I see. Thanks. Pretty clear airspace. ACE is going to have to do better.
Last edited by a moderator:
Help regarding the Cape Cod Canal
- Thread starter PO3SMITH
- Start date
See post #9. ACE has an MoA with the FAA.
As stated in Post #9, the OP should speak with the local FSDO.
Last edited:
Understood and agree the FSDO is the proper path, and the one I'd follow.
However my DNA makes me allergic to misinformation. Seems we are just talking semantics here.
An MOA between federal agencies doesn't change the fact only the FAA can restrict airspace, by law. As the chief of my law enforcement agency we had MOAs with lots of entities to work together cooperatively, exchange information, etc., not to surrender jurisdictional authority. An MOA with the fire dept. did not mean hose jockeys could go around making arrests. An MOA does not grant any authority and can't change the law. At the local and state level, all MOAs required legal review and sign off by the lawyers to ensure these issues were addressed in advance.
I'm guessing the ACE sat down with FAA about restricting the airspace over the canal, fine. IF the FAA agreed to the ACE request, the restriction comes from the FAA (the agency with airspace control) and it has to be on the record somewhere. IHMO, it should be on the sectional or in a NOTAM so airmen (including certificated UAS pilots) can be informed. What good is any NFZ if aviators don't know about it?
I don't have a dog in this discussion; all I'm saying is the Army Corps of Engineers has no authority to ban aircraft anywhere in the US, only the FAA can enact an NFZ. Even the Secret Service doesn't create an NFZ for POTUS, they request it.
But hey, I could be wrong. If anyone has a link to any document granting ACE authority to restrict airspace I'd love to read it.
Title 36 - Parks, Forests, and Public Property
Chapter III - CORPS OF ENGINEERS, DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
Part 327 - RULES AND REGULATIONS GOVERNING PUBLIC USE OF WATER RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS ADMINISTERED BY THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS
Section 327.4 - Aircraft.
(b) The operation of aircraft on project lands at locations other than those designated by the District Commander is prohibited. This provision shall not be applicable to aircraft engaged on official business of Federal, state or local governments or law enforcement agencies, aircraft used in emergency rescue in accordance with the directions of the District Commander or aircraft forced to land due to circumstances beyond the control of the operator.
(c) No person shall operate any aircraft while on or above project waters or project lands in a careless, negligent or reckless manner so as to endanger any person, property or environmental feature.
Now reference: https://www.nae.usace.army.mil/Portals/74/docs/Recreation/CCC/nodroneccc2018.pdf
Safety - Drones pose a potential hazard to visitors due to malfunction or negligent operation.
b. Since UAS operation can be a safety and security risk to USACE infrastructure, as well to staff, visitors, environmental features, and wildlife at USACE projects, all private and public recreational/hobby and/or commercial use of UAS must satisfy all FAA requirements, applicable state and local laws, and USACE regulations.
NOTE: No areas of the Canal have been designated as authorized for aircraft operation by the New England District Commander. Therefore all aircraft operation (including UAS/Drones) is prohibited at the Cape Cod Canal per 36 CFR, Chapter III, Part 327.4, Aircraft. (Public safety agency official use is exempt)
BE ADVISED: Reference aid maps such as B4UFLY and AIRMAP may not indicate that the Cape Cod Canal is a restricted area. This does not remove or prevent the enforcement of restrictions imposed by 36 CFR, Chapter III Part 327, under the authority of 16 U.S.C. 460d; 16 U.S.C. 4601-6a; Sec. 210, Pub. L. 90-483, 82 Stat. 746.; 33 U.S.C. 1, 28 Stat. 362.
Chapter III - CORPS OF ENGINEERS, DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
Part 327 - RULES AND REGULATIONS GOVERNING PUBLIC USE OF WATER RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS ADMINISTERED BY THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS
Section 327.4 - Aircraft.
(b) The operation of aircraft on project lands at locations other than those designated by the District Commander is prohibited. This provision shall not be applicable to aircraft engaged on official business of Federal, state or local governments or law enforcement agencies, aircraft used in emergency rescue in accordance with the directions of the District Commander or aircraft forced to land due to circumstances beyond the control of the operator.
(c) No person shall operate any aircraft while on or above project waters or project lands in a careless, negligent or reckless manner so as to endanger any person, property or environmental feature.
Now reference: https://www.nae.usace.army.mil/Portals/74/docs/Recreation/CCC/nodroneccc2018.pdf
Safety - Drones pose a potential hazard to visitors due to malfunction or negligent operation.
b. Since UAS operation can be a safety and security risk to USACE infrastructure, as well to staff, visitors, environmental features, and wildlife at USACE projects, all private and public recreational/hobby and/or commercial use of UAS must satisfy all FAA requirements, applicable state and local laws, and USACE regulations.
NOTE: No areas of the Canal have been designated as authorized for aircraft operation by the New England District Commander. Therefore all aircraft operation (including UAS/Drones) is prohibited at the Cape Cod Canal per 36 CFR, Chapter III, Part 327.4, Aircraft. (Public safety agency official use is exempt)
BE ADVISED: Reference aid maps such as B4UFLY and AIRMAP may not indicate that the Cape Cod Canal is a restricted area. This does not remove or prevent the enforcement of restrictions imposed by 36 CFR, Chapter III Part 327, under the authority of 16 U.S.C. 460d; 16 U.S.C. 4601-6a; Sec. 210, Pub. L. 90-483, 82 Stat. 746.; 33 U.S.C. 1, 28 Stat. 362.
I read that, in fact I posted it earlier. Where does it say the ACE preempts the FAA? I still agree with OP, ACE has no legal authority over airspace . This is the same issue when local towns and villages ban drone flights; they cannot (legally ) do so.
Similar threads
