For those watching and waiting for Congressional action on counter-drone authorities and expansion, there has been a flurry of activity in recent months and significant forward momentum surrounding dueling legislative efforts in the House and Senate. Last month, Dedrone joined the CUAV Expo to discuss the state of regulations, but for those who didn’t attend, here’s what the drone industry needs to keep an eye on this fall. 

At the beginning of 2024, Dedrone predicted that strengthened counter-drone legislation would finally pass as a component of the annual National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), expanding the type and number of entities authorized to use counter-drone technology. Currently, only a few federal agencies can use drone mitigation and advanced detection technologies, and that existing authorization is now set to expire on December 20 after Congress passed another short-term extension last week. 

Since 1961, Congress has passed an NDAA every single year. The NDAA “provides authorization of appropriations for the Department of Defense (DOD), nuclear weapons programs of the Department of Energy, and other defense-related activities.” In short, everyone understands that the NDAA must pass, and even in our hyper-partisan and polarized political environment, the NDAA has always managed to pass. And while we’re in the midst of another contentious general election, there’s no reason to doubt that the NDAA will once again pass later this year because it is the rare ‘bipartisan unicorn’ and provides a path for counter-drone legislation to be attached to and ultimately be signed into law.  

Work on the Fiscal Year 2025 NDAA has been ongoing since January, and the House passed its version earlier this summer. The next steps in the legislative process require the Senate to pass its version of the NDAA, and then the two sides need to negotiate a middle ground. With both the Senate and House not in session until after the November election, final negotiations and passage by both chambers won’t occur until after Thanksgiving. This gives key lawmakers and stakeholders involved in enhancing and expanding counter-drone powers additional time to reach consensus. 

Democratic Senator Gary Peters of Michigan, in conjunction with Republican Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, have aimed to finally expand critical counter-drone authorizations. They have formally filed an updated version of the Safeguarding the Homeland from the Threats Posed by Unmanned Aircraft Systems Act of 2024 as an amendment to the Senate version of the NDAA. This bipartisan legislation should sound familiar: it was introduced in 2023 and was bipartisan then, too. It includes provisions for access to advanced detection technologies and for setting up a pilot program for state, local, tribal, and territorial (SLTT) law enforcement to have access to and use drone mitigation technology.  

Those who are bullish about the passage of the Peters-Johnson legislation got a boost in August when two key Senators signed off on the revised version of the legislation. Senator Maria Cantwell (D-WA), Chair of the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee and Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL), Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, have indicated support for the legislation after revisions were made. Among others, the legislation now allows 30 SLTT agencies (previously 60) to be granted drone mitigation authorities.  

Dedrone data shows that this technology is quickly becoming necessary; our drone incident center has over 1,000 articles detailing incidents from around the world. Commercial organizations like the NFL have publicly advocated for the 2023 version of the Peters amendment, and the 2024 version is substantially similar.  Since last year’s version of the bill, there have been a number of alarming drone incidents, including the interruption of a major NFL playoff game by a drone. That game was watched by an average of over 55 million people, and it’s safe to say there were probably a few Members of Congress among that group. 

While the Senate has made significant progress in recent months, there is reason to be optimistic about similar legislation building momentum in the House. Just last week, the House companion bill to the Peters-Johnson legislation, H.R. 4333, sponsored by Rep. Chrissy Houlahan (Democrat-PA) and Rep. Andrew Garbarino (Republican-NY), received a formal endorsement from the bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus. While two weeks ago, H.R. 8610, the Counter-UAS Authority Security, Safety, and Reauthorization Act, took a significant step forward and unanimously passed the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. 

H.R. 8610 is sponsored by the top Republican and Democratic lawmakers on the three House Committees with jurisdiction over the legislation – Homeland Security, Transportation and Infrastructure, and Judiciary. The latest version of the bill, which passed the Transportation Committee, included a more robust mitigation pilot program as compared to the introduced version of the legislation. The revamped pilot would initially allow five state or covered local law enforcement agencies to have mitigation authority, and after 18 months, ten additional agencies would be allowed to participate. Unlike the Senate legislation, H.R. 8610 would limit the number of sites per jurisdiction where mitigation capabilities can be deployed to four. The Senate bill has no such limitation. Finally, it’s important to understand that a ‘covered local law enforcement agency’ – which would be eligible to participate in the pilot – is defined as a “...local law enforcement agency with jurisdiction over an area containing a population of at least 650,000 people.”  

Beyond the authorities for use of mitigation tools, there continues to be significant ambiguity about the legality of advanced detection technology, and both the House and Senate bills aim to clarify this landscape. The Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) Remote ID rule, going into full effect in March of this year, helped pave the way for Congress to reach a consensus and support expanding the use of advanced detection capabilities. While support for this capability is widespread, a significant difference exists when comparing the House and Senate legislative efforts - who can operate the advanced detection equipment? The Peters-Johnson legislation would not only authorize SLTT law enforcement but would also provide “any owner or operator of an airport or critical infrastructure” with the ability to use advanced detection. On the House side, H.R. 8610 also takes a significant step forward on authorizing advanced detection but with one key difference – while owners and operators of critical infrastructure may procure advanced detection technology, they cannot operate it. Instead, private sector entities must enter formal agreements with federal or SLTT law enforcement to operate these systems. Regardless of the approach Congress ultimately settles on, it appears the use of advanced detection capabilities will soon become more widespread, further enhancing airspace security for those protecting critical sites.  

While you may be thinking: time is running short, political tensions on Capitol Hill are running high ahead of the election, and of course, there are still differences between House and Senate counter-drone bills – so can anything actually pass? Yes, and there is still reason to be hopeful about something significant being enacted by the end of this year.  

First, the NDAA ‘vehicle’ doors are still open, and there’s still time to catch a ride. Given the congressional calendar for the remainder of the year, it’s possible that the Senate will not ultimately pass its version of the NDAA. Instead, Members and staff will spend the next nine weeks negotiating behind the scenes and agree in early December. This means the web of key congressional players crafting counter-drone legislation has about nine weeks to reconcile differences and hammer out a robust enhancement and expansion agreement.   

Once the country and the Congress get through the November 5 elections, tensions will wane, and lawmakers will no longer be distracted by campaign season. There will be a mad dash to pass as many bills as possible in what’s known as a ‘lame-duck session’  before the new Congress in January, when Members of Congress will have to start the legislative process again. This is a time for cutting deals, and pending counter-drone legislation allows many members to enact meaningful reforms to protect more people and places. 

Finally, can the House and Senate compromise? Things have moved in that direction in recent months, as we’ve already seen both sides take huge steps towards one another. The latest Senate bill cut the number of mitigation pilot program agencies in half, while the House took significant steps toward the Senate bill by tripling their pilot program sites. Compared to where things stood at the beginning of the Congress, much progress has been made, and much more can still be achieved. 

Author: Ryan Little, Government Affairs, Dedrone