Relating to the required provision to campers at youth camps of active radio frequency identification tags.
Summary
HB 226 would require youth camp operators to provide each camper with an active radio frequency identification (RFID) tag that can be used to track the camper’s location if the camper goes missing, or during a severe weather event or other disaster. The bill defines an active RFID tag as a wireless identification system that uses a transmitter and battery or other active power source to broadcast a signal and transmit data without physical contact.
The bill also limits the requirement by allowing a camp operator to provide the tag only with the written consent of the camper’s parent or legal guardian. It directs the executive commissioner to adopt rules to carry out the new requirement, and it would take effect on the 91st day after the end of the legislative session.
Impact
HB 226 would add a new Section 141.0091 to Chapter 141 of the Texas Health and Safety Code, creating a new regulatory requirement for youth camps. It would impose a duty on camp operators to furnish location-tracking RFID tags for campers, subject to parental or guardian consent, and would authorize state rulemaking to implement the program. The bill would affect youth camp operators, campers, and parents or legal guardians by establishing a new safety-related technology requirement and associated compliance obligations.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and available legislative history, the bill appears to be framed as a child-safety and emergency-preparedness measure. No committee transcript or vote record is available in the provided materials, so there is no documented floor or committee debate to indicate broader support or opposition. The referral to the Public Health committee suggests the bill was treated as a health and safety issue rather than a partisan policy measure.
Contention
The main point of potential contention is the use of active RFID tracking for children, which raises privacy, consent, and implementation concerns. Supporters would likely emphasize improved ability to locate missing campers and respond to disasters, while opponents or skeptics may question surveillance implications, data security, cost, and whether camps should be required to deploy tracking technology. The bill attempts to address one concern by requiring written parental or guardian consent before a tag may be provided.