Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Drone Procurement Data Security topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Nevada committee hears bill to loosen sourcing limits for drones if data stored on U.S. servers
Summary
A legislative hearing on AB 4 39 drew presenters from the bill's sponsor and private vendors who said the measure would preserve national-security protections while allowing agencies wider procurement options if drone data is stored and controlled inside the United States.
CARSON CITY — Lawmakers heard testimony on AB 4 39 on the procurement and data-storage rules for unmanned aerial vehicles, a bill that would allow Nevada public agencies to buy a broader range of drones if all operational data is stored and accessible only within the United States.
Supporters said the bill is a narrow follow-up to 2023's SB 11 and is aimed at fixing an unintended consequence of that law that limited agencies' access to competitive, cost-effective equipment.
Assemblywoman Lisa Cole, the bill sponsor, told the committee that AB 4 39 "is essentially a follow-up to a bill that was, approved and signed into law by Governor Lombardo in 2023 session." She said the intent is to preserve sourcing limitations aligned with national security while adding discretion so agencies can obtain reliable equipment.
Elliot Mallon, a consultant who said he was representing Alpine Strategies and Flock, described Section 8 as the core change. He said the bill would permit public agencies to acquire unmanned aerial vehicles when "the data is stored exclusively within The United States and not accessible to third parties." Mallon and others said that language is intended to keep national-security protections in place while broadening allowable hardware options.
Madison Campbell of Flock Safety testified that some life-saving capabilities are currently unavailable to rural and budget-constrained agencies. "It's the difference between reaching a structure fire in 60 seconds instead of 2 minutes," Campbell said, adding that foreign-manufactured drones can be far less expensive than U.S.-made systems and that ensuring onshore data storage can mitigate security concerns.
Committee members asked detailed questions about the bill's phrase "third party" and whether lawful access by federal agencies (for example, the FAA) would be affected. Mallon and Campbell said the bill's intent is to prohibit access by nonpublic entities and foreign adversaries while allowing lawful, operational access by appropriate U.S. authorities. On costs, Campbell said non-U.S. manufactured systems can cost "only 5 to 10 k" while U.S.-made systems can cost "upwards of a hundred a hundred thousand dollars." She and Mallon offered to provide more specific technical safeguards and said vendors can supply step-by-step security procedures for hardware and software review.
The presenters named Switch, a commercial data-center operator with facilities in northern and southern Nevada, as examples of onshore storage options. The committee took no public testimony in support, opposition or neutral status; the hearing record shows no callers or in-person speakers taking the public-comment slots for AB 4 39.
The committee closed the hearing on AB 4 39 after questions and the sponsor's brief closing remarks.
What happened next: The bill hearing concluded with no recorded amendment or interim action at the hearing itself. Presenters offered to work with the committee on drafting more-specific data-security language and to supply vendor security protocols for any follow-up amendment.
