Eight states, including Vermont and Maine, now have laws prohibiting or limiting the weaponization of drones, and Connecticut is expected to take up a similar ban in the next legislative session. A proposal in Connecticut to make it a felony to carry a weapon or an explosive in a drone was approved by the House during the 2016 legislative session, but the Senate failed to take action.

“Hopefully, next year, we will get the legislation across the finish line,” said Rep. Stephen Dargan, D-West Haven, co-chair of the legislature’s Public Safety and Security Committee.

YouTube.

Drones with flamethrowers like this one built by Austin Haughwout would be banned in CT.

Nationally, there were 632,068 drones registered as of December, according to Alison Duquette, a spokeswoman for the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). In Connecticut, a C-HIT analysis of the FAA’s most recent state-by-state database reveals that 5,731 drones were registered as of May.

Connecticut has been at the center of the drone controversy since the videos by Haughwout made national news, spurring investigations by the Clinton police and the FAA. No charges were brought against Haughwout and his father, Bret Haughwout, but the two men are expected to disclose information under oath about their use of weaponized drones before the FAA in the coming months, their attorney said. The men initially refused to comply with federal subpoenas to disclose information, but U.S. District Court Judge Jeffrey Meyer ruled in July that they must comply.

Their attorney, Mario Cerame, said he is prepared to contest any enforcement action or fines against his clients. He argues that the Haughwouts’ drone flights occurred before the FAA established in August specific regulations pertaining to drones.

Agency regulations prior to August, he said, were intended to apply to traditional aircraft with pilots —including airplanes, helicopters and blimps—and not to small, unmanned aircraft like drones.

An FAA spokesperson, Les Dorr, says that while the agency cannot discuss pending litigation, the FAA has the authority to “take enforcement action against anyone who operates an aircraft in a careless or reckless manner” and to levy fines against violators.

Many people fly drones for pleasure, and businesses and government agencies use them for numerous purposes, including assessment of farm crops, power lines, road conditions and storm damage. The FAA expects annual drone sales to jump from 2.5 million this year to 7 million in 2020.

“Civilian drones are incredibly useful devices that can and will improve our everyday lives,” Peter Sachs, a Connecticut lawyer and drone advocate, said. “Weapons are intended to cause damage, injury and even death. Attaching any sort of weapon to a civilian drone serves no useful purpose and does nothing to improve our lives.”

State Legislatures Get Involved

As drone popularity soars, lawmakers in New England and other states are expressing concerns about the dangers of civilians, and in some instances, of law enforcement officials, using weaponized drones.

Nevada, North Carolina, Oregon, Vermont, Wisconsin, Maine, North Dakota and Virginia have laws addressing weaponization of drones, said Amanda Essex, a policy associate at the National Conference of State Legislatures.

Five states, Nevada, North Carolina, Oregon, Vermont and Wisconsin prohibit possession or use of a weaponized drone by anyone. Maine and Virginia prohibit weaponized drones for use by law enforcement or public agencies. North Dakota prohibits law enforcement from attaching lethal weapons to drones, but the state’s law doesn’t address Tasers, tear gas or any other weapon considered non-lethal.

In Connecticut, the Senate “never got a chance” to vote on a proposed drone bill because budget deliberations took up too much time, said Sachs, who worked with Connecticut lawmakers on the bill. “The upcoming session will be different, and it will pass. No one in the legislature is opposed to it,” he said. The bill that failed included a provision to allow law enforcement bomb squads to equip drones with explosive detection, detonation or disposal equipment.

Paul Fitzgerald, the Connecticut Police Chiefs Association’s legislative committee co-chair and Berlin’s police chief, says the state’s police chiefs plan to draft a policy that will not allow weapons of any kind on any drones used by law enforcement. It will be based on a policy that was developed by the Virginia-based International Association of Chiefs of Police and will be shared with the state legislature, Fitzgerald says.Weaponization issues aside, Fitzgerald says drones “can be a great tool in the future to help with search and rescue, traffic investigation, crime investigation and event security.”

The American Civil Liberties Union of Connecticut supports legislation to prevent police from weaponizing drones, says the group’s spokeswoman, Meghan Smith.

“Drones have a legitimate place in some law enforcement operations, such as search and rescue efforts or accident scene recreation,” Smith says. “Given their immense capabilities for surveillance and weaponization, however, we strongly support requiring police to get a warrant before using them for spying and preventing police from attaching weapons to them.”

The new FAA regulations that went into effect in August make no mention of weapons but prohibit drones from carrying “hazardous materials” or operating in a “careless or reckless manner.” The rules also state that “no person may allow an object to be dropped from a small unmanned aircraft in a manner that creates an undue hazard” to people or property.

“The FAA is concerned about anything that can impact aviation safety,” says Alison Duquette, a spokeswoman for the agency. “We work with local, state and federal law enforcement agencies to investigate unauthorized or unsafe unmanned aircraft systems operations.”

FAA rules state that drones must weigh less than 55 pounds, must stay in the line of sight of the operator and can reach a maximum ground speed of 100 mph. Maximum allowable altitude is 400 feet above the ground, but a drone can ascend higher if it is within 400 feet of a structure.

All drones, including model aircraft used by hobbyists, must be registered with the FAA. Drones that are not model aircraft must be operated by someone with a remote pilot airman certificate or under the direct supervision of a person with such a certificate.

Since the drone incidents, Austin Haughwout has been arrested twice. In October, he was charged with fourth-degree sexual assault, enticing a minor and risk of injury to a minor. In July, Clinton police charged him with possession of child pornography, risk of injury to a minor and criminal attempt to commit sexual assault in the fourth degree.

USGS researchers analyzed nearly three decades of data from more than 20,000 public and private wells nationwide and determined that between 75.3 percent and 84.9 percent of wells in Connecticut could contain corrosive groundwater.

If left untreated, corrosive groundwater can leach lead and other metals in pipes en route to the tap, raising health concerns for the estimated 871,000 state residents who rely on private wells as their primary source of drinking water.

In Connecticut, the state does not mandate or conduct testing of well water, instead relying on private well owners to maintain, test and treat their own wells. Many well owners are not aware of the risks of corrosion, environmental health activists say.

This map by the U.S. Geological Survey shows the prevalence of corrosive groundwater nationally. Most New England states have a very high prevalence.

Corrosive groundwater, or water with low pH and alkalinity levels, is a naturally occurring phenomenon dependent on geology, and it is not dangerous to consume by itself. The problem occurs when the water enters pipes. Lead was commonly used in plumbing fixtures throughout the first half of the 20^th century, and Connecticut has some of the oldest housing stock in the country. When water with low pH and alkalinity levels interacts with lead, it triggers a chemical reaction that dissolves the metal and delivers traces to the tap. Warning signs include a metallic taste and bluish-green stains in the sink.

“Millions of Americans rely on private wells,” Kenneth Belitz, the scientist who led the study, said. “But the individual has to treat them, and it might be expensive, or they might not realize they need to do it.”

Water Monitoring, Testing

Public water supplies are monitored and protected by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under the Safe Drinking Water Act, which sets standards for drinking water quality and works with state agencies to ensure drinking water safety. The EPA does not regulate private wells, and most states do not require testing.

Connecticut mandates testing only when a new well is constructed, and no database on testing is maintained. Rhode Island is the only New England state that collects and analyzes testing data on private wells.

The state Department of Public Health (DPH) told C-HIT that while the state does not have specific statistics on the prevalence of lead pipes in homes supplied by private wells, health officials encourage well owners to get their water tested by a state-certified laboratory. Lead exposure can cause a variety of health problems, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reports. Children are especially vulnerable. In children, lead exposure can cause cognitive deficits, a loss in IQ points, speech and developmental delays and hyperactivity.

Ryan Tetrault, an environmental analyst for the DPH Private Well Program, said the program has held a number of outreach and education events in the past several years to provide information to private well owners on the importance of testing their private wells. Three years ago, the DPH received numerous complaints about high levels of arsenic and heavy metals in well water in several communities, including Weston, Stamford and Somers. At the time, DPH recommended that residents stop drinking their tap water, install remediation systems and test their well water yearly.

While well testing is affordable, treatment can be expensive. Bill Ainsworth, a veteran analyst for the Connecticut-based well-water service company Greco & Haines, says a standard battery of water-quality tests costs less than $200, but the bill for installing a chemical injection system or an acid neutralizer to treat corrosive groundwater can range from $1,500 to $2,000.

He estimated that the company tests about 5,000 wells per year, and that about half of them contain corrosive groundwater.

Environmental advocates say that the state should be doing more to protect well owners.

David Brown, the co-founder of the nonprofit Environment & Human Health, Inc., and a former CDC and DPH official, says it’s unrealistic to expect residents to regulate their own water supplies and suggested that local health departments do the job instead.

“I would think the state legislature might want to study this problem to see if the corrosivity of the water is producing exposures to lead and other metals. That would be a serious problem,” Brown said. “If you get a change, you’ll get it there [at the legislature], because the state’s environmental protection agency and the DPH don’t feel they have a responsibility for private wells. They’ll say you’re responsible for your own well.”

Ray Ough, 69, of Marlborough, says he and his wife have lived off well water for almost 40 years, and that well ownership not only lowers his utility bill but fits his do-it-yourself ethos. Ough says he gets his water tested “from time to time,” but conceded he wasn’t aware that corrosivity was a metric worth watching.

“When you have a well, you have some responsibility that goes along with that,” Ough said. “That’s just part of the homeowner experience.”

The USGS is planning more studies.

Corrosivity made national headlines when officials in Flint, Mich., failed to treat the city’s drinking water for corrosivity, creating a citywide public health crisis as lead leached into the public supply, and thousands of residents were exposed to the contamination.

Flint provided the motivation for a closer look at the risks posed by corrosive water in the absence of regulation on a broad scale, Belitz said.

The national study found that the Northeast, Southeast and Northwest had the largest percentage of wells with potentially corrosive groundwater.

In New England, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Maine and New Hampshire also had a “very high” prevalence of corrosive groundwater, while Vermont was rated “high” prevalence.

Joseph Ayotte, a USGS scientist and groundwater expert for the New England Water Science Center, says Belitz’s study provides a starting point for more detailed and localized analyses.

In New England, he said, water in public supply wells tends to be more corrosive because it is drawn from the shallower glacial aquifer, while water in private wells tends to be less corrosive because it is drawn from the deeper bedrock aquifer, a phenomenon that could mitigate the risk of exposure for many private well owners.

“Now that we see there’s a potential for corrosive water…there is additional information that we could get by looking at this in more detail,” Ayotte said. He suggested further studies to identify which well types and aquifers are most susceptible, so that researchers can refine risk assessments.

The Institute for Women’s Policy Research (IWPR) released a report last month that examined the status of women by state. Overall, Minnesota was named the best place for women because of that state’s policies around issues such as reproductive rights, employment, poverty, and health.

Three states – Connecticut, Massachusetts and Vermont – tied for second. Even better news? Connecticut has consistently ranked among the best states for women in 1998, 2000, 2002, and 2004, according to the study.

The state generally scores well in such reports, said Carolyn Treiss, executive director of the Permanent Commission on the Status of Women who is also on the IWPR’s national advisory committee. Having a forward-thinking populace helps.

“We are not beating back attempts to take steps backward,” said Treiss. “One of the things that makes the state rate at the top is that we’re constantly trying to advance and move forward.”

With no serious legislative threats to, say, Connecticut women’s reproductive rights – as is common in places such as Texas and other states, such as Missouri, where abortion clinics are rare – policymakers can devote their energy to issues surrounding employment, work, and family. Those latter aren’t, of course, strictly “women’s issues,” but bolstering women’s financial health has long-reaching and important health effects on their families.

Overall, Connecticut earned an A- in reproductive rights, Bs in employment and earnings, and poverty and opportunity, a B- in health and well-being, and Cs in political participation, and work and family.

(We would have earned an A in reproductive rights, but state law doesn’t require schools to teach sex education. Curriculum is left in the hands of local school boards.)

iStock Photo

In the report, CT earned a C in the work and family category.

The state scores lower in some categories because according to the report, the gender wage gap in Connecticut is 76.7 percent. At this rate, women won’t reach pay equity in the state until 2061. Some of us don’t have that long to wait.

During the Connecticut legislative session that ended last week, the bulk of the bills supported by Treiss’ commission focused on women’s economic security. Not all their bills were successful, but Treiss takes the long view. Bills that don’t make it into law can sometimes start a conversation that leads to successful passage later, as with a bill on paid family and medical leave from this most recent session. That bill, said Treiss, went farther than expected, and illustrated that Connecticut’s workplace policies have yet to catch up with the state’s workplace realities.

Some of the victories, said Treiss, involved getting a conversation going about students giving affirmative consent before sexual encounters, calling attention to the needs of women veterans, and pushing forward a bill that protects interns from sexual harassment.

“That’s a huge group of young women who were unprotected but now will be,” she said. “These are women who were in an incredibly vulnerable situation.”

Treiss said Connecticut’s relatively high financial ranking is encouraging, since a significant portion of the state’s workforce is employed in high-paying jobs, where the gender pay gap is greatest. A recent study found that the higher the income, the greater the disparity.

Though the state must remain vigilant about protecting our reproductive rights, we could use a little of that vigilance around income and job opportunities. Connecticut is a pretty good place to be if you’re a woman, but it could be better.

Susan Campbell is the Robert C. Vance Chair for Journalism and Mass Communication at Central Connecticut State University. She can be reached at slcampbell417@gmail.com.