H.R. 658 FAA Reauthorization and Reform Act of 2011

No amendments regarding sUAS exmptions




The House was informed on March 22nd that all amendments to H.R. 658 needed to be submitted to the House Rules Committee by Tuesday March 29th.


Congressman Richard Nugent (R,FL) had submitted an ammendmentto make all aircraft flying within AC 91-57and under 55 pounds exempt from regulation. Note that his amendment had no mention of any CBOs (IE: AMA) being exempt.


Mr. Nugent withdrew his amendment.


Today, March 30th, the House Rules Committe ruled that, among a few other items, no more amendments can be added to the House version of the Bill.


Ther are no provisions for exempting recreational sUAS from the FAA's authority in the proposed Bill.


The Bill will now go into discussion phase and then to final vote.

E-mail me when people leave their comments –

You need to be a member of diydrones to add comments!

Join diydrones


  • Going to close this thread.

    I will be starting a new Blog Post on the Passage of HR 658

  • These guys were Hallucinating it was passed, too.
  • RCU is also saying that H.R. 658 was defeated yesterday!

    Am I halucinating todays procedings along with http://repcloakroom.house.gov/ ?

  • Now the House and Senate have to agree on how to combine both Bills into one , get it passed by both houses and get President Obama to sign it..
  • H.R. 658 passed 223 - 196

    Amendments passed HERE


    A mix of good and bad (RE sUAS/UAS) in this legislation.


    So why did someone on RCG start a thread that it didn't pass?


  • Interesting reading. Mark Twain is supposed to have said something like; "There are two things you don't want to see... the making of laws and sausage"

    Might still fit.

  • In many cases it is the amendments that get a Bill either killed on the floor, vetoed or found unconstitutional.

    In this Bill, the amendment that would change rules for Transportation Worker Unions may be found unconstitutional at a future time or it could cause the Bill to die because it "looks like" it will become a hot potato so even those that voted for the amendment (good PR with X voters) will vote against the full Bill (good PR with Y voters). Politicians know how to get the record to show they are against and for the same thing at the same time. Welcome to the Representative of Government.


  • Gerry, remember that all the discussion has been done already. Everyone knows how they will vote.

    In most cases the Public stuff is only done because:

    1. The Constitution says they have to.

    2. No Conressperson can say they were not aware of _____ before voting.

    3. A permanent record of a politician's statement.

  • I can't believe how little debate these amendments get. Am I naive to think that all these amendments are going to suffocate the bill?

  • Also passed, lots of things could happen here:

    Schiff (D-CA)[for Waters (D-CA)]: Amendment No. 31—  Expresses the sense of the Congress that the operator of Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) should consult on a regular basis with representatives of the community surrounding LAX regarding LAX operations and expansion plans. Representatives of the community would include any organization with at least 20 members located with 10 miles of the airport.

This reply was deleted.