Legislative Oversight

Official bill text (stored)

Plain-text extraction from Congress.gov text formats. Canonical source remains the official URL above. Full text is prioritized for bills with roll-call votes.

119 HR 7613 IH: Airspace Location and Enhanced Risk Transparency Act of 2026 
 U.S. House of Representatives 
 2026-02-20 
 text/xml 
 EN 
 Pursuant to Title 17 Section 105 of the United States Code, this file is not subject to copyright protection and is in the public domain. 
 
 
 
 I 119th CONGRESS 2d Session H. R. 7613 IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES February 20, 2026 Mr. Graves (for himself, Mr. Larsen of Washington , Mr. Rogers of Alabama , Mr. Smith of Washington , Mr. Nehls , Mr. Carson , Mr. Crawford , Mr. Rouzer , Mr. Mann , Mr. Ezell , Mr. Fong , Mr. Hurd of Colorado , Mr. Wittman , Mrs. Kiggans of Virginia , Mr. McCormick , Mr. Austin Scott of Georgia , Mr. Wilson of South Carolina , Mr. Courtney , Mr. Johnson of Georgia , Ms. Brownley , Ms. Wilson of Florida , Mr. DeSaulnier , Ms. Davids of Kansas , Ms. Friedman , Mr. Beyer , Mr. Subramanyam , Mr. Cisneros , Mr. Tran , Mr. Fleischmann , Mr. Keating , Mr. Figures , Ms. King-Hinds , Mr. Bell , Mr. Fine , Mr. Rose , Mr. Garamendi , Ms. Scholten , Mr. Carter of Louisiana , Mrs. Watson Coleman , Mr. Westerman , Mr. Stauber , Mr. Timmons , Mr. Gooden , Mr. Owens , Mr. Babin , Mrs. Foushee , Mr. Van Drew , and Ms. Houlahan ) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure , and in addition to the Committee on Armed Services , for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned A BILL 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. 
 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. 
 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 mitigation systems. 
 Sec. 105. Time-on-position practices. 
 Sec. 106. Controller training working group. 
 Sec. 107. Safety risk assessment tool. 
 Sec. 108. Operational rates at Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport. 
 Sec. 109. Time-based flow management. 
 Sec. 110. Air traffic control facility levels. 
 Sec. 111. Working group to evaluate shared frequency around Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport. 
 Sec. 112. Anti-blocking technology. 
 Sec. 113. Task force to identify improvements to air traffic controller conflict alert system. 
 Sec. 114. Postaccident and postincident drug and alcohol testing. 
 Sec. 115. Helicopter Route Chart annual review. 
 Sec. 116. Further modifications to Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport area helicopter routes. 
 Sec. 117. Requiring vertical separation near airports during critical phases of flight. 
 Sec. 118. Visual charts. 
 Sec. 119. Close proximity encounters. 
 Sec. 120. Notification of close proximity encounters and analysis of data. 
 Sec. 121. Safety culture review. 
 Sec. 122. Documentation of control position combinations. 
 Sec. 123. Review of miles-in-trail procedures or agreements. 
 Title II—Department of Defense
 Matters 
 Sec. 201. Department of Defense matters relating to aviation safety. 
 Sec. 202. Treatment of superceded memorandum of agreement and provision of law. 
 Sec. 203. Manned rotary wing aircraft safety. 
 2. Definitions In this Act: (1) Administrator The term Administrator means the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration. 
 (2) 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. (3) FAA The term FAA means the Federal Aviation Administration. 
 (4) Secretary The term Secretary means the Secretary of Transportation. I Civil Aviation Matters 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 feasibility 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. 
 (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) Regional air carriers. (5) Air carriers with a low-cost or ultra-low-cost business model. 
 (6) Cargo air carriers. (7) Transport category aircraft manufacturers. 
 (8) General aviation aircraft manufactures. (9) Avionics manufacturers. 
 (10) Exclusive bargaining representatives of air traffic controllers certified under section 7111 of title 5, United States Code. (11) Organizations representing certified collective bargaining representatives of airline pilots. 
 (12) The certified bargaining representative of aviation safety inspectors and engineers for the Federal Aviation Administration. (13) Aviation safety experts with specific knowledge of human factors or human factors experts with specific knowledge of aviation safety. 
 (14) Any other stakeholders the Administrator determines appropriate. (c) Considerations In conducting the evaluation under subsection (a), the Administrator shall consider— 
 (1) to the greatest extent possible, human factors, including products by working groups related to human factors in aviation safety; (2) air traffic control procedures during critical phases of flight; 
 (3) the impact to pilot and air traffic controller focus during critical phases of flight; (4) the benefits and detriments to pilot and air traffic controller situational awareness; 
 (5) pilot training requirements; (6) air traffic controller training requirements; and 
 (7) whether there is potential for overlapping, conflicting, and simultaneous alerts. 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 aircraft that are selected aircraft to be equipped with ACAS-Xa. 
 
 (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 part 91 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations; 
 (4) business aviation operators; (5) cargo air carriers; 
 (6) transport category aircraft manufacturers; (7) general aviation aircraft manufactures; 
 (8) avionics manufacturers; (9) supplemental type certificate holders; 
 (10) modification service providers; (11) exclusive bargaining representatives of air traffic controllers certified under section 7111 of title 5, United States Code; 
 (12) the certified bargaining representative of aviation safety inspectors and engineers for the Federal Aviation Administration; (13) organizations representing certified collective bargaining representatives of airline pilots; 
 (14) aviation safety experts with specific knowledge of human factors or human factors experts with specific knowledge of aviation safety; and (15) 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 modifications to the minimum operational performance standards of ACAS-Xa that are required by subsection (e)(1)(B); 
 
 (2) the results of the evaluation under section 101; (3) the anticipated certification deadline for ACAS-Xa given the technical complexity and requisite procedures for approval; 
 
 (4) the soonest practicable deadline for equipping newly manufactured selected aircraft; (5) the soonest practicable deadline to retrofit existing selected aircraft with ACAS-Xa that considers— 
 
 (A) 
 the feasibility of using the Line Replaceable Units of existing collision avoidance systems in such aircraft; 
 
 
 (B) 
 the feasibility of using existing antennas of existing collisions avoidance systems in such aircraft; and 
 
 
 (C) 
 the commercial availability of all necessary components associated with ACAS-Xa; 
 
 
 
 (6) 
 actions the Administrator can take to prioritize the certification and installation of ACAS-Xa; 
 
 (7) related training for air traffic controllers, pilots, and others; and (8) any other considerations the Committee 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 and modification of minimal operating performance standards (1) In general Not later than 18 months after the submission of the report under subsection (d), the Administrator shall— 
 
 (A) 
 issue a notice of proposed rulemaking to require selected aircraft to be equipped with ACAS-Xa; and 
 
 
 (B) 
 modify the minimum operational performance standards for ACAS-Xa, to include— 
 
 (i) 
 traffic advisory aural alerts to include clock position, relative altitude, range and vertical tendency; and 
 
 
 (ii) 
 the integration of directional traffic symbols. (2) Contents The notice of proposed rulemaking described in paragraph (1)(A) shall include, at a minimum— 
 
 (A) 
 appropriate guidance for certification of ACAS-Xa; (B) defined standards for the modification described in paragraph (1)(B); 
 
 (C) 
 a deadline for any newly manufactured selected aircraft to be equipped with ACAS-Xa, based on the findings and recommendations developed pursuant to subsection (b)(1); and 
 
 
 (D) 
 a deadline for existing selected aircraft to be retrofit with ACAS-Xa, based on the findings and recommendations developed pursuant to subsection (b)(1). 
 
 (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) 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 part 121.356 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, and part 135.180 of such title. 
 103. Airborne collision avoidance systems for rotorcraft 
 
 (a) 
 In general 
 Not later than December 31, 2026, the Administrator shall take necessary action to work with the appropriate standards setting organization to develop, finalize, and publish minimum operational performance standards for the collision avoidance system know as Airborne Collision Avoidance System Xr (in this section referred to as ACAS-Xr ). 
 
 
 (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), 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 be equipped with ACAS-Xr. 
 
 
 (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) 
 general aviation aircraft manufacturers; (F) avionics manufacturers; 
 
 
 (G) 
 supplemental type certificate holders; (H) modification service providers; 
 
 
 (I) 
 exclusive bargaining representatives of air traffic controllers certified under section 7111 of title 5, United States Code; 
 
 
 (J) 
 the certified bargaining representative of aviation safety inspectors and engineers for the Federal Aviation Administration; 
 
 
 (K) 
 aviation safety experts with specific knowledge of human factors or human factors experts with specific knowledge of aviation safety; and 
 
 
 (L) 
 any other stakeholders the Administrator determines appropriate. (3) Considerations In developing the findings and recommendations required under paragraph (1), the Committee shall consider— 
 
 (A) 
 the 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 given the technical complexity and requisite procedures for approval; 
 
 
 (C) 
 a projected deadline for equipping newly manufactured selected rotorcraft the commercial availability of the necessary components associated with ACAS-Xr that considers— 
 
 (i) 
 the anticipated timeline needed for the FAA to approve the installation of ACAS-Xr on various rotorcraft or for various operations; and 
 
 
 (ii) 
 the commercial availability of the necessary components associated with ACAS-Xr; 
 
 
 
 (D) 
 a projected deadline to retrofit selected rotorcraft with ACAS-Xr that considers— 
 
 (i) 
 the feasibility of using existing antennas of existing collision mitigation systems equipped in such rotorcraft; 
 
 
 (ii) 
 the feasibility and cost associated with retrofitting rotorcraft not equipped with existing collision avoidance systems; and 
 
 
 (iii) 
 the commercial availability of the necessary components associated with ACAS-Xr; 
 
 
 
 (E) 
 actions that the Administrator can take to prioritize the certification and installation of ACAS-Xr; 
 
 
 (F) 
 related training for air traffic controllers, pilots, and others; and 
 
 
 (G) 
 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), the Administrator shall— (A) issue a notice of proposed rulemaking to require all selected rotorcraft to be equipped with ACAS-Xr; and 
 
 
 (B) 
 take necessary actions to modify the minimal operational performance standards for ACAS-Xr, including— 
 
 (i) 
 traffic advisory aural alerts to include clock position, relative altitude, range and vertical tendency; and 
 
 
 (ii) 
 the integration of directional traffic symbols. (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 to be equipped with ACAS-Xr, based on the findings and recommendations developed pursuant to subsection (b); and 
 
 
 (D) 
 a deadline for selected rotorcraft to be retrofit with ACAS-Xr, based on the findings and recommendations developed pursuant to subsection (b). 
 
 (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) Selected rotorcraft In this section, the term selected rotorcraft means a civil rotorcraft operating in Class B airspace. 
 104. Collision mitigation systems 
 (a) In general Not later than 45 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall initiate a negotiated rulemaking proceeding to require covered aircraft to be equipped with collision mitigation technology. (b) Composition The committee convened for the negotiated rulemaking described in subsection (a) (in this section referred to as the Committee ) shall include participation from representatives of the following: 
 (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) Transport category aircraft manufacturers. 
 (9) General aviation aircraft manufactures. (10) Rotorcraft manufacturers. 
 (11) Avionics manufacturers. (12) Supplemental type certificate holders. 
 (13) Aircraft modification service providers. (14) Exclusive bargaining representatives of air traffic controllers certified under section 7111 of title 5, United States Code. 
 (15) Certified bargaining representative of aviation safety inspectors and engineers for the FAA. (16) Not less than 3 organizations representing certified collective bargaining representatives of airline pilots operating under part 121 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations. 
 (17) Aviation safety experts with specific knowledge of human factors or human factors experts with specific knowledge of aviation safety. (c) Considerations In the negotiated rulemaking required under this section, the Committee shall consider— 
 (1) relevant collision avoidance technology regulation, guidance, and policies; (2) available and projected software that can predict aircraft movements based on data from Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (in this section referred to as ADS–B ), Mode S, Mode C, or other transponders; 
 
 (3) the necessity of 2 independently verified data sources to activate traffic resolution advisories that require compliance by flight crews to maneuver a covered aircraft regardless of air traffic control instructions; (4) the margin of error and accuracy of technologies listed in paragraph (2); 
 (5) the ways in which collision mitigation technologies can further the accuracy and efficacy of surface surveillance technologies; (6) potential opportunities to extend existing surface safety technologies to address the risk of midair collisions; 
 (7) the effort of the Administrator to modernize the air traffic control system, including timelines, technologies being incorporated, and planned trainings; (8) the role of air traffic controllers in ensuring aircraft separation; 
 (9) the potential benefits and consequences to safety of a phased implementation of effective dates based on types of aircraft and operations; (10) the time it will take for the certification of collision mitigation technologies under chapter 447 of title 49, United States Code; 
 
 (11) the capacity of the aerospace supply chain to manufacture necessary equipment; (12) how to ensure broad compliance without egregiously disproportionate implementation timelines between operators; 
 (13) ongoing rulemakings required under section 102 and section 103 of this Act; (14) the use of existing air traffic control deviation authorization tools to implement the requirement in subsection (j)(1)(B); 
 (15) the requirements for the final rule as specified in subsection (f); and (16) any other considerations the Administrator determines appropriate. 
 (d) Deadline for Committee deliberation Not later than 18 months after the initiation of the rulemaking proceeding under subsection (a), the Committee shall conclude deliberations and submit to the Administrator and the appropriate committees of Congress— (1) if the Committee reaches consensus, a report containing the proposed rule and other applicable records as determined by the Committee; or 
 (2) if the Committee does not reach consensus, any proposed language in which the Committee reached partial consensus, a summary of issues preventing total consensus, and any other information, recommendations, or materials created during deliberations. (e) Proposed rule and congressional briefing Not later than 30 days after receiving the report or information, as applicable, required under subsection (d) from the Committee, the Administrator shall submit a proposed rule to the appropriate committees of Congress and thereafter brief the appropriate committees of Congress on such report or information. 
 (f) Final rule Not later than 2 years after the initiation of the rulemaking proceeding under subsection (a), the Administrator shall issue a final rule to carry out the requirements of this section that incorporates the recommendations from the Committee. (g) Requirements for final rule In issuing the final rule required under subsection (f), the Administrator shall— 
 
 (1) 
 require that covered aircraft be equipped with technologies capable of receiving ADS–B transmissions (in this section referred to as ADS-B In ); 
 
 (2) establish performance requirements for equipping collision mitigation technology that, as determined by the Administrator, are appropriate for the covered aircraft and the operations, including the operating environment; (3) in establishing the performance requirements described in paragraph (2)— 
 (A) require such technology be configured to provide 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) require that covered aircraft equipped with technologies that issue traffic resolution advisories are receiving and integrating into such resolution advisories not less than 2 independently verified data sources; 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 mitigation technology; 
 (4) identify existing or issue additional relevant guidance or technical standard orders to carry out the requirements of this section; and (5) 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. 
 (h) Alternative means of compliance In issuing the final rule required under this section, the Administrator shall allow for an alternative means of compliance that provides an equivalent level of safety— (1) that leverages alternative equipment or technology that utilizes the use of portable ADS–B In receivers or other equipment that displays on an existing or future portable device, electronic flight bag or panel mounted display; and 
 (2) allows for the continued use of any portable or installed collision mitigation technology in use at the time of the effective date established in subsection (g)(5). (i) Administrative provision The Administrator may designate the Committee in a manner that would provide the Committee the same dispensation as if the Administrator had designated it as an aviation rulemaking committee under section 106(p)(5)(B) of title 49, United States Code. 
 (j) Definitions In this section: (1) Covered aircraft The term covered aircraft — 
 (A) means— (i) a turbine-powered civil aircraft (as such term is defined in section 40102 of title 49, United States Code) required to be equipped with ADS–B Out under section 91.225 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations; and 
 (ii) a civil aircraft, not including aircraft specified in section 91.225(e) of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, operating in class B and Class C airspace areas and areas designated by section 91.225(d)(3) of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations; and (B) excludes aircraft manufactured before the date of enactment of this Act 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, to operate in the airspace areas described in subparagraph (A)(ii), 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. 
 (2) Collision mitigation technology The term collision mitigation technology means equipment that receives and process ADS–B transmissions that are broadcast in accordance with part 91.225 and 91.227 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, or any successor regulations, and other aviation advisory information from ground stations, that provides the aircraft with awareness to the location of other aircraft and traffic advisories. 105. Time-on-position practices (a) Memorandum of understanding (1) In general The Administrator and the exclusive bargaining representative of air traffic controllers certified under section 7111 of title 5, United States Code, may execute a memorandum of understanding to review the time-on-position practices for operations supervisory personnel. 
 (2) Contents The memorandum of understanding described in paragraph (1) may— (A) include an evaluation of the time-on-position practices for operations supervisory personnel at the time such memorandum is executed, prioritizing the evaluation of such practices at Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport and other air traffic facilities with high volumes of mixed helicopter and airplane traffic; 
 (B) provide recommendations for improving such practices 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) consider the operational oversight needs and staffing levels of the air traffic facilities described in the previous subparagraphs; and 
 (D) include any other items determined appropriate by the parties executing such memorandum. (b) Rule of construction Nothing in this section shall be construed to interfere with any agreement between a governmental entity and the exclusive bargaining representative of air traffic controllers certified under section 7111 of title 5, United States Code, including requirements under section 7106(a) of title 5, United States Code, section 5333(b) of title 49, United States Code, and section 40122 of title 49, United States Code. 
 (c) Definitions In this section: (1) 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. 
 (2) Operations supervisory personnel The term operations supervisory personnel means managerial personnel responsible for the direct supervision of air traffic control operational personnel. 106. Controller training working group (a) In general Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall establish a working group (in this section referred to as the Working Group ) to provide the Administrator with recommendations for revising regulations and standards pertaining to the initial and recurrent training of air traffic controllers on— 
 (1) threat and error management; and (2) tower-applied and pilot-applied visual separation procedures. 
 (b) Membership The Working Group shall consist of members appointed by the Administrator, including representatives of— (1) the exclusive bargaining representative of air traffic controllers certified under section 7111 of title 5, United States Code; 
 (2) the certified bargaining representative of aviation safety inspectors and engineers for the Administration; (3) organizations representing certified collective bargaining representatives of airline pilots; 
 (4) organizations representing air traffic control managers and operations supervisors; (5) airport sponsors and operators; 
 (6) operators under parts 121, 125, or 135 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations; (7) organizations representing operators under part 91 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations; and 
 (8) aviation safety experts with specific knowledge of— (A) human factors; 
 (B) threat and error management best practices and policies; and (C) visual separation procedures and regulations. 
 (c) Considerations The Working Group shall consider, at a minimum— (1) the findings and recommendations of the National Transportation Safety Board; 
 (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) whether the frequency of the recurrent training described in subsection (a) 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 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 Working Group. (d) Report to Congress Not later than 1 year after the Working Group is established, the Administrator shall submit to the appropriate committees of Congress a report containing the findings and recommendations of the Working Group. 
 (e) Rulemaking 
 (1) Proposed rule Not later than 90 days after the submission of the report under subsection (d), the Administrator shall issue a notice of proposed rulemaking revising standards for the required recurrent training described in subsection (a), as recommended by the Working Group. (2) Final rule Not later than 180 days after publishing the proposed rule under paragraph (1), the Administrator shall issue a final rule based on such proposed rule. 
 (3) Justification for decision related to recommendations If the Administrator decides not to implement any of the recommendations described in subsection (d), the Administrator shall submit to the appropriate committees of Congress the justification for the decision with respect to each such recommendation. (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. 
 107. Safety risk assessment tool 
 
 (a) 
 In general 
 Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall seek to enter into an agreement with a federally funded research and development center to develop a safety risk assessment tool for use by air traffic controllers to assist in airspace risk identification, mitigation, and operational decision making. 
 
 
 (b) 
 Considerations 
 In carrying out subsection (a), the federally funded research and development center shall consider, at a minimum— 
 
 (1) 
 the development of a safety risk assessment tool capable of supporting the 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; 
 
 
 (B) 
 National Airspace System Safety Review Team; 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; and 
 
 
 (8) 
 any other factors determined relevant by the federally funded research and development center. 
 
 
 
 (c) 
 Consultation 
 To develop the safety risk assessment tool required under subsection (a), the federally funded research and development center shall consult with— 
 
 (1) 
 organizations representing operations supervisors; (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 
 
 
 (5) 
 any other stakeholders determined relevant by the federally funded research and development center. 
 
 
 (d) Briefing to Congress Not later than 1 year after entering into the agreement pursuant to subsection (a), the Administrator shall brief the appropriate committees of Congress on the development of the safety risk assessment tool required under this section and recommendations for implementation. (e) 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. 
 108. 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. (2) The exclusive bargaining representatives of air traffic controllers certified under section 7111 of title 5, United Sates Code. 
 (3) The Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority. (4) Any other stakeholders the Administrator determines appropriate. 
 109. Time-based flow management Not later than 1 year 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. 110. Air traffic control facility levels (a) Review of air traffic control facility level criteria (1) In general The National Validation Team may review the criteria and procedures used to assess, determine, and validate the classification level of air traffic control facilities. 
 (2) Considerations To conduct the review required under paragraph (1), the National Validation Team may consider— (A) the accuracy of the factors and multipliers used to calculate the traffic count index and other related formulas for air traffic control facilities; 
 (B) whether new relevant factors and multipliers should be incorporated into such formulas to more accurately reflect the complexity of the facility operations; and (C) the findings and recommendations of the National Transportation Safety Board with respect to air traffic control facility levels. 
 (3) Update criteria and procedures Upon completion of the review of criteria and procedures under this subsection, the National Validation Team may revise, as appropriate, such criteria and procedures. (4) Conforming amendments to FAA documents In issuing such revised guidance, the National Validation Team may recommend revisions to FAA Order 7210.57, titled Traffic Counting, Reporting, and Processing for Determining Facility Classification Levels , or any successor document, and corresponding policy or guidance materials to reflect any criteria and procedures revised pursuant to paragraph (3). 
 (b) Reassessment of air traffic control facility levels 
 (1) In general Upon completion of the review conducted under subsection (a), the National Validation Team shall reassess, taking into account any revisions to criteria and procedures revised under such subsection, the air traffic control facility level at— (A) the Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport; and 
 (B) any other air traffic control facilities with high volumes of mixed helicopter and airplane traffic. (2) Report Not later than 1 year after completion of the review conducted under subsection (a), the Administrator shall submit to the appropriate committees of Congress a report detailing the findings of the reassessment required under paragraph (1) and recommendations with respect to the classification level of air traffic control facilities described in such paragraph. 
 (3) Implementation If the National Validation Team determines that a reclassification of the air traffic control facilities described in paragraph (1) to a higher level is appropriate, the National Validation Team may take any such actions as necessary to do so. (c) Rule of Construction Nothing in this section may be construed to interfere with any agreement between a governmental entity and the exclusive bargaining representative of air traffic controllers certified under section 7111 of title 5, United States Code, including requirements under sections 5333(b) and 40122 of title 49, United States Code, and section 7106(a)(1) of title 5, United States Code. 
 (d) National Validation Team defined In this section, the term National Validation Team means the joint working group comprised of the FAA and the exclusive bargaining representative of air traffic controllers certified under section 7111 of title 5, United States Code, established in May 2011 to administer and assess the agreed-upon calculations, formulas, and standards related to air traffic control facility levels. 111. 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) 3 separate organizations representing the certified collective bargaining representatives of pilots operating under part 121 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations; 
 (4) an organization representing helicopter aviation operators and pilots; (5) an organization representing business aviation operators and pilots; 
 (6) an organization representing air carriers operating under part 121 of title 14, United States Code; (7) an organization representing air carriers operating under part 121 of title 14, United States Code, with a low-cost or ultra-low-cost business model; 
 (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); and 
 (12) other organizations or agencies as determined necessary by the Administrator. (c) Voting The members described in paragraphs (9), (10), (11), and, in the case of a representative chosen by the Administrator that is from a governmental agency, (12) of subsection (b) shall be nonvoting members of the Working Group. 
 (d) 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. (e) 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 situational awareness; (2) to the greatest extent possible, the human factors that would impact pilot and air traffic controller situational awareness; 
 (3) to the greatest extent possible, the human factors that would impact pilot and air traffic controller focus 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 112; 
 (9) the potential for misdirected communications on crowded frequencies; (10) National Transportation Safety Board recommendations pertaining to miscommunications on crowded frequencies; 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. (f) 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. 
 (g) Implementation Not later than 6 months after receiving recommendations outlined in the report under subsection (f), the Administrator may take such action, as appropriate, to implement such recommendations. 112. 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 and maturity 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); and (3) a plan to implement the technologies listed under paragraphs (1) and (2), 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. 
 113. 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 Stat

… [truncated for display; full text stored]

Plain-English summary

Confidence: medium · Complexity: complex · Model: grok-4.5

Related issues

• Regulation & Agency Oversight
• Defense & National Security

How a vote maps to positions

Impartial mapping: which issue position a Yea vs Nay advances. When a bill has multiple floor votes, each roll can have its own mapping. Bill-level entries (no roll listed) apply as a default when a roll has no specific map. Used for legislator alignment.

Official citations

• Congress.gov

Member votes on this bill