HB1148 creates the “Arkansas Privacy Act” and substantially revises Arkansas law governing unmanned aircraft systems (UAS), or drones, especially when they are used to capture images or conduct surveillance. The bill expands the definition of “critical infrastructure” to include additional facilities and systems, such as natural gas distribution and storage, and it broadens the definition of “image” to include sound waves, thermal, infrared, ultraviolet, visible light, odor, and other electromagnetic conditions captured about real property or a person on it.
The bill makes it a criminal offense to use a drone to surveil, gather information about, or record critical infrastructure without the owner’s prior written consent, and it separately criminalizes using a drone to capture an image of a person or private property for surveillance purposes. It also creates a new offense for possessing, disclosing, displaying, distributing, or otherwise using an image captured in violation of the drone-surveillance restrictions. In addition to criminal penalties, the bill creates a private civil cause of action for owners or tenants of private real property, allowing injunctions, statutory damages, actual damages in cases of malice, and attorney’s fees.
At the same time, the bill sets out extensive exceptions and lawful uses for drone imaging. These include research and educational uses, utility inspection and maintenance, law enforcement and emergency response, search and rescue, public works, insurance underwriting and claims, real estate marketing, surveying, pipeline and port operations, and other government or public-safety functions. It also preserves lawful imaging in public places under limited conditions and exempts certain federal, state, and contracted governmental uses.
The bill’s impact on state law is significant because it adds new criminal offenses, new defenses, and a new civil remedy, while also creating a new chapter in Title 27 governing lawful drone imaging. It affects drone operators, property owners, utilities, insurers, law enforcement, public agencies, surveyors, engineers, real estate professionals, and businesses operating near critical infrastructure or private property. It also increases legal exposure for unauthorized drone surveillance and downstream use of unlawfully captured images.
The available voting history suggests the bill was broadly supported and not controversial at final passage, with unanimous third-reading votes in both chambers. No committee transcript was provided, so there is no recorded debate to identify specific objections. Based on the text, any likely points of contention would center on privacy protections versus operational needs, especially the breadth of the surveillance ban, the expanded definition of critical infrastructure, and the scope of exceptions for government, utility, insurance, and commercial uses.
HB1148 amends Arkansas Code § 5-60-103, adds a new criminal offense in § 5-60-126, creates a civil cause of action in § 16-118-119, and adds a new chapter in Title 27 governing lawful drone imaging. It expands the state’s regulation of unmanned aircraft systems by prohibiting unauthorized surveillance of critical infrastructure and private property, while carving out numerous exceptions for public safety, government operations, utilities, research, insurance, real estate, and other specified uses. The bill also authorizes statutory damages, attorney’s fees, and injunctive relief for affected property owners and tenants.
The bill appears to have been received positively overall, with unanimous votes on third reading in both the House and Senate. That voting pattern indicates broad bipartisan support or at least no recorded opposition at final passage. Because no committee discussion transcripts were provided, there is no direct evidence of debate, amendments, or organized opposition in the available record.
The main policy tension in HB1148 is between privacy rights and the practical use of drones for legitimate business, governmental, and emergency purposes. Potentially contentious provisions include the broad definition of “critical infrastructure,” the criminalization of surveillance and later use of unlawfully captured images, and the availability of civil damages for property owners and tenants. The bill’s many exceptions likely reflect efforts to address concerns from utilities, law enforcement, insurers, surveyors, real estate professionals, and public agencies that rely on drone technology for inspection, mapping, response, and operational work.