New Senate Bill Targets Drone Threats to Critical Infrastructure

Senate Bill Seeks to Expand Counter-UAS Authority at Critical Infrastructure Sites
Legislation outlines authority, training, and funding as drone threats gain attention ahead of major events

A new Senate bill introduced by Arkansas Senator Tom Cotton aims to expand the ability of critical infrastructure operators to respond to unauthorized drones, addressing what lawmakers describe as a growing security gap in U.S. airspace.

The proposed Critical Infrastructure Airspace Defense Act comes at a time of heightened concern over drone misuse. Recent incidents, including the theft of agricultural spray drones and increased planning for airspace security during the 2026 FIFA World Cup, have brought the potential for drone-based sabotage into sharper focus. Policymakers and security agencies have increasingly emphasized the need for clearer authority and expanded tools to counter emerging aerial threats.

Expanding Authority to Act

At the core of the legislation is a significant shift in who can respond to drone threats. Under current law, it is not legal to interfere with aircraft.  Only a limited number of agencies have the authority to mitigate drones, actually disabling them and taking them down: and only under closely defined circumstances.

The bill would extend that authority to designated critical infrastructure operators, allowing trained personnel to “detect, track, and mitigate” drones posing a “credible threat” to covered facilities.

According to the accompanying press release, the goal is to ensure that “critical infrastructure sites are protected from all unauthorized drones.”

This authority would apply to facilities such as power plants, substations, and other high-risk sites that currently lack the legal ability to act in real time. Lawmakers argue that this gap leaves essential systems exposed to potential disruption.

Training Requirements and Oversight

The bill pairs expanded authority with structured training and oversight requirements.

Personnel would be required to complete a federal training and certification program before exercising counter-UAS powers. This program would be administered in coordination with agencies including the Department of Homeland Security and the FAA.

In addition, operators would be limited to using approved technologies and would need to coordinate with federal authorities when responding to incidents. These provisions are intended to reduce the risk of unintended interference with lawful drone operations while maintaining safety in shared airspace.

The emphasis on training reflects ongoing concerns within the drone industry about how expanded counter-UAS authority could affect commercial operators, particularly in areas near sensitive infrastructure.

Federal Funding for Deployment

The third major component of the bill is funding.

The legislation would establish a grant program to support the purchase and deployment of approved counter-UAS systems at eligible facilities. Reports indicate that the bill authorizes up to $250 million in funding over multiple fiscal years.

This funding is designed to ensure that infrastructure operators not only have the authority to act, but also the resources to implement detection and mitigation technologies.

Context: Rising Concern Over Drone Misuse

The introduction of the bill aligns with a broader shift in how policymakers view drone-related risk.

Recent thefts of agricultural spray drones—platforms capable of carrying significant payloads—have underscored the potential for misuse. While such drones are primarily designed for crop treatment, law enforcement agencies have long warned that similar systems could be repurposed to disrupt public events or critical services.

At the same time, preparations for the 2026 FIFA World Cup have accelerated efforts to strengthen airspace security across multiple U.S. host cities. Federal agencies have expanded training programs for state and local law enforcement, and counter-UAS capabilities have become a central focus of event planning.

These developments reflect a growing recognition that drone threats are not limited to military or overseas contexts. Instead, they increasingly intersect with domestic infrastructure protection and large-scale public safety operations.

Balancing Security and Access

While the bill seeks to address clear security concerns, it also raises questions about implementation.

Expanding counter-UAS authority to non-federal actors introduces new complexities for commercial drone operators, particularly in areas near designated facilities. The bill’s reference to a “credible threat” leaves room for interpretation, which could lead to inconsistent enforcement if not clearly defined.

Still, lawmakers argue that the current framework leaves too few entities able to respond to fast-moving drone incidents. As one summary of the legislation notes, many critical sites today remain unable to act even when faced with a potential threat.

The Critical Infrastructure Airspace Defense Act reflects a broader trend toward expanding counter-UAS capabilities beyond federal agencies. By focusing on authority, training, and funding, the bill attempts to create a structured pathway for infrastructure operators to play a more active role in airspace security.

As drone adoption continues to grow, and as high-profile events approach, the balance between enabling rapid response and protecting legitimate drone operations is likely to remain a central issue for regulators and industry stakeholders alike.

Read more:

• Public Safety Drone Leaders Discuss What Comes Next for cUAS, BVLOS, and Airspace Integration
• Will States Be Ready with Counter Drone Tech for the FIFA World Cup?
• Theft of Agricultural Spray Drones in New Jersey Raises Security Questions-UPDATE