve, enhance public land, including soil and watershed resources. In its conservation programs, BLM protects endangered animals, plants, dinosaur fossils and the archaeological, paleontological and historical sites on these lands. The number of plant and animal species on BLM lands listed as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act has increased to 305. BLM manages restoration efforts to protect these species by sustaining habitat and documenting stressors on the habitat to reduce threats for species populations. Additionally, BLM has several sites containing dinosaur fossils, greater in numbers and kinds than any other Federal or State land holdings. BLM protects these artifacts because the lands serve as first-class laboratories for scientists from all over the world. In addition, archaeological and historical treasures abound on BLM land. American Indian sacred sites and cliff dwellings, pioneer trails, and frontier ghost towns are just some of the resources that the agency safeguards. BLM owns multiple mines built in the 1800’s which are now abandoned. Because abandoned mines may impair water quality, BLM is responsible for cleaning up the mines and making the mines safe for the public. Typically, mines are closed by placing concrete in the openings. Over time, leaks may form requiring periodic monitoring. BLM manages some lands almost exclusively for conservation purposes. The National Landscape Conservation System (NLCS), for example, brings some of the BLMʼs premier designations under a single organizational unit. By putting these lands into an organized system, the BLM hopes to increase public awareness of these areas’ scientific, cultural, educational, ecological, and other values. The NLCS consists of National Conservation Areas, National Monuments, Wilderness Areas and Wilderness Study Areas, Wild and Scenic Rivers, and National Historic and Scenic Trails.

2.2.4 Wildfire Management BLM is responsible for fire protection and wildfire management on vast tracks of public lands in Alaska and the Western States. Fighting scores of wildfires each year, BLM works to protect and restore landscapes and communities. Under the National Fire Plan, BLM and the other agencies ensure adequate preparedness for future fire seasons, restore landscapes and rebuild communities damaged by wildfire, invest in projects to reduce fire risk, work directly with communities to ensure adequate protection, reduce fuels, and maintain accountability by establishing adequate oversight and monitoring.

2.2.5 Law Enforcement BLM is responsible for resource protection and law enforcement on BLM lands and resources. There are approximately 200 uniformed Law Enforcement Rangers and 70 July 29, 2011 35

II - U.S. Department of the Interior

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

Special Agents, or criminal investigators, responsible for preventing, detecting, and investigating crimes affecting public lands resources. These crimes include mineral resource theft; wilderness area violations; hazardous materials dumping; archaeological and paleontological resource theft and vandalism; cultivation, manufacture, smuggling, and use of illegal drugs; timber, forest product, and native plant theft; off-highway vehicle use; alcohol related crimes; and wildland arson.

2.2.6 Observations BLMâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Assessment, Inventory, and Monitoring (AIM) Strategy includes building the capacity to integrate and better utilize geospatial information system and remote sensing technology. Through the AIM strategy, BLM is developing core indicators to be used for monitoring change in land health (condition) and in evaluating the effectiveness of BLM practices. High quality, high resolution data is required by BLM to accomplish its responsibilities. BLM programs require real-time incident information and long-term monitoring of environmental conditions and use observations in several areas, including: Wildfire. Within the wildfire program exists a requirement to map all wildland and prescribed fires 10 acres and greater. The observations relating to wildfire management can be subdivided into three time periods: pre-fire, active fire, and post-fire. During pre-fire phases, landscape data and on-going environmental conditions (types of fuels, locations of fuels, and conditions of fuels) are required. During an active fire, fire managers require real-time status of ongoing fire, weather, values at risk, including crews, and observation tools to monitor fire behavior and measure its size. Typically, aerial observers in aircraft instrumented with Forward Looking Infrared (FLIR) map the fire perimeters. FLIR imagery is used to locate hotspots. Rock art inventory. BLM monitors the deterioration of Native American rock art with periodic examinations for dust accumulation, encroachment by vegetation or changes in topology, using close range photography with micro-millimeter resolutions on photographs of sizes from two-inch to two-foot square. Wildlife surveys and management. In cooperation with the Fish and Wildlife Service, wildlife surveys of threatened and endangered species are conducted through visual means by observers in aircraft or using telemetry equipment to locate collared animals. Wild horses, burros, and mule deer, among others, are counted along transects. Disturbed surface monitoring. To measure erosion of soils, accumulation of sediments in riparian areas, hazardous materials, impact of recreation use (e.g., soil movement due to off highway vehicles), and other impacts to BLM lands, random sampling methodology on repeated site visits is performed over a geographic area. Satellite imagery is used for disturbed surface monitoring augmented with close-range photogrammetry of soil

July 29, 2011 36

II - U.S. Department of the Interior

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

movement as needed, for example, due to off highway vehicle use. Periodic flights are used to identify abandoned mines and leakages from the mines. Vegetation inventory. Vegetation changes are irregularly observed over a much longer time span and are mapped on a large scale with Landsat satellites or other remote sensing, such as the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS),21 an instrument onboard NASA’s Terra and Aqua Satellites. The objective is to measure the health and growth of range and forest plants. Usually, a random sampling methodology on repeated site visits is performed over a geographic area. Among the targeted observations are the distribution, encroachment and trends of invasive species as well as restoration treatments or intervention methods to reduce threats. Remote sensing is supplemented through additional one millimeter pixel observations along vegetation transects in aircraft or on the ground using cameras and a wide variety of equipment depending on the mission. Resources. To protect public lands and manage resources, BLM monitors and ensures compliance by those extracting resources. Resource measurements plans are updated every one to five years. A random sampling methodology is repeated during site visits over a geographic area. These measurements provide information on changes to the land, removal of resources (primarily the extraction of oil, gas, and minerals), and how much land is disturbed by a process or lease. For example, the volumes of material removed from a gravel pit may be calculated. Mining compliance, mining claims and drilling can be validated. Law enforcement. BLM’s law enforcement activities require current observations of users of the public lands on a routine basis for emergency management (e.g., search and rescue) and to interdict illegal activities, (e.g., smuggling artifacts and marijuana cultivation). Aerial still and video photography supports officers on the ground.

2.2.7 Challenges Among the challenges faced by fire personnel are dangers of being trapped by fast moving fires, lack of visibility due to smoke, and limited number of aircraft to assist in containing or observing the fire. Smoke is the most significant factor in limiting the use of aircraft for observation work. The challenge to obtaining increased resolution required for vegetation analysis either on the ground or through the air is the vastness of the public lands to be covered. With the significant numbers of abandoned mines (an estimated 10,000 in Colorado alone), BLM faces difficulty in both finding all the abandoned mines and cleaning them up. Given staff and funding levels, abandoned mines are triaged and priorities established. Oblique imagery makes comparing images of rock art taken at two different times difficult. In order to sufficiently examine the changes to the rock art, the photograph needs to be NASA, “Home – About MODIS,” MODIS Web, undated. [Online]. Available: http://modis.gsfc.nasa.gov/about/ [Accessed: December 7, 2010]. 21

July 29, 2011 37

II - U.S. Department of the Interior

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

taken at close range and parallel to the image. However, rock art is often inaccessible, on the side of cliffs for example. As the BLM landscape is diverse, so are the duties of the BLM law enforcement officers. For example, in the southwestern desert, law enforcement officers deal with large numbers of recreational off-highway vehicle users and archaeological resources crimes; illegal border crossing and drug smuggling occurs along the southern border; arson and hazardous materials dumping is found in areas near cities; and marijuana cultivation and illegal commercial outfitting activities occur in the northern States.

July 29, 2011 38

II - U.S. Department of the Interior

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

2.3 BUREAU OF OCEAN ENERGY MANAGEMENT, REGULATION AND ENFORCEMENT The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement (BOEMRE) oversees the safe and environmentally responsible development of energy and mineral resources on the 1.7 billion acres of the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) including offshore oil and gas leasing and renewable energy. BOEMREâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s jurisdiction covers all the coasts of the U.S. - Gulf of Mexico, Pacific, Atlantic and Alaska OCS. Under the OCS Lands Act, BOEMRE on behalf of DoI is responsible for conducting supporting research and documentation to ensure that the U.S. receives fair market value for acreage made available for leasing and that any oil and gas activities conserve resources, operate safely, and take maximum steps to protect the environment.

2.3.1 Oil and Gas Production The OCS is a significant source of oil and gas for the U.S. energy supply. The approximately 43 million leased acres account for about 15 percent of the U.S. domestic natural gas production and about 27 percent of the oil production. In 2006, BOEMRE estimated that 86 billion barrels of oil and 420 trillion cubic feet of gas resources are located in undiscovered fields on the OCS, or about 60 percent of the oil and 40 percent of the natural gas resources estimated to be contained in remaining undiscovered fields in the U.S.

2.3.2 Renewable Energy In addition, BOEMRE oversees and facilitates renewable energy operations on the OCS, including solar energy, wind energy, wave and ocean current energy. It is also responsible for other mineral production offshore, including using sand and gravel for coastal restoration projects.

2.3.3 Observations Wildlife monitoring. Running wind farms 24 hours a day poses a hazard to birds, particularly at night. BOEMRE requires information to better understand the nighttime activities of birds and to develop appropriate monitoring and mitigation measures. The research will include the capture, radio/satellite tagging, tracking and mapping of long tailed ducks in wind farms.

July 29, 2011 39

II - U.S. Department of the Interior

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

2.3.4 Challenges 2.3.4.1 The National commission’s report into the Deepwater Horizon disaster22 (National Oil Spill Commission, 2011) The report, which blamed specific mistakes by BP, Halliburton and Transocean as well as wider industry failings for the oil spill, said drilling can continue in the Gulf of Mexico with improved oversight, but questioned whether anyone would be capable of dealing with a similar accident if it occurred off the coast of Alaska. There are, “serious concerns about the Arctic oil spill response, containment, and search and rescue,” in the chief areas of offshore drilling interest–Alaska’s Chukchi and Beaufort seas–the commission said. “Current federal emergency response capabilities in the region are very limited: the Coast Guard operations base nearest to the Chukchi region is on Kodiak Island, approximately 1,000 miles from the leasing sites. The Coast Guard does not have sufficient ice-class vessels capable of responding to a spill under Arctic conditions,” the report said. Furthermore, the environmental conditions in the area will severely hamper what little spill response could be mustered, the report said. “The Alaskan Arctic is characterized by extreme cold, extended seasons of darkness, hurricane-strength storms, and pervasive fog—-all affecting access and working conditions. The Chukchi and Beaufort Seas are covered by varying forms of ice for eight to nine months a year….oil spilled off Alaska (from blowouts, pipeline or tanker leaks, or other accidents) is likely to degrade more slowly than that found in the Gulf of Mexico because of lower water temperatures…And serious questions remain about how to access spilled oil when the area is iced over or in seasonal slushy conditions.” An oil spill that couldn’t be cleaned up quickly would threaten a rich ecosystem. The report continues: “The marine mammals in the Chukchi and Beaufort are among the most diverse in the world, including seals, cetaceans, whales, walruses, and bears. The Chukchi Sea is home to roughly one-half of America’s and one-tenth of the world’s polar bears…[and] also

Wall Street Journal: January 12, 2011

July 29, 2011 40

II - U.S. Department of the Interior

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

support millions of shore birds, seabirds, and waterfowl, as well as abundant fish populations.” The commission said the Federal government should launch an extensive effort to boost oil spill response capabilities in the area, monitor oil companies more closely to ensure their drilling plans are safe and increase research into the danger a spill would pose to Arctic ecosystems. “Industry and government will have to demonstrate standards and a level of performance higher than they have ever achieved before,” the commission said. Continuing pressure to pursue energy independence will push Government and Industry to leverage new, innovative, and more efficient methods to monitor offshore drilling operations. Figure 2-1 UAS could be employed in support of scientific assessments of large arctic mammal habitat and population (Polar Bears – AP)

July 29, 2011 41

II - U.S. Department of the Interior

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

2.4 BUREAU OF RECLAMATION23 The U.S Bureau Reclamation (USBR) manages, develops and protects water and related resources. Established in 1902 to reclaim arid lands, USBR constructed dams, power plants, and canals in the 17 western States to encourage homesteading and economic development of the West. USBR has constructed more than 600 dams and reservoirs including Hoover Dam on the Colorado River and Grand Coulee on the Columbia River. Today, USBR provides water, hydroelectric power and recreation areas.

2.4.1 Water Needs USBR helps the western States, Native American tribes and others meet new water needs and balance the multitude of competing uses of water in the West while protecting the environment and the public's investment in these structures. Reclamation is the largest wholesaler of water in the country, operating 348 reservoirs with a total storage capacity of 245 million acre-feet and serving 31 million people, and providing one out of five western farmers (140,000) with irrigation water for 10 million acres of farmland that produce 60 percent of the nation's vegetables and 25 percent of its fruits and nuts.

2.4.2 Hydroelectric Power In addition to providing water, USBR is also the second largest producer of hydroelectric power in the western U.S. 58 power plants provide more than 40 billion kilowatt hours annually and generate nearly a billion dollars in power revenues and produce enough electricity to serve 3.5 million homes. Additionally, Reclamation manages, with partners, 289 recreation sites that have 90 million visits annually.

2.4.3 Observations To perform the studies described below, USBR employs several techniques including satellite and aerial imagery, remote sensing, and video surveillance supported by sampling and direct observations. Remote sensing instrumentation includes image-based surveillance, optical sensing and LIDAR sensing. Hydrology. Reclamation performs field and laboratory studies in the course of its responsibilities. Data about water—use, flow, quality and availability forecasting—are important to best meet water needs and protect the environment.

References: http://www.usbr.gov/main/about/mission.html http://www.usbr.gov/main/about/index.html http://www.usbr.gov/main/about/fact.html Rowley, William D., The Bureau of Reclamation: Origins and Growth to 1945, Volume 1, Interior Department, Bureau of Reclamation, 2006. 23

July 29, 2011 42

II - U.S. Department of the Interior

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

Wildlife and vegetation inventory. Wildlife, vegetation and species habitat on Reclamation land are observed and monitored, including lands on which the habitat is being restored. In restoration projects, wildlife and vegetation are monitored using photographic monitoring stations. Radio frequency transmitters and other methods are used to track fish, endangered or otherwise. Changes in geography of the riparian lands and flood plains are monitored. Geological surveys. Reclamation must operate and maintain projects in a safe and reliable manner and ensure the dams do not create unacceptable risk to the public by monitoring, evaluating, and when appropriate, performing risk reduction modifications. Quantified movement of the Earth's surface, particularly in the area of water resource and power generation related infrastructure is a key aspect to safe, reliable operation. Earth movement sensors are at various dams and project areas, as are water flow monitors. Security is also an issue at these sites. Invasive species. Exotic and invasive species—animals such as the zebra mussel and plants such as the tamarisk (or saltcedar)—are tracked and various techniques are used in their removal as they disrupt the ecosystems by crowding out or harming North American species. The zebra mussel also clogs water intakes at hydroelectric plants.

2.4.4 Challenges Reclamation oversees the operation of more than 70 dams in the Pacific Northwest. The Safety of Dams24 program was created in response to the failure of Teton Dam in 1976. Since then, Reclamation has embarked on a rigorous review of every major dam in the region. Each major structure is periodically reviewed for resistance to seismic stability, overtopping, internal stability, and physical deterioration. Long-term stability of the dam is Reclamation’s goal in order to save lives, protect property, and insure the physical integrity of what it builds or maintains. Comprehensive Facility Reviews (CFRs) are Figure 2-2 The Teton Dam Collapses performed every six years, and include participation from the Area Office, Regional June 5, 1976 (USBR) Office, and Technical Service Center (TSC). CFRs include not only a detailed on site examination, but they also look at changes in the state of the art, the loading conditions on the dam, downstream population, and an evaluation of the risks. Periodic Facility Review 24

DoI – Bureau of Reclamation: www.usbr.gov/pn/about/dams/sod.html

July 29, 2011 43

II - U.S. Department of the Interior

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

(PFRs) are performed every six years by the Area and Regional Offices, midway between comprehensive facility reviews and involve a detailed on-site examination of the structures. Annual site inspections are conducted by the responsible Area Office in those years in which there is no CFRs or PFRs. Figure 2-3 Teton Dam near Rexburg, Idaho suddenly failed on first filling of the reservoir in 1976. Today, Bureau of Reclamation engineers assess all Reclamation dams under strict criteria established by the Safety of Dams program instituted after this failure (USBR)

Emergency Action Plans (EAPs) have been developed and are annually updated for all high and significant hazard dams. Tabletop and functional exercises are performed for each dam every three and six years, respectively. Tabletop exercises entail an informal discussion of actions to be taken in an example emergency situation. Functional exercises practice a timed, emergency response to a simulated incident. The memory of the 1976 failure of the Teton Dam and the ensuing devastation to Sugar City, Rexburg, and others along the Teton River canyon, and continuing pressure to manage earthen and concrete dams will push Government and Industry to leverage new, innovative, and more efficient methods to ensure the safety of down-stream communities while preserving the resource and flood management strategies that were the basis for dam development at the outset.

July 29, 2011 44

II - U.S. Department of the Interior

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

2.5 NATIONAL PARK SERVICE The mission of the National Park Service (NPS) is to “preserve unimpaired the natural and cultural resources and values of the National Park System for the enjoyment, education, and inspiration of this and future generations and to cooperate with partners to extend the benefits of resource conservation and outdoor recreation throughout this country and the world.”25 The NPS is responsible for 393 national parks that comprise 84 million acres of land, 4.5 million acres of water (oceans, lakes and reservoirs), over 85 thousand miles of rivers and streams, and 43 thousand miles of shoreline. Included are more than 68 thousand archeological sites, 27 thousand historic structures, over 121 million objects in their museums, and over 2,400 historic and nearly 600 natural national landmarks.26 NPS has operations in cultural resource management; park planning, facilities and lands; natural resource stewardship and science; and, visitor and resource protection. The U.S. Park Police is also part of the NPS.

2.5.1 Cultural Resources The objective of cultural resource management27 is to identify, protect, and share the cultural resources in the National Park System. The primary concern is to minimize the loss or degradation of culturally significant material. Among the materials are archeological resources (the remains of past human activity and records documenting the scientific analysis of these remains); cultural landscapes (including settlements, meeting places, agrarian areas, recreation sites, and burial plots); structures (buildings, bridges, locomotives, temple mounds, and factories); museum objects (technical development, scientific observation, of personal expression and curiosity about the past, of common enterprise and daily habits; and ethnographic resources (such as traditional arts and native languages, religious beliefs and subsistence activities).

U.S Department of the Interior – National Park Service, “Park Planning,” NPS Planning, December 1, 2010. [Online]. Available: http://planning.nps.gov/default.cfm [Accessed: December 1, 2010]. 26 U.S Department of the Interior, “About Us,” National Park Service, October 22, 2010. [Online]. Available: http://www.nps.gov/aboutus/index.htm [Accessed: December 1, 2010]. 27 U.S. Department of the Interior, “NS-28: Cultural Resource Management Guideline,” National Park Service, August 16, 2002. [Online]. Available: http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/nps28/28chap1.htm [Accessed: December 1, 2010]. 25

July 29, 2011 45

II - U.S. Department of the Interior

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

2.5.2 Natural Resource Stewardship and Science A primary responsibility of Natural Resource Stewardship and Science is to identify, protect, and share the cultural resources under its jurisdiction. The Social Science Program conducts and promotes state-of-the-art social science research related to the NPS mission, including surveys of visitor enjoyment and understanding; administers a program of competitive research grants for high priority national needs; oversees the Urban Recreation Research Center; provides research and technical assistance to park and program managers, the scientific community, and the public related to social sciences; and supports the acquisition of public use statistics for the National Park System. The Natural Resource Program is responsible for (1) inventorying, monitoring, and evaluating natural resources in the parks; (2) environmental response, damage assessment, and restoration activity and emergency response planning; monitoring air quality and protecting resources from the constituents of pollution; (3) preserving, protecting, and managing water and aquatic resources in national parks (including water quantity, quality and rights; wetland and floodplain protection; aquatic biological resource management; and water resources planning, assessing water resource conditions, reducing contaminants and potential contamination, establishing protection for sufficient water quantities to meet park and visitor needs, protecting endangered aquatic species and wetlands, manage fisheries); (4) protecting, maintaining, or restoring acoustical environments throughout the National Park System; (5) managing biological resources (including ecosystem management and restoration strategies, control of invasive plant and animal species, animal health, pest management, endangered species, and funds overseeing exotic plant management); and (6) managing geologic and mineral resources.

2.5.3 Park Planning, Facilities, and Land Park planning28 provides general management planning; park planning and development; special resource study development; land acquisition and related real estate operations; facility and infrastructure design and construction; facility asset management; interpretive and media planning and design; and construction program management.

2.5.4 Visitor and Resource Protection Visitor and Resource Protection29 comprise the Park Rangers and the varied functions that include enforcing laws that protect people and the parks, emergency services (e.g., search and rescue and emergency medical response and care), fire management, structural fire prevention and response, managing large-scale incidents, and aviation management for fire suppression, scientific research, search and rescue, and law enforcement. Department of the Interior, “National Park Service – Associate Director for Park Planning, Facilities, and Lands,” Departmental Manual, Part 145, Chapter 8, August 11, 2004. [Online]. Available: http://elips.doi.gov/app_dm/act_getfiles.cfm?relnum=3648 [Accessed: December 1, 2010]. 29 Department of the Interior, “National Park Service – Associate Director for Resources and Visitor Protection (Chief Ranger),” Departmental Manual, Part 145, Chapter 7, August 11, 2004. [Online]. Available: http://elips.doi.gov/app_dm/act_getfiles.cfm?relnum=3647 [Accessed: December 1, 2010]. 28

July 29, 2011 46

II - U.S. Department of the Interior

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

Aviation Management Program.30 Among the several areas supported by the Aviation Management program are fire, law enforcement, search and rescue, resource management, backcountry patrol, and transfer of personnel and cargo. The Program provides aviation resources for approximately 25,000 fleet, contract, and rental flying hours. The NPS fleet, including fixed wing and rotary wing aircraft, is augmented by leased and rented aircraft.

2.5.5 U.S. Park Police The U.S. Park Police provides law enforcement to safeguard lives, protect U.S. treasures, and preserve the natural and cultural resources.31 The professional police officers prevent and detect criminal activity such as poaching, dumping and encroachments, they protect the U.S. artifacts and conduct investigations when they are stolen, apprehend individuals suspected of committing offenses against Federal, State and local laws, provide protection to the President of the United States and visiting dignitaries, and provide protective services to monuments, memorials and museums. Several special units exist within the Park Police, including mounted, motorcycle and marine patrols, a special weapons and tactics team (SWAT), traffic safety, and aviation. The aviation unit supports law enforcement, medevac, search and rescue, high-risk prisoner transport and Presidential and dignitary security.

2.5.6 Observations Throughout the NPS units in the continental U.S. and Alaska, the NPS performs observations using satellite, fixed and rotary winged aircraft, and human observations. Sensors include optical and thermal photography either fixed to the platform or handheld. Among the purposes of the observation are wildland fires, law enforcement and natural and cultural resource protection. Wildland fires. Though occurring any time during the year, wildland fire intensity and frequency are seasonally dependent with as many as 10 to 20 incidents in a day. During the wildfire and prescribed fire operations, information is required regarding fire location, perimeters, active edges, direction of spread, burn intensity, and smoke plumes and dispersal, among others. Observations include examining the fire-burned areas (the state of the vegetation, whether it is burned, scorched, or unburned) and active fire line (flaming front and residual heat). The location of homes and other values at risk provide input to the decisions regarding distribution of firefighting resources. Helicopters are often used in making wildland fire observations anytime during the day and, with infrared sensors, once each night. Mapping scales on the order of 1:12,000 to 1:24,000 are required, dependent on the size of the fire and the number of personnel who need to see it. Observers on helicopters may hand draw the fire location on a 1:24,000 topographic map. Department of the Interior – National Park Service, “Aviation Management Fact Sheet,” Aviation Management, undated. [Online]. Available: http://www.nps.gov/fire/download/uti_abo_aviationfact.pdf [Accessed: December 1, 2010]. 31 Department of the Interior, “United States Park Police Home Page,” The United States Park Police, undated. [Online]. Available: http://www.nps.gov/uspp/ [Accessed: December 1, 2010]. 30

July 29, 2011 47

II - U.S. Department of the Interior

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

Law enforcement. Due to the expanse of the National Park System, criminal activity and ongoing emergency services incidents are often spread across State and other jurisdictional boundaries, involving multiple parks, States, wilderness areas, and rural and urban settings. Observations are made by humans as well as by remote camera systems on aircraft. Vegetation inventory. Finding and monitoring control of invasive species and locating marijuana cultivation is accomplished by on-ground sampling and satellite observations. On-ground sampling occurs along accessible areas such as roadways and streams.

2.5.7 Challenges To understand the challenges faced by the NPS, it is instructive to examine the range of activities performed by the Park Rangers in the Death Valley National Park Law Enforcement and Emergency Services unit. This unit is responsible for protecting natural and cultural resources, enforcement of State and Federal law, and providing emergency services in the 3.4 million acre park that has three primary developed areas and one administrative area. Elevations within the park vary from 288 feet below sea level to 11,040 above sea level. Temperatures range from 130Â°F in valley summers to sub-zero mountain winters. Typical daily operations performed by this NPS unit include managing campground occupancy, environmental compliance, infrastructure management, right-ofway permit compliance, Geographic Information System (GIS) mapping, and studying visitation patterns. In performing their duties, on a continuous, daily basis, various observations are conducted at entrance stations, roads, trails, campgrounds, and backcountry areas. Observations are also conducted by the Rangers during their patrols throughout these public lands. In situ observations are made using direct observation and digital photography, and remotely with the tools available through the GIS on a scale of 1:24,000. In an average year, in this area of large distances and difficult terrain, there are approximately five wildland fires, five emergency responses to structure or vehicle fire, over 200 responses requiring emergency medical services, and as much as a third of the fifteen search and rescues require multiple days. During search and rescue, road access is often limited, as are aviation resources. Many challenges are faced during the course of a wildland fire: availability and capability of aerial platforms, availability of experienced firefighters, post-acquisition processing, and particularly timeliness. For example, nightly infrared operations tend to be accurate, but not timely. Putting personnel in an aircraft during fire operations is extremely risky. The weather, low visibility due to cloud cover and darkness, fire behavior and intensity, and smoke complicated by limited or dangerous access exacerbates the danger to the firefighters both on the ground and in aircraft. The accuracy of vegetation inventories is limited if surveys are conducted in areas that are accessible, along roads and streams limits. The surveys are not random and do not extrapolate to the rest of the landscape. Scouting for marijuana crops in rugged terrain puts the law enforcement officer in a position of encountering dangerous individuals. July 29, 2011 48

II - U.S. Department of the Interior

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

2.6 OFFICE OF SURFACE MINING RECLAMATION AND ENFORCEMENT The Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM)32,33 was created to implement two of the programs resulting from the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act: (1) the Abandoned Mine Lands program to reclaim lands containing mines abandoned prior to the enactment of the act in 1977, and (2) regulation of current operations by developing standards and procedures for approving mining. OSM recently began an initiative to increase the use of geospatial information. Knowing the locations of the mines, and their status, help regulatory and abandoned mine land authorities meet their review and approval responsibilities. Global positioning systems (GPS) and interactive maps allow more information to be available to help coal operators map information to get mining permits, design abandoned mine land projects, and determine surface and mineral ownership.

2.6.1 Regulation Active Coal Mines OSM oversees the States and tribes that have primary responsibility for regulation of mining operations, and has direct responsibility for the mine lands in the remaining States, reservations, and Federal lands. The Federal government owns significant amounts of land and coal reserves, primarily in the western U.S. The success of OSM is measured as percentage of no offsite impacts, and OSM provides periodic reports regarding land and water occurring outside mine boundaries.

2.6.2 Reclaiming abandoned mine lands Abandoned mines can pose serious health and safety hazards such as streams polluted by acid mine drainage, steep and unstable slopes, open mine shafts, deadly mine gases, and buildings falling into the earth as a result of land subsided over aged, collapsed underground mines. Hazards include landslides, erosion, and sedimentation of streams, refuse piles, fumes and surface instability due to mine fires and burning coal refuse, inadequate vegetation, and water quality problems.

References: U.S. Department of the Interior, “About Us,” Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, April 23, 2010. [Online]. Available: http://www.osmre.gov/aboutus/Aboutus.shtm [Accessed: November 16, 2010]. 33 U.S. Department of the Interior, “Annual Report,” Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, 2008. [Online]. Available: http://www.osmre.gov/Reports/AnnualReport/2008/2008_Annual_Report.pdf [Accessed: November 16, 2010]. 32

July 29, 2011 49

II - U.S. Department of the Interior

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

Mine drainage may be acidic and can contain iron, manganese, aluminum, and other metals derived from coal and rock rich in iron-sulfide minerals (such as pyrite) exposed to oxygen and moisture during surface or underground mining operations. The acids, resulting from chemical and biological reactions include iron hydroxide and sulfuric acid, when produced in sufficient quantity can contaminate surface and ground water.

2.6.3 Observations Throughout the twenty-six surface coal mining States and Indian trust lands, OSM performs many types of observations for both regulatory and reclamation programs within those states where coal mining is occurring or has occurred. Direct observations and measurements are made primarily on the ground and augmented from air and spaceborne platforms. Boots-on-the-ground, satellite imagery, and aerial imagery using LIDAR, radar, direct observation from aircraft, global positioning system, fish finders and sonar, and traditional on the ground land measurement devices. Mine site inspections and observations support a range of topics: water quality, hazardous conditions, terrain topology, wildlife habitats, post mining land use, and safeguarding cultural features. Mine inspection. Observations are performed at the approximately 8,000 specific mine sites, four times per year. Active mines are observed during preparation for mining, during mining and post mining, over periods of three to ten years depending on the ecosystem. For active mines, partial inspections are performed bimonthly and full inspections quarterly. Abandoned mine land observations are ongoing and continuous. Mine site inspections and observations support a range of topics: water quality, hazardous conditions, terrain topology, wildlife habitats, post mining land use, and safeguarding cultural features. OSM locates and safeguards exposed openings, coal seam fires, and other hazardous conditions. Hydrology. Ground and surface water is monitored. To perform water quality assessments, acid mine drainage sites are inventoried and acid seeps monitored. Impoundments and siltation structures, bathymetry of water holdings and sediment ponds, stream buffer zones, drainage control, discharge structures, drainage reconstruction, diversions, and effluent limits are monitored. Geophysical surveys. Topography (pre-, existing and post mining), high wall elimination, excess spoil disposal placement and construction, coalmine waste (refuse piles and impoundments), placement and construction, and distance prohibitions are monitored. Tracking changes to terrain topography and analyzing the impact of change resulting from mining operations, including subsidence, landslides, topsoil and subsoil removal, soil storage and protection, soil redistribution, soil replacement depth, backfilling and grading, and surface stabilization. Geo-referencing mining coordinate systems are key to preparing detailed three-dimensional maps of mine site topography. Wildlife inventory. Wildlife habitat assessments include the analysis of vegetative restoration and the habitat of threatened and endangered species

July 29, 2011 50

II - U.S. Department of the Interior

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

2.6.4 Challenges Existing abandoned mine land inventories are not comprehensive, complete and/or accurate. â&#x20AC;&#x153;Boots on the groundâ&#x20AC;? observations are constrained by the remoteness of the locations, inclement, sometimes harsh, weather, and limited access. The site of the mine presents a danger to the inspectors due to the openings, cave-ins and mine subsidence. The States are required to inventory abandoned mine land sites for the purpose of remediation; however, there are too few personnel to accomplish this task. The mines are difficult to discover from satellite images and aerial surveys from small aircraft and helicopters are expensive. The challenge for regulating active mines is to provide inspectors with sufficient data so that they have up-front knowledge of ground conditions. There are 59 inspection criteria to address including: air quality monitoring, hydrologic conditions, soil composition, vegetation (cover, composition, and biomass), geomorphology approximate original contour, slope, aspect, volumetric, among others.

July 29, 2011 51

II - U.S. Department of the Interior

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

2.7 FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) is the primary Federal agency with the responsibility to lead the conservation, protection, and enhancement of fish, wildlife and plants, and their habitats. FWS is responsible for implementing and enforcing environmental laws, such as the Endangered Species Act, Migratory Bird Treaty Act, Marine Mammal Protection Act, North American Wetlands Conservation Act, and Lacey Act. The programs FWS manages include:      

Protecting and recovering threatened and endangered species Monitoring and managing migratory birds Restoring nationally significant fisheries and operating 70 National Fish Hatcheries Enforcing Federal wildlife laws and regulating international wildlife trade Conserving and restoring wildlife habitat such as wetlands in the 96 million acre National Wildlife Refuge System Assisting foreign governments conserve wildlife through international efforts

2.7.1 Endangered Species The goal of the FWS Endangered Species program is to protect endangered and threatened species and oversee their recovery. More than 1,700 listed U.S. and foreign species, subspecies, and populations are listed as endangered. Tools used to protect these species and the many more at-risk include: Candidate Conservation Agreements with Assurances, Safe Harbor Agreements, Habitat Conservation Plans, financial assistance in the form of grants to States under the Cooperative Endangered Species Conservation Fund. Additionally, species are being reintroduced into their former habitats.

2.7.2 Migratory Birds The complex routes of migratory birds, known as the Flyway System, creates a challenge to the health and sustainability of these species as it involves wildlife efforts well beyond the regional level and requires cooperation of national and international scope. The FWS migratory bird program includes annual surveys, monitoring, and assessments and conducts biological project planning, implementation and evaluation for both game and non-game birds. FWS is responsible for issuing permits and regulations for hunting, scientific research, rehabilitation of injured birds, education, falconry, and taxidermy, as well as control of overabundant species. FWS also participates in international treaty negotiations and coordinates efforts to reduce bird mortalities resulting from collisions with equipment and structures, by-catch, pesticide, and other human-related causes.

July 29, 2011 52

II - U.S. Department of the Interior

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

2.7.3 Fisheries and Habitat Conservation The FWS Fisheries and Habitat Conservation program manages species and conserves their habitat through three major programs: fisheries, habitat conservation, and environmental contaminants. Fisheries. Several factors have contributed to the more than 40 percent of North American fish species that are currently in jeopardy: lost habitats, introduction of invasive species, infectious diseases and global climate change. To respond, FWS works through the National Fish Hatchery System (operating 70 National Fish Hatcheries), Fish and Wildlife Conservation Offices, the Aquatic Invasive Species program, and the Marine Mammals program (conservation and management of polar bears, sea otters, walrus, manatees, and dugongs). Habitat. Conserving and restoring habitat not only protects fish and wildlife, but also safeguards the watersheds for public health. The primary Habitat Conservation programs include: Conservation Planning Assistance, Coastal Barrier Resources (to conserve aquatic habitat on hurricane-prone coastal barrier islands), Partners for Fish and Wildlife (to improve habitat on non-public lands, Coastal Program, National Coastal Wetlands Conservation Grants, National Wetlands Inventory (digital map data and scientific reports of status and trends of wetland habitats), and Sikes Act (to work with the DoD to conserve of 30 million acres of habitat, including wetlands, on U.S. military lands). Environmental Contaminants. FWS has stationed contaminant biologists at 75 locations throughout the U.S. to assist in the restoration of habitats harmed by pollution, evaluate water quality, respond to oil and chemical spills, evaluate pesticide effects on fish and wildlife during pesticide registrations, and conduct investigations into contaminant impacts to fish and wildlife.

2.7.4 Law Enforcement The FWS Office of Law Enforcement interdicts threats to wildlife resources, including illegal trade, unlawful commercial exploitation, habitat destruction, and environmental hazards. FWS officers ensure understanding and compliance of wildlife laws, safeguard wildlife habitat, enforce game bird hunting regulations, investigate wildlife crimes, regulate and ensure compliance of wildlife trade, break up smuggling activities, and coordinate activities with international, Federal, State, and tribal counterparts to protect wildlife resources and prevent unlawful exploitation.

2.7.5 National Wildlife Refuge System To restore, protect and manage wildlife habitat, FWS manages the National Wildlife Refuge System, comprised of 96 million acres including 548 National Wildlife Refuges, 37 Wetland Management Districts, and 49 Coordination Areas, devoted to protection and conservation of fish and wildlife and their habitats. Over 40 million visitors each year visit the Refuge System to hunt, fish, observe and photograph wildlife, and participate in other outdoor recreation activities. July 29, 2011 53

II - U.S. Department of the Interior

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

2.7.6 Observations For habitat restoration, endangered species reintroduction, and visitor management on the National Wildlife Refuge System, wildlife surveys, habitat assessments and law enforcement are among FWS responsibilities that require observation. FWS is comprised 150 million acres, 553 national wildlife refuges and other units, and 38 wetland management districts. Wildlife Surveys. Performed to track endangered species reintroduction, surveys are conducted on refuges and adjacent lands through partnerships with other government organizations. From April to September, whooping cranes are counted during observations on foot and in ground vehicles. Cranes congregate at night making counting easier so thermal imaging is used. Two-centimeter resolution provides sufficient resolution to count eggs. Observing the presence-or absence of adult cranes near nests provides an indication of abandonment. Chick survivability can be estimated by observing adults in combination with chicks. In 2009, 12 individual nests were observed on a regular basis. On occasion, ultralight aircraft flown at low levels have augmented the observations. The Division of Migratory Bird Management is responsible for conducting status assessments of migratory birds, developing recommendations for harvest- and habitatmanagement programs, and for implementing the FWS migratory bird permit program. The tasks entail obtaining accurate and precise estimates of migratory bird abundances and habitats at various scales. Survey types range from ground counts along transects to estimates based on visual observations of bird abundance from fixed-wing and rotarywinged aircraft to aerial videography and satellite imagery. To identify bird species, aircraft typically fly between 100-150 feet AGL. Statutory responsibility requires that the status of 1,007 species of migratory birds assessed. Surveys are conducted once per year during a specific timeframe depending on the species. Surveys are conducted in the spring, during both fall and winter migrations, and during winter. Numerous individuals and aircraft are spread across the continent to conduct these surveys in most cases. Since the migratory birds are ubiquitous, accurate estimates require surveys across broad swaths of their range. These counts are accomplished as simultaneously as possible to avoid doublecounting. Wildlife and Habitat Surveys. The Arthur R. Marshall Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge includes 145,800 acres of northern Everglades habitat. The Refuge's management activities focus primarily on wetland habitat restoration, particularly through water quality and hydropattern (or surface water) improvement and exotic plant control. In any given year, as many as 257 species of birds may use the diverse wetland habitat of the Refuge. Breeding pairs of wading birds are counted during the spring when wading birds forage and nest on the Refuge. Colonies are often identified and monitored using aerial surveys. Photographs of the colony coupled with GIS imagery provide bird count estimates. Exotic plant infestation surveys are also conducted during aerial surveys using Aerial Sketch Mapping. Exotic trees, for example Melaleuca, and vines such as Lygodium are surveyed to provide an estimate of the percentage of the Refuge covered by exotics. Aerial surveys are July 29, 2011 54

II - U.S. Department of the Interior

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

performed throughout the year with wading birds the focus during the spring and exotic vegetation all year round. Habitats. Annually, throughout the non-snow covered season of the year, FWS collects digital aerial photographs across the landscape of the Northern Great Plains for wetland habitat assessments, easement monitoring, and other uses. The wetland habitat project involves over 50,000 wetland basins scattered in 380 study plots. Easement protected wetland monitoring can involve tens of thousands wetlands scattered over a multi-State area. Specific observations include ponded water for wetland habitats, agricultural use of uplands, and drainage, disturbance of soils and other infringement upon easement protected. Remote sensing is accomplished by small fixed wing aircraft at heights of 1800 feet to 9500 feet mean sea level. A typical wetland habitat monitoring project requires an on-the-ground spatial resolution of 1.3 meters per pixel. The photographs enable measurements of interest to be made using GIS applications. Law Enforcement. Among the law enforcement issues faced by Refuge Officers are wetland drainage, illegal activities such as drug cultivation, and visitor and hunter use of Federal property. Observations are performed mainly from the road or hiking in on foot. Using photography or the human eye, observations are accomplished year round in daylight. If available, aircraft are used, on average, twice a year. Hiking in is very random, depending on terrain and suspected activity.

2.7.7 Challenges Currently, of more than 1,000 only about 50 species of migratory birds are adequately monitored. Resources will never be sufficient to conduct the monitoring of all required species by ground counts. Aerial methods are the only feasible means of obtaining the image resolution necessary to obtain data, though using aircraft presents challenges, as well. Foremost are safety concerns when performing wildlife and habitat surveys. The rugged terrain notwithstanding, aerial surveys are performed at altitudes (100 to 150 feet AGL) that place the aircraft in direct conflict with land-based obstacles, for example, wind turbines and communication towers. Additionally, oblique imagery makes counting difficult. Georeferencing and orthophotography are required. The radiometric and spectral capability of affordable airborne equipment and sensors requires improvement. Sensors that might provide more suitable data that can be used to map wetland habitats are extremely expensive. More efficient methodologies to obtain the data are needed. Specific to the whooping crane survey is the challenge of performing the daily inspection of nests and chicks without disturbing the birds. With the current complement of officers, the size and remoteness of the refuge limits complete coverage for law enforcement surveillance. The terrain and vegetation severely limit ground-based observation. Increasing cost and the small number of appropriately trained personnel to fly low- level missions hampers surveys conducted by aircraft. Additionally, aerial observations from current platforms are limited by weather.

July 29, 2011 55

II - U.S. Department of the Interior

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

2.8 U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY A science organization, USGS34,35 collects, monitors, analyzes, and provides scientific understanding about natural resource conditions, issues, and problems to provide impartial information on the health of the U.S. ecosystems and environment, threats from natural hazards, its natural resources, the impacts of climate and land-use change, and the core science systems that provide timely, relevant, and useable information. The USGS areas of focus include:       

Climate and Land Use Change Core Science Systems Ecosystems Energy and Minerals, and Environmental Health Natural Hazards Science Quality and Integrity Water

2.8.1 Climate and Land Use Change The Climate and Land Use Change Program has seven programs that are targeted toward understanding the impact of climate change and changing land use on society, resources and economic development. Scientists are assessing the potential capacities and limitations of the various forms of Carbon Sequestration and to evaluate their geologic, hydrologic, and ecological consequences. The Climate Effects Network, a consortium of observation and research programs, collect, share and use data, models and related information to assess climate impacts on ecosystems, resources, and society. Through research and operational activities, the EROS Center contributes to the understanding of local to global land change. Over multiple spatial and temporal scales, Geographic Analysis and Monitoring develops an understanding of the patterns, processes, and consequences of changes in land use, land condition, and land cover that result from the interactions between humans and natural systems. Operating the Landsat satellites, the Land Remote Sensing Program provides the U.S. portal to the largest archive of remotely sensed land data in the world. The National Climate Change and Wildlife Science Center provides science and technical support regarding the impacts of climate change on fish, wildlife and ecological process. The Global Larson, Tania M., USGS Science – Addressing Our Nation’s Challenges, U.S. Department of the Interior – U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Geological Survey General Information Product 93, 2009. [Online]. Available: http://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/93 [Accessed: December 2, 2010]. 35 U.S. Geological Survey, Aligning USGS senior leadership structure with the USGS science strategy, ver. 4, September 13, 2010, U.S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet 2010–3066. [Online]. Available: http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2010/3066/ [Accessed: December 2, 2010]. 34

July 29, 2011 56

II - U.S. Department of the Interior

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

Change Research and Development Program is developing the fundamental understanding of processes controlling Earth system responses to global change modeling impacts of climate and land-cover change on ecosystems and other natural resources. On multiple climate scales and processes, Science Applications and Decision Support provide information about the effects of climate and land use change on natural resources.36

2.8.2 Core Science Systems The Core Science Systems program has six programs that provide readily available access to natural science information. The Biological Informatics Program provides informatics framework and scientific content for the understanding of the U.S. biological resources. The National Geospatial Program organizes, maintains, and publishes the geospatial baseline of the U.S. topography, natural landscape, and built environment. Core Science Informatics works with USGS science programs, partners, and industry to create new paradigms for accessing, integrating, visualizing, and delivering USGS data and information. Serving both internal and external users, the USGS Library Program supports USGS fundamental scientific research access to the literature, data, and information regarding the earth and natural sciences. The National Cooperative Geologic Mapping Program produces accurate geologic maps and 3-D geologic frameworks that provide critical data for sustaining and improving the quality of life and economic vitality of the U.S. The National Geological and Geophysical Data Preservation Program established an archive of geological, geophysical, and engineering data, maps, well logs, and samples.37

2.8.3 Ecosystems To develop a fundamental understanding of ecosystem function and distributions, physical and biological components and trophic dynamics for freshwater, terrestrial, and marine ecosystems and the human and fish and wildlife communities they support the USGS conducts six programs. The Invasive Species Program is addressing threats to ecological systems and native species due to invasive species. With 40 units in 38 States, the Cooperative Research Unit Program supports graduate education in fisheries and wildlife sciences, and facilitates research between natural resource agencies and universities. The Fisheries: Aquatic and Endangered Resources Program focuses on the study of aquatic organisms and aquatic habitats from the molecular genetics level to species and population interactions with the environment. To model and predict changes to ecosystems, Terrestrial, Freshwater, and Marine Ecosystems provides basic science for understanding the factors that control ecosystem structure, function, dynamics, condition, and provision of goods and services in context of linkages and interactions with the surrounding landscape. The Status and Trends of Biological Resources Program monitors, analyzes and reports on the status and trends of the U.S. living resources and the habitats on which they depend. The Wildlife Program conducts research on diverse natural resource topics U.S. Geological Survey, Climate and Land Use Change, Start with Science, November 22, 2010. [Online} Available: http://www.usgs.gov/climate_landuse/ [Accessed: December 2, 2010]. 37 U.S. Geological Survey, Climate and Land Use Change, Start with Science, November 22, 2010. [Online} Available: http://www.usgs.gov/core_science_systems/ [Accessed: December 2, 2010]. 36

July 29, 2011 57

II - U.S. Department of the Interior

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

involving wildlife and their habitat, marine mammals, threatened and endangered species, pollinators and plants.38

2.8.4 Energy and Minerals, and Environmental Health The Energy and Minerals, and Environmental Health Activity conducts research and assessments on the location, quantity, and quality of mineral and energy resources, including the economic and environmental effects of resource extraction and use; and conducts research on the environmental impacts of human activities that introduce chemical and pathogenic contaminants into the environment and threaten human, animal (fish and wildlife), and ecological health. The Energy Resources Program develops an understanding of the processes critical to geologically based energy resources; to conduct scientifically robust assessments of those resources and studies the impact of energy resource occurrence, production and use on environmental and human health. The USGS Mineral Resources Program provides scientific information for resource assessments on mineral potential, production, consumption, and environmental effects. The Toxic Substances Hydrology Program provides objective scientific information on environmental contamination. The Contaminant Biology Program investigates the effects and exposure of environmental contaminants on living resources. Through the use of scientific information and tools in a multidisciplinary, open architecture, the Center for Science, Decisions, and Resource Management is a focal point for science-based resource management decisions.39

2.8.5 Natural Hazards To provide a clear understanding of natural hazards and their potential threats to society and support development of smart, cost-effective strategies for achieving preparedness and resilience, the USGS has six natural hazards programs. The Earthquake Hazards Program provides information and products for earthquake loss reduction, including hazard and risk assessment, and comprehensive real-time earthquake monitoring. Monitoring active and potentially active volcanoes, the Volcano Hazards Program advances the understanding of volcanic processes to lessen the harmful impacts of volcanic activity and issues warnings of potential volcanic hazards. The Landslide Hazards Program conducts landslide hazard assessments, investigates landslides, forecasts their occurrence, and provides technical assistance to respond to landslide emergencies. The Global Seismographic Network provides near-uniform, worldwide monitoring of the Earth, with over 150 modern seismic stations distributed globally. Using its ground-based observatories, the Geomagnetism Program monitors the Earthâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s magnetic field, provides continuous records of magnetic field variations covering long timescales, disseminates magnetic data, and conducts research into the nature of geomagnetic variations. The

U.S. Geological Survey, Climate and Land Use Change, Start with Science, October 15, 2010. [Online} Available: http://www.usgs.gov/ecosystems/ [Accessed: December 2, 2010]. 39 U.S. Geological Survey, Climate and Land Use Change, Start with Science, November 17, 2010. [Online} Available: http://www.usgs.gov/resources_envirohealth/ [Accessed: December 2, 2010]. 38

July 29, 2011 58

II - U.S. Department of the Interior

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

Coastal and Marine Geology Program conducts research on changes in the coastal and marine environment, whether naturally occurring or human induced.40

2.8.6 Science Quality and Integrity To enhance the integrity, quality, and health of USGS science, the Office of Science Quality and Integrity has four components. Education and Development strengthens the earth- and biological-science communities through educational outreach, internships, postdoctoral fellowships, scientist emeritus, and youth programs. Evaluation, Review, and Recognition monitors and oversees internal and external review of USGS science programs. Native American Activities facilitates USGS activities with Native American governments, organizations, and people. Fundamental Science Practices ensures that USGS scientific activities are transparent by overseeing the USGS Peer Review Process, establishing best practices for publication, data and laboratories, and investigates allegations of scientific misconduct.41

2.8.7 Water Society depends on fresh and reliable water supplies, as do diverse and fragile ecosystems. To understand the Nation's water resources, USGS collects hydrologic and water-quality information and provides access to water data, publications, and maps, as well as to recent water projects and events. Water Data for the Nation provides a view of current and historical streamflow, groundwater level, and water-quality data. Through observations and analyses, the Streams, Lakes, and Reservoirs program advances the understanding of the movement and condition of surface water. Information about the location, condition, and behavior of water in the ground is provided by Groundwater, Aquifers, and Wells. Quality of Water Resources monitors and evaluates biological, chemical, and environmental factors affecting water quality. A view of current water conditions and real-time locations of floods and droughts are provided by Floods, Droughts, and Current Conditions. Water Use provides reports on past and current water use. International Water Activities supports ongoing water projects of international interest. Methods and Modeling provides sources for available tools and expertise to conduct water resources science.42

2.8.8 Observations Volcano Hazards. To reduce the threats posed by volcanoes, the Volcano Hazards Program conducts volcano hazard assessments and volcano monitoring as part of the National Volcano early Warning System (NVEWS). For all dangerous volcanoes in the U.S. and its territories, hazard assessments are performed and response plans are established for all communities threatened by those volcanoes. The monitoring involves collection and U.S. Geological Survey, Climate and Land Use Change, Start with Science, September 30, 2010. [Online} Available: http://www.usgs.gov/natural_hazards/ [Accessed: December 2, 2010]. 41 U.S. Geological Survey, Climate and Land Use Change, Start with Science, October 8, 2010. [Online} Available: http://www.usgs.gov/quality_integrity/ [Accessed: December 2, 2010]. 42 U.S. Geological Survey, Climate and Land Use Change, Start with Science, October 4, 2010. [Online} Available: http://www.usgs.gov/water/ [Accessed: December 2, 2010]. 40

July 29, 2011 59

II - U.S. Department of the Interior

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

scientific interpretation of real-time and near-real-time geophysical data and integration of data collected by other groups, such as NASA and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) satellite imagery. In Hawaii, weekly overflights in helicopters provide visual monitoring of active volcano flow fields and support gas monitoring. Wildland Fire. USGS land managers require wildland fire and fuels science information. Managing wildland fires requires real time information for situational awareness and firefighter safety, for example accurate fire perimeter maps and fire severity. Detailed maps of heat signatures, spot fires, and other information are required to meet the needs of incident management teams, so images need to be orthorectified. Fuel characterization is performed seasonally and includes characterization of fine fuels found in non-forested arid lands, its structure, composition, sequestered carbon, and vegetation. In situ sampling to calculate the cure rates in grasses are needed several times per month during spring through fall in the western U.S. Remote sensing is also used. Wildlife Health. The National Wildlife Health Center, a national diagnostic and research laboratory focused exclusively on wildlife health, investigates wildlife die-offs to determine the cause of death of these animals. The center accepts 1600-1700 carcasses representing 600 -700 cases per year. For large wildlife die-offs, teams investigate the event on site. Research on disease agents includes vaccine development. Rapid and thorough situational information regarding die-off events and their extent is important to the intelligence and security agencies as they may be related to terrorist (domestic and foreign) activities. In addition to the carcasses, water, vegetation or soil samples are taken. Additionally, the weather condition beginning a few days prior to the discovery of the carcasses is noted. Numerous photographs are taken, mainly using handheld cameras during walks, drives on land vehicles or from a boat. Depending on the disease agent, events may be short (one day exposure to toxic material) or months long (viral infection in migratory birds or a major oil spill). Wetlands. Research on wetlands includes ecology, restoration, invasive species, mapping, geochemical processes, and others. Among the exotic invasive species found in the coastal marshes (both fresh and salt water) of Louisiana, and often on National or State Wildlife Refuges, is the nutria (Myocastor coypus), a large, herbivorous, semiaquatic rodent with destructive feeding and burrowing behaviors. Observing the nutria to estimate their population is a challenge because it is nocturnal and cryptic, that is, it can avoid observation or detection by other organisms. Live traps are used to capture the animals so they may be marked. Submerged aquatic vegetation is also studied in this region. The vegetation is found in ephemeral habitats, often in the interior of the marsh. Aerial photography is an efficient means to find these difficult to find patches of the vegetation and avoid disturbing the marsh. The scale of a study may range from monitoring a pond to a regional survey, and for population estimates, it may cover an entire refuge. Monitoring may occur year round on a weekly or monthly basis or can be intensively studied over the course of a few weeks. In some cases, several visits a day may occur.

July 29, 2011 60

II - U.S. Department of the Interior

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

Hydrology. Reliable, impartial and timely information is required to understand the U.S. water resources to minimize the loss of life and property as a result of water-related natural hazards, such as floods, droughts and land movement. Water resources are protected and enhanced for human health, aquatic health and environmental quality. Groundwater and surface-water resources are managed for domestic, agricultural, commercial, industrial, recreational, and ecological uses. Measurements and observations are collected to support studies of water quality or quantity. These observations include location, conditions, quality and quantity of surface-water and groundwater. Water quality measurements include field parameters, ions, metals, biological and microbiological, nutrients, sediment, treated/untreated, and habitat. The location, purpose and quantity of water use are also measured. River or stream banks and the riparian zones are sampled and observed, and include human and animal activities as well as the impact each may or has had on the water. Samples are typically taken Statewide, but sometimes may include larger areas. A wide range of instruments and procedures are employed due to the multitude of scenarios examined. Measurements are taken year-round at different frequencies (daily, weekly, monthly, annually, etc.) though winter ice may suspend sampling. Field studies at rivers, embayments estuaries, coastlines, wetlands and lakes are made to quantify and characterize earth surface processes and their linkages to water and air quality. They typically include evaluation of topography, geomorphology (grain size, spatial distribution and color), water, land and vegetation color, water and land temperature, water cloudiness and surface roughness. The erosive effects of a river on its banks are also observed during the course of a year. Additionally, greenhouse gas fluxes from tidal and freshwater wetlands area ascertained. The studies are performed at dozen of sites nationwide. Techniques include satellite imagery, aerial photos, in situ manual and automated water quality samplers including optical instrumentation, LIDAR, and acoustics. Depending on the need, observations are made every few seconds to once a year. On a much shorter timescale and sometimes requiring quick action to protect property and life, overflowing banks during the annual spring run-off or during high flow events, such as the washout of dams, are monitored visually and with sensors. Global Change. The USGS Geographic Science Centers use remote sensing coupled with GIS research for global change and other USGS priority issues, such as contaminants. Measurements and observations may be conducted regionally, such as the Chesapeake Bay watershed, or nationally in scope. Measurements include remote sensing such as hyperspectral reflectance of soil and vegetation as well as contaminants like hydrocarbons or heavy metals as well as ecosystem processes such as nitrogen load or agricultural productivity. Measurements also include field and imaging spectroscopy, X-ray fluorescence and standard lab chemistry and may be conducted over periods of days to decades. Geophysical surveys. Geophysical surveys are designed to measure the earth's physical properties and their spatial (vertical and horizontal) and temporal contrasts. Using various types of instruments, measurements include electrical and electromagnetic conductivity, July 29, 2011 61

II - U.S. Department of the Interior

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

magnetic susceptibility, temperature, and radiometrics and are made from borehole, on the earth's surface, and from various surface, marine, and airborne platforms. Over time, periods of days to years, studies may be single characterization campaigns, or temporal observations across the U.S. Observations may be necessary at several locations simultaneously, for example temperature and electrical conductivity. Surface Change/deformation. The USGS Western Remote Sensing and Visualization Center in Sacramento, CA, detects, measures, maps and analyzes land surface change or deformation associated due to natural hazards. Land surface deformation caused by earthquakes, landslides, debris flows, land subsidence, and glacial motion are measured by changes in point position of the land surface via direct positional measurement by utilizing geodetic measurements (ground-based tripod LIDAR, GPS, leveling, airborne LIDAR, multispectral airborne, among others) and satellite interferometric synthetic aperture radar imagery. Land surface change measurements are accomplished through image change detection (for example, offset of pixels from raster images). Measurements are taken in the U.S. and internationally and at various scales over time periods ranging from minutes to years. For earthquakes, scientists need targeted, post-earthquake photographs to perform analysis to determine how the land moved and where it broke. Data is required quickly and up close. In the Haitian earthquake of January 2010, photography and â&#x20AC;&#x153;eyes on the groundâ&#x20AC;? were the means by which the data was gathered. Images were obtained from aircraft flown by NOAA and Google, from a small helicopter, and from Landsat. After the April 2010 Baja California earthquake, a reconnaissance helicopter flew 20 kilometers along the rupture. Landscape Change. To protect natural resources and ecosystem health, changes to the landscape are observed using wireless sensor networks, terrestrial scanning LIDAR, realtime kinematic global positioning system, and surveys. Rangeland health, sand dune migration and activation, and dust storm sources and activity at five sites in the Mojave Desert and four sites on the Navajo Nation are observed through automated in-situ systems recording on 10-minute intervals and physical surveys occurring every three months or more. Observations are made simultaneously at more than one location using a distributed network of sensors and automated cameras.

2.8.9 Challenges Emergency situations such as earthquakes, wildland fires, volcano eruptions and floods require real-time information over territory that is vast, rough and remote. Even with the wide range of geodetic and imaging techniques, it is not always possible to provide rapid site inspection during disasters nor feasible to use ground-based observations or measurements over moderate size area. Visual monitoring in these situations frequently puts the observer in danger. Following the Haitian earthquake, though aircraft were flown, images necessary to ascertain the location of the rupture were obtained by happenstance. In the past, aircraft were available to crisscross the area until it was fully mapped. Today, aircraft availability is rare and funding limited. It has become necessary to quickly find the rupture so that the limited assets can be directed to the best coordinates. Based on July 29, 2011 62

II - U.S. Department of the Interior

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

assumptions that were made following the Baja earthquake, scientists initially missed a 30kilometer stretch of the rupture and it took weeks to establish its location. Firefighting is inherently risky. The nature of the fires in these remote terrains is such that it is difficult to keep firefighters out of harmâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s way. Some firefighting situations involve hazardous materials and by-products. Flying aircraft to track the hazardous materials puts the pilot and passengers at risk for exposure. Data requirements are often challenging, such as obtaining sufficient resolution of landscape over broad areas of territory. Satellite imagery resolutions are insufficient and ground-based imagery is inefficient for large areas. Real time imagery for remote areas is needed to assist in determining where to sample. Landscape observations frequently require short interval repeat observations or data gathering in sufficiently short time intervals to be able to record causal links to change. High-resolution data over large areas can be costly. Time sensitive events such as wildlife die-offs are typically investigated on foot precluding the ability to have immediate information of the extent of the die-off. Some species that require monitoring are cryptic and observations without undue disturbance is challenging. Repeated surveys of areas too large to effectively cover on foot are often too small for traditional aircraft and satellite operations to be effective. Using manned aircraft to obtain population estimates of invasive species is expensive, constrained with respect to time, dangerous due to the requirement to fly low and slow, and disruptive to wildlife. A significant challenge for global change science is acquiring hyper-spectral imagery over selected targets of interest. Imaging platforms and processes tend to be very limited or too expensive.

July 29, 2011 63

II - U.S. Department of the Interior

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

2.9 THE NATIONAL BUSINESS CENTER AVIATION MANAGEMENT DIRECTORATE The National Business Center Aviation Management Directorate (NBC-AMD), originally called the Office of Aircraft Services, was established by the Secretary of the Interior on July 1, 1973 “to raise the safety standards, increase the efficiency, and promote the economical operation of aircraft activities in the Department of the Interior." To accomplish this important mission NBC-AMD is responsible for the development, implementation, and continued oversight of policy for aviation activities within DoI. It is this responsibility for program policy development, implementation, and oversight that makes AMD unique among NBC Directorates. Unlike other NBC Directorates whose services are designed to meet administrative business needs through the delivery of common services, AMD’s “services” are there to ensure the collaboratively developed DoI aviation policies are implemented according to accepted standards and through oversight, are being uniformly followed across DoI. AMD carries out its aviation policy development, implementation, and oversight responsibilities through the dedication and expertise of a team of aviation professionals with over 900 years of cumulative experience in private sector and government aviation. Leveraging its resident wealth of aviation management experience and expertise and in keeping with DoI management excellence initiatives and the President’s Management Agenda, AMD also serves the aviation needs of numerous other Federal agencies. AMD is headquartered in Boise, Idaho near the National Interagency Fire Center and in the same building as the Office of the Secretary of Wildland Fire. This location supports close policy development, implementation, and oversight relationships with the Office of the Secretary fire, law enforcement, and emergency management personnel, U.S. Forest Service Aviation Management (also located in Boise), and the Bureau national aviation managers for BLM, NPS, and BIA, all of whom are stationed in Boise. AMD has regional offices in Anchorage, Alaska; Atlanta, Georgia; Boise, Idaho; and Phoenix, Arizona that enable tailored regional support for all eight DoI Bureaus’ aviation requirements as well as those of over a dozen other Federal and State agencies that AMD serves.

2.9.1 Aviation Management Vision NBC-AMD’s vision is “to be the competitive aviation services provider of choice for the Federal government and related customers.”

2.9.2 Aviation Management Mission NBC-AMD’s mission is to provide our customers with higher quality (Better), more costwise (Cheaper) aviation services at lower cycle times (Faster) that result in increased operational performance and fewer losses (Safer) than any one of them can provide for themselves. AMD provides direct Bureau support through its primary service offerings.

July 29, 2011 64

II - U.S. Department of the Interior

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

2.9.3 Aviation Safety and Program Evaluation 

Development and implementation of DoI-wide aviation safety and aircraft accident prevention programs.



Establishment and management of DoI-wide aircraft accident/incident and aviation hazard reporting systems.



Inspecting and monitoring aircraft operations to assure standards are being met.



In cooperation with the NTSB, investigating all aircraft mishaps occurring in DoI aviation operations and representing DoI on all aircraft accident investigations where DoI has involvement as specified by the NBC-AMD Director.

2.9.4 Aircraft Fleet Program Management 

DoI aircraft fleet maintenance, pilot and aircraft inspections, pilot training, fuels inspections.



Ownership and management of DoI fleet aircraft. Assigning DoI fleet aircraft and/or NBC-AMD personnel to Bureaus as requested to support Bureau programs.



Coordinating aircraft use in such a manner as to obtain the best utilization of existing equipment, consistent with DoI-wide mission requirements.

2.9.5 Aviation Training 

On-line and instructor led aviation user training, DoI Aviation Instructor Certification, Aviation Centered Education Seminars



Developing and implementing an aviation user-training program to meet DoI-wide and specific Bureau needs.

2.9.6 Aviation Commercial Flight Services Support 

Aircraft acquisition support – specification development, pre-buy inspections, vendor pilot inspections, post award aircraft inspections.



Procuring DoI-owned aircraft, commercial aviation services, and other aviationrelated services in support of Bureau programs.

2.9.7 Aviation Policy Development, Implementation, & Oversight 

Responsive & collaborative policy development in support of new/changing Bureau, DoI, and Federal interagency requirements. DoI representation on the Interagency Committee for Aviation Policy and with other Federal agency aviation programs. Secretary’s office for the oversight of DoI aviation policies.

July 29, 2011 65

II - U.S. Department of the Interior

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025



Maintaining Bureau aviation program oversight to provide quality assurance, measure efficiency and effectiveness, and to assure that standards are in place to enhance personnel safety.



Establishing and maintaining standards governing operational procedures, aircraft maintenance, aircrew qualifications and proficiency, and maintenance personnel qualifications.



Prescribing the procedures for justification, budgeting and management of the financial aspects of aircraft owned and/or operated by the DoI.



Organizing, implementing and chairing a DoI-wide airspace committee to assist the Bureaus through sharing of airspace information on common concerns and seeking solutions to common airspace problems at the DoI level.



Facilitating and participating with the DoI Aviation Board of Directors.

July 29, 2011 66

II - U.S. Department of the Interior

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

2.10 OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY The Office of the Secretary consists of the Departmental Offices which includes the Secretary, Deputy Secretary, Solicitor, Inspector General, Assistant Secretary for Policy, Management and Budget (AS –PMB) and the Assistant Secretary for Insular Affairs. The Deputy Assistant Secretary, Technology, Information and Business Services oversees the NBC which contains the AMD. The NBC-AMD has been a vital and long standing institution at DoI formerly known as the Office of Aircraft Services and established in 1973. The NBC-AMD’s primary goals are “to raise the safety standards, increase the efficiency, and promote the economical operation of aircraft activities in the Department of the Interior." In this capacity, NBC-AMD serves both the Secretary and the eight DoI Bureaus as primary customers. Leveraging its resident wealth of aviation management experience and expertise and in keeping with the DoI management excellence initiatives, NBC-AMD also serves the aviation needs of numerous other Federal agencies. NBC-AMD’s mission is to provide its customers with higher quality (Better), more cost-wise (Cheaper) aviation services at lower cycle times (Faster) that result in increased operational performance and fewer losses (Safer) than any one of them can provide for themselves. The NBC-AMD currently provides the following service offerings: aviation safety services, aviation program management services, aviation user training, and flight scheduling and coordination services.

July 29, 2011 67

II - U.S. Department of the Interior

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

2.11 SUMMARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR OBSERVATION REQUIREMENTS DoI has a significant responsibility to protect and manage the U.S. public lands, lands that comprise one-fifth of the surface area of the U.S. This section has provided a sampling of the variety observations conducted by the Bureaus and the challenges they face in obtaining the data required to perform their missions. Table 1 summarizes the observations. Table 1 Summary of the observations performed by the Bureaus Bureau Observations

BIA

BLM

Archaeological and historic inventory

• •

• • • • • • • • • • •

Dam inspection Geophysical surveys Global change Hydrology Disturbed surface monitoring Law enforcement Mine inspection Resources Road inspection Vegetation, habitat and invasive species inventory

• • • • • • • •

BOEMRE

• • •

• •

BOR

NPS

OSM

FWS

USGS

• • • • • •

• •

• • • • • •

• •

•

• • •

Volcano hazards Wildfire Wildlife inventory, management and health

• •

•

• •

• • • • • • • • • • •

• • •

•

• • • •

• • • • •

• • •

July 29, 2011 68

III - Near-Term UAS Mission Operations

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

3. NEAR-TERM (2010-2015) UAS MISSION OPERATIONS 3.1 VIGNETTES Several vignettes are offered as candidate scenarios wherein UAS mission suitability could explored with an eye toward both a compelling business case along with a preferred and at least comparable risk profile to current mission sets.

3.1.1 Wildfires

Figure 3-1 Wildfire image taken August 6, 2000 as several fires converged in the Bitterroot National Forest near Sula in western Montana (John McColgan BLM Alaska Fire Service) 3.1.1.1 Activity A wildfire can be defined as any uncontrolled fire in combustible vegetation that occurs in the countryside or a wilderness area43. By definition, a wildfire tends to have a plentiful supply of fuel and in many cases, significant difficulty in terms of access due to its remote location or its rugged terrain. In much the same way as a camp fire or fireplace fire will form a draft, wildfires have the ability to form and then flare out of control - exacerbated by 43

Wikipedia

July 29, 2011 69

III - Near-Term UAS Mission Operations

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

strong winds and inrush currents of fresh air pulled into the base of the fire which is drawn in to fill the void created by the hot air and combustion byproduct gasses escaping above the fire. The fireâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s results vary widely but in some cases can encompass vast expanses of land; destroy extensive wildlife and wildlife habitat; cause irreparable damage to wilderness areas; destroy property, and pose a lethal hazard to anyone unlucky enough to be caught in their path. Terrain variability, high winds and complex support logistics are just a few factors that contribute to the high degree of danger associated with wildfire management. A wildfire's burning front may also change direction unexpectedly and jump across fire breaks. Intense heat and smoke can lead to disorientation. For example, during the 1949 Mann Gulch fire in Montana, U.S., thirteen smokejumpers died when they lost their communication links, became disorientated, and were overtaken by the fire. In the Australian February, 2009 Victorian bushfires, at least 173 people died and over 2,029 homes and 3,500 structures were lost when they became engulfed by wildfire.44 3.1.1.2 Measurement and Observation For many years wild fires on public lands were detected from ranger towers linked by telephone or land-lines built to have visibility over the existing canopy. Modern communications and networked systems have enabled new strategies for fire detection and for monitoring large expanses of diverse terrain. Currently, public hotlines, ranger towers, cell phones and ground and aerial patrols can be used as a means of early detection of wild fires. These systems employ varying degrees of automation depending on a combination of risk factors and data exploited. An integrated approach of multiple systems can be used to merge satellite data, aerial imagery, and personnel position via GPS into tactical data and information aimed at providing real-time situational awareness throughout the fire managementâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Incident Command Center, the firefighters on the ground and those onboard aerial platforms. 44

Figure 3-2 Wildfires across the Balkans in late July 2007 (MODIS image) (Wikipedia)

Wikipedia

July 29, 2011 70

III - Near-Term UAS Mission Operations

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

Satellite and aerial monitoring can provide a wider view and provide valuable information for very large fires. These more sophisticated systems employ GPS and aircraft-mounted infrared or high-resolution visible cameras to identify and target wildfires. Satellitemounted sensors such as Envisat's Advanced AlongTrack Scanning Radiometer and European Remote-Sensing Satellite's Along-Track Scanning Radiometer can measure infrared radiation emitted by fires, identifying hot spots greater than 39 °C (102 °F). NOAA’s Hazard Mapping System combines remote-sensing data from satellite sources such as Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite Figure 3-3 Relative Altitudes for Remote Sensing from Small (GOES), MODIS- flown on UAS to Geosynchronous Weather Satellites (USGS Rocky NASA’s EOS AM & PM Mountain Geographic Science Center) Satellites, and Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer (AVHRR), flown on NOAA’s Polar Operational Environmental Satellite (POES) for detection of fire and smoke plume location. However, satellite detection is prone to offset errors, anywhere from 2 to 3 kilometers (1 to 2 mi) for MODIS and AVHRR data and up to 12 kilometers (7.5 mi) for GOES data. Satellites in geostationary orbits may become disabled, and satellites in polar orbits are often limited by their short window of observation time. Cloud cover and image resolution and may also limit the effectiveness of satellite imagery.45 3.1.1.3 UAS Complementarity The Association of Unmanned Vehicle Systems, International (AUVSI) has been a leading advocacy group for UAS for over 30 years. Recently they have identified wildfires and firefighting in remote lands as a prime candidate for civilian applications of UAS. In 45

Wikipedia

July 29, 2011 71

III - Near-Term UAS Mission Operations

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

addition to table top exercises, AUVSI has been instrumental along with DoI / USGS and the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) in conducting wildfire data collection from UAS testing and simulation. During a recent exercise conducted at the U.S. Army’s Dugway Proving Ground in Utah, AUVSI identified the following key objectives and some related strengths46: Objective 1: Determine how the availability of unmanned technologies may impact preparation activities such as operational response planning and organizational coordination. Strengths:  The Interagency Wildland Fire Community is currently proactive in exploring areas for UAS integration into existing response systems, including other wildland fire management agencies.  Business models for the employment of unmanned technologies in support of fire management services, such as mass broadcast text messaging (accomplished by the Israelis), already exist.  Best practices from the military with regards to airspace deconfliction can be potentially applied to operational firefighting. Objective 2: Identify the technical, regulatory, political, and organizational obstacles that may currently inhibit the use of unmanned systems in wildland firefighting applications. Strengths:  Technologies, such as Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System (TCAS), are available to provide effective Sense and Avoid (SAA) capability, which is a critical issue. Derivative SAA applications for addressing UAS integration to the NAS are actively under study.  A substantial number of data sets are accessible, which can be used to build the safety case for the FAA to allow integration into the NAS.  The FAA is currently collecting all information/data regarding UAS operations conducted under Certificates of Authorization. Objective 3: Develop insights and recommendations concerning the prospective operational utility, or shortcoming, of unmanned systems in firefighting applications and the transition to the general civil sector. Strengths:

AUVSI Table Top Exercise Dugway, UT; September 2010

July 29, 2011 72

III - Near-Term UAS Mission Operations       

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

As a result of the live event at DPG, participating systems successfully demonstrated the potential to provide persistent situational awareness. Many platforms are able to serve as a communications relay. The TTX discussion revealed that there is a capability to provide continuous weather coverage. Small unmanned systems are transportable and equipped for rapid deployment. Versatility is achieved through the use of multiple sensors. The participating vehicles (UASs and UGVs) proved to be capable of moving real-time data and information. Program Maturity – ability to capitalize on the lessons learned from the DoD.

Objective 4: Examine the business case for operating unmanned technologies as wildfire management resources and the potential for other public safety applications: Strengths:  UASs could be of assistance to the Burned Area Rehabilitation Team.  Re-vegetation (aerial seeding)  Fuel assessment  The majority of capabilities used to support the Fire Managers can also be applied to law enforcement and other public safety functions  Persistent situational awareness  Communications relay  Continuous weather coverage  Transportable and equipped for rapid deployment  Adaptable to the situation through the use of multiple sensors  Capable of moving real-time data and information  Additional applications include:  Wildlife monitoring and management  Soil erosion/post-fire debris flow management  Road surveys

July 29, 2011 73

III - Near-Term UAS Mission Operations

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

3.1.2 Abandoned Mine Land 3.1.2.1 Activity The quarterly monitoring of every mine portal – public and private, active or dormant, represents a statutory requirement that will continue to demand increasing numbers of raw data measurements coupled with further data processing and higher order information product development. These data are challenging from the outset due to the amount of continued uncertainty in surface canopy. Traditionally, data has been provided through aerial photography. The Landsat data sets can provide significant assistance but many of the problems predate Landsat. For example, DoI / OSM have formed the National Mine Map Registry with the stated mission of “Preserving Mine Maps for Future Generations”. However, these registries also make clear the challenges of locating long-dormant and abandoned mines- both surface and sub-surface.

Landsat 7 ETM+

Landsat 5 TM

Figure 3-4 By 2002, the Hobet-21 Mine (near Charleston, WV), had expanded across a large area on either side of the Mud River. At least one stream, Connelly Branch, was turned into a valley fill. (Landsat)

3.1.2.2 Measurement and Observation Add in an un-quantified non-pointsource acid mine leaching / drainage process and it becomes an increasingly formidable task that will require more automation and technology to leverage any remediation effort. Landsat imagery or the National Mine Map Registry may be useful to isolate / establish land-use data records from archival maps or imagery. It can then be assumed that a routine set of land-use / land-cover and hydrologic system data sets from commercial information providers exploiting space borne sensor data sets (Landsat or others) would reveal when significant changes were taking place in either vegetative indices or effluent. 3.1.2.3 UAS Complementarity Change revealed based on the quarterly sampling requirement should provide ample data for the hydrologic system models to initialize and indicate where major problem areas require additional measurements, including higher resolution multi-spectral and hyper July 29, 2011 74

III - Near-Term UAS Mission Operations

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025 spectral imaging. These cues would initiate the requirement for close-in field aerial surveys by Raven class UAS aimed at identifying both point- and non-point-source pollution drainage from mine portals or surface mine disturbances. Once remotely-sensed data products from the UAS had isolated and localized specific ‘problem sites’, on-site in situ calibration / validation data would be obtained to further refine the remote data sets and begin to lay out the site remediation strategy. The aerial survey would potentially include photogrammetry to aid in the site-access support and site access route planning where no obvious roads existed.

Of course, once a problem site has been identified, the role of the UAS would only expand and the sampling rate increase until the toxicity levels or particular offenders dropped below the Maximum Allowable Daily Levels (MADL) or Total Maximum Daily Levels (TMDL)47. Presumably, once remediation had been effectuated the Figure 3-5 Acid Mine Drainage (Ben Fertigproblem site would be placed on a “Watch IAN Image Library List” for more frequent data collection by ian.umces.edu/imagelibrary/) UAS sensors to provide updates to the corresponding site models. Once a reasonable period of time had elapsed, the site could be returned to “Normal” status and monitored quarterly. The pace at which these would be returned to normal would need to be a question for policy makers based on the recidivism rates for problem portals. In fact, this would likely be a multi-dimensional policy question based on surface-vs.-deep mine; depth of mine; mineral concentration; surrounding geology; seismic activity; proximity of subterranean aquifers; and overall hydrological volumetric flow.

http://www.epa.gov/Region7/water/tmdl_mo_public_notice/elevenpointfinaltmdl.htm

July 29, 2011 75

III - Near-Term UAS Mission Operations

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

3.1.3 Wildlife Survey 3.1.3.1 Activity FWS is a Bureau of the DoI with the primary mission to conserve, protect and enhance all fish, wildlife and plants as well as their habitats. To meet this goal of wildlife management, related measurements must be collected to develop data sets on habitat, reproduction rates, migratory patterns, disease, and mortality rates. There are numerous data collection strategies that currently exist. Key to any data Figure 3-6 White Ibis Pair (USFWS Jim Mathisen @ collection strategy is how best to J.N. ‘Ding’ Darling National Wildlife Sanctuary) collect the data while introducing the minimal bias to the observed system which may skew the data or measured results. Additional questions emerge regarding the coupling between various species and the biodiversity composition over time. Avian nesting, especially of waterfowl is of particular interest. Birds are especially sensitive to any new aerosol contaminants, pollution, or airborne viral strains. Waterfowl are susceptible to these airborne threats plus they have exposure to any pollution that may be present in the surface hydrologic systems. Furthermore, any bio-chemical hazard that can pose a hazard to society’s water supply will likely surface first in the public wetlands and can be observed by its effect on the dependent avian population. 3.1.3.2 Measurement and Observation The FWS employs numerous techniques to measure and collect data related to wildlife under its management. In some cases, data can be telemetered to a remote collection site or relayed to a satellite in Earth orbit before being transmitted to a central collection and processing point. In other cases, ground observations are taken by biologists where the terrain or the nesting site does not preclude access for nest observation or egg count. Often aerial surveys are taken by a crew comprised of a survey pilot combined with an aerial observer. In most cases these can be taken from either a fixed or rotary wing craft. Selection is based on suitability for terrain and overall mission objectives. 3.1.3.3 UAS Complementarity The UAS platforms will serve to provide a close- in aerial survey with multi-spectral, hyperspectral, and infrared imagery with minimal acoustic signatures. In addition, the ability to focus on remotely sensed data collection strategy without having the added risk of July 29, 2011 76

III - Near-Term UAS Mission Operations

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

exposing the scientist to a potentially hazardous data collection mission is a positive aspect of UAS missions from a safety perspective. This strategy was tested and validated in the Monte Vista Wildlife Refuge during the Sand Hill Crane Survey. The Raven UAS proved to be an exceptionally quiet data collection platform while conducting the science mission surveys. The airborne platform introduced fewer disturbances to the measurement field as it did not agitate or flush the cranes while they were on the roost.

Figure 3-7 FWS Flyway Biologist (USFWS Todd Harless in WV)

3.1.3.3.1 SAND HILL CRANES AND Raven SOAR TOGETHER OVER COLORADO The DoI conducted their first Small Unmanned Aerial System (sUAS) mission using the Raven RQ-11A UAS from 19-24 Mar 2011 at the Monte Vista National Wildlife Refuge just outside of Monte Vista, CO. USGS utilized the Raven RQ-11A UAS to support the FWS to determine the feasibility of using sUAS to count Sandhill Cranes. This was the first operation conducted by the DoI in NAS using the COA process. In addition to conducting the operational mission, three Raven operators were given refresher training, six operators were given flight evaluations and three new sUAS products were demonstrated.

July 29, 2011 77

III - Near-Term UAS Mission Operations

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

Figure 3-8 Nesting Sandhill Crane48 The intent of the operation was to determine if the Raven sensor package was capable of picking up the heat signature of the cranes that would allow biologist to obtain an accurate count during their roosting period. Not only was there a concern whether the cranes could be seen, but also how would the birds react to the Raven. One of the cranes major predators are eagles and several of the biologists were concerned that they would see the Raven as an Eagle and flush, fly away, when the Raven approached. Sandhill cranes migrate from Texas to Idaho and Siberia every year, stopping at the Monte Vista Refuge to rest and feed. This is a location where the cranes consolidate and an accurate count can be conducted. Traditionally, Sandhill crane population counts were conducted using fixed-wing aircraft, placing both birds and staff at risk of mid-air collisions. Ground-counts are also conducted where biologists with binoculars attempt to enumerate the birds by counting them.

Photobucket (krowland consolidated)

July 29, 2011 78

III - Near-Term UAS Mission Operations

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

This operation was developed by Leanne Hanson USGS, Jim Dubovsky USFWS Central Flyway Coordinator, and Floyd Truetken FWS Monte Vista Refuge Manager and presented to the USGS UAS Project Office, headed by Mike Hutt of the Rocky Mountain Geographic Science Center, Denver CO. The USGS has received 15 Raven ‘A’ systems from the U.S. Army under a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) and is using them to determine the feasibility of flying UASs across the DoI footprint. Raven training and currency flights up to this point had been conducted within military restricted airspace not requiring a COA, as this operation did. The USGS began working on the COA on 9 Jul 10 and received final approval on 27 Dec 10. The COA specified that the Raven remain below 400’ AGL, within visual line of sight (trained observers were authorized) and flown between morning civil twilight to evening civil twilight. The altitude limitations and lack of clearance for night time flights were major concerns, as the cranes are least likely to flush at night at roost. The vast majority of cranes depart the roost at or shortly after sunrise. This left an approximate 30 minute time frame between civil twilight and sunrise to conduct the mission before too many cranes were in the air at the Raven’s operational altitude. In addition to conducting this operation, all the operators needed an annual flight evaluation and several operators required refresher training. In conjunction with Harry Kieling, the DoI Figure 3-9 Ground track of Sandhill Crane UAS aerial survey AMD acting UAS Manager, the USGS team planned to (USGS, USFWS, Google) conduct both classroom and flight training on Monday and Tuesday prior to the operational flights on Wednesday and Thursday. Due to high winds, no flights were conducted all day Monday and Tuesday afternoon. A 50 question open book written test had been sent out a week prior and was required on Monday morning. The test motivated the operators to hit the books which demonstrated their knowledge of the classroom work. This also allowed the flight training to be conducted more efficiently. The flight evaluation portion was also incorporated into both training and the actual operational flights. The first operational flight launched at 0636 on 23 Mar 11 and flew approx. 800 meters to the roosting site, where two certified observers were stationed. The team was expecting July 29, 2011 79

III - Near-Term UAS Mission Operations

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

the cranes to flush as they approached, but as the Raven flew over there was no reaction and the operator noted that the cranes were clearly visible using the FLIR camera. The team conducted several more passes at varying altitudes, from 75’ to 300’ AGL before returning and landing at the launch site. The flight was a great success. The team was able to identify individual birds without disturbing them. The flight team and scientists, who were located at different locations, met for a detailed debrief and then conducted extensive planning for the next day’s mission. It was decided to use a new modified down looking thermal camera designed by enrGies and fly an area 600 X 400 meters using parallel line transects at 200’ AGL to cover the complete roost site. A Huntsville, Alabama small business, enrGies, accompanied the USGS team to support their operation and to demonstrate several of its products, which enhance the use of unmanned sensors and aircraft in the non-defense world. enrGies’ “OASIS” system allows the user to capture, record, and distribute multiple UAS sensor inputs, other imagery, and assorted data in near real time. The data and imagery is made available for scientists and other interested parties through a secure web portal. OASIS will allow the user to capture and distribute video and data in remote locations, like the middle of a wildlife management area, which normally do not have network connectivity or internet access. During this mission, the Raven video was displayed to the scientists on-site in Monte Vista and digitized in both a low density stream as well as the highest density possible. The low density stream was transmitted to enrGies streaming server for non-co-located access and the high density stream was available for real time and post processing analysis. In addition to this operational support, enrGies demonstrated their “Bio-Tracker” consisting of a modification to the Raven allowing it to locate radio-frequency tagged wildlife. The advantage of using inexpensive UAS’s rather than manned aircraft is significant. The Bio-Tracker consists of a broad beam antenna array, a scanning receiver, and the processing and integration to inject the received data into the Raven’s existing telemetry downlink. The location of the target is identified within 100 meters and any data regarding the tagged subject, e.g., live, dead or other biometric available information is also provided. This additional metadata consists of location, roll, pitch, yaw, signal strength, heading, and aircraft pointing angle as well as other customized platform information. Imagery and metadata are referenced to each other resulting in a smooth path to rectification and imagery tessellation. Raven and subject locations are viewed real time by the use of enrGies “GE Trakker” software plug-in which enables the users existing Google Earth™ application to display the Raven flight path, wildlife location, and any other instrumented vehicle, person or aircraft. This common operating environment or moving map display is available either on-line or off-line, significantly enhancing Google Earth’s utility in network deprived areas. For interested scientists and researchers who are nonco-located, a web link may be accessed via the web server supporting the imagery distribution. These applications and capabilities have significant implications across the scientific spectrum and are a great addition to the biologist and earth science mission toolkit.

July 29, 2011 80

III - Near-Term UAS Mission Operations

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

On Thursday morning, the USGS team met at 0530 for their operational brief, the weather was good; clear skies, 8oF and light winds. The COA Notice to Airman was published and we were ready to fly. The team moved to the launch and recovery site and set up the Raven system in preparation for a 0634 launch. The scientists went to the enrGies location, and the observers to their pre-determined locations. Using FalconView mission planning software the day before, way points establishing an east west transect grid had been set up so that the entire roosting area was covered, with overlapping flight paths at an altitude of 200’ AGL. After a successful launch with the Nadir IR payload, the Raven was flown in its autonomous mode of flight and within 13 minutes flew all eight of its transected runs without disturbing the cranes. After adjusting the waypoints, it flew seven more runs at higher altitudes, 300 ’ and 400’ AGL, The total flight lasted 24 minutes and made 13 passes over the roost. The Nadir camera worked perfectly and the Raven did not disturb the cranes. The video will be processed using mosaicing software allowing biologists to conduct a detailed count of the roosting area. The FWS conducted ground-count surveys before the Raven flights to get an ‘observed’ population count as well as to verify the location of the cranes within their roosting area. These ground-counts will be used as validation to the population count derived from the Raven videography. Dave Sharp, a retired FWS biologist, who has been working with the Sandhill cranes for over 25 years, said “I was skeptical about this process at first, but it has exceeded my wildest expectations”. Another biologist when asked if Raven video could be used to validate their count said that it was the other way around, his count will be used to validate the Raven’s - “the Raven found birds that we did not know were there.” The Refuge Manager, Floyd Truetken, said “I would like Raven and the team to come back to my refuge next year and they can come and train anytime. I would definitely recommend them to other refuge managers and biologists." There was 100% agreement among the scientists that this technology will revolutionize the way wildlife counts and tracking are conducted in the future.

Figure 3-10 Sandhill Crane Data Imagery from Raven (USGS)

This first operational mission for the DoI was an outstanding success across the board and set the standard for future operations. The USGS team conducted a total of 9 flights for a total of 4 hours of flight time without incident. COA development and submission is the July 29, 2011 81

III - Near-Term UAS Mission Operations

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

critical first stage. Currently USGS Rocky Mountain Geographic Science Center, is working on 9 COAâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s for the remainder of the year, with more requests coming daily. The USGS is planning on two or three more basic operator classes this year, of which one will be law enforcement specific. Maintaining currency and proficiency will continue to be a major hurdle, however USGS has begun working with military facilities across the country to develop MOAs to use DoD restricted airspace for that purpose. The enrGies Bio-Tracker opens the door for countless scientific missions. Dr. Richard Sojda, Branch Chief at the USGS Northern Rocky Mountain Science Center and USGS Science Coordinator for the Great Northern Landscape Conservation Cooperative in Bozeman MT, was at the Monte Vista operation, and has already started working on a COA to locate tagged grizzly bears in remote areas.

July 29, 2011 82

III - Near-Term UAS Mission Operations

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

3.1.4 Law Enforcement 3.1.4.1 Activity DoI Federal law enforcement includes activities within the NPS, the BLM and the BIA among others. The NPS identifies their primary mission as being to care for the “special places saved by the American people so that all may experience our heritage.” The NPS host over 11 million visitors annually to over 84 million acres of land, 43,000 miles of Figure 3-11 A CBP Air unit Citation Jet patrols the waters shoreline, and 4.5 million off of a U.S National Park. acres of oceans, lakes, and reservoirs that comprise the NPS. NPS is home to 2,461 national historic landmarks, 582 national natural landmarks, and what many refer to as the crown jewels of the DoI, the 393 national parks. Unfortunately, criminal enterprise has taken note of the extensive real estate holdings of NPS. In fact, NPS has emerged as an attractive host for illicit marijuana production in the U.S. In addition to the opportunity for plentiful, remote, and potentially well irrigated land parcels, the ‘share croppers’ found tending these illegal grows have continued to evolve into increasingly sophisticated, concealed, and well-armed encampments. Many of the 'grows' are maintained by well-armed illegal immigrants, including many Figure 3-12 The P-3 Airborne Early Warning Aircraft equipped with automatic weaponry. is utilized primarily for long-range patrols along the Other illegal activities that may be entire U.S. border, and in source and transit zone encountered on DoI land include countries, throughout Central and South America tunneling across the Mexican (USCBP). border for illicit drug and human July 29, 2011 83

III - Near-Term UAS Mission Operations

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

trafficking. High speed surface and sub-surface vessels are also a problem for similar reasons. Manned aircraft flying below traditional air traffic control (ATC) radar has been a problem for many years. But more recently, ultra-light aircraft with a payload capacity of 250 pounds has become more popular. The ultra-lights have an intrinsically lower Radar Cross Section (RCS), reduced logistics support footprint, are comparatively ‘easy’ to learn to fly, and are well Figure 3-13 DoI-AMD's Mission requires highsuited to support an “entrepreneurial” smuggler performance turbo Float Planes to support missions over a broad expanse of territory near the Arctic Circle model with difficult contraband traceability, (i.e. if interdicted, the contraband can be thrown overboard and may be more difficult to recover, or dissipate as an evidentiary collective. It is also recognized that additional technological innovations are being sought by criminal enterprise. It is also apparent that any profit opportunity will suffice to these operations irrespective of the risk to the public or legal breach. The rangers, officers, and special agents of the DoI are what stands in the gap between what was reserve lands intended for the public use, and what criminal opportunism can organize for illicit profiteering. Moreover, shortly after the War on Terror broke into full view on September 11, 2001, DoI law enforcement officials have been coordinating with another Cabinet level department- the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) is one of DHS’ largest and most complex components, with a priority mission of keeping terrorists and their weapons out of the U.S. It also has a responsibility for securing and facilitating trade and travel while enforcing hundreds of U.S. regulations, including immigration and drug laws.49 3.1.4.2 Measurement and Observation UAS for law enforcement missions can employ a variety of sensor packages. In many cases the priority will be on real-time or near real-time imagery. In others, the need for data collections and geospatially referenced information becomes the pacing requirement. Both passive sensor sets, e.g. multiband optical, FLIR, or short wave infrared (SWIR), or 49

CBP Website

July 29, 2011 84

III - Near-Term UAS Mission Operations

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

hyperspectral payloads, are required. In other instances, the requirement will derive in the direction of an active payload, (e.g. SAR, or LIDAR.) 3.1.4.3 UAS Complementarity UAS employed by DoI constituent Bureaus aimed at supporting the law enforcement mission are challenged with a complex and urgent requirement. The existing set of resources available include manned aircraft, (both fixed and rotary wing), within the DHS’ CBP and the DoI. The DoI also works with DHS on data sharing. Strategic resources are in place and are being further enhanced with an eye toward providing routine mid-to-high altitude data collection. Low-level hi-resolution imagery from tactical UAS assets could greatly enhance the ability of DoI law enforcement officials to collect more accurate real time information to ensure operational readiness and response. Mission complexity will continue to be an issue with evidence collection, video surveillance, imagery correlation / coregistration, and the timely coordination of airspace access will become an essential component to full exploitation of UAS technology in support of DoI law enforcement missions and the prospect to maximize the leverage of tactical UAS by DoI law enforcement for public safety.

Figure 3-14 A pair of Customs and Border Protection UAS aircraft located at the southern border 05/19/2010 (USCBP)

The P-3 and MALE (Predator-class UAS) comprise the principal strategic airborne resources employed by CBP. These resources may be deployed in support of several Federal law enforcement missions including the Secret Service, Coast Guard, CBP agents operating on the ground and DoI agents. The employment of sUAS like the Raven or Wasp has inherently reduced aerodynamic losses during operations and this includes parasitic acoustic losses from propulsion systems and thrust surfaces. This can enable law enforcement missions to be supported with greater stealth to include covert data collection / remote sensing from a stand-off position without putting agents in harm’s way. The dramatic increase in cross-border / near-border violence by highly organized and well-armed forces operating in support of illicit activity has made this requirement more evident. Regional application of UAS, both tactical and strategic, should be leveraged as expeditiously as possible. Clearly, law July 29, 2011 85

III - Near-Term UAS Mission Operations

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

enforcement officials are in the midst of a pitched battle on the U.S. southern border and UAS represent a near-term force-augmentation that is vitally important.

July 29, 2011 86

III - Near-Term UAS Mission Operations

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

3.1.5 Volcanoes 3.1.5.1 Activity Volcanology remains a compelling scientific discipline aimed at further scientific development for deep Earth science, and the influence of magma on the shapes and forms of the land and oceanâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s surface. Volcanic eruptions are also a basic requirement for study of natural hazards and USGS topographic mapping changes which may occur. 3.1.5.2 Measurement and Observation UAS can be used to perform any number of parameters from surface temperature to the ejecta constituent gases, aerosols, and larger structures. UAS based exploitation will naturally avoid the hazard(s) of manned aircraft missions in close proximity to a dangerous, unpredictable, and potentially deadly scientific data collection mission. Gas emission can interfere with internal combustion engine operations. Gritty aerosols can fuse, glaze and subsequently clog turbomachinery within high temperature aircraft propulsion systems. Abrupt and unpredictable release of volcanic magma or ejecta can disrupt close in aircraft operations by turbulence or other visual factors. Ejecta composition, velocity, and trajectory are difficult to predict. High velocity rocks can be launched from the primary or secondary vents. These projectiles can cause serious, potentially disabling damage to aircraft collecting critical pre-eruption information. Pyrocumulonimbus cloud formation and the related convective systems they telegraph Figure 3-15 This Landsat 7 image was acquired using are classic signatures of volcanic bands 3, 2, 1 and the panchromatic band on February activity. Moreover, the convective 13, 2000. (Landsat) system, if established in close proximity to both a high temperature surface vent, and a credible source of fuel (e.g. national forest) may spawn a combustion event that will develop regenerative feedback. 3.1.5.3 UAS Complementarity Landsat Imagery archived at the EDC serves as a reference with which to compare current observations of volcanic formations. Any indications of increased activity or near-surface activity can be pursued with higher resolution imagery from multi-spectral and thermal July 29, 2011 87

III - Near-Term UAS Mission Operations

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

imagers. Close in surveys including assays of active vents can be accomplished without putting human life at risk by performing in situ data collections by flying UAS through volcanic plumes, pyrocumulonimbus formations and ejecta. 3.1.5.3.1 Other Hazardous Land Remote Sensing Missions In addition to volcanic surveys, other hazardous missions exist that are considered too dangerous for low-level manned overflight. Recent events in Japan following the 9.0 offshore earthquake and the subsequent tsunami produced numerous system failures.

Figure 3-16 Too hazardous for a human pilot: The drone used to take the pictures of the Fukushima Nuclear plant. The unmanned aircraft was deployed amid fears for the health of pilots sent over the plant after radiation reached unsafe levels nearby

The reactor complex at Fukushima was badly damaged and several back-up safety systems failed in the tsunami’s aftermath. Radiation leakage stemming from compromised containment structures resulted in a difficult conundrum – extraordinarily dangerous levels of radiation prohibited up-close air operations at the same time that a critical need for information existed to help the decision makers reestablish control of the facility within safe levels of radiation. Another interesting aspect of this story is that the UAS-sourced

July 29, 2011 88

III - Near-Term UAS Mission Operations

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

imagery was provided by a commercial news service, AP Photo: Air Photo Service 50 in lieu of a scientific or engineering services provider operating at the behest of the power company or Japanese government.

Figure 3-17 'Race is lost': Steam rises from the crippled reactors in another picture taken by the drone. Water in the plant is emitting radiation at a dangerous 1,000 millisieverts per hour51

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1371375/Japan-nuclear-suicide-squads-paid-fortunes-battlelost-reactor-2.html 51 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1371375/Japan-nuclear-suicide-squads-paid-fortunes-battlelost-reactor-2.html 50

July 29, 2011 89

III - Near-Term UAS Mission Operations

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

3.2 UAS BUSINESS MODEL The UAS Model is based on a three dimensional framework. The three dimensions; Users, Mission Application, and Technology are employed to establish an optimum mission and business model. The model focuses first on user requirements, (e.g. what data product is required by the agency) followed by the Mission Application (e.g. what is the mission purpose) and finally what is the optimum technological solution to meet the user and mission requirements (e.g. small vs. large UAS, active vs. passive sensor, etc.).

3.2.1 Users The UAS Mission Framework first considers the perspective of the User- in the case of DoI, the eight Bureaus. From what Bureau are the User and the respective requirement(s) emerging? Are there pre-existing data sets? Are there current manned platforms or satellite data sets that are providing the necessary data or will this be to service an emerging or previously unsatisfied requirement? Once these questions are addressed, the next major parameter will deal with Mission Application.

3.2.2 Mission Application The UAS Mission Applications can be as diverse as the respective Bureauâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s observation data requirements and will likely continue to evolve as new data collection capability emerges. While some data is mandated by statute, many data sets represent derived requirements aimed at a need to quantify specific aspects of complex systems and the underlying scientific variables that July 29, 2011 90

III - Near-Term UAS Mission Operations

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

influence and control system dynamics. As an example, the FWS may be performing migratory bird surveys, counting nests, and the number of eggs in a nest, but in actuality be working to establish a link to pesticide leeching into groundwater and its long term impact on the ecology. Another mission data set may be aimed at a more direct measurement, e.g. infrared measurements during a wildfire. This data can be fed in real time to an operations center or directly to a fire crew / fighter on the ground. In this case, the real time imagery / data are provided Figure 3-18 Mission Suitability test data in an operations context to support an developed from a Raven UAS equipped with a operational mission. Where current passive thermal imager(USGS) forward air-traffic-controllers restrict air support over active wildfires to daylight hours for safety reasons, obviously the fire can continue to advance or change direction overnight. The ability to track these â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;hot spotsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; in real time imagery, feed it to the fire management team, and direct resources accordingly at first light is a considerable benefit to the overall wildfire management effort.

3.2.3 Technology Finally, the optimum UAS technology solution is identified. Initial mission sets contemplated for DoI are centered on Low-Altitude, Light-Weight, and Passive sensor packages (i.e. not radar or LIDAR). The platforms currently available and certified airworthy by DoI AMD include the Raven and DragonEye UAS. The sensors include multi-band imagers, thermal infrared and natural color electro-optical.

Figure 3-19 UAS Business Model July 29, 2011 91

III - Near-Term UAS Mission Operations

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

3.3 REGULATORY CHALLENGES The largest breakthrough over the next three to five years will come in the form of a regulatory realignment for sUAS – that is, those under 20 pounds. To illustrate the regulatory disconnect that exists today consider the following: 

According to the FAA’s Model Aircraft Operating Standards (AC 91-57: June 9, 1981) an aircraft operated as a model establishes guidance and “encourages voluntary compliance” with AC 91-57. Coupled with the Academy of Model Aeronautics (AMA) “Model Aircraft Safety Code”, which stipulates that gross takeoff weight shall not exceed 55 pounds and flights will not exceed 400’ AGL, it is reasonable to interpret that the FAA places no hard restrictions on a model airplane being operated by any private citizen.



The FAA will release a fully loaded air transport into airspace with large populations of game birds without issuing an advisory. This made headlines recently when US Air 1549 struck a flock of Canada Geese (average weight of these geese is 20-25 pounds, migration routes of up to 3,000 miles) at 3200’ causing both of the A-320’s engines to lose power forcing the plane to ditch in the Hudson River. In this particular instance due to the experience of the pilot, superior overall skill of the crew, and considerable good fortune for all involved, no one was injured. On September 22, 1995 a military flight departing Elmendorf Air Force Base, AK encountered a different fate. The aircraft, a fully fueled E-3 Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS), was headed out for a seven-hour surveillance training mission. The military tower controller provided the customary runway wind advisory and cleared the flight for takeoff, (call sign Yukla-27). The controller added a traffic advisory for a C-130 three miles north of the base climbing out of two thousand feet. The cockpit acknowledged the tower’s clearance communication: “Yukla two seven heavy; cleared for takeoff; traffic in sight.” Seconds before the flight engineer called “Flight start” there were multiple reports of birds and bird strikes, including with at least one engine. The aircraft crashed soon after takeoff. All 24 members of the multi-national Yukla 27 flight team perished in the catastrophic accident (see Yukla27.org). The U.S. Air Force investigating officer from Headquarters Pacific Air Forces determined the crash resulted from loss of power in both port engines following ingestion of several geese. According to the accident investigator, engine number two lost all power and engine number one experienced severe damage after ingesting the geese shortly after takeoff. The resulting loss of thrust rendered the E-3 uncontrollable. After a slow, left climbing turn, the aircraft pitched downward and crashed. Human error on the part of the crew was not a factor.

July 29, 2011 92

III - Near-Term UAS Mission Operations

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

3.3.1 NTSB § 830.2 Definitions: ‘‘Unmanned aircraft accident’’ The NTSB has recently issued the following guidance for UAS accidents:  Aircraft accident * * * For purposes of this part, the definition of ‘‘aircraft accident’’ includes ‘‘unmanned aircraft accident,’’ as defined herein.  Unmanned aircraft accident means an occurrence associated with the operation of any public or civil unmanned aircraft system that takes place between the time that the system is activated with the purpose of flight and the time that the system is deactivated at the conclusion of its mission, in which: 1. Any person suffers death or serious injury; or 2. The aircraft has a maximum gross takeoff weight of 300 pounds or greater and sustains substantial damage. o Dated: August 17, 2010. o Deborah A.P. Hersman, o Chairman. The FAA mandates a Certification of Waiver or Authorization process for all UAS operated as “Public Use” under provisions of Title X Airworthiness Certification by a public agency – independent of operating environment, aircraft size, or crew training.

July 29, 2011 93

III - Near-Term UAS Mission Operations

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

3.3.2 Complex COA Process Irrespective of UAS Size or Mission Operation

Figure 3-20 The COA Application Process as Modeled by the USGS in Compliance with FAA Requirements for UAS. The resulting requirements inhibit USGS / DoI data collection operations, confuse the NAS interoperability safety issues, and impede the FAAâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s own stated objective of collecting substantial quantities of data from UAS for the purposes of establishing operational benchmarks.

July 29, 2011 94

III - Near-Term UAS Mission Operations

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

3.3.3 Conflicted Airspace Policy Although great care has been taken in the development of these airspace management policies, it is natural that conflicts may emerge. In the case of UAS access to the NAS, a hobbyist in full compliance with FAA policy for model aircraft may pose significantly more risk to ongoing operations in the NAS than a small UAS operated over broad expanses of public land. In this case, the ability to gain access to the NAS is incongruent with the risk posed to other manned operators or the public on the ground.

Figure 3-21 Airspace Management Policy for UAS is Incongruent

3.3.4 Realistic Goal: Near Term Access to the NAS for Small UAS With a concerted effort to establish a bi-lateral MOA between the DoI and the FAA, it is entirely reasonable that these conflicted policies could be reconciled. During the next three to five years DoI / USGS should expect to resolve any airspace access issues for low kinetic energy UAS operations. These operations would generally fall under the heading of routine for small (under 20 pounds) low-speed (under 30 knots indicated airspeed) low-altitude operations (less than 400â&#x20AC;&#x2122; AGL) Public Use UAS Missions. July 29, 2011 95

III - Near-Term UAS Mission Operations

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

Figure 3-22 FAA Advisory Circular (AC) 91-57 - Model Aircraft Operating Standards July 29, 2011 96

III - Near-Term UAS Mission Operations

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

Figure 3-23 Academy of Model Aeronautics - Model Safety Code for models up to 55 pounds

July 29, 2011 97

III - Near-Term UAS Mission Operations

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

3.4 COMMUNICATION CHALLENGES – SPECTRAL MANAGEMENT The electromagnetic spectrum is a crowded neighborhood. Just as important as spatial deconfliction is to ensure safe separation of aircraft, UAS and other systems actively communicating using radio wave communication principles, must maintain appropriate separation from adjacent or interfering signals. This management and coordination activity chartered by the Communications Act of 1934 and later revised in 1996, has become increasingly complex as demand for spectrum has grown exponentially.

3.4.1 National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) Office of Spectrum Management 52 The Office of Spectrum Management is responsible for managing the Federal government's use of the radio frequency spectrum. To achieve this, the Office receives assistance and advice from the Interdepartment Radio Advisory Committee (IRAC). The Office carries out this responsibility by:       

 

establishing and issuing policy regarding allocations and regulations governing the Federal spectrum use; developing plans for the peacetime and wartime use of the spectrum; preparing for, participating in, and implementing the results of international radio conferences; assigning frequencies; maintaining spectrum use databases; reviewing Federal agencies' new telecommunications systems and certifying that spectrum will be available; providing the technical engineering expertise needed to perform specific spectrum resources assessments and automated computer capabilities needed to carry out these investigations; participating in all aspects of the Federal government's communications related emergency readiness activities; and, participating in Federal government telecommunications and automated information systems security activities.

The DoI and its constituent Bureaus coordinate all spectrum management issues through the Office of Secretary of the Interior / Office of Chief Information Officer’s National Spectrum Management Office. It is within this specialized office that all “licensing” for DoI activities is coordinated with the NTIA. Just as the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) manages licensing for non-Government and commercial interests, the NTIA allocates spectrum authorizations to Federal Government agencies including DoI. One of the current challenges with the USGS / DoI UAS program is the command and control (C&C) channel for the Raven UAS. The systems delivered from the U.S. Army 52

www.NTIA.DoC.gov

July 29, 2011 98

III - Near-Term UAS Mission Operations

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

employ the military’s slice of the UHF spectrum (380-400 MHz) for purposes of maintaining control of the vehicle. Therefore, any UAS mission using the Raven UAS loaned from the U.S. Army require an extra step (to coordinate spectrum use, location, timing, etc.) before going to the NTIA for approval. Future UAS C&C systems will likely occupy the 1755 – 1850 MHz portion of the L-Band channel (Civilian and DoD share). Instead of needing to borrow spectrum from the U.S. Army to operate the current C&C equipment, DoI would have a straight path to NTIA to coordinate usage. DoI Raven UAS already has some use of this channel. The existing telemetry (TM) link operates through this L-Band microwave channel. DoI’s central spectrum clearinghouse is the National Spectrum Management Office which also has management responsibility for all other radio frequency (RF) spectrum issues within DoI. It is anticipated that DoI’s AMD would coordinate all UAS operations for the UAS Project Office but the spectrum management aspect will remain through this central spectrum management facility. All operations of the DoI UAS resources would need to coordinate through NTIA to ensure spectral de-confliction

3.4.2 Department Manual 377 DM The NTIA Manual of Regulations and Procedures for Federal Radio Frequency Management Departmental Manual DM-377 is the requisite reference document. The Manual includes a Part A for IT and Part B for Spectrum Management. The 377 DM should serve as an excellent starting point for anyone interested in the essential reference for spectrum policy management and deconfliction.

July 29, 2011 99

III - Near-Term UAS Mission Operations

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

This page intentionally left blank.

July 29, 2011 100

IV - Mid-Term ConOps Upgrade

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

4. MID-TERM (2016-2025) CONOPS UPGRADE With routine access established to low altitude, low gross take-off weight, mission sets over low-population DoI lands mission design will naturally become more complex. It is anticipated that DoI AMD will have a requirement to acquire MQ-1 Predator or shadow class UAS capable of providing dedicated research and operations support for Mid-Altitude Long Endurance (MALE) mission sets. These MALE mission sets will augment the low altitude UAS missions while continuing to expand the operational envelope for routine access to the NAS over remote public lands. In addition to expansion of operations envelopes, operations and reliability data will be fed to the FAA for purposes of supporting the Unmanned Aircraft Program Office (UAPO) work and their continued effort on flight standards.

4.1 VIGNETTES 4.1.1 Wildfire Communication Support Smoke jumpers operating deep into the wilderness on a remote fire can and have found communication cut off due to poor line-of-site radio communication. By employing a midaltitude long endurance relay platform, this problem is solved. The requirement would stipulate that the relay platform be “talking and squawking” with the Figure 4-1 Conceptual Framework for UAS Communications appropriate forward air RelayCredit: (USGS)1 Figure: controller or other automation equipment to enable localized cockpit display of traffic information (CDTI) or similar ground-based equipment if coordinating with other UAS operations in the area.

4.1.2 Natural or Man-Made Disaster Recovery In the wake of natural or man-made disasters there is often an immediate need for basic infrastructure to be re-established in close proximity to the disaster. After the recent earthquake in Haiti, where most basic infrastructure was badly damaged or destroyed near the capital city of Port-Au-Prince, relief workers and support personnel were desperate for July 29, 2011 101

IV - Mid-Term ConOps Upgrade

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

hospital surgical units, post-surgical wards, and emergency first aide service area. Today some of those services can be implemented through specialty tent structures but there is always a problem of logistic integrity. One innovative concept would have a hospital delivered intact, complete with power generation equipment, diagnostic equipment (e.g. x-ray / cat-scan) and fully outfitted surgical suites, to support triage as the sick and injured are brought in for help. Similarly, in the case of a massive man-made disaster (e.g. Deepwater Horizon) specialty support infrastructure could be moved in and put “on station” with relatively little delay.

July 29, 2011 102

IV - Mid-Term ConOps Upgrade

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

4.2 MID-TERM UAS Significant technological advances can be anticipated for the mid-term. Continued upgrades within the FAA’s NAS modernization programs will be especially well suited to the rapid adoption cycle typical with UAS. In addition to technological enhancements, interoperability within the NAS will expand and become generally accepted over this period. UAS automation and communication advances, including intelligent flight control systems, digitized communication protocols, and fully integrated ANSP flight planning will become an essential basis for advanced UAS interoperability in the NextGen NAS. This will be increasingly evident as 4DT navigational procedures couple with more advanced enroute automation systems currently under development to accommodate file-and-fly flight plan submissions, flight plan approval, conformance management, and enroute deviations.

4.2.1 Lighter than Air Giant airships, able to remain at long duration operations, will be able to lift up to 150 tons -- more than seven times the weight that helicopters are able to carry; the airship, which will be able to move aid -- or even portable hospitals and entire buildings -- to remote areas or disaster zones, harnesses aerostatic lift, meaning it is able to fly using lighter-than-air (LTA) gases that keep it buoyant rather than aerodynamic lift.

Figure 4-2 Photo-rendering of SkyLifterdelivered hospitals on Mt. Everest (SkyLifter)

Australian company SkyLifter is developing a giant flying saucer that can transport buildings for long distances anywhere in the world. The airship, dubbed the “SkyLifter,” would be able to lift up to 150 tons — more than seven times the weight that helicopters are able to carry. The Sydney Morning Herald’s53 Glenda Kwek writes that the designers of SkyLifter, English-Australian Jeremy Fitton and Englishman Charles Luffman, hope to power it using bio-diesel fuel and solar panels. “There is a massive need for this,” SkyLifter’s investor relations partner Sam Mokhtari told Kwek in a phone call from London. Potential uses for a successful commercial model of the SkyLifter include moving aid or even portable hospitals to remote areas - such as rural regions or disaster zones - that have limited or no available infrastructure such as roads, Mokhtari said. The airship, which will

http://www.smh.com.au/business/introducing-skylifter-a-new-giant-of-the-sky-20101007-168v8.html

July 29, 2011 103

IV - Mid-Term ConOps Upgrade

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

be made using "strong laminated fabric", harnesses aerostatic lift - meaning it is able to fly using lighter-than-air (LTA) gases that keep it buoyant - rather than aerodynamic lift.

4.3 SENSORS There is a natural evolution from passive sensor technology to active array technology. As the power requirements for RF, microwave, and optical devices become more in-line with passive sensor components, integration of these devices into overall power budgets becomes a relatively straight forward exercise. Device efficiency further simplifies the component integration problem as heat-rejection issues become less significant. Typically, a reduced noise characteristic accompanies the improved power efficiency of the sensor device. Moreover, increased levels of component integration, including high performance integrated circuitry, have enabled denser component packaging as power requirements and power loss characteristics have improved. SAR and LIDAR would become more viable as power requirements were reduced through improved efficiency, reduced size, lower-noise amplifiers, and other post detection data extraction strategies. While the basic physics has not changed, the ability to lower the noise-figure of first stage amplifiers has greatly enhanced the performance of these active devices. In addition to improvements in raw signal processing, advanced modulation techniques coupled with high performance post-detection video channel processing have greatly enhanced the ability to extract marginal or low signal-to-noise artifacts that would have otherwise gone undetected. These techniques will continue to advance and provide greater flexibility to the scientists, engineers, and data users in the future.

July 29, 2011 104

IV - Mid-Term ConOps Upgrade

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

4.4 REGULATORY Assuming that the basic question of access to the NAS is resolved for small low-altitude operations in the next three to five years, the mid-term (next ten to fifteen years) would be for expansion of the envelope. Continued collaborative sourcing of operations data to the FAA would speed the case for an ETOPS / RVSM–esque Airworthiness Type Certification beyond the realm of an experimental aircraft airworthiness certification. The ultimate objective is a regulatory environment for UAS that aligns with the Type Certification process followed by the Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEM’s) and the Operation Specifications for the commercial operators. Instead of having a UAS airframe certified as experimental, sufficient operations data can provide sufficient support for a type certification in the same way two engine operations reliability data provided the underpinning for granting OEM’s and operators these authority for manned transport and freighter aircraft. As an example, prolonged operations data demonstrating engine reliability and operational conformance was necessary to obtain these privileges for ETOPS and RVSM OEM’s and commercial operators of commercial transports. In addition, larger UAS platforms with more endurance and power would similarly be the beneficiary of progressively reduced restrictions on their ability to operate over DoI lands. The key factors would be a diligent safety management system coupled to a strong data collection process that could support the FAA’s UAPO and Flight Standards requirements.

July 29, 2011 105

IV - Mid-Term ConOps Upgrade

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

This page intentionally left blank.

July 29, 2011 106

V - Next Generation Operational Benchmarks

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

5. FAR-TERM (2026- ) NEXT GENERATION UAS OPERATIONAL BENCHMARKS

Figure 5-1 Future Pseudo-Satellite UAS Concepts could stay aloft for years (DARPA)

It is difficult to fully appreciate the conceptual leap from where UAS originated to where they will be operating over the next fifteen years. The transition from experimental lab prototypes to the readily available, reliable and commercially viable production vehicles of today has evolved over several decades. While the introduction and acceptance of these systems to the NAS as cooperative agents is just beginning, the commercial applications for UAS are as limitless as the ingenuity of their technical and entrepreneurial advocates. The following represent a few advanced concept airspace and technological operational benchmarks that could be in place within the next fifteen years for UAS.

5.1 FULLY DECONFLICTED 4DT / RTA INTEROPERABLE NEXTGEN / NAS AIRSPACE Although most of the Class A airspace environment supporting commercial air transportation enjoys deconflicted operations today, there are still occasions when spatial conflicts occur. Traffic, weather and individual platform performance variability continually introduce variance to a highly complex automated management system. As Flight Management Systems (FMS) are upgraded to incorporate 4-Dimensional Trajectory Navigation (4DT)-based operations, Required Time of Arrival (RTA), enhanced ground automation and improved navigation precision, it can be anticipated that the potential for conflicted airspace for manned and UAS operations will continue to abate. As the prospects for spatial conflicts continue to decline the opportunity for cooperative / paired operations can be enhanced.

July 29, 2011 107

V - Next Generation Operational Benchmarks

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

5.2 AUTOMATED FILE AND FLY When the New York Times ran a page 46 article entitled “The News of Radio” the unnamed reporter probably did not appreciate the global impact this news would herald. Oxford English Dictionary cites this article as the first time the invention was mentioned by name in print.54 The invention from Bell Laboratories was called a “Transfer Resistor” or “Transistor”. The column’s last item began, “A device called a transistor, which has several applications in radio where a vacuum tube ordinarily is employed, was demonstrated for the first time yesterday.”55 When Intel co-founder Gordon E. Moore56 authored his seminal paper in 1965 he noted that the number of transistor components in Figure 5-2 Discrete Transistors integrated circuits had doubled every year from (Wikipedia) the invention of the integrated circuit in 1958 until 1965. Moore boldly predicted that the trend would continue "for at least ten years". It is helpful to consider that Moore’s paper was published in the same year that Lufthansa booked the first order for a 737-100 from Boeing. Still years ahead of TI’s four-function calculator (April 1972), computational equipment capable of solving flight dynamics equations in 1965 would have fallen to physically large main frame systems, e.g. the IBM 360 (introduced April 1964). If alphanumeric displays were employed, they were typically based on NIXIE tubes (1955), a special type of vacuum tube as Light Emitting Diodes (LED) would not be commercially viable for a few more years (1968).57 The extraordinary changes brought to everyday life since Moore’s paper by semiconductorbased technology infrastructure would be difficult to overstate. Now a common staple of commercial systems, advanced semiconductor devices have enabled the development and commercial viability of systems including GPS navigation, digital-cellular, internet, broadband communication, and single-chip microcomputers. When Moore wrote his paper, flight progress strips made of paper were still the means by which a flight was tracked through the NAS. Glass cockpits were a concept relegated to science fiction.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2330137/posts http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2330137/posts 56 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore%27s_law 57 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light-emitting_diode 54 55

July 29, 2011 108

V - Next Generation Operational Benchmarks

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

Figure 5-3 Semiconductor Packing Density Illustrates “Moore’s Law” (WGSimon – Wikipedia) Although some ATC operators still prefer the physical aspect of paper flight progress strips, they have been replaced in many cases by an electronic facsimile rendered on a display screen. It is also entirely predictable that with continued advancements in computational capacity, miniaturization, predictive algorithms, adaptive models, and high performance networks the file-and-fly flight-plan systems of the future will be far more automated to ensure maximum accuracy, safety, and user convenience.

July 29, 2011 109

V - Next Generation Operational Benchmarks

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

5.3 ADVANCED CONCEPT COMMUNICATIONS AND COOPERATIVE UAS OPERATIONS A fully deconflicted 4DT / RTA airspace with automated file-and-fly could seem like a lofty technical destination unto itself. However, these represent the advanced concept operational building blocks that will enable cooperative UAS operations. The prospect for servicing DoI remote and in situ data collection requirements with UAS is already intriguing. Safety, cost-per-byte, data-continuity, and mission risk are understood reasons to pursue data collection with UAS, but this can be greatly expanded through distributed coupled-platform or paired-operations. Future platforms will be equipped with substantially increased on-board computational capacity. This capacity can be allocated to any number of complex tasking but largebaseline physical geometries can be coupled with signal digitization to facilitate synthetic apertures by employing comparatively small sensor / UAS platform elements. In addition to airspace access, key aspects of this operational concept will be high-resolution onboard spatial baseline correction and data encoding. Another intriguing operational scenario is automated wildfire operations. Today’s aerial combatants employ large tankers that are restricted to daylight operations that are directed by forward air controllers- a function that may or may not have the best scientific impact on extinguishing the fire. Further inefficiencies are introduced as the aircraft are forced to slow or land to refill with water or retardant. Worse yet, the fire front behavior may routinely shift after sunset during which no airborne combatant operations are permitted. Future strategies will employ a distributed collection and suppression deposition strategy that is guided principally by thermal imagers and LIDAR wind profilers to facilitate maximum heat reduction to the fire front. These collaborative fire-suppression aerobots would execute formation-flight paired-operations based on approved operations within restricted airspace based on existing fire conditions and containment strategies. Cooperative performance algorithms would continually update to optimize squadron efficiency against known mission parameters. Formations would be adjusted as appropriate to minimize any population over-flight footprint. As an example, if a squadron of eight platforms were collecting water from the ocean, they would fly ‘single file’ over any highways before ‘fanning out’ over a fire front.

July 29, 2011 110

VI - FAA Regulatory Environment

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

6. FAA REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT 6.1 REGULATIONS 6.1.1 Orders and Notices 6.1.1.1 FAA Order N JO 7110[1].512 The FAA has issued an Order N JO 7210.766, “Unmanned Aircraft Operations in the National Airspace System.” The purpose of the order is to provide information and interim guidance on air traffic policies and procedures for the planning, coordination and services involving UAS in the NAS. The cancellation date is December 15, 2010, however it is renewed annually, expect a new order effective for 2011 on that date. Some of the USGS UAS operations may come under Special Operations, covered by FAA Order JO 7610.4 – Special Operations, and FAA Order JO 7110.67 – Special Aircraft Operations by Federal, State Law Enforcement, Military Organizations and Special Activities. Access to these documents can be found at: http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/spec_ops/ Interim Operational Approval Guidance 08-01, “Unmanned Aircraft Systems Operations in the U.S. National Airspace System.” This document provides the guidance to UAPO and the Air Traffic Organization when evaluating applications for COA. The document is being revised will be re-issued as a Notice in the spring of 2011.

6.1.2 Expanding regulations and participatory process 6.1.2.1 Relative to rulemaking, the FAA has identified the rule for sUAS as SFAR 107. An Aviation Rulemaking Committee was formed in 2008 by FAA Order 1110.150. The records, reports, agendas, working papers and other documents of this committee are available from the Aircraft Certification Service, 800 Independence Ave. SW, Washington, DC 20591. In the FAA’s Aviation Fiscal Year 2011 Business Plan, there are four identified goals, one of which concerns UAS. (ref:http://www.faa.gov/about/plans_reports/media/AVS%20Final%20FY11%20BP%20 10-11-08.pdf ) Under the Increased Safety Goal, UAS Procedures is identified as a “Strategic Initiative: Develop policies, procedures and approval processes to enable operation of unmanned aircraft systems”. To support the initiative are two Strategic Activities:  Strategic Activity – UAS Approval Procedure. Support the sUAS Special Federal Aviation Regulation (SFAR) 107 rule making and standard development efforts enabling operation of sUAS in the NAS by 2012. Activity Target 1: Finalize list of required standards for sUAS SFAR. Due: December 30, 2010.  Strategic Activity: UAS SMS Assessment. UAPO to develop a Safety Management System approach to qualitatively assess system safety risk and appropriate mitigation strategies. The effort will evolve to a quantitative assessment as more July 29, 2011 111

VI - FAA Regulatory Environment

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

operational safety data is collected from COA proponents, experimental certificate holders and through sUAS operations under impending SFAR 107 Rule. Activity Target 1: Establish requirements for reporting safety related events and capture data in UAPO database for analysis. Due: September 30, 2011. The FAA’s goal is to have the rule published by December, 2012. There will be a period for public comment opened by a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in mid-2011. The USGS is encouraged to have input into the NPRM by taking advantage of the data collected and operational experience from flights conducted under the COA, advancements in their program as followed in this Roadmap, and goals identified where UAS will benefit the public.

6.1.3 Airspace Classes 6.1.3.1 Definitions In the NAS there are two categories of airspace defined as “Controlled”, consisting of Class A, B, C, D, and E; and “Uncontrolled”, consisting of Class G. The categories and types are established based on: 1. 2. 3. 4.

The complexity or density of aircraft movement. Nature of operations conducted within the airspace. Level of safety required. The national and public interest.

July 29, 2011 112

VI - FAA Regulatory Environment

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

While most of the DoI operations are expected to be below the NAS 1,000 feet AGL, and given the vast amount of territory for which the DoI has responsibility, familiarization of operators with airspace definition is an important safety aspect of the DoI program. The Airspace Class Definitions are defined in the next section.

Figure 6-1 Airspace classes (FAA) 6.1.3.2 Airspace Classes Defined From Chapter 3, Section 2 of the Aeronautical Information Manual: 6.1.3.2.1 Class A Airspace a. Definition. Generally, that airspace from 18,000 feet Mean Sea Level (MSL) up to and including Flight Level (FL) 600, including the airspace overlying the waters within 12â&#x20AC;&#x2030;nautical miles of the coast of the 48 contiguous States and Alaska; and designated international airspace beyond 12 nautical miles of the coast of the 48 contiguous States and Alaska within areas of domestic radio navigational signal or ATC radar coverage, and within which domestic procedures are applied. b. Operating Rules and Pilot/Equipment Requirements. Unless otherwise authorized, all persons must operate their aircraft under Instrument Flight Rules (IFR). (See 14CFR Section 71.33 and 14 CFR Section 91.167 through 14 CFR Section 91.193.) c. Charts. Class A airspace is not specifically charted.

July 29, 2011 113

VI - FAA Regulatory Environment

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

6.1.3.2.2 Class B Airspace a. Definition. Generally, that airspace from the surface to 10,000 feet MSL surrounding the nation's busiest airports in terms of IFR operations or passenger enplanements. The configuration of each Class B airspace area is individually tailored and consists of a surface area and two or more layers (some Class B airspace areas resemble upside-down wedding cakes), and is designed to contain all published instrument procedures once an aircraft enters the airspace. An ATC clearance is required for all aircraft to operate in the area, and all aircraft that are so cleared receive separation services within the airspace. The cloud clearance requirement for VFR operations is "clear of clouds." b. Operating Rules and Pilot/Equipment Requirements for Visual Flight Rules (VFR) Operations. Regardless of weather conditions, an ATC clearance is required prior to operating within Class B airspace. Pilots should not request a clearance to operate within Classâ&#x20AC;&#x2030;B airspace unless the requirements of 14 CFR Section 91.215 and 14 CFR Section 91.131 are met. Included among these requirements are: 1. Unless otherwise authorized by ATC, aircraft must be equipped with an operable two-way radio capable of communicating with ATC on appropriate frequencies for that Class B airspace. 2. No person may take off or land a civil aircraft at the following primary airports within Class B airspace unless the pilot-in-command holds at least a private pilot certificate: (a) Andrews Air Force Base, MD (b) Atlanta Hartsfield Airport, GA (c) Boston Logan Airport, MA (d) Chicago O'Hare Intl. Airport, IL (e) Dallas/Fort Worth Intl. Airport, TX (f) Los Angeles Intl. Airport, CA (g) Miami Intl. Airport, FL (h) Newark Intl. Airport, NJ (i) New York Kennedy Airport, NY (j) New York La Guardia Airport, NY (k) Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport, DC (l) San Francisco Intl. Airport, CA 3. No person may take off or land a civil aircraft at an airport within Class B airspace or operate a civil aircraft within Class B airspace unless: (a) The pilot-in-command holds at least a private pilot certificate; or (b) The aircraft is operated by a student pilot or recreational pilot who seeks private pilot certification and has met the requirements of 14 CFR Section 61.95. July 29, 2011 114

VI - FAA Regulatory Environment

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

4. Unless otherwise authorized by ATC, each person operating a large turbine engine-powered airplane to or from a primary airport shall operate at or above the designated floors while within the lateral limits of Class B airspace. 5. Unless otherwise authorized by ATC, each aircraft must be equipped as follows: (a) For IFR operations, an operable VHF omnidirectional range (VOR) or tactical air navigation system (TACAN) receiver; and (b) For all operations, a two-way radio capable of communications with ATC on appropriate frequencies for that area; and (c) Unless otherwise authorized by ATC, operable radar beacon transponder with automatic altitude reporting equipment. Note: ATC may, upon notification, immediately authorize a deviation from the altitude reporting equipment requirement; however, a request for a deviation from the 4096 transponder equipment requirement must be submitted to the controlling ATC facility at least one hour before the proposed operation. Reference: AIM, Transponder Operation, Paragraph 4-1-19. 6. Mode C Veil. The airspace within 30 nautical miles of an airport listed in Appendix D, Section 1 of 14 CFR Part 91 (generally primary airports within Class B airspace areas), from the surface upward to 10,000 feet MSL. Unless otherwise authorized by ATC, aircraft operating within this airspace must be equipped with automatic pressure altitude reporting equipment having Mode C capability. However, an aircraft that was not originally certificated with an engine-driven electrical system or which has not subsequently been certified with a system installed may conduct operations within a Mode C veil provided the aircraft remains outside Class A, B or C airspace; and below the altitude of the ceiling of a Class B or Class C airspace area designated for an airport or 10,000 feet MSL, whichever is lower. c. Charts. Class B airspace is charted on Sectional Charts, IFR En Route Low Altitude, and Terminal Area Charts. d. Flight Procedures. 1. Flights. Aircraft within Class B airspace are required to operate in accordance with current IFR procedures. A clearance for a visual approach to a primary airport is not authorization for turbine- powered airplanes to operate below the designated floors of the Class B airspace. 2. VFR Flights. (a) Arriving aircraft must obtain an ATC clearance prior to entering Class B airspace and must contact ATC on the appropriate frequency, and in relation July 29, 2011 115

VI - FAA Regulatory Environment

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

to geographical fixes shown on local charts. Although a pilot may be operating beneath the floor of the Class B airspace on initial contact, communications with ATC should be established in relation to the points indicated for spacing and sequencing purposes. (b) Departing aircraft require a clearance to depart Class B airspace and should advise the clearance delivery position of their intended altitude and route of flight. ATC will normally advise VFR aircraft when leaving the geographical limits of the Class B airspace. Radar service is not automatically terminated with this advisory unless specifically stated by the controller. (c) Aircraft not landing or departing the primary airport may obtain an ATC clearance to transit the Class B airspace when traffic conditions permit and provided the requirements of 14 CFR Section 91.131 are met. Such VFR aircraft are encouraged, to the extent possible, to operate at altitudes above or below the Class B airspace or transit through established VFR corridors. Pilots operating in VFR corridors are urged to use frequency 122.750 MHz for the exchange of aircraft position information. e. ATC Clearances and Separation. An ATC clearance is required to enter and operate within Class B airspace. VFR pilots are provided sequencing and separation from other aircraft while operating within Class B airspace. Reference: AIM, Terminal Radar Services for VFR Aircraft, Paragraph 4-1-17. Notes: (1) Separation and sequencing of VFR aircraft will be suspended in the event of a radar outage as this service is dependent on radar. The pilot will be advised that the service is not available and issued wind, runway information and the time or place to contact the tower. (2) Separation of VFR aircraft will be suspended during CENRAP operations. Traffic advisories and sequencing to the primary airport will be provided on a workload permitting basis. The pilot will be advised when center radar ARTS presentation (CENRAP) is in use. 1. VFR aircraft are separated from all VFR/IFR aircraft which weigh 19,000 pounds or less by a minimum of: (a) Target resolution, or (b) 500 feet vertical separation, or (c) Visual separation. 2. VFR aircraft are separated from all VFR/IFR aircraft which weigh more than 19,000 and turbojets by no less than: (a) 1 1/2 miles lateral separation, or (b) 500 feet vertical separation, or (c) Visual separation. 3. This program is not to be interpreted as relieving pilots of their responsibilities to see and avoid other traffic operating in basic VFR weather conditions, to adjust their operations and flight path as necessary to preclude serious wake encounters, to maintain appropriate terrain and obstruction clearance or to July 29, 2011 116

VI - FAA Regulatory Environment

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

remain in weather conditions equal to or better than the minimums required by 14 CFR Section 91.155. Approach control should be advised and a revised clearance or instruction obtained when compliance with an assigned route, heading and/or altitude is likely to compromise pilot responsibility with respect to terrain and obstruction clearance, vortex exposure, and weather minimums. 4. ATC may assign altitudes to VFR aircraft that do not conform to 14 CFR Section 91.159. "RESUME APPROPRIATE VFR ALTITUDES" will be broadcast when the altitude assignment is no longer needed for separation or when leaving Class B airspace. Pilots must return to an altitude that conforms to 14 CFR Section 91.159. f. Proximity operations. VFR aircraft operating in proximity to Class B airspace are cautioned against operating too closely to the boundaries, especially where the floor of the Class B airspace is 3,000 feet or less above the surface or where VFR cruise altitudes are at or near the floor of higher levels. Observance of this precaution will reduce the potential for encountering an aircraft operating at the altitudes of Class B floors. Additionally, VFR aircraft are encouraged to utilize the VFR Planning Chart as a tool for planning flight in proximity to Class B airspace. Charted VFR Flyway Planning Charts are published on the back of the existing VFR Terminal Area Charts. 6.1.3.2.3 Class C Airspace a. Definition. Generally, that airspace from the surface to 4,000 feet above the airport elevation (charted in MSL) surrounding those airports that have an operational control tower, are serviced by a radar approach control, and that have a certain number of IFR operations or passenger enplanements. Although the configuration of each Class C airspace area is individually tailored, the airspace usually consists of a 5 nautical mile (NM) radius core surface area that extends from the surface up to 4,000 feet above the airport elevation, and a 10 NM radius shelf area that extends no lower than 1,200â&#x20AC;&#x2030;feet up to 4,000 feet above the airport elevation. b. Charts. Class C airspace is charted on Sectional Charts, IFR En Route Low Altitude, and Terminal Area Charts where appropriate. c. Operating Rules and Pilot/Equipment Requirements: 1. Pilot Certification. No specific certification required. 2. Equipment. (a) Two way radio; and (b) Unless otherwise authorized by ATC, operable radar beacon transponder with automatic altitude reporting equipment. 3. Arrival or Through Flight Entry Requirements. Two way radio communication must be established with the ATC facility providing ATC services prior to entry July 29, 2011 117

VI - FAA Regulatory Environment

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

and thereafter maintain those communications while in Class C airspace. Pilots of arriving aircraft should contact the Class C airspace ATC facility on the publicized frequency and give their position, altitude, radar beacon code, destination, and request Class C service. Radio contact should be initiated far enough from the Class C airspace boundary to preclude entering Class C airspace before two‐way radio communications are established. Notes: 1. If the controller responds to a radio call with, “(aircraft call sign) standby,” radio communications have been established and the pilot can enter the Class C airspace. 2. If workload or traffic conditions prevent immediate provision of Class C services, the controller will inform the pilot to remain outside the Class C airspace until conditions permit the services to be provided. 3. It is important to understand that if the controller responds to the initial radio call without using the aircraft identification, radio communications have not been established and the pilot may not enter the Class C airspace. 4. Though not requiring regulatory action, Class C airspace areas have a procedural Outer Area. Normally this area is 20 NM from the primary Class C airspace airport. Its vertical limit extends from the lower limits of radio/radar coverage up to the ceiling of the approach control's delegated airspace, excluding the Class C airspace itself, and other airspace as appropriate. (This outer area is not charted.) 5. Pilots approaching an airport with Class C service should be aware that if they descend below the base altitude of the 5 to 10 mile shelf during an instrument or visual approach, they may encounter non-transponder, VFR aircraft. Example: 1. [Aircraft call sign] “remain outside the Class Charlie airspace and standby.” 2. “Aircraft calling Dulles approach control, standby.” 4. Departures from: (a) A primary or satellite airport with an operating control tower. Two‐way radio communications must be established and maintained with the control tower, and thereafter as instructed by ATC while operating in Class C airspace. (b) A satellite airport without an operating control tower. Two‐way radio communications must be established as soon as practicable after departing with the ATC facility having jurisdiction over the Class C airspace. 5. Aircraft Speed. Unless otherwise authorized or required by ATC, no person may operate an aircraft at or below 2,500 feet above the surface within 4 NM of the primary airport of a Class C airspace area at an indicated airspeed of more than 200 knots (230 mph).

July 29, 2011 118

VI - FAA Regulatory Environment

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

d. Air Traffic Services. When two‐way radio communications and radar contact are established, all participating VFR aircraft are: 1. Sequenced to the primary airport. 2. Provided Class C services within the Class C airspace and the outer area. 3. Provided basic radar services beyond the outer area on a workload permitting basis. This can be terminated by the controller if workload dictates. e. Aircraft Separation. Separation is provided within the Class C airspace and the outer area after two‐way radio communications and radar contact are established. VFR aircraft are separated from IFR aircraft within the Class C airspace by any of the following: 1. Visual separation. 2. 500 feet vertical; except when operating beneath a heavy jet. 3. Target resolution. Notes: 1. Separation and sequencing of VFR aircraft will be suspended in the event of a radar outage as this service is dependent on radar. The pilot will be advised that the service is not available and issued wind, runway information and the time or place to contact the tower. 2. Separation of VFR aircraft will be suspended during CENRAP operations. Traffic advisories and sequencing to the primary airport will be provided on a workload permitting basis. The pilot will be advised when CENRAP is in use. 3. Pilot participation is voluntary within the outer area and can be discontinued, within the outer area, at the pilot's request. Class C services will be provided in the outer area unless the pilot requests termination of the service. 4. Some facilities provide Class C services only during published hours. At other times, terminal IFR radar service will be provided. It is important to note that the communications and transponder requirements are dependent of the class of airspace established outside of the published hours. f. Secondary Airports 1. In some locations Class C airspace may overlie the Class D surface area of a secondary airport. In order to allow that control tower to provide service to aircraft, portions of the overlapping Class C airspace may be procedurally excluded when the secondary airport tower is in operation. Aircraft operating in these procedurally excluded areas will only be provided airport traffic control services when in communication with the secondary airport tower. 2. Aircraft proceeding inbound to a satellite airport will be terminated at a sufficient distance to allow time to change to the appropriate tower or advisory frequency. Class C services to these aircraft will be discontinued when the aircraft is instructed to contact the tower or change to advisory frequency. July 29, 2011 119

VI - FAA Regulatory Environment

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

3. Aircraft departing secondary controlled airports will not receive Class C services until they have been radar identified and twoâ&#x20AC;?way communications have been established with the Class C airspace facility. 4. This program is not to be interpreted as relieving pilots of their responsibilities to see and avoid other traffic operating in basic VFR weather conditions, to adjust their operations and flight path as necessary to preclude serious wake encounters, to maintain appropriate terrain and obstruction clearance or to remain in weather conditions equal to or better than the minimums required by 14 CFR Section 91.155. Approach control should be advised and a revised clearance or instruction obtained when compliance with an assigned route, heading and/or altitude is likely to compromise pilot responsibility with respect to terrain and obstruction clearance, vortex exposure, and weather minimums. g. Class C Airspace Areas by State These States currently have designated Class C airspace areas that are depicted on sectional charts. Pilots should consult current sectional charts and Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) s for the latest information on services available. Pilots should be aware that some Class C airspace underlies or is adjacent to Class B airspace. (See Table 2.)

July 29, 2011 120

VI - FAA Regulatory Environment

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

Table 2 Class C Airspace Areas by State. State/City Airport ALABAMA Birmingham Birmingham-Shuttlesworth International Huntsville International-Carl T Jones Fld Mobile Regional ALASKA Anchorage Ted Stevens International ARIZONA Davis-Monthan AFB Tucson International ARKANSAS Fayetteville (Springdale) Northwest Arkansas Regional Little Rock Adams Field CALIFORNIA Beale AFB Burbank Bob Hope Fresno Yosemite International Monterey Peninsula Oakland Metropolitan Oakland International Ontario International Riverside March AFB Sacramento International San Jose Norman Y. Mineta International Santa Ana John Wayne/Orange County Santa Barbara Municipal COLORADO Colorado Springs Municipal CONNECTICUT Windsor Locks Bradley International FLORIDA Daytona Beach International Fort Lauderdale Hollywood International Fort Myers SW Florida Regional Jacksonville International Orlando Sanford International Palm Beach International Pensacola NAS Pensacola Regional Sarasota Bradenton International Tallahassee Regional Whiting NAS GEORGIA Columbus Metropolitan Savannah Hilton Head International

July 29, 2011 121

VI - FAA Regulatory Environment

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

Table 2 Class C Airspace Areas by State. (cont'd) State/City HAWAII Kahului IDAHO Boise ILLINOIS Champaign Chicago Moline Peoria Springfield INDIANA Evansville Fort Wayne Indianapolis South Bend IOWA Cedar Rapids Des Moines KANSAS Wichita KENTUCKY Lexington Louisville LOUISIANA Baton Rouge Lafayette Shreveport Shreveport MAINE Bangor Portland MICHIGAN Flint Grand Rapids Lansing MISSISSIPPI Columbus Jackson MISSOURI Springfield MONTANA Billings

Airport Kahului Air Terminal Urbana U of Illinois-Willard Midway International Quad City International Greater Peoria Regional Abraham Lincoln Capital Regional International International Regional The Eastern Iowa International Mid-Continent Blue Grass International-Standiford Field Metropolitan, Ryan Field Regional Barksdale AFB Regional International International Jetport Bishop International Gerald R. Ford International Capital City AFB Jackson-Evers International Springfield-Branson National Logan International

July 29, 2011 122

VI - FAA Regulatory Environment

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

Table 2 Class C Airspace Areas by State. (cont'd) State/City NEBRASKA Lincoln Omaha Offutt NEVADA Reno NEW HAMPSHIRE Manchester NEW JERSEY Atlantic City NEW MEXICO Albuquerque NEW YORK Albany Buffalo Islip Rochester Syracuse NORTH CAROLINA Asheville Fayetteville Greensboro Pope Raleigh OHIO Akron Columbus Dayton Toledo OKLAHOMA Oklahoma City Tinker Tulsa OREGON Portland PENNSYLVANIA Allentown PUERTO RICO San Juan RHODE ISLAND Providence

Airport Lincoln Eppley Airfield AFB Reno/Tahoe International Manchester International International Sunport International Niagara International Long Island MacArthur Greater Rochester International Hancock International Regional Regional/Grannis Field Piedmont Triad International AFB Raleigh-Durham International Akron-Canton Regional Port Columbus International James M. Cox International Express Will Rogers World AFB International International Lehigh Valley International Luis Munoz Marin International Theodore Francis Green State

July 29, 2011 123

VI - FAA Regulatory Environment

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

Table 2 Class C Airspace Areas by State. (cont'd) State/City SOUTH CAROLINA Charleston Columbia Greer Myrtle Beach Shaw TENNESSEE Chattanooga Knoxville Nashville TEXAS Abilene Amarillo Austin Corpus Christi Dyess El Paso Harlingen Laughlin Lubbock Midland San Antonio VERMONT Burlington VIRGIN ISLANDS St. Thomas VIRGINIA Richmond Norfolk Roanoke WASHINGTON Point Roberts Spokane Spokane Whidbey Island WEST VIRGINIA Charleston WISCONSIN Green Bay Madison Milwaukee

Airport AFB/International Metropolitan Greenville-Spartanburg International Myrtle Beach International AFB Lovell Field McGhee Tyson International Regional Rick Husband International Austin-Bergstrom International International AFB International Valley International AFB Preston Smith International International International International Charlotte Amalie Cyril E. King International International Regional/Woodrum Field Vancouver International Fairchild AFB International NAS, Ault Field Yeager Austin Straubel International Dane County Regional-Traux Field General Mitchell International

July 29, 2011 124

VI - FAA Regulatory Environment

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

6.1.3.2.4 Class D Airspace a. Definition. Generally, that airspace from the surface to 2,500 feet above the airport elevation (charted in MSL) surrounding those airports that have an operational control tower. The configuration of each Class D airspace area is individually tailored and when instrument procedures are published, the airspace will normally be designed to contain the procedures. b. Operating Rules and Pilot/Equipment Requirements: 1. Pilot Certification. No specific certification required. 2. Equipment. Unless otherwise authorized by ATC, an operable two-way radio is required. 3. Arrival or Through Flight Entry Requirements. Two-way radio communication must be established with the ATC facility providing ATC services prior to entry and thereafter maintain those communications while in the Class D airspace. Pilots of arriving aircraft should contact the control tower on the publicized frequency and give their position, altitude, destination, and any request(s). Radio contact should be initiated far enough from the Class D airspace boundary to preclude entering the Class D airspace before two-way radio communications are established. Note: 1. If the controller responds to a radio call with, “[aircraft call sign] standby,” radio communications have been established and the pilot can enter the Class D airspace. 2. If workload or traffic conditions prevent immediate entry into Class D airspace, the controller will inform the pilot to remain outside the Class D airspace until conditions permit entry. Example: 1. “[Aircraft call sign] remain outside the Class Delta airspace and standby.” It is important to understand that if the controller responds to the initial radio call without using the aircraft call sign, radio communications have not been established and the pilot may not enter the Class D airspace. 2. “Aircraft calling Manassas tower standby.” At those airports where the control tower does not operate 24 hours a day, the operating hours of the tower will be listed on the appropriate charts and in the Airport/Facility Directory (A/FD). During the hours the tower is not in operation, the Class E surface area rules or a combination of Class E rules to 700 feet above ground level and Class G rules to the surface will become applicable. Check the A/FD for specifics. 4. Departures from: (a) A primary or satellite airport with an operating control tower. Two-way radio communications must be established and maintained with the control

July 29, 2011 125

VI - FAA Regulatory Environment

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

tower, and thereafter as instructed by ATC while operating in the Class D airspace. (b) A satellite airport without an operating control tower. Two-way radio communications must be established as soon as practicable after departing with the ATC facility having jurisdiction over the Class D airspace. 5. Aircraft Speed. Unless otherwise authorized or required by ATC, no person may operate an aircraft at or below 2,500 feet above the surface within 4 NM of the primary airport of a Class D airspace area at an indicated airspeed of more than 200 knots (230 mph). c. Class D airspace areas are depicted on Sectional and Terminal charts with blue segmented lines, and on IFR En Route Lows with a boxed [D]. d. Arrival extensions for instrument approach procedures may be Class D or Class E airspace. As a general rule, if all extensions are 2 miles or less, they remain part of the Class D surface area. However, if any one extension is greater than 2 miles, then all extensions become Class E. e. Separation for VFR Aircraft. No separation services are provided to VFR aircraft.

July 29, 2011 126

VI - FAA Regulatory Environment

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

6.1.3.2.5 Class E Airspace a. Definition. Generally, if the airspace is not Class A, Class B, Class C, or Class D, and it is controlled airspace, it is Class E airspace. b. Operating Rules and Pilot/Equipment Requirements: 1. Pilot Certification. No specific certification required. 2. Equipment. No specific equipment required by the airspace. 3. Arrival or Through Flight Entry Requirements. No specific requirements. c. Charts. Class E airspace below 14,500 feet MSL is charted on Sectional, Terminal, and IFR Enroute Low Altitude charts. d. Vertical limits. Except for 18,000 feet MSL, Class E airspace has no defined vertical limit but rather it extends upward from either the surface or a designated altitude to the overlying or adjacent controlled airspace. e. Types of Class E Airspace: 1. Surface area designated for an airport. When designated as a surface area for an airport, the airspace will be configured to contain all instrument procedures. 2. Extension to a surface area. There are Class E airspace areas that serve as extensions to Class B, Class C, and Class D surface areas designated for an airport. Such airspace provides controlled airspace to contain standard instrument approach procedures without imposing a communications requirement on pilots operating under VFR. 3. Airspace used for transition. There are Class E airspace areas beginning at either 700 or 1,200 feet AGL used to transition to/from the terminal or en route environment. 4. En Route Domestic Areas. There are Class E airspace areas that extend upward from a specified altitude and are en route domestic airspace areas that provide controlled airspace in those areas where there is a requirement to provide IFR en route ATC services but the Federal airway system is inadequate. 5. Federal Airways. The Federal airways are Class E airspace areas and, unless otherwise specified, extend upward from 1,200 feet to, but not including, 18,000 feet MSL. The colored airways are green, red, amber, and blue. The VOR airways are classified as Domestic, Alaskan, and Hawaiian. 6. Offshore Airspace Areas. There are Class E airspace areas that extend upward from a specified altitude to, but not including, 18,000 feet MSL and are designated as offshore airspace areas. These areas provide controlled airspace beyond 12 miles from the coast of the U.S. in those areas where there is a requirement to provide IFR en route ATC services and within which the U.S. is applying domestic procedures. 7. Unless designated at a lower altitude, Class E airspace begins at 14,500 feet MSL to, but not including, 18,000 feet MSL overlying: the 48 contiguous States including the waters within 12 miles from the coast of the 48 contiguous States; July 29, 2011 127

VI - FAA Regulatory Environment

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

the District of Columbia; Alaska, including the waters within 12 miles from the coast of Alaska, and that airspace above FL 600; excluding the Alaska peninsula west of long. 160Â°00'00''W, and the airspace below 1,500 feet above the surface of the Earth unless specifically so designated. f. Separation for VFR Aircraft. No separation services are provided to VFR aircraft.

July 29, 2011 128

VI - FAA Regulatory Environment

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

6.2 USGS OBJECTIVES By integrating UAS into its operational portfolio, USGS has stated operational objectives to pursue through this Roadmap. All center on easing current restrictions to enable increased efficiency and utilization. Attainability of some will be dependent on FAA rulemaking; some will require USGS to develop a ‘work around’. Prior to its rulemaking, the FAA allows an open period for comment under NRPM and USGS is strongly encouraged to participate in that process. Key regulatory relief objectives: 1. Relief from observer requirements. In the visual environment that USGS is initially pursuing, the heads-up pilot is its own observer. This works well in the Raven concept. 2. Requirement to fly night missions. The FAA allows night missions when flown in accordance with the COA. When USGS conducts night flying in the near term, the advantage of Raven aircraft below 400 feet AGL provide a heads-up pilot observer better visibility from the aircraft position lights than unaided recognition under daytime VFR conditions. A further advantage is the lack of general aviation traffic below 400 feet AGL at night in Class G Airspace. 3. Relief from COA with delegation to the DoI’s AMD for UAS flying over Federal lands. The FAA is also building its own Roadmap for the new era of unmanned flight. It is also to be a living document stretched out over the next several decades. Over time, and with more definitive airworthiness certifications for UAS, it is entirely plausible to envision a goal whereby the COA process yields to a more conventional “file and fly” environment. Because of these two factors, it is felt the risk of midair collision is actually less for night flights under these conditions. 4. Agreement on categories of UAS. The DoD has classified their unmanned vehicles by weight into five groups. The FAA will take a different, but similar approach, defining categories by weight and size. 5. DoI is currently pursuing “military equivalency”. The initial training, both academic and flight training, mirrors the military sUAS checkout. AMD has also designed focused training on operating a sUAS in the NAS. 6. Achieving a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) similar to the DOD/FAA MOU that will allow Federal agencies to fly sUAS over Federal lands. Using the existing DOD/FAA MOA on sUAS operations in Class G airspace over military lands, an agreement will be sought for DoI operations under similar operational constraints over Federal land.

July 29, 2011 129

VI - FAA Regulatory Environment

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

6.3 SOME CHALLENGES 6.3.1 Sense and Avoid The requirement of manned aircraft to see (i.e. sight is a sense) and avoid (SAA) is found in 14 Part 91.113b: Â§ 91.113 Right-of-way rules: Except water operations.

(a) Inapplicability. This section does not apply to the operation of an aircraft on water. (b) General. When weather conditions permit, regardless of whether an operation is conducted under IFR or VFR, vigilance shall be maintained by each person operating an aircraft so as to see and avoid other aircraft. When a rule of this section gives another aircraft the right-of-way, the pilot shall give way to that aircraft and may not pass over, under, or ahead of it unless well clear. (c) In distress. An aircraft in distress has the right-of-way over all other air traffic. (d) Converging. When aircraft of the same category are converging at approximately the same altitude (except head-on, or nearly so), the aircraft to the other's right has the right-of-way. If the aircraft are of different categories (1) A balloon has the right-of-way over any other category of aircraft; (2) A glider has the right-of-way over an airship, powered parachute, weight-shift-control aircraft, airplane, or rotorcraft. (3) An airship has the right-of-way over a powered parachute, weightshift-control aircraft, airplane, or rotorcraft. However, an aircraft towing or refueling other aircraft has the right-of-way over all other engine-driven aircraft. (e) Approaching head-on. When aircraft are approaching each other head-on, or nearly so, each pilot of each aircraft shall alter course to the right. (f) Overtaking. Each aircraft that is being overtaken has the right-of-way and each pilot of an overtaking aircraft shall alter course to the right to pass well clear. (g) Landing. Aircraft, while on final approach to land or while landing, have the right-of-way over other aircraft in flight or operating on the surface, except that they shall not take advantage of this rule to force an aircraft off the runway surface which has already landed and is attempting to make way for an aircraft on final approach. When two or more aircraft are approaching an airport for the purpose of landing, the aircraft at the lower altitude has the

July 29, 2011 130

VI - FAA Regulatory Environment

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

right-of-way, but it shall not take advantage of this rule to cut in front of another which is on final approach to land or to overtake that aircraft. The USGS Roadmap, as a living document, must continually address the maturation of innovative technologies that safely meet the SAA requirement. SAA can be defined as the onboard, self-contained ability to detect potential traffic conflict, evaluate flight trajectory, determine right of way and execute an avoidance maneuver. The purpose of SAA is to avoid mid-air collisions with other aircraft, weather avoidance, and impact with other airborne objects, i.e. birds, parachutes, and flight into the ground. This objective is the focus of technology development by government, industry and academia. Compliance with 14 CFR Part 91.113b is two-fold. Two aircraft must be able to see and avoid each other: a manned aircraft must be able to see and avoid an unmanned aircraft, as well as the UAS to sense and avoid any obstacle, airborne or on the ground. “See and be seen” is the concept behind aircraft broadcasting its presence through lighting and other methods, such as the new Automatic Dependent Surveillance - Broadcast (ADS-B) technologies progressing in the FAA Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) upgrades. Integration of unmanned and manned aircraft in the same airspace is an important element in the usefulness and efficiency of UAS, enabling maximized expansion of UAS mission utility. To enable access to the NAS, collision avoidance through SAA is a mandatory requirement. “Sense and Avoid” is not an official FAA term; however it refers either to using onboard aircraft sensors, or off board air and ground sensors to detect the location of other aircraft or obstacles relative to the UAS. Through Special Committee 203 of Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics (RTCA), Inc., the FAA has requested the development of Minimum Aviation System Performance Standards (MASPS) for UAS SAA. These standards, developed with industry, government and academia, must meet an “equivalent level of safety” to satisfy FAA requirements for entry into the NAS. Aircraft currently occupying the airspace may be said to be “cooperating” that is, using Air Traffic Surveillance services with a transponder, or a position broadcast capability such as ADS-B. “Non-cooperating” aircraft not utilizing Air Traffic Services are non-transponder aircraft, aircraft without electrical systems, parachutes, balloons and gliders. The NAS comprises the airspace of different classes (See Section 7.1.4) The operating environment for UAS, particularly in the USGS mission, is expected to be in uncontrolled airspace where pilots use visual flight rules to see and avoid other aircraft or obstacles. UAS operations can expect to encounter a variety of airborne and ground obstacles to avoid. Current SAA technologies and future development of SAA must include the ability to sense and avoid cooperating and non-cooperating aircraft, as well as obstacles on the ground, i.e., terrain, towers etc. For UAS to be fully integrated into the NAS, SAA systems must perform the same essential conflict and collision avoidance functions as a human pilot.

July 29, 2011 131

VI - FAA Regulatory Environment

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

The challenges designers of SAA avionics face are difficult because of the wide range of UAS sizes, speeds, and maneuverability. Sensor designs differ in the ability to measure distance and/or angle to an obstacle, as well as closing rate and time to collision. The issues are threefold: 1. Sense—Sensors on the UAS continuously collect data about the airspace. 2. Detect—Onboard computer determines if there are convergent trajectory data, i.e. is an imminent collision detected? 3. Avoid—Onboard computer calculates alternative trajectory to avoid the collision and coordinates execution. There is no single, easy solution. Air Traffic Management of UAS requires ADS-B, 4DT/ Required Navigation Performance (RNP), multilateration, integrated communication, radar/LIDAR, SAA and ground control stations as players in the integration of UAS into controlled and uncontrolled airspace. UAS collision avoidance capabilities must be interoperable and compatible with existing collision avoidance and separation assurance capabilities, including TCAS, a necessary step so that a collision avoidance capability for unmanned aircraft can be certified by the FAA. The FAA’s NextGen modernization program offers possible resolutions to the SAA issues. NextGen is the transformation of the radar-based air traffic control system of today to a satellite-based system of the future. ADS-B uses GPS satellite signals to more accurately identify an aircraft’s location throughout the flight. ADS-B uses GPS signals along with aircraft avionics to transmit the aircraft’s location to ground receivers and other ADS-B equipped aircraft. The ground receivers then transmit that information to controller screens and cockpit displays on aircraft equipped with ADS-B avionics. ADS-B equipment is an advanced surveillance technology that combines an aircraft’s positioning source, aircraft avionics, and a ground infrastructure to create an accurate surveillance interface between aircraft and ATC. Rulemaking for ADS-B avionics was finalized and the rule published in May, 2010. The rule is effective January 1, 2020 and will require ADS-B avionics for manned aircraft to receive surveillance services.

July 29, 2011 132

VI - FAA Regulatory Environment

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

6.4 SAFETY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM AMD is developing a Safety Management System (SMS) to provide a safety case with an FAA MOU. The FAA, as a regulatory agency whose goal is the promotion of aviation safety, is moving towards mandating SMS for Part 121 Air Carriers. It is advantageous to USGS to take the initiative, in the development an SMS of its own, to demonstrate a commitment in concert with the FAA. It is recommended that the SMS being designed by USGS reflects the system detailed by the FAA in AC-120-92. (Appendix E) New in the evolution of safety programs is that SMS is not a “reactive” program, but a “proactive” safety culture. There is always a constant balance of resources in any organization between production, (the output of work generated by the organization’s mission) and protection (the minimizing of lost productivity and assets due to risk). In the history of aviation, regulations and policies evolved as the result of accidents and incidents resulting in loss of life and/or aircraft. The industry for decades has sought to drive down accident rates, and has been successful to the point of “flattening” a number of data measurements. The goal of zero accidents, however, has remained elusive. Aviation, like all human endeavors, is prone to human error. In the past, reactive safety programs have focused on whom or what caused the accident/incident, often resulting in blame. This can result in a culture where safety priorities are suppressed by the members of an organization. Contributing to this culture is an atmosphere where production is over emphasized relative to protection, and can cause the organization to live in fear of reprisal. Accident investigation can often reveal where the “links in the chain” came together as the accident scenario developed, and provide a germane picture of the human factors and system design that would have resulted in many other people making the same error or series of errors. Advancement of human factors research and systems design moved the concept of safety being as much of a management process as any production process in the organization’s mission. A SMS is the integration of safety into the conscious decision making of the organization. As a business process, it must have the full support of the organization, most importantly that of the executive leadership. There are four “pillars” of a SMS that provide a foundation upon which to build an environment of rational analysis of hazard and risk, and their mitigation, thereby advancing a ‘culture’ that is without fear, is pro-active and predictive, and safety focused in its endeavors. These pillars are Safety Policy, Safety Risk Management Hazard Identification and Reporting, Safety Assurance, and Safety Promotion.

July 29, 2011 133

VI - FAA Regulatory Environment

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

6.4.1 Safety Policy An SMS will expect that the executive leadership of an organization will define the safety policy and convey the expectations and objectives to its employees. The leadership should convey a proactive approach as a key element in the organization’s integrity, ethical behavior and social responsibility. The policy should demonstrate the leadership’s commitment in the following areas:        

Development and implementation of an SMS Management of risk Continual safety improvement Assurance of regulatory compliance Non-punitive reporting of safety issues Documentation and measurement of safety objectives Communication of the safety policy and review for relevancy Identification of individual safety responsibilities

6.4.2 Safety Risk Management Hazard Identification and Reporting Process Risk can be defined as the likelihood of a hazardous event and the severity of the consequences. Risk management can be called the tradeoff between the rate of occurrence of an event and the severity of its consequence. Safety risk management has two aspects; the first is proactive in the review of procedures and operations in order to identify and forecast inherent risk. The second is reactive to the information and data obtained through a program of continuous monitoring, auditing and investigation. Every human endeavor contains risk, and risk is an inherent element in the conduct of flight. Accidents have a context in which they happen as well as a specific combination of causes. Each contributing factor may have its own set of pre-existing causal factors, and each of these may have their own set of pre-existing factors. Crucial to preventing accidents is the identification and mitigation of as many causal factors as possible, i.e. “breaking the link in the accident chain”. Existing in every organization are latent causal factors that are ‘symptomized’ by human error. These conditions can be viewed as non-factors either because they have been unnoticed or viewed as harmless, or there have been no consequences yet attributed to them. Just as human senses become attenuated over time; system safety sense over time has the tendency to deteriorate, making safety measurement and assessment necessary in maintaining a high level of safety awareness. The expectation in an SMS is that operational hazards can be identified, described and documented in detail to determine risk and acceptability. While not every situation and risk can be identified, with due diligence, significant and reasonably foreseeable hazards can be controlled and mitigated.

July 29, 2011 134

VI - FAA Regulatory Environment

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

In its Advisory Circular, the FAA provides a Risk Analysis Matrix that is useful in many applications.

Figure 6-2 FAA risk analysis matrix (FAA) In the FAA Safety Management requirements, the operator can build the system to meet its own requirements. Thus, the definitions of likelihood and severity are left to the operator to define. In an aviation operation, the organization would not want to endeavor a high-risk venture. The risk would be mitigated down to at least medium, preferably green before flight with proper analysis and approval authority.

6.4.3 Safety Assurance To build a continuing base of improvement, the safety assurance function applies methods of measuring, monitoring and evaluating risk controls for performance and effectiveness in maintaining risk within the defined acceptable levels. Once risk controls are implemented,

July 29, 2011 135

VI - FAA Regulatory Environment

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

the organization must ensure that these controls conform to the requirements and are effective in meeting regulatory requirements as well as operational requirements. Through internal and external auditing and evaluation, the organization can determine if the risk controls are being used as designed and that performance is as designed. Data and information from these sources, as well as from reporting systems, accident/incident investigations and continuous monitoring programs when formalized in the SMS standard, is used for solid decision making in every undertaking of the organization.

6.4.4 Safety Promotion An organization’s culture consists of the elements of psychological (how people think and feel), behavioral (how people act and perform), and structural (the programs, procedures and organization of the enterprise). Processes identified in the SMS set the structural element, however, the organization must also set communication channels in place that allow two way communications with management. An organizational safety program cannot be mandated or succeed through an imposed implementation of policy. An organization’s culture is comprised of the values, mission, goals and sense of responsibility held by the leadership and members that provide a sense of purpose to efforts including safety. USGS is encouraged in the development of a SMS to closely study its safety culture and goals. Alignment with the FAA’s direction toward SMS programs should facilitate dialogue that is open to innovation and cooperation.

July 29, 2011 136

VI - FAA Regulatory Environment

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

6.5 AIRCRAFT 6.5.1 Aircraft categories The FAA does not categorize UAS as does the DoD. As rulemaking progresses, it is possible the FAA could decide upon classifications. In general, sUAS are considered to be less than 55 pounds. As a public aircraft, USGS may adopt a categorization of its choosing. Adopting the DoD system is practical, with the risk that it may not parallel an FAA system.

6.5.2 Airworthiness Certification FAA Advisory Circular AC 21-12b provides guidance on completion of FAA Form 8130-6 for the application of an airworthiness certificate. Over the next decade, as part of its UAS Roadmap, the FAA will develop Airworthiness Design Standards contained in the Code of Federal Regulations. Equipment standards in the form of Technical Standard Orders will be developed for avionics and communications equipment. Type Certificates and Supplemental Type Certificates for unmanned platforms and ground support infrastructure must be developed by the UAPO. The philosophy is that UAS has capabilities and characteristics far above the Advisory Circular that covers model aircraft and therefore will meet the higher standards of manned operations.

6.5.3 Continued Airworthiness It should be expected that the rulemaking in 2012 will contain airworthiness directives similar to manned aircraft today. This will include Instructions for Continued Airworthiness documents and conformance with Parts Manufacturing Approvals. This is another area where an active USGS participation will enhance its position as a leading public UAS operator.

July 29, 2011 137

VI - FAA Regulatory Environment

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

6.6 HUMAN INTERFACE 6.6.1 Training As a public agency, the DoI can self-certify its personnel in the training of UAS crew. These training curriculum and programs, for example the current Army program at Dugway Proving Ground, utilized by many USGS personnel to date, would need to be reviewed by the FAA and “accepted” as meeting regulations. As the USGS matures, it must address who will receive training, what type aircraft training, and it will standardize training, qualification, and continuing training.

6.6.2 Certification Current FAA thinking is that a successful completion of the Private Pilot written exam or equivalent is necessary for flights below four hundred feet AGL. Above four hundred feet AGL, the FAA will require a Private Pilot license. Active participation in the NPRM process is advised for USGS should the AMD differ on this opinion, as the FAA seems intent on this requirement at this point.

6.7 OVERSIGHT The AMD has very good procedures in place for the oversight of manned operations in terms of continuing training and evaluation of crews, maintenance inspections and inspector qualifications. UAS adds another dimension that should be addressed at the forefront. Additional manpower and staffing will be required to monitor a large fleet of sUAS that are deployed throughout the country. Procedures for evaluations and inspections will need to be developed for the various mission scenarios and requirements. Further refinement of the OPM into a Procedures Manual may become desirable.

July 29, 2011 138

VII - Policy Issues and Next Steps

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

7. POLICY ISSUES AND NEXT STEPS USGS and the DoI have extraordinary data collection needs. These data collection requirements cover an area the expanse of which covers over 20% of the U.S., coast lines, and off-shore regions where oil and gas wells operate. The quest to manage this statutory requirement effectively and within continuing budget constraints has brought focus to the question of UAS viability for some data collection applications. But as the FAA clearly states on their web site, data is the key to acceptance of routine UAS operations in the NAS. Whether over New York City, or Yellowstone National Park, the FAA has responsibility for civilian airspace in the U.S. The conundrum is where can a body of unbiased data be collected and pose the minimum threat to a risk-averse public? Although DoI services an extraordinary data collection requirement, it is also in a unique position to support the FAA in collection of low-risk UAS flight operations data. It is the FAA’s stated intent to support utilization of the airspace along with commercial aviation interests. Collective action should be taken to establish a closer working relationship between DoI and the FAA. This collaboration would contribute to resolution of the simple policy issues and provide opportunities for serious deliberation relative to the more complex policy requirements. While not exhaustive the following issues should be addressed in the near term:

7.1.1 Inter-Agency Policy Deconfliction DoI and the FAA should enter into a bi-lateral agreement to cooperate on sUAS operations over Federal land controlled / managed by DoI. The agreement should include provisions to provide UAS operational performance data to FAA. The data provided should be organized to assist FAA in the build-out and population of the requisite safety and flight standards information requirements with the ultimate intent of obtaining a type certification for UAS.

7.1.2 FAA Policy Deconfliction The FAA should undertake an open review, comment, and revision of UAS policy to ensure congruent alignment of UAS policy. sUAS policy (limited to 20 pounds gross takeoff weight, 30 knots airspeed, 400 feet AGL) review should be expedited.

7.1.3 Spectral Deconfliction While most of the concern for UAS interoperability has focused on airspace deconfliction, in reality a comparable, and perhaps greater concern should be focused on spectral deconfliction. The DoI and its constituent Bureaus coordinate all spectrum management issues through the Office of Secretary of the Interior / Office of Chief Information Officer’s National Spectrum Management Office. It is within this specialized office that all “licensing” for DoI activities is coordinated with the NTIA. Just as the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) manages licensing July 29, 2011 139

VII - Policy Issues and Next Steps

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

for the for-profit commercial interests, the NTIA allocates spectrum authorizations to the public-use agencies including DoI. UAS mission safety is inherently linked to communications integrity. From this perspective, the FAA needs to play a central role as arbiter of safety for civilian airspace. This is not mission creep as much as it is mission alignment with technological advancement. If the FAA is to control civilian airspace than it must have a grasp for the spectrum used to control the aircraft that may be operated robotically or under autonomous command through a radio link. All operations of DoI UAS resources must coordinate through the NTIA to ensure spectral deconfliction. However, the FAA needs to be ‘hard-wired’ into this process for DoI and anyone else operating UAS in civilian airspace. There may be additional special focus areas but these three constitute the primary collective for substantive policy discussion in and around UAS missions for DoI. The next step should be to codify the bilateral agreement between the FAA and DoI as soon as possible. Special emphasis should be placed on flight operations data requirements so DoI can provide strategic support to FAA as they begin the process of establishing clear guidance to achieve non-experimental airworthiness type certifications for OEM’s and operations specifications for UAS service providers.

July 29, 2011 140

Appendix A – Unmanned Aircraft Systems

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

8. APPENDICES A. Unmanned Aircraft Systems The objective of the observations for the DoI is to meet its mission of protecting the U.S. public lands and the natural resources and heritage found on those lands. Today, DoI makes most of its observations on the ground, usually on foot aided by ground vehicles, and by satellite-based sensors. On occasion, piloted aircraft have filled the observation gaps between ground and satellite systems. Aircraft complement these systems since sensors aboard aircraft provide better resolution than satellites and more efficient coverage than on the ground. However, many observations go unfilled because of the cost of flying and, more importantly, the risk to human life. Much of the data to close these gaps must be obtained by flying over remote and often dangerous areas, such as the polar regions, the oceans, large uninhabited areas, volcanic islands, and other harsh areas of the Earth. Observations in these areas are better suited to unmanned platforms due to long, dull flight durations and hazardous conditions.

Summary of DoI Observations From 2004 to 2006, a series of three workshops sponsored by NASA, NOAA and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) explored the role of UASs in measuring and modeling global climate change.58,59,60 Later in 2006, NASA issued a report that presented the findings of a capability assessment of UAS for civil use in Earth observations.61 The report identified potential future civil missions that would benefit from UAS under the broad categories of homeland security, Earth science, commercial, and land management. Some of these missions, those directly related to the observations that DoI Bureaus conduct, are provided in Table A.1 in terms of two requirements of the observation: the altitude at which the observation is required and its duration. Detailed descriptions of these missions may be found in the NASA report. The observations of Table A.1, shown graphically in Figure A.1 are recorded into one of four quadrants which map flight duration to operational altitude. For duration, the graph can be divided into those observations requiring several (approximately eight) hours or National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, “Home,” Utilization of Unmanned Aerospace Vehicles for Global Climate Change Research, Workshop 1, August 3-4, 2004. [Online]. Available: http://uas.noaa.gov/workshops/workshop1/index.html [Accessed: June 1, 2009]. 59 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, “Home,” Utilization of Unmanned Aerospace Vehicles for Global Climate Change Research, Workshop 2, December 7-8, 2004. [Online]. Available: http://uas.noaa.gov/workshops/workshop2/ [Accessed: June 1, 2009]. 60 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, “Home,” Third NASA/NOAA/DOE Workshop on the Utilization of UASs for Global Climate Change and Weather Research, Workshop 3, February 28 – March 1, 2006. [Online]. Available: http://uas.noaa.gov/workshops/workshop3/ [Accessed: June 1, 2009]. 61 Civil UAV Assessment Team, Earth Observations and the Role of UAVs: A Capabilities Assessment, Version 1.1, August 2006. [Online]. Available: http://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/research/civuav/civ_uav_doc-nref.html [Accessed: January 30, 2009]. 58

July 29, 2011 141

Appendix A – Unmanned Aircraft Systems

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

less and those requiring a day or more. For altitude, the observations tend to group into those altitudes below 20,000 feet AGL and those above 20,000 feet AGL.

Table A.1 Earth science mission requirements.62 Observation Observation Duration Altitude (days) (k ft.) AGL

Mission Active Fire, Emissions, and Plume Assessment

1.0 - 3.0

Aerosol, Cloud, and Precipitation Distribution

0.8 - 1.3

2 - 60

Cloud Properties

7.0

3 - 82

Coastal Ocean Observations

1.0

> 40

Glacier and Ice Sheet Dynamics

1.0

12 - 20

High-Resolution Sampling Coastal Water Quality

0.5 - 3.0

3 - 30

Identify and Track Maritime Species

2.0 - 3.0

10 - 30

Imaging Spectroscopy – Surface Composition

0.5 - 1.0

Precision Agriculture

0.3 - 0.5

0.5 - 5

Radiation - Vertical Profiles of Shortwave Atmospheric Heating Rates

0.3

0.1 - 60

Range Management

0.3

0.3 - 5

Repeat Pass Interferometry for Surface Deformation

0.5

River Discharge

0.3

16.5 - 33

Shallow Water Benthic Ecosystem

0.3

1 - 20

Soil Moisture and Freeze/Thaw States

1.0

0.3 - 33

Topographic Mapping and Topographic Change with LIDAR

0.4

2.0 - 4.0

40 - 60

0.3

0.3 - 5

Vegetation Structure, Composition, and Canopy Chemistry

0.5 - 1.0

Water Vapor and Total Water Measurements

3.0 - 5.0

30 - 70

Wildfire/Disaster – Predict, Measure, Monitor and Manage Events

0.2 - 2.0

1 - 16

Wildlife Habitat Change

0.3 - 0.5

0.1 - 10

Wildlife Population Count

0.3 - 0.7

0.1 - 10

Wildlife Management Telemetry

1.0 - 7.0

0.2 - 14

0.3

5 - 20

Tropospheric Pollution and Air Quality Urban Management

Water Reservoir

Ibid.

July 29, 2011 142

Appendix A â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Unmanned Aircraft Systems

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

Figure A.1 Earth observation requirements (NASA) The lower altitude observations require high resolutions over small areas, such as wildlife surveys. As a general rule, if a larger surface area is to be observed, then a corresponding increase in altitude is required. The shorter duration observations are those that are often repeated throughout the year with a specific target, such as photographing a feature to ascertain surface deformation. The longer observations involve those that have larger surface areas to cover, such as vegetation structure, or require more time to accomplish, such as support for firefighting. In terms of the quadrants in Figure A.1, the short-duration-low-altitude observations involve high resolution, periodic observations for comparison with prior observations to determine change, for example change in wildlife habitat of population or change in landscape. The short-duration-high-altitude quadrant is comprised of periodic observations, but over large areas such as for understanding the change to vegetation structure over time. The long-duration-low-altitude quadrant observations require high resolution but the observations may be several days in length. Examples of this mission set include tracking the movement of wildfires, for example. Atmospheric quality measurements are in the long-duration-high-altitude quadrant. July 29, 2011 143

Appendix A – Unmanned Aircraft Systems

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

Unmanned Aircraft Systems UASs provide the potential to address scientific questions through observations that may be challenging to piloted aircraft. In the most recent UAS Worldwide Roundup, Wilson noted that the “proliferation of UASs continues to accelerate, with a growing number of companies, countries, and innovative designs entering the market.”63 The UAS environment is constantly changing. As a result, even the recently published databases are soon out of date. In their annual yearbook for 2009/10, AUVSI lists over 400 platforms from 35 countries in the category of Civil/Commercial, Research and Dual Purpose UAS.64 This represents an increase of 100 aircraft reported in these categories in the AUVSI yearbook for 2008/09. To meet the DoI need of reliable observations to protect public lands, UAS should be flight proven and have flown in an environment relevant to those observations. Except in cases where the gain from the observation far outweighs the risk of maturing prototype aircraft or using aircraft not heretofore used in Earth observations, the aircraft must be a reliable platform capable of meeting the performance requirements to meet observational objectives. Cost and schedule constraints significantly impact the decisions to expend resources on aircraft. If the aircraft requires maturation, the cost and schedule risks are exacerbated. Therefore, the risk—that risk associated with flying in the operational environments necessary to answer the scientific questions as well as the risk of integrating the sensor suites onto these platforms—requires thorough analysis. Other risks that impact the choice of the aircraft include the margins for the flight envelop (e.g., altitude, endurance, range, etc.) as well as the margins for the payload in terms of mass, volume and power. The ability of the aircraft to be deployed in varying weather conditions should also be considered. The level of the risks should be reflected in the project’s margins and reserves in terms of cost and schedule. DoI observation needs must be understood before UASs can be identified to meet those needs. Section A.1, Table A.1 and Figure A.1 provide an indication of the vehicle performance characteristics required to perform DoI observations. The next step is to find suitable platforms. The search to identify aircraft that meet required performance characteristics began with a review of Wilson’s UAS Worldwide Roundup and the database provided in the AUVSI yearbook. Both the Roundup and AUVSI yearbook provide a wide range of unmanned air system categories based on range, altitude and endurance as well as airframe configurations and types of propulsion. The search was limited to U.S. vendors. This information was supplemented by researching each of the vendors websites. Those in which little or no supplemental technical information could be found were eliminated due to time limitations. (Further research and contact with the companies could provide the information on performance characteristics.) Also, as noted earlier, the world is rapidly changing, thus several vehicles fell off the list because their existence could not be verified through further research. Of these, several on the list had status of “development continuing” and likely suffered from a lack of funding. The remaining vehicles appear to be 63 64

Wilson, J. R., “UAV Worldwide Roundup,” Aerospace America, April 2009. UVS International, “Unmanned Aircraft Systems,” 2009/10 Annual Yearbook, June 2009.

July 29, 2011 144

Appendix A – Unmanned Aircraft Systems

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

at a level of maturity to support DoI. The performance capabilities of these aircraft are presented in Table A.2. To provide the reader with access to more information, links to the vendor’s websites are provided in the table. Figure A.2 provides a graphical representation of the performance capability of the UASs in terms of endurance versus ceiling.

Figure A.2 Endurance versus ceiling for UAS from U.S. commercial vendors (NASA) Among those for which both endurance and ceiling data was obtained, the UASs generally fall into three groupings. In terms of endurance, their times aloft are very-short (2 hours or less), short (3 hours to 10 hours), long (10 hours to 80 hours), and extremely-long (greater than 80 hours). Their ceilings fall into groups of: low-altitude (less than 10,000 feet), medium-altitude (10,000 to 40,000 feet), and high-altitude (greater than 40,000 feet). Very-short durations (2 hours or less) and low-altitude (less than 10,000 feet). Nine aircraft fall into this category, including the AeroVironment Wasp, Puma and Raven; the Draganflyer X6 and X8 and the Tango; Honeywell’s T-Hawk Micro Air Vehicle (MAV); Insitu’s Inceptor; and, L3-BAI Aerosystems’ Cutlass. Of these aircraft, the fixed-wing Wasp, Puma, Raven, and Cutlass and the shrouded rotary wing (SRW) T-Hawk were built for intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) military applications for tactical observations. The Draganflyers, small multi-bladed vertical take-off and landing (VTOL)

July 29, 2011 145

Appendix A – Unmanned Aircraft Systems

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

aircraft, and the Inceptor, a helicopter, are intended for use by law enforcement and first responders and are capable of 20-minute flights and equipped with cameras. Short-duration (3 to 10 hours) at medium-low altitude (10,000 to 15,000 feet). AAI Corporation’s Shadow 200 and Shadow 400 are fixed-wing aircraft for performing ISR - the 200 for the U.S. Army and the U.S. Marines and the 400 for the U.S. Navy. Dragonfly Pictures Inc. developed the DP-4X and DP-5X Wasp helicopters for aerial imaging and airborne sensor applications. The Vector P, a fixed-wing aircraft developed by Maryland Aerospace, Inc., can perform law enforcement and first responder functions. The fixed-wing Arrow from Neany UAS Systems was built for the U.S. Navy and can be configured as a manned aircraft. Trek Aerospace’s Dragonfly, a twin shrouded-prop VTOL aircraft, was designed as an unmanned utility cargo vehicle. Long-duration (10 to 80 hours) at medium-altitude (10,000 to 40,000 feet). All the vehicles in this category are fixed-wing aircraft. Several were developed for electro-optical, infrared and laser targeting capability for the U.S. Navy, including: AAI Corporation’s Aerosonde; Arcturus’ T-20; Dragonfly Pictures’ DP-7 Bat and DP-10X Boomerang; Insitu’s Integrator (for the Navy). Others with electro-optical and infrared capability include: Arcturus’ T-16XL and Institu’s ScanEagle and NightEagle. Others were developed for ISR capability, including: General Atomics’ I-GNAT, Predator MQ-1 and Skywarrior and Kuchera Defense’s PeriStar. The Shadow 600 from AAI Corporation performs situational awareness and intelligence collection functions. Long-duration (10 to 80 hours) at high-altitude (greater than 40,000 feet). The General Atomics’ Predator B performs ISR and weapons delivery for the U.S. Air Force. The synthetic aperture radar, electro-optical and infrared sensors on Northrop Grumman’s Global Hawks provide target surveillance for the U.S. Air Force. NASA’s Global Hawks support high-altitude, long-endurance Earth science missions and have recently been used to monitor the development of Atlantic hurricanes.

July 29, 2011 146

Appendix A – Unmanned Aircraft Systems

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

Table A.2 U.S. commercial vendors unmanned air systems. Aircraft

Vehicle Type

Max. Speed (kts)

Endurance (hrs.)

Range (nmi)

Ceiling (ft.)

GTOW (lb.)

Payload (lb.)

15000

AAI Corp (http://www.aaicorp.com/products/uas/air_vehicles.html) Aerosonde Mark 4.7

Shadow 200

110

15000

460

Shadow 400

110

108

11000

465

Shadow 600

108

16000

585

Advanced Hybrid Aircraft (http://www.ahausa.com) Hornet

LtA

684

9000

7500

2500

Wasp

LtA

100

500

0.03

AeroVironment (http://www.avinc.com/uas) Wasp

0.75

2.7

1000

0.95

Puma

8.1

500

Raven

1.5

5.4

500

4.2

Airscooter (http://www.airscooter.net) Airscooter E70

0.2

Airscooter G70

0.75

Arcturus (http://www.arcturus-uav.com) T-15

T-16XL

15000

T-20

15000

150

Aurora Flight Sciences (http://www.aurora.aero) GoidenEye-50

VTOL

100

5000

GoidenEye-80

VTOL

120

10000

180

Excalibur

VTOL

460

40000

2600

400

15000

1.25

Continental Controls & Design (http://www.continentalctrls.com/) LOCUST MAV

2.7

Dara Aviation (http://www.daraaviation.com) D-1 Heavy Payload

28.7

D-1 Long Mission

810

D-1 Short Mission

1.5

108

July 29, 2011 147

Appendix A – Unmanned Aircraft Systems

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

Table A.2 U.S. commercial vendors unmanned air systems. (cont'd) Aircraft

Vehicle Type

Max. Speed (kts)

Endurance (hrs)

Range (nmi)

Ceiling (ft)

GTOW (lb)

Payload (lb)

0.6

Draganfly (http://www.draganfly.com) Draganflyer X4

Draganflyer X6

0.33

8000

3.3

1.1

Draganflyer X8

0.33

8000

2.2

Tango

0.83

2100

2.5

Dragonfly Pictures (http://67.15.211.8/~dragonf5/index.php) DP-4X

300

11000

210

DP-7 Bat

207

110

30000

600

100

VTOL

295

3859

35000

1900

300

DP-11 Bayonet

112

479

20000

125

DP-5X Wasp

4.8

15000

540

300

DP-5XT Gator

530

872

215

25000

2300

750

DP-10X Boomerang

162

General Atomics Aeronautical Systems (http://www.ga-asi.com/products/index.php) I-GNAT

120

Predator MQ-1

120

675

25000

2300

750

Predator B

240

3200

50000

10500

3850

Skywarrior

150

29000

3200

1075

0.83

10000

Honeywell (http://www.thawkmav.com/) T-Hawk MAV

SRW

Insitu (http://www.insitu.com/uas) ScanEagle

19500

11.2

NightEagle

19500

48.4

13.1

Integrator

15000

135

37.5

Inceptor

0.33

1.6

500

2.4

280

10000

15000

1322

100

Maryland Aerospace, Inc. (http://www.vectorp.com) Vector P

100

Kuchera Defense (http://www.kuchera.com/kds) PeriStar

July 29, 2011 148

Appendix A – Unmanned Aircraft Systems

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

Table A.2 U.S. commercial vendors unmanned air systems. (cont'd) Aircraft

Vehicle Type

Max. Speed (kts)

Endurance (hrs)

Range (nmi)

Ceiling (ft)

GTOW (lb)

Payload (lb)

5000

540

220

24000

3000

1000

15,000

1500

200

L3 - BAI Aerosystems (http://www.l-3com.com/uas) Cutlass

Viking 400

Mobius

215

Neany UAV Systems (http://www.neanyinc.com/products.htm) Arrow

Northrop Grumman (http://www.as.northropgrumman.com/products/ghrq4b) Global Hawk RQ-4A

340

12000

65,000

26700

2000

Global Hawk RQ-4B

310

12300

60,000

32500

3000

0.83

1.7

Octatron (http://www.octatron.com) SkySeer

Rotomation (http://www.rotomotion.com/index.html) SR 20

0.4

26.5

SR 100

0.75

SR 200

105

1.5

Thesis Aviation (http://www.theissaviation.com/uav.html) Ferret

8000

5.5

PLANC

8000

5.8

Super Ferret

24000

Tarzan TD-1c

215

14000

225

105

500

12900

1070

450

700

1000

Trek Aerospace (http://www.trekaero.com) DragonFly

SRW

Victory Systems (http://www.victory-systems-uav.com) Mini-UAS

VTOL UAS

VTOL

July 29, 2011 149

Appendix A – Unmanned Aircraft Systems

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

Comparison of DoI observations with the current capability of today’s UAS Overlaying DoI observation requirements on UAS capability provides a means to assess gaps in that capability. Figure A.3 provides an illustration of the assessment. The UAS examined in the Appendix are capable in providing the necessary altitude and duration to meet the requirements of DoI observations detailed in this document. The UAS with veryshort duration, low-altitude capability appear to be able to meet the lower altitude observations. With a Raven, for example, range management or wildlife counts are possible. Some of the other observations in the altitude-duration space may require a more capable vehicle, such as the L#-BAI Cutlass or the shrouded rotary-wing T-Hawk from Honeywell. For the other “quadrants” of observations (referring to the discussion in Section A.1), there are several aircraft that should be able to meet observation requirements. However, these aircraft are very capable from an endurance standpoint. This would result in excess UAS capability at greater cost than if the endurance capability more closely matched the observation requirements. It may be beneficial for DoI to influence and track UAS development.

Figure A.3 Comparison of DoI observation requirements and UAS capability.

July 29, 2011 150

Appendix A – Unmanned Aircraft Systems

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

Comparing endurance and ceiling to observation duration and altitude is the first step in the analysis. To identify the most appropriate UAS for a particular observation, other parameters need consideration. Among these are:   

Payload: Can the UAS carry the sensor or sensors? Range: Is the UAS able to fly to the observation site with enough reserve to complete the observation and return? Power: Is there sufficient onboard power to run the sensors, computers and send the data back to the ground station?

July 29, 2011 151

Appendix A – Unmanned Aircraft Systems

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

This page intentionally left blank.

July 29, 2011 152

Appendix B – UAS Sensors

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

B. Unmanned Aircraft Systems Sensors Remote sensing sensors can be grouped as optical and microwave for airborne and spaceborne platforms. For this study we emphasize sensors for DoI applications as examples of sensors that can be used in UASs. Within the optical sensors, there are panchromatic sensors (one wavelength region), multispectral sensors (typically less than 12 wavelength regions or bands), hyperspectral or imaging spectrometer sensors, and LIDARs. Optical sensors can operate in the visible and near-infrared region (VNIR) (400 to 1000 nanometers), short-wave infrared region (SWIR) (1000 to 2500 nanometers), midinfrared (MIR) (3 to 5 microns), or thermal infrared region (TIR) (8 to 12 microns). Imaging spectrometers or hyperspectral sensors use a prism or a grating to disperse radiation into a large number of bands. These sensors provide the greatest amounts of information for resource applications. Imaging spectrometers have applications such as identification of hidden targets, vegetation species mapping, chemistry mapping, aboveground carbon mapping, mineral mapping, and environmental assessments, among others. For the DoI, UAS sensors fit within a hierarchy of platforms that include aircraft and satellites. This hierarchy is undergoing rapid change. For example, over the next five years, there will be more than 100 new resource mapping remote sensing satellites. Each optical satellite typically has more than one sensor. India and China each plan to launch about 15 remote sensing satellites, or one every four months per country. Europe has the Global Monitoring for Environmental Security (GMES) program. GMES and European Space Agency (ESA) will be launching five threads of satellites or Sentinels. Sentinel-1 is a C-band polarimetric SAR; Sentinel-2 has a multispectral sensor with 13 bands, Sentinel-3 has thermal imaging, Sentinel-4 is for atmospheric observation (polar orbiting), and Sentinel-5 is for atmospheric observation (geostationary). The U.S. will also be launching atmospheric satellites, including the National Polar-orbiting Operational Environmental Satellite System (NPOESS) Preparatory Project, Landsat Data Continuity Mission (LDCM) and remote sensing satellites (Decadal Survey). Germany will launch more radar satellites, as will Canada with its Radarsat Constellation Mission. New hyperspectral missions include Germany’s Environmental Mapping Analysis Program (ENMAP) and Italy’s Precursore IperSpettrale (Hyperspectral Precursor) of the Application Mission (PRISMA). The Committee on Earth Observation Satellites (CEOS) maintains a list of planned missions in the CEOS Earth Observation (EO) Handbook. One of the major uses of airborne and UAS remote sensing is to calibrate and validate satellite systems for large-scale applications. The future remote sensing environment can be characterized as rapidly changing with airborne sensors and satellites from many countries. Within this environment, this Road Map has focused on the sensors providing the greatest advantages for DoI applications. For optical sensors, we have reviewed multispectral, thermal, hyperspectral, and LIDAR sensors. For microwave sensors, we have chosen SAR. It should be noted that a mention of

July 29, 2011 153

Appendix B – UAS Sensors

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

a particular sensor is for illustrative purposes only and does not constitute an endorsement by the authors.

Sensors Types OPTICAL – PASSIVE Passive optical sensors rely on solar illumination. Thus operations are limited by cloud cover and daylight periods. Optical sensors use filters, prisms or diffraction gratings for creating the spectral bands of the measured radiation. A panchromatic sensor creates a gray scale image with high spatial resolution. UAS platforms with multiple optical sensors will have the challenge of co-registering the various data sources to maximize the information content from the UAS data collection. It will be essential to include avionics on the UAS that can provide attitudinal and positional detail sufficient to geometrically correct the sensors to at least half-pixel accuracy. Hyperspectral sensors use either prisms or diffraction gratings for dispersing the measured radiation. Prisms can provide higher optical throughput but have two limitations. First, the bandwidth for each band varies (e.g., from 3 nanometers to 10 nanometers in a sinusoid). Secondly, the dispersion of the prism for airborne implementations is sensitive to variations in temperature and pressure. Diffraction gratings have reduced throughput but typically provide nearly uniform bandwidth for each band. Hyperspectral sensing has been greatly influenced by the development by NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) of Airborne Visible/Infrared Imaging Spectrometer (AVIRIS). AVIRIS has 220 bands and covers the VNIR and SWIR regions. Nominal bandwidth is 10 nanometers. Many algorithms and applications have been developed using AVIRIS data. Several nations have developed hyperspectral sensors for aircraft. Costs have dropped sufficiently now that several universities worldwide own airborne hyperspectral sensors. National Science Foundation (NSF) is implementing the National Ecological Observation Network (NEON) and plans to have three airborne hyperspectral sensor systems implemented. NEON will draw on NASA JPL’s experience with the Moon Mineralogy Mapper (M3), a hyperspectral sensor sent to the moon on board the Indian satellite, Chandrayan-1. The airborne implementation is called ATOM by NASA JPL. It may be possible to scale ATOM to fit into a UAS.

OPTICAL – ACTIVE LIDAR is a laser ranging sensor. In airborne remote sensing, it is used for topographic mapping, hydrographic mapping, and for vegetation structure mapping. An example of an airborne LIDAR system is NASA’s Airborne Topographic Mapper (ATM). The ATM65 (see Figure B1) is a scanning LIDAR developed and used by NASA for observing the Earth's topography for several scientific applications, foremost of which is the measurement of National Aeronautics and Space Administration, “About the ATM,” Goddard Space Flight Center/Wallops Flight Facility, Hydrospheric and Biospheric Sciences Laboratory. [Online]. Available: http://atm.wff.nasa.gov/ [Accessed: April 13, 2010]. 65

July 29, 2011 154

Appendix B – UAS Sensors

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

changing Arctic and Antarctic icecaps and glaciers. It typically flies on aircraft at an altitude between 1300 and 2600 feet (400 - 800 meters) AGL, and measures topography to an accuracy of ten to twenty centimeters by incorporating measurements from GPS receivers and Inertial Navigation System (INS) attitude sensors. An example of current LIDAR specifications is provided in Table 1.

Figure B.1 Airborne Topographic Mapper.66

National Aeronautics and Space Administration, “IceBridge Science Instruments,” IceBridge, September 9, 2010. [Online]. http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/icebridge/science/index.html [Accessed: December 4, 2010]. 66

July 29, 2011 155

Appendix B – UAS Sensors

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

Table B.1 Example Topographic LIDAR specifications.67 Parameter

Value

Pulse Rate

≤ 40 KHz

Wavelength

1.045 - 1.065 µm (near infrared)

Altitude

300 - 2000 meters

Swath Width

Up to 0.70 x altitude (meters)

Z Accuracy (Vertical) RMSE

Approximately 15 centimeters

X, Y Accuracy (Horizontal) RMSE

≤ 1 meter

Resolution (point spacing)

≥ 0.75 meters

Laser Footprint on ground

≤ 0.50 meters

The ATM instruments commonly fly aboard the NASA P-3B based at Wallops Flight Facility, Virginia, and have also flown aboard several twin-otters (DHC-6), C-130, and other P-3 aircraft. Uses have included verification of satellite altimeters, and the measurement of seaice thickness. The altimeter often flies in conjunction with other instruments, and has been used to measure sea-surface elevation and ocean wave characteristics. New applications are always being investigated. The ATM has not been designed for a UAS. There are, however, UAS LIDARs available for precise positioning and height measurement discussed in section B.2. LIDAR data are processed in conjunction with differential GPS data to determine precise spatial and vertical dimensions of objects. The desired product is a topographic map with high accuracy. Errors can arise from aircraft motion and returns not representative of the true solid surface. High repetition accuracy ensures high measurement density, usually better than 13.4 points/inch2 (1 point/meter2). There are also helicopter-based LIDAR systems with 250 kHz scanning that can provide precise three-dimensional mapping for plots at scales of approximately eight inches (20 centimeters).

RADAR NASA’s Uninhabited Aerial Vehicle Synthetic Aperture Radar (UAVSAR)68 is a compact podmounted reconfigurable, polarimetric L-band SAR with a second antenna mounted to give single-pass polarimetric interferometry. UAVSAR is specifically designed to acquire airborne repeat track SAR data for differential interferometric measurements. Differential National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Coastal Services Center, “LIDAR,” Remote Sensing for Coastal Management. [Online]. Available: http://www.csc.noaa.gov/crs/rs_apps/sensors/LIDAR.htm [Accessed: May 5, 2010]. 68 National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, “Home,” UAVSAR – Uninhabited Aerial Vehicle Synthetic Aperture Radar, November 13, 2008. [Online]. Available: http://uavsar.jpl.nasa.gov/ [Accessed: April 13, 2010]. 67

July 29, 2011 156

Appendix B – UAS Sensors

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

interferometry can provide key deformation measurements, and is important for studies of earthquakes, volcanoes and other dynamically changing phenomena. Using precision realtime GPS and a sensor controlled FMS; the system flies predefined paths with great precision. Despite its name, the UAVSAR is presently operated on an aircraft. The radar aircraft is a G-III operated out of NASA’s Dryden Flight Research Center. The system nominally operates at an altitude of 45,000 feet (13.8 kilometers). The expected performance of the flight control system requires the flight path to be within a 32.8-foot (10 meter) diameter tube about the desired flight track. The specifications for the UAVSAR are provided in Table 2. The radar is fully polarimetric, with a range bandwidth of 80 MHz (5.9-foot (1.8-meter) range resolution), and supports a 6.8-mile (11 kilometers) range swath. The antenna is electronically steered along track to ensure that the antenna beam can be directed independently, regardless of speed and wind direction.

Figure B.2 Uninhabited aerial vehicle synthetic aperture radar pod.69 The swath width of the radar is 6.8 miles (11 kilometers) with a resolution of 5.9 feet (1.8 meters). The interferometric radar can produce a topographic map of the Earth’s surface. As the imaging mechanisms are different between the optical and radar sensors, it is often required to have common registration points, such as road intersections, land/water boundaries, or geometric targets placed to ensure the accuracy of the registration. A LIDAR-derived topographic map can be used to compute areas in the SAR image that correspond to layover and shadow. To minimize these effects it may become necessary to have SAR flight lines at orthogonal angles. In rugged mountainous terrain, for example, it is sometimes necessary to image the surface with SAR at three different angles (e.g. northsouth, east-west, and 45 degrees) in order to minimize shadow and layover effects. The UAVSAR is well tested and integrated to its airborne platform. Further flights would be required to test the system on a UAS. The UAVSAR can be used in all weather conditions and at night. National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, “Instrument,” UAVSAR – Uninhabited Aerial Vehicle Synthetic Aperture Radar, April 18, 2007. [Online]. Available: http://uavsar.jpl.nasa.gov/instrument.html [Accessed: April 13, 2010]. 69

July 29, 2011 157

Appendix B – UAS Sensors

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

Table B.2 UAVSAR instrument parameters.70 Parameter

Value

Frequency

L-band

Bandwidth

80 MHz

Range Resolution

5.9 feet (1.8 meters)

Polarization

Full Quad-Polarization

Raw ADC Bits

12 baseline

Waveform

Nominal Chirp/Arbitrary Waveform

Antenna Dimensions

0.5 m range/1.5 azimuth

Azimuth Steering

Greater than ±20°

Power

> 2.0 kW

Polarization Isolation

<-20 dB

SENSOR PAYLOADS UASs can carry a variety of sensors. As an example, consider the Raven RQ-11B which carries an optical camera with side and front look, 2048 by 1536 pixels, and an ability to zoom by 5 times. This platform can also carry a side-looking infrared camera with 320 by 240 pixels with a laser illuminator covering a spot of 25 feet (7.62 m) diameter. Larger UASs can carry more complex sensors or more sensors. There are airborne sensors that can be used in UASs. DoI staff can gain training and experience with these airborne sensors that will ease the transition to UASs.

Optical Sensors The following is a list of companies with airborne and UAS optical sensors. Airborne Data Systems (http://www.airbornedatasystems.com/) offers a variety of cameras, multi-spectral (4 bands; 420 nm to 960 nm) and panchromatic (400 nm to 1000 nm), for airborne and UAS reconnaissance. An example of the specifications of their Spectra-View Oblique Camera System is given below. (Note: The following is shown for illustrative purposes only.)

Ibid.

July 29, 2011 158

Appendix B – UAS Sensors

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025 Spectra-View® Oblique Digital Camera System

Specifications 5 Color Cameras: 4872 x 3248, Dynamic Range 12 bit 1 camera Nadir, 1 camera left, 1 camera right, 1 camera forward, 1 camera aft. All oblique cameras at 45 degrees to line of flight Shutter: Electronic 1/100 – 1/1000 (No moving parts, no life limits) Light Metering: Images are viewed in flight. Exposure times are set by the operator from histograms for each camera. Remote controlled aperture. Calibration: Each camera/lens combination is totally mapped for radial distortion, PP, MTF, and Flat Field using Airborne Data System’s proprietary CHARLIE® calibration system. Optics: All optics are Carl Zeiss. 153 degree FOV cross track (custom optics available) 71 degree FOV along track (custom optics available) Variable Optics for constant resolution. Nominal Resolution: 4 inch @ 150 Kts. Camera Deck including INS and Automatic Azimuth Correction Ring. 40-degree Left and Right drift correction automatically corrected by the INS. Automatic Azimuth Correction Ring is internally mounted in camera deck. Size: 16 inch diameter by 17 inches tall Weight: 35 pounds Operating temperature: –20C to +50C Humidity: 5-95% Non-Condensing Operating Altitude: 25,000 feet Non-pressurized All cameras are co-mounted with the DGPS/INS in precision-machined fixture. Band registration and DGPS/INS alignment is accomplished using BandMatch® software. All systems use Lord Aerospace vibration isolating mounts that have been tested to meet Section RTCA/DO-160 Section 7. Custom mounting decks are available. Spectra-View® Processor: Size: 11x14x17 inches Weight: 28 pounds Operating temp: –20C to +50C Humidity: 5-95% Non-Condensing Operating Altitude: 25,000 ft. Non-pressurized System power: Total system power is 200 watts at startup and 150 watts continuous at 10-30 Volt DC Image Storage: Solid state removable drives. Drives are swappable in flight. Non-pressurized to 25,000 feet. Maximum storage rate is 2 camera cycles per second. DGPS/INS: Position Accuracy (1 sigma) Position (m) .10 (DGPS aided) Altitude (m) .2 (DGPS aided) Velocity (m/s) .005 @ 400 Hz Pitch/Roll (mrads)

.028 Heading (mrads) <.2 Drift Rate <.25 degree p/hr w/out GPS Velocity Range 0-400 meters per second Acceleration Range 30g all axis Alignment time 5 minutes System outputs a full navigation solution @ 50 Hz Accelerometers @ 400 Hz Dual 1553 output FAA approved DGPS antenna RF/EMI Certification: This system meets both civilian and US Air Force requirements for RF/EMI emissions and is certified for operation in small, medium, and large US Air Force fixed wing aircraft. Flight Management System Processing Software Flight Planning Software [FPS]: Plans flight lines and image centers from shape files or corner coordinates. Calculates image center positions to include side and forward overlap. Calculates number of scenes and mission time. Provides a visual display. Automatically recalculates flight lines and image centers in flight to provide full coverage in changing altitudes. Spectra-View® Remote: Provides link between the Spectra-View® camera system and the System Operator. Provides visual display of the health of the DGPS/INS, cameras, processor and image storage system at start up. Allows System Operator to set shutter speeds and aperture settings to maintain highest quality data for the flight conditions. Displays the camera information in visual quality and histogram format for each camera and respective band. Course Deviation Indicator [CDI]: Displays the precise position of the aircraft in relation to flight line. Displays proposed and actual heading, altitude, speed, flight line number and beginning and ending waypoints. Band-Match® Oblique: Ties NADIR, Left, and Right Cameras together to OrthoRectify image. Matches Forward and Aft Scene to NADIR Scene. Uses imported DEM files, image and header files to automatically Ortho-Rectify images. Exports processed images to assigned files. Exports header files in NITIF format. All processing is done in real time, from navigation solution stored in header file. Uses imported DEM files, image and header files to automatically Ortho-Rectify images. Exports processed images to assigned files. Exports header files in NITIF format. All processing is done in real time, from navigation solution stored in header file.

July 29, 2011 159

Appendix B – UAS Sensors

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

CONTROP Precision Technologies Ltd. (http://www.controp.com/) headquartered in Israel sells a variety of products for UASs, including: stabilized observation payloads used for day and night surveillance on board UASs; wide-area coverage (real time) EO stabilized payloads for day and night reconnaissance on board UASs; thermal imaging cameras with continuous zoom lens. Their FOX thermal imaging camera uses a third generation InSb focal plane array (FPA) 320x256 or 640x512 pixels which is sensitive in the 3-5 micron spectral range. This camera also has auto-focus with zoom and can have 14-bit digital output. Goodrich ISR Systems has optical reconnaissance systems that have been tested on UASs (http://www.goodrich.com/portal/site/grcom?GUID=9a3a6fbbfe2cc110VgnVCM1000006 8f57eaaRCRD).

AIRBORNE HYPERSPECTRAL SENSORS A list of known airborne hyperspectral systems is provided in Table B.3. The entries are sorted by country. Specim and Norsk Electro Optikk, offer VNIR hyperspectral sensors for UAS operation. Northrup Grumman has a VNIR and SWIR UAS hyperspectral system called HATI that weighs less than 4 kg and consumes less than 50 watts of power. Additional information on each sensor can be provided as the client narrows their selection in terms of capabilities, such as spatial resolution, spectral range, and platform capacity. Airborne hyperspectral sensors with spatial resolutions in the 2–meter range and spectrometers with 3-nanometer bandwidth can also be obtained. Table B.3 Airborne Hyperspectral Systems Name

# of Bands

Wavelength Region

Manufacturer

Country

AMSS MK1

VNIR, SWIR, TIR

Geoscan

Australia

HYMAP

126

VNIR, SWIR

HyVista

Australia

CASI 1500

288

VNIR

Itres

Canada

SASI 600

100

SWIR

Itres

Canada

TASI 600

TIR

Itres

Canada

MASI 600

MIR

Itres

Canada

AISA Dual

492

VNIR, SWIR

Specim

Finland

AISA Eagle

488

VNIR

Specim

Finland

AISA Eaglet

200

VNIR

Specim

Finland

AISA Hawk

254

SWIR

Specim

Finland

HySpex

128

VNIR

Norsk Electro Optikk

Norway

AAHIS

288

VNIR

SETS

USA

NEON ATOM?

224

VNIR, SWIR

NASA JPL

USA

UAS?

UAS UAS UAS?

July 29, 2011 160

Appendix B â&#x20AC;&#x201C; UAS Sensors

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

RADAR Radar sensors have the great advantage of providing their own illumination. As a result, SAR sensors are able to operate in cloudy conditions or at night. SAR sensors are usually described by band. For example, C-band is nominally 6-centimeter wavelength, L-band is 22-centimeter wavelength, X-band is 3-centimeter wavelength, and P-band is 68centimeter wavelength. Radars can also sense polarization. Radars that operate with quadpolarization, with phase, measure the full polarization response of an object. This provides much more information. Radars can operate in many different modes (e.g. Radarsat-2 has more than 200 modes). In Table B.4 below, polarization is included (Single, Dual, Quad pol with phase).

AIRBORNE RADAR SENSORS Table B.4 summarizes the known airborne SAR systems. NASA JPL has developed a SAR for UASs, though it is currently flown on a Gulfstream III, and General Atomics, EADS, and Boeing sell UAS SARs. Most airborne SAR systems require a much larger aircraft than the typical UAS. Resolution in the range and azimuth directions may differ as noted in the table. Systems with quad-pol with phase provide the most information for resources and target discrimination.

UAS RADAR EADS sells a close range UAS Ka-band radar sensor. This sensor has a spatial resolution of 0.5 m and covers a swath width from 500 m to 2000 m. Power consumption is less than 100 watts and it weighs less than 4 kg. Additional information can be found at: http://www.uvs-international.org/pdfs/brochures/eads-sde_pyld_mini-sar.pdf.

Future Sensing Advancements DoI can expect that there will continue to be a reduction in weight and size for airborne sensors, leading to greater choices. DoD and other agencies with UAS development teams will continue to create new sensors, some of which may be available to civilian agencies. Optical sensors with greater swath width, spectral resolution, and higher signal to noise ratios will be created in the 2010 to 2025 time period. For airborne radar sensors, the trend is to full polarization (quad-pol with phase) and interferometric systems (two antennas) which permit precise determination of topography, measurement of tree height, and change detection. With reduction in radar size, one can expect UAS systems which are multifrequency, polarimetric, and interferometric. The German Aerospace Research Agency (DLR) currently operates an airborne polarimetric system with 5 frequencies. Interferometry is achieved by repeat pass acquisitions.

July 29, 2011 161

Appendix B – UAS Sensors

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

Table B.4 Airborne SAR systems Name

Wavelength

Polarization (See notes)

Resolution Range (R) by Azimuth (Az)

Operator

Country

E-SAR

X, C, L, P

Quad-pol with Phase

R: 2m or 4m; Az: 0.25 m to 1.5 m

DLR

Germany

UAVSAR

Quad-pol with Phase

R: 2m; Az: 2m

NASA JPL

USA

RAMSES

X, C, S, L, P, Ku, Ka, W

Quad-pol with Phase VV, HH LR, LL

ONERA

France

AIRSAR

C, L, P

Quad-pol with Phase

NASA JPL

USA

EMISAR

C, L

Quad-pol with Phase

Technical University of Denmark

Denmark

Pi-SAR

X, L

Quad-pol with Phase

2.5 m, 1.6 m

JAXA-CRL

Japan

SAR-580

C X

Quad Dual

Environment Canada

Canada

Lynx / AN/APY-8

0.1 to 3.0 m

EADS

Germany

UAS

SAR/MTI

0.5 m

EADS

Germany

UAS

NanoSAR / ImSAR

Boeing

USA

UAS

UAS?

UAS

Communications Relay Payloads The communication system consists of the hardware and software to exchange data and voice communications between the UAS, control element, and operator. These are commercially available, the choice of which will be determined by the operational requirements of DoI.

July 29, 2011 162

Appendix C â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Analytic Tools

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

C. Analytic Tools Most UAS sensors will create images. Many of these images will have value over time and will be archived for future additional analysis. Some images will have a short shelf life for use, for example, detection of illegal crops or illegal forest harvesting. For greatest utility, the imagery should be calibrated and corrected to physical units. The UAS data should be orthorectified to DoI approved map standards. With such corrected data, users will be able to relate UAS observations to observations from other platforms, such as aircraft and satellites, and to GIS files.

Preprocessing Each sensor has unique requirements for preprocessing. The output signals of the sensor must be radiometrically corrected to physical units. As DoI identifies the set of UAS sensors for its operations, this will permit the identification of the calibration procedures to be followed for each sensor. For optical sensors, the outputs would be radiances by spectral band or wavelength. With atmospheric correction models, these radiances can be corrected to reflectance values and compared with reflectance observations form other platforms. Optical sensors may also have detector-to-detector calibration variation, drop-outs, systematic noise patterns, non-symmetrical optical transfer functions, etc. DoI may be able to obtain from other UAS sensor operators, preprocessing software. It is likely, however, that DoI will need to customize preprocessing software to meet DoI standards and requirements. The objective of the preprocessing is to create corrected data ready for analysis. A particular challenge will be the high spatial resolution of UAS imagery over areas lacking ground control. Precise knowledge of UAS attitude, altitude, and sensor pixel location will be required to create accurate orthorectified products.

Image Analysis DoI has extensive experience in image analysis of airborne (optical) and satellite data (optical and radar). This experience, knowledge, and systems will be directly applicable to the analysis of UAS preprocessed data. In image analysis, preprocessed data is transformed into information, as represented by classifications, object detection and identification, and mapping.

July 29, 2011 163

Appendix C – Analytic Tools

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

Within DoI there is extensive use of ERDAS for image analysis. ENVI is also used for hyperspectral analysis. PCI, like ERDAS and ENVI, is a multisensor image analysis package best known for its excellent orthorectification. DoI also has access to image analysis tools from DoD, National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA), and other Federal agencies. These image analysis systems can be used for UAS sensor analysis.

Geographic Information System (GIS) The DoI standard for GIS is ESRI’s ARC/Info. The graphical side of ARC/Info is usually connected to a relational database, such as Oracle. An important aspect of data integration across the GIS of the DoI Bureaus is the interoperability standards discussed in Section C.4.

July 29, 2011 164

Appendix D â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Concept of Operations for Data

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

D. Concept of Operations for Data UASs can produce large quantities of data. As part of the UAS Roadmap, this appendix provides a concept of operations for data management. Data management applies to all field data, airborne data, geographic information, and satellite data collected for the Bureaus. DoI has a data management policy for satellite data and will need a data management policy for data from UASs.

UAS Data Management It is envisioned that there will be multiple UAS data collects across the DoI. These data collects may be of use to more than one Bureau. DoI may wish to establish a system for notifying Bureaus of future data collects so that Bureaus can provide additional inputs into sensor choice and operational parameters. Once the data has been collected it will be placed in one or more data management systems. For rapid access to data, DoI metadata standards for UAS data will be required. DoI will presumably establish access control lists for metadata. For most sensor data, the metadata will be viewable across DoI. For some regulatory functions, the metadata may be restricted. Having established metadata standards for DoI, it will then be necessary to adopt or develop standards for image formats. DoI has extensive systems and world-renowned experience in satellite and airborne data management. Therefore, it should be relatively straightforward for DoI to create a UAS data management and archiving architecture.

UAS Data Processing Data processing refers to those functions required to prepare the data for subsequent data analysis. Most UAS data will be placed on a mapping grid. GPS data will be used for precise geolocation and subsequent track recovery. Most UAS data will be calibrated. For radar, for example, polarimetric active radar calibrators can be used to calibrate the airborne SAR. Optical sensors can be calibrated using known targets with ground measurements of reflectance properties. Calibrated data can subsequently be orthorectified to a digital surface defined by scanning LIDAR measurements or digital terrain models. Appendix C, Analytical Tools describes the analysis and GIS software for transforming the UAS data into information. Data processing will generate calibrated, geometrically corrected data, ready to analyze (level 2 products). July 29, 2011 165

Appendix D â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Concept of Operations for Data

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

UAS Interoperability Standards The large volumes of data will require a modern data management environment, such as a distributed grid or cloud computing system. The metadata should be searchable and available online. Data transfers amongst the DoI could occur over high bandwidth links operating at 1 gigabit per second or better. The metadata should conform to USGS Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC), Open Geographic Information System Consortium (OGC), and International Standards Organization Technical Committee 211 standards. Metadata are data describing data information, such as file structures, sensor characteristics, time, geographic extent, etc. The UAS data management system should be able to serve as the data archival system or be able to automatically update a DoI-specified data archival system. The data management system should also conform to Global Earth Observation System of Systems (GEOSS) standards for interoperability, especially if DoI envisions having international partners or sharing data with international partners.

UAS Data Archiving The DoI will give guidance on the UAS data archive desired. For example, if there is a desire to preserve the UAS data for more than five years, it would be efficient to have a DoI archive system to which project data management systems could connect and provide data and products. USGS has extensive satellite and aircraft data archive systems at the EDC. Often data archive systems would hold the raw data, but also products produced by the DoI. In some cases, intermediate products may be archived because of their use as a base for many other products.

UAS Data Distribution The data could be distributed via high bandwidth links (>1 gigabits per second) to other Federal agencies and amongst the DoI. The data could also be distributed on large portable disks to those sites specified by DoI. The DoI could create product description documents for each product type and make these documents available online. UAS data catalogs can be searchable from computer to computer, or through portals and web services online.

July 29, 2011 166

Appendix E – Concepts of Operations

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

E. Concept(s) of Operations DoI Operational Procedures Memorandum The Operational Procedures Memorandum (OPM) issued August 24, 2010, by the AMD is a solid document outlining several aspects of UAS operations. In the evolving Roadmap document, DoI should develop a concept of operations document to guide their staff on the trade-offs between platforms, resolution, temporal coverage, responsiveness, and costs. Additionally, the benefit of this document can be to serve as a basis of an operational manual governing UAS operation within DoI. At present, each DoI Bureau contracts independently for UAS operation. Data collected now from UASs goes to the contracting Bureau and is usually not available online to other parts of DoI. Current UAS products are usually raw red, green, blue color model (RGB) images and grey scale thermal images. At present, UAS data are not archived at EDC. We anticipate that the Bureaus will identify for their geographic information needs the spatial resolutions and temporal resolutions needed to fulfill regulatory and monitoring requirements. There will be a variety of spatial and temporal resolutions. There are space data sources available that provide free or low cost optical data. DoI leads the Landsat program and this would be a primary sensor for 25 m-scale mapping. Landsat satellites have had a 16-day repeat cycle and usually all of the U.S. is acquired each cycle. Approximately half the Landsat data collects are eliminated due to cloud cover. The temporal scale with Landsat mapping is coarser than monthly. Aircraft acquisitions are more responsive in time. But to achieve this responsiveness, DoI would have to have available aircraft either owned or on contract. Most responsive to a Bureau’s needs are UAS platforms. Easily launched and operated, a UAS platform can provide immediate coverage over a small area of interest at high spatial resolution. Limiting this responsiveness are the requirements for prior approval for UAS operation and the operating requirements. Most UASs require relatively calm weather for takeoff and landing, and sensor acquisitions are adversely affected by turbulence. Cloud cover can be a problem, but aircraft can be flown under the clouds and acquire optical imagery if there is sufficient uniform solar illumination. Variability in cloud cover results in variable solar illumination making the creation of accurate, calibrated data more difficult.

Near Term The AMD has identified procedures and policy in the OPM dated August 24, 2010. The AMD should give further consideration to the following issues.

BUDGET The AMD will require a budget analysis and funding mechanisms to expand UAS operations. Current budget is for manned aircraft operations, while UAS development July 29, 2011 167

Appendix E â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Concepts of Operations

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

activity is taking an estimated 20% of the AMD resources. USGS will have to determine how flight activity is accounted. Options can be: AMD to absorb fixed costs, while charging user Bureau hourly costs. Each Bureau is budgeted for UAS operations. Other funding methods to be developed that best suit DoI. As an example of costs, Brady McCombs (Arizona Daily Star, on-line Nov. 23, 2010) interviewed Maj. Gen. Michael Kostelnik, assistant commissioner of the CBP Office of Air and Marine and obtained the current cost-per-hour figures for a variety of platforms. The per-hour costs include fuel, engine, avionics, equipment, support and services cost. For the UAS (Predator B) the costs also include the satellite communications time, maintenance, and pilot training. Table E.1 Costs per Hour (from Customs and Border Protection Office)

Aircraft

Costs per Hour ($) 7,034

King Air C12

Aircraft

5,245

Helicopter

5,233

Aircraft

3,994

Agusta Westland AW139

Helicopter

3,744

UH1H (Huey)

Helicopter

3,476

Aircraft

3,395

UAS

3,234

Pilatus PC-12

Aircraft

2,781

Dash 8

Aircraft

2,568

Aerospatiale Astar

Helicopter

1,932

MD-600N

Helicopter

1,841

Aircraft

1,727

American Eurocopter EC-120

Helicopter

1,617

Hughes OH6

Helicopter

1,441

Piper PA-18

Aircraft

1,141

Platform

Type

Blackhawk King Air

Cessna Citation UAS (Predator B)

Cessna 210

The preferred UAS for CBP Office is the Predator B (also known as the Reaper) which can operate at 15240 m (50,000 feet) for up to 14 hours and fully loaded. It has an internal payload capacity of 363 kg (800 lbs). It has sufficient payload capacity to carry a mix of optical and SAR sensors for DoI operations. July 29, 2011 168

Appendix E – Concepts of Operations

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

PERSONNEL Currently, the staffing of AMD is for manned aircraft. This includes flight crew, flight following, maintenance and management personnel. To move into UAS operations could require organizational changes to meet the needs of UAS flying. Additional staffing in all these areas could become necessary. The AMD planning should include manpower tasking for training, operations, maintenance, regulatory compliance, safety, data recording and reporting, and administrative duties.

FACILITIES It is clear that sUAS operations will take place anywhere in the U.S. AMD and USGS should address facilities required in terms of UAS size, launch and recovery, airports, maintenance activity and storage of aircraft.

Far Term The goal of the USGS program, along with many operators and the FAA, is to arrive at the day when “file and fly” is permissible. The USGS Roadmap will help to position the AMD for file and fly. With the guidance of a well maintained Roadmap, methodically developed requirements, authorizations and procedures would enable routine file and fly as in today’s manned environment. In this future environment, a Bureau would determine a need for data. The request for an aerial data collection platform would be crafted to include a risk analysis, area of operations, dates of operations, day/night requirement, duration of data collection and as much as pertinent information as can be provided. During this phase the requesting Bureau could identify risks involved and possible mitigation. The request is forwarded to the AMD. Funding requests would be through the appropriately defined USGS channels. Close coordination between AMD and the requesting Bureau is conducted to identify and plan for complete data collection. Alternative plans are identified to accommodate changing and dynamic flight conditions. Selected aircraft is readied in accordance with AMD directives conforming to FAA airworthiness standards and AMD maintenance procedures. The region or area of interest is studied with regard to airspace classification, terrain, weather, launch and recovery sites, and line of sight or beyond line of communication requirements and diversion and emergency actions identified. The flight path and airspace requirements are planned; flight following requirements is determined; and the Bureaus and AMD would apply the equivalent of today’s Sections 5 through 7 of the OPM. This would include maintenance and airworthiness of the aircraft, crew and personnel training and qualification. AMD would assign and position the UAS crew, and facilitate activation of any flight planning and clearances, initiate flight authorization and following procedures and the mission would initiate.

July 29, 2011 169

Appendix E â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Concepts of Operations

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

Conduct of the flight would be under the command of a UAS pilot who is properly trained, qualified and certified by the AMD and the FAA in accordance with current policy. Preflight inspections would include the aircraft airworthiness, local flight restrictions, communications and lost link procedures, review of emergency procedures, review of weather conditions, and inspection/review of intended landing site and diversion sites. During the flight, procedures are executed to enable the data collection and transmission, AMD flight following is tracking the flight and advising ATC where necessary. Pilots and ground crew are monitoring onboard systems for SAA issues, aircraft performance, and communications issues and any emergency contingency. At mission termination, crew lands and secures aircraft, logs any maintenance discrepancies and reports mission data to AMD. AMD closes flight plan if applicable, records and reports its mission data, notifies maintenance of discrepancies. AMD completes mission report to requesting Bureau, including data collection, recording, and transmission, arranges and conducts UAS transport to home base and hangaring/storage needs. Post mission activity would include crew debriefing, safety management reporting, and financial reporting to DoI.

July 29, 2011 170

Appendix F - Questionnaire

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

F. Questionnaire for USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 - 2025 Demographics First Name: Last Name: Job Title: Work Phone: City: State: Postal Code: In what Bureau or Service and Division do you work?

Your Mission and Existing Observation and Measurement Activities Please describe the job your organization has to perform. Please be as specific and quantitative as possible [limited to 1,000 characters].

Please describe the challenges associated with the performance of that job today. [limited to 1,000 characters.]

Your current instruments' capabilities to make observations or measurements What are you measuring or observing?

Where are you measuring or observing it?

July 29, 2011 171

Appendix F - Questionnaire

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

How do you measure or observe it? In Situ Remote Other: _______________________________________ Describe how you measure or observe.

Over what time period do you measure or observe?

What is the frequency of observation or measurement?

Do you make simultaneous observations at more than one location? Please describe.

Do you make the same measurement or observation at different geographical areas? Yes

If yes, how many? Where?

With what mapping scale are measurements made (e.g. 1:10,000, 1:50,000, 1:1,000,000, etc.)?

What constraints exist for performing measurements or observations?

July 29, 2011 172

Appendix F - Questionnaire

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

Your Current Instrumentation What type of instrumentation (scientific or operational) are you currently using to make these measurements or observations? [Choose all that apply.] Image-based surveillance Environmental air sampling Communications Optical sensing Optical sensing – LIDAR Microwave sensing – radiometer Microwave sensing – radar Other: Comment:

If optical sensing is required, what wavelength ranges are desired? [Please type "NA" if optical sensing is not required.]

Below, please indicate what the current properties are of your existing instrument. If you do not know your instrument's current properties, please type "unknown" in the boxes provided. Please also specify which unit of measurement you use in your data. For example, cubic feet or cubic meters. Weight requirement (pounds or kilograms):

Volume requirement (cubic feet or cubic meters):

July 29, 2011 173

Appendix F - Questionnaire

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

DC Power requirement (Watts (W)):

AC Power requirement (Watts (W)):

Communication requirement:

Serviceability requirement:

Please specify the current special environmental requirements of your existing instrument. Again, please include units of measurement. Vibration:

Temperature:

Pressurization:

Stability:

July 29, 2011 174

Appendix F - Questionnaire

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

Cryogenic:

For the following questions, please consider requirements you might have for any type of measurement or observation instrument carried on an Unmanned Aircraft Systems. Will uplinked control of the instrumentation be required? Yes

What type of functions will need to be performed remotely?

Will real-time data monitoring be required? Yes

Will on-board data storage be required? Yes

What is the volume (in GB) for on-board storage?

Will real-time or post flight processing be required? Yes

What are the bandwidth requirements for real-time delivery?

The Unmanned Aircraft Systems Platform The following questions relate to your requirements and usage of Unmanned Aircraft Systems, if you were to use them.

July 29, 2011 175

Appendix F - Questionnaire

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

Below, we list 11 flight conditions at which you might like to make measurements or observations with an Unmanned Aircraft System and ask for data about those flight conditions. First, please indicate what your level of confidence is in your ability to accurately report these conditions: I do not know at what flight conditions we will want to make measurements or observations. I am providing you with my best guess as to the flight conditions. I am highly confident in the flight conditions I describe below. Other: Comment:

At what flight conditions will you want to make measurements? [Please specify which unit of measurement you use.] Speed (miles per hour or kilometers per hour):

Altitude (feet or meters):

Range (miles or kilometers):

Endurance (how long must the UAS stay aloft?) (hours):

Area Coverage (square miles or square kilometers):

July 29, 2011 176

Appendix F - Questionnaire

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

Temporal Coverage (annually, monthly, etc.):

Spatial Resolution (ground sample distance in feet or meters):

Temporal Resolution (frames or samples per second):

Pointing Direction (degrees with respect to nadir):

Climate (temperature range in °F, °C):

Typical Proximity to Population (miles or kilometers):

What type of maneuvering will you want from the platform in order to collect your measurements or observations, for example: loiter, vertical profiling, or other?

Will you require accurate positional and altitude knowledge of the UAS? Yes

What accuracy will you require for this knowledge (meters or feet)?

How often should the positional and altitude measurements be sampled (milliseconds)?

July 29, 2011 177

Appendix F - Questionnaire

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

What other data will the instrumentation require from the UAS (e.g. speed, angle of attack, etc.)?

What viewing or sampling ports are required for the instrumentation?

What are the required reliability characteristics (e.g., mission success, vehicle loss rate, etc.)?

What support equipment will be necessary for pre-flight instrumentation checkout?

Your Vision for the Future of UAS What is your opinion about the use of UASs to accomplish your mission?

What DoI missions do you foresee for UASs over the next 5 years (2010-2015)? [Please include dates if available.]

What DoI missions do you foresee for UASs over the following 10 years (2015-2025)? What phenomena will you want to observe or measure?

How would you characterize your current knowledge of the application of UASs? None/Novice Beginner July 29, 2011 178

Appendix F - Questionnaire

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

Competent Proficient Expert Comment:

Please list any other departments, branches, divisions, units of your organization (horizontal or vertical) who may benefit from the use of UASs.

Please list any individual in your chain of authority who may be aware of this effort and who you think we should interview. [Please include name, title, email address, and phone number.]

Is there anything else we should know about your potential use of UASs?

May we contact you should we have questions regarding your responses or if we seek additional information? Yes

Comment:

July 29, 2011 179

Appendix F - Questionnaire

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

This page intentionally left blank.

July 29, 2011 180

IV - Mid-Term ConOps Upgrade

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

G. Acronym List 4DT

4-Dimensional Trajectory (Navigation)

A/FD

Airport/Facility Directory

ADS-B

Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast

AGL

Above Ground Level

AIM

Assessment, Inventory, and Monitoring

AMA

Academy of Model Aeronautics

AMD

Aviation Management Directorate

ANSP

Air Navigation Service Provider

ATC

Air Traffic Control

ATM

Airborne Topographic Mapper

AUVSI

Association of Unmanned Vehicle Systems International

AVHRR

Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer

AVIRIS

Airborne Visible/Infrared Imaging Spectrometer

AWACS

Airborne Warning and Control System

BIA

Bureau of Indian Affairs

BIE

Bureau of Indian Education

BLM

Bureau of Land Management

BOEMRE

Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement

CBP

U.S. Customs and Border Protection

C&C

Command and Control

CDTI

Cockpit Display of Traffic Information July 29, 2011 181

IV - Mid-Term ConOps Upgrade

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

CENRAP

Center Radar ARTS Presentation

CEOS

Committee on Earth Observation Satellites

CEQ

Council on Environmental Quality

CFRs

Comprehensive Facility Reviews

COA

Certificate of Waiver or Authorization

CSPO

Closely Spaced Parallel Operations

DHS

Department of Homeland Security

DLR

German Aerospace Research Agency

DoD

U.S. Department of Defense

DOE

U.S. Department of Energy

DoI

U.S. Department of the Interior

EAPs

Emergency Action Plans

EDC

Earth resources observation systems Data Center

ENMAP

Environmental Mapping Analysis Program

Earth Observation

EPA

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

EROS

Earth Resources Observation and Science center

ESA

European Space Agency

ETOPS

Extended Twin Engine Operations

FAA

Federal Aviation Administration

FCC

Federal Communications Commission

FGDC

Federal Geographic Data Committee

July 29, 2011 182

IV - Mid-Term ConOps Upgrade

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

Flight Level

FLIR

Forward Looking Infrared

FMS

Flight Management Systems

FWS

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

GDP

Gross Domestic Product

GEOSS

Global Earth Observation System of Systems

GIS

Geographic Information System

GMES

Global Monitoring for Environmental Security

GOES

Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite

GPS

Global Positioning Systems

GTOW

Gross Take-off Rate

Indian Affairs

IFR

Instrument Flight Rules

IMC

Instrument Meteorological Conditions

INS

Inertial Navigation System

IRAC

Interdepartment Radio Advisory Committee

ISR

Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance

JPL

Jet Propulsion Laboratory

LDCM

Landsat Data Continuity Mission

LED

Light Emitting Diode

LIDAR

Light Detection and Ranging

LTA

Lighter-Than-Air

July 29, 2011 183

IV - Mid-Term ConOps Upgrade

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

MADL

Maximum Allowable Daily Levels

Moon Mineralogy Mapper

MALE

Mid-Altitude Long Endurance

MASPS

Minimum Aviation System Performance Standards

MIR

Mid-Infrared Region

MOA

Memorandum of Agreement

MODIS

Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer

MOU

Memorandum of Understanding

MPH

Miles per Hour

MSL

Mean Sea Level

NAS

National Airspace System

NASA

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

NBC

National Business Center

NEON

National Ecological Observation Network

NextGen

Next Generation Air Transportation System

NGA

National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency

NLCS

National Landscape Conservation System

Nautical Mile

NOAA

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

NOTAM

Notice to Airmen

NPOESS

National Polar-orbiting Operational Environmental Satellite System

NPRM

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

July 29, 2011 184

IV - Mid-Term ConOps Upgrade

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

NPS

National Park Service

NSF

National Science Foundation

NTIA

National Telecommunications and Information Administration

NTSB

National Transportation Safety Board

NVEWS

National Volcano Early Warning System

OCS

Outer Continental Shelf

OEM

Original Equipment Manufacturer

Operational Improvement

OGC

Open Geographic Information System Consortium

OPM

Operational Procedures Memorandum

OSM

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement

PFRs

Periodic Facility Reviews

POES

Polar Operational Environmental Satellite

PRISMA

Precursore IperSpettrale (Hyperspectral Precursor) to Application Mission

RCS

Radar Cross Section

Radio Frequency

RGB

Red, Green, Blue color model

RNP

Required Navigation Performance

RTA

Required Time of Arrival

RTCA

Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics

RVSM

Reduced Vertical Separation Minimum

SAA

Sense and Avoid

July 29, 2011 185

IV - Mid-Term ConOps Upgrade

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

SAR

Synthetic Aperture Radar

SFAR

Special Federal Aviation Regulation

SMS

Safety Management System

SoS

System of Systems

sUAS

Small Unmanned Aerial System

SWAT

Special Weapons and Tactics

SWIR

Short Wave Infrared Region

TACAN

Tactical Air Navigation System

TCAS

Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System

TIR

Thermal Infrared Region

Telemetry

TMDL

Total Maximum Daily Levels

TRL

Technology Readiness Level

TSC

Technical Service Center

UAPO

Unmanned Aircraft Program Office

UAS

Unmanned Aircraft Systems

UAVSAR

Uninhabited Aerial Vehicle Synthetic Aperture Radar

USBR

U.S. Bureau of Reclamation

USDA

U.S. Department of Agriculture

USFS

U.S. Forest Service

USGS

U.S. Geological Survey

VFR

Visual Flight Rules

July 29, 2011 186

IV - Mid-Term ConOps Upgrade

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

VMC

Visual Meteorological Conditions

VNIR

Visible and Near-Infrared Region

VOR

VHF Omnidirectional Range

VTOL

Vertical Take-Off and Landing

July 29, 2011 187

IV - Mid-Term ConOps Upgrade

USGS UAS Roadmap 2010 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2025

This page intentionally left blank

July 29, 2011 188

Appendix H – Other References

DoI UAS Roadmap 2010 – 2025

H. Other References (n.d.). Retrieved from Wikipedia. jetsinhd. (2009, August 22). Very, very, very fast Turbine powered RC Jet. Retrieved May 12, 2011, from YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dTHWBSluUjU National Oil Spill Commission. (2011, March 11). Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling . Retrieved May 12, 2011, from Oil Spill Commission: http://www.oilspillcommission.gov/final-report Team Black Sheep. (2010, November 30). New York City Team Black Sheep Dares to Dream. Retrieved May 12, 2011, from YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9cSxEqKQ78 UPI. (2008). AV Raven UAS approved for Italian airspace. MONROVIA, Calif: UPI.com. Writers, S. (2008, December 16). Raven UAS Certified By Italian Ministry Of Defense. Retrieved May 12, 2011, from Space War: http://www.spacewar.com/reports/Raven_UAS_Certified_By_Italian_Ministry_Of_D efense_999.html

July 29, 2011 189