<html><head><style type='text/css'>p { margin: 0; }</style></head><body><div style='font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; color: #000000'><P>As well as sending your own letter or email commentary, encourage others to comment.</P>
<P>Last evening at my local club meeting I briefed members on the issue, provided some</P>
<P>documents, my draft response, and encouraged all to get comments into into the system </P>
<P>before July 25</P>
<P> </P>
<P>Ron Lockhart</P>
<P>
<HR id=zwchr>
</P>
<P><B>From: </B>"SilentAV8R via NSRCA-discussion" <nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org><BR><B>To: </B>"General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org><BR><B>Sent: </B>Thursday, July 10, 2014 4:16:42 PM<BR><B>Subject: </B>Re: [NSRCA-discussion] FAA Rule Comments<BR><BR></P>
<DIV class=moz-cite-prefix>I'm with Steve on this one. Make your voice heard or live with the consequences of silence. As far as the 400 rule I think they mention it and AC 91-57 mostly as a means of establishing their history of actively "regulating" models. I see no mention of it moving forward or in the Public Law Section 336.<BR><BR>Bill<BR><BR>On 7/10/14, 1:09 PM, steve hannah via NSRCA-discussion wrote:<BR></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE cite=mid:CADbg7RFBO47=qa0xe_u5Tx+UiKUKomM-sESb+-mjMAbVjdQbKg@mail.gmail.com>
<DIV dir=ltr>As I am sure most of you are aware, the recent FAA interpretation is an active rule and is open for comment until July 25.
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Everyone needs to take a few minutes and read the rule and submit comments directly to the FAA. No petitions or form letters. Numbers matter.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><A href="http://www.regulations.gov/#%21docketDetail;D=FAA-2014-0396" target=_blank>http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FAA-2014-0396</A><BR></DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>The rule has some really troubling things in it which will impact or shut down major portions of model aviation. It is important that the ambiguous items, unacceptable items, or overly restrictive items be removed or clarified.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>One major aspect which affects us is their overly broad definition of commercial operations. basically, anyone that helps a manufacturer in furthering their business (i.e. testing a product or aircraft, advertising, selling, etc.) is in violation of the published rule. So, no sponsored pilots, no cash or prizes at contests, no manufacturer reps, and no US manufacturers or reps that test their products in US airspace. </DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Another one is their repeated reference to the old AC 91-57 which has, amongst other things, a 400' altitude limit.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>If you don't want to live with these things (which are law already), then you have just 15 days to try and overturn them or get them clarified.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Steve</DIV></DIV><BR>
<FIELDSET class=mimeAttachmentHeader></FIELDSET> <BR><PRE>_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
<A class=moz-txt-link-abbreviated href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" target=_blank>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</A>
<A class=moz-txt-link-freetext href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion" target=_blank>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</A></PRE></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>NSRCA-discussion mailing list<BR>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</div></body></html>