[House Report 118-151]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
118th Congress } { Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
1st Session } { 118-151
======================================================================
UNMANNED AERIAL SECURITY ACT
_______
July 19, 2023.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Green of Tennessee, from the Committee on Homeland Security,
submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany H.R. 1501]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Homeland Security, to whom was referred
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, having
considered the same, reports favorably thereon with an
amendment and recommends that the bill as amended do pass.
CONTENTS
Page
Purpose and Summary.............................................. 3
Background and Need for Legislation.............................. 3
Hearings......................................................... 5
Committee Consideration.......................................... 6
Committee Votes.................................................. 6
Committee Oversight Findings..................................... 6
C.B.O. Estimate, New Budget Authority, Entitlement Authority, and
Tax Expenditures............................................... 6
Federal Mandates Statement....................................... 7
Duplicative Federal Programs..................................... 7
Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives............ 7
Congressional Earmarks, Limited Tax Benefits, and Limited Tariff
Benefits....................................................... 7
Advisory Committee Statement..................................... 7
Applicability to Legislative Branch.............................. 8
Section-by-Section Analysis of the Legislation................... 8
The amendment is as follows:
Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the
following:
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 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) Waiyer.--
(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) Waiyer 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.
PURPOSE AND SUMMARY
H.R. 1501, the ``Unmanned Aerial Security Act,'' prohibits
the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) from operating,
providing financial assistance for, entering into, or renewing
a contract for any unmanned aircraft systems (UAS), known as
drones, that are manufactured in certain adversarial foreign
countries, or by a business entity domiciled in such foreign
countries. Adversarial foreign countries include those that are
identified in the Office of the Director of National
Intelligence's February 2023 Annual Threat Assessment of the
U.S. Intelligence Community (which includes the People's
Republic of China (PRC), Russia, Iran, and North Korea)\1\ and
other countries designated by DHS. H.R. 1501 also includes a
waiver on the prohibition on using or purchasing UAS from
covered foreign countries after certifying in writing to
Congress that the UAS, is in the national interest of the
United States, is needed for counter-UAS research and training,
or is for intelligence and warfare information testing and
analysis. Finally, an office or component of DHS may continue
to use a UAS or system in its supply that would otherwise be
barred until DHS grants or denies a waiver or until one year
after this legislation is enacted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Office of the Director of National Intelligence, Annual Threat
Assessment of the U.S. Intelligence Committee (Feb. 6, 2023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION
The need for this legislation is critical so that DHS may
protect the United States against potential threats to U.S.
counterintelligence efforts and critical infrastructure posed
by UAS that is manufactured in foreign adversarial countries,
which includes the PRC, Russia, Iran, and North Korea.\2\ The
PRC poses a particularly acute threat in this space given its
domination of the global UAS market.\3\ The PRC, led by the
Chinese Communist Party, aggressively seeks to undermine the
global rules-based order as well as U.S. interests through
economic, political, and military power.\4\ This legislation
aims to safeguard the sensitive data collected by UAS for
homeland security purposes and combat the PRC's aggressions
towards the United States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\Brian Harrell and Travis Moran, The pressing threat of Chinese-
made drones flying above U.S. critical infrastructure, Cyberscoop
(March 23, 2023) https://cyberscoop.com/chinese-drone-threat-dji-
regulation-critical-infrastructure/.
\3\Nessa Anwar, World's largest drone maker is unfazed--even if
it's blacklisted by the U.S. CNBC (Feb. 7, 2023) https://www.cnbc.com/
2023/02/08/worlds-largest-drone-maker-dji-is-unfazed-by-challenges-
like-us-blacklist.html.
\4\White House, United States Strategic Approach to the People's
Republic of China (2020) https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/wp-
content/uploads/2020/05/U.S.-Strategic-Approach-to-The-Peoples-
Republic-of-China-Report-5.24v1.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DHS uses UAS for a number of important functions, including
but not limited to, enhancing situational awareness at the
Southwest border,\5\ conducting counter-UAS efforts in the U.S.
homeland,\6\ and meeting the U.S. Coast Guard National Security
Cutter's operational need for a persistent airborne
surveillance capability.\7\ Unfortunately, numerous U.S.
federal agencies rely on foreign-made UAS, particularly those
made in the PRC.\8\ A single Chinese UAS manufacturer, DJI
Technology Co., owns over 70 percent of the global market
share.\9\ In June 2020, the former Cybersecurity and
Infrastructure Security Agency Director wrote of DJI Technology
Co. saying that ``any information collected by a drone from
this particular manufacturer should be considered at risk and
protected from inadvertent disclosure.''\10\ As a result of
this threat, several other Departments, such as Commerce and
the Interior, have taken actions to ground their drone fleets
until the threat to United States government data can be
determined.\11\ 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 accessed by the Chinese
government.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\John Davis, Small but Mighty: Border Patrol's use of small
drones is a game changer in border security, US CBP (last accessed May
31, 2023) https://www.cbp.gov/frontline/cbp-small-drones-program.
\6\U.S. Dep't of Homeland Sec., Counter-Unmanned Aircraft Systems
(C-UAS) (last accessed May 31, 2023) https://www.dhs.gov/science-and-
technology/counter-unmanned-aircraft-systems-c-uas.
\7\U.S. Dep't of Homeland Sec. USCG, Unmanned Aircraft Systems
(last accessed May 31, 2023) https://www.dcms.uscg.mil/Our-
Organization/Assistant-Commandant-for-Acquisitions-CG-9/Programs/Air-
Programs/UAS/.
\8\Annie I. Anton, Olivia C. Mauger, U.S. Reliance on Chinese
Drones: A Sector for the Next CHIPS Act? (May 25, 2023) https://
www.lawfareblog.com/us-reliance-chinese-drones-sector-next-chips-act.
\9\Nessa Anwar, World's largest drone maker is unfazed--even if
it's blacklisted by the U.S. CNBC (Feb. 7, 2023) https://www.cnbc.com/
2023/02/08/worlds-largest-drone-maker-dji-is-unfazed-by-challenges-
like-us-blacklist.html.
\10\Letter from Christopher Krebs, Former Director, CISA, to Jerry
Nadler, Former Chairman, House Judiciary Committee (June 23, 2020),
available at https://www.scribd.com/document/466960345/DHS-warns-about-
China-made-DJI-drones?irclickid=1s4WxhQbmxyNR9L2odz-
41r2UkASfeUSXC5Ug0&irpid=10078&utm_source=impact&utm_medium=cpc&utm
_campaign=affiliate_pdm_acquisition
_Skimbit20%Ltd.&sharedid=nypost.com&irgwc=1.
\11\Brian Harrell and Travis Moran, The pressing threat of Chinese-
made drones flying above U.S. critical infrastructure, Cyberscoop
(March 23, 2023) https://cyberscoop.com/chinese-drone-threat-dji-
regulation-critical-infrastructure/.
\12\David Shortell, DHS warns of `strong concerns' that Chinese-
made drones are stealing data (May 20, 2019) https://www.cnn.com/2019/
05/20/politics/dhs-chinese-drone-warning/index.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, under the PRC's National Intelligence Law, as
amended in 2018, all organizations and citizens are required to
support, assist, and cooperate with the PRC's intelligence
work.\13\ Under this law, all Chinese organizations and
citizens, to include DJI Technology Co., as well as U.S. and
other foreign organizations and citizens doing business or
otherwise operating in the PRC would be required to share all
information in their possession with the CCP.\14\ It is
imperative that DHS be prohibited from purchasing and operating
foreign-made UAS, particularly Chinese-made UAS, given the
technology's significant capacity to collect sensitive
information as well as the legal requirement for UAS crafted in
the PRC to share such information with the CCP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\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/ (last visited May 31, 2023).
\14\Murray Scot Tanner, Beijing's New National Intelligence Law:
From Defense to Offense, Lawfare (July 20, 2017) https://
www.lawfareblog.com/beijings-new-national-intelligence-law-defense-
offense.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Committee's intent is to safeguard sensitive
information that may be collected by UAS deployed by DHS for
the purpose of completing its various mission sets.
Furthermore, the Committee's intent is to mitigate covered
foreign countries, especially the PRC, from leveraging UAS to
commit espionage or create risks to U.S. homeland security. It
is also the Committee's intent to ensure that foreign
adversarial countries are unable to compromise the work of the
United States government through foreign-made UAS as well as
domestic-made UAS that is implicated under the PRC's National
Intelligence Law, as amended in 2018.
In the 117th Congress, on September 29, 2021, this
unamended version of this bill passed the House of
Representatives on suspension by voice vote. In the 118th
Congress, this legislation was reintroduced. H.R. 1501 has
bipartisan support and was reported favorably out of the
Committee on Homeland Security by voice vote.
HEARINGS
The Committee held the following hearing in the 118th
Congress that informed H.R. 1501:
On March 9, 2023, the Subcommittee on Counterterrorism, Law
Enforcement, and Intelligence held a hearing entitled
``Confronting Threats Posed by the Chinese Communist Party to
the U.S. Homeland.'' The Subcommittee received testimony from
the Honorable William R. Evanina, former Director of the
National Counterintelligence and Security Center, Office of the
Director of National Intelligence, Lieutenant General Joseph
Guastella Jr., (Ret.), Senior Fellow, Mitchell Institute, the
Honorable Kari A. Bingen, former Principal Deputy Under
Secretary of Defense for Intelligence, Department of Defense,
and Dr. Tyler Jost, Assistant Professor of Political Science
and International and Public Affairs, Brown University.
On May 23, 2023, the Subcommittee on Counterterrorism, Law
Enforcement, and Intelligence held a hearing entitled ``A
Security Sprint: Assessing the U.S. Homeland's Vulnerabilities
to Chinese Communist Party Aggression.'' The Subcommittee
received testimony from Jill M. Murphy, Deputy Assistant
Director of Counterintelligence, Federal Bureau of
Investigation, Iranga Kahangama, Assistant Secretary for Cyber,
Infrastructure, Risk, and Resilience, Department of Homeland
Security, and Tyrone Durham, Acting Director of the Nation
State Threats Center, Office of Intelligence and Analysis,
Department of Homeland Security.
COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION
The Committee met on May 17, 2023, a quorum being present,
to consider H.R. 1501 and ordered the measure to be favorably
reported to the House, as amended, by a voice vote.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\H.R.1501--UAS Act, Congress.gov, https://www.congress.gov/bill/
118th-congress/house-bill/1501/all-actions (last visited May 31, 2023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE VOTES
Clause 3(b) of rule XIII requires the Committee to list the
recorded votes on the motion to report legislation and
amendments thereto.
No recorded votes were requested during consideration of
H.R. 1501.
COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS
In compliance with clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII, the
Committee advises that the findings and recommendations of the
Committee, based on oversight activities under clause 2(b)(1)
of rule X, are incorporated in the descriptive portions of this
report.
CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE ESTIMATE, NEW BUDGET AUTHORITY, ENTITLEMENT
AUTHORITY, AND TAX EXPENDITURES
With respect to the requirements of clause 3(c) of rule
XIII and section 308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of
1974, and with respect to the requirements of clause 3(c)(3) of
rule XIII and section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of
1974, the Committee adopts as its own the estimate of any new
budget authority, spending authority, credit authority, or an
increase or decrease in revenues or tax expenditures contained
in the cost estimate prepared by the Director of the
Congressional Budget Office.
H.R. 1501 would prevent the Department of Homeland Security
(DHS) from operating or procuring an unmanned aircraft system
(UAS) that is manufactured in or by a business entity
headquartered in a foreign country that poses a threat to
national security. The prohibition would also apply to software
systems associated with UAS that store data or use a network
located in such a country. The bill would allow DHS to waive
the prohibition on a case-by-case basis upon notification to
the Congress. H.R. 1501 also would require DHS to report to the
Congress on the number of UAS subject to the prohibition
currently operated by DHS and the threats they pose to national
security.
DHS's current operations and policy are largely consistent
with the bill's requirements and CBO estimates that any changes
required under the bill would not require substantial action by
the department. On that basis and the cost of similar reporting
requirements, CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 1501 would
cost less than $500,000 over the 2024 2028 period. Any spending
would be subject to the availability of appropriated funds.
The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Jeremy Crimm.
The estimate was reviewed by H. Samuel Papenfuss, Deputy
Director of Budget Analysis.
Phillip L. Swagel,
Director, Congressional Budget Office.
FEDERAL MANDATES STATEMENT
The Committee adopts as its own the estimate of Federal
mandates prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget
Office pursuant to section 423 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act of 1995.
DUPLICATIVE FEDERAL PROGRAMS
Pursuant to clause 3(c) of rule XIII, the Committee finds
that H.R. 1501 does not contain any provision that establishes
or reauthorizes a program known to be duplicative of another
Federal program.
STATEMENT OF GENERAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
Pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII, the objective of
H.R. 1501 is to prohibit the Secretary of Homeland Security
from operating or procuring certain foreign-made unmanned
aircraft systems, and for other purposes.
CONGRESSIONAL EARMARKS, LIMITED TAX BENEFITS, AND LIMITED TARIFF
BENEFITS
In compliance with rule XXI, this bill, as reported,
contains no congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or
limited tariff benefits as defined in clause 9(d), 9(e), or
9(f) of rule XXI.
ADVISORY COMMITTEE STATEMENT
No advisory committees within the meaning of section 5(b)
of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. Sec. 1004) were
created by this legislation.
APPLICABILITY TO THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH
The Committee finds that H.R. 1501 does not relate to the
terms and conditions of employment or access to public services
or accommodations within the meaning of section 102(b)(3) of
the Congressional Accountability Act.
SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS OF THE LEGISLATION
Section 1. Short title
This section states that the Act may be cited as the
``Unmanned Aerial Security Act'' or the ``UAS Act''.
Section 2. Prohibition on operation or procurement of certain foreign-
made unmanned air craft systems
Subsection (a) paragraph (1) prohibits the Secretary of
Homeland Security from operating, providing financial
assistance for, or entering into or renewing a contract for the
procurement of an unmanned aircraft system or drones that is
manufactured in a covered foreign country or by a business
entity domiciled in such foreign country; 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; uses
ground control system or operating software developed in a
covered foreign country or by a business entity domiciled in a
covered foreign country; or uses network connectivity or data
storage located in a covered foreign country or administered by
a business entity domiciled in a covered foreign country.
Subsection (a) paragraph (2) prohibits the Secretary of
Homeland Security from operating, providing financial
assistance for, entering into, or renewing a contract for the
procurement of 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.
Subsection (a) paragraph (3) prohibits the Secretary of
Homeland Security from operating, providing financial
assistance for, entering into, or renewing a contract for the
procurement of 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.
Subsection (b) authorizes the Secretary of Homeland
Security 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 subsection (a) is
required in the national interest of the United States;
required for counter-UAS surrogate research, testing,
development, evaluation, or training; or required for
intelligence, electronic warfare, or information warfare
operations, testing, analysis, and or training. The waiver must
be submitted to the Committees specified no later than the date
that is 14 days after the date on which a waiver is issued.
Subsection (c) details that the Act shall take effect 120
days after the date of enactment. Subsection (c) also details
that no later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this
Act, the Secretary shall establish a process by which the head
of an office or component of DHS may request a waiver under
subsection (b).
Subsection (d) directs the Secretary of Homeland Security
to submit to the Committee on Homeland Security of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Homeland Security and
Government Affairs of the United States Senate a terrorism
threat assessment and report on information relating to DHS's
analysis of the threats posed by UAS operating in the United
States, the number of UAS and related technologies in operation
by DHS, including identifying the specific component or office
of DHS, and information on how UAS and related technologies
could be used to harm the national or economic security of the
United States.
Subsection (e) defines the terms of a covered foreign
country, the intelligence community, and an unmanned aircraft
system. The term covered foreign country means a country that
the intelligence community has identified as a foreign
adversary in its annual Threat Assessment or the Secretary of
Homeland Security in coordination with the Director of National
Intelligence has identified as a foreign adversary. The terms
intelligence community and an unmanned aircraft system have the
same meaning of title 50 section 3003(4) and title 49 section
44801, respectively. Additionally, the term business entity in
this bill has the meaning given in 15 U.S.C. 6764.
[all]