[Congressional Record Volume 169, Number 128 (Tuesday, July 25, 2023)]
[House]
[Pages H3936-H3938]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                      UNMANNED AERIAL SECURITY ACT

  Mr. GUEST. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
bill (H.R. 1501) to prohibit the Secretary of Homeland Security from 
operating or procuring certain foreign-made unmanned aircraft systems, 
and for other purposes, as amended.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                               H.R. 1501

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Unmanned Aerial Security 
     Act'' or the ``UAS Act''.

     SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON OPERATION OR PROCUREMENT OF CERTAIN 
                   FOREIGN-MADE UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS.

       (a) Prohibition on Agency Operation or Procurement.--Except 
     as provided in subsection (b) and subsection (c)(3), the 
     Secretary of Homeland Security may not operate, provide 
     financial assistance for, or enter into or renew a contract 
     for the procurement of--
       (1) an unmanned aircraft system (UAS) that--
       (A) is manufactured in a covered foreign country or by a 
     business entity domiciled in a covered foreign country;
       (B) uses flight controllers, radios, data transmission 
     devices, cameras, or gimbals manufactured in a covered 
     foreign country or by a business entity domiciled in a 
     covered foreign country;
       (C) uses a ground control system or operating software 
     developed in a covered foreign

[[Page H3937]]

     country or by a business entity domiciled in a covered 
     foreign country; or
       (D) uses network connectivity or data storage located in a 
     covered foreign country or administered by a business entity 
     domiciled in a covered foreign country;
       (2) a software operating system associated with a UAS that 
     uses network connectivity or data storage located in a 
     covered foreign country or administered by a business entity 
     domiciled in a covered foreign country; or
       (3) a system for the detection or identification of a UAS, 
     which system is manufactured in a covered foreign country or 
     by a business entity domiciled in a covered foreign country.
       (b) Waiver.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary of Homeland Security is 
     authorized to waive the prohibition under subsection (a) if 
     the Secretary certifies in writing to the Committee on 
     Homeland Security of the House of Representatives and the 
     Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of 
     the Senate that a UAS, a software operating system associated 
     with a UAS, or a system for the detection or identification 
     of a UAS described in any of paragraphs (1) through (3) of 
     such subsection that is the subject of such a waiver is 
     required--
       (A) in the national interest of the United States;
       (B) for counter-DAS surrogate research, testing, 
     development, evaluation, or training; or
       (C) for intelligence, electronic warfare, or information 
     warfare operations, testing, analysis, and or training.
       (2) Notice.--The certification described in paragraph (1) 
     shall be submitted to the Committees specified in such 
     paragraph by not later than the date that is 14 days after 
     the date on which a waiver is issued under such paragraph.
       (c) Effective Dates.--
       (1) In general.--This Act shall take effect on the date 
     that is 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.
       (2) Waiver process.--Not later than 60 days after the date 
     of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland 
     Security shall establish a process by which the head of an 
     office or component of the Department of Homeland Security 
     may request a waiver under subsection (b).
       (3) Exception.--Notwithstanding the prohibition under 
     subsection (a), the head of an office or component of the 
     Department of Homeland Security may continue to operate a 
     UAS, a software operating system associated with a UAS, or a 
     system for the detection or identification of a UAS described 
     in any of paragraphs (1) through (3) of such subsection that 
     was in the inventory of such office or component on the day 
     before the effective date of this Act until--
       (A) such time as the Secretary of Homeland Security has--
       (i) granted a waiver relating thereto under subsection (b); 
     or
       (ii) declined to grant such a waiver; or
       (B) one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, 
     whichever is later.
       (d) Drone Origin Security Report to Congress.--Not later 
     than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, 
     the Secretary of Homeland Security shall submit to the 
     Committee on Homeland Security of the House of 
     Representatives and the Committee on Homeland Security and 
     Governmental Affairs of the Senate a terrorism threat 
     assessment and report that contains information relating to 
     the following:
       (1) The extent to which the Department of Homeland Security 
     has previously analyzed the threat that a UAS, a software 
     operating system associated with a UAS, or a system for the 
     detection or identification of a UAS described in any of 
     paragraphs (1) through (3) of subsection (a) operating in the 
     United States poses, and the results of such analysis.
       (2) The number of UAS, software operating systems 
     associated with a UAS, or systems for the detection or 
     identification of a UAS described in any of paragraphs (1) 
     through (3) of subsection (a) in operation by the Department, 
     including an identification of the component or office of the 
     Department at issue, as of such date.
       (3) The extent to which information gathered by a UAS, a 
     software operating system associated with a UAS, or a system 
     for the detection or identification of a UAS described in any 
     of paragraphs (1) through (3) of subsection (a) could be 
     employed to harm the national or economic security of the 
     United States.
       (e) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) Business entity.--The term ``business entity'' has the 
     meaning given such term in section 334 of the Graham-Leach-
     Bliley Act (15 U.S.C. 6764).
       (2) Covered foreign country.--The term ``covered foreign 
     country'' means a country that--
       (A) the intelligence community has identified as a foreign 
     adversary in its most recent Annual Threat Assessment; or
       (B) the Secretary of Homeland Security, in coordination 
     with the Director of National Intelligence, has identified as 
     a foreign adversary that is not included in such Annual 
     Threat Assessment.
       (3) Intelligence community.--The term ``intelligence 
     community'' has the meaning given such term in section 3(4) 
     of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 3003(4)).
       (4) Unmanned aircraft system; uas.--The terms ``unmanned 
     aircraft system'' and ``UAS'' have the meaning given the term 
     ``unmanned aircraft system'' in section 44801 of title 49, 
     United States Code.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Mississippi (Mr. Guest) and the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Payne) 
each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Mississippi.


                             General Leave

  Mr. GUEST. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and 
include extraneous material on H.R. 1501.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Mississippi?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. GUEST. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1501. It is imperative that 
the Department of Homeland Security is equipped to protect the Nation 
against all threats. This protection includes ensuring that the 
unmanned aircraft systems, or drones, that DHS uses and buys are not 
made in foreign countries that do not align with our interests, 
countries like China.
  DHS requires the dominant, air domain capabilities that drones 
provide to accomplish many of its land and maritime missions. DHS uses 
drones for everything from surveilling the border to the Coast Guard 
National Security Cutter's operational need for a persistent airborne 
surveillance capability. Utilizing drones is a cost-effective way to 
cover large areas of the homeland.
  However, many of the commercial drones used in the United States are 
manufactured in China, which dominates the United States' market. Of 
the top 10 drone manufacturers that supply the United States market, a 
single Chinese manufacturer towers over the others with nearly 77 
percent of market share.
  Because of this threat, several other Departments, such as Commerce 
and Interior, have taken actions to ground their drone fleets until the 
threat to U.S. Government data can be determined.
  DHS has also issued warnings in recent years about Chinese-made 
drones, specifically citing concerns that they may be sending sensitive 
data to their manufacturers in China where it can then be assessed by 
the Chinese Government.
  Our colleagues in the Senate share our concerns. In fact, Senator 
Rick Scott and Mark Warner have introduced similar legislation to ban 
the purchase and use of these drones across the Federal Government, not 
just at DHS.
  Given the role drones have in protecting homeland security, it is 
more important than ever to require DHS to assess its drone fleets. 
Once DHS has identified the extent of the problem, we can then work 
with the Department to find a suitable solution.

                              {time}  1930

  This bill would require DHS to provide a threat assessment report to 
Congress on whether the agency has analyzed the threat of its drones 
that are manufactured in covered countries. It would also require that 
they report the number of these drones the department has in operation 
and the extent to which the information gathered by these drones may be 
a threat to the homeland or economic security of the United States.
  Second, the bill would prohibit DHS from buying or using drones made 
in a covered foreign country going forward.
  I am proud to say that this bill was passed out of the House Homeland 
Security Committee in a bipartisan fashion.
  I thank my friend and colleague, Chairman Green, for being an 
original cosponsor of this bipartisan legislation and Congressman 
Cuellar for being a cosponsor of this bill. I am grateful that this 
body passed this measure in a bipartisan fashion last Congress, and I 
am optimistic that we will be able to do so again today.
  Madam Speaker, with China looming as a growing threat on the horizon, 
maintaining our homeland security is of the utmost importance. I urge 
my colleagues to support H.R. 1501, and I reserve the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. PAYNE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Madam Speaker, to help carry out its many missions, the Department of

[[Page H3938]]

Homeland Security has increasingly come to rely on unmanned aircraft 
systems, or drones.
  DHS utilizes these eyes in the sky to make timely assessments about 
the extent of damage caused by hurricanes, tornadoes, and other natural 
disasters in instances where the Federal Emergency Management Agency 
cannot easily deploy personnel to affected areas.
  The Coast Guard uses drones to enhance its ability to collect and 
disseminate information on maritime hazards and threats. In remote 
parts of the land border, DHS uses them to detect and prevent illicit 
smuggling activities.
  Many unmanned aircraft systems in the marketplace today are 
manufactured in nations considered foreign adversaries. As such, there 
are legitimate security concerns about the integrity of the data drones 
collect.
  Recent reports suggest that Chinese-manufactured drones might be 
compromised and used to send sensitive information to the Chinese 
Government.
  In response to security concerns, the Departments of the Interior and 
Defense have taken steps to limit their use of foreign-made drones.
  H.R. 1501, the Unmanned Aerial Security Act, would direct the 
Department of Homeland Security to take similar protective measures.
  It would prohibit DHS from purchasing or using drone systems 
manufactured in a foreign country that is deemed to be an adversary by 
either the intelligence community's annual threat assessment or the 
Secretary of Homeland Security.
  Importantly, H.R. 1501 allows the Secretary of Homeland Security to 
waive the prohibition in certain circumstances, such as the national 
interest of the United States or for research or intelligence purposes.
  Finally, the bill requires DHS to report to Congress on information 
related to drones, including the results of any threat assessments 
conducted.
  H.R. 1501 has bipartisan support and was reported out of the Homeland 
Security Committee by voice vote.
  Madam Speaker, I commend my colleague from Mississippi (Mr. Guest) 
for introducing this bill that seeks to ensure the integrity and 
security of the drone systems that the Department of Homeland Security 
operates.
  Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. GUEST. Madam Speaker, I, again, urge my colleagues to support 
H.R. 1501, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Luna). The question is on the motion 
offered by the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Guest) that the House 
suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 1501, as amended.
  The question was taken.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds 
being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
  Mr. GUEST. Madam Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a 
quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not 
present.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further 
proceedings on this question will be postponed.
  The point of no quorum is considered withdrawn.

                          ____________________