Prohibits "drones" from flying over chemical plants or water facilities. (gov sig)
If enacted, the bill would introduce criminal penalties for violations, including fines of up to $2,000 and possible imprisonment for repeated offenses. Importantly, it would also enforce civil liability, allowing property owners who experience unauthorized drone activity to seek damages, minimum amounts set at $10,000, in addition to legal costs. This could lead to significant implications for individuals and organizations operating near critical infrastructure, heightening awareness around drone usage in these sensitive areas and reinforcing the necessity for compliance with state regulations.
Senate Bill 356 aims to establish regulations surrounding the use of unmanned aircraft systems (drones) specifically regarding their operation over critical infrastructure, which includes essential systems and assets vital to public health and safety, national security, and economic stability. The bill prohibits the use of drones for surveillance or information collection on targeted critical infrastructure without prior written consent from the owner. This legislation is designed to protect sensitive sites such as chemical plants, water treatment facilities, and other critical assets from unauthorized surveillance, which could pose security risks.
The sentiment surrounding SB 356 appears largely supportive among legislators who prioritize public safety and security, viewing the legislation as a necessary step to safeguard critical infrastructure against potential drone-related threats. However, there may be concerns among civil liberties advocates regarding overreach and the balance between security measures and privacy rights. The bill signifies an acknowledgment of the growing presence and capabilities of drones, prompting proactive measures to regulate their use in sensitive contexts.
While there is a clear intention behind SB 356 to enhance security, some points of contention may arise related to how the definitions for 'critical infrastructure' are applied and whether these restrictions are too broad. There are concerns about potential implications for research, journalism, and other sectors that rely on aerial technology for legitimate purposes. The need for operational clarity in how consent is obtained and the potential impact on legitimate drone users must also be addressed to prevent unintended consequences.