[House Hearing, 118 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


                     UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEMS AND EMERGENCY 
                      RESPONSE: THE IMPACT OF DRONES AND 
                      OTHER EMERGING TECHNOLOGY ON U.S. LAW 
                      ENFORCEMENT

=======================================================================

                             JOINT HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

                            SUBCOMMITTEE ON
                  EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AND TECHNOLOGY

                                AND THE

                            SUBCOMMITTEE ON
          COUNTERTERRORISM, LAW ENFORCEMENT, AND INTELLIGENCE

                                 OF THE

                     COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                    ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                             SECOND SESSION

                               __________

                              MAY 16, 2024

                               __________

                           Serial No. 118-65

                               __________

       Printed for the use of the Committee on Homeland Security
                                     
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
                                     

       Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov/

                               __________
                               

                   U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE                    
58-456 PDF                  WASHINGTON : 2025                  
          
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------                                    
                               

                     COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY

                 Mark E. Green, MD, Tennessee, Chairman
Michael T. McCaul, Texas             Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi, 
Clay Higgins, Louisiana                  Ranking Member
Michael Guest, Mississippi           Sheila Jackson Lee, Texas
Dan Bishop, North Carolina           Eric Swalwell, California
Carlos A. Gimenez, Florida           J. Luis Correa, California
August Pfluger, Texas                Troy A. Carter, Louisiana
Andrew R. Garbarino, New York        Shri Thanedar, Michigan
Marjorie Taylor Greene, Georgia      Seth Magaziner, Rhode Island
Tony Gonzales, Texas                 Glenn Ivey, Maryland
Nick LaLota, New York                Daniel S. Goldman, New York
Mike Ezell, Mississippi              Robert Garcia, California
Anthony D'Esposito, New York         Delia C. Ramirez, Illinois
Laurel M. Lee, Florida               Robert Menendez, New Jersey
Morgan Luttrell, Texas               Thomas R. Suozzi, New York
Dale W. Strong, Alabama              Timothy M. Kennedy, New York
Josh Brecheen, Oklahoma              Yvette D. Clarke, New York
Elijah Crane, Arizona
                      Stephen Siao, Staff Director
                  Hope Goins, Minority Staff Director
                       Natalie Nixon, Chief Clerk
                                 ------                                

          SUBCOMMITTEE ON EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AND TECHNOLOGY

                 Anthony D'Esposito, New York, Chairman
Nick LaLota, New York                Troy A. Carter, Louisiana, Ranking 
Dale W. Strong, Alabama                  Member
Josh Brecheen, Oklahoma              Daniel S. Goldman, New York
Mark E. Green, MD, Tennessee (ex     Timothy M. Kennedy, New York
    officio)                         Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi 
                                         (ex officio)
               Diana Bergwin, Subcommittee Staff Director
          Lauren McClain, Minority Subcommittee Staff Director
                                 ------                                

  SUBCOMMITTEE ON COUNTERTERRORISM, LAW ENFORCEMENT, AND INTELLIGENCE

                    August Pfluger, Texas, Chairman
Dan Bishop, North Carolina           Seth Magaziner, Rhode Island, 
Tony Gonzales, Texas                     Ranking Member
Anthony D'Esposito, New York         J. Luis Correa, California
Elijah Crane, Arizona                Daniel S. Goldman, New York
Mark E. Green, MD, Tennessee (ex     Thomas R. Suozzi, New York
    officio)                         Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi 
                                         (ex officio)
               Michael Koren, Subcommittee Staff Director
          Brittany Carr, Minority Subcommittee Staff Director
                           
                           C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page

                               Statements

The Honorable Anthony D'Esposito, a Representative in Congress 
  From the State of New York, and Chairman, Subcommittee on 
  Emergency Management and Technology:
  Oral Statement.................................................     1
  Prepared Statement.............................................     3
The Honorable Troy A. Carter, a Representative in Congress From 
  the State of Louisiana, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on 
  Emergency Management and Technology:
  Prepared Statement.............................................    11
The Honorable August Pfluger, a Representative in Congress From 
  the State of Texas, and Chairman, Subcommittee on 
  Counterterrorism, Law Enforcement, and Intelligence:
  Oral Statement.................................................     4
  Prepared Statement.............................................     7
The Honorable J. Luis Correa, a Representative in Congress From 
  the State of California, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on 
  Counterterrorism, Law Enforcement, and Intelligence:
  Oral Statement.................................................     8
  Prepared Statement.............................................    10
The Honorable Bennie G. Thompson, a Representative in Congress 
  From the State of Mississippi, and Ranking Member, Committee on 
  Homeland Security:
  Prepared Statement.............................................    10

                               Witnesses

Mr. Kaz Daughtry, Deputy Commissioner, Operations, New York City 
  Police Department:
  Oral Statement.................................................    13
  Joint Prepared Statement.......................................    15
Mr. John Chell, Chief of Patrol, Patrol Services Bureau, New York 
  City Police Department:
  Oral Statement.................................................    16
  Joint Prepared Statement.......................................    15
Mr. Kevin Fetterman, Division Chief, Command and Emergency 
  Planning, Orange County Fire Authority on Behalf of the 
  International Association of Fire Chiefs:
  Oral Statement.................................................    16
  Prepared Statement.............................................    18
Mr. Rahul Sidhu, Founder and CEO, Aerodome:
  Oral Statement.................................................    22
  Prepared Statement.............................................    24
Mr. Michael Robbins, President and CEO, Association for Uncrewed 
  Vehicle Systems International:
  Oral Statement.................................................    27
  Prepared Statement.............................................    28

                             For the Record

The Honorable Troy A. Carter, a Representative in Congress From 
  the State of Louisiana, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on 
  Emergency Management and Technology:
  Letter From the National Football League.......................    56

                                Appendix

Questions From Chairman August Pfluger for Kaz Daughtry and John 
  M. Chell.......................................................    57
Questions From Honorable Nick LaLota for Kaz Daughtry and John M. 
  Chell..........................................................    57
Questions From Honorable Nick LaLota for Kevin Fetterman.........    58
Questions From Honorable Nick LaLota for Rahul Sidhu.............    59
Questions From Honorable Nick LaLota for Michael Robbins.........    60

 
 UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEMS AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE: THE IMPACT OF DRONES 
         AND OTHER EMERGING TECHNOLOGY ON U.S. LAW ENFORCEMENT

                              ----------                              


                         Thursday, May 16, 2024

             U.S. House of Representatives,
                    Committee on Homeland Security,
                  Subcommittee on Emergency Management and 
                                        Technology, and the
        Subcommittee on Counterterrorism, Law Enforcement, 
                                          and Intelligence,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The subcommittees met, pursuant to notice, at 10:09 a.m., 
in room 360, Cannon House Office Building, Hon. Anthony 
D'Esposito [Chairman of the Subcommittee on Emergency 
Management and Technology] presiding.
    Present from the Subcommittee on Emergency Management and 
Technology: Representatives D'Esposito and Strong.
    Present from the Subcommittee on Counterterrorism, Law 
Enforcement, and Intelligence: Representatives Pfluger, 
Kennedy, and Correa.
    Also present: Representatives Higgins and Nehls.
    Chairman D'Esposito. The Committee on Homeland Security 
Subcommittee on Emergency Management and Technology and the 
Subcommittee on Counterterrorism, Law Enforcement, and 
Intelligence will come to oreder. The purpose of this hearing 
is to allow Members to examine how first responders are using 
unmanned aerial systems, or drones, and other emerging 
technologies, to improve public safety in communities 
throughout this great Nation.
    Without objection, the gentleman from Louisiana, Mr. 
Higgins; the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Nehls; the gentleman 
from Guam, Mr. Moylan; the gentleman from New York, Mr. Lawler; 
and the gentlewoman from New York, Ms. Stefanik, are permitted 
to sit on the dais to ask questions of the witnesses.
    I now recognize myself for an opening statement.
    I would like to begin this hearing by welcoming our new 
Member to the subcommittee who will be joining us in a few 
minutes from the great State of New York, Mr. Kennedy. 
Unfortunately, also the passing of my esteemed colleague, Mr. 
Payne of New Jersey. I know we didn't always agree on 
everything policy-wise, but there is no doubt that he was a 
fierce fighter for his constituency. My prayers remain with his 
family, his friends, and the residents of his district.
    I ask you all for a moment of silence for the Honorable 
Donald Payne, Jr. Thank you.
    Welcome to our witnesses and thank you for testifying 
before the Subcommittees on Emergency Management and Technology 
and Counterterrorism, Law Enforcement, and Intelligence as we 
examine the use of unmanned aerial systems or drones in 
emergency response and their impact on the United States' law 
enforcement.
    I commend each of you for your dedication to improving 
public safety throughout this country, and we look forward to 
hearing your testimony.
    In honor of National Police Week I also want to thank our 
Nation's police officers for their service and commitment to 
keeping our communities safe. I know there are many in this 
room, so I would like to give a round of applause to the men 
and women of law enforcement.
    Americans can freely live their lives and sleep well at 
night because of the unwavering work of our police forces to 
uphold our laws and make our communities safer. One of my 
greatest honors was serving as an NYPD detective, and as 
Chairman of the Subcommittee on Emergency Management and 
Technology, I am committed to supporting our State and local 
law enforcement officials and ensuring that our Nation's 
bravest and finest have the resources and technologies they 
need.
    I have been a supporter of FEMA's suite of preparedness 
grants for States and localities to harden their defenses 
against the threat of terrorism, and I hope to hear how State 
and local police departments are using these grants to acquire 
drones and other emerging technologies to improve police 
operations and prepare for new challenges.
    Throughout the Nation an estimated 1,400 public safety 
agencies are actively utilizing drones to enhance their 
operational capabilities. Cities throughout the country have 
implemented drones as first responder programs to provide 
police departments with tactical intelligence and situational 
awareness that informs police operations and emergency response 
on the ground.
    In my home State of New York, the great New York City 
Police Department, who is represented well here today, has used 
drones to assist with search-and-rescue efforts, inspect 
emergency incidents, and provide intelligence for hostage 
situations, only to name a few. I am proud to say that the 
usage of those drones and technology is growing every single 
day.
    More recently, following the April earthquake that occurred 
in New Jersey, the NYPD partnered with the New York City 
Department of Buildings and used its drones to inspect local 
bridges for any structural defects. It is clear that the 
utilization of UAS technology has the potential to reform the 
way that police departments operate, and I am looking forward 
to learning how UAS technology cuts emergency response times, 
saves taxpayer dollars, and enhances police department 
operations.
    Drones have the potential to save lives by delivering 
medical support in rural and densely-populated urban areas. 
Tragically in 2022, over 75,000 people died from opioids. 
However, by dropping medication, a life-saving nasal spray, 
drones have improved emergency response times by arriving on 
the scene faster than an ambulance. As such, the benefits of 
drone use in emergency response are far-reaching.
    As police departments look to expand their use of UAS 
technology it is important that they take stock of any 
unintended national security concerns. According to January 
2024 guidance released by the FBI and the Cybersecurity and 
Infrastructure Security Agency, Chinese-made drones present 
risks to U.S. national security. However, Chinese-based drone 
manufacturer DJI makes up the majority of the United States' 
commercial market and due to its advanced features and 
affordability has become increasingly used among public safety 
agencies.
    It is important that the Federal Government and the 
intelligence community continue to share guidance and relevant 
security information so that law enforcement agencies and first 
responders are able to take necessary precautions while not 
stifling innovative tools.
    Further, it is important that the U.S. House of 
Representatives examine any regulatory barriers to public 
safety agencies when looking to utilize emerging technologies. 
We need to work with you to make sure that you have the ability 
to keep your communities safe.
    We also need to ensure that those on the front lines, all 
of our law enforcement men and women, do not have to jump 
through hoops to be able to use the best tools available. UAS 
technology has the potential to save lives through efficient 
response times, providing medical care, and offering 
operational support to police officers with their boots on the 
ground.
    I look forward to examining how public safety technology 
has complimented the United States' law enforcement and what 
the future could hold. I commend those for serving in uniform 
for their relentless pursuit to save lives and improve 
emergency response through the usage of drones and other 
emerging technology.
    I want to thank our witnesses again for being here. I look 
forward to hearing your testimony and, more importantly, I look 
forward to working with you to make sure that departments and 
law enforcement agencies throughout this great Nation have 
every resource they need to do the job that you all do.
    [The statement of Chairman D'Esposito follows:]
                Statement of Chairman Anthony D'Esposito
                              May 16, 2024
    I'd like to begin this hearing by welcoming a new Member to the 
committee and subcommittee, Mr. Kennedy from the great State of New 
York, and by sharing my condolences for the passing of my esteemed 
colleague, Mr. Payne of New Jersey. I know we didn't always agree on 
everything policy-wise, but he was a fierce fighter for his 
constituency. My prayers remain with his family, friends, and district.
    Welcome to our witnesses. Thank you for testifying before the 
Subcommittees on Emergency Management and Technology and 
Counterterrorism, Law Enforcement, and Intelligence, as we examine the 
use of unmanned aerial systems, or drones, in emergency response and 
their impact on U.S. law enforcement. I commend each of you for your 
dedication to improving public safety throughout this great Nation, and 
we look forward to hearing your testimony.
    In honor of National Police Week, I also want to thank our Nation's 
police officers for their service and commitment to keeping our 
communities safe. As a retired NYPD detective, I know first-hand that 
justice is upheld only because of their bravery, dedication, and 
sacrifice. Americans can freely live their lives and sleep well at 
night because of the unwavering work of our police forces to uphold our 
laws and make our communities safer.
    As the Chairman of the Subcommittee on Emergency Management and 
Technology, I am committed to supporting our State and local law 
enforcement officials and ensuring that our Nation's bravest have the 
resources and technologies they need. I have been a supporter of FEMA's 
suite of preparedness grants for States and localities to harden their 
defenses against the threat of terrorism, and I hope to hear how State 
and local police departments are using these grants to acquire drones 
and other emerging technologies to improve police operations and 
prepare for new challenges.
    Throughout the Nation, an estimated 1,400 public safety agencies 
are actively using drones to enhance their operational capabilities.\1\ 
Cities throughout the country have implemented Drone as First Responder 
(DFR) programs to provide police departments with tactical intelligence 
and situational awareness that informs police operations and emergency 
response on the ground.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ https://www.axon.com/resources/police-drones.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In my home State of New York, the New York City Police Department 
(NYPD) has used drones to assist with search-and-rescue efforts, 
inspect emergency incidents, and provide intelligence for hostage 
situations, to name only a few. More recently, following the April 
earthquake that occurred in New Jersey, the NYPD partnered with the NYC 
Department of Buildings, and used its drones to inspect local bridges 
for any structural defects. It is clear that the use of UAS technology 
has the potential to reform the way that police departments operate, 
and I am looking forward to learning how UAS technology cuts emergency 
response times, saves local taxpayer dollars, and enhances police 
department operations.
    Drones have the potential to save lives by delivering medical 
support in rural or densely-populated urban areas. Tragically, in 2022, 
over 75,000 people died from opioids.\2\ However, by dropping naloxone, 
a life-saving nasal spray, drones could improve emergency response 
times by arriving on the scene faster than an ambulance. As such, the 
benefits of drone use in emergency response are far-reaching.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ https://www.yahoo.com/news/untrained-bystanders-administer-
drone-delivered-132401332.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    As police departments look to expand their use of UAS technology, 
it is important that they take stock of any unintended national 
security concerns. According to January 2024 guidance released by the 
FBI and the Cybersecurity Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), 
Chinese-made drones present risks to U.S. national security.\3\ 
However, Chinese-based drone manufacturer, DJI, makes up the majority 
of the United States' commercial market, and due to its advanced 
features and affordability, has become increasingly used among public 
safety agencies.\4\ It is important that the Federal Government and the 
intelligence community continue to share guidance and relevant security 
information so that law enforcement agencies and first responders are 
able to take necessary precautions while not stifling innovative tools.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\ https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/25/us/politics/us-china-drones-
dji.html.
    \4\ https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/25/us/politics/us-china-drones-
dji.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Further, it is important for Congress to examine any regulatory 
barriers to public safety agencies when looking to utilize emerging 
technologies. We need to ensure that those on the front lines keeping 
our communities safe don't have to jump through hoops to be able to use 
the best tools available.
    UAS technology has the potential to save lives through efficient 
response times, providing medical care and offering operational support 
to police officers on the ground. I look forward to examining how 
public safety technology has complimented U.S. law enforcement and what 
the future could hold. I commend those serving in uniform for their 
relentless pursuit to save lives and improve emergency response through 
using drones and other emerging technology.
    Thank you again to our witnesses here today and I look forward to 
hearing your testimony.

    Chairman D'Esposito. Is Mr. Carter here?
    I now recognize the Chairman of Counterterrorism, Law 
Enforcement, and Intelligence Subcommittee, the gentleman from 
Texas, Mr. Pfluger, for his opening statement.
    Mr. Pfluger. Thank you, Chairman D'Esposito.
    We thank the witnesses and agree with the statement 
previously that we thank you for your service and your 
families' service as well because we know that it is a team 
effort.
    We are holding this important hearing to examine how first 
responders are using unmanned aerial systems, or drones, to 
improve public safety in communities throughout the United 
States while considering security vulnerabilities and privacy 
concerns.
    The use of drones by first responders represents a paradigm 
shift in our country. The ability of drones to access remote or 
hazardous areas, gather real-time intelligence, and provide 
aerial support in emergency situations can be at times 
invaluable.
    In recent years, first responders have increasingly turned 
to drones to amplify their operations' response times, 
efficiency, and safety. Law enforcement agencies utilize drones 
in a variety of ways from special weapons and tactics or SWAT 
operations to search-and-rescue missions, as well as to provide 
situational awareness and added community safety for major 
events like the Super Bowl, the World Series, and other 
sporting events where tens of thousands of Americans gather 
together.
    Law enforcement agencies are also bringing policing to the 
future with programs like mobile drones as first responders, a 
program to kit out marked patrol units with drones to respond 
to urgent calls like foot pursuits or violent crimes in 
progress.
    Drones are utilized in emergency responses to establish 
situational awareness of various incidents. For instance, both 
rural and urban fire departments utilize drones to provide 
real-time information and to reveal the extent of a fire's 
spread on a burning building. All-in-all, drones can provide 
key data to our first responders allowing for effective 
decision making and assisting in public safety and saving 
lives.
    While drones are used for emergency response, recreational 
use, or for research and commerce purposes, the proliferation 
of this emerging technology has also introduced new risks to 
homeland security and to privacy. In particular, malicious 
actors have used drones domestically to commit crimes, conduct 
illegal surveillance, industrial espionage, and hinder law 
enforcement efforts at all levels.
    Additionally, malicious drone operators continue to attempt 
to target and disrupt critical infrastructure sectors. For 
example, the energy and chemical sectors often report 
suspicious activity by drones, including in my home State of 
Texas. Criminals, including drug cartels, regularly use drones 
for smuggling contraband into prisons, cross-border 
trafficking, and surveillance of U.S. law enforcement.
    CBP officials have consistently raised concerns that 
Mexican narcoterrorist gangs are utilizing weaponized drones 
only a short distance from the U.S. Southwest Border to conduct 
nefarious activities.
    We must do everything we can to protect against these 
threats, and we must also do everything we can to protect 
against potential threats to U.S. critical infrastructure and 
other matters posed by drones that are manufactured in foreign 
adversarial countries like the People's Republic of China.
    In fact, DJI, a Shenzhen-based company, is a Chinese-based 
drone manufacturer that controls nearly the entire global drone 
market. While DJI has received the most attention from 
Congress, given the company's dominant market position, Autel, 
a drone technology company also headquartered in Shenzhen, has 
increased its footprint in the United States. The extensive 
deployment of Chinese-manufactured drones in the U.S. critical 
sectors is a national security concern, and it may increase the 
risk of unauthorized access to sensitive systems and data.
    Multiple U.S. Federal departments and agencies have already 
warned against or banned the procurement of certain drones 
originating in the PRC in recognition of the threats they pose. 
Most recently in January 2024, the Cybersecurity and 
Infrastructure Agency and the Federal Bureau of Investigation 
shared that Chinese manufactured UAS pose a threat to critical 
infrastructure and provided guidance for drone procurement.
    The advisory in part states that the use of Chinese 
manufactured drones in critical infrastructure operations risks 
exposing sensitive information to PRC authorities, jeopardizing 
U.S. national security, economic security, and public health 
and safety. Further, the Department of Commerce placed DJI on 
the entity list and the Department of Treasury placed DJI on 
the Office of Foreign Assets Controls List of Chinese 
technology businesses that have a nexus to PRC's military 
industrial complex.
    These lists restrict U.S.-based business investments in DJI 
due to claims of support of human rights abuses against China's 
Uyghur Muslim population. State, local, Tribal, and territorial 
law enforcement agencies Nation-wide have increasingly turned 
to DJI drones without adequately considering the potential 
cybersecurity risk and broader national security implications.
    Florida, Arkansas, Tennessee, and Mississippi all 
successfully have taken steps to prevent law enforcement 
agencies in their State from procuring drones that are 
manufactured in the PRC. I would strongly urge other States to 
follow suit and find ways to not be dependent on the PRC-
manufactured drones.
    As has been stated before, it is not good public policy to 
rely upon the goodwill of a strategic foreign competitor which 
is known for using supply chain control as a weapon of war and 
is beholden to the PRC's military and national security laws 
for public safety drones, and I couldn't agree any more.
    Moreover, under the PRC's national security law from 2017, 
all Chinese organizations and citizens, including DJI and other 
Chinese manufacturers, are required to support, assist, and 
cooperate with the State's intelligence work. More must be done 
to ensure that certain foreign adversarial countries, including 
the PRC, are unable to supply our U.S. Government law 
enforcement partners and other entities with their own drones.
    As the Chair of the Subcommittee on Counterterrorism, Law 
Enforcement, and Intelligence, I plan to continue to examine 
these issues and, in particular, the potential national 
security threats posed by drones that have been produced, 
manufactured, or assembled inside the PRC.
    I look forward to the hearing from this distinguished panel 
today. I thank my colleague and the Chairman of this 
subcommittee, Mr. D'Esposito, for his leadership in this 
particular issue and yield back.
    [The statement of Chairman Pfluger follows:]
                  Statement of Chairman August Pfluger
                              May 16, 2024
    Thank you, Chairman D'Esposito.
    We are holding this important hearing to examine how first 
responders are using unmanned aerial systems, or drones, to improve 
public safety in communities throughout the United States, while 
considering security vulnerabilities and privacy concerns.
    The use of drones by first responders represents a paradigm shift 
in our country. The ability of drones to access remote or hazardous 
areas, gather real-time intelligence, and provide aerial support in 
emergency situations has proved invaluable.
    In recent years, first responders have increasingly turned to 
drones to amplify their operations, response times, efficiency, and 
safety.
    Law enforcement agencies utilize drones in various ways, from 
Special Weapons and Tactics or SWAT operations to search-and-rescue 
missions, as well as to provide situational awareness and added 
community safety for major events like the Super Bowl, the World 
Series, the Kentucky Derby, and many other major events, where tens of 
thousands of Americans attend.
    Law enforcement agencies are also bringing policing to the future 
with programs like Mobile Drones as a First Responder, a program to kit 
out marked patrol units with drones to respond to urgent calls like 
foot pursuits or violent crimes in progress.
    Drones are also utilized in emergency responses to establish 
situational awareness of various incidents.
    For instance, both rural and urban fire departments utilize drones 
to provide real-time information to reveal the extent of a fire's 
spread on a burning building.
    All in all, drones can provide key data to our first responders, 
allowing for effective decision making, and assisting in public safety 
and saving lives.
    While drones are used for emergency responses, recreational use, or 
for research and commerce purposes, the proliferation of this emerging 
technology has also introduced new risks to homeland security and 
privacy.
    In particular, malicious actors have used drones domestically to 
commit crimes, conduct illegal surveillance, industrial espionage, and 
hinder law enforcement efforts at all levels.
    Additionally, malicious drone operators continue to attempt to 
target and disrupt critical infrastructure sectors.
    For example, the energy and chemical sectors often report 
suspicious activity by drones, including in my home State of Texas.
    Criminals, including drug cartels, regularly use drones for 
smuggling contraband into prisons, cross-border trafficking, and 
surveillance of U.S. law enforcement.
    Customs and Border Protection officials have consistently raised 
concern that Mexican narco-terrorist gangs are utilizing weaponized 
drones only a short distance from the U.S. Southwest Border to conduct 
nefarious activities.
    We must do everything we can to protect against these threats.
    We must also do everything we can to protect against potential 
threats to U.S. critical infrastructure and other matters posed by 
drones that are manufactured in foreign adversarial countries, like the 
People's Republic of China (PRC).
    In fact, DJI, a Shenzhen-based company, is a Chinese-based drone 
manufacturer that controls nearly the entire global drone market.
    While DJI has received the most attention from Congress given the 
company's dominant market position, Autel--a drone technology company 
also headquartered in Shenzhen, China--has increased its footprint in 
the United States, which is equally concerning.
    The extensive deployment of Chinese-manufactured drones in the U.S. 
critical sectors is a national security concern, and it may increase 
the risk of unauthorized access to sensitive systems and data.
    Multiple U.S. Federal departments and agencies have already warned 
against or banned the procurement of certain drones originating in the 
PRC, in recognition of the threats they pose.
    Most recently, in January 2024, the Cybersecurity and 
Infrastructure Agency and the Federal Bureau of Investigation shared 
that Chinese-manufactured UAS pose a threat to critical infrastructure 
and provided guidance for drone procurement.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24362988-cybersecurity-
guidance-chinese-manufactured-uas-final.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The advisory, in part, states that, ``the use of Chinese-
manufactured UAS [drones] in critical infrastructure operations risks 
exposing sensitive information to PRC authorities, jeopardizing U.S. 
national security, economic security, and public health and 
safety.''\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Further, the Department of Commerce placed DJI on the Entity List, 
and the Department of the Treasury placed DJI on the Office of Foreign 
Assets Control's list of Chinese technology businesses that have a 
nexus to the PRC's military-industrial complex.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\ https://www.bis.doc.gov/index.php/documents/regulations-docs/
2326-supplement-no-4-to-part-744-entity-list-4/file.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    These lists restrict U.S.-based business investments in DJI due to 
claims of support of human rights abuses against China's Uyghur Muslim 
minority.
    State, local, Tribal, and territorial law enforcement agencies 
Nation-wide have increasingly turned to DJI drones without adequately 
considering the potential cybersecurity risks and broader national 
security implications.
    Florida, Arkansas, Tennessee, and Mississippi have all successfully 
taken steps to prevent law enforcement agencies in their State from 
procuring drones that are manufactured in the People's Republic of 
China.
    I would strongly urge other States to follow suit and find ways to 
not be dependent on PRC-manufactured drones.
    As has been stated before, ``It is not good public policy to rely 
upon the goodwill of a strategic foreign competitor, which is known for 
using supply chain control as a weapon of war and is beholden to PRC's 
[People's Republic of China's] military and national security laws, for 
public safety drones.''\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\ See, Testimony of Michael Robbins, AUVSI (pg. 11-12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    I couldn't agree anymore.
    Moreover, under the PRC's National Security Law from 2017, all 
Chinese organizations and citizens--including DJI and other Chinese 
drone manufacturers--are required to support, assist, and cooperate 
with the State intelligence work.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \5\ PRC National Intelligence Law (as amended in 2018). China Law 
Translate. https://www.chinalawtranslate.com/en/national-intelligence-
law-of-the-p-r-c-2017/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    More must be done to ensure that certain foreign adversarial 
countries, including the PRC, are unable to supply our U.S. Government, 
law enforcement partners, and other entities, with their drones.
    As the Chair of the Subcommittee on Counterterrorism, Law 
Enforcement, and Intelligence, I plan to continue to examine these 
issues, and in particular, the potential national security threats 
posed by drones that have been produced, manufactured, or assembled in 
the PRC.
    I look forward to hearing from this distinguished panel today and 
working in a bipartisan fashion to better understand this important 
matter and find solutions to address these cross-cutting public safety 
and national security issues.

    Chairman D'Esposito. Thank you, Mr. Pfluger.
    I now recognize the Ranking Member of the Counterterrorism, 
Law Enforcement, and Intelligence Subcommittee, the gentleman 
from California, Mr. Correa, for his opening statement.
    Mr. Correa. Thank you, Chairman D'Esposito.
    First, I want to associate myself with the comments made by 
my colleagues regarding the passing of our friend, Congressman 
Don Payne. Congressman Payne's contributions to this committee, 
this institution were incredible, and Don, I just want to say 
we will miss you.
    Given that this week is Police Week, I also want to thank 
our law enforcement witnesses here today for your good work. 
You are the thin blue line that stands between us and those 
that would harm our family.
    I also want to thank our Chairman, Mr. D'Esposito, for 
serving and protecting the citizens of New York City. Thank 
you, sir.
    Chairman D'Esposito. Thank you.
    Mr. Correa. Turning to our hearing today, Chairman Pfluger, 
Mr. D'Esposito, and Ranking Member Carter, I want to thank you 
for leading the discussion on these unmanned aerial systems, or 
AE UASes in emergency situations. I want to start out by 
acknowledging that these drones have a long history of being 
used in military theaters throughout the world. Recently this 
technology of UASes has evolved and become adopted by Federal 
and local law enforcement agencies in the emergency response 
situations.
    In fact, in my home State of California, the Chula Vista 
Police Department has become the first to routinely respond to 
9-1-1 calls using flying drones. Chula Vista's drone program is 
a first responder. This is a concept that is proactive rather 
than reactive as to the fact that drones are actually remotely 
stationed around the city and give officers first real-time 
information before they actually arrive at situations, crime 
scenes so to speak.
    My home district, city of Fullerton, Fullerton Police 
Department also uses drones to provide support to its officers 
in their emergency operations.
    Of course, today I want to welcome all of our guests, but 
especially I want to welcome Chief Kevin Fetterman with the 
Orange County Fire Department that provides fire [sic] not only 
to the County of Orange but my own city, the city of Santa Ana. 
Thank you, Kevin Fetterman, for being here today.
    The Orange County Fire Authority's drone program has 
assisted in search-and-rescue missions during fires, and they 
are deployed quickly to determine whether there are any victims 
trapped in homes and what have you, good tools to use. In 2021, 
there was an incident on the 261 toll road where Orange County 
Fire Authority deployed drones with infrared capability to 
better assess the scene and extinguish that fire. But you also 
teamed up with local police and the drones were able to locate 
the suspected arsonist who was hiding in the bushes nearby.
    Unmanned aerial systems are also used at the Federal level 
in planning national special security events like the Los 
Angeles Olympics that are coming up in 2028. Clearly, these 
unmanned aerial drones will play a key role in preserving 
security for the people of Los Angeles.
    A lot of positives here, but there are some concerns. 
Surveillance of society and privacy, are we being monitored 
every time we turn around? The answer is probably yes. But by 
whom is the issue. I have had many neighbors complain to me 
that they see drones flying over their backyards. So they will 
be home having a barbecue and all of a sudden a drone just 
essentially flies over their private residence and God knows 
who is controlling that drone or who is watching our private 
citizens.
    I think all of us here today appreciate the benefits of 
drone technology, especially in emergent situations, but I 
think we can also agree that such technology has to be deployed 
in a manner that protects individuals' privacy, civil rights, 
and liberties. So I am looking forward to hearing from our 
witnesses today, your testimony about the novel ways that you 
have used drones and what you see emerging in the future.
    I think we are just barely scratching the tip of the 
iceberg here. This is a great technology. Let's hope with your 
testimony here we can plot a great future that protects our 
citizens much better than they are protected today. Thank you 
very much.
    Mr. Chairman, I yield.
    [The statement of Ranking Member Correa follows:]
                  Statement of Chairman J. Luis Correa
                              May 8, 2024
    Given that this week is Police Week, I would like to thank our law 
enforcement witnesses for being here today.
    Turning to our hearing today, Chairmen Pfluger and D'Esposito and 
Ranking Member Carter, thank you for leading this discussion on the use 
of Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) in emergency response.
    I would like to start by acknowledging that UAS, or drone programs, 
have a long history of utilization by militaries throughout the world. 
Recently, with technological advances, UAS programs have evolved and 
been adopted by Federal and local law enforcement and emergency 
response agencies.
    In fact, in my home State of California, the Chula Vista police 
department became the first to routinely respond to 9-1-1 calls by 
flying drones. Chula Vista's ``Drone as First Responder'' concept is 
proactive rather than reactive in that drones are stationed at 
permanent locations throughout the city to help give officers real-time 
information before they arrive at a crime scene. In my District, 
Fullerton Police also use drones to provide support to its officers and 
their emergency operations.
    Today, I am honored to have some Orange County representation on 
the panel with Division Chief Kevin Fetterman testifying on behalf of 
the Orange County Fire Authority. The Orange County Fire Authority's 
drone program has assisted in search and mission rescues during 
residential fires, where firefighters deployed drones to quickly search 
homes and determine that residents were not trapped inside.
    In a 2021 incident on the 261 toll road, OC's Fire Authority 
deployed a drone with infrared capability to better assess the scene 
and extinguish the fire. Teaming up with the local police, the drone 
was also used to locate the suspected arsonist who was hiding in the 
bushes.
    Unmanned aerial systems are also used on the Federal level in the 
planning of National Special Security Events, referred to as NSSEs, to 
include major sporting events, one of which will be held in Los 
Angeles--the 2028 Summer Olympics. Despite these positive examples of 
growing UAS programs Nation-wide, there are also concerns about their 
use.
    People are concerned that the proliferation of drones could enable 
a ``surveillance society,'' in which our every move may be monitored, 
tracked, recorded, and scrutinized by Government agencies. This concern 
has been heightened by reporting that drones have been deployed to 
monitor First Amendment-protected activity, like during the summer of 
2020 protests against police brutality.
    I believe that all of my colleagues here today appreciate the many 
beneficial uses of drone technology, particularly in emergency 
response, I believe we can also all agree that such technology has to 
be deployed in a manner that protects individuals' privacy and civil 
rights and liberties.
    So today I look forward to hearing from our witnesses about the 
novel ways in which drones are enhancing our emergency response 
capabilities but also about how we can ensure safe and responsible use 
of this technology.

    Chairman D'Esposito. The gentleman yields.
    Other Members of the subcommittee are reminded that opening 
statements may be submitted for the record.
    [The statements of Ranking Member Thompson and Honorable 
Carter follow:]
             Statement of Ranking Member Bennie G. Thompson
                              May 16, 2024
    In honor of Police Week, I would like to express my heartfelt 
gratitude to our first responder witnesses for their dedication and 
commitment to keeping our communities safe. Thank you for your service.
    Turning to the topic of today's hearing, unmanned aerial systems 
(UAS), also known as drones, were first used by the military to gather 
intelligence. More recently, law enforcement agencies and fire 
departments have found drones to be helpful in an emergency response 
capacity.
    Drones can be used to monitor crimes in progress, traffic 
accidents, residential fires, and wildfires at a larger scale--a role 
usually served by crewed aircraft. Drones can carry camera systems 
capable of thermal imaging for search-and-rescue missions, as well as 
radio equipment and other sensors.
    First responders across the country have recognized that drones can 
be a useful tool in advancing their public safety missions while 
reducing risk to personnel and the public. In short, the biggest 
advantage of drones for first responders is the ability to go where 
humans cannot. In my home State of Mississippi, we have found drones 
useful for surveying the damage wrought by disasters, such as the 
devastating tornadoes that ravaged my district in 2023, killing 22 
people.
    While drones can be helpful for emergency response missions, some 
have understandably raised concerns that law enforcement's use of 
drones could infringe upon individuals' privacy or free speech rights--
such as in situations where law enforcement fly drones over First 
Amendment-protected activities.
    It is imperative that Americans' Constitutional rights are upheld 
when first responders use drones to enhance public safety. I look 
forward to hearing from our witnesses about drones and how they are 
used for emergency response operations, and any recommendations they 
may have to strengthen this technology.
                                 ______
                                 
                Statement of Ranking Member Troy Carter
                              May 15, 2024
    Drones offer rapid aerial assessment capabilities, providing real-
time views of disaster areas. They can comb through flooded areas, 
fires, wildfires, or collapsed buildings, identifying survivors and 
hazards.
    My home district, New Orleans, is highly vulnerable to hurricanes 
and flooding. In such situations, drones can be incredibly useful in 
rapidly surveying affected neighborhoods, levees, and infrastructure. 
By providing a comprehensive overview of the extent of damage and 
potential risks, drones can aid first responders in their efforts to 
understand the situation better and take necessary actions. The 
usefulness of drones was particularly evident during Hurricane Ida, 
where drones were used to observe and analyze damage. By leveraging 
drones in emergency response efforts, particularly in disaster-prone 
areas like New Orleans, responders can enhance their capabilities to 
save lives, mitigate damage, and expedite recovery efforts.
    Additionally, earlier this year, the New Orleans Police Department 
received approval by the Department of Justice to use drones in its 
investigations, which could potentially prove to be a game-changer in 
terms of enhancing the effectiveness of law enforcement. With Super 
Bowl LIX being held in New Orleans next year, it is essential for first 
responders to gear up and be prepared with the latest technologies at 
their disposal. I look forward to seeing how this capability will be 
used to ensure the safety and security of Louisianans.
    While drones can be effective in emergency response efforts in 
disaster-prone areas like New Orleans, there are concerns about their 
use as these programs continue to grow Nation-wide and become easily 
accessible. The increasing use of drones has raised concerns about 
privacy and civil liberties as their capabilities for aerial 
surveillance and data collection continue to advance. Federal, State, 
and local first responders need to ensure that they use drones to 
enhance public safety while protecting individuals' and the public's 
privacy and Constitutional rights.
    I also look forward to speaking to our witnesses today about a few 
things, the first being how the Federal Government can support use of 
drone technology by State and local first responders to enhance the 
efficiency, safety, and effectiveness of their efforts including via 
funding.
    The Emergency Management and Technology Subcommittee has 
jurisdiction over the Department of Homeland Security Grant Programs, 
which can be used to purchase drones; however, these grants received a 
10 percent cut for fiscal year 2024. The 10 percent cut not only 
compromises the effectiveness of first responders but also endangers 
communities by reducing their access to essential resources like 
drones. This shortfall could impair their ability to promptly address 
security threats and emergencies, heightening risks and diminishing 
overall safety levels within affected areas.
    To this end, the second thing I hope to hear from our witnesses is 
about any concerns about the grant programs and any recommendations you 
may have to improve them.
    Last, I want to give a special thank you to our first responder 
witnesses today for their dedication and service to our communities.

    Chairman D'Esposito. I am pleased to have a distinguished 
panel of witnesses before us today on this very important 
topic.
    [Witnesses sworn.]
    Chairman D'Esposito. Let the record reflect that the 
witnesses have answered in the affirmative. Thank you and 
please be seated.
    I would now like to formally introduce our witnesses. First 
is Deputy Commissioner Kaz Daughtry, who started his career 
with the New York City Police Department as a police officer in 
2006 and currently serves as the New York City Police 
Department's deputy commissioner of operations, in which he has 
spearheaded technological innovations within the New York City 
Police Department, including the expansion of the city's drone 
program.
    Chief John Chell serves as the chief of Patrol Services 
Bureau, which is the largest bureau in the New York City Police 
Department, and oversees the majority of the department's 
uniformed patrol officers throughout 8 borough commands and 77 
police precincts.
    I will take a moment of personal privilege to say that I 
had the honor to serve with both Deputy Commissioner Kaz 
Daughtry and Chief of Patrol John Chell, and I will tell you 
that I am thankful that Mayor Adams has two of the finest of 
the finest leading the pack in the NYPD. So, gentlemen, thank 
you.
    Mr. Kevin Fetterman has over 27 years of fire and emergency 
services experience and currently serves as a division chief at 
the Orange County Fire Authority where he oversees the Command 
and Emergency Planning Division and the Emergency Command 
Center and participates in the all-hazards incident management 
team.
    Mr. Rahul Sidhu is a former police officer and paramedic as 
well as the cofounder and chief executive officer of Aerodome, 
a company that provides advanced drone as first response 
capabilities to public safety agencies. Mr. Sidhu also serves 
as a member of the board of advisors at the University of 
California and has travelled to help over 250 law enforcement 
agencies around the country. Thank you, sir, for your service.
    Mr. Michael Robbins is president and chief executive 
officer of the Association for Uncrewed Vehicle Systems 
International, the world's largest trade association for 
uncrewed systems, autonomy, and robotics in both the commercial 
and defense sectors. He recently served as co-chair of the 
Federal Aviation Administration's UAS Detection and Mitigation 
Aviation Rulemaking Committee and currently serves on a task 
force with the United States Department of Transportation and 
are working with a group of the Cybersecurity and 
Infrastructure Security Agency.
    I thank all the witnesses for being here today. I now 
recognize Deputy Commissioner Daughtry for 5 minutes to 
summarize his opening statement.

STATEMENT OF KAZ DAUGHTRY, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, OPERATIONS, NEW 
                  YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT

    Mr. Daughtry. Thank you. Good morning. Good morning, Chair 
D'Esposito and Pfluger, Ranking Member Carter, and Ranking 
Member Magaziner, and Members of the subcommittee. I am Kaz 
Daughtry, deputy commissioner of operations of the New York 
City Police Department. On behalf of Police Commissioner Edward 
Caban and Mayor Eric Adams, I am pleased to testify before your 
subcommittee today to discuss the importance of emergent 
technology in policing and how vital our Federal partnerships 
are to the NYPD public safety mandate.
    With 8.8 million residents and 62.2 million visitors from 
every corner of the globe, New York City remains a city of 
possibility. Our police officers proudly patrol the city's 
6,300 miles of streets and highways, 472 subway stations, and 
274 public housing developments. In a city constantly on the 
move, our police department must continue to look forward and 
adapt.
    I am proud to have spearheaded a number of strategies to 
better position our department and our crime-fighting efforts 
and make New York City the safest big city in America. This 
call to action requires that we embrace technology.
    I am proud to point to some of our success stories today. 
This is a showcase of some of the most exciting technology and 
highlights of the work of our technical assistance in TARU, 
also known as our TARU team.
    They provide expertise in audiovisual technology, operate 
our unmanned aircraft system commonly known as drones, and 
provide our officers with a crucial advantage in emergency 
management. We are also focused on the importance of securing 
our ability to mitigate hostile drones over the critical 
infrastructure and mass gatherings, such as those in Times 
Square.
    Our most prolific technology-based innovation has been the 
department's use of drones. The NYPD has 85 drones. In 2023, 
our drone use has increased 419.8 percent compared to 2022.
    There are, of course, limited circumstances in which a 
drone can be used. We have self-imposed policies that place 
limitations and restrictions on our drone uses. Under these 
policies drones are not used for warrantless surveillance, 
routine patrol, traffic enforcement, or immobilizing vehicles 
of suspects. Drones are not used as weapons and cannot be 
equipped with weapons of any kind, but they can be used to 
preserve life.
    On Friday, April 5, 2024, after a 4.8 magnitude earthquake 
was felt throughout the tri-State area, our department ordered 
our drones be deployed to examine the structural integrity of 
our bridges and buildings. If we detected an infrastructure 
flaw, we had the ability to share this information with the 
Department of Buildings in real time.
    Drone technology allows us to work closer with our partners 
in ensuring the community safety. Safety and security is always 
a priority and our drones have played a vital role in those 
endeavors.
    Each year hundreds of thousands converge on Times Square, 
the crossroad of the world, to ring in a new year. This year we 
utilized our drone technology to give a bird's-eye view to our 
incident commanders in order to prevent overcrowding.
    Another example on Sunday, September 3, 2023, 10,000 people 
rushed the entrance of the Electric Zoo concert, creating a 
dangerous situation. Due to the safety concerns, the NYPD 
leadership considered canceling this event entirely.
    To gain better situational awareness, we ordered the TARU 
to deploy our drone truck. We put a tethered drone up and live 
footage showed us that the crowd was massed at the entrance, 
but there were no danger to life or safety. Using this 
information, we gathered our resources and we made the decision 
to allow the show to go on.
    Likewise, the possibility that hostile actors may use 
drones in a malicious manner at such a mass gathering is always 
at the forefront of our concerns. In an effort to support 
innovation to public safety, 5 precincts have been selected for 
the drone as first responder program, more commonly referred to 
as DFR.
    Chosen based on recent crime trends, these precincts will 
each be outfitted to support 2 drone platforms affixed to their 
rooftops. Three of these precincts are in Brooklyn, 1 precinct 
in the Bronx, and Central Park precinct, which is located in 
the borough of Manhattan.
    The plan to be rolled out in the coming months is to deploy 
these drones in response to certain 9-1-1 calls for service. 
The pilots, however, will be remotely positioned in our joint 
operations center at police headquarters rather than on the 
scene. This information will be provided by the DFR and will be 
shared with responding officers. DFR will enhance officers' 
situational awareness as they arrive on the scene and promote 
officer safety and help deploy resources more effectively.
    In an effort to find technology-based solutions to reduce 
the number of vehicle pursuits, as well as to reduce the risks 
to the public, the department implemented a pilot program 
utilizing specialized GPS tracking equipment known as 
StarChase. By attaching a GPS-enabled device to a vehicle which 
can be tracked remotely, this technology prevents us to pursue 
vehicles while avoiding high-speed chases that endanger the 
community and our officers.
    Since April 2023, the limited pilot program has helped us 
recover 42 vehicles and make 58 arrests. This technology has 
saved valuable manpower hours while reducing the risks 
associated with vehicle pursuits.
    To speak more broadly on our ability to adapt as a 
department supported by critical Federal funding assistance, 
the funding that the city and the department receive from the 
Federal Government, as well as our collaboration with Federal 
partners such as the FBI, ATF, have been a key component in 
thwarting numerous attacks over the years.
    By responsibly leveraging technology, we are able to 
promote public safety in our city, and we appreciate you 
calling attention to this important issue through today's 
hearing.
    Thank you again for this opportunity to testify today. I am 
happy to answer any questions that you may have.
    [The joint prepared statement of Mr. Daughtry and Mr. Chell 
follows:]
        Joint Prepared Statement of Kaz Daughtry and John Chell
                         Thursday, May 16, 2024
    Good morning Chairs D'Esposito and Pfluger, Ranking Members Carter 
and Magaziner, and Members of the subcommittee. I am Kaz Daughtry, 
deputy commissioner of operations for the New York City Police 
Department (``NYPD''). On behalf of Police Commissioner Edward Caban 
and Mayor Eric Adams, I am pleased to testify before your subcommittee 
today to discuss the importance of emerging technology in policing and 
how vital our Federal partnerships are to the NYPD's public safety 
mandate.
    With 8.8 million residents and 62.2 million visitors from every 
corner of the globe, New York City remains a city of possibility. Our 
police officers proudly patrol the city's 6,300 miles of streets and 
highways, 472 subway stations, and 274 public housing developments. In 
a city constantly on the move, our police department must continually 
look forward and adapt. I am proud to have spearheaded a number of 
strategies to better position our department in our crime-fighting 
efforts and make New York City the safest big city in America. This 
call to action requires that we embrace technology.
    I am proud to point to some of our success stories today. This is a 
showcase of some of our most exciting technology, and highlights the 
work of our Technical Assistance and Response Unit (TARU). They provide 
expertise in audio/visual technology, operate our Unmanned Aircraft 
Systems (UAS), commonly known as drones, and provide our officers a 
crucial advantage in emergency management. We are also focused on the 
importance of securing our ability to mitigate hostile drones over 
critical infrastructure and mass gatherings such as those in Times 
Square.
    Our most prolific technology-based innovation has been the 
Department's use of drones. The NYPD has 85 drones. In 2023, our drone 
usage increased 419.8 percent compared to 2022. There are, of course, 
limited circumstances in which a drone can be used. We have self-
imposed policies that place limitations and restrictions on our use of 
drones. Under these policies, drones are not used for warrantless 
surveillance, routine patrol, traffic enforcement or immobilizing 
vehicles of suspects. Drones are not used as weapons, and cannot be 
equipped with weapons of any kind.
    But they can be used to preserve life: On Friday, April 5, 2024, 
after a 4.8 magnitude earthquake was felt throughout the Tri-State 
area, our department ordered our drones be deployed to examine the 
structural integrity of our bridges and buildings. If we detected an 
infrastructure flaw, we had the ability to share this information with 
the Department of Buildings in real time. Drone technology allows us to 
work closer with our partners, ensuring the community's safety.
    Safety and security is always a priority, and our drones have 
played a vital role in those endeavors. Each year, hundreds of 
thousands converge on Times Square, the ``Crossroads of the World,'' to 
ring in the New Year. This year, we utilized our drone technology to 
give a bird's eye view to our incident commanders, in order to prevent 
overcrowding.
    As another example, on Sunday, September 3, 2023, 10,000 people 
rushed the entrance of the Electric Zoo concert, creating a dangerous 
situation. Due to safety concerns, NYPD leadership considered canceling 
the event entirely. To gain better situational awareness, we ordered 
TARU to deploy our drone truck. We put our tethered drone up, and the 
live footage showed us that the crowd was massed at the entrance but 
there were no dangers to life or safety. Using this information, we 
gathered our resources, and we made the decision to allow the show to 
go on. Likewise, the possibility that hostile actors may use drones in 
a malicious manner at such a mass gathering is always at the forefront 
of our concerns.
    In an effort to support innovation in public safety, 5 precincts 
have been selected for the Drone as First Responder Program, more 
commonly referred to as DFR. Chosen based on recent crime trends, these 
precincts will each be outfitted to support 2 drone platforms affixed 
to their rooftops. Three of these precincts are in Brooklyn, with 1 
precinct in the Bronx, and 1 at the Central Park Precinct in Manhattan. 
The plan, to be rolled out in the coming months, is to deploy these 
drones in response to certain 9-1-1 calls for service. The pilot 
however, will be remotely positioned in the Joint Operations Center, at 
Police Headquarters, rather than on scene. The information provided by 
DFR will be shared with responding officers. DFR will enhance officers' 
situational awareness as they arrive on scene, promote officer safety, 
and help us deploy resources more effectively.
    In an effort to find technology-based solutions to reduce the 
number of vehicle pursuits, as well as reduce the risk to the public, 
the Department implemented a pilot program utilizing specialized GPS 
tracking equipment, known as StarChase. By attaching a GPS-enabled 
device to a vehicle, which can be tracked remotely, this technology 
permits us to pursue vehicles, while avoiding high-speed chases that 
endanger the community and our officers. Since April 2023, this limited 
pilot program has helped us recover 42 vehicles and make 58 arrests. 
This technology has saved valuable manpower hours while reducing the 
risks associated with vehicle pursuits.
    To speak more broadly, our ability to adapt as a department is 
supported by critical Federal funding assistance. The funding the city 
and the Department receive from the Federal Government, as well as our 
collaboration with Federal partners, such as the FBI and ATF, have been 
key components in thwarting numerous attacks over the years. By 
responsibly leveraging technology, we are able to promote public safety 
in our city, and we appreciate your calling attention to this important 
issue through today's hearing.
    Thank you again for this opportunity to testify today. I am happy 
to answer any questions you may have.

    Chairman D'Esposito. Thank you, Deputy Commissioner 
Daughtry.
    I now recognize Chief Chell for 5 minutes to summarize his 
opening statement.

   STATEMENT OF JOHN CHELL, CHIEF OF PATROL, PATROL SERVICES 
            BUREAU, NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT

    Mr. Chell. Good morning, everybody, glad to be here. Thank 
you for having us to discuss this very important topic.
    I am here just to describe things we have used the drones 
for, examples of how it has helped us, quite frankly, and 
policing in New York City, it is a game-changer to what we are 
doing. Whether it be earthquakes, New Year's Eve, Columbia 
University, missing kids found in the water who drowned, shark 
attacks, the 2,600 protests we have had to deal with since 
October 7, to mitigate crime control and keep us safe and keep 
New Yorkers safe, to collapsed buildings, and overall 
technology as a whole that we are using incorporating drones 
and incorporating what the commissioner said about StarChase. 
Incorporating old technology that we have refurbished, if you 
will, to add to a more safety and robust crime-fighting 
mechanism that I believe, that our team believes is really 
keeping crime down in New York City and, more importantly, 
keeping our cops safe and our city safe.
    I look forward to the discussion from the panel and any 
questions you might have. Thank you.
    Chairman D'Esposito. Thank you, Chief Chell.
    I now recognize Chief Fetterman for 5 minutes to summarize 
his opening statement.

   STATEMENT OF KEVIN FETTERMAN, DIVISION CHIEF, COMMAND AND 
 EMERGENCY PLANNING, ORANGE COUNTY FIRE AUTHORITY ON BEHALF OF 
          THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF FIRE CHIEFS

    Chief Fetterman. Good morning, Chairman D'Esposito, 
Chairman Pfluger, Ranking Member Carter, and Ranking Member 
Correa. I am Kevin Fetterman, the division chief over command 
and emergency planning with the Orange County Fire Authority in 
Orange County, California.
    My perspective is that of an all-hazard incident commander 
and an operational emerging technology lead, and today I am 
here on behalf of the International Association of Fire Chiefs. 
I appreciate and I am humbled by today's opportunity to discuss 
UAS and this emerging technology's role in emergency response.
    First, I would like to acknowledge the passing of former 
Member of the committee, Representative Donald Payne, Jr. 
Representative Payne was always a long-time friend of the fire 
service and Representative Payne's dedication to public service 
will be long-remembered and he will be sorely missed.
    One of the first steps in emergency response is 
establishing situational awareness. This is the ability to 
identify and decipher all aspects of an incident, and UAS can 
be a game-changer in establishing and maintaining situational 
awareness at an emergency scene. Here is how.
    Drones provide real-time data, visual documentation of 
affected areas by capturing high-resolution aerial images and 
video. This is vital for coordinating incident operations, such 
as how they were used at the Surfside building collapse in 
Florida. Also, drones can offer thermal imaging, like how they 
were used at the Tustin Hangar fire in California, tracking the 
fire's progression through the structure in subsequent 
operational periods.
    Drones can also take on actionable roles, such as a PSD 
drone or plastic sphere dispenser drone, which can assist with 
firing operations to hold critical fire breaks. The Dixie Fire 
in California, which was the State's largest single-source 
wildfire, a PSD drone was used in a very technically 
challenging firing operation and this limited the risk to 
wildland firefighters on the ground.
    Clearly, public safety's use of drones is drastically 
different than commercial users. The key to public safety's use 
of drones is communication and coordination. In 2001, after a 
serious mid-air collision in California, fire traffic areas 
were established as an interagency airspace management tool. 
Fire traffic areas could also be described as the layering 
approach to aeronautical management.
    When non-coordinated drones intersect with an FTA, they 
impact the fire service's ability to utilize the full spectrum 
of firefighting aircraft that is available, potentially tipping 
the scales between containment and catastrophe.
    In the western United States, the saying is, ``If you fly, 
we cannot.'' Standards such as the FTA and remote 
identification capabilities, known as remote ID, can help 
prevent non-coordinated drones from interfering with critical, 
life-saving missions and prevent explosive fire growth.
    The needs of firefighters also often demand operations 
beyond what the FAA's visual line of sight rules permit. For 
example, UAS need to be deployed over long distances to track 
wildfire progression or see over the mountain ridge to assess 
the on-coming fire's impacts. Yet existing regulations on 
beyond visual line of sight operations remain cumbersome and 
ambiguous.
    Failure to address this issue undermines our ability to 
leverage drones effectively, potentially hindering our capacity 
to save lives and protect property. We simply cannot afford to 
be slowed down by procedural delays when lives are on the line.
    Rapid coordination and streamlined approvals in zero grid 
airspace are also crucial. Fire departments require the 
flexibility to deploy drones swiftly within these zones to 
ensure this benefit to public safety.
    By continuing to foster collaboration between stakeholders, 
we can develop agile solutions that balance safety imperatives 
with operational realities. The inclusion of AI within the UAS 
continues to make significant improvements to their operational 
capabilities. This can be critical in ensuring that aircraft 
work together in a coordinated and safe manner.
    AI UAS avoidance technology can be a useful tool to ensure 
airspace deconfliction, so UAS plus AI equates to increased 
safety for all public safety responders. The use of drones by 
emergency responders is continuing to do wonders, especially 
when it comes to the proper deployment of resources. As 
described earlier, drones can be used to accomplish tasks that 
would otherwise put first responders at high risk. In rural 
communities, drones are also revolutionizing the way response 
is being delivered.
    To enhance the response to everyday emergency calls, drones 
can now physically deliver automatic external defibrillators or 
life-saving medications such as Narcan. The application with 
drone pickup and delivery for medical professionals are 
endless.
    I thank you for the opportunity to address the use of UAS 
during emergency response. This emerging technology is already 
a life-saving tool for first responders. Congress can also play 
a role in streamlining public safety's access to UAS.
    For example, we appreciate the inclusion of provisions in 
the FAA bill to make it easier for volunteer fire departments 
to access tethered drones.
    In closing, the IAFC looks forward to working with this 
committee to ensure that first responders can utilize UAS to 
better provide service to all of our communities. Thank you.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Fetterman follows:]
                 Prepared Statement of Kevin Fetterman
                              May 16, 2024
    Good morning, Chairman D'Esposito, Chairman Pfluger, Ranking Member 
Carter, and Ranking Member Correa. I am Kevin Fetterman, division chief 
of Emergency Planning and Command with the Orange County Fire Authority 
in Orange County, California. I have personally been involved with 
unmanned aerial systems (UAS) or ``drone'' use on several all-hazard 
incidents, such as multi-alarm structural fires, wildland fires, 
building collapses, static water rescues/recoveries, and other 
incidents. I appreciate the opportunity today to discuss UAS and the 
role that this emerging technology plays in emergency response.
    The IAFC represents the leadership of over 1.1 million firefighters 
and emergency responders. IAFC members are the world's leading experts 
in firefighting, emergency medical services, terrorism response, 
hazardous materials (hazmat) incidents, wildland fire suppression, 
natural disasters, search and rescue, and public-safety policy. Since 
1873, the IAFC has provided a forum for its members to exchange ideas, 
develop best practices, participate in executive training, and discover 
diverse products and services available to first responders.
    America's fire and emergency service is an all-hazards response 
force that is locally situated, staffed, trained, and equipped to 
respond to all types of emergencies. There are approximately 1.1 
million men and women in the fire and emergency service--consisting of 
approximately 300,000 career firefighters and 800,000 volunteer 
firefighters--serving in over 30,000 fire departments around the 
Nation. They are trained to respond to all hazards ranging from 
earthquakes, hurricanes, tornadoes, and floods to acts of terrorism, 
hazardous materials incidents, technical rescues, fires, and medical 
emergencies. We usually are the first at the scene of a disaster and 
the last to leave.
    Orange County is the third-most populous county in California and 
the sixth-most populous in the United States. The population is larger 
than 21 States and the county is the second-most densely populated in 
California, behind San Francisco County. The Orange County Fire 
Authority (OCFA) is an all-hazard regional fire service organization. 
Over 1,500 career firefighters and staff serve 23 cities in the county 
and all unincorporated areas in a 586-square-mile coverage area. The 
OCFA protects nearly 2 million residents from its 78 fire stations, 
covers over 188,817 acres of wildland, and 658,659 dwellings. The OCFA 
responded to nearly 180,000 incidents in 2023.
    First, I want to acknowledge the passing of a former Member of the 
committee, Representative Donald Payne, Jr. Representative Payne was 
always a long-time friend of the fire service. He often worked with 
first responders to ensure they had the support they needed. Just 3 
months ago, Representative Payne held a workshop to help local fire 
departments receive Federal grants, such as the Assistance to 
Firefighters Grant Program. Representative Payne's dedication to public 
service will be long remembered, and he will be sorely missed.
                         situational awareness
    The first step to any sort of emergency response is establishing 
situational awareness. This is the ability to identify and decipher all 
aspects of an incident. UAS can be a game-changer when it comes to the 
situational awareness of an incident scene. Here are some examples on 
how drones can improve overall situational awareness:
   Drones provide real-time data and visual documentation of 
        affected areas by capturing high-resolution aerial images and 
        videos, which is vital for coordinating incident operations. 
        High-resolution ortho-imagery can be critical in incident 
        decision support. During the Surfside building collapse, the 
        Incident Management Team's Planning Section worked in close 
        coordination with the Florida State University Drone Team and 
        provided real-time situational awareness and increased 
        personnel safety by providing overwatch to first responders. 
        Later, the imagery was used for advanced analysis, such as 
        verifying volumetric analysis on the amount of rubble that 
        needed to be moved off-site.
   Drones can also provide thermal imaging, such as what was 
        utilized in the Tustin Hanger Fire, to determine the extent of 
        the fire's spread on the structure in subsequent operational 
        periods. This structure was so large and hazardous that it 
        required personnel to be hundreds of feet away from the 
        designated collapse zones.
   Drones can utilize LIDAR (light detection and ranging) to 
        assess landslides and mud and debris flows.
   Drones have been utilized to locate and communicate with 
        victims stranded during water rescue operations of swollen 
        rivers and waterways.
   In the California fire service, wildland fire line 
        leadership often ask the question, ``What's over the next 
        ridge?''. While the question is simple, the answer is not. 
        During a rapidly-expanding wildfire in the urban interface 
        which impacts structures, the need for real-time information 
        about what is occurring over the next ridge is of paramount 
        importance. Drones can provide this necessary information.
   By providing this type of information directly to common 
        operation platforms, such as SARCOP, Tablet Command, TAK, or 
        Intterra, this information can be properly analyzed. This 
        allows first responders to make critical, time-sensitive 
        decisions and keep their personnel safe.
   Drones can also take actionable roles, such as a PSD Drone 
        (Plastic Sphere Dispenser), which can assist with firing 
        operations in active fire areas, eliminating the need to 
        utilize wildland firefighters in dangerous and technically 
        challenging areas. This occurred when I managed a division on 
        the Dixie Fire in California. Without the use of the PSD drone, 
        it is likely the operation would not have been successful, and 
        the fire line not held.
                        fire traffic areas (fta)
    Public safety's use of drones is drastically different than 
commercial users. The key to public safety's use of drones is 
communication and coordination. In 2001, after a serious mid-air 
collision, Fire Traffic Areas (FTA) were established as an interagency 
air space management tool for standard communication protocols. In 
California, it is the Interagency Standard for Aerial Firefighting. The 
FTA can be further defined as air space with a 5-nautical-mile radius 
from an incident during suppression operations. Since its 
implementation, it has been adopted by the United States Forest 
Service, and it has become policy at the Bureau of Land Management and 
the U.S. Department of the Interior.
    Fire Traffic Areas also could be described as a layered approach to 
aeronautical management. After an incident and establishment of a FTA, 
coordination takes place with helicopters, fixed-wing fire suppression 
aircraft, command-and-control aircraft, intelligence-gathering 
aircraft, as well as with drones that are being used by public safety. 
When non-coordinated drones intersect into a FTA, it eliminates any 
allowable area to fly in. Pilots are either provided with an additional 
clearance or told to hold until one can be provided to them. For a 
standard FTA, pilots are instructed to hold at 7 nautical miles. 
Standards such as a FTA can help prohibit non-coordinated drones from 
interfering with critical life-saving missions.
                    remote identification of drones
    In the realm of fire suppression operations, every second counts. 
As a fire department leveraging drones for situational awareness and 
tactical advantage, our operations hinge on seamless coordination and 
air space integrity. However, the presence of non-coordinated drones 
poses a grave threat to our efforts. Uncoordinated drones near 
structural fires and wildfires jeopardize not only our public safety 
drone operations but, more importantly, they pose a significant risk to 
our manned aircraft operations that are vital to firefighting. This is 
why remote identification capabilities, known as Remote ID, are so 
important, to discern between coordinated and non-coordinated drones in 
the skies in which we operate.
    The uncoordinated presence of drones around wildfires significantly 
impairs our ability to swiftly mitigate fires, potentially tipping the 
scales between containment and catastrophe. Picture this: a drone 
operator, unaware of the on-going firefighting efforts, sends their 
personal drone into the air space, ignorant of the disruption it 
causes. The air space above a wildfire becomes a complex environment, 
with firefighting aircraft maneuvering with precision and purpose. Yet, 
amidst this orchestrated chaos, the sudden appearance of a non-
coordinated drone immediately impacts our operations, and often brings 
such operations to a complete halt. In California, the saying is, ``If 
you fly, we can't.''
    The importance of Remote ID capabilities cannot be overstated. Not 
only does Remote ID empower us to swiftly identify and address 
unauthorized and non-coordinated drones, but it also bolsters the 
safety of our firefighting personnel and the public. Without this 
critical capability, the air space would remain increasingly vulnerable 
to intrusion, threatening to disrupt our firefighting efforts at a 
moment's notice.
                 beyond visual line-of-sight operations
    The exigencies of firefighting often demand operations beyond what 
the Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) conventional visual line-
of-sight rules permit. When battling unpredictable fires, navigating 
through smoke columns and around steep terrain is routine. Yet, 
existing regulations on beyond visual line-of-sight operations remain 
cumbersome and ambiguous. Therein lies the conundrum: while drones 
could provide invaluable support in penetrating hazardous environments, 
procedural hurdles impede their deployment.
    Failure to address this issue undermines our ability to leverage 
drones effectively, potentially hindering our capacity to save lives 
and protect property. Imagine a scenario where there is an explosive 
wildfire, engulfing homes and threatening lives. A drone equipped with 
thermal imaging could swiftly assess the extent of the fire spread, 
guiding firefighters to the area's most in need of attention. However, 
current regulations limit this potential, necessitating a reevaluation 
to align with the exigencies of firefighting.
    In the heat of battle, time is of the essence. We cannot afford to 
be slowed down by procedural delays when lives are on the line. The 
urgency of revising visual line-of-sight regulations and expediting 
approval processes cannot be overstated. Only by embracing flexibility 
and innovation can we fully harness the transformative potential of 
drones in our firefighting efforts.
                  zero grid air space drone operations
    In the high-stakes domain of firefighting, the need for rapid 
coordination and approvals in zero-grid air space cannot be overstated. 
The FAA's UAS Facility Maps delineate areas where drone operations are 
restricted, aiming to safeguard critical air space. However, in the 
dynamic context of fire response, agility is paramount. Fire 
departments require the flexibility to deploy drones swiftly within 
these zones for timely investigation and response.
    Streamlined processes and real-time coordination mechanisms are 
indispensable in ensuring that drone operations remain a force 
multiplier in our firefighting arsenal, rather than an operational 
hindrance. Picture a scenario where every minute lost in obtaining 
clearance to deploy a drone translates to acres of land consumed by the 
fire or another room within a building being completely immersed in 
flames. The consequences of procedural delays in such situations are 
not merely logistical but have far-reaching implications for public 
safety and property preservation.
    The intersection of regulatory frameworks and operational 
exigencies underscores the need for a proactive approach to zero-grid 
air space operations. By fostering collaboration between firefighting 
agencies, regulatory authorities, and technology providers, we can 
develop agile solutions that balance safety imperatives with 
operational realities. Only through concerted effort and forward-
thinking strategies can we unlock the full potential of drones in our 
firefighting efforts.
                      artificial intelligence (ai)
    The inclusion of AI within UAS made significant improvements to 
their operational capabilities. The ability to detect hazards such as 
trees, power lines, buildings, and other aircraft is otherwise known as 
avoidance technology. This can be critical in ensuring that aircraft 
work together in a coordinated and safe manner. Not every community in 
our Nation has experience with establishing Fire Traffic Areas. AI can 
be a useful tool to assist in their place. Teaming of drone systems and 
manned aircraft is vital, as drone technology with the inclusion of 
Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast technologies, and other 
avoidance technologies, should ease the concerns of all pilots.
    Autonomous, simultaneous coordinated drone operations conducted by 
a single operator controlling multiple drones (coordinated and waiver 
authorized) can maintain persistent situational awareness over 
emergency incidents for multiple operational periods. This provides 
incident commanders with the best information possible and directly 
correlates to lives and property saved. Similarly, the use of approved 
advanced drone technology with AI and advanced sensor arrays allows for 
even further flights, which are out of visual line-of-sight. Thereby 
extending the range an incident commander or division supervisor may 
peer into their areas of responsibility. This equates to better 
preparedness for impending fire behavior or fire advancement.
              examples of usage of drones by public safety
    The use of drones by emergency responders is continuing to do 
wonders, especially when it comes to the proper deployment of 
resources. As described earlier, drones can be used to accomplish tasks 
that would otherwise put first responders at high risk. In rural 
communities, drones are revolutionizing the way response is being 
delivered. Instead of dispatching units out to everyday fire calls, 
drones can now physically deliver automatic external defibrillators or 
the life-saving drug NARCAN. In communities where response time is 
typically greater than 10 minutes, drones can significantly improve the 
success of response. Now, drones can be dispatched to provide care in 
an efficient manner. This is noticeable when it comes to volunteer fire 
departments. For most volunteer fire departments, typically the 
firefighters must travel to the fire station, instead of living there 
while on duty. If volunteers can use drones during response, the 
likelihood of success will rise.
    For example, Tangier Island, Virginia, is roughly 17 miles from 
land. It currently has about 500 residents. If a resident requires any 
blood tests, it can take a week or longer to transport specimens. With 
the use of drones, residents must no longer rely upon commercial mail 
carriers to transport medical specimens. The applications of drone 
pickup and delivery for medical professionals are practically endless. 
Since 2021, the Sacramento Metropolitan Fire District has operated a 
fleet of drones. Recently, the Sacramento Fire Authority has said that 
they will always respond to hazardous materials incidents with some 
sort of drone. Their drones can even drop life jackets to those who 
need assistance whom first responders cannot reach fast enough.
    Finally, the use of tethered drones from public safety has yielded 
great results. The ease with which these can be deployed is remarkable. 
However, there are prohibitions to their use that are currently written 
into law. Provisions in the 2024 FAA Reauthorization Act will immensely 
strengthen this work for public safety. In 2018, Congress passed the 
FAA Reauthorization Act (Pub. L. 115-254) which defined ``public 
actively tethered'' unmanned aerial systems as UAS weighing 4.4 lbs. or 
less and physically tethered to a ground station. The act directed the 
FAA to permit the use of public actively tethered UAS under certain 
conditions without obtaining further certificates or authority from the 
agency. The FAA determined that the word ``public'' in this section 
only applies to aircraft used by Federal, State, or local governments, 
or a political subdivision of one of those groups. Unfortunately, the 
current FAA interpretation excludes numerous public safety groups who 
rely on actively tethered UAS to carry out life-saving operations--like 
volunteer fire departments. Approximately 65 percent of the country's 
fire departments are volunteer-based and thus fall outside the 
definition of ``public'' under the FAA's current interpretation.
    Section 604 of the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024 would expand the 
aperture so that tethered drones may be operated by any public safety 
organization. It also would require tethered UAS to have increased 
safety systems to prevent injury in the case of malfunction. 
Additionally, this bill would allow actively tethered UAS to be flown 
in zero-grid spaces, expanding public safety groups and first 
responders' flexibility to utilize UAS technologies when responding to 
emergencies. I urge the U.S. House of Representatives to support the 
final passage of H.R. 3935, Securing Growth and Robust Leadership in 
American Aviation Act (the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024).
                               conclusion
    I thank you for the opportunity to address the use of drones and 
other UAS during emergency response. This emerging technology is 
already a life-saving tool for first responders. Congress can also play 
a role in streamlining public safety's use of UAS. Passing the FAA 
Reauthorization Act of 2024 (H.R. 3935) can help empower first 
responders to better use and better understand this innovative 
technology. If first responders can keep pace with UAS innovations, the 
result will mean more lives are saved. The IAFC looks forward to 
working with the committee to ensure that first responders can utilize 
UAS to provide better service to their communities.

    Chairman D'Esposito. Thank you, Chief Fetterman.
    I now recognize Mr. Sidhu for 5 minutes to summarize his 
opening statement.

      STATEMENT OF RAHUL SIDHU, FOUNDER AND CEO, AERODOME

    Mr. Sidhu. Good morning, Chairman D'Esposito, Chairman 
Pfluger, Ranking Member Correa, and esteemed committee Members. 
My name is Rahul Sidhu, and I am the CEO of Aerodome, a company 
specializing in next-generation drone as first responder 
technology.
    With over 14 years of experience in public safety as a 
former full-time police officer and now reserve officer, crew 
chief, paramedic, and pilot, I am here today to discuss the 
transformative role of unmanned aerial systems in public 
safety. Unmanned aerial systems, or drones, have been 
integrated into emergency response for over a decade. These 
older-use cases usually involve first responders taking drones 
out of their vehicle and deploying them on scene. I am not here 
to talk about the past.
    I am here to discuss the future, drone as first responder, 
or DFR. DFR involves sending a drone from a pre-positioned 
launch point, like a police station, and flying it directly to 
the scene of an emergency.
    These drones are remotely piloted from a central location 
often beyond the visual line-of-sight. Launching drones at the 
scene of an emergency, even if piloted remotely, is not DFR.
    In May 2018, Captain Fritz Reber of the Chula Vista Police 
Department, now a vice president at Aerodome, invented this 
concept. In 2020, as a reserve police officer, I followed in 
Captain Reber's footsteps and developed this Nation's second-
ever DFR program in Redondo Beach, California.
    Our DFR program virtually reduced our response time by 
nearly 70 percent and reduced the number of low-priority calls 
our patrol officers had to respond to by nearly 25 percent. 
This decreased high-priority response times and increased the 
apprehension of suspects, making our community safer.
    Over the past 4 years, the Redondo Beach DFR program 
conducted over 5,000 DFR flights. The impact of DFR is 
undeniable. Dozens of agencies are operating true DFR programs 
today with dozens more awaiting waivers from the FAA.
    These programs are vital in crime-fighting strategies, 
significantly reducing retail theft, violent crime, and 
property crime. These programs routinely save lives. Just last 
month a police department in Texas used the Aerodome DFR system 
to find and rescue an unconscious victim of a violent assault 
and rape, who likely would have bled out and died if the drone 
had not located them in time.
    These programs are also used to de-escalate and reduce the 
likelihood of tragic outcomes. Agencies report using DFR drones 
to identify the subjects who were reported to have guns in 
their hands were only actually holding toys or gun-shaped 
objects allowing officers to approach them safely without 
resorting to deadly force.
    Most public safety agencies are implementing the first 
iteration of DFR, known as DFR 1.0. Aerodome is the first to 
deploy what is referred to as DFR 2.0 technology, which refers 
to fully remote, automated, multi-drone, 24/7 operations.
    DFR 2.0 utilizes battery swapping drone stations and 
advanced air space sensors such as radar and allows for one 
person to safely launch from multiple drone stations without 
the need for visual observers. DFR 2.0 allows agencies to 
operate fully functional DFR programs with a fraction of the 
staff needed for DFR 1.0.
    Unfortunately, we live in a time where police staffing is a 
challenge across the country, which makes this technology even 
more important. Aerodome's technology is already deployed in 
cities like Redondo Beach where the average drone response time 
to an emergency is now 85 seconds.
    As with all advancements in public safety technology, we 
believe police accountability and transparency should not only 
be considered but should advance alongside the technology 
itself. Unlike traditional helicopter-based air support 
programs, DFR 2.0 systems record and upload entire flights, 
much like body cams, with flight logs made easily accessible to 
the public to promote accountability and transparency.
    Several other key differences emerge when comparing 
traditional helicopter-based air support programs to highly-
advanced DFR 2.0 programs. DFR 2.0 can supplement helicopter-
based programs, making air support more effective, efficient, 
economical, environmentally-friendly, and, more importantly, 
safer for every community in America.
    Enhanced safety should be within the reach of all 
communities, not just the ones that can afford helicopters. As 
DFR 2.0 systems continue to evolve, it is important to 
recognize how they can adapt to unique challenges. For example, 
these systems can be used to detect wildfires faster in 
wilderness areas, reducing the likelihood of destruction and 
death.
    Larger drones capable of carrying water and fire retardants 
can remotely deploy firefighting payloads onto these fires 
before they spread, potentially extinguishing them prior to the 
fire crew arrival. DFR 2.0 can also map this air space in real 
time, ensuring that these drones don't pose a threat to manned 
aircraft, which is important, especially given that my 
colleague, Chief Fetterman, mentioned this exact issue.
    In conclusion, I believe the potential for DFR 2.0 to save 
lives, reduce crime, and increase safety is immense, making the 
adoption of these advanced technologies a crucial step forward 
toward a safer future for America. I urge this esteemed 
committee to support their local public safety agencies as they 
look to implement this type of technology.
    I also want to thank my police chief, Chief Joe Hoffman, 
and my captain, Captain Stephen Sprengel, for being here to 
support me today. Thank you.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Sidhu follows:]
                   Prepared Statement of Rahul Sidhu
                              May 16, 2024
                      introduction and background
    Good afternoon, Chairman D'Esposito, Ranking Member Carter, and 
Members of the Subcommittee on Emergency Management and Technology. On 
behalf of my organization and partners, I would like to thank you for 
inviting me to testify in front of you today.
    My name is Rahul Sidhu, and I serve as the chief executive officer 
of Aerodome, a company specializing in next-generation drone-as-first-
responder technology. My previous company also operated within public 
safety, where I concentrated on developing customer service systems for 
local law enforcement agencies.
    Over the past 14 years, I have served as a paramedic, crew chief, 
and police officer in the city of Redondo Beach, where I continue to 
serve as a reserve officer. I am not merely a business executive 
looking to profit from working with public safety agencies; I consider 
myself a police officer first and a business executive second.
                 the birth and success of dfr programs
    I am here to speak about the application of unmanned aerial 
systems, more commonly known as drones, and their role in public 
safety. I recognize that many of you may already be acquainted with the 
use of drones in emergency response over the past decade. Previous 
applications have included perimeter security, safely searching the 
interior of residences for tactical teams, reconstructing accident 
scenes, and search and rescue. Many police and fire agencies have 
adopted similar programs, and they have found tremendous value in doing 
so.
    I am not here to discuss previously understood and established 
drone use cases. I am here to talk about the future. This future is 
anchored in the concept of ``drone-as-first-responder.'' To explain 
this further, let me share how this future came to be.
    In May 2018, my colleague Fritz Reber, who now serves as a vice 
president at Aerodome and was previously a captain with the Chula Vista 
Police Department, launched an experiment. He deployed drones directly 
from the police department's rooftop to respond in real time to the 
scenes of 9-1-1 calls. Since these drones responded to calls directly, 
he referred to this initiative as ``drone-as-first-responder,'' also 
known as DFR. I was particularly intrigued when I learned about this 
program, as I had heard that it virtually reduced their response time 
to emergencies by more than 50 percent.
    Recognizing the importance of true DFR, I followed in Captain 
Reber's footsteps and spearheaded the development of the Nation's 
second-ever DFR program. In March 2020, I served as a reserve police 
officer with the Redondo Beach Police Department, where I continue to 
serve. Like many police and fire agencies at the time, we were short-
staffed due to COVID. It's worth noting that many agencies are still 
short-staffed today. The Police Executive Research Forum yearly survey 
revealed that since 2020, sworn numbers across responding agencies are 
down 4.8 percent.
    We knew DFR could revolutionize our approach to staffing 
challenges. By implementing this cutting-edge program, we achieved 
several significant improvements:
   Centralized Drone Launching.--By launching drones directly 
        from a central location to calls-for-service throughout the 
        city, we reduced our average visual response time by nearly 70 
        percent.
   Efficient Triage of Responses.--We triaged police and fire 
        response more efficiently, reducing approximately 25 percent in 
        the number of low-priority calls that patrol officers had to 
        respond to.
   Improved High-Priority Response Time.--This ripple effect 
        accelerated patrol officers' physical response time to high-
        priority calls.
   Increased Apprehension of Suspects.--This program also led 
        to a significant increase in the apprehension of suspects 
        fleeing the scene of crimes, resulting in safer outcomes for 
        our community.
   Longevity and Impact.--This program has remained operational 
        at the Redondo Beach Police Department for nearly 4 years, with 
        over 5,000 DFR flights to date.
                     understanding and defining dfr
    It's crucial to understand what constitutes DFR and what does not. 
DFR is defined as utilizing a system of pre-positioned drone launch 
points, flying drones directly from these launch points to the scene of 
an emergency. These drones are remotely piloted through a computer, 
typically beyond a visual line of sight, from a central location. To 
clarify, simply launching drones at the scene of an emergency is not 
drone-as-first-responder. Patrol-based drone programs have been around 
for nearly a decade, and while they can be helpful, they are not DFR 
programs. DFR programs are designed to have the drone arrive on the 
scene first before any first responders on the ground arrive. If the 
system isn't specifically designed to send a drone to an incident 
within seconds of learning of an emergency, it is not a drone-as-first-
responder program.
    I want to emphasize why DFR exists: its undeniable impact on saving 
American lives. Today, dozens of agencies have received the necessary 
waivers from the FAA to fly Beyond Visual Line-of-Sight to support 
their DFR programs, with more than double that amount currently working 
to do the same. These agencies have seen tremendous success with their 
DFR programs, sharing countless stories of lives saved, including those 
of children. Their DFR programs have been critical in modern crime-
fighting strategies, significantly reducing retail theft, violent 
crime, and property crime. Just last month, our system was used to find 
and rescue an unconscious victim of a violent assault and rape who 
likely would have bled out if the drone had not located them on time.
    The agencies are leveraging DFR programs not only to locate 
individuals needing rescue, apprehend dangerous criminals, and protect 
first responders but also to de-escalate potentially fatal encounters. 
For instance, many agencies have reported sending drones to incidents 
where people reported a man with a firearm threatening the public. In 
these situations, drones flew overhead and verified that the firearm 
was not real. This information was relayed to officers, allowing them 
to safely approach these individuals without resorting to deadly force.
         the impact and future of dfr, next-generation dfr 2.0
    Most of the public safety agencies I'm referring to are 
implementing the first iteration of DFR, which we call DFR 1.0. DFR 1.0 
is limited, as it requires 2 staffed personnel per drone launch site 
and can only be operated during hours in which these launch sites are 
fully staffed. I want to introduce you to DFR 2.0, also known as next-
generation DFR.
    Aerodome is currently the sole provider of DFR 2.0 technology, 
which refers to a fully remote, automated, multi-station, and multi-
drone operation. This involves several advanced features:
   City-Wide Drone Coverage.--Positioning drone stations across 
        various locations within a city while managing the launch and 
        flight of the drones remotely from a central hub.
   Fully Remote Operations.--Drones can safely operate day or 
        night without a visual observer, utilizing a suite of ground 
        sensors such as 3D radar, radio frequency, remote ID, and ADS-
        B.
   Automated Docking Station.--Once their mission is complete, 
        the drones return to their docking station, where robotic arms 
        swap out their batteries, preparing them for the next mission.
   24/7 Operations.--Enables the launch of drones 24/7, in 
        various weather conditions, from mobile devices, without 
        needing to rely on full staffing.
    DFR 2.0 significantly reduces personnel requirements, allowing 
agencies to operate fully functional DFR programs with a fraction of 
the staff needed for DFR 1.0. Moreover, it provides scalable, 
sustainable, and affordable next-generation air support coverage, 
enabling every city in America to benefit from this advanced 
technology.
    Although our agencies are still working with the FAA to obtain the 
necessary waivers to operate without visual observers, our DFR 2.0 
technology is already deployed in cities like Redondo Beach, where the 
average drone response time to an emergency is now 85 seconds.
                ethical responsibility and transparency
    We recognize that as leaders in the space, it is our responsibility 
to build this technology ethically and with the best interest of 
community members at the forefront of our minds. As with all 
advancements in public safety technology, police accountability and 
transparency should not only be considered but should advance alongside 
the technology itself. For instance, today's conventional helicopter-
based air support video recordings are uploaded usually only when 
deemed evidentiary, with no straightforward process for the public to 
submit Freedom of Information Act requests to view them.
    DFR 2.0 systems record and upload entire flights, much like 
bodycams. All flight logs are then uploaded to a community dashboard, 
where the details of each flight are readily accessible to the public, 
with any personally identifying information redacted.
    Furthermore, several key differences emerge when comparing 
traditional helicopter-based air support programs to highly-advanced 
DFR 2.0 programs. Few agencies can afford helicopters due to their high 
costs and unpredictable on-going expenses. Helicopters can be unsafe, 
and using them has resulted in numerous public safety aviation-related 
deaths in the past decade.
    Additionally, they significantly pollute the environment, rivaling 
private jet usage and generating noise complaints Nation-wide. DFR 2.0 
can supplement these traditional helicopter programs, making air 
support more affordable, effective, efficient, safe, and 
environmentally friendly for every city and county in America.
                    dfr 2.0 and alternative response
    As DFR 2.0 systems continue to be implemented in public safety 
agencies Nation-wide, it is essential to understand how they can adapt 
to unique public safety challenges. With some hardware and software 
modifications, DFR 2.0 systems can be stationed in remote wilderness 
areas, rapidly detecting wildfires as they emerge. This capability can 
significantly decrease firefighter response times, reducing the 
likelihood of wild fires spreading and causing property damage or loss 
of life. Larger drones, capable of carrying water and fire retardants, 
can be operated remotely to deploy firefighting payloads onto these 
fires before they spread, potentially extinguishing them early enough 
to eliminate the need for firefighter response. This can be managed 
through a DFR 2.0 air traffic awareness system that prevents drones 
from interfering with manned aircraft operating in the same air space.
    Last, it's essential to understand how DFR 2.0 systems can play a 
role in improving our response to things like natural disasters, school 
shootings, and terrorist attacks by domestic and foreign adversaries.
    How much more quickly could the drone have located the terrorists 
who killed 14 people in San Bernardino on December 2, 2015?
    How many more people could we have located and rescued during our 
response to Hurricane Katrina?
    How many children could we have saved during school shootings by 
locating the shooter sooner for responding officers?
    How many lives could we have saved if we more quickly detected and 
potentially extinguished the California wildfires in 2018?
    Incorporating DFR 2.0 systems into our public safety infrastructure 
will revolutionize how we respond to emergencies, providing faster, 
more efficient, and safer solutions to crises that threaten our 
communities. The potential to save lives, reduce injuries, and mitigate 
damage is immense, making the adoption and integration of these 
advanced technologies a crucial step toward a safer future for America.
                               conclusion
    In conclusion, I implore this esteemed committee to acknowledge the 
indispensable role of DFR 2.0 in modern emergency response strategies. 
We must rally support for the wide-spread adoption of DFR 2.0 Nation-
wide. By allocating resources to invest in advanced American drone 
technology and fostering collaboration among public safety agencies, 
Federal regulatory bodies, and forward-thinking companies, we can 
collectively pave the way for a safer and more resilient future for all 
Americans.

    Chairman D'Esposito. Well, thank you, sir.
    I now recognize Mr. Robbins for 5 minutes to summarize his 
opening statement.

 STATEMENT OF MICHAEL ROBBINS, PRESIDENT AND CEO, ASSOCIATION 
           FOR UNCREWED VEHICLE SYSTEMS INTERNATIONAL

    Mr. Robbins. Thank you, Chairman D'Esposito and Chairman 
Pfluger, Ranking Member Correa, and Ranking Member Carter, and 
all the distinguished Members of the committee. I am Michael 
Robbins. I am the chief executive officer and president of 
AUVSI, the world's largest trade association and industry 
association representing uncrewed systems, robotics, and 
autonomy. Our members create the systems that operate in the 
air, on the ground, and in and on the water, in the civil, 
commercial, and defense domains.
    The use of our industry's technology in public safety is 
unquestionably a positive-use case. As you have heard, drones 
are saving lives in emergency response. They are being relied 
upon to reduce the Nation--excuse me, reduce the risk posed to 
first responders every day in communities across the Nation.
    As one first responder noted to me last week, drones help 
public safety make better decisions on actionable intelligence. 
They are often used as tools to de-escalate situations, reduce 
response times, provide overwatch, and identifying missing 
persons, those that are lost and those that are not looking to 
be found.
    Drones can augment police forces that are short-handed, as 
mentioned, and monitor fires for hotspots. They can enter 
buildings in disaster zones where it would be unsafe to send in 
a human and can deliver life-saving medical supplies to those 
in need of urgent care.
    This is just a snapshot of the many public safety use case. 
The bottom line, in emergency response drones have quickly 
become an effective and critical life-saving tool. To be clear, 
while I believe most of this hearing today is focused on aerial 
drones, everything I have just detailed applies to the ground 
and maritime drones, too.
    Our member companies in all domains are working with public 
safety agencies to understand their needs and to develop 
products that serve the public safety community effectively. 
While drones in public safety is absolutely a good news story, 
there are points of friction. The FAA deserves tremendous 
credit for the progress made in recent years toward enabling 
more tactical beyond visual line of sight, or BVLOS, waivers 
and allowances for drones as a first responder programs.
    That said, the FAA must move forward on the Part 108 BVLOS 
rule making to allow for drone operations to safely scale and 
grow. AUVSI sincerely appreciates the leadership of the U.S. 
Congress with yesterday's passage of the FAA reauthorization 
bill, which requires the FAA to release a draft BVLOS rule in 
the next 4 months and a final rule within 16 months after the 
release of that draft.
    However, we need not wait 20 months to get this right. 
AUVSI and our members stand ready to work with the FAA to 
ensure a timely rule that enhances safety and unlocks the full 
potential of drones for public safety and other responsible 
drone users.
    Funding also remains a point of friction. Across the Nation 
the demands on public safety are increasing while budgets are 
decreasing. Accordingly, Congress should enact the Drones for 
First Responders Act, which was introduced yesterday, which 
would establish a new revenue-neutral grant program for first 
responders to purchase secure drones manufactured in the United 
States or manufactured in allied nations.
    Further, Congress should also move forward on a robust 
competitiveness effort to support the U.S. drone industrial 
base with manufacturing tax incentives, loan guarantees, and 
other programs to level the playing field for U.S. drone 
companies against subsidized competition largely from the 
People's Republic of China.
    AUVSI believes that we must move away from being reliant on 
Chinese companies and intellectual property for our drones, 
just as the United States is doing with other critical 
technologies. It is not good public policy to rely upon a 
strategic foreign competitor which is known for using supply 
chain control as a weapon of war and is beholden to the PRC's 
military and national security laws for public safety drones. 
Accordingly, a reasonable, common-sense transition is required 
to ensure that these critical life-saving tools are available 
to public safety, while at the same time we move rapidly to 
diversify supply lines outside of China.
    AUVSI is in the middle between those who want to preserve 
the status quo, which is not working very well, and those that 
want to bring about an immediate ban on PRC drones, which would 
be extremely problematic for public safety.
    Our objective is simple: To support a strong and 
competitive industrial base and to build global leadership in 
this critical industry that is relied upon by so many agencies 
and enterprise organizations, including public safety.
    Grant programs for public safety, like the Drones for First 
Responders Act and AUVSI's other drone competitiveness 
priorities, will ensure public safety has the tools they need 
to do their jobs and demand that is generated from platforms 
produced outside the PRC, which will kickstart the flywheel for 
innovators and manufacturers. This is vital to reduce risk and 
to build the industrial base that is sorely lacking for all 
users, including public safety.
    Thank you for your time. I look forward to discussing these 
topics as well as others over the course of the hearing.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Robbins follows:]
                 Prepared Statement of Michael Robbins
                              May 16, 2024
                              introduction
    Thank you Chairmen D'Esposito and Pfluger, Ranking Members Carter 
and Magaziner, and distinguished Members of the committee. My name is 
Michael Robbins, and I am the president & CEO of the Association for 
Uncrewed Vehicle Systems International (AUVSI), the world's largest 
industry association representing the uncrewed systems, robotics, and 
autonomy industry. Our members create systems that operate in the air, 
on the ground, and in the water across the civil, commercial, and 
defense domains. The use of our industry's technology in public safety 
is unquestionably a very positive-use case.
    Drones are saving lives in emergency response operations. They are 
being relied on to reduce the risk posed to first responders, every 
day, in communities across the Nation.
    As one first responder noted to me last week, ``drones help public 
safety make better decisions on actionable intelligence.'' They are 
often used as tools to de-escalate situations, reduce response times, 
provide overwatch, and identify missing persons--those that are lost, 
and those that do not wish to be found. Drones can augment police 
forces that are short-handed. They can enter buildings and disaster 
zones where it would be unsafe to send in a human. Drones can monitor 
fires and wildfires, enabling more effective decision making and 
resource allocation. Drones can deliver life-saving medical supplies to 
those in need of urgent care.
    In emergency response situations, drones have quickly become a 
critical, effective, life-saving tool.
    And to be clear, while I believe most of this hearing today is 
focused on aerial drones, everything I just detailed applies to ground 
and maritime drones too. AUVSI member companies in all operational 
domains are working with public safety agencies to understand their 
needs and to develop products that serve the public safety community 
effectively.
    While drones in public safety is absolutely a good news story, 
there are points of friction.
    The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) deserves tremendous 
credit for the progress made in recent years toward enabling more 
Tactical Beyond Visual Line-of-Sight (BVLOS) waivers and allowances of 
Drones as First Responder (DFR) programs. That said, the FAA must move 
forward on the Part 108 BVLOS rule making to allow for operations to 
safely scale and grow.
    AUVSI sincerely appreciates the leadership the U.S. Congress has 
demonstrated with the recent passage of the FAA Reauthorization Bill, 
which requires the FAA to release a draft BVLOS rule in the next 4 
months and a final rule within 16 months after the release of the 
draft. That mandate is certainly welcome, but with that time line a 
rule is still 20 months away. Accordingly, while that rule making is 
under way, the FAA should move faster toward a template exemption for 
BVLOS operations for public safety and DFR. This would enhance the 
number of operations Nation-wide, which would increase public safety. 
Furthermore, the increase in operations would increase the demand for 
drone systems and components, thereby lowering prices and making the 
industry more robust and leading to even greater adoptions.
    Funding also remains a point of friction. Across the Nation, the 
demands on public safety are increasing while budgets are decreasing. 
Accordingly, Congress should enact the Drones for First Responders Act, 
which was just recently introduced, which would establish a new 
revenue-neutral grant program for first responders to purchase secure 
drones manufactured in the United States or manufactured in allied 
nations. Funds for this grant program will be raised through existing 
and enhanced tariffs on drones imported from the People's Republic of 
China (PRC). Further, Congress should also move forward on broader 
efforts to support the U.S. drone industry with manufacturing tax 
incentives, loan guarantees, and other programs to level the playing 
field for U.S. drone companies against subsidized competition, largely 
from the PRC.
    In short, we need a robust, bipartisan drone competitiveness 
package--akin to the CHIPS Act or the Solar Energy Manufacturing Act--
targeted toward the drone and robotics industry to ensure America 
doesn't lose complete control over this critical technology to the PRC 
and to level the playing field. Further, a drone competitiveness 
package would leverage Federal dollars to drive significantly greater 
private capital investment domestically, and with our allies.
    AUVSI believes that we must move away from being reliant on Chinese 
companies and intellectual property for our drones, as the United 
States is doing with other critical technologies. A reasonable, common-
sense transition is required to ensure that these critical life-saving 
tools are available to public safety, while at the same time we move 
rapidly to diversify manufacturing and technology supply lines outside 
of China.
    AUVSI is advocating for a multi-pronged effort to support policies 
that would encourage investment, innovation, and ultimately scaled 
production of drone supply chains within the United States and its 
allied partners to lead us to a more balanced level of self-
sustainment. This is important because multiple U.S. Government 
agencies--including the Departments of Defense,\1\ Treasury,\2\ 
Commerce,\3\ Homeland Security,\4\ and the FBI \5\--have made it quite 
clear that the continued reliance on PRC drones is a risk to national 
security. Nevertheless, despite a shift away from PRC-drones by some 
public safety departments, approximately 90 percent of public safety 
agencies Nation-wide with drone programs are still using at least some 
Chinese drones as part of their fleets, despite the U.S. Government's 
warnings about the security threats these drones pose.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ https://www.defense.gov/News/Releases/Release/Article/2706082/
department-statement-on-dji-systems/.
    \2\ https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy0538.
    \3\ https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/12/22/2020-
28031/addition-of-entities-to-the-entity-list-revision-of-entry-on-the-
entity-list-and-removal-of-entities.
    \4\ https://www.cisa.gov/resources-tools/resources/cybersecurity-
guidance-chinese-manufactured-uas.
    \5\ Ibid.
    \6\ Airborne International Response Team, 2024 Public Safety UAS 
Survey, Initial Analysis for Public Release, 11 May 2024.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    AUVSI is firmly in the middle between those that want to preserve 
the status quo--which isn't working very well--and those that want to 
bring about an immediate ban on PRC drones--which would be extremely 
problematic, as we saw in Florida, which was an action we resolutely 
opposed.
    Our objective is simple: To support a strong and competitive 
industrial base and to build global leadership in this critical 
industry that is relied on by so many agencies and enterprise 
organizations, including public safety.
    Grant programs for public safety, like the DFR Act would create, 
will ensure public safety has the tools they need to do their jobs, and 
demand is generated for platforms produced outside the PRC, which will 
kickstart the flywheel for innovators and manufacturers. This is vital 
to reduce risk, and to build the industrial base that is sorely 
lacking--for all users, including public safety.
                     drones for emergency response
    In preparation for this hearing, I spoke with many AUVSI member 
companies that work on behalf of public safety agencies, as well as 
directly with multiple public safety agencies across the Nation, about 
how drones are being used for emergency operations.
    The top takeaway is that public safety agencies are using drones in 
innovative ways to enhance their operations, response times, and 
overall efficiency and safety. Drones have become indispensable tools 
that offer a variety of enhanced capabilities.
    It is truly remarkable how public safety leaders have put drones to 
work to protect citizens and save lives Nation-wide. In Southern 
California, the Chula Vista Police Department led the way on the Drones 
as a First Responder program with the FAA. In Texas, the Department of 
Public Safety has State-wide authorization to use drones to cover 
everything from the U.S.-Mexico border to protecting the State Capitol 
in Austin. In New York City and Virginia, city and State police forces 
are using drones to monitor campus protests.
    Here is a snapshot of what AUVSI has heard about how drones (which 
in this context can apply in most cases to uncrewed aerial systems 
(UAS) and ground robotics) are being used in public safety missions 
Nation-wide:
    Law Enforcement Support.--Police departments across the United 
States utilize drones for surveillance, crowd monitoring, and tactical 
operations, including Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT).
    Drones provide aerial views during crime scene investigations, 
monitor active incidents, and assist in tracking suspects, enhancing 
the capabilities of law enforcement agencies. Police departments 
increasingly use Drones as First Responders (DFR), providing aerial 
views for situational awareness (overwatch), suspect tracking, two-way 
communication, and more. When a drone is on site first, providing real-
time high-resolution imagery back to officers responding to an 
incident, the knowledge the officer has before arriving on scene can be 
meaningfully enhanced, which will very likely inform how they respond. 
This is saving lives--blue lives as well as those of the public.

The Chula Vista Police Department (CVPD), under the capable leadership 
of Chief Roxanne Kennedy and Captain Miriam Foxx, has led the way with 
demonstrating the incredible utility of DFR programs. CVPD has flown 
nearly 20,000 DFR missions with zero critical airspace incidents, which 
has allowed them to avoid dispatching patrol units over 4,200 times and 
achieve an average response time of approximately 90 seconds.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \7\ https://www.chulavistaca.gov/departments/police-department/
programs/uas-drone-program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Today, other departments around the country are also successfully using 
DFR programs. Pearland, Texas has a fully BVLOS DFR program using 
ground-based airspace monitoring. New York City and Oklahoma City are 
using patrol-led DFR programs, where a responding officer on the ground 
deploys a drone that is piloted by command staff at headquarters.

    Firefighting and Wildfire Monitoring.--Both urban and rural fire 
departments across the country are using drones for wildfire monitoring 
and prevention, and even spraying dry powder to extinguish flames. 
Drones equipped with thermal imaging cameras have become invaluable 
tools for firefighters in detecting hotspots, monitoring fire spread, 
and assessing structural damage during firefighting operations. Drones 
provide critical data to firefighters, enabling more effective decision 
making and resource allocation, ultimately enhancing safety and saving 
lives.
    Search and Rescue Operations.--Drones equipped with high-resolution 
cameras and thermal imaging can quickly cover large areas and provide 
real-time visuals to aid in locating missing persons or individuals in 
distress, especially in rugged or remote terrain. There are numerous 
well-documented instances where lives of people missing in the 
wilderness have been saved due to the effective deployment of a drone. 
Urban search and surveillance missions benefit from drones' ability to 
navigate congested or inaccessible areas, providing aerial views for 
reconnaissance, monitoring suspicious activities, or assisting in anti-
terrorism efforts.
    Disaster Response and Assessment.--Drones are deployed to assess 
damage, monitor hazards, survey affected areas, and deliver aid 
following disasters such as tornadoes, hurricanes, earthquakes, 
wildfires, and infrastructure collapses. They provide valuable 
situational awareness to emergency responders and help them coordinate 
relief efforts.
    Traffic Management and Accident Reconstruction.--Drones equipped 
with high-resolution cameras are employed to monitor traffic flow, 
identify congestion points, and assist in accident reconstruction. 
Drones help improve roadway safety and optimize traffic management 
strategies.
    Threat, Hazmat, and Environmental Monitoring.--Drones are being 
used to assess active-shooter situations, suspicious packages, bomb 
threats, hostage situations, and other extortionary threats. Drones 
equipped with specialized sensors can detect hazardous materials, 
monitor air quality, and assess environmental risks in industrial 
settings or areas prone to pollution. Drones help safeguard public 
health and facilitate timely responses to environmental emergencies.
    Public Event Management.--Drones are deployed to monitor large 
public gatherings, such as protests, parades, concerts, or sporting 
events, to ensure public safety, manage crowds, and respond swiftly to 
any emergencies or security threats.
    Delivery and Rescue Operations.--Drones can deliver life-saving 
medical supplies, including snakebite antivenom, EPIPENs, prescription 
medications, and defibrillators to those in need of urgent care but out 
of reach from traditional modes of delivery. Drones equipped with 
flotation devices or life-saving equipment have been deployed in water 
rescue missions to deliver aid, conduct swift water searches, or 
provide assistance to lifeguards and marine rescue teams.

As part of an initiative funded by DoT's Strengthening Mobility and 
Revolutionizing Transportation (SMART) Grants Program, Riverside Health 
System, Virginia Institute for Spaceflight & Autonomy (VISA) at Old 
Dominion University, Accomack-Northampton Planning District Commission 
(A-NPDC), an AUVSI member company has put together a drone delivery 
program for medicine and medical supply delivery to the area, including 
Tangier Island, which is 17 miles off coast and only accessible by sea 
or air. Over the last year, the company has delivered hypertension 
medication to patients in a 2-3-mile radius of Riverside Health System 
facilities. The SMART Grant Phase 1 is meant to be a demonstration 
exercise, and as the team progresses toward a Phase 2 application, it 
will enable consistent operations with the intent to improve patient 
outcomes and prescription adherence.
Another AUVSI member company recently announced that they have made 
more than 1 million deliveries, many of which have been health care 
supplies, including blood, vaccines, and prescriptions.

    The continued integration and advancement of drone operations hold 
great promise for further improving public safety and emergency 
preparedness efforts, and AUVSI's members are motivated to be part of 
this mission set working with public safety officials to deliver the 
tools they need with the capabilities, cost, service, and support they 
require.
                          faa air space access
    The FAA has made significant progress in recent years toward 
enabling more Tactical Beyond Visual Line-of-Sight (BVLOS) waivers and 
allowances of Drones as First Responder (DFR) programs.\8\ The true 
full potential of drones in public safety, however, awaits the Part 108 
BVLOS rule. AUVSI appreciates the support of the U.S. Congress of the 
BVLOS rule, putting time lines on the FAA for moving forward with that 
rule-making progress in the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \8\ https://www.faa.gov/sites/faa.gov/files/uas/public_safety_gov/
public_safety_toolkit/TBVLOS_Waiver_Final.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    AUVSI encourages the FAA to work on an accelerated time line to 
complete the rule, which will safely unlock scalability for public 
safety missions. Our industry stands ready to work with the FAA to 
ensure a timely rule that enhances safety; we need not take the full 20 
months to get this right.
    While the BVLOS rule making is under way, the FAA should move 
faster toward a template exemption for BVLOS operations for public 
safety and DFR. This would enhance the number of operations Nation-
wide, which would thereby increase public safety. The public safety 
drone use cases, especially DFR use cases, are often consistent across 
the country, and public safety operators are already a trusted public 
entity who are accustomed to producer-based operations and concepts 
like safety management.
    By using the exemption process for public safety, the FAA would 
then gain operational data to inform additional BVLOS rule making, such 
as characterization of low-altitude air space in urban environments, 
the effectiveness of ADS-B as a primary mitigation for airborne 
collisions, common practices for remote pilot in command (RPIC) and 
operational training, mean time to failure for specific components of 
the system, and more.
                      drone capabilities and cost
    A common misconception is that the only viable drone options for 
public safety departments to employ are from the People's Republic of 
China (PRC). This is not true, but is a convenient myth propagated by 
PRC drone companies and their spokespeople. Dozens of the companies 
that AUVSI represents across operational domains offer leading 
technology designed for public safety use cases. Further, U.S. 
technology innovation is dynamics and rapidly evolving. The platforms 
offered today will most certainly be different from those offered in 
the years ahead.
    Many public safety experts I spoke with stated that, even if they 
are using PRC drones today, they would like to move away from using 
them in the future. Many have already transitioned away from PRC 
drones, are in the process of doing so, or have a strong desire to do 
so as soon as practicable.
    In the past, there have been at least two major hurdles for public 
safety agencies acquiring non-PRC drones, causing them instead to 
default to Chinese drones: capabilities and cost.
    For many years, the capability gap between drones designed and 
manufactured in the PRC and drones designed and manufactured anywhere 
else in the world, including the United States, was real and it was, to 
varying degrees, quite wide. That is no longer the case. Due to the 
investments in innovation and advanced manufacturing, in recent years 
U.S. and other non-PRC drone companies have largely closed the 
capability gap in most use cases. With continued investment, this gap 
will disappear entirely.
    AUVSI is confident in U.S. and allied innovation. There are now a 
wide variety of drones available on the market that provide the same 
level of capability, or in some cases even greater capability, than PRC 
drones.
    Many of the departments that I spoke to that use U.S. or allied 
nation drones are pleased with their investments. Those with mixed 
fleets often noted that support from PRC drone companies was often 
lacking, whereas service and support was often outstanding from U.S. 
and allied nation drone companies.
    This is not to say, ``mission accomplished.'' Much work remains, as 
the non-PRC drone industry is still fractional in size compared to the 
state-supported PRC drone industry. Many U.S. drone companies have 
successfully narrowed or closed the capability gap with Chinese drone 
companies, but there remains a significant cost gap. This gap is 
undoubtedly an area of on-going friction within the public safety 
community with limited budgets.
    PRC subsidies have allowed their drone companies to scale 
production and flood the U.S. market (a practice known as ``dumping''). 
This monopolistic position created barriers to the development of U.S. 
and other non-PRC supply chains for the drone industry by effectively 
excluding them from the largest markets. The results have been 
devastating to the domestic manufacturing industry, resulting in 
difficulty attracting the capital investments to scale operations, and 
thereby drive down costs over time.
    The cost gap is one of the reasons why AUVSI is a strong supporter 
of programs to support the U.S. drone industry to level the playing 
field, as well as grant programs to help public safety transition away 
from PRC drones. As the next sections will detail, given very real 
supply chain risks and national security concerns highlighted by the 
U.S. Government, the transition away from unsecure PRC-drones to non-
PRC-manufactured secure drones must occur in a common-sense and 
reasonable time frame, and that transition should begin immediately.
 leveling the playing field for u.s. drone manufacturing & ensuring a 
     robust, secure supply chain of drones for public safety users
    U.S. drone manufacturers and their component supply chain have 
struggled to compete against foreign subsidized competition, which 
hinders the availability of American-made UAS on the market and impedes 
workforce growth and investment. Accordingly, the U.S. Government must 
foster a more competitive and fair playing field for U.S.-based drone 
manufacturers. AUVSI is advocating for specific proposals that would 
generate demand for U.S.-made drones and supply-side measures that 
level the playing field for U.S. drone and component manufacturers 
against subsidized competition and dumping practices.
    The U.S. Government should also coordinate activities with allied 
and partner nations to create a stronger, more secure supply chain. 
AUVSI believes it is essential to advance security and competitiveness 
in a thoughtful way that respects existing investments while building 
toward a more secure, sustainable future that puts U.S. interests 
first, including security, the economy, and overarching values. In 
practice, this means any effort to support the growth of U.S. drone 
manufacturers and the drone supply chain should account for the large 
investments, both of time and capital, made by U.S. companies.
    Congress has enacted several laws, including the American Security 
Drone Act, that will strengthen our national security by limiting the 
purchase and use of certain drones manufactured in the People's 
Republic of China. Future legislation should focus on creating 
incentives for U.S. companies directly, and indirectly through demand 
generation, by providing grants, tax incentives, and loan guarantees.
    Congress should enact a new program designed to help public safety 
agencies acquire more drones to enhance public safety and provide first 
responders with critical tools. Programs should also be designed to 
transition public safety agencies away from using Chinese drones to 
secure, non-PRC options.
    AUVSI has been working closely with Members of Congress on these 
types of efforts, including the Drones for First Responders (DFR) Act, 
which was recently introduced. The legislation would establish a new 
revenue-neutral grant program for first responders, critical 
infrastructure providers, and farmers to purchase secure drones 
manufactured by the United States or our allies. Funds for this grant 
program will be raised through a new tariff on PRC drones. AUVSI urges 
Congress to support public safety users of drones in their transition 
away from PRC technology by passing the DFR Act into law in 2024.
    Congress should also enhance existing Federal grant programs for 
first responders, ensuring that programs to support first responders 
are adequately funded to enable State and local agencies to transition 
to secure drone solutions. This should include the Department of 
Homeland Security's (DHS) Urban Areas Security Initiative (UASI) 
Program, the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA's) Homeland 
Security Grant Program, and grants administered by the U.S. Department 
of Justice. Critically, these and other Federal grant programs for 
first responders must allow grant recipients to purchase drones. At 
present, the Justice Department's Bureau of Justice Assistance flatly 
prohibits the use of grant funds to purchase UAS, as does FEMA's 
Assistance to Firefighters Grants (AFG) Program. Enabling these 
programs to support the purchase of U.S.-made drones would 
significantly benefit first responders.
    Bolstering new drone manufacturing capabilities and the associated 
workforce will require infrastructure and capital expenditures. 
Providing tax incentives, loan guarantees, and other mechanisms to spur 
that spending would accelerate growth and development that would have 
otherwise been delayed or denied. Manufacturer tax credits for the 
production and sale of certain UAS equipment and components produced 
and sold in the United States would benefit the industry and its 
competitiveness and would decrease reliance on subsidized, foreign 
drones.
    This has worked in other industries. According to the Financial 
Times, U.S. manufacturing commitments doubled--to more than $200 
billion, creating 82,000 jobs--based on the success of tax incentive 
programs for other industries, including solar panels, semiconductors, 
electric vehicles, and other clean technologies.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \9\ https://www.ft.com/content/b1079606-5543-4fc5-acae-
2c6c84b3a49f.

In the solar industry alone, since the passage of the Solar Energy 
Manufacturing Act (SEMA), more than $100 billion in private-sector 
investment has been made into 51 new manufacturing facilities in the 
United States, ultimately representing more than 20,000 additional U.S. 
jobs to be created and significant capacity added for domestic solar 
panel production.\10\ During a 2023 hearing on the CHIPS and Science 
Act, it was stated that since the law was enacted, along with $39 
billion in Government appropriations and 25 percent investment tax 
credit to spur domestic production of semiconductors, more than $200 
billion in additional private-sector funding has flowed into the 
industry in the United States.\11\ Recently, the U.S. Energy Department 
made $15.5 billion in new funding available to spur domestic battery 
manufacturing through cost-shared grants and loans \12\ and an 
additional $20 billion is being invested in crane manufacturing to on-
shore production of secure cranes for U.S. ports.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \10\ https://www.seia.org/research-resources/impact-inflation-
reduction-act.
    \11\ Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation 
CHIPS and Science Implementation and Oversight, October 4, 2023: 
https://www.commerce.senate.gov/2023/10/chips-and-science-
implementation-and-oversight.
    \12\ https://www.energy.gov/articles/biden-harris-administration-
announces-155-billion-support-strong-and-just-transition.
    \13\ https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/
2024/02/21/fact-sheet-biden-harris-administration-announces-initiative-
to-bolster-cybersecurity-of-u-s-ports/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The time has come for the U.S. Government to act to similarly spur 
investment into the U.S. drone and component marketplace to level the 
playing field as it has done for other critical technologies. Congress 
should act on the following:
    Manufacturing tax credits.--To promote domestic drone manufacturing 
capacity, Congress needs to develop a tax incentive program for drone 
manufacturing. This program can leverage the language and model the 
frameworks of SEMA, CHIPS, the House's Bioeconomy Research and 
Development Act of 2021 (America Creating Opportunities for 
Manufacturing, Pre-Eminence in Technology and Economic Strength 
(COMPETES) Act of 2022), and the Senate's United States Innovation and 
Competition Act (USICA) on semiconductors and other technologies.
    Loan guarantees.--Congress should develop a program of loan 
guarantees to U.S. drone and component manufacturers modeled around 
language included in the Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing 
Direct Loan Program.
    Ensuring critical mineral access.--Access to rare earth-driven 
components is a challenge to U.S. drone and component manufacturers. 
Congress should enact legislation along the lines of H.R. 8981, the 
Securing America's Mineral Supply Chains Act, from the 117th Congress.
    AUVSI does not support policies that would immediately ban the use 
of PRC drones in the United States, as this would have a negative 
impact on public safety given the number of safety agencies with PRC 
drones in their fleets.

When the State of Florida instituted an immediate ban, we witnessed the 
very real challenge this imposed on public safety, removing a critical, 
life-saving tool from their operations overnight. Ultimately, Florida 
authorized a $25 million program for public safety agencies acquire 
fleets of non-PRC, secure drones;\14\ a move AUVSI applauds. Going 
forward, Florida should serve as an example to other entities seeking 
to transition away from PRC drones; immediate bans should be avoided, 
transition times should allow for a reasonable period of changeover, 
and funding should be made available to public safety agencies for the 
transition to new, secure drone fleets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \14\ https://www.fdle.state.fl.us/FDLE-Grants/Open-Funding-
Opportunities/Funding-Opportunities/Drone/FY23-24-DRONE.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    To ensure a robust, secure supply chain, we need a robust, 
bipartisan competitiveness package--like the CHIPS Act--targeted toward 
the drone and robotics industry to ensure America doesn't lose complete 
control over this critical technology to the PRC, and which leverages 
Federal dollars to drive private capital investment domestically and 
with our allies.
    The next section of our testimony details the ``why'' support for 
the transition away from PRC drones is so critical.
 prc national security laws & direct threats to u.s. national security
    Public safety agencies, as well as other users of drones, cannot be 
reliant on the PRC, a strategic competitor and an increasingly hostile 
foreign adversary, for critical technology such as drones and ground 
robotics. It is not logical to allow such power over public safety 
technology in the hands of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Should 
the United States enter a conflict with the PRC, a scenario our member 
companies are actively working to prevent through the success of 
strategic deterrence, access to PRC technology would end immediately.
    Lawfare observes, ``A foreign adversary dominating the world market 
could deny the United States effective drone support in warfighting or 
potentially disable U.S. drones in a conflict.''\15\ The Lawfare 
article proved prescient, confirming the fear that Chinese companies 
would in fact use software updates to disable drones to meet CCP policy 
goals--something that could also happen to every Chinese drone in the 
United States. Just 6 months ago, in December 2023, a firmware update 
from Autel Robitcs, a PRC drone company, disabled all drones in 
``conflict zones'' as defined by the company.\16\ This action, however, 
presumably came via direct influence from the CPP and the People's 
Liberation Army (PLA), as the drone deactivating extended into 
international conflicts in Ukraine and Israel, but also, aligning with 
CCP and PLA policy, into the entire island of Taiwan and the disputed 
the Arunachal Pradesh region on the border of India and the PRC.\17\ 
This is a disturbing example of CCP and PLA policy extending directly 
into corporate supply chain interdiction as a weapon of war. U.S. users 
of drones, including public safety users, are vulnerable to these same 
software updates, that could come at any time and without warning. The 
United States must have a plan to transition away from PRC drones 
forthwith, as AUVSI has set forth.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \15\ https://www.lawfareblog.com/us-reliance-chinese-drones-sector-
next-chips-act.
    \16\ https://dronexl.co/2023/12/24/autel-robotics-drone-no-fly 
zones-conflict/.
    \17\ Ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Furthermore, the U.S. Government has raised multiple security 
concerns associated with Chinese drone companies, which are obligated 
to comply with China's national security laws.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \18\ https://www.wsj.com/articles/china-adopts-sweeping-national-
security-law-1435757589/Article 7 of National Security Law of China 
states ``All organizations and citizens shall support, assist, and 
cooperate with national intelligence efforts in accordance with law, 
and shall protect national intelligence work secrets they are aware 
of.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In December 2023, in recognition of the threat PRC drones pose to 
the United States, the American Security Drone Act was signed into law 
as part of the 2024 National Defense Authorization Act, prohibiting the 
U.S. Government from purchasing and operating PRC drones, as well as 
drones from other ``covered entities'' including Iran, Russia, and 
North Korea.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \19\ https://www.Congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/2670/
text?s=2&r=2&q=%7B%22- 
search%22%3A%22national+defense+authorization+act+of+2024%22%7D.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In January 2024, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security 
Agency (CISA), along with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), 
released a warning memo noting that, ``The use of Chinese-manufactured 
UAS in critical infrastructure operations risks exposing sensitive 
information to PRC authorities, jeopardizing U.S. national security, 
economic security, and public health and safety.''\20\ Assistant 
Director of the FBI's Cyber Division, Bryan Vorndran stated, ``the 
wide-spread deployment of Chinese-manufactured UAS in our Nation's key 
sectors is a national security concern, and it carries the risk of 
unauthorized access to systems and data.''\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \20\ https://www.cisa.gov/sites/default/files/2024-01/
Cybersecurity%20Guidance%20Chinese-
Manufactured%20UAS_final508_16JAN2024.pdf.
    \21\ https://www.cisa.gov/news-events/news/release-cybersecurity-
guidance-chinese-manufactured-uas-critical-infrastructure-owners-and-
operators.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In October 2022, the DoD identified Shenzhen-based Da Jiang 
Innovations, or DJI as it is commonly known, as a ``Chinese military 
company'' operating in the United States under Section 1260H of the 
fiscal year 2021 NDAA.\22\ The Section 1260H list catalogs companies 
that the DoD believes contribute to the modernization goals of the 
People's Liberation Army, ensuring its access to advanced technologies 
as part of China's military-civil fusion strategy. The U.S. Department 
of Commerce placed DJI on the Entity List,\23\ and the U.S. Department 
of the Treasury placed DJI on the Office of Foreign Assets Control's 
(OFAC) list of Chinese tech firms that are part of the Chinese 
military-industrial complex.\24\ These lists restrict U.S. investments 
in DJI based on allegations of support of human rights abuses against 
the Uyghur people.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \22\ https://www.defense.gov/News/Releases/Release/Article/3180636/
dod-releases-list-of-peoples-republic-of-china-prc-military-companies-
in-accord/.
    \23\ https://www.bis.doc.gov/index.php/documents/regulations-docs/
2326-supplement-no-4-to-part-744-entity-list-4/file.
    \24\ https://sanctionssearch.ofac.treas.gov.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    It is not good public policy to rely upon the goodwill of a 
strategic foreign competitor, which is known for using supply chain 
control as a weapon of war and is beholden to PRC's military and 
national security laws, for public safety drones.\25\ AUVSI challenges 
Congress to act immediately on the policy areas detailed earlier in 
this testimony to ensure public safety departments continue to have 
cost-effective, capable, life-saving drone technology, while also 
safeguarding the United States from the very real threat of reliance on 
PRC drones.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \25\ https://warontherocks.com/2023/05/the-art-of-supply-chain-
interdiction-to-win-without- fighting/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                             drone security
    The Defense Innovation Unit's (DIU) Blue UAS program is an effort 
to curate, maintain, and improve a robust roster of policy-approved 
commercial drone technology that is compliant with the fiscal year 2020 
and fiscal year 2023 National Defense Authorization Acts (NDAA).\26\ 
Blue UAS is intended to meet the needs of Department of Defense (DOD) 
users and addresses cybersecurity and supply chain requirements. DIU 
does not assess drones that will not be used to accomplish DOD 
objectives. Congress has not mandated or provided funding to DIU to 
take on the responsibility of assessing all commercial-sector drones 
and components that could serve the needs of all Government agencies or 
other users, including public safety.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \26\ https://www.diu.mil/blue-uas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The limits of the Blue UAS program for non-DOD users left a void in 
cybersecurity and supply chain validation for much of the industry that 
was not part of the Blue UAS program. This was a source of significant 
friction; accordingly, AUVSI moved toward the friction to solve this 
problem. In close collaboration with DIU, AUVSI provides Green UAS as a 
solution to fill the gaps between the Blue UAS Cleared List and drones 
that meet non-DOD needs.\27\ AUVSI's goal is to assess and certify 
additional platforms and components beyond those on the Blue UAS list 
as secure, widening the offering of secure, vetted drones available for 
procurement by non-DOD agencies, including public safety. Green UAS was 
designed to develop a standing application for NDAA-compliant 
technology and validate them preemptively. Green UAS builds upon DIU's 
Blue UAS program and brings it into the commercial realm, while still 
offering any company that obtains Green UAS certification the 
opportunity to undergo Blue UAS certification if they wish to sell to 
DOD. Last month, AUVSI and DIU strengthened our partnership with a new 
data-sharing Memorandum of Understanding.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \27\ https://www.diu.mil/latest/auvsi-launches-green-uas-
cybersecurity-certification-program-for-commercial.
    \28\ https://www.c4isrnet.com/unmanned/2024/04/26/defense-
innovation-unit-moves-to-ease-commercial-drone-certifications/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    For public safety agencies seeking drones meeting validated 
cybersecurity and supply chain requirements, in addition to those 
cleared on the Blue List, AUVSI offers the Green UAS program. This 
initiative expands certification beyond the Blue UAS list, providing 
more options that meet public safety operational needs while continuing 
to comply with the appropriate cybersecurity and supply chain 
compliance standards. The Green UAS program mirrors Blue requirements 
for the certification process and also expands upon it, including a 
Remote Operations and Connectivity assessment (5G, WiFi, Bluetooth, 
Remote ID, etc.) that has become increasingly important across use 
cases, especially for first responders and public safety mission 
requirements.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \29\ https://www.auvsi.org/green-uas-framework.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    AUVSI supports the Drone Evaluation to Eliminate Cyber Threats Act 
of 2024 (DETECT Act), which directs the National Institute of Standards 
and Technology (NIST) to develop cybersecurity guidelines for the 
Federal Government's use of drones, which could also be extrapolated to 
public safety and other users.\30\ Notably, the legislation 
specifically notes AUVSI's Green UAS as a best practice for NIST to 
consider.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \30\ https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/3758/
text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 prc flooding the u.s. market with subsidized drones and ``no limits'' 
                           government support
    In 2015, the PRC launched ``Made in China 2025,'' a 10-year whole-
of-society effort to invest in key industries, primarily in the 
technology area, to ensure China's world leadership and market 
dominance.\31\ In a distinct role reversal with high-tech capitalist 
economies in the West, China has removed red tape to development while 
enabling sophisticated market mechanisms to spur rapid growth. While 
much of the discussion on PRC government involvement in the industry 
has centered around direct subsidization, the scope of their support is 
far greater. No Chinese company or investment firm is free of Chinese 
Communist Party (CCP) involvement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \31\ https://www.csis.org/analysis/made-china-2025.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC) labels ``dumping'' as an 
illegal trade practice.\32\ In 2019, U.S. Under Secretary for Defense 
Ellen Lord highlighted this challenge with respect to drones, noting, 
``We don't have much of a small UAS industrial base because DJI dumped 
so many low-price quadcopters on the market, and we then became 
dependent on them.''\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \32\ https://www.trade.gov/us-antidumping-and-countervailing-
duties: Unfair foreign pricing and government subsidies distort the 
free flow of goods and adversely affect American business in the global 
marketplace. Enforcement and Compliance, within the International Trade 
Administration of the Department of Commerce, enforces laws and 
agreements to protect U.S. businesses from unfair competition within 
the United States, resulting from unfair pricing by foreign companies 
and unfair subsidies to foreign companies by their governments.
    \33\ https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/08/27/pentagon-seeks-to-
counter-chinas-drone-edge/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The flood of inexpensive drones into the United States has resulted 
in PRC drones accounting for more than 90 percent of the first 
responder market, according to 2024 data from the Airborne 
International Response Team (AIRT).\34\ As a former U.S. Deputy 
Assistant Secretary of Defense put it, ``China's domination of drone 
manufacturing has been deliberately cultivated through aggressive 
government subsidies, direct investment, and strategic regulations to 
develop a domestic industry and gain a technological edge.''\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \34\ Airborne International Response Team, 2024 Public Safety UAS 
Survey, Initial Analysis for Public Release, 11 May 2024.
    \35\ https://www.thedefensepost.com/2023/10/13/drone-war-chinese-
equipment/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    DJI has been a major beneficiary of the ``Made in China 2025'' 
policy and the resulting subsidies.\36\ In a February 2022 report, The 
Washington Post found that DJI's investors included at least 4 Chinese 
investment firms with close ties to the government of the People's 
Republic of China (PRC).\37\ The company's investors include ``China 
Chengtong Holdings Group, which is directly administered by Beijing's 
state-owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission, a 
ministerial-level organization tasked by China's State Council to 
manage the country's state-owned enterprises.''\38\According to the 
Post report,
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \36\ https://www.csis.org/analysis/made-china-2025.
    \37\ https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2022/02/01/
china-funding-drones-dji-us-regulators/.
    \38\ Ibid.

``Other funds that list DJI as an investment include the Shanghai 
Venture Capital Guidance Fund, which is administered under the Shanghai 
Municipal Government. Guidance funds in China mix state assets with 
private funds to advance Beijing's industrial development goals in 
emerging industries. A Chinese-language S&P global report released in 
March 2021 says that state-run Guangdong Hengjian Investment Holding 
invested in DJI alongside SenseTime, which was also added to a U.S. 
sanctions list in December 2021 by the Biden administration over 
alleged human rights abuses in Xinjiang.\39\ SDIC Unity Capital, a fund 
administered by the State Development & Investment Corporation, a 
state-owned investment holding company approved by China's State 
Council, also lists DJI as an investment on its website.''\40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \39\ https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/12/10/us-
investment-ban-sensetime/.
    \40\ https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2022/02/01/
china-funding-drones-dji-us-regulators/.

    The PRC's support for its drone industry, to the detriment of U.S. 
manufacturing and global competition, was recently reinforced by a 
Shenzhen visit from high-level government officials who noted ``no-
limits support'' to DJI and the Shenzhen-based drone and component 
industry.\41\ This unequivocal support for the PRC drone industry 
increasingly extends to another Shenzhen-based drone company, Autel 
Robotics, which has been growing in market share in recent years.\42\ 
Autel has received similar preferential tax rates and government 
subsidies as DJI, and as a result is similarly flooding the U.S. market 
with drones, crowding out U.S. and non-PRC manufacturers who must 
compete on unequal footing with the government-backed PRC 
companies.\43\ The founder of Autel, Li Hongjing, described the PRC's 
support for the company as ``indispensable oxygen'' to the company.\44\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \41\ https://www.scmp.com/economy/china-economy/article/3238118/
shenzhen-trip-dji-visit-chinas-vice-premier-offers-no-limits-support-
amid-us-tech-curbs.
    \42\ https://www.reuters.com/markets/asia/dji-is-more-elusive-us-
target-than-huawei-2021-12-17/.
    \43\ https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/2023/09/15/dji-isnt-the-
only-chinese-drone-threat- to-us-security-meet-autel/.
    \44\ https://selectcommitteeontheccp.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/
selectcommitteeontheccp.- house.gov/files/evo-media-document/11.29.23-
letter-to-austin-yellen-and-raimondo-autel-drones-final-.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The results of PRC support for the domestic drone industry, and the 
subsequent PRC drone dumping, have been devastating to the U.S. drone 
manufacturing industry. Non-PRC companies in the United States, and 
across the global, struggle to attract capital to scale operations, and 
thereby drive down costs. This is an area of friction that Congress can 
address, and AUVSI challenges Congress to take immediate action on the 
policy solutions communicated in this testimony to level the playing 
field for U.S. drone manufacturers, ensuring secure and robust drone 
supply chains are available to public safety and other enterprise 
users.
                               conclusion
    The use of drones in public safety operations is a tremendous boost 
to the effectiveness, efficiency, and ultimately safety of various 
missions. Drones are saving lives in public safety across multiple use 
cases. Points of friction remain--including air space access, the need 
for a BVLOS rule for expanded operations, funding for secure drone 
operations, and transitioning away from unsecure PRC drone technology--
but Congress has the playbook, as detailed in this testimony, for 
action. Thank you again. I am looking forward to answering your 
questions.

    Chairman D'Esposito. Thank you, Mr. Robbins.
    Members will be recognized by order of seniority for their 
5 minutes of questioning. An additional round of questioning 
may be called after all Members have been recognized.
    I now recognize myself for 5 minutes of questioning. New 
York City Mayor Eric Adams has stated that deploying drones in 
the utilization of public safety costs only 17 cents per 
launch, whereas a helicopter would cost $2,200 per flight. So I 
think we would all clearly understand that utilizing drones are 
a step in the right direction in places like the city of New 
York where the mayor is working to crunch numbers and save 
money.
    But while we begin to utilize drones, we do have the 
concerns, as many of my colleagues have mentioned. We have seen 
guidance released by both CISA and the FBI where there are 
risks posed to U.S. national security by Chinese-manufactured 
drones.
    Deputy Commissioner Daughtry, what measures have the NYPD 
taken to ensure that when utilizing drones that information is 
kept safe?
    Mr. Daughtry. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you for the 
question. So the measures that we have taken we put in place 
is, No. 1, this department under this administration we are 
looking to move away from purchasing DJI drones. We share, this 
agency as well as the police commissioner, shares the same 
sentiments as this committee that there is some security 
concerns with the DJI drones, and we are looking to phase them 
out of our fleet.
    As far as your question, the safety measures that we have 
taken place, when a drone is recording it goes from up to down 
so it goes from the recording goes back to the SD card which 
then goes into our Genetec system. It is like a firewall 
basically so that nobody can go in there and tamper with the 
video data.
    But to answer your question, we are looking to phase out 
DJI drones. We are not looking to purchase any more.
    Chairman D'Esposito. So in the process of phasing out the 
DJI drones you are confident, which I know the answer is yes, 
and we are confident that none of the information collected by 
drone usage is compromised in the New York City Police 
Department?
    Mr. Daughtry. That is, that is 100 percent correct. No, it 
is not.
    Chairman D'Esposito. Right. Your testimony also mentions 
that the NYPD plans to roll out DFR programs in 5 police 
precincts based on crime analysis. Can you just briefly explain 
what a game-changer that will be and really the idea that, you 
know, New York and others are setting a precedent on how we 
will continue to fight crime?
    Mr. Daughtry. Yes. So we are actually in the testing phase. 
I have a big vision for the drones in our department, but the 
DFR program we have what is called in our department 
ShotSpotter. I believe a lot of other municipalities in the 
country uses it, also. So when the ShotSpotter is activated it 
will send the coordinates, the longitude and the latitude, to 
the actual drone in a box, the drone station, which I just in 
my testimony--where it is a couple of them in the Bronx, 
Brooklyn, and Central Park.
    When the drone receives that alert it will then send an 
alert to the pilot which would be sitting in our joint 
operations center. He will do his preflight inspection and then 
hit send. The drone will then autonomously fly to the 
ShotSpotter location.
    Officers will have the ability to go into their department-
issued smartphone, pull up the job, look at the job as in real 
time, and click the link to see what the drone is seeing before 
they even get there.
    Chairman D'Esposito. Amazing.
    Chief Chell, I know that you mentioned some of it in your 
opening testimony, but I would like to get into it a little bit 
deeper. What are the limitations that you are seeing in the 
usage of drones in law enforcement and what could Members of 
Congress--what legislation can we provide that will require you 
to have less restrictions?
    Mr. Chell. Well, we are looking, first and foremost, for 
drone mitigation, to have the ability to take a drone down 
electronically. So again, things I am going to talk about here 
are real-life examples.
    So the funeral of Detective Diller on Long Island, there 
were thousands and thousands of cops, elected officials all 
lined up down the street and we made an announcement to remove 
any drones from the area. But there was one drone that we 
couldn't get down.
    You know, from a safety point of view we don't know who has 
that drone, what they are doing, what they intend to do. In 
this case, nothing happened, but we have to deal at a level 
where when you have that many people in the area, especially 
police officers, community elected officials, we have to have 
the ability to take that drone down safely and mitigate any 
harm to us.
    Chairman D'Esposito. Great. Yes, and I know that we have 
had conversations prior with Commissioner Weiner and that was 
some of the language that we inserted into the FAA 
reauthorization to try to help with you guys being able, and 
law enforcement in general, having the ability to take down 
drones. My time has expired.
    I now recognize the gentleman from California, Mr. Correa.
    Mr. Correa. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
    Really enjoyed presentation, gentlemen.
    Emergency responders tell us they need access to drones 
that are affordable, easy to operate, customizable, and easy to 
replace. These men and women who are out there putting their 
lives on the line for us every day, whether they are police 
officers, firefighters, EMTs, have told us that they are aware 
of some of the security risks of Chinese drones.
    Are there any security risks? That would be my first 
question. And that usually they take preventative measures to 
make sure if there are security issues they are minimized, but, 
at the end of the day, these foreign-made drones seem to hit 
the sweet spot: cost, performance, being able to replace them.
    Mr. Daughtry, any thoughts? I am going to ask each one of 
you the same question.
    Mr. Daughtry. I agree with you, we are working with 
American-based companies, Skydio and Nightingale, I can go on 
and on.
    I have reached out to the CEOs of this company personally, 
have been on calls with them personally tell them that the DJI 
drone performs better than your drones; however you have to, 
get to that standard. I want our American-based companies, 
Skydio and Nightingales to have the ability--the same abilities 
that the DJI drones have, payloads, parachutes----
    Mr. Correa. But right now we are looking at a situation 
that those foreign-made drones may have capabilities that 
locals can't offer on that cost-by-cost basis. We are talking 
about a weapon, a tool that our front-liners need to protect 
their lives, save innocent lives out there. That is essentially 
what we are talking about. Is that correct?
    Mr. Daughtry. Yes, sir.
    Mr. Correa. Mr. Chell, any thoughts?
    Mr. Chell. Absolutely. Like I said in my opening statement, 
what drones have done for us as an agency in protecting the 
lives and property of New York City has been a game-changer for 
us. I mean, I can go down the list. I mean, just what was 
listed with the hot topic of protests.
    The ability for me as an incident command to see what I am 
up against in terms of viable people, crimes being committed. 
When we have to take back a campus, I will go right to Columbia 
University. The fog was low that night. We didn't have any 
aviation support. We had to utilize our drones to keep us safe 
in order to take back the building, the rooftops, the rooftop 
surveillance so we can take any ammo which was coming at us, 
just really provided us with the safety to actively take back 
that campus with minimal to zero incidents whatsoever.
    Mr. Correa. That is important. Thank you very much.
    Mr. Fetterman, back home I look at my city of Santa Anna 
and looking at a multimillion-dollar deficit. The city of 
Orange same thing.
    So I am trying to figure out here foreign-made drones, 
cost-effectiveness, can we figure out a way to minimize the 
security risks and continue to use this technology to save 
lives and protect front-liners?
    Chief Fetterman. Ranking Member Correa, thank you for the 
opportunity to address this. While certainly the IAFC and 
Orange County Fire are working diligently with American-made 
manufacturers to seek American-made drones and certainly the 
fire service as a whole would prefer to buy American-made, we 
also are dealing with the reality on the ground.
    The nuances of the importance of life safety and the tool 
that drones and information that they provide to us are 
critical. So we actively take steps when we are utilizing our 
current drones to ensure that we are not flying over critical 
infrastructure or in scenarios that may compromise security.
    We take great lengths to ensure we don't identify any 
personally identifiable information.
    Mr. Correa. Would it be safe to say, Mr. Fetterman, that 
you are buying the best product at the best price to protect 
lives and protect your men and women in uniform?
    Chief Fetterman. Yes, absolutely, sir. We will always seek 
to buy the best products to keep the most available technology.
    Mr. Correa. Thank you very much. I am running out of time.
    Mr. Sidhu, I am going to ask you not as a CEO but as a 
first responder, police officer, and emergency tech, this stuff 
is emerging now. You know, this stuff is exploding, but right 
now, given what is out there, you work with Chula Vista, you 
work with Redondo Beach, what can we do to minimize the 
security risk? Do we continue to buy these foreign-made 
products until we reach that level that American products are 
as good as these foreign ones?
    Mr. Sidhu. Ranking Member Correa, thank you for the 
question. I would start by saying, you know, I am a first 
responder first. I am an executive in the American drone 
industry. As much as I want to say it I have to, you know, be 
honest and say that as an industry we have not yet caught up to 
the capabilities of some of the drones in question.
    As a first responder I think it is the most important thing 
to make sure that our first responders have the best technology 
to have at any given moment, but it is also our responsibility 
as an industry to catch up and build products that can provide 
that level of security that we discussed without the need for 
foreign adversaries and ensure that first responders choose 
those products of the products available today.
    Mr. Correa. I would ask Mr. Robbins the same question 
except that I am out of time, sir.
    So, Mr. Chairman, thank you very much.
    Chairman D'Esposito. The gentleman's time has expired.
    I now recognize the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Pfluger.
    Mr. Pfluger. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I will kind-of 
pick up on that line of questioning.
    I think, you know, we know the benefits of what drones can 
do when it comes to the operations and the intelligence and 
situational awareness, and so I will start with you, Mr. 
Robbins.
    Looking back at HSI's August 2017's warning, maybe kind-of 
talk us through what that warning meant and what it means for 
these DJI and other Shenzhen or PRC-based companies to utilize 
those drones? What is the risk right now that we face with 
those drones?
    Mr. Robbins. Sure. Thank you very much for that question, 
Mr. Chairman. I think the risk as we lay out in our testimonies 
is two-fold. First, as it relates to public safety, while the 
public safety officers here and many that I spoke to over the 
last couple of weeks have talked to me about, they are 
obviously more concerned about their tactical day-to-day job 
and saving the lives of the public and blue lives and 
firefighters and other public safety, and of course that makes 
sense.
    The challenge comes when they are almost completely reliant 
upon a foreign adversary for this technology. As we have seen, 
as I noted in my testimony and you did as well, sir, this 
foreign adversary often uses supply chain control as a weapon 
of war.
    This is not a theoretical concern. This is a very real 
concern. In December 2023, Autel Robotics, which you mentioned 
in your opening statement, set forward a software update to 
their drones rendering them inoperable in what they deemed as 
conflict zones. So that included Gaza. That included Ukraine. 
It also included the entire nation of Taiwan, and it included 
the border region between India and China.
    Those are not current conflict zones. I am in the Navy 
Reserve, I think I would know. So that clearly aligned with PLA 
policy and CCP policy and was not something that Autel Robotics 
would have done on its own.
    Mr. Pfluger. Yes.
    Mr. Robbins. So we have that risk where if we are going to 
be reliant upon a foreign nation for these drones we are 
putting ourselves at risk.
    In terms of data security, there is absolutely a risk 
there. That is not AUVSI saying that. That is the FBI. That is 
CISA. That is the Department of Treasury. That is Department of 
Commerce and Department of Defense. That is actually the U.S. 
Congress because you have banned the use of PRC drones by the 
Department of Defense. Recently in December of last year you 
banned them for all of the Federal Government.
    Mr. Pfluger. Let me pick up there with Mr. Sidhu. Talk to 
us about the steps that have been taken to mitigate those data 
risk vulnerabilities? Then I have got another couple of 
questions for the other side of the table after that.
    Mr. Sidhu. Well, first of all, I would say that, I mean, I 
rely on the experts within the Federal Government to make those 
determinations and I do understand the risks of, as my 
colleague mentioned, of these foreign adversaries potentially 
controlling hardware that our public safety personnel use 
today.
    When you talk about data security, there is data that lives 
and is exported from the hardware itself, the drones, and that 
is something that the drones are relying on and that is 
security that is posed by the drones.
    On the software side, companies like Aerodome are beholden 
to ensuring the data that reaches our software is, you know, is 
secure and is not able to be or is not vulnerable, and we take 
multiple steps to ensure that is the case.
    Mr. Pfluger. Commissioner, I appreciate you talking to us 
about the NYPD and, you know, getting away from the purchasing 
of DJI drones and I think that is something that is very 
important. So I would like the two of you, both commissioner 
and chief, to just talk to us about what is the utility today 
of the drones and explain some of the benefits of why we should 
be using these specifically on the police force?
    Mr. Daughtry. Do you want to go first? Mr. Chell let's 
bring the children in, right? I mean, I have got a bunch of 
topics. Let's bring the children in, like, what we can do, what 
we have done.
    Mr. Chell. In York City we have seen a phenomenon of young 
teenagers driving and jumping on top of moving trains on the 
outside on TikTok and to get millions of views. Unfortunately, 
they have lost their lives.
    So in one program we have a drone that follows the 7 line 
that goes to old--if you are a Met fan you go and it follows 
the train back and forth.
    Mr. Pfluger. I am sorry, I am not.
    Mr. Chell. We were able to see kids jump on the train. We 
have cops down below running parallel to them and we pull them 
off the train and hopefully save their lives.
    When you look at the beaches, where you just look at the 
beach, we had a shark attack last year in New York City. It was 
our first one in decades. For the next couple of days we were 
be able to see sharks in the water and close the beach to help 
prevent people getting bit by a shark, obviously.
    Then just in terms of purposes of what we can we do on a 
beach, AEDs, payloads that could drop a flotation device if a 
young child gets caught in riptides. We have that in New York 
City also where after the lifeguards go home, the kids go in 
the water, they don't understand how to deal with riptides.
    So the speed, the accuracy, the cost, and the bottom line 
trying to save lives in that situation is just--we can just 
keep going with it. It is a game-changer to protect the 
children of New York City.
    Mr. Pfluger. My time has expired. If you don't mind maybe 
reply in writing?
    Then also for the panel what I would like to understand is 
when you are--you are using these for your benefits but they 
are also flying around and they pose a risk if you don't know 
who is flying them or what they are carrying. You know, the 
payloads can differ.
    So also for the record would like to hear your thoughts on 
the attribution and also the anti-drone defense that we have at 
major sporting events like you mentioned at ball games and et 
cetera.
    My time has expired. I yield back.
    Chairman D'Esposito. Yes. The gentleman's time has expired.
    I now recognize the newest Member of the subcommittee and 
committee from New York, Mr. Kennedy.
    Mr. Kennedy. Thank you, Chairman D'Esposito, Ranking Member 
Carter and Correa, for holding this hearing. Thank you to each 
of you for your testimony, for your leadership, and for keeping 
our streets and communities across the Nation safe.
    It is clear from your testimony and my conversations with 
first responders in my district in western New York that the 
technology improvement of drones can make them an effective 
tool for emergency responses. You are speaking today of keeping 
the law enforcement and other first responders safe on the job 
in a moment's notice in an emergency.
    I have a few questions. I want to start with you, Mr. 
Sidhu. Out of western New York we deal with inclement weather 
quite often and just a couple of years ago we had a horrific 
storm that killed dozens of people. It was a blizzard across 
this Nation. We were hit particularly hard in Buffalo.
    When it comes to the use of drones and the effectiveness in 
evaluating and assessing damage following a severe winter 
weather event, can you speak to that and their use and 
effectiveness in that regard?
    Mr. Sidhu. Yes. So I believe that drones when used to find, 
for example, patients in need of care, missing people, people 
in need of rescue after a natural disaster like you described, 
it is a fantastic use case and it has been used for that 
purpose routinely.
    Many of these drones are equipped with thermal cameras that 
can see something that the human eye might not be able to see. 
If someone is wearing a white T-shirt and they are laying in 
the snow it might be difficult, for example, to see them with 
the human eye even through using a helicopter or just walking 
around and finding them where the drones can actually be 
utilized for that purpose.
    I think in the variety of natural disasters that have 
occurred in the United States our response would have been 
improved had the technology been available the time.
    Mr. Kennedy. Thank you.
    I want to switch over to our friends from the NYPD. Again, 
thank you for being here, thank you for your testimony and your 
leadership. I also want to recognize Mayor Adams for his 
leadership and commitment to public safety. I know his team has 
joined us here today.
    Currently, the Department of Homeland Security lacks a 
Department-wide policy regarding the law enforcement use of 
drones, but has developed best practices to not only utilize 
them but to protect privacy, civil rights, and civil liberties.
    Deputy Commissioner, what can be done to ensure that you 
and your brothers and sisters in law enforcement and emergency 
management departments are able to safely and securely utilize 
these drones?
    Mr. Daughtry. Yes. Well, thank you for the question. We 
have our policies in place where when our drones are up our 
legal team is actually monitoring them to making sure that we 
are not violating anybody's rights. We are not putting them in 
people's faces. You know this is--we have a robust policy plan 
in regards to the drones in this department.
    We just can't arbitrarily fly drones throughout the city 
without permission from the chief of department's office. So 
there are a ton of policies in place in regards to that.
    Mr. Kennedy. Is there a need for more comprehensive 
training and supports from the Federal Government to your 
agency?
    Mr. Daughtry. You have to have your FAA 107, your 107 to 
fly a drone so uniformed members go get that on themselves and 
then they go through a 2-week robust training plan with our 
technical assistance, our drone experts in the department.
    Mr. Kennedy. Where would investments from the Federal 
Government be most impactful?
    Mr. Daughtry. Definitely in technology, more U.S.-based 
drones would help the guys. If we can get the ability to--we 
only have detection capabilities but if we can get the ability 
from the Federal Government to actually intercept and take down 
a drone, a hostile drone and have it returned to home, that 
would be extremely beneficial to this department.
    Mr. Kennedy. So you need Federal clearance to do that?
    Mr. Daughtry. Yes.
    Mr. Kennedy. You need investment into the agency?
    Mr. Daughtry. Yes, sir.
    Mr. Kennedy. OK. Back to you, Mr. Sidhu. Again, you know, 
we are seeing a proliferation of drones over both the Southern 
Border and the Northern Border. There was a report even today 
of drone technology used over the Northern Border in my 
community in western New York to smuggle narcotics and other 
illicit drugs.
    What advice do you have to our Government to help to 
mitigate this and give the resources necessary to our front-
liners?
    Mr. Sidhu. I completely agree with my colleagues in New 
York here that, No. 1, we need to invest more heavily in the 
technology that is able to detect those drones and then able to 
mitigate those drone threats in real time.
    I don't believe that the reality of the situation is--I 
believe the reality is that in a local environment like at a 
city where a rogue drone is going to be utilized in the next 2 
minutes to attack something, that the Federal Government will 
have the resources to zap that drone out of the air.
    So we need to be able to empower our public safety agencies 
to have not just the resources to be able to defend themselves 
from drone attacks, but the clearance to be able to do so as 
well.
    Mr. Kennedy. Thank you. I yield my time.
    Chairman D'Esposito. The gentleman's time has expired.
    I now recognize from the State of Alabama, Mr. Strong.
    Mr. Strong. Thank you, Chairman D'Esposito.
    I appreciate each of you for being here today. As you have 
highlighted, drones are a powerful force multiplier for law 
enforcement and have drastically improved both officers and 
community safety.
    In my district one police department's UAS team flew nearly 
3,000 flight missions last year with 37 certified pilots. 
Similar to stories we have heard today UAS have enabled the 
department to locate and apprehend violent suspects, quickly 
respond to traffic accidents, missing persons, natural 
disasters, civil unrest, and gather valuable intelligence, size 
up the scenes to determine resources that are needed, and, most 
importantly, protect the officers and the public.
    Mr. Daughtry, Mr. Sidhu, as both of you worked within your 
respective departments to establish drone and first responder 
programs, what were the most significant challenges that each 
of you faced?
    Mr. Sidhu. I believe that many of the challenges come down 
to first learning how to utilize these drones. I have 
experience as a pilot so it is easier for me to understand what 
drone systems use and what is important. I believe challenges 
exist when it comes to incorporating these drones in the 
existence of your policies and then choosing how to--you know, 
which drone stations to use and how to be able to monitor air 
space.
    There is a variety of technological gaps that are now being 
filled with companies, but you have to become an expert very 
quickly as a police commander to be able to install a program 
like that.
    Then you have to get buy-in from the community and I think 
that is extremely important, to go to the community and say 
this is what we are going to use these drones for and you can 
hold us accountable to ensure that we are using them for the 
right purposes.
    Mr. Strong. Thank you.
    Mr. Daughtry. Yes, and finding drones that can do all of 
the things that we need. That is the one. The second challenge 
that I have personally seen speaking to our drone teams are 
when there are, I guess, mass gatherings when everybody is on 
their cellphone, sometimes there is frequency interference, 
cellular interference, where the drone will lose connectivity 
to the satellite and they can't fly or they can't push forward 
a little more until they reconnect with the satellite. But that 
is due to the interference from the cell towers and cellphones 
in the area.
    Mr. Strong. Thank you. What is the one thing Congress can 
do better to support departments seeking to establish such 
programs and continuity of equipment?
    Mr. Daughtry. Like what we said before, drone mitigation. 
If we could have the ability to take down a hostile drone or a 
drone that has not been identified, that didn't follow our 
rules and regulations that we have set forth where they apply 
for a permit in the city of New York and they just go out there 
and arbitrarily put their drone up. To be able to take that 
drone down and not have to wait for the FAA or wait for--let's 
use a perfect example.
    July 4th. July 4th, the 4th of July, Independence Day in 
New York City, the fireworks display is on the river. A lot of 
times we see outside people just putting drones up because they 
want to get a nice picture of the fireworks show.
    The FBI comes in purposely for that because they know that 
there is going to be hostile drones in there and they take them 
down. Instead of having somebody come from Washington all the 
time, to be able to have the ability to do it ourselves I think 
would be extremely beneficial to us and I think any agency in 
the United States of America.
    Mr. Strong. Mr. Daughtry, man, I like you. I am going to 
tell you, we have got to take you to the Southern Border with 
us. If you know right now, border security for every 1 drone 
they are flying the Mexican cartel is flying 17. I like what 
you are talking about.
    You shouldn't have to have Federal authorization to take 
that bad drone down and you know what we are dealing with at 
that Southern Border. But I like how you answered that 
question.
    Mr. Sidhu, are you aware of any police department that have 
received rejections from the FAA to fly their drones outside of 
direct line-of-sight in an official capacity?
    Mr. Sidhu. Congressman, yes. I believe that multiple 
agencies have applied and have not obtained set of waivers. I 
think that that is one of the largest hurdles in scaling these 
programs Nation-wide is to create a reasonable and scalable 
process with the FAA for a public safety agency to be able to 
obtain a beyond visual line-of-sight waiver without a visual 
observer by demonstrating that they have the ground sensors 
like radar, et cetera, to be able to safely operate.
    I believe that that needs to be a more scalable and easy 
thing for agencies to do.
    Mr. Strong. So that is kind-of the common reason the FAA 
rejects a police department's application for certificates of 
waiver authorization or beyond visual line-of-sight, BVLOS 
waivers? What can Congress do to make this easier for police 
departments to acquire these authorizations?
    Mr. Sidhu. Well, I believe Congress has taken up a 
meaningful step with the FAA Reauthorization Act. I believe 
with that act the FAA has a few months essentially to come up 
with a plan and show Congress that they are going to make 
meaningful steps to taking these BVLOS waivers and making them 
scalable and easy for these agencies to apply for and receive.
    Mr. Strong. As you mentioned, I guess Mr. Robbins, in your 
testimony, Part 108 of the BVLOS rule could have the potential 
to safely unlock scalability for public safety and drones as 
first responder missions, but that could be months away. What 
can be done today to ensure departments are able to safely 
scale and grow operations?
    Mr. Robbins. Templatize the approval process, make it 
standard. By and large, as my colleague noted, for the most 
part a lot of the DFR programs are very, very similar, the air 
space challenges are similar, the technology exists to 
integrate these into the air space safely now. If the FDA were 
to templatize the process it could lead to much greater 
operations and, as a result, much greater safety for our 
citizens.
    Mr. Strong. Thank you. The other thing is I can tell you 
this. We have the capability to block, drop, or intercept other 
drones. We have got to take advantage of doing that. I thank 
each of you for being here.
    Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Chairman D'Esposito. The gentleman's time has expired.
    I now recognize from the State of Louisiana, Mr. Higgins.
    Mr. Higgins. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Gentlemen, thank you for being here.
    Mr. Robbins, you are the president and CEO of the 
Association for Uncrewed Vehicle Systems International. Is that 
correct?
    Mr. Robbins. Yes, sir.
    Mr. Higgins. You are an expert on drones, shall we say, for 
the American people watching?
    Mr. Robbins. I do my best.
    Mr. Higgins. What does this technology look like in the 
decade then?
    Mr. Robbins. Well, if I knew that I would----
    Mr. Higgins. Take a stab. You know that better than I. I 
see----
    Mr. Robbins. I think drones are----
    Mr. Higgins. I see silent drones. I see----
    Mr. Robbins. Yes.
    Mr. Higgins. I see drones----
    Mr. Robbins. In 10----
    Mr. Higgins [continuing]. That are virtually invisible with 
incredible technologies of optics, including thermal and 
incredible clarity.
    Mr. Robbins. Yes. I think----
    Mr. Higgins. I see drones that are----
    Mr. Robbins [continuing]. We may come to work on a drone.
    Mr. Higgins [continuing]. That have AI programs that 
coordinate with each other.
    Mr. Robbins. Yes. With the scalability of the industry with 
AI, the potentials are almost limitless. I think you may come 
to work on a, you know, a drone that is operated to move people 
safely. I think it transforms the logistics industry and it 
makes the movement of goods and services much, much quicker, 
much, much safer, much more efficient.
    I think it, you know, our entire transportation economy is 
going to be upended by autonomy and ultimately make things much 
safer.
    Mr. Higgins. Great.
    Mr. Robbins. I think it is also the case for war-fighting, 
sir, which was of particular interest to you.
    Mr. Higgins. So I concur. You know, regular Americans are 
quite capable of observing emerging technologies, and we 
envision what that technology might look like over the course 
of time.
    This is where the concerns of a Constitutionalist like me 
would be part of the narrative, and indeed they are. I am a 
Member of Congress. I serve we the people and I have sworn an 
oath to uphold the Constitution and that means protecting the 
freedoms of the citizens that I serve.
    So we have a variance of responsibility to deploy 
technology depending upon the mission. For instance, the 
mission at the border, I would encourage the wide use of the 
most advanced drone systems in the world for border security 
because at the border if you are coming into a sovereign 
territory as a child of God, as not an American citizen, you 
have no expectation of privacy.
    There is no reasonable expectation of privacy if you are 
crossing into the sovereign territory of another land. You are 
expecting to be observed.
    However, in our police departments, Chief, Mr. Daughtry, 
American citizens do and should enjoy a reasonable expectation 
of privacy as we embrace our freedom to travel the land. We 
have concerns some of us, Chief, about, you know, where is that 
barrier?
    You said, Chief, and I wrote the quote, you said, ``We 
won't compromise security.'' In the effort to not compromise 
security using drone technology, are you willing to compromise 
freedom? Are you willing to compromise Fourth Amendment 
protections? Are you willing to compromise an American's 
expectation of privacy as we walk about the city of New York?
    Mr. Chell. Oh, absolutely not. In our opening statements we 
have strict self-imposed restrictions that we put upon 
ourselves as it relates to expectation of privacy in people's 
backyards. No facial recognition, just not randomly going on 
daily patrol with a drone just to arbitrarily----
    Mr. Higgins. A public street?
    Mr. Daughtry. Not unless it is mitigating circumstance. We 
have about 10 of them that we have clearly defined and----
    Mr. Higgins. You see what I am saying though, Chief?
    Mr. Daughtry. Absolutely. We won't. No one is being 
watched.
    Mr. Higgins. Throughout the history of mankind, and we are 
entering an era now where things are changing. That is why--are 
you are familiar with the observer effect and the Hoffman 
studies that basically that if you observe something it 
necessarily is changed and altered? Even at the quantum level, 
you know, tests and studies show that subatomic matter, right, 
changes its action and behavior when observed. There is 
something very significant about our moments of privacy that we 
anticipate and enjoy.
    I just think it should be part of the narrative, Mr. 
Chairman. I support this technology for the right reasons, but 
I also advise caution amongst my colleagues as we move forward.
    I yield. Thank you for allowing me to waive onto your 
committee.
    Chairman D'Esposito. The gentleman's time has expired. Mr. 
Higgins, thank you for your service as well.
    I now recognize my good friend from Texas, Mr. Nehls.
    Mr. Nehls. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I thank you for 
allowing me to also waive onto your committee today to speak on 
this important issue.
    As a former law enforcement official of 30 years, folks, 
retired sheriff, large county in Texas, I am pleased to speak 
today about the importance of unmanned aerial drones in 
providing public safety.
    I had drones. I thought they were fantastic, expensive 
ones, like $35,000, $40,000. Would tether them to the top of my 
command center to give us a good view of the area, fantastic.
    Every day law enforcement officers and first responders 
around our great Nation are forced to deal with some of the 
most difficult and dangerous situations, whether it is a 
firefighter racing into a burning building or a police officer 
responding to gang violence, having real-time--real-time--
information is invaluable.
    The unknown and high-risk scenarios has the potential to 
lead to more unintended consequences and often one of the most 
dangerous things to consider. In high-stress situations where 
seconds can be a matter of life or death, it is imperative that 
we provide our brothers and sisters in blue the best 
technology, weaponry, and tools to combat violent criminals. 
Every police officer around the country would prefer to 
deescalate high-risk situations. To achieve this objective, law 
enforcement needs to gain situational awareness of the threats 
they face and drones provide real-time data to responding 
officers about the threats they face and where they should 
respond.
    So I have a bill. I have a bill. It is called the Drone 
Research and Innovation for Law Enforcement Act and that would 
permit small, unmanned aircraft pilot research for public 
safety. Specifically, the bill would establish a pilot research 
study managed by the FAA's Center of Excellence for unmanned 
drones utilized for public safety.
    The goal of the study is to evaluate the potential of 
nonlethal de-escalation drones as a tool for State and local 
law enforcement during high-risk events. It just makes sense. I 
believe de-escalation drones provide officers more distance 
from dangers and time to address them.
    After completing this study, the bill directs the 
administrator of the FAA to initiate a rule-making process that 
could approve the use of nonlethal de-escalation unmanned 
aircraft.
    So, Mr. Daughtry, first I want to thank you, sir, for your 
service.
    Mr. Daughtry. Thank you.
    Mr. Nehls. Can you explain how law enforcement would 
utilize, let's just say a drone in a hostage situation or, God 
forbid, my friend, a school shooting where the perpetrators 
have bunkered into a compound?
    Mr. Daughtry. I am going to give you a real-life example. A 
couple of months ago there was a barricaded situation where the 
issue--our emergency service units were positioned outside the 
door. They did everything to try to mitigate this incident. 
They sent in a scout, which is a robot where they go in and 
look. The guy put a towel over it. They sent in a--like, a 
little ball where it had a camera where they could see. The guy 
threw it out.
    We sent in a drone in the window and they seen that he had 
the weapon, and the guy smacked it with a broom, but then that 
was a diversion where he was distracted and our team went in 
and safely took the individual into custody.
    So these drones are a game-changer and they are saving our 
officers' lives.
    Mr. Nehls. Without a question. You know, when we would have 
high-risk warrants we would send a drone overhead just to 
evaluate the situation, see if there is anybody going in and 
going out. Drones are absolutely a wonderful way. I think it 
saves lives. I think it saves officers' lives.
    I will even take it to the next step and say eventually we 
should put nonlethal on drones, use one to tase somebody, you 
know? How are you going to knock that drone out of the air that 
is 10 feet above you?
    If you have a camera on it and you can communicate with 
that drone and that drone can communicate with that suspect, I 
think it is going to save officer's lives. But that is a whole 
other story.
    But tell me a little bit about the StarChase. What do you 
think about that?
    Mr. Daughtry. StarChase is another tool under this 
administration, under our police commissioner, our mayor, we 
are not going to have a city of lawlessness. I think after 
COVID that the criminal element just became emboldened. They 
are not stopping for the police on regular minor traffic stops.
    So if a car takes off or if a stolen car comes in, we know 
if we get a hit from one of our LPR readers throughout one of 
the areas throughout the city, once the officer is behind that 
vehicle, they activate their lights and sirens, the vehicle 
takes off. Instead of us going through a pursuit throughout New 
York City, as you know 8.6 million people, the officers will go 
behind the vehicle, shoot a dart that sticks on the back of the 
car and will fall back. They are tracking it in our joint 
operations center real-time.
    Also, the officers are tracking it live on their cell phone 
as well as our aviation unit. When that vehicle stops, the team 
will move in and converge on him and safely take him into 
custody.
    Mr. Nehls. I think that makes total sense, too, because 
officers don't like to get into high-speed chases. They don't 
want to do that because they are risking their own lives as 
well. So eventually you have that technology. Eventually you 
just wait for the guy to go home.
    Mr. Daughtry. Yes.
    Mr. Nehls. Wait for the guy to get home or stop in a 
certain area in an unincorporated area and then try to take 
that unit down. But the technology that we have today, and 
specifically drones, using the drones that we have had, putting 
one in every sergeant's car, I mean, you can get them. They are 
relatively cheap. Then to be able to transmit that information 
down to the MDC inside police in their cars or back in a 
command center I think is a tool. I think it is a step in the 
right direction, and we need to do everything we possibly can 
to support the use of unmanned drones in law enforcement.
    God bless you guys for what you do. Have a good Police 
Week.
    Mr. Daughtry. Thank you.
    Chairman D'Esposito. Thank you, Mr. Nehls. We are going to 
do a second round of questioning so, Mr. Nehls, if you have 
anything else that you want to stick around for.
    So, Mr. Robbins or Mr. Sidhu, either one, so I think we 
have come to the conclusion that drones are making a drastic 
improvement to the way that public safety is handled in this 
country, whether it is in the fire service or as, you know, we 
have heard in our law enforcement agencies throughout this 
Nation.
    But there are hurdles that we need to clear, and we have 
had this conversation. As I mentioned in my opening remarks, I 
have had conversations with Commissioner Daughtry and 
Commissioner Weiner from the NYPD, and we have included 
language in the FAA reauthorization to assist in giving the 
authority to take down the drones, as well as legislation to 
support domestic drone manufacturers so, to Commissioner 
Daughtry's point, we can begin to move from depending on 
Chinese technology and actually utilizing American drone 
technology in order to keep these communities safe.
    So there are roadblocks ahead, and I know that if a law 
enforcement agency wants to launch a DFR program they have to 
acquire a certificate of authorization from the FAA. They have 
to have someone who can fly the drone. So we know how to get 
there, but there obviously are still those hurdles.
    So this really is for both of you. If you could lay out the 
steps that Congress needed to take from this point forward in 
order to give all of you, and specifically the law enforcement 
world, the ability to utilize drones to the full capacity, give 
me the top 3 steps that we need to take.
    Mr. Robbins. Thank you very much for that question, Mr. 
Chairman. I think getting more of the technology into the hands 
of law enforcement is step No. 1.
    So as I mentioned my opening statement, yesterday the 
Drones for First Responders Act was introduced as a revenue-
neutral program to allow first responders to acquire more 
drones and more drone systems. It is not unique to just the 
drones, also the training, all the maintenance that goes along 
with that. So that would be step 1. That would help. That would 
go a long way toward helping these great public officials 
acquire more of this technology.
    No. 2 is oversight of the FAA and ensuring that the FAA is 
sticking to the BVLOS rule-making time line and ensuring in 
that gap between now and when the rule comes out that they are 
making continued progress on BVLOS waivers and exemptions.
    No. 3 would be to support a broader drone competitiveness 
initiative to level the playing field for U.S. drone 
manufacturers so they can compete against subsidized, unsecured 
competition from China. Thank you, sir.
    Chairman D'Esposito. Real quick, talk about the oversight 
of the FAA.
    Mr. Robbins. So I think the FAA is doing an admirable job 
with the resources that they have and with the allowances that 
they have at the moment given existing authorities. Every time 
a public safety community wants to go forward with a new 
program they are asking for an exemption from the current 
rules. An exemption within the FAA's bureaucracy, frankly, is a 
challenging thing to do.
    Chairman D'Esposito. Everything in the FAA is a challenging 
thing to do.
    Mr. Robbins. There are some great public officials there 
and as I have made outreach calls to public safety officials 
the first question I ask all of them is how is your 
relationship with the FAA? Time and time again I heard it is 
good. There are good people there, like Mike O'Shea and others, 
that are trying to make progress on our behalf. So I don't want 
to completely knock the agency because there are people that 
are trying to help these officials.
    But like with anything else within the broader, the larger 
Federal Government they need oversight, to Congressman Higgins' 
standpoint. When you are observed, the Hoffman effect, your 
decisions and what you do changes. The more Congress provides 
oversight on the FAA the better the behavior will be, the more 
they will do to support public safety.
    Chairman D'Esposito. So I asked that because there are 
Members of this committee, like myself and others, who have the 
honor to serve on both Homeland Security and Transportation and 
Infrastructure, and I think that this is an opportunity for us 
to sort-of, you know, take what we have learned from both 
committees and put it to good use so that we can provide the 
resources that law enforcement and the fire service need for 
throughout the country to actually begin to utilize drones in 
their full capacity.
    Mr. Robbins. Yes, absolutely, sir.
    Chairman D'Esposito. Commissioner Daughtry, how is your 
relationship and the intergovernmental relationship between the 
NYPD and the FAA?
    Mr. Daughtry. So the FAA came down to our TARU base and we 
gave a demonstration of our joint operations first responder 
program, our drone in a box, and the feedback was very well. 
They said that they would like to use the NYPD as the model for 
the rest of the country when we get this up and fully running. 
We are going to be the model police department.
    Chairman D'Esposito. Excellent.
    My time has expired.
    I now recognize Mr. Correa from California.
    Mr. Correa. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Just while I was just talking to Mr. D'Esposito here he has 
some legislation regarding the FAA and giving you authority to 
address the issue of hostile--possibly hostile drones. I want 
to thank him for that work.
    Mr. Fetterman, thinking about back home, we have 2028 
Olympics. We have a world soccer match coming up in the 
Americas. Back home we have Disneyland that is about to build a 
third park. We have the OCVIBE, a huge complex that is under 
construction.
    So the challenges there in terms of safety are there. My 
question would also be what you need from the Federal 
Government to make sure you have the tools to use this emerging 
technology, these drones, to keep our public safe and, No. 2, 
to protect us from hostile drones?
    Chief Fetterman. Thank you. That was an excellent question. 
I appreciate the opportunity.
    No. 1, we would really appreciate the additional or the 
reinstitution of the UASI and SHSGP funding with that purchase 
authority for drones within that.
    I have heard from my partners with the IAFF and the IAFC 
and the Robotics Committee that they would really appreciate a 
national curriculum, a national standard training curriculum 
for the fire service potentially to be hosted by the National 
Fire Academy under the USFA.
    Last, what the drones provide is information and so with 
that a common operational platform, support for common 
operational platforms such as SARCOP, Search and Rescue Common 
Operational Platform. Those types of areas would provide a 
tremendous amount of capability for us.
    Mr. Correa. Mr. Sidhu, I want you to follow up on that, the 
answer to my question there, which is common operational 
platforms. In your opinion, I mean, foreign manufacturers right 
now a little bit ahead of us in terms of these technologies. 
Where do we start in terms of moving forward to catch up and 
also to adopt, to address the needs of our locals in terms of 
common platforms, so on and so forth?
    Mr. Sidhu. Well, first I would start by answering the 
second part of your question, which is the need for local 
agencies to be able to utilize this. I think there is actually 
quite an overlap between an agency putting up a DFR 2.0 system 
like I referred to and then being able to protect the air 
space, not just for events that occur but generally speaking 
above them.
    That overlap exists because in order to fly a drone beyond 
visual line-of-sight without a visual observer, you need to 
place ground-based sensors like radar, et cetera, that can 
detect drones and aircraft in that air space to allow the drone 
to fly miles away and to be able to do this safely.
    So a lot of the work that gets done into putting this in 
the hands of local agencies where they will put the 
infrastructure to be able to detect drones and manage their air 
space up can kind-of, you know, essentially do both things at 
once. I think that if we are able to go out to these agencies 
and support their ability to deploy that infrastructure to 
detect drones and detect aircraft and support their ability to 
do these DFR 2.0 programs, we are doing that. It is a two 
birds, one stone, initiative.
    To answer your first question about what we can do to 
support the American industry, I think American manufacturers 
on the drone side, you know, we need to support them everywhere 
we can. We need to provide them with the ability to catch up 
financially. These foreign adversaries have dumped quite a bit 
of money into these companies of the billions of dollars over 
the course of 10 years.
    I also urge that it won't happen overnight. We are not 
there yet and it will take some time. It will take financial 
support. It will take the ability for them to be allowed to do 
things at the agency level to be able to utilize what is 
available today. We have to be able to support those while we 
do it.
    Mr. Correa. I would like to also ask you to address the 
issue of privacy. We haven't talked a lot about that.
    Mr. Sidhu. It is a great question. When we deploy a DFR 
program, having deployed one before, one of the most important 
things you do is you go to your community and you ask them, 
this is what we are looking to do. What are your concerns? I 
have done this many times for many communities.
    The common thread is you ensure that the drone is only used 
to respond to calls for service----
    Mr. Correa. In my few seconds I would--later on we will 
talk.
    Mr. Sidhu. Sure.
    Mr. Correa. A question to all of you, Government drones 
versus knuckleheads out there that are just, you know, 
recreational and can't figure common sense that you shouldn't 
be flying these things in certain places. Those are the people 
we have got to figure out, No. 1, how to say if you do this 
there are going to be serious penalties, and, No. 2, don't do 
it.
    So let's talk later on about developing a policy to educate 
folks, for lack of a better term, in terms of what is right and 
what is not.
    Mr. Chairman, I am out of time. Thank you very much.
    Chairman D'Esposito. The gentleman's time has expired.
    I now recognize from the State of New York, Mr. Kennedy.
    Mr. Kennedy. Thank you, Chairman.
    Once again, I want to go back to the technology and first 
responders. This time, Chief Fetterman, I have a couple of 
questions for you. First of all, thank you for your leadership. 
Thank you for your service. My brother-in-law is actually a 
Buffalo fireman so I have a unique perspective on the 
sacrifices families make protecting our communities as 
firefighters.
    As this drone technology continues to advance, are drones 
being utilized for locating and triaging patients in maybe a 
multiple casualty accidents prior to the arrival of health care 
units to potentially improve the time and quality of the care 
that you might provide as a first responder?
    Chief Fetterman. Thank you, Congressman Kennedy. 
Absolutely. Drones bring one of the purest abilities is their 
thermal imaging. So at night when you may have a vehicle 
accident over the side where patients or victims may be thrown 
from the vehicle in a rural environment or in scenarios where 
other aircraft can't fly, we absolutely utilize drones to look 
for search areas to identify if there are any additional 
patients that we can care for.
    Mr. Kennedy. Similar to what law enforcement is dealing 
with and requesting actually here today is, you know, our 
engagement in changing the law and regulations to allow them to 
utilize these drones more effectively for their work. Are there 
regulations that need to be changed for first responders, fire 
departments that utilize these drones as well?
    Chief Fetterman. Thank you. So when dealing with drone 
incursions into FTAs we are very fortunate in the County of 
Orange to have a very good relationship with our Federal 
partners through our fusion centers and our relationships with 
the JTTF.
    So on the law enforcement side we collaborate very closely 
with our Federal partners to look for those private drones that 
may be including into fire traffic areas. They are very helpful 
when taking care of those and that allows us to get our robust 
fleet of aircraft, fixed-wing, rotary-wing, back into the 
firefight.
    We are very fortunate under the leadership of Fire Chief 
Brian Fennessy to have a robust program but also to have very 
good relationships with our law enforcement partners.
    Mr. Kennedy. Thank you, Chief. At this time FEMA grants, 
such as assistance to firefighter grants, they do not allow the 
purchase of these drones. So is the access or lack thereof 
having a detrimental impact on your department or would you 
suggest that as we are looking at funding for this technology 
across the country how we look at including that within those 
areas as well?
    Chief Fetterman. So certainly additional funding and 
support of American-made drones and the proliferation of that 
American-made technology is fantastic. In the mean time, you 
know, the Federal Urban Search and Rescue Task Force has worked 
very closely with all of their local partners when we have a 
national disaster. We work closely to collaborate and gather 
information and there is really a partnership from the State, 
local, and Federal level on local and national-level disaster 
responses.
    Mr. Kennedy. Thank you, Chief.
    Thank you, Chairman. I yield back.
    Chairman D'Esposito. The gentleman yields.
    I want to thank the witnesses for their valuable testimony 
and the Members for their questions. The Members of the 
subcommittee----
    Mr. Correa. Mr. Chair.
    Chairman D'Esposito. Sure.
    Mr. Correa. Let me interrupt you.
    Chairman D'Esposito. OK.
    Mr. Correa. Just wanted to, without objection, submit for 
the record a letter from the NFL expressing their concerns with 
threats posed by illicit unmanned aircraft systems.
    Chairman D'Esposito. Without objection.
    [The information follows:]

                Letter From the National Football League
                                      May 14, 2024.
The Honorable Lou Correa,
U.S. House of Representatives, 2301 Rayburn House Office Building, 
        Washington, DC 20515.
    Dear Congressman Correa: On behalf of the National Football League, 
I write to express our deep concern with the increasing threat posed by 
illicit unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) that jeopardize the safety and 
security of the millions of fans who atend our games each year. Under 
current law, the State and local law enforcement officials who are 
primarily responsible for security at our games are severely limited in 
their ability to address the safety threats posted by drones.
    The bipartisan Safeguarding the Homeland from the Threats Posed by 
Unmanned Aircraft Systems Act is legislation that would provide State 
and local law enforcement officials with the authority to implement 
counter-UAS detection and mitigation capabilities under a limited pilot 
program. These narrowly-tailored counter-UAS authorities would ensure 
that State and local law enforcement have the tools necessary to ensure 
the safety of our fans and your constituents that attend our games. The 
bill, which reflects the Biden Administration's counter-UAS National 
Action Plan, closes critical policy and legal gaps that inhibit a more 
coordinated, whole-of-government approach to defending the homeland 
against UAS threats.
    We thank you for your attention to this important matter and for 
your consistent support for the NFL. We urge Congress to enact the 
bipartisan Safeguarding the Homeland from the Threats Posed by Unmanned 
Aircraft Systems Act into law so that we can ensure that State and 
local law enforcement have the proper authority, training, and 
equipment to effectively protect our fans from this growing threat.
            Sincerely,
                                             Brendon Plack,
       Senior Vice President, Public Policy and Government Affairs.

    Chairman D'Esposito. The Members of the subcommittee may 
have some additional questions for the witnesses and we would 
ask the witnesses to respond to these questions in writing. 
Pursuant to committee rule VII(D), the hearing record will be 
open for 10 days.
    Without objection, the subcommittee stands adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 11:51 a.m., the subcommittees were 
adjourned.]



                            A P P E N D I X

                              ----------                              

  Questions From Chairman August Pfluger for Kaz Daughtry and John M. 
                                 Chell
    Question 1. While drones clearly offer benefits when used in a law 
enforcement context, they can pose a risk to law enforcement when it is 
unclear who is piloting them. What tools do law enforcement have at 
their disposal to properly determine whether UAS are piloted by law 
enforcement or a third party?
    Question 2. What anti-drone defense measures do we employ at major 
events, such as at ballgames and other sporting events?
Questions From Honorable Nick LaLota for Kaz Daughtry and John M. Chell
    Question 1. Malicious drones pose a significant risk to America's 
critical infrastructure, airports, and other sensitive sites. How can 
lawmakers assist State and local law enforcement to effectively address 
risks posed by illicit drone use?
    Question 2. What are the Department's plans for First Person View 
(FPV) defeat when it inevitably spreads to the United States outside of 
Ukraine?
    Question 3. Given last week's passage of FAA Reauthorization 
legislation, which includes required rule making for how drones can fly 
safely in the National Airspace System (NAS) beyond visual line of 
sight (BVLOS), what are your thoughts on how the FAA rule making should 
address and differentiate between scheduled flights like deliveries and 
infrastructure inspections versus drone as a first responder (DFR) 
operations?
    Question 4. Under the current FAA regulatory structure, emergency 
response entities like police departments must go through an arduous 
process to receive a Certificate of Authorization (COA) to operate DFR 
BVLOS without a visual observer. How could we simplify and expedite 
this process while ensuring safety to enable more State, local, Tribal, 
and territorial jurisdictions across the country to take advantage of 
DFR operations, resulting in faster, safer, and more efficient 
emergency responses?
    Answer. Thank you once again for the opportunity to address the 
Subcommittee on Emergency Management and Technology and the 
Subcommittee on Counterterrorism, Law Enforcement, and Intelligence. 
The purpose of this correspondence is to offer further information 
following our testimony at the May 16, 2024 hearing on Unmanned Aerial 
Systems: An Examination of the Use of Drones in Emergency Response.
    The New York City Police Department effectively leverages 
technology to protect New York City's approximately 8.3 million 
residents and almost 62 million annual visitors. Our efforts, including 
the use of Unmanned Aircraft Systems, commonly referred to as drones, 
have helped make New York City the safest big city in America.
    Safety has, and always will remain top of mind for the Department. 
In 2023, the NYPD's use of drones increased 419.8 percent compared to 
2022. More than simply an eye in the sky, our drones offer police 
officers situational awareness for incidents as they unfold, delivering 
live footage of rapidly-evolving situations for our incident 
commanders. Department policies and procedures regulate use of drones. 
Drones are not used for warrantless surveillance, routine patrol, 
traffic enforcement, or immobilizing vehicles of suspects. Drones are 
not used as equipped with weapons.
    Drones have, however, allowed us to address hostage situations; 
inspect critical infrastructure following a seismic event (the April 12 
4.8 magnitude earthquake in New Jersey that reverberated in NYC); 
patrol our beaches for sharks; prevent overcrowding at large-scale 
events, such as the New Year's Eve Ball Drop in Times Square; and 
assess the danger of rapidly expanding crowds at music festivals.
    In an effort to support innovation in public safety, 5 NYPD 
precincts have been selected for the Drone as First Responder Program, 
more commonly referred to as DFR. These precincts, chosen based on 
recent crime trends, will each be outfitted to support 2 drone 
platforms affixed to their rooftops. Three of these precincts are in 
Brooklyn, 1 is in the Bronx, and 1 is the Central Park Precinct in 
Manhattan. The plan, to be rolled out in the coming months, is to 
deploy these drones in response to certain 9-1-1 calls for service. The 
pilot however, will be remotely positioned in the Joint Operations 
Center, at Police Headquarters, rather than on scene.
    The information provided by DFR will be shared with responding 
officers. DFR will enhance officers' situational awareness as they 
arrive on scene, promote officer safety, and help us deploy resources 
more effectively.
    While drones are a useful public safety tool for local police 
departments, there are security risks that must be considered. In the 
wrong hands, drones can pose serious risks to public safety and 
security. Unauthorized flights of drones may interfere with police 
operations and hostile drone activity could include the downing of a 
police drone. At the memorial service held on Long Island for fallen 
NYPD hero Detective First Grade Jonathan Diller, an unknown drone was 
flown over the crowd of thousands of police officers. Thankfully, this 
drone belonged to a neighbor who was simply attempting to get a good 
look at the mass of blue gathered to honor our fallen brother, but the 
incident was an important reminder of the damage that can be done by a 
drone operator with sinister intentions.
    Each year, New York City hosts dozens of large-scale events, 
attracting several hundred thousand individuals to concentrated areas 
such as Times Square and various avenues and thoroughfares. Currently, 
the NYPD partners with branches of the United States Military, U.S. 
Secret Service, and Federal Bureau of Investigation for drone 
mitigation at such large-scale events. We are aware of the burden this 
places on the resources of the Federal Government. Notably, even though 
the FBI conducts mitigation for a handful of events, we need more 
internal robust options to defend the public against a drone in the 
hands of a bad actor at dozens of other events, like parades, outdoor 
concerts, drone and firework shows, and large protests. During the 5 
operational days of NYC Fleet Week 2024, we had 45 drone incursions 
into our detection zones, 11 pilot interdictions in critical zones, and 
issued 5 summons to operators flying less than \1/2\ mile of either of 
the 2 ports. In order to alleviate that burden and improve response 
time to rapidly-evolving situations and unplanned events, such as 
various protests, the NYPD seeks permission to utilize drone mitigation 
technology to protect New Yorkers. Our agency can serve as a force 
multiplier of protection alongside Federal partners as well as a stand-
alone resource with our own Drone Mitigation authorization. Allowing 
local police departments to responsibly deploy this technology will 
ensure that potentially hostile drones are unable to put American lives 
at risk. In New York City, it's our job to keep everyone safe, on land, 
at sea, and in the air. Your continued support and partnership will aid 
us in accomplishing that mission.
        Questions From Honorable Nick LaLota for Kevin Fetterman
    Question 1. Given last week's passage of FAA Reauthorization 
legislation, which includes required rule making for how drones can fly 
safely in the National Airspace System (NAS) beyond visual line-of-
sight (BVLOS), what are your thoughts on how the FAA rule making should 
address and differentiate between scheduled flights like deliveries and 
infrastructure inspections versus drone as a first responder (DFR) 
operations?
    Answer. To streamline DFR operations, the FAA should stand up a DFR 
Priority and Preemption ADHOC Committee or an Aviation Rulemaking 
Committee (ARC). This group could develop a process for standards which 
focus on identifying priority and preemption for emergency vs. non-
emergency operations. They could also identify how to better utilize 
remote ID to assist with DFR priority and preemption operational 
efforts.
    Question 2. Under the current FAA regulatory structure, emergency 
response entities like police departments must go through an arduous 
process to receive a Certificate of Authorization (COA) to operate DFR 
BVLOS without a visual observer. How could we simplify and expedite 
this process while ensuring safety to enable more State, local, Tribal, 
and territorial jurisdictions across the country to take advantage of 
DFR operations, resulting in faster, safer, and more efficient 
emergency responses?
    Answer. Public safety operates at its best when we can follow clear 
and defined standards. Examples of this are the FAA's First Responder 
Tactical BVLOS waiver guide. For DFR flights, there are insufficient 
guides and standards. If DFR programs had more robust guidance and 
checklists to follow, public safety agencies are more likely to stand 
up a successful DFR program. Additionally, consideration should be 
given to the development of performance-based FAA guidance on system/
service parameters and pilot certifications programs/processes that 
would allow flights without the issuance of COAs. This could be based 
on previously-approved systems or operational procedures (much like 
manned helicopters).
    Another strategy to make DFR programs more accessible would be for 
the FEMA Criteria Development Panel to recommend and FEMA to approve 
the increase in priority of NDAA-compliant drones within Federal grant 
programs. Other internal process strategies should also be developed to 
make these drones easier to acquire through Federally-funded programs.
    These critical life-saving operations could thrive if robust 
standards are established, and purchase authority is made easier for 
public safety agencies.
          Questions From Honorable Nick LaLota for Rahul Sidhu
    Question 1. Given last week's passage of FAA Reauthorization 
legislation, which includes required rule making for how drones can fly 
safely in the National Airspace System (NAS) beyond visual line-of-
sight (BVLOS), what are your thoughts on how the FAA rule making should 
address and differentiate between scheduled flights like deliveries and 
infrastructure inspections versus drone as a first responder (DFR) 
operations?
    Answer. Given the immediacy of emergency response, and the variety 
of potential destinations at any given moment, and taking into 
consideration the public safety aspect of each mission, the FAA should 
have an appropriate amount of flexibility and latitude in crafting 
rules that are specific to public safety.
    These rules should be prioritized over commercial operations and 
acknowledge the incredible safety record of the millions of public 
safety flights to date.
    Putting advanced beyond visual line-of-sight (without the need for 
visual observers) public safety operations on hold while needlessly 
waiting for a fully-developed, accident-free drone integration into the 
air space, will frustrate agencies trying to improve safety in their 
communities. Carving out air space specific for communities utilizing 
DFR-type public safety drone operations (for example 300-400 AGL), with 
commercial operations restricted to traffic lanes above and or below 
these levels, can reduce the chance of a collision from extremely 
unlikely to virtually non-existent.
    The FAA has long touted the air safety of General Aviation (GA), 
but even this, with virtually 100 percent compliance in pilot and 
aircraft certification, suffers from hundreds of fatal accidents each 
year. Comparatively, with statistical data currently in the possession 
of the FAA, UAS operations, in general, have proven to be orders of 
magnitude safer. This existing safety record can support FAA efforts to 
better balance the cost-benefit analysis of life-saving drone 
operations vs the air space risk posed by responsible and accountable 
public safety drone operations.
    Question 2. Under the current FAA regulatory structure, emergency 
response entities like police departments must go through an arduous 
process to receive a Certificate of Authorization (COA) to operate DFR 
BVLOS without a visual observer. How could we simplify and expedite 
this process while ensuring safety to enable more State, local, Tribal, 
and territorial jurisdictions across the country to take advantage of 
DFR operations, resulting in faster, safer, and more efficient 
emergency responses?
    Answer. The FAA can follow the example set by simplified 
application processes for the Tactical Beyond Visual Line-of-Sight 
(TBVLOS) and First Responder Beyond Visual Line-of-Sight (FRBVLOS) 
waivers, and allow agencies to rapidly receive approval for 
standardized DFR and other advanced BVLOS-type missions without the 
need for human visual observers. The replacement of humans as the 
detect-and-avoid solution with a layered approach to air space hazard 
mitigation, including ADS-B and radar sensors, should be accepted as a 
better alternative.
    The current level of statistical safety for all drone operations 
world-wide, let alone those by responsible, well-trained, and 
accountable public safety agencies, is significantly better than crewed 
operations. The FAA uses fatal accidents per flight hour as a current 
measure of air space safety. The FAA receives all flight and accident 
data from compliant public safety agencies under the COA process today. 
Therefore, the FAA already has in its possession significant data to 
assist in determining the existing safety of public safety drone 
operations, including those agencies with BVLOS approval (now over 600 
for TBVLOS and about 50 for FRBVLOS).
    The FAA should publish the current safety record of public safety 
UAS operations Nation-wide (fatalities per flight hour). The results 
would serve to better justify efforts by the FAA to move toward a more 
balanced approach in considering air space risk vs community risk. UAS 
operations have proven life-saving, with hundreds, and likely thousands 
of lives saved by public safety drone use. This, in contrast to the 
known risks posed by UAS thus far, seems to favor further enablement of 
public safety BVLOS operations.
        Questions From Honorable Nick LaLota for Michael Robbins
    Question 1. Malicious drones pose a significant risk to America's 
critical infrastructure, airports, and other sensitive sites. How can 
lawmakers assist State and local law enforcement to effectively address 
risks posed by illicit drone use?
    Answer. Lawmakers can assist State and local law enforcement to 
effectively address risk posted by illicit drone use in numerous ways, 
including:
    (a) Passing the recently introduced Counter-UAS Authority Security, 
        Safety, and Reauthorization Act of 2024. The bill has multiple 
        provisions that would help to ensure Federal law enforcement, 
        in coordination with State and local law enforcement, have 
        tools to effectively address risk posed by illicit drone use. 
        This includes ensuring key Preventing Emerging Threats Act 
        authorities never lapse and are consistently reauthorized and, 
        when prudent, expanded.
    (b) Ensuring full funding of the Federal Aviation Administration's 
        (FAA) Know Before You Fly (KBYF) campaign, which helps to 
        educate the public about drone regulations, including air space 
        awareness and Remote ID compliance, to mitigate careless and/or 
        clueless drone flyers around critical infrastructure, airports, 
        and other sensitive sites.
    Question 2. Given last week's passage of FAA Reauthorization 
legislation, which includes required rule making for how drones can fly 
safely in the National Airspace System (NAS) beyond visual line-of-
sight (BVLOS), what are your thoughts on how the FAA rule making should 
address and differentiate between scheduled flights like deliveries and 
infrastructure inspections versus drone as a first responder (DFR) 
operations?
    Answer. AUVSI applauds the recent passage of the FAA 
Reauthorization Act of 2024 and thanks Congress for its leadership. 
There is no denying that BVLOS will unlock the potential of the UAS 
industry and allow it to scale to new heights, including for companies 
conducting scheduled flights and those pursuing drone as a first 
responder (DFR) operations. Specifically, to the greatest extent 
possible, the FAA should seek to adopt the BVLOS Aviation Rulemaking 
Committee's (ARC) recommendations for safely integrating more advanced 
and scalable drone operations. Going forward, FAA rule making should 
rely upon a risk-based and performance-based approach to beyond visual 
line-of-sight (BVLOS) operations.
    The language in the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024 Section 930 
requires a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) no later than 4 months 
after enactment (September 16, 2024) and a final rule no later than 16 
months after issuing the NPRM. AUVSI will be doing everything in our 
power to ensure the FAA sticks to those critical time lines, and to 
ensure key Members of Congress/committees are conducting robust 
oversight of the process and time lines.
    While BVLOS operations will vary based on the various segments of 
the industry, it will be critical that the rule hews as closely to the 
ARC report as possible. This includes critically ensuring that the 
general aviation community is properly equipped with Automatic 
Dependent Surveillance--Broadcast (ADS-B) or other similar safety 
technologies so aircraft can properly deconflict in the National 
Airspace System (NAS).
    Question 3. Under the current FAA regulatory structure, emergency 
response entities like police departments must go through an arduous 
process to receive a Certificate of Authorization (COA) to operate DFR 
BVLOS without a visual observer. How could we simplify and expedite 
this process while ensuring safety to enable more State, local, Tribal, 
and territorial jurisdictions across the country to take advantage of 
DFR operations, resulting in faster, safer, and more efficient 
emergency responses?
    Answer. As noted in the question, under the current FAA regulatory 
structure, which lacks the required Part 108 rule to allow for BVLOS 
drone as a first responder (DFR) operations to scale, emergency 
response entities like police departments must go through an arduous 
process to receive a Certificate of Authorization (COA) to operate DFR 
BVLOS without a visual observer. Specifically, the FAA must approve an 
alternative means of compliance to the 14 CFR 91.113 ``see and avoid'' 
requirement to move toward ``detect and avoid.'' To simplify and 
expedite this process to ensure safety while also enabling more State, 
local, Tribal, and territorial jurisdictions across the country to take 
advantage of DFR operations, the FAA must employ a risk-based approach 
to approving air space awareness technology for detect and avoid. Air 
space awareness, through various detect and avoid technologies 
including ADS-B in, radar, optical, and acoustic sensors are more 
reliable and effective than human visual observers (VO).

                                 [all]