The SHIELD U Act lets certain authorities detect, identify, monitor, and respond to unmanned aircraft (drones) that threaten airport safety or public safety. It defines “Counter-UAS activities” to include tracking, warning operators, disrupting control signals, seizing or disabling drones, and using reasonable force to destroy a drone when needed. On commercial service airport property, the Department of Homeland Security, State and local law enforcement, and airport police may carry out these activities with the airport operator’s consent and in a way consistent with the Fourth Amendment. Use or testing of radio- and signal-disrupting equipment (called non-kinetic equipment) must involve consultation with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA).
The bill requires each commercial service airport to form a task force within two years to add a tactical response plan to its emergency action plan. The task force must include DOT, FAA, DHS, law enforcement, air carriers, general aviation, and local telecom providers. Plans must define threat levels, assign roles, minimize collateral damage, and narrowly limit non-kinetic equipment use to temporary actions to stop immediate threats. The bill also makes purchasing Counter-UAS equipment eligible under the Airport Improvement Program definition of airport development.
Outside airports, State and local law enforcement may carry out Counter-UAS activities within their jurisdictions. States, localities, and private entities may create testing areas for Counter-UAS equipment, subject to FAA cooperation and FCC/NTIA consultation for non-kinetic testing. The FAA must set up an interim notification process so local law enforcement can tell the FAA about active Counter-UAS actions; FAA will warn nearby manned and unmanned aircraft and notify when airspace is clear. The bill adds authority for several federal departments to contract for facility protection and requires the Office of Management and Budget to publish annual lists of recommended vendors and equipment for Counter-UAS use. It also directs federal training on Counter-UAS tactics and creates exceptions in the Communications Act so that covered jamming or signal-disrupting equipment may be used by state, local, or airport law enforcement in consultation with the FCC. The Act says it does not take away traditional state police powers.
No publicly available information on total costs or new funding amounts is included in the bill text. The bill does specify administrative actions and deadlines (for example, FCC/NTIA office assignments within 30 days, public processes within 180 days, task forces within two years, FAA guidance within one year, and annual OMB publications). It also changes the Airport Improvement Program definition to allow airports to buy Counter-UAS equipment, which could redirect existing AIP funds to such purchases. The bill does not state specific appropriations or cost estimates.
No publicly available information.
No publicly available information.