[Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 55 (Tuesday, March 24, 2026)]
[House]
[Pages H2654-H2655]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
WILDFIRE AERIAL RESPONSE SAFETY ACT
Mr. TAYLOR. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the
bill (H.R. 6618) to require the Administrator of the Federal Aviation
Administration to conduct a study on drone incursions on wildfire
suppression, and for other purposes, as amended.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 6618
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Wildfire Aerial Response
Safety Act''.
SEC. 2. STUDY ON DRONE INCURSIONS ON WILDFIRE SUPPRESSION.
(a) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Counter-UASsystem; unmanned aircraft system.--The terms
``counter-UAS system'' and ``unmanned aircraft system'' have
the meanings given such terms in section 44801 of title 49,
United States Code.
(2) Unmanned aircraft system incursion.--The term
``unmanned aircraft system incursion'' means the operation of
an unmanned aircraft system within any airspace for which the
Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration has
issued a temporary flight restriction because of a wildfire.
(b) Study Required.--The Administrator of the Federal
Aviation Administration, in consultation with the Secretary
of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture, acting
through the Chief of the Forest Service, shall conduct a
study on the effects of unmanned aircraft system incursions
on wildfire suppression with respect to land managed by the
Department of the Interior or the Department of Agriculture.
(c) Study Contents.--In conducting the study required under
subsection (b), the Administrator shall--
(1) determine, for each of the 5 most recent calendar
years--
(A) the number of occurrences in which a unmanned aircraft
system incursion has interfered with wildfire suppression;
and
(B) the estimated effect of each occurrence described in
subparagraph (A) on--
(i) the length of time required to achieve complete
suppression;
(ii) any associated delay in the fielding of aerial
firefighting response units; and
(iii) the amounts expended by the Federal Government; and
(2) evaluate the feasibility and effectiveness of--
(A) the dissemination of educational materials relating to
the effects of unmanned aircraft system incursions on
wildfire suppression operations; and
(B) the deployment of approved counter-UAS systems by
authorized entities as a means to detect, mitigate, and
prevent unmanned aircraft system incursions during such
operations.
(d) Report.--Not later than 18 months after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall submit to the
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, the Committee on
Appropriations, and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation of the Senate and the Committee on Natural
Resources, the Committee on Appropriations, and the Committee
on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of
Representatives a report describing--
(1) the findings of the study required under subsection
(b); and
(2) any recommendations relating to those findings.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Ohio (Mr. Taylor) and the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Figures) each
will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Ohio.
General Leave
Mr. TAYLOR. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may
have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and
include extraneous material in the Record on H.R. 6618.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Ohio?
There was no objection.
Mr. TAYLOR. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I am proud to support this bipartisan, commonsense
legislation that requires the Federal Aviation Administration, in
coordination with its Federal partners, to conduct a study and produce
a report on the effects of unmanned aircraft system incursions on
wildfire suppression efforts.
Federal, State, and local responses to wildfires are incredibly
dynamic and require sanitized airspace to ensure rapid response and,
ultimately, the effectiveness of an operation. The study and report
required in the legislation will produce valuable recommendations that
ensure that lawmakers have the necessary information and facts to craft
informed policy.
Furthermore, the study will assess the delays of wildfire suppression
efforts associated with unlawful UAS incursions and identify the
taxpayer resources expended as a result of the incursions.
We witnessed the negative effects that UAS incursions can have on
wildfire aerial responses last January during the Pacific Palisades
fires when an unauthorized UAS, flying within a temporary flight
restriction, struck the wing of a fixed-wing Super Scooper aircraft,
endangering the life of the pilot and causing more than $65,000 in
damage.
Mr. Speaker, I urge support of this legislation, and I reserve the
balance of my time.
Mr. FIGURES. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 6618, the Wildfire Aerial
Response Safety Act, as amended, bipartisan legislation introduced by
my good friend from Oregon and fellow freshman, Representative Bynum,
Representative Neguse from Colorado, and Representatives Crane and
Ciscomani from Arizona.
The devastating impacts of wildfires are seen far too often across
this country, destroying local communities and the livelihoods of many
of our constituents. According to the National Interagency Fire Center,
there were at least 34 drone incursions into active wildfire
suppression areas last year. Of those 34, 29 incursions forced aerial
[[Page H2655]]
firefighting efforts to be grounded and significantly delayed critical
response efforts.
Most notably, as my colleague Representative Taylor just mentioned, a
drone actually struck a Canadian Super Scooper plane during last year's
catastrophic wildfires in southern California.
Whether these drone disruptions are intentionally malicious or the
result of uninformed operators, they are a costly nuisance to Federal
wildfire suppression efforts and needlessly risk the lives of first
responders and law enforcement, both those in the air and those on the
ground. These brave women and men put their lives on the line to fight
dangerous fires and should not have to deal with drone incursions while
doing their jobs.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 6618 requires the FAA to evaluate the number and
impact of drone incursions over the previous 5 years, including any
cost to the Federal Government, the effectiveness of educational public
outreach, and deploying approved counter-UAS systems to detect and
mitigate against drone interference.
This study and the recommendations will be key in establishing
necessary safeguards against drone incursions during wildfire
suppression activities. With the growing number and severity of
wildfires across the country, we cannot afford to let these dangerous
drone incursions go unabated, lest we run the risk of distracting or
endangering our firefighters and first responders.
These brave individuals put their lives on the line for us, and
today, they need our assistance. This is the first step to delivering
it.
Mr. Speaker, I support this legislation. I urge my colleagues to do
the same, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. TAYLOR. Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers. I am prepared to
close, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. FIGURES. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Oregon (Ms. Bynum).
Ms. BYNUM. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 6618,
my Wildfire Aerial Response Safety Act.
Mr. Speaker, wildfires are no longer seasonal. They are year-round
threats that are growing more intense, destructive, and dangerous for
the communities that we serve and the responders that we rely on.
In 2020, Oregon experienced one of the most devastating wildfire
seasons in our State's history. More than 1 million acres burned.
Entire communities were displaced. For days, the air across our State
and much of the West was among the worst in the world.
What struck me from that moment wasn't just the scale of the
destruction but the importance of fast-acting firefighting to slow the
spread and protect lives. One of the tools that firefighters use in
Oregon is aerial firefighting, but personal aircraft like drones can
prevent that tool from being used.
That is because aviation rules require the grounding of all aircraft
when an unauthorized drone is sighted in active response zones. When
that happens, it can stop water drops, delay rescues, and interrupt
information gathering, which puts nearby communities at risk. Our
ground crews lose critical visibility and protection, which increases
the danger for firefighters, rescuers, and residents.
Just last August, in my home State of Oregon, a recreational drone
delayed the initial air attack of the Flat fire by nearly 30 minutes.
This is the window of time when it is most critical in fighting a fire.
That is exactly the problem that my bill is designed to address.
The Wildfire Aerial Response Safety Act ensures that our aerial
wildfire response is not just fast but safe, coordinated, and
effective.
{time} 1620
This bill improves the safety and effectiveness of aerial wildfire
response by addressing the growing threat of drone interference. It
directs the FAA to evaluate recent disruptions, develop solutions, and
to prevent future interference. It makes sure that the public
understands the risks of flying drones near active wildfires, because
the reality is simple: When the airspace isn't managed well,
firefighting slows down, and lives are put at risk.
This is a commonsense, bipartisan bill that reflects how wildfire
response is evolving in real time. It supports the pilots and the first
responders doing this dangerous work, and it helps ensure we are giving
them the tools and conditions that they need to succeed.
I thank Representatives Neguse, Crane, and Ciscomani for working with
me on this bill and the leadership of the House Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure for passing the bill through
committee without opposition.
Protecting firefighters and improving how quickly we respond to
wildfires will always remain my top priority.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 6618.
Mr. FIGURES. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, we must do everything that we can to help our
firefighters and first responders battling wildfires. We know drone use
is becoming more prolific. With that, we are seeing increased risks to
the efforts to battle these fires. Sometimes it is out of curiosity.
Sometimes it is out of carelessness or recklessness. Sometimes it is
just pure stupidity.
At the end of the day, we have an obligation in this House to do
everything that we can to protect our firefighters and make sure that
they are equipped with the resources and the laws that they need to be
able to do their jobs effectively.
That is why I support H.R. 6618, and I urge my colleagues to do the
same.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. TAYLOR. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, in the unfortunate event of a wildfire, once that spark
is ignited, the only thing that matters is extinguishing the flames as
quickly as possible to protect our neighbors, forests, and properties.
We owe all aerial firefighters a great debt of gratitude. In the
event of a wildfire, personally, I like for them to be focused on the
task at hand rather than worrying about and avoiding unauthorized UAS
flying within a Temporary Flight Restriction.
To reiterate, this commonsense study will produce valuable
recommendations and ensure lawmakers have the information and facts to
craft informed policy.
Mr. Speaker, I urge support of this bill, and I yield back the
balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Taylor) that the House suspend the rules and
pass the bill, H.R. 6618, as amended.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the
rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________