[House Report 119-608]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
119th Congress } { Rept. 119-608
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session } { Part 2
======================================================================
AIRSPACE LOCATION AND ENHANCED RISK
TRANSPARENCY ACT OF 2026
_______
April 9, 2026.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Graves, from the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany H.R. 7613]
The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, to whom
was referred the bill (H.R. 7613) to require certain aircraft
to be equipped with collision mitigation technology, to improve
helicopter route safety and separation around airports, to
update air traffic control processes and procedures, to address
national airspace system safety in Department of Defense
activities, and for other purposes, having considered the same,
reports favorably thereon with amendments and recommends that
the bill as amended do pass.
CONTENTS
Page
Purpose of Legislation........................................... 27
Background and Need for Legislation.............................. 27
Hearings......................................................... 29
Legislative History and Consideration............................ 30
Committee Votes.................................................. 33
Committee Oversight Findings and Recommendations................. 36
New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures........................ 36
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate........................ 37
Performance Goals and Objectives................................. 37
Duplication of Federal Programs.................................. 37
Congressional Earmarks, Limited Tax Benefits, and Limited Tariff
Benefits....................................................... 37
Federal Mandates Statement....................................... 37
Preemption Clarification......................................... 37
Advisory Committee Statement..................................... 38
Applicability to Legislative Branch.............................. 38
Section-by-Section Analysis of the Legislation................... 38
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported............ 52
The amendments are as follows:
Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the
following:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.
(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Airspace Location
and Enhanced Risk Transparency Act of 2026'' or the ``ALERT Act''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act is as
follows:
Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Definitions.
Sec. 3. Findings; sense of Congress.
TITLE I--CIVIL AVIATION MATTERS
Sec. 101. Airborne Collision Avoidance System Xa inhibit altitude.
Sec. 102. Airborne Collision Avoidance System upgrades.
Sec. 103. Airborne collision avoidance systems for rotorcraft.
Sec. 104. Collision prevention systems.
Sec. 105. Prohibition on certain use of ADS-B data.
Sec. 106. Rulemaking accountability.
Sec. 107. Time-on-position limits.
Sec. 108. Controller threat and error management training.
Sec. 109. Controller visual separation training.
Sec. 110. Safety risk assessment tool.
Sec. 111. Operational rates at Ronald Reagan Washington National
Airport.
Sec. 112. Time-based flow management.
Sec. 113. Air traffic control facility levels.
Sec. 114. Working group to evaluate shared frequency around Ronald
Reagan Washington National Airport.
Sec. 115. Anti-blocking technology.
Sec. 116. Task force to identify improvements to air traffic controller
conflict alert system.
Sec. 117. Postaccident and postincident drug and alcohol testing.
Sec. 118. Further modifications to Ronald Reagan Washington National
Airport area helicopter routes.
Sec. 119. Requiring vertical separation near airports during critical
phases of flight.
Sec. 120. Helicopter Route Chart annual review.
Sec. 121. Visual charts.
Sec. 122. Close proximity encounters.
Sec. 123. Notification of close proximity encounters and analysis of
data.
Sec. 124. Safety culture and safety management review.
Sec. 125. Documentation of control position combinations.
Sec. 126. Review of miles-in-trail procedures or agreements.
Sec. 127. Closure of Helicopter Route 4.
TITLE II--[PLACEHOLDER]
SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) ADS-B in.--The term ``ADS-B In'' means technology that
receives and processes Automatic Dependent Surveillance-
Broadcast transmissions that are broadcast in accordance with
part 91.225 and 91.227 of title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations, and other aviation advisory information from
ground stations, including traffic information service-
broadcast (TIS-B) and Automatic Dependent Surveillance-
Rebroadcast (ADS-R).
(2) Administrator.--The term ``Administrator'' means the
Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration.
(3) Appropriate committees of congress.--The term
``appropriate committees of Congress'' means the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation of the Senate.
(4) Collision prevention technology.--The term ``collision
prevention technology'' means equipment, or a combination of
equipment, that--
(A) has ADS-B In;
(B) uses ADS-B data to provide the pilot and flight
crew with situational awareness of surrounding traffic
and traffic advisories; and
(C) provides, and is configured to provide, alerting
that is audible to the pilot and flight crew.
(5) FAA.--The term ``FAA'' means the Federal Aviation
Administration.
(6) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary of
Transportation.
SEC. 3. FINDINGS; SENSE OF CONGRESS.
(a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
(1) On January 29, 2025, about 8:48 p.m. Eastern Standard
Time, a Sikorsky UH-60L operated by the United States Army
under the callsign PAT25 (Priority Air Transport 25) and an MHI
RJ Aviation (formerly Bombardier) CRJ700 operated by PSA
Airlines as American Airlines flight 5342, collided in flight
about 0.5 miles southeast of Ronald Reagan Washington National
Airport (DCA), Arlington, Virginia, and impacted the Potomac
River in southwest Washington, D.C.
(2) The 2 pilots, 2 flight attendants, and 60 passengers
onboard the airplane and 3 crewmembers onboard the helicopter
died.
(3) This tragedy represents the deadliest aviation disaster
in the United States since the crash of American Airlines
Flight 587 in 2001 and the first fatal major commercial
passenger flight accident in the United States since Colgan Air
Flight 3407 in 2009.
(4) Passengers aboard Flight 5342 included American citizens
from across the country and international travelers, among them
championship figure skaters and coaches returning from
competition, military servicemembers, and families traveling
for personal and professional reasons, each of whom is mourned
by loved ones.
(5) Crewmembers aboard Flight 5342 served their passengers
with professionalism and dedication and the three United States
Army soldiers aboard Priority Air Transport 25 gave their lives
in service to this Nation.
(6) Emergency responders from Alexandria City Fire
Department, Alexandria Police Department, Ann Arundel Fire
Department, Arlington County Fire & Rescue, Arlington County
Office of Emergency Management, Arlington Police Department,
Baltimore City Fire Department, Baltimore Police, Charles
County Fire and Rescue, DC Fire Department & EMS, DC
Metropolitan Police Department, Fairfax City Fire & Rescue,
Fairfax County Fire & Rescue Department, Federal Aviation
Administration, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Maryland
Natural Resources Police, Maryland State Police, Metropolitan
Police Department, Montgomery County Fire and Rescue,
Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority (MWAA) Fire &
Rescue, MWAA Police, NCR-Incident Management Team, Office of
Chief Medical Examiner of the District of Columbia, Prince
George's County Fire & Rescue, Prince William Fire & Rescue,
U.S. Air Force, U.S. Army, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S.
Coast Guard, U.S. Navy Supervisor of Salvage and Diving,
Virginia Department of Emergency Management, Virginia State
Police, and other local, state, and Federal agencies conducted
heroic rescue and recovery operations in frigid, dangerous
conditions--including near-freezing water temperatures and
strong winds--working tirelessly to recover all 67 victims and
reunite them with their loved ones.
(7) The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB)
immediately launched a full investigation and, on March 7,
2025, issued urgent safety recommendations to prohibit
operations on Helicopter Route 4 during simultaneous runway
operations, which the Department of Transportation and Federal
Aviation Administration promptly implemented.
(8) The NTSB held a public meeting on January 27, 2026, where
the NTSB determined that the probable cause of the accident was
the FAA's placement of a helicopter route in close proximity to
a runway approach path; their failure to regularly review and
evaluate helicopter routes and available data, and their
failure to act on recommendations to mitigate the risk of a
midair collision near DCA; as well as the air traffic system's
overreliance on visual separation in order to promote efficient
traffic flow without consideration for the limitations of the
see-and-avoid concept.
(9) The NTSB determined that the lack of effective pilot-
applied visual separation by the helicopter crew, the tower
team's loss of situation awareness and degraded performance due
to the high workload of the combined helicopter and local
control positions and the absence of a risk assessment process
to identify and mitigate real-time operational risk factors,
and the Army's failure to ensure pilots were aware of the
effects of error tolerances on barometric altimeters in their
helicopters, were also causal to the collision.
(10) The NTSB further determined that contributing factors
included the limitations of the traffic awareness and collision
alerting systems on both aircraft, which precluded effective
alerting of the impending collision to the flight crews; an
unsustainable airport arrival rate, increasing traffic volume
with a changing fleet mix, and airline scheduling practices at
DCA, which regularly strained the DCA air traffic control tower
workforce and degraded safety over time; the Army's lack of a
fully implemented safety management system, which should have
identified and addressed hazards associated with altitude
exceedances on the Washington, DC, helicopter routes; the FAA's
failure across multiple organizations to implement previous
NTSB recommendations, including Automatic Dependent
Surveillance-Broadcast In, and to follow and fully integrate
its established safety management system, which should have led
to several organizational and operational changes based on
previously identified risks that were known to management; and
the absence of effective data sharing and analysis among the
FAA, aircraft operators, and other relevant organizations.
(11) The NTSB on January 27, 2026, adopted 74 findings and
issued 50 safety recommendations to the Department of
Transportation, the FAA, the United States Army, the Department
of Defense Policy Board on Federal Aviation, the inspector
general of the Department of Transportation, and RTCA Program
Management Committee to prevent similar accidents in the
future.
(12) The families of the victims have demonstrated
extraordinary courage and dignity in their grief, and have
called for accountability and systemic reform so that no other
family will endure such loss.
(13) Congress remains committed to ensuring that the aviation
system of the United States achieves the highest possible
standard of safety, and that the lessons of this tragedy are
fully learned and acted upon.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that--
(1) Congress mourns the loss of all 67 lives taken in the
midair collision near Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport
on January 29, 2025, and extends its deepest condolences to the
families, friends, and communities of all those who perished;
(2) Congress honors the four crew members of American
Airlines Flight 5342 who served their passengers with
professionalism and dedication;
(3) Congress honors the three United States Army soldiers
aboard Priority Air Transport 25, who gave their lives in
service to this nation;
(4) Congress honors the passengers of Flight 5342, including
the figure skaters and coaches of the United States figure
skating community and all other individuals whose lives,
achievements, and contributions to their families and
communities are irreplaceable;
(5) Congress commends the first responders who worked with
valor and dedication under dangerous conditions to conduct
rescue and recovery operations in the Potomac River;
(6) Congress affirms its full support for the National
Transportation Safety Board, its mission of independent
accident investigation, and the integrity of its investigative
process, and herein the ALERT Act responds to all of the 50
recommendations to prevent a similar tragedy from reoccurring;
(7) Congress further commits to conducting rigorous oversight
to ensure accountability for implementing these safety
recommendations and ensuring the systemic failures that
contributed to this disaster are fully addressed; and
(8) Congress pledges, on behalf of the American people, that
the 67 lives lost on January 29, 2025, will not be forgotten,
and that their memory will be honored by this Nation's
commitment to an aviation system that is worthy of the trust
placed in it by every passenger who boards an aircraft in the
United States.
TITLE I--CIVIL AVIATION MATTERS
SEC. 101. AIRBORNE COLLISION AVOIDANCE SYSTEM XA INHIBIT ALTITUDE.
(a) In General.--Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment
of this Act, the Administrator shall complete an evaluation of the
hazards and safety benefits of decreasing the traffic advisory and
resolution advisory inhibit altitudes in Airborne Collision Avoidance
System Xa (hereinafter referred to as ``ACAS Xa'') to enable improved
alerting throughout more of the flight maneuvering envelope of an
aircraft than is required under the RTCA minimum operational
performance standards for the Airborne Collision Avoidance System (DO-
385A, issued June 22, 2023).
(b) Consultation.--In conducting the evaluation under subsection (a),
the Administrator shall consult with representatives of the following:
(1) Air carriers operating under part 121 of title 14, Code
of Federal Regulations, including regional air carriers and air
carriers with a low-cost or ultra-low-cost business model.
(2) Air carriers operating under part 135 of title 14, Code
of Federal Regulations.
(3) Air carriers operating under part 91 of title 14, Code of
Federal Regulations.
(4) Cargo air carriers.
(5) Transport category aircraft manufacturers.
(6) General aviation aircraft manufactures.
(7) Avionics manufacturers.
(8) Exclusive bargaining representatives of air traffic
controllers certified under section 7111 of title 5, United
States Code.
(9) Organizations representing certified collective
bargaining representatives of airline pilots.
(10) The certified bargaining representative of aviation
safety inspectors and engineers for the Federal Aviation
Administration.
(11) Aviation safety experts with specific knowledge of human
factors or human factors experts with specific knowledge of
aviation safety.
(12) Research institutions with relevant aviation safety or
human factors subject matter expertise.
(13) The National Transportation Safety Board.
(14) Any other stakeholders the Administrator determines
appropriate.
(c) Considerations.--In conducting the evaluation under subsection
(a), the Administrator shall consider, at a minimum--
(1) safety benefits to the public, including reductions in
the probability of midair and near-midair collisions;
(2) the benefits and risks to the ability of pilots and air
traffic controllers to ensure operational safety;
(3) false, misleading, or potentially overlapping alerts or
resolution advisories;
(4) technological advances in software logic to limit
nuisance or false alerts;
(5) air traffic control procedures and the impact of such
procedures on pilots and air traffic controllers during
critical phases of flight;
(6) training requirements for pilots and air traffic
controllers;
(7) to the greatest extent practicable, human factors,
including products by working groups related to human factors
in aviation safety;
(8) research and simulations of reduced resolution advisory
inhibit altitudes conducted by the National Transportation
Safety Board pursuant to Aviation Investigation Report AIR-26-
02 adopted on January 27, 2026; and
(9) any other considerations the Administrator determines
appropriate.
SEC. 102. AIRBORNE COLLISION AVOIDANCE SYSTEM UPGRADES.
(a) In General.--Not later than 45 days after the date of enactment
of this Act, the Administrator shall establish an aviation rulemaking
committee (in this section referred to as the ``Committee'') to review
and develop findings and recommendations to require selected aircraft
to be equipped and operating with ACAS Xa that is--
(1) integrated and uses both ADS-B In and transponder
interrogations, as required under the RTCA minimum operational
performance standards for the Airborne Collision Avoidance
System (DO-385A, issued June 22, 2023); and
(2) is configured to provide visual and audible alerting to
the pilot and flight crew.
(b) Composition.--The Committee shall consist of members appointed by
the Administrator, including representatives of--
(1) air carriers operating under part 121 of title 14, Code
of Federal Regulations, including regional air carriers and air
carriers with a low-cost or ultra-low-cost business model;
(2) air carriers operating under part 135 of title 14, Code
of Federal Regulations;
(3) air carriers operating under subpart K of part 91 of
title 14, Code of Federal Regulations;
(4) business aviation operators;
(5) cargo air carriers;
(6) air ambulance operators;
(7) transport category aircraft manufacturers;
(8) general aviation aircraft manufactures;
(9) avionics manufacturers;
(10) supplemental type certificate holders;
(11) modification service providers;
(12) exclusive bargaining representatives of air traffic
controllers certified under section 7111 of title 5, United
States Code;
(13) the certified bargaining representative of aviation
safety inspectors and engineers for the Federal Aviation
Administration;
(14) organizations representing certified collective
bargaining representatives of airline pilots;
(15) aviation safety experts with specific knowledge of human
factors or human factors experts with specific knowledge of
aviation safety;
(16) research institutions with relevant aviation safety or
human factors subject matter expertise;
(17) a representative from the National Transportation Safety
Board with subject matter expertise as an observer; and
(18) any other stakeholders the Administrator determines
appropriate.
(c) Considerations.--In developing the findings and recommendations
under subsection (a), the Committee shall consider--
(1) the anticipated certification timeline for ACAS Xa
equipment given the technical complexity and requisite
procedures for approval;
(2) the feasibility of using the Line Replaceable Units of
existing collision avoidance systems in such aircraft;
(3) the feasibility of using existing antennas of existing
collisions avoidance systems in such aircraft;
(4) the commercial availability of all necessary components
associated with integrated ACAS Xa;
(5) actions the Administrator can take to prioritize the
certification and installation of integrated ACAS Xa;
(6) related changes that may be required for the operating
rules and training necessary for air traffic controllers,
pilots, and others;
(7) harmonization of global standards associated with
collision avoidance systems; and
(8) any other considerations the Committee or the
Administrator determines appropriate.
(d) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of establishment of
the Committee, the Committee shall submit to the Administrator and the
appropriate committees of Congress a report containing the findings and
recommendations of the Committee.
(e) Rulemaking.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 18 months after the
submission of the report under subsection (d) or 32 months
after the date of enactment of this Act (whichever is earlier),
the Administrator shall issue a notice of proposed rulemaking
to prohibit persons from operating selected aircraft unless
such aircraft are equipped and operating with ACAS Xa that--
(A) is integrated and uses both ADS-B In and
transponder interrogations, as required under the RTCA
minimum operational performance standards for the
Airborne Collision Avoidance System (DO-385A, issued
June 22, 2023); and
(B) provides visual and audible alerting to the pilot
and flight crew.
(2) Contents.--The notice of proposed rulemaking described in
paragraph (1) shall include, at a minimum--
(A) appropriate guidance for certification of ACAS
Xa;
(B) a deadline, not to exceed December 31, 2031, for
any newly manufactured selected aircraft to be equipped
with ACAS Xa that reflects various aircraft types,
appropriate maintenance cycles, and required updates to
appropriate guidance after certification of ACAS Xa;
(C) a deadline, not to exceed December 31, 2031, for
existing selected aircraft to be retrofit with ACAS Xa
that reflects various aircraft types, appropriate
maintenance cycles, and required updates to appropriate
guidance after certification of ACAS Xa;
(D) if the new minimal operating performance
standards promulgated under subsection (f) require an
upgrade of software, an upgrade of hardware, or
additional training, a deadline for selected aircraft
to be upgraded, not to exceed December 31, 2033; and
(E) a process by which the Administrator may extend
the deadlines specified in subparagraphs (B) and (C),
not to exceed a period of 2 years, provided that the
Administrator provides a report to the appropriate
committees of Congress within 14 days of taking such
action, with the reasons justifying such action and an
assurance that safety will not be compromised by the
delay.
(3) Final rule.--Not later than 1 year after the issuance of
the notice of proposed rulemaking required under paragraph
(1)(A), the Administrator shall issue a final rule to carry out
the requirements of this section.
(f) Modification of Minimal Operating Performance Standards.--Not
later than 30 days after the issuance of a final rule under subsection
(e), the Administrator shall work with the appropriate standards-
setting organization to update the minimal operation standards for ACAS
Xa to--
(1) if the evaluation conducted pursuant to section 101
determines that inhibit altitudes can be safely decreased,
safely decrease the inhibit altitude in accordance with the
results of such evaluation;
(2) update traffic advisory aural alert standards to include
clock position, relative altitude, range, and vertical
tendency; and
(3) integrate directional traffic symbols into visual
displays.
(g) Technical Assistance.--The Administrator shall provide technical
assistance for facilitating equipage across the entire fleet of
affected aircraft, including, as appropriate, guidance under part 26 of
title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, to provide support for affected
aircraft operators in complying with the requirements of this section.
(h) Selected Aircraft Defined.--In this section, the term ``selected
aircraft'' means aircraft that are required to be equipped with traffic
alert and collision avoidance systems as required in sections 121.356,
135.180, and 91.1045 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations.
SEC. 103. AIRBORNE COLLISION AVOIDANCE SYSTEMS FOR ROTORCRAFT.
(a) In General.--Not later than December 31, 2026, the Administrator
shall take necessary action with the appropriate standards-setting
organization to finalize and publish minimum operational performance
standards for the collision avoidance system known as ``Airborne
Collision Avoidance System Xr'' (in this section referred to as ``ACAS
Xr'') that uses both ADS-B In and a second independent source of target
aircraft data, such as transponder interrogations.
(b) ACAS Xr Aviation Rulemaking Committee.--
(1) Establishment.--Not later than 30 days after the date on
which the appropriate standards-setting organization publishes
minimal operational performance standards for ACAS Xr under
subsection (a), or January 31, 2027, (whichever is earlier),
the Administrator shall establish an aviation rulemaking
committee (in this section referred to as the ``Committee'') to
review and develop findings and recommendations to require
selected rotorcraft and selected powered-lift aircraft be
equipped and operating with ACAS Xr that has ADS-B In and is
configured to provide visual and audible alerting to the pilot
and flight crew.
(2) Composition.--The Committee shall consist of members
appointed by the Administrator, including representatives of--
(A) rotorcraft operating under part 135 of title 14,
Code of Federal Regulations;
(B) rotorcraft operating under part 91 of title 14,
Code of Federal Regulations;
(C) rotorcraft manufacturers;
(D) an organization representing rotorcraft operators
and pilots;
(E) an organization representing rotorcraft air
medical services;
(F) general aviation aircraft manufacturers;
(G) powered-lift aircraft operators and
manufacturers;
(H) avionics manufacturers;
(I) supplemental type certificate holders;
(J) modification service providers;
(K) exclusive bargaining representatives of air
traffic controllers certified under section 7111 of
title 5, United States Code;
(L) the certified bargaining representative of
aviation safety inspectors and engineers for the FAA;
(M) aviation safety experts with specific knowledge
of human factors or human factors experts with specific
knowledge of aviation safety;
(N) a career representative from the National
Transportation Safety Board with subject matter
expertise as an observer; and
(O) any other stakeholders the Administrator
determines appropriate.
(3) Considerations.--In developing the findings and
recommendations required under paragraph (1), the Committee
shall consider--
(A) any anticipated modifications to the minimum
operational performance standards of ACAS Xr that are
required by subsection (c)(1)(B);
(B) the anticipated certification timeline for ACAS
Xr equipment given the technical complexity and
requisite procedures for approval;
(C) a projected deadline for equipping newly
manufactured selected rotorcraft and selected powered-
lift aircraft with ACAS Xr that considers--
(i) the safety benefits of ACAS Xr;
(ii) the anticipated timeline needed for the
FAA to approve the installation of ACAS Xr on
various rotorcraft and powered-lift aircraft or
for various operations;
(iii) the commercial availability of the
necessary components associated with ACAS Xr;
and
(iv) the operational and technical
considerations associated with installing ACAS
Xr on newly manufactured selected rotorcraft
and selected powered-lift aircraft;
(D) a projected deadline to retrofit selected
rotorcraft and selected powered-lifted aircraft with
ACAS Xr that considers--
(i) the safety benefits of ACAS Xr;
(ii) the feasibility of using existing
antennas of existing collision prevention
systems equipped in selected rotorcraft and
selected powered-lift aircraft;
(iii) the feasibility and cost associated
with retrofitting selected rotorcraft and
selected powered-lift aircraft not equipped
with existing collision avoidance systems;
(iv) the commercial availability of the
necessary components associated with ACAS Xr;
and
(v) the operational and technical
considerations associated with retrofitting
selected rotorcraft and selected powered-lift
aircraft;
(E) actions that the Administrator can take to
prioritize the certification and installation of ACAS
Xr;
(F) the interaction of ACAS Xr with existing
collision prevention technologies;
(G) the efficacy of ACAS Xr in low-altitude and high-
density airspace environments;
(H) any available safety data assessing the
effectiveness of ACAS Xr in reducing midair collision
risk;
(I) related training for air traffic controllers,
pilots, and others;
(J) National Transportation Safety Board Aviation
Investigation Report AIR-26-02 adopted on January 27,
2026; and
(K) any other considerations the Committee determines
appropriate.
(4) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the establishment of
the Committee, the Committee shall submit to the Administrator
and the appropriate committees of Congress a report on the
findings and the recommendations developed by the Committee
under this subsection.
(c) Rulemaking and Modification of Minimal Operating Performance
Standards.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 18 months after the
submission of the report required under subsection (b)(4), or
24 months after the date of enactment of this Act (whichever is
earlier), the Administrator shall--
(A) issue a notice of proposed rulemaking to prohibit
persons from operating selected rotorcraft and selected
powered-lift aircraft unless such rotorcraft or
powered-lift aircraft are equipped and operating with
ACAS Xr that uses both ADS-B In and transponder
interrogations, as required under the minimum
operational performance standards as required under
subsection (a); and
(B) take necessary actions with the appropriate
standards-setting organization to modify the minimal
operational performance standards for ACAS Xr to--
(i) update traffic advisory aural alert
standards to include clock position, relative
altitude, range and vertical tendency; and
(ii) integrate directional traffic symbols
into visual displays.
(2) Contents.--The notice of proposed rulemaking required
under paragraph (1)(A) shall include, at a minimum--
(A) appropriate guidance for the certification of
ACAS Xr systems;
(B) defined standards for the modifications to such
systems described in paragraph (1)(B);
(C) a deadline for any newly manufactured selected
rotorcraft and selected powered-lift aircraft to be
equipped with ACAS Xr, considering the findings and
recommendations developed pursuant to subsection (b);
(D) a deadline for selected rotorcraft and selected
powered-lift aircraft to be retrofit with ACAS Xr,
considering the findings and recommendations developed
pursuant to subsection (b); and
(E) a deadline for selected rotorcraft and selected
powered-lift aircraft to be equipped with collision
prevention technology pursuant to section 104, not to
exceed December 31, 2031.
(3) Final rule.--Not later than 18 months after the issuance
of a notice of proposed rulemaking under paragraph (1)(A), the
Administrator shall issue a final rule associated with such
proposed rulemaking.
(d) Technical Assistance.--The Administrator shall provide technical
assistance to facilitating equipage across the entire fleet of affected
aircraft to provide support for selected rotorcraft operators and
selected powered-lift aircraft operators in complying with the
requirements of this section.
(e) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Selected rotorcraft.--The term ``selected rotorcraft''
means a non-military rotorcraft operating in Class B airspace.
(2) Powered-lift aircraft.--The term ``powered-lift
aircraft'' has the meaning given the term ``powered-lift'' in
section 1.1 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations.
(3) Selected powered-lift aircraft.--The term ``selected
powered-lift aircraft'' means a non-military powered-lift
aircraft operating in Class B airspace.
SEC. 104. COLLISION PREVENTION SYSTEMS.
(a) Final Rule.--Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment
of this Act, the Administrator shall issue a final rule with an
effective date not later than December 31, 2031, to require covered
aircraft to be equipped and operating with collision prevention
technology.
(b) Consultation.--In developing the final rule under subsection (a),
the Administrator shall consult with the following:
(1) Air carriers operating under part 135 of title 14, Code
of Federal Regulations.
(2) Air carriers operating under part 121 of title 14, Code
of Federal Regulations.
(3) Air carriers operating under part 91 of title 14, Code of
Federal Regulations.
(4) Organizations representing helicopter aviation operators
and pilots.
(5) Organizations representing the general aviation
community.
(6) Organizations representing business aviation operators.
(7) Organizations representing experimental aircraft
operators.
(8) Transport category aircraft manufacturers.
(9) General aviation aircraft manufactures.
(10) Rotorcraft manufacturers.
(11) Avionics manufacturers.
(12) Powered-lifted aircraft manufacturers.
(13) Supplemental type certificate holders.
(14) Aircraft modification service providers.
(15) Exclusive bargaining representatives of air traffic
controllers certified under section 7111 of title 5, United
States Code.
(16) Certified bargaining representative of aviation safety
inspectors and engineers for the FAA.
(17) Not fewer than 3 organizations representing certified
collective bargaining representatives of airline pilots
operating under part 121 of title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations.
(18) Aviation safety experts with specific knowledge of human
factors or human factors experts with specific knowledge of
aviation safety.
(19) The National Transportation Safety Board.
(20) Any other representative the Administrator determines
appropriate.
(c) Considerations.--In developing the final rule under subsection
(a), the Administrator shall consider--
(1) the safety benefits of collision prevention technologies;
(2) relevant regulations, guidance, and policies for traffic
awareness and traffic advisory technology that uses ADS-B In;
(3) ways in which ADS-B In software applications can be used
as of the date of enactment of this Act;
(4) software in existence on the date of enactment of this
Act, and reasonably projected thereafter, that can predict
aircraft movements, display surrounding traffic, and provide
visual and audible traffic advisories;
(5) the margin of error and accuracy of software described in
paragraph (4);
(6) the safety benefits of software described in paragraph
(4) in preventing conflicts with both aircraft and ground
vehicles on airport surfaces;
(7) the safety benefits of software described in paragraph
(4) in informing pilots or flight crews of operational risks,
including encounters with forecasted severe weather using
flight information services broadcast (FIS-B);
(8) the effort of the Administrator to modernize the air
traffic control system, including timelines, technologies being
incorporated, changes to operational rules, and training
requirements;
(9) the role of air traffic controllers in ensuring aircraft
separation, including the need for additional training to air
traffic controllers given the requirements of this section;
(10) the necessity of certification for implementing
collision prevention technology based on type of aircraft and
operation;
(11) the capacity of the aerospace supply chain to
manufacture necessary equipment;
(12) the use of existing air traffic control deviation
authorization tools to implement the requirement in subsection
(g)(2);
(13) the requirements for the final rule as specified in
subsection (d);
(14) if available at the time of consideration, the results
of the studies on ADS-B Out equipage and development of low-
cost voluntary ADS-B as required by sections 808 and 810 of FAA
Reauthorization Act of 2024 (Public Law 118-63); and
(15) any other considerations the Administrator determines
appropriate.
(d) Requirements for Final Rule.--In issuing the final rule required
under subsection (a), the Administrator shall--
(1) establish performance requirements for equipping
collision prevention technology that, as determined by the
Administrator, are appropriate for the covered aircraft and the
operations, including the operating environment;
(2) in establishing the performance requirements described in
paragraph (1)--
(A) require such technology be configured to provide
visual and audible alerting to the pilot and flight
crew;
(B) consider the field of view of the pilots, human
factors, and, if applicable, mounting method of such
technology, to ensure that such technology can be
readily utilized and has minimal risk of unexpected
detachment;
(C) consider the reliability and resiliency of alerts
in environments where inputs or signals, including GPS,
can be jammed or spoofed; and
(D) consider the utilization of existing antenna
locations or the placement of new antenna used to
receive and, if applicable, transmit, data used in
collision prevention technology;
(3) identify existing or issue additional relevant guidance
or technical standard orders to carry out the requirements of
this section; and
(4) establish an effective date not later than December 31,
2031, for equipping the covered aircraft with technology
described in subsection (a) that reflects various aircraft
types, appropriate maintenance cycles, and required updates to
appropriate guidance for such technology after certification of
such technologies.
(e) Equivalent Level of Safety.--In issuing the final rule required
under this section, the Administrator shall allow for the use of any
collision prevention technology (including technology that uses
portable ADS-B In receivers or other equipment that displays on an
existing or future portable device, electronic flight bag, or panel
mounted display) available for use at the time of the effective date
established in subsection (d)(4), if the Administrator determines it
provides an equivalent level of safety as the requirements of the final
rule issued pursuant to subsection (a).
(f) Technical Assistance.--The Administrator shall provide technical
assistance to facilitating equipage across the entire fleet of affected
aircraft to provide support for affected aircraft operators in
complying with the requirements of this section.
(g) Covered Aircraft Defined.--In this section, the term ``covered
aircraft''--
(1) means any non-military aircraft, except a selected
aircraft as defined in section 102, that is required to be
equipped with ADS-B Out under section 91.225 of title 14, Code
of Federal Regulations; and
(2) excludes aircraft that have a limited category special
airworthiness certificate or an experimental airworthiness
certificate, provided the pilot of such aircraft is authorized
to deviate from the requirements of this section by air traffic
control in the same manner ADS-B Out deviations are approved
under section 91.225(g) of title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations.
SEC. 105. PROHIBITION ON CERTAIN USE OF ADS-B DATA.
(a) In General.--
(1) Limitation on use of data.--Data from Automatic Dependent
Surveillance-Broadcast may not be used by any person,
governmental agency, or other entity to identify aircraft for
the purpose of obtaining revenue from the owner or operator of
such aircraft, without the consent of such owner or operator.
(2) Use of data by air traffic controller.--Automatic
Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast data may be used to assist air
traffic controllers in tracking aircraft and improving air
traffic safety and efficiency.
(b) Limit on Use of ADS-B Data.--Section 46101(c)(1) of title 49,
United States Code, is amended by striking ``the Administrator of the
Federal Aviation Administration may not'' and inserting ``neither the
Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration nor any other
Federal, State, local, territorial, or Tribal official may''.
SEC. 106. RULEMAKING ACCOUNTABILITY.
(a) Public Dashboard.--The Secretary shall establish, maintain, and
make available, on a publicly available website of the Department of
Transportation, a dashboard that displays, for the rulemakings required
in sections 102, 103, and 104--
(1) dates of publication and links to the minimum operating
performance standards referenced by and developed pursuant to
such sections;
(2) the date of establishment, membership roster, and tasking
memoranda (or similar document) for rulemaking committees
established pursuant to such sections;
(3) deadlines and actual dates for the submission for all
required rulemaking committee reports to the Administrator or
Congress;
(4) publication dates of and a link to any--
(A) advanced notice of proposed rulemakings published
pursuant to such sections;
(B) notice of proposed rulemakings published pursuant
to such sections; and
(C) revised notice of proposed rulemakings published
pursuant to rulemakings described in subparagraphs (A)
and (B);
(5) the opening and closing of public comment periods and a
link to public comments;
(6) the publication of and a link to any final rule issued
pursuant to such sections;
(7) all associated official correspondence with the National
Transportation Safety Board regarding related safety
recommendations; and
(8) any additional information the Secretary determines will
increase transparency without delaying the publication of a
final rule.
(b) Congressional and Family Briefing.--Not later than 180 days after
the date of enactment of this Act, and every 180 days thereafter until
the final rules required pursuant to sections 102, 103, and 104 are
issued, the Administrator shall brief the appropriate committees of
Congress and the families of the victims of the midair collision
referenced in National Transportation Safety Board Aviation
Investigation Report AIR-26-02 adopted on January 27, 2026 on the
progress in issuing such final rules.
(c) Congressional Oversight in Case of Failure to Meet Deadlines.--
(1) In general.--If the Administrator fails to meet any
rulemaking deadline established in sections 102, 103, and 104,
the Administrator shall brief the appropriate committees of
Congress in person not later than 4 weeks after the date on
which such deadline is not met.
(2) Deadline for initial outreach and coordination.--Not
later than 4 days after the date described in paragraph (1),
the Administrator shall begin initial outreach to and
coordination with the appropriate committees of Congress to
arrange and organize logistics of the briefing required under
paragraph (1).
(3) Format and time of briefing.--The briefing required under
paragraph (1) shall be in a format and at a time to be
determined by the appropriate committees of Congress.
SEC. 107. TIME-ON-POSITION LIMITS.
(a) Time-on-position Limits.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Administrator, in coordination with
organizations representing air traffic controller managers and
supervisors, shall establish time-on-position limits for
operations supervisory personnel.
(2) Considerations.--In developing the limits described in
paragraph (1), the Administrator shall--
(A) evaluate appropriate time-on-position limits for
operations supervisory personnel, prioritizing the
evaluation of such limits at Ronald Reagan Washington
National Airport and other air traffic facilities with
high volumes of mixed rotorcraft and airplane traffic;
(B) establish such limits for Air Traffic
Organization operations supervisory personnel at Ronald
Reagan Washington National Airport and other air
traffic facilities with high volumes of mixed
helicopter and airplane traffic;
(C) develop guidance for district and facility-level
management to adapt such limits to account for their
own staffing and local standard operating procedures;
(D) consider the operational needs and staffing
levels of the air traffic facilities described in the
previous subparagraphs to ensure effective oversight
and monitoring of safety critical operations;
(E) consider air traffic control specialists
performing watch supervision in the controller-in-
charge position;
(F) consider requirements of FAA Order JO 7210.3EE,
titled ``Facility Operation and Administration'',
issued on February 20, 2025, or any successor document,
and FAA Order JO 7110.65BB, titled ``Air Traffic
Control'', issued on February 20, 2025, or any
successor document;
(G) consider data, reports, and best practices
pertaining to human factors; and
(H) consider any other items determined appropriate
by the Administrator.
(3) Consultation.--The Administrator may consult with the
exclusive bargaining representative of air traffic controllers
certified under section 7111 of title 5, United States Code.
(b) Rule of Construction.--Nothing in this section shall be construed
to interfere with any agreement between a governmental agency and the
exclusive bargaining representative of air traffic controllers
certified under section 7111 of title 5, United States Code, section
7106(a) of title 5, United States Code, or section 40122 of title 49,
United States Code.
(c) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Controller-in-charge.--The term ``controller-in-charge''
means the bargaining unit air traffic control specialist
responsible for providing watch supervision for the continuous
operation of an air traffic control facility or area in any
case in which operations supervisory personnel are not
available.
(2) Operational oversight.--The term ``operational
oversight'' means the duty of the individual in charge of the
operation to effectively lead and manage the delivery of air
traffic services by maintaining intentional engagement,
situational awareness, and accountability within the area of
supervision.
(3) Operations supervisory personnel.--The term ``operations
supervisory personnel'' means managerial personnel responsible
for the direct supervision of air traffic control operational
personnel.
SEC. 108. CONTROLLER THREAT AND ERROR MANAGEMENT TRAINING.
(a) In General.--Not later than 9 months after the date of enactment
of this Act, the Administrator shall, in coordination with the
exclusive bargaining representative of air traffic controllers
certified under section 7111 of title 5, United States Code, develop
and implement initial, recurrent, and refresher training for air
traffic controllers on threat and error management that is instructor-
led and scenario-based.
(b) Consultation.--In developing the training under subsection (a),
the Administrator shall consult with representatives of--
(1) organizations representing air traffic control managers
and operations supervisors;
(2) aviation safety experts with specific knowledge of--
(A) human factors and human decision making in
realistic operational settings; and
(B) threat and error management best practices and
policies; and
(3) a career representative from the National Transportation
Safety Board with subject matter expertise as an observer.
(c) Considerations.--In developing the training described in
subsection (a), the Administrator shall consider, at a minimum--
(1) the findings and recommendations of the National
Transportation Safety Board, including as contained in the
final aviation investigation report, AIR-26-02, adopted on
January 27, 2026, such as--
(A) training controllers to continuously monitor
their environment to more quickly and accurately
identify threats;
(B) promoting team communication to ensure that
communications are clear, timely, and assertive;
(C) emphasizing effective scanning habits;
(D) recognizing patterns in the development of
adverse events; and
(E) enhanced decision making under stress by
developing habits that balance procedural compliance
with problem-solving;
(2) the requirements of--
(A) FAA Order JO 3120.4S, titled ``Air Traffic
Technical Training'', issued on August 28, 2024;
(B) FAA Order JO 7210.3EE, titled ``Facility
Operation and Administration'', issued on February 20,
2025;
(C) FAA Order JO 7110.65BB, titled ``Air Traffic
Control'', issued on February 20, 2025; and
(D) other relevant air traffic control standards,
guidance, and policies;
(3) the frequency of the recurrent and refresher training
described in subsection (a) and whether frequency should be
increased for air traffic controllers in facilities managing
high-complexity or high-volume airspace;
(4) data, reports, and peer-reviewed studies on human factors
and threat and error management best practices;
(5) the appropriate use of tower simulator systems and other
advanced training technologies to supplement the recurrent
training described in subsection (a), including the use of data
analytics from such systems and technologies to individualize
instruction;
(6) the use of data analytics to identify systemic gaps in
the recurrent and refresher training described in subsection
(a) and to dynamically enhance training curriculum and
techniques;
(7) data gathered from aviation safety reporting programs;
and
(8) any other item determined appropriate by the
Administrator.
(d) Implementation.--Not later than 90 days after the development of
the training under subsection (a), the Administrator shall revise the
orders of the FAA described in subsection (c)(2), or any successor
documents, and any corresponding policy or guidance materials, to
reflect the requirements of this section.
(e) Briefing to Congress.--Not later than 1 year after the training
requirements under this section and section 109 are established, the
Administrator shall brief the appropriate committees of Congress on the
implementation of such training and any potential recommendations for
improvements.
(f) Threat and Error Management Defined.--In this section, the term
``threat and error management'' has the meaning described in chapter 6
of the Risk Management Handbook (FAA H-8083-2A) or any successor
document.
SEC. 109. CONTROLLER VISUAL SEPARATION TRAINING.
(a) In General.--Not later than 270 days after the date of enactment
of this Act, the Administrator shall, in coordination with the
exclusive bargaining representative of air traffic controllers
certified under section 7111 of title 5, United States Code, develop
and implement initial, recurrent, and refresher training for air
traffic controllers on tower-applied and pilot-applied visual
separation procedures that is instructor-led and scenario-based.
(b) Consultation.--In developing and implementing the training
required under subsection (a), the Administrator shall consult with
representatives of--
(1) the certified bargaining representative of aviation
safety inspectors and engineers for the FAA;
(2) organizations representing certified collective
bargaining representatives of airline pilots;
(3) organizations representing air traffic control managers
and supervisors;
(4) organizations representing general aviation pilots; and
(5) aviation safety experts with specific knowledge of--
(A) human factors and human decision making in
realistic operational settings; and
(B) tower-applied and pilot-applied visual separation
procedures and regulations.
(c) Considerations.--In developing the training under subsection (a),
the Administrator shall consider, at a minimum--
(1) the findings and recommendations made by the National
Transportation Safety Board, including as contained in the
final aviation investigation report, AIR-26-02, adopted on
January 27, 2026;
(2) the requirements of--
(A) FAA Order JO 3120.4S, titled ``Air Traffic
Technical Training'', issued on August 28, 2024;
(B) FAA Order JO 7210.3EE, titled ``Facility
Operation and Administration'', issued on February 20,
2025;
(C) FAA Order JO 7110.65BB, titled ``Air Traffic
Control'', issued on February 20, 2025; and
(D) other relevant air traffic control standards,
guidance, and policies;
(3) the frequency of the recurrent and refresher training
described in subsection (a), including--
(A) whether such frequency should be increased for
air traffic controllers in facilities managing high-
complexity or high-volume airspace; and
(B) the need for advance training and guidance ahead
of any changes to FAA visual separation policies;
(4) the appropriate use of tower simulator systems and other
advanced training technologies to supplement the recurrent and
refresher training described in subsection (a), including the
use of data analytics from such systems and technologies to
individualize instruction;
(5) the use of data analytics to identify systemic gaps in
the recurrent and refresher training described in subsection
(a) and to dynamically enhance training curriculum and
techniques;
(6) data gathered from aviation safety reporting programs;
and
(7) any other item determined appropriate by the
Administrator.
(d) Implementation.--Not later than 90 days after the development of
the training under subsection (a), the Administrator shall revise the
orders of the FAA described in subparagraph (c)(2), or any successor
documents, and any corresponding policy or guidance materials, to
reflect the requirements of this section.
SEC. 110. SAFETY RISK ASSESSMENT TOOL.
(a) In General.--Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment
of this Act, the Administrator shall develop a safety risk assessment
tool for use by air traffic controllers, including by supervisory air
traffic control personnel, to assist in airspace risk identification,
mitigation, and operational decision making.
(b) Considerations.--In carrying out subsection (a), the
Administrator shall consider, at a minimum--
(1) the development of a safety risk assessment tool capable
of supporting air traffic controllers in--
(A) identifying safety risks;
(B) analyzing the impact of and prioritizing such
risks; and
(C) developing strategies to reduce or eliminate such
risks in real time;
(2) data, reports, studies, and best practices on threat and
error management;
(3) findings and recommendations of the--
(A) National Transportation Safety Board, including
as contained in the final aviation investigation
report, AIR-26-02, adopted on January 27, 2026;
(B) National Airspace System Safety Review Team as
contained in the final report titled ``Discussion and
Recommendations to Address Risk in the National
Airspace System'', issued on November 15, 2023; and
(C) frontline manager workload study authorized under
section 412 of the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024
(Public Law 118-63);
(4) air traffic facility type and staffing level;
(5) risk assessment guidance, policies, and regulations of
the Administration in place prior to the date of enactment of
this Act;
(6) data gathered from aviation safety reporting programs;
(7) best practices or similar relevant risk assessment tools
and methods used by foreign civil aviation authorities;
(8) the feasibility of leveraging commercially available
products or technologies that may be utilized to develop such
tool;
(9) benefits of incorporating such tool into a Common
Automation Platform; and
(10) any other factors determined relevant by the
Administrator.
(c) Coordination.--In developing the safety risk assessment tool
under subsection (a), the Administrator shall coordinate with--
(1) organizations representing air traffic control
supervisors and managers;
(2) the exclusive bargaining representative of air traffic
controllers certified under section 7111 of title 5, United
States Code;
(3) aviation safety experts with specific knowledge of threat
and error management;
(4) aviation safety experts with specific knowledge of human
factors and human decision making in realistic operational
settings;
(5) organizations representing operators of Federal contract
towers pursuant to section 47124 of title 49, United States
Code; and
(6) any other stakeholders determined relevant by the
Administrator.
(d) Briefing to Congress.--Not later than 18 months after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall brief the appropriate
committees of Congress on--
(1) the development of the safety risk assessment tool
required under this section and recommendations for
implementation;
(2) the progress of implementation described in subsection
(e); and
(3) any recommendations to improve the deployment of the
safety risk assessment tool.
(e) Implementation.--The Administrator shall deploy the safety risk
assessment tool developed under this section at--
(1) the Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport air traffic
control tower, not later than 1 year after the development of
the safety risk assessment tool;
(2) air traffic control facilities with high volumes of mixed
rotorcraft and airplane traffic not later than 18 months after
the development of the safety risk assessment tool; and
(3) any remaining air traffic control facilities not later
than 2 years after the development of the safety risk
assessment tool.
(f) Threat and Error Management Defined.--In this section, the term
``threat and error management'' has the meaning described in chapter 6
of the Risk Management Handbook (FAA H-8083-2A) or any successor
document.
SEC. 111. OPERATIONAL RATES AT RONALD REAGAN WASHINGTON NATIONAL
AIRPORT.
(a) In General.--Not later than 30 days after the date of enactment
of this Act, the Administrator shall initiate an assessment of the
aircraft arrival rate at Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport.
(b) Considerations.--In conducting the assessment described in
subsection (a), the Administrator shall consider--
(1) airspace complexity;
(2) airfield limitations;
(3) mixed-fleet operations;
(4) traffic volume;
(5) air carrier scheduling practices;
(6) the operational capacity of such airport;
(7) the current hourly instrument flight rules allocation
practice at such airport;
(8) expertise provided by the Air Traffic Organization; and
(9) any other considerations the Administrator determines
appropriate.
(c) Completion of Assessment.--Not later than 180 days after the
Administrator initiates the assessment under subsection (a), the
Administrator shall complete and submit to the appropriate committees
of Congress such assessment, including any related findings and
recommendations.
(d) Rulemaking.--Not later than 30 days after completing the
assessment pursuant to subsection (c), and taking such assessment into
account, the Administrator shall initiate a rulemaking proceeding to
update subpart K of part 93 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations,
to require allocated instrument flight rules operations at Ronald
Reagan Washington National Airport to be prescribed in periods not
greater than 30 minutes to ensure such airport does not exceed safe
capacity.
(e) Consultation.--In conducting the rulemaking required under
subsection (d), the Administrator shall consult with the following:
(1) Any air carrier operating under part 121 of title 14,
Code of Federal Regulations, with scheduled operations at
Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport, including regional
air carriers and low-cost and ultra-low-cost air carriers.
(2) Air carriers operating under parts 91, including subpart
K, and 135 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, authorized
to conduct non-scheduled operations at Ronald Reagan Washington
National Airport.
(3) The exclusive bargaining representatives of air traffic
controllers certified under section 7111 of title 5, United
Sates Code.
(4) The Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority.
(5) Any other stakeholders the Administrator determines
appropriate.
SEC. 112. TIME-BASED FLOW MANAGEMENT.
Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the
Administrator shall implement operational use of the time-based flow
management system at Potomac Consolidated Terminal Radar Approach
Control and associated air traffic control towers.
SEC. 113. AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL FACILITY LEVELS.
(a) Review of Air Traffic Control Facility Level Criteria.--
(1) In general.--The Administrator and the exclusive
bargaining representative of air traffic controllers certified
under section 7111 of title 5, United States Code, (in this
section referred to as the ``Parties'') may, at their joint
election, review and advise, as agreed to, the criteria and
procedures used to assess, determine, and validate the facility
pay levels of air traffic control facilities.
(2) Considerations.--In conducting a review under paragraph
(1), the Parties may consider--
(A) the many variables that may affect the difficulty
and complexity of air traffic control work, including
technological advancements, aviation industry trends,
and the modification or extension of air traffic
control services;
(B) weights and add-ons used to calculate the traffic
count index and other related formulas for air traffic
control facilities; and
(C) whether new weights and add-ons should be
incorporated into such formulas to more accurately
reflect the air traffic density and complexity of the
facility operations.
(b) Reassessment of Air Traffic Control Facility Levels.--
(1) Limitation.--No changes to facility pay levels due to
data source changes may be implemented until negotiations
pursuant to the collective bargaining agreement of the Parties
and title 49, United States Code, have been completed.
(2) Application of standard.--Upon completion of a review
conducted under subsection (a) and related negotiations
pursuant to the collective bargaining agreement of the Parties
and title 49, United States Code, the Parties shall apply the
standard in accordance with any agreements made pursuant to
this section at--
(A) the Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport;
and
(B) all other air traffic control facilities,
prioritizing facilities with high volumes of mixed
rotorcraft and airplane traffic.
(c) Rule of Construction.--Nothing in this section may be construed
to interfere with any agreement between a governmental agency and the
exclusive bargaining representative of air traffic controllers
certified under section 7111 of title 5, United States Code, or section
40122 of title 49, United States Code.
SEC. 114. WORKING GROUP TO EVALUATE SHARED FREQUENCY AROUND RONALD
REAGAN WASHINGTON NATIONAL AIRPORT.
(a) In General.--Not later than 3 months after the date of enactment
of this Act, the Administrator shall convene a working group (in this
section referred to as the ``Working Group'') to conduct a
comprehensive evaluation of the safety benefits and risks of requiring
all aircraft to use the same communications frequency during any period
in which helicopter and local air traffic control positions are
combined in the Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport air traffic
control tower.
(b) Members.--The Working Group convened under subsection (a) shall
be comprised of representatives of--
(1) the exclusive bargaining representatives of air traffic
controllers certified under section 7111 of title 5, United
States Code;
(2) the organization representing air traffic control
operational supervisors and managers;
(3) not fewer than 3 separate organizations representing the
certified collective bargaining representatives of pilots
operating under part 121 of title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations;
(4) air medical services;
(5) an organization representing helicopter aviation
operators and pilots;
(6) an organization representing business aviation operators
and pilots;
(7) air carriers operating under part 121 of title 14, United
States Code;
(8) an individual that has expertise in an operational or
academic discipline that is relevant to the analysis of human
factors in aviation, which may include air carrier operations,
line pilot expertise, air traffic control, linguistics, human-
machine integration, general aviation operations, and
organizational behavior and culture;
(9) the FAA, provided the representative has expertise on
flight operations in the area described in subsection (a);
(10) the Department of Defense, provided the representative
has expertise on Department of Defense flight operations in the
area described in subsection (a);
(11) the Coast Guard, provided the representative has
expertise on Coast Guard flight operations in the area
described in subsection (a);
(12) the National Transportation Safety Board; and
(13) other organizations or agencies as determined necessary
by the Administrator.
(c) Local Operator Preference.--The members described in paragraphs
(3), (4), (5), (6), and (7) of subsection (b) shall be, or represent,
individuals who operate in the Washington, DC Metropolitan Area Special
Flight Rules Area, as defined in subpart V of part 93 of title 14, Code
of Federal Regulations.
(d) Government Representatives.--The members described in paragraphs
(11), (12), (13), (14), and, in the case of a representative chosen by
the Administrator that is from a governmental agency, (15) of
subsection (b)--
(1) may not be political appointees; and
(2) shall be nonvoting members of the Working Group.
(e) Duration.--
(1) In general.--Members of the Working Group shall be
appointed for the duration of the Working Group.
(2) Length of existence.--
(A) In general.--The Working Group shall have an
initial duration of 1 year.
(B) Optional extension.--The Administrator may extend
the duration of the Working Group for an additional
period of up to 1 year.
(f) Considerations.--In conducting the comprehensive evaluation under
subsection (a), the Working Group shall, at minimum, consider--
(1) the benefits or detriments to pilot and air traffic
controller situation awareness;
(2) to the greatest extent possible, the human factors that
would impact pilot and air traffic controller situation
awareness;
(3) to the greatest extent possible, the human factors that
would impact pilot and air traffic controllers during critical
phases of flight;
(4) existing products by other working groups related to
human factors in aviation safety;
(5) pilot training requirements;
(6) air traffic controller training requirements;
(7) if any, technological limitations or challenges that
would impede aircraft from using the same communications
frequency;
(8) the potential for overlapping, conflicting, and
simultaneous communication transmissions, prior to and after
any improvements made as a result of the assessment conducted
pursuant to section 115;
(9) the potential for misdirected, missed, or stepped on
communications if requiring all aircraft to use the same
communication frequency;
(10) National Transportation Safety Board recommendations
pertaining to miscommunications on crowded frequencies,
including relevant recommendations included in the National
Transportation Safety Board Aviation Investigation Report AIR-
26-02 adopted on January 27, 2026; and
(11) solicited feedback from air carriers operating under
part 121 and part 135 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations,
and general aviation operators under part 91 of title 14, Code
of Federal Regulations.
(g) Report.--Not later than 6 months after the conclusion of the
Working Group, the Working Group shall submit to the Administrator and
the appropriate committees of Congress a report on the findings and
recommendations resulting from the activities carried out under this
section.
(h) Implementation.--Not later than 6 months after receiving
recommendations outlined in the report under subsection (g), the
Administrator shall operationally validate such recommendations and may
take such action, as appropriate, to implement such recommendations.
SEC. 115. ANTI-BLOCKING TECHNOLOGY.
(a) Assessment.--Not later than 30 days after the date of enactment
of this Act, the Administrator shall initiate an assessment on the
feasibility, maturity, hazards, and safety benefits of technology that
serves to alert air traffic controllers or flight crews to instances of
potentially blocked transmissions when simultaneous broadcasting
occurs.
(b) Considerations.--In conducting the assessment under subsection
(a), the Administrator shall, at minimum, consider--
(1) technologies currently in use domestically and
internationally that alert an air traffic controller or flight
crew to instances in which radio transmissions may have been
blocked;
(2) the technical standards written for, and associated with,
the use of such technologies identified under paragraph (1);
(3) existing and proposed technologies not in use that could
alert an air traffic controller or flight crew to instances in
which radio transmissions may have been blocked;
(4) the technical standards that would be needed to implement
the technologies identified under paragraph (3);
(5) the potential benefits and enhanced awareness that the
adoption of such technologies would provide;
(6) the technological limitations associated with such
technologies;
(7) air traffic controller training requirements;
(8) the effort of the FAA to modernize the air traffic
control system, including timelines, the incorporation of new
technologies, and planned training; and
(9) any benefits and detriments to air traffic controller
situational awareness, including availability of information,
nuisance alerts, and human factors.
(c) Consultation.--In conducting the assessment under subsection (a),
the Administrator shall consult with stakeholders or standards
organizations, including--
(1) the exclusive bargaining representatives of air traffic
controllers certified under section 7111 of title 5, United
States Code;
(2) the organization representing air traffic control
operational supervisors and managers;
(3) the certified bargaining representative of aviation
safety inspectors and engineers for the FAA;
(4) an organization representing manufacturers of air traffic
management systems, equipment and technologies;
(5) an organization representing helicopter aviation
operators and pilots;
(6) an organization representing general aviation operators
and pilots; and
(7) any other organization or agency the Administrator
determines appropriate.
(d) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of
this Act, the Administrator shall submit to the appropriate committees
of Congress a report on the results of the assessment under subsection
(a) that includes--
(1) a list of technologies identified by the Administrator
serving the purpose described in subsection (a);
(2) a list of technologies the Administrator proposes that
could serve the purpose described in subsection (a);
(3) results of simulations and testing; and
(4) a plan to implement the technologies listed under
paragraphs (1) and (2) if the assessment under subsection (a)
finds such technology can be safely implemented, including--
(A) the scope of potential upgrades;
(B) predicted costs;
(C) a projected timeline; and
(D) how the potential upgrades to facilities and
equipment within the scope of subparagraph (A) would be
prioritized.
SEC. 116. TASK FORCE TO IDENTIFY IMPROVEMENTS TO AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLER
CONFLICT ALERT SYSTEM.
(a) In General.--Not later than 3 months after the date of enactment
of this Act, the Administrator shall convene a task force (in this
section referred to as the ``Task Force'') to develop a framework
detailing the priorities, goals, timeline, and recommendations to
implement improvements to the conflict alert system to provide more
salient and meaningful alerts to air traffic controllers based on the
severity of the conflict triggering the alert.
(b) Members.--The Task Force convened under subsection (a) shall be
comprised of representatives of--
(1) the exclusive bargaining representatives of air traffic
controllers certified under section 7111 of title 5, United
States Code;
(2) the organization representing air traffic control
operational supervisors and managers;
(3) the organization representing operators under the
Contract Tower Program established under section 47124 of title
49, United States Code;
(4) the certified bargaining representative of aviation
safety inspectors and engineers for the FAA;
(5) individuals with expertise in the human factors of alert
design and related impacts on human performance;
(6) individuals with expertise in an operational or academic
discipline that is relevant to the analysis of human factors in
aviation, which may include air carrier operations, line pilot
expertise, air traffic control, linguistics, human-machine
integration, general aviation operations, and organizational
behavior and culture;
(7) the FAA, including the Air Traffic Organization and the
Office of Finance and Management, provided such representative
has expertise on equipment procurement; and
(8) other organizations or agencies as determined necessary
by the Administrator.
(c) Voting.--The members described in paragraphs (3), (6), and, in
the case of a representative chosen by the Administrator that is from a
governmental agency, (7) of subsection (b) shall be nonvoting members
of the Task Force.
(d) Duration.--
(1) In general.--Members of the Task Force shall be appointed
for the duration of the Task Force.
(2) Length of existence.--
(A) In general.--The Task Force shall have an initial
duration of 1 year.
(B) Optional extension.--The Administrator may extend
the duration of the Task Force for an additional period
of up to 6 months.
(e) Considerations.--In developing the framework under subsection
(a), the Task Force shall, at minimum, consider--
(1) the benefits and detriments to air traffic controller
situational awareness, including availability of information,
nuisance and false alerts, and human factors;
(2) opportunities and challenges of consolidating numerous
systems and underlying data sources into a single display,
including through the deployment of the Enterprise-Information
Display System;
(3) existing products by other working groups related to
human factors in aviation safety;
(4) air traffic controller training requirements;
(5) advances in available technology not being utilized as of
the date on which the Task Force is convened;
(6) technological limitations;
(7) National Transportation Safety Board recommendations
pertaining to air traffic controller alerts, distractions, and
loss of focus;
(8) the effort of the FAA to modernize the air traffic
control system, including timelines, new technologies being
incorporated, and planned training; and
(9) solicited feedback from equipment manufacturers and
entities involved with the air traffic control modernization
effort of the Administrator.
(f) Report.--Not later than 4 months after the conclusion of the Task
Force, the Task Force shall submit to the Administrator and the
appropriate committees of Congress a report that includes the framework
developed as a result of the activities carried out under subsection
(a).
(g) Implementation Plan.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 8 months after receiving the
framework outlined in the report under subsection (f), the
Administrator shall finalize and submit to the appropriate
committees of Congress a plan (in this section referred to as
the ``Plan'') to implement such framework.
(2) Contents.--Such Plan shall include, as appropriate--
(A) specific training requirements for air traffic
controllers, as detailed in--
(i) FAA Order JO 3120.4S, titled ``Air
Traffic Technical Training'', issued on August
28, 2024;
(ii) FAA Order JO 7210.3EE, titled ``Facility
Operation and Administration'', issued on
February 20, 2025; and
(iii) any successor or other relevant
documents or guidance; and
(B) a publicly available prioritized list of airports
enumerating the order in which they will receive such
upgrades.
(3) Time limit.--The Plan may not contain a timeline of
implementation that exceeds 2 years.
(h) Implementation.--The Administrator shall immediately begin
implementing the Plan upon the submission of such Plan under subsection
(g)(1) to the appropriate committees of Congress.
(i) Briefings to Congress.--Not later than 6 months after the
submission of the Plan to the appropriate committees of Congress under
subsection (g)(1), and every 6 months thereafter until the full
implementation of the Plan, the Administrator shall brief the
appropriate committees of Congress on the progress of implementation.
SEC. 117. POSTACCIDENT AND POSTINCIDENT DRUG AND ALCOHOL TESTING.
(a) Sense of Congress.--The Administrator shall abide by DOT Order
3910.1D, titled ``Drug and Alcohol-Free Departmental Workplace
Program'' (or any successor document) to ensure appropriate
postaccident and postincident drug and alcohol testing.
(b) Revision of Procedures.--Not later than 180 days after the date
of enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall revise procedures of
the Air Traffic Organization to ensure an appropriate on-site
supervisor makes each postaccident and postincident drug and alcohol
testing determination in a timely manner based on an assessment of such
supervisor of whether the event meets testing criteria and which
controllers had duties pertaining to the involved aircraft without need
to wait for investigation or approval.
(c) Training.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall incorporate
training on the revised postaccident and postincident drug and
alcohol testing determination procedure described in subsection
(b) for all staff of the Air Traffic Organization who have
responsibilities under such procedure.
(2) Requirements.--The training described under this
subsection shall, at a minimum--
(A) be administered during initial training, and
annually thereafter; and
(B) include a postlearning knowledge assessment.
(d) Review.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter, the Secretary
shall conduct a review of the ability of each FAA-operated air
traffic control facility to routinely accomplish the required
postaccident and postincident drug and alcohol testing within
the Secretary's specified timeframes of within 2 hours for
alcohol testing and within 4 hours for drug testing.
(2) Requirements.--The review described under this subsection
shall, at a minimum, require each FAA-operated air traffic
control facility to conduct a demonstration to establish the
time that would be required for urine and breath evidence
collection to begin if testing were unexpectedly needed during
a time with the lowest routinely anticipated level of resource
availability for testing.
(3) Remediation.--After each review under paragraph (1), the
Administrator shall work with the Secretary to mitigate
identified barriers to timely postaccident and postincident
drug and alcohol testing, and to remediate the performance of
each facility for which the demonstration under paragraph (2)
indicated inability to meet required timeframes for
postaccident drug or alcohol testing.
(4) Report.--Not later than 3 months after each review under
paragraph (1), the Secretary shall submit to the appropriate
committees of Congress a report detailing the results of the
review, including facilities in need of remediation, progress
at facilities previously identified for remediation, and
planned approaches to remediation.
SEC. 118. FURTHER MODIFICATIONS TO RONALD REAGAN WASHINGTON NATIONAL
AIRPORT AREA HELICOPTER ROUTES.
(a) In General.--Not later than 90 days after the date of enactment
of this Act, the Administrator shall evaluate, via the safety risk
management process in accordance with FAA Order JO 8040.4C, titled
``Safety Risk Management Policy'' (or any successor document), charted
helicopter routes in the vicinity of Ronald Reagan Washington National
Airport.
(b) Revisions to Deconflict Traffic.--Upon the completion of each
route evaluation under subsection (a), the Administrator shall
immediately, as necessary, revise such route to ensure that the route
and routes utilized by fixed-wing aircraft--
(1) are safely deconflicted physically at all times; or
(2) have operating procedures that require positive control
from the controller to ensure safe deconfliction during
operations.
(c) Safety Review Requirements.--In carrying out the route revisions
required under subsection (b), the Administrator shall conduct a safety
risk management review, as necessary, for any helicopter route changes,
in accordance with FAA Order 8040.4C, titled ``Safety Risk Management
Policy'' (or any successor document).
(d) Report.--Not later than 120 days after the Administrator
completes all the evaluations and subsequent route revisions required
under this section, the Administrator shall submit to the appropriate
committees of Congress a report containing--
(1) the results of the evaluations required under subsection
(a);
(2) the route revisions required under subsection (b),
including an explanation for such revisions; and
(3) the safety risk management review documentation developed
as a result of the review conducted under subsection (c).
SEC. 119. REQUIRING VERTICAL SEPARATION NEAR AIRPORTS DURING CRITICAL
PHASES OF FLIGHT.
(a) In General.--Except as provided in subsection (b), the
Administrator shall ensure that each segment of a helicopter route
contains, in the appropriate helicopter route chart, recommended flight
altitudes, including altitude ceilings and floors, in a manner
consistent with FAA Order JO 7210.3EE, titled ``Facility Operation and
Administration'' (or any successor document).
(b) Consideration of Vertical Separation in Route Criteria.--Not
later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the
Administrator shall amend FAA Order JO 7210.3EE, titled ``Facility
Operation and Administration'' (or any successor document), to add
minimum vertical separation requirements to the criteria for the
helicopter route chart program.
(c) Charting Minimum Separation Near Airports.--
(1) In general.--The Administrator shall ensure that any
helicopter chart that represents an area near an airport
clearly conveys to an operator the segments of such helicopter
routes in the vicinity of such airport.
(2) Content requirements.--At minimum, each such chart shall
clearly convey for each of the segments, the recommended flight
altitudes, including altitude ceilings and floors, and any
necessary instructions, to convey minimum separation, in
accordance with FAA Order JO 7110.65BB, titled ``Air Traffic
Control'' (or any successor document), between--
(A) a helicopter or powered-lift aircraft utilizing
such segment; and
(B) a fixed-wing aircraft operating at or near such
airport during critical phases of flight.
(d) Update Policy.--Not later than 90 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall update FAA Order JO
7210.3EE, titled ``Facility Operation and Administration'' (or any
successor document), to account for any additional changes made by this
section.
(e) Annual Review.--The Administrator shall ensure that any changes
made to Helicopter Route Charts as a result of this section are
assessed on an annual basis as part of the annual review described in
section 120.
SEC. 120. HELICOPTER ROUTE CHART ANNUAL REVIEW.
(a) Criteria Review.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter, the
Administrator shall initiate a review of the criteria for
annual reviews of helicopter routes as required pursuant to FAA
Order JO 7210.3EE, titled ``Facility Operation and
Administration'' (or any successor document).
(2) Update of criteria.--After each annual criteria review
under paragraph (1), the Administrator shall update the
criteria based on such review and publish the updated criteria
on a publicly available website of the FAA.
(3) Changes to route reviews.--After any change is made to
FAA Order JO 7210.3EE, titled ``Facility Operation and
Administration'' (or any successor document) pursuant to
section 119(d), the Administrator shall update the criteria for
annual reviews of helicopter routes to reflect such change.
(b) Publication.--The Administrator shall publish, on a publicly
available website of the FAA, the date on which the annual review for
each Helicopter Route Chart has been most recently completed, as
required pursuant to FAA Order JO 7210.3EE, titled ``Facility Operation
and Administration'' (or any successor document).
(c) Report.--Not later than December 31, 2026, and December 31 of
each year thereafter, the Administrator shall submit to the appropriate
committees of Congress a report containing, at a minimum, the following
information:
(1) A summary of changes, if applicable, made to each
Helicopter Route Chart, including--
(A) changes, additions, or deletions to designated
helicopter routes;
(B) changes in instrument flight rules routes;
(C) additions or deletions of visual checkpoints; and
(D) rationale or safety data to justify any changes
described in subparagraphs (A) through (C).
(2) The safety risk management documentation completed in
accordance with FAA Order JO 8040.4C, titled ``Safety Risk
Management Policy'' (or any successor document).
(3) A summary of any advanced consultation between the
Administrator and impacted helicopter and fixed-wing operators
in planning the safety risk management process.
(4) A certification that the designated recommended route
altitudes and flight ceilings and floors ensure helicopters
maintain minimum separation, in accordance with FAA Order
7110.65BB, titled ``Air Traffic Control'' (or any successor
document), with fixed-wing aircraft operating along airport
approach and departure paths.
(d) Failure To Submit.--
(1) In general.--If the Administrator fails to submit an
annual report required under subsection (b) on or before the
date on which such report is required to be submitted, the
Chief Operating Officer of the Air Traffic Organization shall
brief the appropriate committees of Congress in person not
later than 4 weeks after such date.
(2) Deadline for initial outreach and coordination.--Not
later than 4 days after such date, the FAA shall begin initial
outreach to and coordination with the appropriate committees of
Congress to arrange and organize logistics of the briefing
required under paragraph (1).
(3) Format and time of briefing.--The briefing required under
paragraph (1) shall be in a format and at a time to be
determined by such committees.
SEC. 121. VISUAL CHARTS.
(a) Study.--Not later than 30 days after the date of enactment of
this Act, the Administrator shall initiate a study on incorporating the
lateral location and published altitudes of helicopter routes into all
instrument and visual approach and departure procedures for airports to
provide situation awareness to fixed-wing operators of the risk of
helicopter traffic operating in the vicinity of such operators.
(b) Consultation.--In carrying out subsection (a), the Administrator
shall consult with relevant stakeholders, including--
(1) air carriers;
(2) an organization representing helicopter operators and
pilots;
(3) an organization representing general aviation operators
and pilots;
(4) an organization representing business aviation operators
and pilots;
(5) an organization representing emergency air medical
services;
(6) representatives of the Department of Defense and United
States Coast Guard who are not political appointees;
(7) not fewer than 3 separate organizations representing
certified collective bargaining representatives of airline
pilots operating under part 121 of title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations;
(8) the certified exclusive bargaining representatives of air
traffic controllers certified under section 7111 of title 5,
United States Code; and
(9) an individual that has expertise in an operational or
academic discipline that is relevant to the analysis of human
factors in aviation, including air carrier operations, line
pilot expertise, air traffic control, linguistics, human-
machine integration, general aviation operations, and
organizational behavior and culture.
(c) Considerations.--In carrying out subsection (a), the
Administrator shall consider the--
(1) spacing and legibility of information on charts;
(2) workload of flight crews at lower altitudes and during
critical phases of flight;
(3) feasibility and decipherability of layered information on
digital charts;
(4) current best practices for pilots when landing at or
departing from airports with high volume helicopter traffic but
that do not have charted helicopter routes; and
(5) human factors involved with approach and departure
procedures.
(d) Implementation.--Not later than 1 year after initiating the study
under subsection (a), the Administrator shall make any revisions
necessary to--
(1) Terminal Procedures Publications to include charted
helicopter routes to provide appropriate situational awareness
to fixed-wing operators; and
(2) Helicopter Route Charts to include airport approach and
departure paths to provide appropriate situational awareness to
helicopter operators.
(e) Congressional Briefing.--If the Administrator makes revisions
under subsection (d), the Administrator shall brief the appropriate
committees of Congress on such revisions not later than 60 days after
making such revisions.
SEC. 122. CLOSE PROXIMITY ENCOUNTERS.
(a) In General.--Not later than 60 days after the date of enactment
of this Act, the Administrator shall establish a working group to make
recommendations on--
(1) an objective definition of close proximity encounters;
(2) associated parameters that can be used to monitor the
prevalence of such encounters and identify areas of potential
traffic conflict for safety assurance and safety risk
management for such encounters; and
(3) making publicly available aggregated information about
all such encounters, including date and location.
(b) Considerations.--In carrying out subsection (a), the working
group shall consider--
(1) existing airborne separation rules and required loss of
airborne separation reporting requirements;
(2) the development of a definition of, and associated
parameters for, close proximity encounter events;
(3) data gathered from aviation safety reporting systems and
reports, including the Aviation Safety Information Analysis and
Sharing Program, the Aviation Safety Action Program, the
Performance Data Analysis and Reporting System, the Aviation
Risk Identification and Assessment (``ARIA'') system,
preliminary ARIA reports, the Air Traffic Safety Action
Program, the Aviation Safety Reporting System, the Near Midair
Collision System, mandatory occurrence reports, and other
relevant systems and reports;
(4) National Transportation Safety Board aviation
investigation report AIR-26-02, adopted on January 27, 2026;
(5) FAA risk assessment guidance, policies, and regulations
in place prior to the date of enactment of this Act;
(6) best practices or similar relevant risk assessment tools
and methods used by foreign civil aviation authorities; and
(7) any other factors determined relevant by the working
group.
(c) Membership.--The working group shall consist of the following:
(1) Appointed members.--The following members appointed by
the Administrator:
(A) 2 representatives of the National Aeronautics and
Space Administration with expertise in safety data.
(B) 5 appropriately qualified representatives of
aviation labor organizations (designated by the
applicable represented organization), including--
(i) organizations representing certified
collective bargaining representatives of
airline pilots;
(ii) the exclusive bargaining representatives
of FAA air traffic controllers certified under
section 7111 of title 5, United States Code;
(iii) organizations representing helicopter
operators and pilots, including law enforcement
and air ambulance operators; and
(iv) organizations representing general
aviation operators and pilots.
(C) Not fewer than 5 independent subject matter
experts in safety management systems and safety data
who--
(i) have not served as a political appointee
in the Administration; and
(ii) have a minimum of 10 years of relevant
applied experience.
(D) 2 air carrier employees whose job
responsibilities include administration of a safety
management system.
(E) 2 individuals representing holders of a
certificate issued under part 21 of title 14, Code of
Federal Regulations, whose job responsibilities include
administration of a safety management system.
(F) 2 other representatives from the aerospace
industry that do not meet the criteria described in
subparagraph (D) or (E) and who have expertise in
safety assurance or safety risk or whose job
responsibilities include administration of a safety
management system.
(G) A career representative from the National
Transportation Safety Board with subject matter
expertise, as a nonvoting member.
(2) Advisory members.--In addition to the appointed members
described in paragraph (1), the working group shall be advised
by up to 5 employees of the Administration, at least 3 of whom
shall be subject matter experts in implementing safety
assurance and safety risk management.
(d) Implementation.--Not later than 30 days after the working group
develops recommendations under subsection (a), the Administrator shall
make publicly available a report containing the recommendations and
describing how the Administrator will implement such recommendations.
SEC. 123. NOTIFICATION OF CLOSE PROXIMITY ENCOUNTERS AND ANALYSIS OF
DATA.
(a) In General.--Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment
of this Act, the Administrator, in accordance with the mandatory
occurrence reporting requirements in FAA Order JO 7210.632A, titled
``Air Traffic Organization Occurrence Reporting'' (or any successor
document), FAA Order 8020.11D, titled ``Aircraft Accident and Incident
Notification, Investigation, and Reporting'' (or any successor
document), and FAA Advisory Circular AC 90-120, titled ``Operational
Use of Airborne Collision Avoidance Systems'' (or any successor
document), shall establish a process to--
(1) notify, with respect to each event, parties involved
with--
(A) a near midair collision event;
(B) a traffic collision avoidance system resolution
advisory event;
(C) a close proximity encounter, as defined pursuant
to section 122; and
(D) any other events, as determined by the
Administrator; and
(2) provide deidentified event data to the Aviation Safety
Information Analysis and Sharing program.
(b) Requirements.--In establishing the process under subsection (a),
the Administrator shall--
(1) establish a database that tracks the details of events
described in subsection (a)(1);
(2) continuously monitor and review such database to identify
areas of potential traffic conflict for safety assurance and
safety risk management;
(3) ensure timeliness of notifications to the parties
described in subsection (a)(1) so that relevant data remains
available before meaningful safety analysis, reporting, or
corrective action is no longer practicable;
(4) consider informing, with deidentified or aggregated data,
other frequent operators of events described in subsection
(a)(1); and
(5) consider the practicality and usefulness of notification
requirements for--
(A) airport surface loss of separation;
(B) loss of separation with terrain or obstacles;
(C) airborne loss of separation; and
(D) any other close proximity encounters as
determined by the Administrator.
(c) Consultation.--In establishing the process under subsection (a),
the Administrator shall consult with--
(1) air carriers operating under part 121 of title 14, Code
of Federal Regulations;
(2) air carriers operating under part 135 of title 14, Code
of Federal Regulations;
(3) air carriers operating under part 91 of title 14, Code of
Federal Regulations;
(4) organizations representing helicopter aviation operators
and pilots;
(5) organizations representing the general aviation
community;
(6) organizations representing business aviation operators;
(7) organizations representing experimental aircraft
operators;
(8) organizations representing powered-lift operators;
(9) organizations representing certified collective
bargaining representatives of airline pilots;
(10) the certified exclusive bargaining representatives of
air traffic controllers of the Administration certified under
section 7111 of title 5, United States Code;
(11) FAA subject matter experts, including aviation safety
inspectors; and
(12) other aviation safety experts determined appropriate by
the Administrator.
(d) Briefing.--Not later than 30 days after establishing the process
required under subsection (a), the Administrator shall brief the
appropriate committees of Congress on the implementation of this
section.
(e) Report.--Not later than 1 year after establishing the process
required under subsection (a), and annually thereafter, the
Administrator shall submit to the appropriate committees of Congress a
report containing--
(1) data on number and location of--
(A) near midair collision events;
(B) traffic collision avoidance system resolution
advisory events; and
(C) close proximity encounters, as defined pursuant
to section 122;
(2) the average time of notification to parties involved in
such events;
(3) identified locations of concern or other trends; and
(4) actions taken to mitigate identified risks and reduce
such events.
(f) Protection of Data.--
(1) In general.--Data collected in response to subsection (a)
shall be used solely for safety assurance and safety risk
management.
(2) Consistency with existing safety programs.--The
Administrator shall ensure consistency with existing voluntary
safety programs, including the Aviation Safety Action Program,
the Aviation Safety Reporting System, the Air Traffic Safety
Action Plan, and flight operational quality assurance programs.
SEC. 124. SAFETY CULTURE AND SAFETY MANAGEMENT REVIEW.
(a) In General.--Not later than 30 days after the date of enactment
of this Act, the inspector general of the Department of Transportation
shall initiate an audit of the safety culture and the safety management
system of the Air Traffic Organization and the Aviation Safety
Management Organization.
(b) Considerations.--In conducting the audit under subsection (a),
the inspector general shall, at a minimum, evaluate--
(1) the safety management system of the Air Traffic
Organization and the Aviation Safety Management Organization,
including the functions and data sharing activities of such
system at all air traffic control facilities;
(2) whether such system effectively coordinates safety
assurance and safety risk management activities with external
stakeholders consistent with FAA requirements for operators
under section 5.57 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations;
(3) which data analysis, safety assurance, and risk
assessment processes failed to identify and mitigate the risk
of potential midair collisions near Ronald Reagan Washington
National Airport before January 29, 2025;
(4) the failure of the Air Traffic Organization and the
Aviation Safety Management Organization to recognize external
compliance verification results as indicators of systemic
traffic management, volume, and flow issues at Ronald Reagan
Washington National Airport for which air traffic controllers
were required to compensate to mitigate such issues;
(5) the failure of the Air Traffic Organization and the
Aviation Safety Management Organization to conduct annual
reviews of helicopter route charts as required by FAA Order JO
7210.3EE, titled ``Facility Operation and Administration'';
(6) the failure of the Air Traffic Organization and the
Aviation Safety Management Organization to understand and
implement post-accident and post-incident drug and alcohol
testing as required by Department of Transportation Order
3910.1D, titled ``Drug and Alcohol-Free Departmental Workplace
Program'';
(7) whether there are fears of retaliation against persons
identifying or reporting risks in accordance with the safety
management system; and
(8) how the Air Traffic Organization and the Aviation Safety
Management Organization have addressed the findings and
utilized the Safety Risk Management process in accordance with
FAA Order 8040.4C, titled ``Safety Risk Management Policy'' (or
any successor document) in the National Airspace System
Helicopter Operations Helicopter Route Analysis of the FAA
issued in April 2025.
(c) Report of the Inspector General.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the inspector general shall submit to
the appropriate committees of Congress a report on the audit
conducted under subsection (a).
(2) Recommendations.--The inspector general shall include in
the report submitted under paragraph (1)--
(A) recommendations for actions the Secretary should
take with respect to the Air Traffic Organization and
the Aviation Safety Management Organization to--
(i) strengthen and adhere to the tenets of
the safety management system;
(ii) increase transparency in the safety
management system process, including by
adopting policies that provide assurances to
FAA employees that the Air Traffic Organization
is addressing any identified safety issues;
(iii) increase data sharing and collaboration
with external stakeholders;
(iv) protect against retaliation;
(v) encourage open, nonpunitive
communication; and
(vi) foster a just culture across the Air
Traffic Organization and the Aviation Safety
Management Organization;
(B) recommendations for actions the Secretary may
take to ensure adequate oversight over the safety
management system of the Air Traffic Organization; and
(C) any other recommendations the inspector general
determines appropriate.
(d) Response to Recommendations.--Not later than 120 days after
submission of the report required under subsection (c)--
(1) the Secretary shall respond to any recommendations in
such report that are directed at the Department of
Transportation or FAA, respectively; and
(2) the Secretary shall submit to the appropriate committees
of Congress a report describing how the Secretary intends to
implement such recommendations.
SEC. 125. DOCUMENTATION OF CONTROL POSITION COMBINATIONS.
(a) In General.--Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of
this Act, the Administrator shall review and revise, as appropriate,
procedures regarding the documentation of the combination of air
traffic control position responsibilities, including each occurrence in
which any air traffic control position is combined with any other
position, including a local control position, operations supervisor, or
controller-in-charge.
(b) Requirements.--In reviewing and revising the procedures described
in subsection (a), the Administrator shall--
(1) evaluate procedures and guidance regarding the
combination of controller position responsibilities described
in subsection (a) that are in effect prior to the date of
enactment of this Act;
(2) examine the feasibility of digitizing, or providing an
electronic means of, the documentation described in subsection
(a);
(3) require the operations supervisor to periodically review
documentation of occurrences of combined control position
responsibilities described in subsection (a) and report on
deviations from the standard operating procedures to the
facility air traffic manager;
(4) consider air traffic facility type and staffing level;
and
(5) consult with representatives of--
(A) the exclusive bargaining representative of air
traffic controllers certified under section 7111 of
title 5, United States Code;
(B) organizations representing air traffic control
managers and operational supervisors; and
(C) aviation safety experts with specific knowledge
in information technology.
(c) Briefing to Congress.--Not later than 1 year after the completion
of the review required under subsection (a), the Administrator shall
brief the appropriate committees of Congress on implementation of this
section.
(d) Rule of Construction.--Nothing in this section may be construed
to interfere with any agreement between a governmental agency and the
exclusive bargaining representative of air traffic controllers
certified under section 7111 of title 5, United States Code or section
7106(a) of title 5, United States Code.
(e) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Controller-in-charge.--The term ``controller-in-charge''
means an air traffic control specialist performing duties of a
shift supervisor in accordance with--
(A) FAA Order JO 7210.3EE, titled ``Facility
Operation and Administration'', issued on February 20,
2025; and
(B) FAA Order JO 7110.65BB, titled ``Air Traffic
Control'', issued on February 20, 2025.
(2) Operations supervisor.--The term ``operations
supervisor'' means managerial personnel responsible for the
direct supervision of air traffic control operational
personnel.
SEC. 126. REVIEW OF MILES-IN-TRAIL PROCEDURES OR AGREEMENTS.
(a) In General.--Not later than 60 days after the date of enactment
of this Act, the Administrator shall complete a review of the miles-in-
trail standards and procedures to determine if such standards provide
for a separation of traffic that is appropriate for operational safety.
(b) Considerations.--In conducting the review under subsection (a),
the Administrator may consider--
(1) the accuracy of the criteria used to determine the miles-
in-trail procedures for air traffic control facilities;
(2) whether additional criteria should be incorporated to
more appropriately reflect the traffic volume and operational
complexity of air traffic control facilities; and
(3) the findings and recommendations of the National
Transportation Safety Board.
(c) Standards Update.--Upon completion of the review conducted under
subsection (a), the Administrator shall update the miles-in-trail
standards and procedures to ensure such standards and procedures are
appropriate for operational safety.
(d) Review of Certain Facilities.--Not later than 90 days after the
completion of the review under subsection (a), the Administrator shall
initiate a review of the miles-in-trail procedures or agreements at all
air traffic control facilities located within Class B or Class C
airspace to ensure such procedures or agreements provide for a
separation of traffic that is appropriate for operational safety.
(e) Consultation.--In carrying out the review under subsection (d),
the Administrator shall consult with, at minimum--
(1) the exclusive bargaining representatives of the air
traffic controllers certified under section 7111 of title 5,
United States Code;
(2) organizations representing air traffic control managers
and operations supervisors;
(3) sponsors and operators of airports with air traffic
control facilities described in subsection (d);
(4) organizations representing the certified collective
bargaining representatives of pilots operating under part 121
of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations; and
(5) air carriers, business aviation, and general aviation
operators with operations at airports with air traffic control
facilities described in subsection (d).
(f) Report.--Not later than 18 months after the date of enactment of
this Act, the Administrator shall submit to the appropriate committees
of Congress a report that includes--
(1) a list of air traffic control facilities identified under
subsection (d) as having miles-in-trail procedures or
agreements that did not provide for a separation of aircraft
traffic appropriate for operational safety; and
(2) steps that the Administrator has taken, or plans to take,
to modify the miles-in-trail procedures or agreements at each
facility listed under paragraph (1) to ensure such procedures
or agreements provide for a separation of traffic that is
appropriate for operational safety.
SEC. 127. CLOSURE OF HELICOPTER ROUTE 4.
(a) In General.--Operations on Helicopter Route 4, as such Route
existed on January 29, 2025, on the segment located between Hains Point
and the Woodrow Wilson Memorial Bridge in the District of Columbia
shall be prohibited.
(b) Segment Elimination.--The segment of Helicopter Route 4 described
in subsection (a) shall remain eliminated from helicopter charts.
TITLE II--[PLACEHOLDER]
Amend the title so as to read:
A bill to require certain aircraft to be equipped and
operating with collision prevention technology, to improve
helicopter route safety and separation around airports, to
update air traffic control processes and procedures, to address
national airspace system safety in Department of Defense
activities, and for other purposes.
Purpose of Legislation
The purpose of H.R. 7613, as amended, is to require certain
aircraft to be equipped and operating with collision prevention
technology, to improve helicopter route safety and separation
around airports, to update air traffic control processes and
procedures, to address national airspace system safety in
Department of Defense activities, and for other purposes.
Background and Need for Legislation
On January 29, 2025, American Airlines Flight 5342 departed
from Dwight D. Eisenhower National Airport (ICT) in Wichita,
Kansas to Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport (DCA). Air
traffic controllers at DCA instructed American Airlines Flight
5342 to land on runway 33. While on final approach, an Army UH-
60 ``Black Hawk'' helicopter collided with American Airlines
Flight 5342 resulting in both aircraft impacting the Potomac
River. The two pilots, two flight attendants, the 60 passengers
onboard the airplane, and three crew members on the
helicopter--67 people--tragically died. This mid-air collision
was the deadliest aviation accident in the United States since
2001. Immediately following the collision, Federal authorities,
alongside state and local first responders from Maryland,
Virginia, and Washington, D.C., launched an aggressive search
and rescue mission on the Potomac River. Furthermore, the
National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) launched an
immediate investigation into the collision to determine the
probable cause, contributing factors and findings, and issue
recommendations to the appropriate Federal agencies.
On March 7, 2025, the NTSB issued an urgent recommendation
report containing two urgent recommendations on mitigating the
risk of mid-air collisions at DCA.\1\ The NTSB's urgent safety
recommendations cautioned the Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA) to prohibit operations on helicopter Route 4 between
Hains Point and the Wilson Bridge while Runways 15/33 were
being used at DCA.\2\ The NTSB successfully closed this urgent
recommendation, determining the FAA's response ``exceeded
recommendation action'' on May 2, 2025.\3\ Additionally, the
NTSB cautioned the FAA to designate an alternative helicopter
route that could be used to facilitate travel between Hains
Point and the Wilson Bridge when that segment of helicopter
Route 4 was closed.\4\ To date, the NTSB classifies this urgent
safety recommendation as ``open-acceptable response.''\5\
Following the NTSB's urgent safety recommendations, the FAA
took immediate action to improve safety around DCA, including
by: (1) permanently restricting non-essential helicopter
operations around DCA and eliminating helicopter and fixed-wing
mixed traffic, (2) permanently closing helicopter Route 4
between Hains Point and the Wilson Bridge and evaluated
alternative helicopter routes, (3) keeping traffic at specific
distances from fixed-wing aircraft in the event a helicopter
needed to transit through the airspace on an urgent mission
(e.g., lifesaving medical evacuations, priority law enforcement
missions, or Presidential transport), (4) prohibiting the
simultaneous use of Runways 15/33 and 4/22 when helicopters are
conducting those urgent missions around DCA airspace, and (5)
limiting the use of visual separation to certain Coast Guard,
Marine Corps, and Park Police helicopter operations outside of
the restricted airspace.\6\ Additionally, the FAA conducted a
deeper analysis of other airports in the National Airspace
System (NAS) with high volumes of mixed traffic operations,
utilizing machine learning and language modeling.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Nat'l transp. safety board, deconflict airplane and helicopter
traffic in the vicinity of Ronald Reagan Washington national airport
(2025), available at https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/
AccidentReports/Reports/AIR2501.pdf. [hereinafter Urgent Safety
Recommendations].
\2\Id.
\3\nat'l transp. safety board, Safety Recommendation A-25-001 (last
updated May 2, 2025), available at https://data.ntsb.gov/carol-main-
public/sr-details/A-25-001.
\4\Urgent Safety Recommendations, supra note 1.
\5\nat'l transp. safety board, Safety Recommendation A-25-002 (last
updated March 11, 2025), available at https://data.ntsb.gov/carol-main-
public/sr-details/A-25-002.
\6\Press Release, FAA, FAA Statement on NTSB Recommendations for
DCA (March 14, 2025), available at https://www.faa.gov/newsroom/faa-
statement-ntsb-recommendations-dca.
\7\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
During the NTSB's Board meeting on January 27, 2026, the
Board adopted a final report, which was subsequently published
on February 17, 2026, that contained the probable cause of the
collision, findings, and 50 new safety recommendations.\8\ Of
the 50 safety recommendations: 33 recommendations were directed
to the FAA, eight recommendations were directed to the United
States Army, five recommendations were directed to the
Department of Defense's (DoD's) Policy Board on Federal
Aviation, two recommendations were directed to the Department
of Transportation (DOT), one recommendation was directed to the
DOT Office of Inspector General, and one recommendation was
directed to the Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics
(RTCA) Program Management Committee.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\nat'l transp. safety board, midair collision over the Potomac
river PSA airlines flight 5342, Mitsubishi heavy industries (mhi) rj
aviation cl-600-2C10 (crj700), and u.s. army priority air transport
flight 25, sikorsky uh-60l (2026), available at https://www.ntsb.gov/
investigations/AccidentReports/Reports/AIR2602.pdf. [hereinafter Final
Report].
\9\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the final report, the NTSB determined that the probable
cause of the collision was primarily the FAA's placement of
helicopter Route 4 near the runway approach path, the FAA's
failure to regularly review helicopter routes and available
data, and the overreliance on visual separation. Causal factors
were determined to be ineffective application of the see-and-
avoid concept within visual separation procedures, air traffic
controllers' loss of situational awareness and high workload,
lack of alerts to both flight crews, and the helicopter crew's
lack of awareness of their altimeter tolerances.\10\
Additionally, the Board identified contributing factors which
included: (1) the limitations of traffic awareness, collision
avoidance technology, and alerts, (2) an unsustainable aircraft
arrival rate at DCA, (3) the Army's inadequate safety
management system (SMS), (4) the FAA's failure to fully
integrate SMS, and (5) the absence of effective data sharing
among the FAA, aircraft operators, and others.\11\ The
culmination of the NTSB's year-long investigation revealed the
need for systemic reform across several areas of aviation
safety, including: enhancing situational awareness for flight
crews and air traffic controllers, improving helicopter route
safety and separation around airports, improving air traffic
control processes and procedures, addressing the shortcomings
in the FAA's and Army's safety culture and data sharing
mechanisms, reducing conflict in and around the airspace of
DCA, and overhauling cooperation between the military and the
FAA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\Id.
\11\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To advance adoption of NTSB's safety recommendations, on
February 20, 2026, the leaders of the House Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure and House Committee on Armed
Services introduced the Airspace Location and Enhanced Risk
Transparency Act of 2026 (ALERT Act).\12\ The ALERT Act, as
amended, is a comprehensive package that addresses all 50
safety recommendations issued by the NTSB in its final
report.\13\ Specifically, the ALERT Act takes important steps
to improve safety throughout the NAS by ensuring civil aircraft
are equipped and operating with technology to enhance flight
crew alerting and controller situational awareness, requiring
updates to helicopter route safety and separation requirements,
requiring updates to air traffic control processes and
procedures to promote safety, investigating the shortcomings in
safety culture and data sharing at the FAA and the DoD,
strengthening safety standards for military aircraft and
enhancing cooperation between the FAA and the DoD, enhancing
the requirements and guidance for collision avoidance
technology for military aircraft operating in the NAS, and
requiring flight data sharing between the FAA and the DoD.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ALERT Act, H.R. 7613, 119th Cong. (2026). [hereinafter ALERT].
\13\NTSB Safety Analysis, Nat'l Transp. Safety Board, Analysis of
H.R. 7613 ALERT Act, Titles I & II: A Side-by-Side Review of Amendment
in the Nature of a Substitute (ANS) to H.R. 7613 (ALERT Act), as posted
Mar. 24, 2026, compared with NTSB Safety Recommendations from NTSB
Aviation Investigation Report AIR-26-02 on the DCA Midair Collision
(Mar. 24, 2026) (on file with Comm.).
\14\ALERT, supra note 12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On March 26, 2026, the Transportation and Infrastructure
and Armed Services Committees of the House of Representatives
marked up their respective titles of the ALERT Act. Title I of
the ALERT Act pertains to civil aviation matters, and is within
the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee's jurisdiction,
while Title II pertains to DoD matters, which is under the
Armed Services Committee's jurisdiction. Both Committees
ordered their respective Titles to be reported to the House
with a favorable recommendation, with amendment, by unanimous
recorded vote. The House Armed Services Committee will file a
separate Bill Report for Title II of the ALERT Act. This Bill
Report covers Title I.
Hearings
For the purposes of rule XIII, clause 3(c)(6)(A) of the
119th Congress--
The following hearing was used to develop or consider H.R.
7613: On Tuesday, December 16, 2025, the Subcommittee on
Aviation held a hearing entitled, ``The State of American
Aviation.'' At the hearing, Members received testimony from the
Honorable Bryan Bedford, Administrator, FAA. The hearing
examined the general state of aviation in America and Members
had the opportunity to discuss recent regulatory actions taken
by the FAA, including changes to the Washington, DC airspace in
response to the January 29, 2025 crash, air traffic control
modernization, air traffic controller hiring and training, the
continued implementation of the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024
(P.L. 118-63), and other current issues in aviation.
Legislative History and Consideration
H.R. 7613, the ``ALERT Act,'' was introduced in the United
States House of Representatives on February 20, 2026, by
Representative Sam Graves (R-MO), with Representatives Rick
Larsen (D-WA), Mike Rogers (R-AL), and Adam Smith (D-WA) along
with 44 other members as original cosponsors and was referred
to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and the
Committee on Armed Services. Within the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure, H.R. 7613 was referred to
the Subcommittee on Aviation. The Subcommittee on Aviation was
discharged from further consideration of H.R. 7613 on March 26,
2026.
The Committee considered H.R. 7613 on March 26, 2026, and
ordered the measure to be reported to the House with a
favorable recommendation, with amendment, by a recorded vote of
62 yeas to 0 nays.
The following amendments were offered:
An Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to H.R. 7613,
offered by Chairman Graves of Missouri; was AGREED TO, as
amended, by voice vote.
A Manager's Amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a
Substitute to H.R. 7613, offered by Chairman Graves of Missouri
(Graves MGRS 01): Page 6, line 6, strike ``March 11'' and
insert ``March 7''. Page 20, line 16, insert ``a second
independent source of target aircraft data, such as'' after
``and''. Page 27, line 21, strike ``civil'' and insert ``non-
military''. Page 28, line 4, strike ``civil'' and insert ``non-
military''. Page 28, after line 17, insert the following (and
redesignate the subsequent paragraphs accordingly): ``(2) Air
carriers operating under part 121 of title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations.'' Page 34, line 6, strike ``civil'' and insert
``non-military''. Page 47, strike lines 6 through 10 and insert
the following: ``(3) the frequency of the recurrent and
refresher training described in subsection (a), including--(A)
whether such frequency should be increased for air traffic
controllers in facilities managing high-complexity or high-
volume airspace; and (B) the need for advance training and
guidance ahead of any changes to FAA visual separation
policies;''. Page 50, line 17, strike ``and''. Page 50, after
line 17, insert the following (and redesignate the subsequent
paragraph accordingly): ``(5) organizations representing
operators of Federal contract towers pursuant to section 47124
of title 49, United States Code; and''. Page 53, after line 21,
insert the following (and redesignate the subsequent paragraphs
accordingly): ``(2) Air carriers operating under parts 91,
including subpart K, and 135 of title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations, authorized to conduct non-scheduled operations at
Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport.'' Page 90, line 13,
insert ``the Air Traffic Safety Action Plan,'' after
``Reporting System,''. Page 90, line 21, insert ``and the
Aviation Safety Management Organization'' after ``Air Traffic
Organization''. Page 91, line 2, insert ``and the Aviation
Safety Management Organization'' after ``Traffic
Organization''. Page 91, line 15, insert ``and the Aviation
Safety Management Organization'' after ``Air Traffic
Organization''. Page 91, line 21, insert ``and the Aviation
Safety Management Organization'' after ``Air Traffic
Organization''. Page 92, line 1, insert ``and the Aviation
Safety Management Organization'' after ``Air Traffic
Organization''. Page 92, line 10, insert ``and the Aviation
Safety Management Organization'' after ``Air Traffic
Organization''. Page 93, line 3, insert ``and the Aviation
Safety Management Organization'' after ``Organization''. Page
93, line 18, insert ``and the Aviation Safety Management
Organization'' after ``Air Traffic Organization''. Page 93,
line 22, insert ``and the Aviation Safety Management
Organization'' after ``Traffic Organization''. Page 94,
beginning on line 16, strike ``regulations and standard
operating''. Page 94, line 24, strike ``regulations'' and
insert ``procedures''. Page 95, line 1, strike ``standard
operating procedures,'' and insert ``procedures and''. Page 95,
line 2, strike ``, and regulations''. Page 95, beginning on
line 12, strike ``submit a rationale for atypical occurrences''
and insert ``report on deviations from the standard operating
procedures''. Page 97, beginning on line 5, strike ``in FAA
Order JO 7210.3EE, titled `Facility Operation and
Administration' (or any successor document)'' and insert ``and
procedures''. Page 97, beginning on line 23, strike ``in FAA
Order JO 7210.3EE, titled `Facility Operation and
Administration' (or any successor document)'' and insert ``and
procedures''. Page 97, line 25, insert ``and procedures'' after
``such standards''. Page 99, after line 15, insert the
following: ``SEC. 127. CLOSURE OF HELICOPTER ROUTE 4. (a) IN
GENERAL.--Operations on Helicopter Route 4, as such Route
existed on January 29, 2025, on the segment located between
Hains Point and the Woodrow Wilson Memorial Bridge in the
District of Columbia shall be prohibited. (b) SEGMENT
ELIMINATION.--The segment of Helicopter Route 4 described in
subsection (a) shall remain eliminated from helicopter charts.;
was AGREED TO by voice vote.
An Amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute
to H.R. 7613, offered by Mr. Carbajal of California (Carbajal
061): Strike section 105 (and redesignate subsequent sections
accordingly). Page 44, line 23, strike ``109'' and insert
``108''. Page 60, line 12, strike ``115'' and insert ``114''.
Page 76, line 4, strike ``120'' and insert ``119''. Page 76,
line 22, strike ``119(d)'' and insert ``118(d)''. Page 86, line
24, strike ``122'' and insert ``121''. Page 89, line 22, strike
``122'' and insert ``121''.; was NOT AGREED TO by a recorded
vote of 27 Yeas and 36 Nays (RC#71).
An Amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute
to H.R. 7613, offered by Ms. Hoyle of Oregon (Hoyle 042): At
the end of title I of the bill, insert the following: SEC. 127.
ENHANCED NOTIFICATION AND ALERTING FOR SLACKLINES. Not later
than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the
Administrator shall implement enhanced notification and
alerting requirements for slacklines and similar temporary
aerial hazards that--(1) exceed existing regulatory notice
requirements; and (2) provides pilots with a warning, similar
to a temporary flight restriction, that is--(A) not limited to
an airport-specific notice (NOTAM); and (B) displayed on pilot-
facing tools for aircraft operating in the vicinity of the
affected airspace.; was WITHDRAWN.
An Amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute
to H.R. 7613, offered by Ms. Friedman of California (Friedman
035): Page 34, strike line 22 through line 3 on page 35 (and
redesignate the subsequent paragraph accordingly).; was NOT
AGREED TO by a recorded vote of 27 Yeas and 36 Nays (RC#72).
An Amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute
to H.R. 7613, offered by Ms. Hoyle of Oregon (Hoyle 043): Page
2, strike lines 3 through 11 and insert the following
paragraphs (and redesignate subsequent paragraphs accordingly):
TITLE I--REQUIREMENTS AS TO COMMERCIAL DRIVERS' LICENSES Add,
at the end of the bill, the following: TITLE II--VERIFICATION
ENHANCEMENT AND RELIABILITY FOR IMMIGRATION FIDELITY SEC. 101.
SAVE PROGRAM MODERNIZATION. (a) GENERAL REQUIREMENT.--The
Secretary of Homeland Security, acting through United States
Citizenship and Immigration Services, shall modernize the SAVE
program to ensure accurate, timely, and reliable verification
response, including by--(1) upgrading query processing
infrastructure to reduce response latency; (2) implementing
automated data reconciliation with source systems; (3)
expanding API access for authorized querying agencies; and (4)
establishing a user feedback mechanism for agencies to report
suspected data errors. (b) TIMELINESS OF UPDATES.--To the
maximum extent practicable and consistent with applicable law,
the Secretary shall ensure that changes to an individual's
immigration status, including grants, extensions, expirations,
revocations, or terminations of lawful status or parole, are
reflected in the SAVE program not later than 24 hours after
such changes are recorded in the originating system. (c)
INTEROPERABILITY AND DATA SHARING.--The Secretary, consistent
with the Privacy Act of 1974, the E Government Act of 2002, the
Computer Matching and Privacy Protection Act of 1988, and other
applicable Federal law, shall--(1) integrate the SAVE program
into relevant Department of Homeland Security systems,
including arrival and departure information systems; (2)
establish or update memoranda of understanding with the Social
Security Administration and other Federal agencies, as
appropriate, to improve verification accuracy using data-
sharing arrangements authorized under applicable Federal law,
including section 6103 of the Internal Revenue Code, the
Computer Matching and Privacy Protection Act of 1988, and
memoranda of understanding in effect as of the date of
enactment of this Act; and (3) encourage voluntary data-sharing
agreements with State vital records agencies for verification
of birth and death information, where legally permissible. (d)
POST-VERIFICATION STATUS CHANGE ALERTS.--The SAVE program shall
notify querying agencies when an individual's immigration
status materially changes after a prior verification, when such
notification is relevant to continued eligibility.
Notifications shall comply with applicable Federal privacy
laws, including the Privacy Act of 1974, and with additional
administrative safeguards established by the Secretary and
include only information necessary for eligibility
determinations. (e) DATA SCOPE LIMITATIONS.--Information used
or displayed through the SAVE program shall be limited to data
necessary for eligibility verification purposes. Nothing in
this Act may be construed to authorize--(1) the expansion of
the SAVE program to include non-immigration criminal history
databases; and (2) the use of the SAVE program for general law
enforcement or surveillance purposes. (f) USE OF AUTOMATED
TOOLS.--The Secretary may use automated or algorithmic tools
within the SAVE program solely for data reconciliation, error
reduction, and identity matching, provided that--(1) no adverse
eligibility determination is made solely on the basis of
automated processing; (2) human review is required for
contested or negative determinations; and (3) the Secretary
implements regular testing for accuracy and bias and submits
summary results annually to Congress. SEC. 102. PROHIBITION ON
USER ACCESS AND FEES. No fee may be charged to a Federal,
State, local, or Tribal government agency for submitting a
verification query through the SAVE program. SEC. 103.
IMPLEMENTATION AND OVERSIGHT. (a) MODERNIZATION PLAN.--Not
later than 180 days after enactment of this Act, the Secretary
shall submit to Congress a SAVE modernization plan that
includes--(1) a description of technological upgrades to the
SAVE program; (2) user training improvements; and (3)
performance metrics related to accuracy and response time,
including error rates and average query completion time
benchmarks. (b) INSPECTOR GENERAL AUDITS.--The Inspector
General of the Department of Homeland Security shall conduct
annual audits of the SAVE program's accuracy, timeliness, and
compliance with this Act, and submit reports to Congress. (c)
CORRECTIVE ACTION.--If the Inspector General identifies
material non-compliance, the Secretary shall submit a
corrective action plan to Congress within 90 days. Continued
non-compliance may be addressed through limitations on the use
of funds for non-SAVE discretionary activities, as determined
by Congress, and may trigger suspension of SAVE queries until
compliance is restored. SEC. 104. DEFINITION. For purposes of
this title, the term ``SAVE program'' means the Systematic
Alien Verification for Entitlements program, established
pursuant to section 121 of the Immigration Reform and Control
Act of 1986. SEC. 105. EFFECTIVE DATE. This title shall take
effect one year after the date of enactment, except that
planning and reporting requirements under section 103 shall
take effect immediately upon enactment. SEC. 106. SEVERABILITY.
If any provision of this title, or the application thereof, is
held invalid, the remainder of this title shall not be
affected.; was WITHDRAWN.
An Amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute
to H.R. 7613, offered by Mr. Figures of Alabama (Figures 052):
Page 34, line 24, insert ``(except a State or local government
for the assessment of taxes and preventing tax evasion)'' after
``governmental agency''. Page 35, line 14, strike ``State,
local,''. Page 35, line 15, insert ``, and no State or local
official may, except for the assessment of taxes or preventing
tax evasion,''. After ``may''.; was NOT AGREED TO by a recorded
vote of 25 Yeas and 38 Nays (RC#73).
Committee Votes
Clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives requires each committee report to include the
total number of votes cast for and against on each record vote
on a motion to report and on any amendment offered to the
measure or matter, and the names of those members voting for
and against.
Vote: 74.
Measure: H.R. 7613.
On: final passage, as amended.
Yea 62; Nay 0.
Present 0; Not Voting 4.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member Vote Member Vote
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Graves of MO................................ Y Mr. Larsen of WA.................. Y
Mr. Crawford.................................... Y Ms. Norton........................ Y
Mr. Webster of FL............................... Y Mr. Nadler........................ ............
Mr. Massie...................................... Y Mr. Garamendi..................... Y
Mr. Perry....................................... ............ Mr. Johnson of GA................. Y
Mr. Babin....................................... Y Mr. Carson........................ Y
Mr. Rouzer...................................... Y Ms. Titus......................... Y
Mr. Bost........................................ Y Mr. Huffman....................... Y
Mr. Westerman................................... Y Ms. Brownley...................... Y
Mr. Mast........................................ Y Ms. Wilson of FL.................. Y
Mr. Stauber..................................... ............ Mr. DeSaulnier.................... Y
Mr. Burchett.................................... Y Mr. Carbajal...................... Y
Mr. Johnson of SD............................... Y Mr. Stanton....................... Y
Mr. Van Drew.................................... Y Ms. Davids of KS.................. Y
Mr. Nehls....................................... Y Mr. Garcia of IL.................. Y
Mr. Mann........................................ Y Mr. Pappas........................ Y
Mr. Owens....................................... Y Mr. Moulton....................... ............
Mr. Burlison.................................... Y Ms. Strickland.................... Y
Mr. Collins..................................... Y Mr. Ryan.......................... Y
Mr. Ezell....................................... Y Ms. Hoyle of OR................... Y
Mr. Yakym....................................... Y Mrs. Sykes........................ Y
Mr. Fong........................................ Y Ms. Scholten...................... Y
Mr. Wied........................................ Y Mrs. Foushee...................... Y
Mr. Barrett..................................... Y Mr. Deluzio....................... Y
Mr. Begich...................................... Y Mr. Garcia of CA.................. Y
Mr. Bresnahan................................... Y Ms. Pou........................... Y
Mr. Hurd........................................ Y Ms. McDonald Rivet................ Y
Mr. Shreve...................................... Y Ms. Friedman...................... Y
Mr. McDowell.................................... Y Ms. Gillen........................ Y
Mr. Taylor...................................... Y Mr. Figures....................... Y
Mr. Knott....................................... Y Mr. Frost......................... Y
Ms. King-Hinds.................................. Y
Mr. Kennedy..................................... Y
Mr. Onder....................................... Y
Mr. Patronis.................................... Y
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vote: 71.
Measure: H.R. 7613.
On: No. 061, amdt to ANS offered by Mr. Carbajal.
Yea 27; Nay 36.
Present 0; Not Voting 3.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member Vote Member Vote
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Graves of MO................................ N Mr. Larsen of WA.................. N
Mr. Crawford.................................... N Ms. Norton........................ Y
Mr. Webster of FL............................... N Mr. Nadler........................ ............
Mr. Massie...................................... N Mr. Garamendi..................... Y
Mr. Perry....................................... N Mr. Johnson of GA................. Y
Mr. Babin....................................... N Mr. Carson........................ N
Mr. Rouzer...................................... N Ms. Titus......................... Y
Mr. Bost........................................ N Mr. Huffman....................... Y
Mr. Westerman................................... N Ms. Brownley...................... Y
Mr. Mast........................................ N Ms. Wilson of FL.................. Y
Mr. Stauber..................................... ............ Mr. DeSaulnier.................... Y
Mr. Burchett.................................... N Mr. Carbajal...................... Y
Mr. Johnson of SD............................... N Mr. Stanton....................... Y
Mr. Van Drew.................................... N Ms. Davids of KS.................. Y
Mr. Nehls....................................... N Mr. Garcia of IL.................. Y
Mr. Mann........................................ N Mr. Pappas........................ Y
Mr. Owens....................................... N Mr. Moulton....................... ............
Mr. Burlison.................................... N Ms. Strickland.................... Y
Mr. Collins..................................... N Mr. Ryan.......................... Y
Mr. Ezell....................................... N Ms. Hoyle of OR................... Y
Mr. Yakym....................................... N Mrs. Sykes........................ Y
Mr. Fong........................................ N Ms. Scholten...................... Y
Mr. Wied........................................ N Mrs. Foushee...................... Y
Mr. Barrett..................................... N Mr. Deluzio....................... Y
Mr. Begich...................................... N Mr. Garcia of CA.................. Y
Mr. Bresnahan................................... N Ms. Pou........................... Y
Mr. Hurd........................................ N Ms. McDonald Rivet................ Y
Mr. Shreve...................................... N Ms. Friedman...................... Y
Mr. McDowell.................................... N Ms. Gillen........................ Y
Mr. Taylor...................................... N Mr. Figures....................... Y
Mr. Knott....................................... N Mr. Frost......................... Y
Ms. King-Hinds.................................. N
Mr. Kennedy..................................... N
Mr. Onder....................................... N
Mr. Patronis.................................... N
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vote: 72.
Measure: H.R. 7613.
On: No. 035, an amdt to the ANS offered by Mr. Friedman.
Yea 27; Nay 36.
Present 0; Not Voting 3.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member Vote Member Vote
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Graves of MO................................ N Mr. Larsen of WA.................. N
Mr. Crawford.................................... N Ms. Norton ....................... Y
Mr. Webster of FL............................... N Mr. Nadler........................ ............
Mr. Massie...................................... N Mr. Garamendi..................... Y
Mr. Perry....................................... N Mr. Johnson of GA................. Y
Mr. Babin....................................... N Mr. Carson........................ N
Mr. Rouzer...................................... N Ms. Titus......................... Y
Mr. Bost........................................ N Mr. Huffman....................... Y
Mr. Westerman................................... N Ms. Brownley...................... Y
Mr. Mast........................................ N Ms. Wilson of FL.................. Y
Mr. Stauber..................................... ............ Mr. DeSaulnier.................... Y
Mr. Burchett.................................... N Mr. Carbajal...................... Y
Mr. Johnson of SD............................... N Mr. Stanton....................... Y
Mr. Van Drew.................................... N Ms. Davids of KS.................. Y
Mr. Nehls....................................... N Mr. Garcia of IL.................. Y
Mr. Mann........................................ N Mr. Pappas........................ Y
Mr. Owens....................................... N Mr. Moulton....................... ............
Mr. Burlison.................................... N Ms. Strickland.................... Y
Mr. Collins..................................... N Mr. Ryan.......................... Y
Mr. Ezell....................................... N Ms. Hoyle of OR................... Y
Mr. Yakym....................................... N Mrs. Sykes........................ Y
Mr. Fong........................................ N Ms. Scholten...................... Y
Mr. Wied........................................ N Mrs. Foushee...................... Y
Mr. Barrett..................................... N Mr. Deluzio....................... Y
Mr. Begich...................................... N Mr. Garcia of CA.................. Y
Mr. Bresnahan................................... N Ms. Pou........................... Y
Mr. Hurd........................................ N Ms. McDonald Rivet................ Y
Mr. Shreve...................................... N Ms. Friedman...................... Y
Mr. McDowell.................................... N Ms. Gillen........................ Y
Mr. Taylor...................................... N Mr. Figures....................... Y
Mr. Knott....................................... N Mr. Frost......................... Y
Ms. King-Hinds.................................. N
Mr. Kennedy..................................... N
Mr. Onder....................................... N
Mr. Patronis.................................... N
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vote: 73.
Measure: H.R. 7613.
On: 052, an amdt to the ANS offered by Mr. Figures.
Yea 25; Nay 38.
Present 0; Not Voting 3.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member Vote Member Vote
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Graves of MO................................ N Mr. Larsen of WA.................. N
Mr. Crawford.................................... N Ms. Norton........................ Y
Mr. Webster of FL............................... N Mr. Nadler........................ ............
Mr. Massie...................................... N Mr. Garamendi..................... Y
Mr. Perry....................................... N Mr. Johnson of GA................. Y
Mr. Babin....................................... N Mr. Carson........................ N
Mr. Rouzer...................................... N Ms. Titus......................... Y
Mr. Bost........................................ N Mr. Huffman....................... Y
Mr. Westerman................................... N Ms. Brownley...................... Y
Mr. Mast........................................ N Ms. Wilson of FL.................. Y
Mr. Stauber..................................... ............ Mr. DeSaulnier.................... N
Mr. Burchett.................................... N Mr. Carbajal...................... Y
Mr. Johnson of SD............................... N Mr. Stanton....................... Y
Mr. Van Drew.................................... N Ms. Davids of KS.................. Y
Mr. Nehls....................................... N Mr. Garcia of IL.................. Y
Mr. Mann........................................ N Mr. Pappas........................ N
Mr. Owens....................................... N Mr. Moulton....................... ............
Mr. Burlison.................................... N Ms. Strickland.................... Y
Mr. Collins..................................... N Mr. Ryan.......................... Y
Mr. Ezell....................................... N Ms. Hoyle of OR................... Y
Mr. Yakym....................................... N Mrs. Sykes........................ Y
Mr. Fong........................................ N Ms. Scholten...................... Y
Mr. Wied........................................ N Mrs. Foushee...................... Y
Mr. Barrett..................................... N Mr. Deluzio....................... Y
Mr. Begich...................................... N Mr. Garcia of CA.................. Y
Mr. Bresnahan................................... N Ms. Pou........................... Y
Mr. Hurd........................................ N Ms. McDonald Rivet................ Y
Mr. Shreve...................................... N Ms. Friedman...................... Y
Mr. McDowell.................................... N Ms. Gillen........................ Y
Mr. Taylor...................................... N Mr. Figures....................... Y
Mr. Knott....................................... N Mr. Frost......................... Y
Ms. King-Hinds.................................. N
Mr. Kennedy..................................... N
Mr. Onder....................................... N
Mr. Patronis.................................... N
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Committee Oversight Findings and Recommendations
With respect to the requirements of clause 3(c)(1) of rule
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the
Committee's oversight findings and recommendations are
reflected in this report.
New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures
With respect to the requirements of clause 3(c)(2) of rule
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and section
308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 and with respect
to requirements of clause (3)(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules
of the House of Representatives and section 402 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee has requested
but not received a cost estimate for this bill from the
Director of Congressional Budget Office. The Committee has
requested but not received from the Director of the
Congressional Budget Office a statement as to whether this bill
contains any new budget authority, spending authority, credit
authority, or an increase or decrease in revenues or tax
expenditures. The Chairman of the Committee shall cause such
estimate and statement to be printed in the Congressional
Record upon its receipt by the Committee.
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate
With respect to the requirement of clause 3(c)(3) of rule
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, a cost
estimate provided by the Congressional Budget Office pursuant
to section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 was not
made available to the Committee in time for the filing of this
report. The Chairman of the Committee shall cause such estimate
to be printed in the Congressional Record upon its receipt by
the Committee.
Performance Goals and Objectives
With respect to the requirement of clause 3(c)(4) of rule
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the
performance goal and objective of this legislation is to
require certain aircraft to be equipped with collision
prevention technology, to improve helicopter route safety and
separation around airports, to update air traffic control
processes and procedures, to address national airspace system
safety in Department of Defense activities, and for other
purposes.
Duplication of Federal Programs
Pursuant to clause 3(c)(5) of rule XIII of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, the Committee finds that no provision
of H.R. 7613 establishes or reauthorizes a program of the
Federal government known to be duplicative of another Federal
program, a program that was included in any report from the
Government Accountability Office to Congress pursuant to
section 21 of Public Law 111-139, or a program related to a
program identified in the most recent Catalog of Federal
Domestic Assistance.
Congressional Earmarks, Limited Tax Benefits, and Limited Tariff
Benefits
In compliance with clause 9 of rule XXI of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, this bill, as reported, contains no
congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff
benefits as defined in clause 9(e), 9(f), or 9(g) of the rule
XXI.
Federal Mandates Statement
The Committee adopts as its own the estimate of Federal
mandates prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget
Office pursuant to section 423 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act (Public Law 104-4).
Preemption Clarification
Section 423 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974
requires the report of any Committee on a bill or joint
resolution to include a statement on the extent to which the
bill or joint resolution is intended to preempt state, local,
or tribal law. The Committee finds that H.R. 7613 may preempt
state, local, or tribal laws. Consistent with section 105 of
this bill, which restricts certain use of ADS-B data, state
legislatures are increasingly considering proposals to prohibit
public and private entities from utilizing ADS-B data for
calculating or collecting fees from aircraft owners or
operators. Montana was the first state to enact such a law on
May 13, 2025.\15\ However, absent Federal action, other states
or localities could consider authorizing or mandating the use
of ADS-B data for revenue generating purposes. This bill would
establish a clear, nationwide standard, preempting any future
state, local, or tribal law, ensuring that ADS-B is solely used
for its intended safety purpose.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\Act of May 13, 2025, ch. 494, 2025 Mont. Laws (H.B. 571).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Advisory Committee Statement
No advisory committees within the definition of Section
5(b) of the appendix to Title 5, United States Code, are
created by this legislation.
Applicability to Legislative Branch
The Committee finds that the legislation does not relate to
the terms and conditions of employment or access to public
services or accommodations within the meaning of section
102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act (Public Law
104-1).
Section-by-Section Analysis of the Legislation
Section 1. Short title; Table of Contents
This section states that the bill may be cited as the
Airspace Location and Enhanced Risk Transparency of 2026 or
ALERT Act and provides for the table of contents.
Section 2. Definitions
This section provides global definitions for the terms
``Administrator,'' ``Appropriate Committees of Congress,''
``FAA,'' and ``Secretary,'' ``ADS-B In,'' and ``Collision
Prevention Technology.'' These definitions apply throughout the
legislation.
Section 3. Findings; Sense of Congress
This section states that it is the Sense of Congress that:
(1) Congress mourns the lives of the 67 souls taken in the
midair collision near Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport
on January 29, 2025, and extends its deepest condolences to the
families, friends, and communities of the who perished; (2)
Congress honors the lives of the four crew members of American
Airlines Flight 5342; (3) Congress honors the lives of the
three United States Army soldiers aboard Priority Air Transport
25 (PAT25); (4) Congress honors the passengers of Flight 5342;
(5) Congress commends the first responders who worked with
valor and dedication; (6) Congress affirms its support for the
NTSB and in this act responds to all 50 recommendations; (7)
Congress commits to conducting rigorous oversight to ensure
accountability; and (8) Congress pledges that the lives lost on
January 29, 2025, will not be forgotten; their memory will be
honored by this Nation's commitment to aviation safety.
TITLE I--CIVIL AVIATION MATTERS
Section 101. Airborne Collision Avoidance System Xa inhibit altitude
This section requires the Administrator to complete, within
180 days, an evaluation of the hazards and safety benefits of
changing the traffic advisory (TA) and resolution advisory (RA)
inhibit altitudes in the Airborne Collision Avoidance System Xa
(ACAS Xa) to improve alerting throughout the flight maneuvering
envelope of an aircraft. In conducting the evaluation, the
Administrator shall consider (1) public safety benefits; (2)
benefits and risk to the ability of pilots and air traffic
controllers to ensure operational safety; (3) false,
misleading, or potential overlapping alerts or resolution
advisories; (4) advances in software logic to minimize nuisance
and false alerts; (5) air traffic control procedures and the
impacts to pilots and air traffic controllers during critical
phases of flight, (6) pilot and air traffic controller training
requirements; (7) human factors; and (8) research and
simulations of reduced RA inhibit altitudes conducted by the
NTSB.
Section 102. Airborne Collision Avoidance System upgrades
This section requires the Administrator to issue a final
rule to require selected aircraft that are currently required
to be equipped with traffic alert and collision avoidance
systems (TCAS) under part 121.356, part 135.180, and part
91.1045 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, respectively,
to be upgraded to and operating with Airborne Collision
Avoidance System Xa (ACAS Xa). Moreover, the system must be
integrated and use both ADS-B In and transponder
interrogations. Additionally, ACAS Xa must be configured to
provide visual and audible alerting to the pilot and flight
crew.
To fulfill this requirement, the Administrator must
establish an aviation rulemaking committee (ARC) within 45 days
of enactment to review and develop findings and
recommendations. The ARC shall consider: (1) the anticipated
certification timeline of ACAS Xa given the technical
complexity and requisite procedures for approval; (2) the
feasibility of using the Line Replaceable Units of existing
collision avoidance systems in such aircraft; (3) the
feasibility of using existing antennas of existing collision
avoidance systems in such aircraft; (4) the commercial
availability of all necessary components associated with
integrated ACAS Xa; (5) actions the Administrator can take to
prioritize the certification and installment of integrated ACAS
Xa; (6) related changes that may be required for the operating
rules and training necessary for air traffic control, pilots
and others; and (7) harmonization of global standards
associated with collision avoidance systems. The ARC is
directed to complete its work within a year of its formation
and submit to the Administrator and the appropriate committees
of Congress a report on the findings and recommendations
developed by the ARC.
To ensure continued movement, the Administrator shall,
within 18 months of receiving the report or 32 months after the
date of enactment, whichever is sooner, issue a notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to prohibit persons from operating
selected aircraft unless such aircraft are equipped and
operating with ACAS Xa in accordance with the above
requirements. The NPRM shall include appropriate guidance for
the certification of ACAS Xa and deadlines, not to exceed
December 31, 2031, for newly manufactured and existing selected
aircraft to be equipped and operating with ACAS Xa. While the
Administrator may extend the deadlines specified for no longer
than two years, if the Administrator exercises such extension
authority, then they must provide Congress a report with the
justification for the extension and assurances that safety will
not be compromised by the extension. Separately but
concurrently, if the new minimum operating performance
standards require an upgrade of software, hardware, or
additional training, the Administrator must establish a
separate deadline for selected aircraft to be upgraded that
shall not exceed December 31, 2033. Furthermore, not later than
30 days after issuing a final rule, the Administrator shall
work with the appropriate standards setting organization to
update the minimum operational standards for ACAS Xa to: (1)
safely decrease the inhibit altitude if the evaluation
conducted pursuant to section 101 determines it can be done
safely; (2) update traffic advisory aural alert standards to
include clock position, relative altitude, range and vertical
tendency; and (3) integrate directional traffic symbols into
visual displays.
Lastly, the Administrator shall provide technical
assistance facilitating equipage across the entire fleet of
affected aircraft to provide support for affected aircraft
operators in complying with the requirements of this section.
In the amended text, the interim equipage requirement for
commercial passenger aircraft subject to ACAS Xa under section
102 has been removed. To avoid unnecessary delays, these
aircraft must proceed directly to next-generation, ADS-B In-
enabled collision avoidance technology--ACAS Xa. This mandate
is distinct from the broader collision prevention technology
requirement in section 104.
Section 103. Airborne Collision Avoidance Systems for rotorcraft
This section requires the Administrator to issue a final
rule to require selected rotorcraft and powered-lift aircraft
(non-military rotorcraft and powered-lift aircraft operating in
Class B airspace) be equipped and operating with the collision
avoidance system known as ``Airborne Collision Avoidance System
Xr'' (ACAS Xr) that uses both ADS-B In and transponder
interrogations.
To do so, the Administrator is required, by December 31,
2026, to take necessary action to work with the appropriate
standards setting organization to finalize and publish minimum
operational performance standards for ACAS Xr.
Then, not later than 30 days after the minimum operational
performance standards are published, or not later than January
31, 2027, whichever occurs earlier, the Administrator is
required to establish an ARC to review the minimum operational
performance standards and develop findings and recommendations
to require selected rotorcraft and powered-lift aircraft (non-
military rotorcraft and powered-lift operating in Class B
airspace) be equipped and operating with ACAS-Xr. As part of
its work, the ARC is directed to consider: (1) any
modifications that may need to be made to the minimum
operational performance standards to carry out the requirements
of this section; (2) an anticipated certification timeline for
ACAS Xr; (3) a projected deadline for equipping newly
manufactured selected rotorcraft and selected powered-lift
aircraft with ACAS Xr, that considers the safety benefits,
anticipated timeline for FAA to approve installations, and
commercial availability of components; (4) a projected deadline
to retrofit selected rotorcraft and selected powered-lift
aircraft with ACAS Xr; (5) actions that the Administrator can
take to prioritize the certification and installation of ACAS
Xr; (6) the interaction of ACAS Xr with existing collision
prevention technologies; (7) the efficacy of ACAS Xr in low-
altitude and high-density airspace; (8) any available data
assessing the effectiveness of ACAS Xr in reducing midair
collision risk; (9) related training for air traffic
controllers, pilots, and others; and (10) NTSB report AIR-26-
02. Furthermore, the ARC is directed to complete its work
within a year of its formation and submit to the Administrator
and the appropriate committees of Congress a report on the
findings and recommendations developed by the ARC.
To ensure continued movement, within 18 months of receiving
the report, or 24 months after enactment, whichever is sooner,
the Administrator shall: (1) issue an NPRM to prohibit persons
from operating selected rotorcraft and selected powered-lift
aircraft, unless such rotorcraft or powered-lift aircraft are
equipped and operating with ACAS Xr; and (2) take the necessary
actions with the appropriate standards setting organization to
modify the minimum operational performance standards for ACAS
Xr to update traffic advisory aural alert standards (including
clock position, relative altitude, range, and vertical
tendency) and integrate directional traffic symbols into visual
displays. The NPRM shall include (1) appropriate guidance for
the certification of ACAS Xr systems; (2) defined standards for
the modification of ACAS Xr to support the modifications listed
above; (3) a deadline for any newly manufactured selected
rotorcraft and powered-lift aircraft to be equipped with ACAS
Xr; (4) a deadline for selected rotorcraft and powered-lift
aircraft to be retrofitted with ACAS Xr; and (5) a deadline for
selected rotorcraft and selected powered-lift aircraft to be
equipped with collision prevention technology pursuant to
section 104, not to exceed December 31, 2031.
Finally, this section directs the Administrator to issue a
final rule carrying out the requirements of this section no
later than 18 months after the issuance of the NPRM.
In executing these requirements, the Administrator shall
provide technical assistance to facilitate equipage across the
entire fleet of selected rotorcraft and selected powered-lift
aircraft and to provide support for such aircraft operators in
complying with the requirements of this section.
Section 104. Collision prevention systems
This section requires the Administrator issue a final rule
within two years of enactment, with an effective date not later
than December 31, 2031, to require covered aircraft be equipped
and operating with ``collision prevention technology.'' In this
bill, ``collision prevention technology'' is equipment, or a
combination of equipment that has ADS-B In; uses ADS-B In to
provide the pilot with situational awareness of the location of
other aircraft and traffic advisories; and provides, and is
configured to provide, alerting that is audible to the pilot
and flight crew. ``Covered aircraft,'' are defined as any non-
miliary aircraft that is required to have ADS-B out (pursuant
to section 91.225 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations),
with an exception for aircraft that have a limited category
special airworthiness or an experimental airworthiness
certificate. It also excludes selected aircraft described in
section 102, since such aircraft are already covered under the
ACAS Xa and ADS-B In equipage requirement promulgated under
that section.
In developing the final rule, the Administrator shall
consider (1) the safety benefits of collision prevention
technologies; (2) relevant regulations, guidance, and policies
for traffic awareness and traffic advisory technology that
utilizes ADS-B In; (3) ways in which ADS-B In software
applications can be used as of the date of enactment of this
Act; (4) available and projected software that can predict
aircraft movements, display surrounding traffic, and provide
visual and audible traffic advisories; (5) the margin of error
and accuracy of such technologies; (6) the safety benefits of
software in preventing conflicts with both aircraft and ground
vehicles on airport surfaces; (7) the safety benefits of the
software in informing pilots or flight crews to operational
risks, such as encounters with forecasted severe weather, using
flight information services-broadcast (FIS-B); (8) the
Administrator's efforts to modernize the air traffic control
system, including timelines, technologies being incorporated,
changes to operational rules, and training requirements; (9)
the role of air traffic controllers in ensuring aircraft
separation including the need for additional training to air
traffic controllers; (10) the necessity of certification for
implementing collision prevention technology based on type of
aircraft and operation; (11) the capacity of the aerospace
supply chain to manufacture necessary equipment; (12) the use
of existing air traffic control deviation authorization tools;
(13) the minimum requirements for this final rule, as
enumerated by Congress; and (14) the results, if available at
the time of consideration, of the studies on ADS-B Out equipage
and development of low-cost voluntary ADS-B as required by
sections 808 and 810 of the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024
(P.L. 118-63).
The final rule, at minimum, shall: (1) establish
performance requirements for equipping collision prevention
technology appropriate for the covered aircraft and the
operations; (2) have performance requirements that require the
technology to be configured to provide visual and audible
alerting to the pilot and flight crew, consider the field of
view of the pilots to ensure the technology can be readily
utilized and has minimal risk of unexpected detachment,
consider the reliability and resiliency of alerts in
environments where inputs or signals can be jammed or spoofed,
and consider the utilization of existing antenna locations or
the placement of a new antenna used to receive and transmit
data; (3) identify existing or issue additional relevant
guidance or technical standards orders to carry out the
requirements of this section; and (4) establish an effective
date of no later than December 31, 2031, that reflects various
aircraft types, appropriate maintenance cycles, and required
updates to appropriate guidance for such technology after
certification. In issuing the final rule, the Administrator
shall allow for the use of any collision prevention technology
(including technology that uses portable ADS-B In receivers or
other equipment that displays on an existing or future portable
device, electronic flight bag, or panel mounted display)
available for use at the time of the effective date
(established in this section) if the Administrator determines
it provides an equivalent level of safety.
Furthermore, the Administrator shall provide technical
assistance to facilitate equipage in complying with the
requirements of this section.
Section 105. Prohibition on certain use of ADS-B data
This section prohibits the use of ADS-B data to identify an
aircraft for the purpose of obtaining revenue from the aircraft
owner or operator without prior consent. This section affirms
air traffic controllers may use ADS-B data for the purposes of
tracking aircraft, improving safety, and efficiency.
Further, this section extends to other Federal, state,
local, territorial, or Tribal official the existing prohibition
on the FAA from initiating investigations (excluding criminal
investigations) based exclusively on ADS-B data.
Section 106. Rulemaking accountability
This section requires the Secretary to establish, on a
publicly available website, a dashboard that displays the
progress of the rulemakings required by sections 102, 103, and
104.
Further, this section requires the FAA to brief Congress
and families of the victims of the January 29, 2025, midair
collision near Washington Ronald Reagan National Airport every
180 days until final rules are published pursuant to sections
102, 103, and 104. For any rulemaking deadlines established in
sections 102, 103, and 104 missed by the FAA, the Administrator
shall brief Congress in-person within four weeks.
Section 107. Time-on-position limits
This section directs the Administrator, no later than one
year after enactment, in coordination with organizations
representing air traffic controller managers and supervisors,
to establish time-on-position limits for air traffic control
(ATC) operations supervisory personnel. In establishing such
limits, the Administrator shall (1) evaluate the time-on-
position limits for operations supervisory personnel,
prioritizing the evaluation of such limits at Ronald Reagan
Washington National Airport and other air traffic facilities
with high volumes of mixed rotorcraft and airplane traffic; (2)
establish such limits for Air Traffic Organization operations
supervisory personnel at Ronald Reagan Washington National
Airport and other air traffic facilities with high volumes of
mixed helicopter and airplane traffic; (3) develop guidance for
district and facility level management to adapt such
limitations to account for their own staffing and local
standard operating procedures; (4) consider the operational
needs and staffing levels of the air traffic facilities
described in the previous subparagraphs to ensure effective
oversight and monitoring of safety critical operations; (5)
consider air traffic control specialists performing watch
supervision in the controller-in-charge position; (6) consider
existing relevant FAA orders; (7) consider data, reports, and
best practices pertaining to human factors; and (8) any other
factor determined appropriate by the Administrator. To
establish the time-on-position limits, the Administrator may
consult with the air traffic controllers' union. Lastly, it
clarifies that nothing in the section may be construed to
interfere with any agreement between a governmental agency and
the air traffic controllers' union.
Section 108. Controller threat and error management training
This section requires the Administrator, no later than nine
months after enactment, in coordination with the air traffic
controllers' union, to develop and implement initial,
recurrent, and refresher training for air traffic controllers
on threat and error management that is instructor-led and
scenario-based. The Administrator shall consult with air
traffic controllers, managers, and operations supervisors;
aviation safety experts with knowledge of human factors; and a
non-political representative from the NTSB with subject matter
expertise will serve as an observer.
This section requires the Administrator to consider: (1)
the findings and recommendations of the NTSB; (2) existing
relevant FAA orders; (3) whether the frequency of training
should be increased for air traffic controllers in high-volume
or high-complexity air traffic control facilities; (4) data and
reports on human factors and threat and error management best
practices; (5) the appropriate use of tower simulator systems
and other advanced training technologies to supplement
recurrent controller training; (6) the use of data analytics to
identify systemic gaps in controller training; (7) data
gathered from aviation safety reporting programs; and (8) any
other factor determined appropriate by the Administrator.
No later than 90 days after development of the training
program, the FAA shall revise associated orders, policies, and
guidance documents and brief the appropriate committees of
Congress on the implementation of such training requirements
and potential recommendations for improvements.
Section 109. Controller visual separation training
This section requires the Administrator, no later than 270
days after enactment, in coordination with the air traffic
controllers' union, to develop and implement initial,
recurrent, and refresher training for air traffic controllers
on tower-applied and pilot-applied visual separation procedures
that is instructor-led and scenario-based. The Administrator
shall consult with representatives of air traffic controllers,
managers, and operations supervisors; general aviation and
commercial airline pilots; and aviation safety experts with
knowledge of human factors and visual separation procedures.
In developing and implementing the training, the
Administrator shall consider (1) the findings and
recommendations of the NTSB; (2) existing relevant FAA orders;
(3) whether the frequency of training should be increased for
air traffic controllers in high-volume or high-complexity air
traffic control facilities and the need for advance training
and guidance before any changes to visual separation policies;
(4) the appropriate use of tower simulator systems and other
advanced training technologies to supplement the recurrent and
refresher training; (5) the use of data analytics to identify
systemic gaps in controller training; (6) data gathered from
aviation safety reporting programs; and (7) any other factor
determined appropriate by the Administrator.
No later than 90 days after development of the training
program, the Administrator shall revise associated orders,
policies, and guidance documents to reflect the requirements of
this section.
Section 110. Safety risk assessment tool
This section requires the Administrator, no later than 180
days after enactment, to develop a safety risk assessment tool
to assist air traffic controllers and supervisors in airspace
risk identification, mitigation, and operational decision-
making. In developing the safety risk assessment tool, the
Administrator shall consider, at a minimum, (1) developing a
tool that can support air traffic controllers in identifying
safety risks, analyzing the impact of and prioritizing such
risks, and developing strategies to reduce or eliminate such
risks in real time; (2) data, reports, studies, and best
practices on threat and error management; (3) the findings and
recommendations of the NTSB, National Airspace System Safety
Review Team, and a frontline manager workload study required by
the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024; (4) air traffic control
facility type and staffing level; (5) current FAA risk
assessment guidance, policies, and regulations; (6) data
gathered from aviation safety reporting programs; (7) best
practices or similar relevant risk assessment tools and methods
used by foreign civil aviation authorities; (8) the feasibility
of leveraging commercially available products or technologies
that may be utilized; (9) benefits of incorporating this tool
into a Common Automation Platform; and (10) any other relevant
factors determined by the Administrator.
Additionally, the section requires the Administrator to
coordinate with representatives of air traffic controllers; air
traffic control operations supervisors; aviation safety experts
with knowledge of threat and error management and human
factors; organizations representing operators of Federal
contract towers; and any other relevant stakeholders.
Furthermore, this section requires the Administrator to brief
the appropriate committees of Congress on the development of
the safety risk assessment tool, progress of implementation,
and recommendations to improve deployment of the tool. Lastly,
the section requires implementation of the tool, prioritizing
Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport within one year of
development of the tool, air traffic control facilities with
high volumes of mixed rotorcraft and airplane traffic no later
than 18 months, and any remaining air traffic control
facilities no later than 24 months.
Section 111. Operational rates at Ronald Reagan Washington National
Airport
This section requires the Administrator to initiate an
assessment of the aircraft arrival rate at Ronald Reagan
Washington National Airport (DCA). In conducting the
assessment, the Administrator shall consider (1) the airspace
complexity; (2) the airfield's limitations; (3) mixed-fleet
operations; (4) traffic volume; (5) air carrier scheduling
practices; (6) operation capacity of the airport; (7) current
hourly instrument flight rules allocation practices at the
airport; and (8) expertise provided by the FAA's Air Traffic
Organization (ATO). Following completion of the assessment, the
Administrator shall submit the assessment to the appropriate
committees of Congress, including any related findings and
recommendations.
Furthermore, this section requires the Administrator to
initiate rulemaking proceedings to update the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) to require allocated instrument flight rules
operations at DCA to be prescribed in periods not greater than
30 minutes to ensure the airport does not exceed safe capacity.
Section 112. Time-based flow management
This section requires the Administrator, not later than 180
days after the date of enactment of this Act, to implement the
operational use of the time-based flow management (TBFM) system
at the Potomac Consolidated Terminal Radar Approach Control
(TRACON) and associated air traffic control towers.
Section 113. Air traffic control facility levels
This section allows the air traffic controllers' union and
the Administrator (jointly referred to as ``the Parties''), at
their joint election, to review the criteria and procedures
used to assess, determine, and validate the facility pay levels
of air traffic control (ATC) facilities. To conduct this
review, the Parties may consider (1) the many variables that
may affect the difficulty and complexity of ATC work, including
technological advancements, aviation industry trends, and the
modification or extension of air traffic control services; (2)
the weights and add-ons used to calculate the formulas used to
determine ATC facility levels; and (3) whether new relevant
weights and add-ons should be incorporated into such formulas
to more accurately reflect the density and complexity of
facility operations.
The section also allows the reassessment of ATC facility
pay levels by the Parties, upon completion of this review,
prioritizing the ATC facility level of Washington National
Airport (DCA) followed by all other ATC facilities with high
volumes of mixed helicopter and airplane traffic.
Lastly, it clarifies that nothing in the section may be
construed to interfere with any agreement between a
governmental agency and the air traffic controllers' union.
Section 114. Working group to evaluate shared frequency around Ronald
Reagan Washington National Airport
This section directs the Administrator to convene a working
group to conduct a comprehensive evaluation of the safety
benefits and risks of requiring all aircraft to use the same
communications frequency during any period in which helicopter
and local air traffic control positions are combined at DCA.
Members of this working group will include air traffic
controllers; air traffic control operational supervisors and
managers; aircraft pilots; helicopter pilots and operators; air
carriers; business aviation operators and pilots; air medical
operators; human factors experts; the FAA; the DoD; the United
States Coast Guard; the NTSB; and other relevant stakeholders.
Government representatives are nonvoting members of the working
group and may not be political appointees.
The working group is authorized to be in effect for one
year, with an option for a one-year extension if the
Administrator deems it necessary. To conduct the required
comprehensive evaluation, the working group must consider the
(1) benefits or detriments to pilot and air traffic controller
situational awareness; (2) human factors that would impact
pilot and air traffic controllers focus during critical phases
of flight; (3) pilot training requirements; (4) air traffic
controller training requirements; (5) technological limitations
or challenges that would impeded aircraft from using the same
communications frequency; (6) potential for overlapping,
conflicting, and simultaneous communication transmissions; (7)
potential for misdirected, missed, or stepped on communications
on crowded frequencies; (8) relevant NTSB recommendations; and
(9) feedback from air carriers and general aviation operators.
Additionally, this section requires the working group to
submit a report to the Administrator and the appropriate
committees of Congress detailing their findings and
recommendations. No later than six months after the submission
of this report, the Administrator shall operationally validate
such recommendations and take action, as appropriate, to
implement the recommendations.
Section 115. Anti-blocking technology
This section requires the Administrator to initiate an
assessment into the feasibility, maturity, hazards, and safety
benefits of technology that serves to alert an air traffic
controller or flight crew to instances of potentially blocked
transmissions when simultaneous broadcasting occurs.
Additionally, this section requires the Administrator to
submit to Congress a report on the results of the assessment
that includes: (1) a list of technologies identified by the
Administrator as serving to alert air traffic controllers or
flight crews to instances of blocked transmissions; (2) a list
of the technologies that the Administrator proposes could alert
air traffic controllers or flight crews to instances of blocked
transmissions; (3) results of simulations and testing; and (4)
the Administrator's plan to implement anti-blocking technology
if the assessment finds the technology can be safely
implemented, including the projected costs, a projected
timeline for implementation, and how the upgrades to facilities
and equipment would be prioritized.
Section 116. Task force to identify improvements to air traffic
controller conflict alert systems
This section requires the Administrator to convene a task
force to develop a framework detailing the priorities, goals,
timeline, and recommendations to implement improvements to the
conflict alert system to provide more salient and meaningful
alerts to air traffic controllers. The task force will consist
of air traffic controllers; operators of Federal Contract
Towers; air traffic control operational supervisors and
managers; human factors experts; employees from the FAA's Air
Traffic Organization (ATO) and Office of Finance and Management
(AFN) with expertise in equipment procurement; and other
relevant stakeholders.
The task force is authorized to be in effect for one year,
with an option for a six-month extension if the Administrator
determines it is necessary. To develop the required framework,
the task force must, at minimum, consider the (1) benefits and
detriments to air traffic controller situational awareness,
including availability of information, nuisance and false
alerts, and human factors; (2) opportunities and challenges of
consolidating numerous systems and underlying data sources into
a single display; (3) products by other working groups related
to human factors in aviation safety; (4) air traffic controller
training requirements; (5) advances in available technology
currently not being utilized; (6) technological limitations;
(7) relevant NTSB recommendations; (8) ATC modernization
efforts by the FAA; and (9) feedback from manufacturers and
entities involved in the FAA's ATC modernization initiative.
This section also requires the task force to submit a
report to the Administrator and the appropriate committees of
Congress detailing the framework. No later than eight months
after the submission of this report, the Administrator must
submit to the appropriate committees of Congress, and
immediately begin implementing, a two-year implementation plan.
This plan must include specific training requirements for air
traffic controllers and a publicly available list of
prioritized airports to receive upgrades to the conflict alert
system. Lastly, this section requires briefings every six
months until full implementation of the plan to the appropriate
committees of Congress on progress of the implementation.
Section 117. Postaccident and postincident drug and alcohol testing
This section states it is the Sense of Congress that the
Administrator shall abide by Department of Transportation order
(DOT Order 3910.1D) requiring postaccident and postincident
drug and alcohol testing.
This section requires the Administrator to revise
procedures of the FAA's Air Traffic Organization (ATO) to
ensure that an appropriate on-site supervisor makes each
postaccident and postincident drug and alcohol testing
determination based on their assessment of whether the event
meets testing criteria and which controllers had duties
pertaining to the involved aircraft without need to wait for
investigation or approval.
This section also requires the Administrator to incorporate
into annual training the revised postaccident and postincident
drug and alcohol testing determination procedure for all ATO
staff who have such responsibilities. The training standards
shall include a post-learning knowledge assessment.
Additionally, this section requires the Administrator to
conduct an annual review of the ability of each air traffic
control facility to routinely accomplish the required
postaccident and postincident testing within the specified
timeframes, within two hours for alcohol testing and within
four hours for drug testing, including conducting a
demonstration. Following the review, the Administrator shall
work with the Secretary to mitigate identified barriers to
timely postaccident and postincident drug and alcohol testing,
and to remediate the performance of each facility that failed
the demonstration. Lastly, not later than three months after
each annual review, the Secretary is required to submit a
report to Congress detailing the results of the reviews, any
facilities needing remediation, progress at facilities
previously identified for remediation, and planned approaches
to remediation.
Section 118. Further modifications to Ronald Reagan Washington National
Airport area helicopter routes
This section requires the Administrator, via the safety
risk management process, to evaluate all charted helicopter
routes in the vicinity of DCA to ensure that helicopter and
fixed-wing aircraft routes are safely always deconflicted
physically or have operating procedures that require positive
control from the controller to ensure safe deconfliction during
operations. In carrying out the route revisions under this
section, the Administrator shall conduct a safety risk
management review for any helicopter route changes. Lastly, the
Administrator is required to report the results of the
evaluation to Congress and provide safety risk assessment
documentation.
Section 119. Requiring vertical separation near airports during
critical phases of flight
This section requires the Administrator to ensure that each
segment of a helicopter route contains, in the appropriate
helicopter route chart, recommended flight altitudes (ceilings
and floors) consistent with FAA Order Job Order (JO) 7210.3EE.
Additionally, this section requires the Administrator to amend
FAA Order JO 7210.3EE to add minimum vertical separation
requirements to the criteria for the helicopter route chart
program. In making these revisions, the Administrator shall
ensure that any helicopter route chart that represents an area
near an airport clearly conveys to an operator the segments of
the route in the vicinity of an airport. Further, this section
requires the changes to be incorporated into the annual review
of helicopter charts.
Section 120. Helicopter route chart annual review
This section requires the Administrator to initiate,
annually, a review of the criteria for annual reviews of
helicopter routes required by FAA Order JO 7210.3EE. After each
annual review of the criteria, the Administrator shall update
the criteria based on the review and publish the updated
criteria on a publicly available website of the FAA. The
Administrator shall publish on a FAA website the date on which
the annual review for each Helicopter Route Chart has been most
recently completed.
Furthermore, this section requires the Administrator to
report annually to Congress a summary of changes to the charted
helicopter routes, the rationale or safety data justifying the
changes, a summary of any consultation with helicopter and
fixed-wing operators, and the associated safety risk management
process documents. If the Administrator fails to submit an
annual report, the chief operation officer of the FAA's ATO is
required to brief Congress in-person within four weeks.
Section 121. Visual charts
This section requires the Administrator to initiate a study
on incorporating the lateral location and published altitudes
of helicopter routes into all instrument and visual approach
and departure procedures for airports to provide situational
awareness to fixed-wing operators of the risk of helicopter
traffic operating in their vicinity. The Administrator shall
consider: (1) the spacing and legibility of information on the
charts; (2) the workload of flight crews at lower altitudes
during critical phases of flight; (3) the feasibility and
decipherability of layered information on digital charts; (4)
current best practices for pilots when landing at or departing
from airports with high volumes of helicopter traffic that do
not have charted helicopter routes; and (5) the human factors
involved with approach and departure procedures.
Additionally, after completion of the study, this section
requires the Administrator to make any necessary revisions to
(1) Terminal Procedures Publications to include charted
helicopter routes providing appropriate situational awareness
to fixed-wing operators and (2) Helicopter Route Charts to
include airport approach and departure paths to provide
appropriate situational awareness to helicopter operators. If
the Administrator revises any of the publications or charts,
the appropriate committees of Congress must be briefed on the
revisions.
Section 122. Close proximity encounters
This section requires the Administrator to establish a
working group to make recommendations on an objective
definition of ``close proximity encounters'', as well as the
associated parameters that can be used to monitor the
prevalence of such encounters and identify areas of potential
traffic conflict. This section also requires the working group
to make publicly available aggregated information about all
encounters, including the date and location.
The working group shall consider (1) existing airborne
separation rules and required loss of airborne separation
reporting requirements; (2) development of a definition of, and
associated parameters for, close proximity encounters; (3) data
gathered from aviation safety reporting systems; (4) NTSB
aviation investigation report AIR-26-02; (5) FAA risk
assessment guidance, policies, and regulations; (6) best
practices or similar risk assessment tools used by foreign
civil aviation authorities; and (7) any other relevant factors
determined by the working group.
The working group's membership will include representatives
from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA);
aviation labor organizations; subject matter experts in safety
management systems and safety data; air carriers; helicopter
pilots and operators, including law enforcement and air
ambulance operators; general aviation operators and pilots; and
a non-political representative from the NTSB with subject
matter expertise, who will be a non-voting member. Furthermore,
after the working group develops recommendations, the
Administrator is required to make publicly available a report
containing the working group's recommendations and how the
Administrator will implement such recommendations.
Section 123. Notification of close proximity encounters and analysis of
data
This section requires the Administrator to establish a
process to notify parties involved in: (1) a near midair
collision, (2) a traffic collision avoidance system resolution
advisory (TCAS RA) event, (3) a close proximity encounter event
(as defined by section 122), or (4) any other event determined
by the Administrator and provide deidentified event data to the
Aviation Safety Information Analysis and Sharing (ASIAS)
program. The Administrator shall also establish and
continuously monitor a database of events listed above to
identify trends, ensure timely notification to involved parties
to prevent the loss of data, consider informing frequent
operators of such events, and account for other close proximity
encounters. Additionally, the Administrator is required to
brief Congress on the implementation of this section not later
than 30 days after establishing the notification process
mandated in this section.
Furthermore, the Administrator shall annually submit to
Congress a report containing data on the number of instances
and locations of near midair collision events, TCAS RA events,
close proximity events, identified locations of concern, and
action taken to mitigate identified risks and reduce the
occurrence of such events. Lastly, this section ensures that
the data collected under this section shall only be used for
safety assurance and safety risk management.
Section 124. Safety culture and safety management review
This section requires the Department of Transportation
Inspector General to initiate a comprehensive audit of the
FAA's ATO and Aviation Safety Management Organization safety
culture and Safety Management System, including its risk
identification, data sharing, compliance with existing safety
directives, and mitigation of collision risks within the
National Airspace System.
Furthermore, the Inspector General must submit a report to
Congress that includes recommendations to strengthen adherence
to safety management principles, enhance transparency, protect
against retaliation, and foster a just culture. The section
further requires the Secretary of Transportation to respond to
those recommendations and submit an implementation plan to
Congress within 120 days of the report's submission, ensuring
timely oversight and corrective action.
Section 125. Documentation of control position combinations
This section requires the Administrator, not later than one
year after enactment, to review and revise, as appropriate, the
regulations and standard operating procedures governing the
documentation of combining air traffic control position
responsibilities.
In carrying out this section, the Administrator shall: (1)
consider the current standard operating procedures and guidance
on the combination of air traffic control position
responsibilities; (2) examine the feasibility of digitizing the
documentation required under this section; (3) require the
Operations Supervisor (OS) to periodically review the
documentation of combined controller position occurrences and
report on deviations from standard operating procedures; (4)
consider air traffic facility type and staffing level; and (5)
consult with the air traffic controllers' union, organization
representing ATC managers and supervisors, and aviation safety
experts with knowledge in information technology.
Additionally, the Administrator shall brief the appropriate
committees of Congress on the implementation of this section no
later than one year after completion of the review required
under subsection (a). Lastly, it clarifies that nothing in the
section may be construed to interfere with any agreement
between a governmental agency and the air traffic controllers'
union.
Section 126. Review of miles-in-trail procedures or agreements
This section requires the Administrator to complete a
review, within 60 days of enactment, of the miles-in-trail
(MIT) standards and procedures to determine if they provide for
a separation of aircraft traffic that is appropriate for
operational safety. In conducting the review, the Administrator
may consider the: (1) accuracy of the criteria used to
determine MIT procedures for air traffic control (ATC)
facilities; (2) whether additional criteria should be
incorporated to more appropriately reflect the traffic volume
and operational complexity of ATC facilities; and (3) the
findings and recommendations of the NTSB. The Administrator is
required to update the standards and procedures to ensure the
standards provide for a separation of traffic that is
appropriate for operational safety. In carrying out the review,
the Administrator must consult with the air traffic
controllers' union; ATC managers and supervisors; airport
sponsors and operators located within Class B or Class C
airspace; commercial airline pilots; and air carriers, general
aviation and business aviation operators.
After completing the review of the MIT standards and
procedures, the Administrator will initiate an additional
review of the MIT procedures or agreements at all ATC
facilities located within Class B and Class C airspace to
ensure the procedures provide for a separation of traffic that
is appropriate for operational safety.
Finally, no later than 18 months after enactment, the
Administrator is required to submit to the appropriate
committees of Congress a report that includes: (1) a list of
ATC facilities identified during the Administrator's review
that did not have MIT procedures or agreements that allowed for
the separation of traffic appropriate for operational safety
and (2) steps that the Administrator has taken, or plans to
take, to modify the MIT procedures or agreements at each
facility to ensure they provide for a separation of traffic
appropriate for operational safety.
Section 127. Closure of Helicopter Route 4
This section states that operations on Helicopter Route 4
between Hains Point and the Woodrow Wilson Memorial Bridge in
the District of Columbia, as such Route existed on January 29,
2025, shall be prohibited and shall remain eliminated from
helicopter charts.
TITLE II--[PLACEHOLDER]
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported
In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law
proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new
matter is printed in italic, existing law in which no change is
proposed is shown in roman):
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported
In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by
title I of the bill, as reported, are shown as follows
(existing law proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black
brackets, new matter is printed in italics, and existing law in
which no change is proposed is shown in roman):
TITLE 49, UNITED STATES CODE
* * * * * * *
SUBTITLE VII--AVIATION PROGRAMS
* * * * * * *
PART A--AIR COMMERCE AND SAFETY
* * * * * * *
SUBPART iv--ENFORCEMENT AND PENALTIES
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 461--INVESTIGATIONS AND PROCEEDINGS
* * * * * * *
Sec. 46101. Complaints and investigations
(a) General.--(1) A person may file a complaint in writing
with the Secretary of Transportation (or the Administrator of
the Transportation Security Administration with respect to
security duties and powers designated to be carried out by the
Administrator of the Transportation Security Administration or
the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration with
respect to aviation safety duties and powers designated to be
carried out by the Administrator of the Federal Aviation
Administration) about a person violating this part or a
requirement prescribed under this part. Except as provided in
subsection (b) of this section, the Secretary, Administrator of
the Transportation Security Administration, or Administrator of
the Federal Aviation Administration shall investigate the
complaint if a reasonable ground appears to the Secretary,
Administrator of the Transportation Security Administration, or
Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration for the
investigation.
(2) On the initiative of the Secretary, Administrator of the
Transportation Security Administration, or Administrator of the
Federal Aviation Administration, as appropriate, the Secretary,
Administrator of the Transportation Security Administration, or
Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration may
conduct an investigation, if a reasonable ground appears to the
Secretary, Administrator of the Transportation Security
Administration, or Administrator of the Federal Aviation
Administration for the investigation, about--
(A) a person violating this part or a requirement
prescribed under this part; or
(B) any question that may arise under this part.
(3) The Secretary of Transportation, Administrator of the
Transportation Security Administration, or Administrator of the
Federal Aviation Administration may dismiss a complaint without
a hearing when the Secretary, Administrator of the
Transportation Security Administration, or Administrator of the
Federal Aviation Administration is of the opinion that the
complaint does not state facts that warrant an investigation or
action.
(4) After notice and an opportunity for a hearing and subject
to section 40105(b) of this title, the Secretary of
Transportation, Administrator of the Transportation Security
Administration, or Administrator of the Federal Aviation
Administration shall issue an order to compel compliance with
this part if the Secretary, Administrator of the Transportation
Security Administration, or Administrator of the Federal
Aviation Administration finds in an investigation under this
subsection that a person is violating this part.
(b) Complaints Against Members of Armed Forces.--The
Secretary of Transportation, Administrator of the
Transportation Security Administration, or Administrator of the
Federal Aviation Administration shall refer a complaint against
a member of the armed forces of the United States performing
official duties to the Secretary of the department concerned
for action. Not later than 90 days after receiving the
complaint, the Secretary of that department shall inform the
Secretary of Transportation, Administrator of the
Transportation Security Administration, or Administrator of the
Federal Aviation Administration of the action taken on the
complaint, including any corrective or disciplinary action
taken.
(c) Prohibition on Using ADS-B Out Data to Initiate an
Investigation.--
(1) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision
of this section, [the Administrator of the Federal
Aviation Administration may not] neither the
Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration
nor any other Federal, State, local, territorial, or
Tribal official may initiate an investigation
(excluding a criminal investigation) of a person based
exclusively on automatic dependent surveillance-
broadcast data.
(2) Rule of construction.--Nothing in this subsection
shall prohibit the use of automatic dependent
surveillance-broadcast data in an investigation that
was initiated for any reason other than the review of
automatic dependent surveillance-broadcast data,
including if such investigation was initiated as a
result of a report or complaint submitted to the
Administrator.
* * * * * * *
[all]