A BILL TO AMEND THE SOUTH CAROLINA CODE OF LAWS BY ADDING SECTION 23-1-235 SO AS TO DEFINE CERTAIN TERMS, TO PROVIDE ONLY CERTAIN ENTITIES MAY USE AN AUTOMATIC LICENSE PLATE READER SYSTEM, AND TO PROVIDE HOW INFORMATION OBTAINED THROUGH THE SYSTEM MAY BE USED BY LAW ENFORCEMENT; AND BY ADDING SECTION 57-3-786 SO AS TO AUTHORIZE THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO PERMIT CERTAIN CAMERAS USED BY GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES ON NONINTERSTATE HIGHWAY RIGHTS OF WAY.
H4013 would create a new state law governing the use of automated license plate reader (ALPR) systems in South Carolina and would also direct the Department of Transportation to create a permitting process for certain cameras placed on noninterstate highway rights of way. The bill defines key terms such as “alert,” “hot list,” “license plate reader data,” and “secured area,” and generally makes it unlawful for individuals and governmental bodies to use ALPR systems unless the use falls within specific exceptions.
Under the bill, ALPR systems could be used by state, county, or municipal law enforcement agencies for criminal justice purposes, by entities regulating parking, by entities controlling access to secured areas, for public safety and crime deterrence efforts coordinated with law enforcement, and by the Department of Public Safety and Department of Transportation for toll collection and traffic flow purposes. The bill also requires law enforcement agencies using ALPRs to adopt public policies covering oversight, training, data security, retention, destruction, and audits, and it limits data sharing, sale, and retention.
The bill would add new sections to Titles 23 and 57 of the South Carolina Code, creating statewide restrictions and standards for automated license plate reader use. It would authorize certain governmental and law enforcement uses while prohibiting broader use by private parties and public entities outside the listed exceptions, and it would impose data-handling rules including a 90-day retention limit absent an ongoing investigation. It would also require the Department of Transportation to establish a permitting process for cameras on noninterstate highway rights of way, which could affect how governmental entities deploy surveillance or traffic-related camera systems along state-maintained roads.
Based on the bill text and available context, the measure appears to be framed as a public-safety and privacy-regulation bill rather than a controversial expansion of surveillance. Its structure suggests an effort to legitimize and standardize ALPR use for law enforcement and transportation functions while imposing guardrails on access, retention, and oversight. No committee transcripts or votes were provided, so there is no recorded legislative debate or voting pattern to indicate stronger support or opposition.
The main points of potential contention are likely to be privacy, surveillance, and data-use concerns versus law-enforcement and transportation benefits. Critics may focus on the broad allowance for ALPR use in public safety, crime deterrence, tolling, and highway operations, as well as the inclusion of cameras on highway rights of way. Supporters are likely to emphasize the bill’s restrictions: public policies, audit logs, visual confirmation before stops, documented law-enforcement purpose, limits on sharing and sale, and a 90-day retention cap. The bill text does not identify specific lawmakers, agencies, or outside groups taking positions.