4 versions

CosmeticWhat changed in REFERRED IN SENATEcompared with ENGROSSED IN HOUSE (Mar 24, 2026)

Technical and procedural updates only. The later version, v4, includes an updated attestation with the Clerk's name, reflecting the bill's passage in the House and referral to the Senate. No substantive policy changes were made to the text of the bill between v3 and v4.

H.R. 6618119th CongressIntroduced Dec 11, 2025

Wildfire Aerial Response Safety Act

Passed HouseTransportation and Public WorksSubstantive

View bill text

Sponsor: Rep. Bynum, Janelle S. [D-OR-5]
Committees: Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee (primary)
Last action: Mar 25, 2026

Bottom line

The Wildfire Aerial Response Safety Act aims to quantify the problem of drones interfering with wildfire fighting and explore solutions, providing data to inform future policy decisions.

What it actually does

This bill mandates the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to conduct a comprehensive study on the impact of unauthorized drone operations (unmanned aircraft system incursions) on wildfire suppression efforts. The study will analyze the frequency and effects of such incursions over the past five years, including delays in suppression, impacts on aerial firefighting, and increased federal expenditures. It also requires an evaluation of educational campaigns and the potential use of counter-UAS systems to prevent these incursions.

Proponents argue

Supporters argue that unauthorized drone activity near wildfires poses significant safety risks to aerial firefighters and can severely impede suppression efforts, leading to larger fires, increased costs, and greater danger to communities. They contend that a detailed study is crucial to understand the scope of the problem and identify effective strategies, including public education and technology, to protect emergency responders and public lands.

Opponents contend

Critics might argue that while drone incursions are a concern, mandating a specific study might be an overly bureaucratic approach, potentially delaying more immediate action or diverting resources from direct firefighting efforts. Some might also express concerns about the potential for overreach or privacy implications if counter-UAS systems are widely deployed, or question the cost-effectiveness of such a study compared to other preventative measures.

The bill is very short and clear, making it highly accessible for any reader to understand its provisions quickly.

Section 2

Mandate for a Study on Drone Incursions and Wildfire Suppression

prominently featuredstraightforward

This section requires the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Administrator, in collaboration with the Departments of the Interior and Agriculture, to conduct a study. The study will examine how unauthorized drone flights within temporary flight restriction zones around wildfires have impacted suppression efforts over the last five years. It will specifically look at how often these incidents occur, how much longer fires burn, how much more money is spent, and how aerial firefighting is delayed. Additionally, the FAA must assess the effectiveness of public education and the use of anti-drone technology to prevent such incursions.

GroupImpactMechanismScale

GroupFederal Aviation Administration (FAA)ImpactRequired to conduct a study and report findings.MechanismDirect legislative mandate.ScaleSignificant, as it requires coordination and data collection.

GroupDepartment of the Interior and Department of Agriculture (Forest Service)ImpactRequired to consult with the FAA for the study.MechanismConsultation mandate.ScaleModerate, involves providing input and data.

GroupWildfire suppression agencies and personnelImpactPotential for improved safety and effectiveness through data-driven policy.MechanismStudy findings could lead to better strategies and tools.ScaleLong-term, potentially significant.

GroupDrone operatorsImpactPotential for increased public awareness campaigns and stricter enforcement or new technologies to prevent unauthorized flights.MechanismEducational materials and counter-UAS systems evaluation.ScaleModerate, could impact operational freedom in certain areas.

Supporters argue

Proponents argue that this study is a critical first step to address a growing and dangerous problem. By quantifying the impact of drone incursions, policymakers can develop targeted and effective solutions, ensuring the safety of firefighters and the efficiency of wildfire suppression efforts. The evaluation of educational materials and counter-UAS systems offers practical avenues for mitigation.

Critics contend

Opponents might suggest that while the issue is real, a study could be seen as a delay tactic or an inefficient use of resources that could otherwise be directed towards immediate preventative measures or direct firefighting. Concerns might also be raised about the scope and methodology of the study, and whether it will yield actionable results within the specified timeframe.

Tradeoffs

The bill balances the need for data-driven policy with the urgency of addressing a safety concern. There's a tension between the immediate need for action to prevent drone interference and the time required to conduct a thorough study and develop informed recommendations. It also navigates the balance between public access to airspace and the safety requirements of emergency operations.

About this analysis. AI-Generated from the official bill text and available committee reports. Gaps in available data are noted explicitly. Verify important details with the official Congress.gov record.