An Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to H.R. 7613

I call the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure to order. Pursuant to Committee Rule 6(f) and House Rule 11, Clause 2(h), the Chairman may postpone further proceedings today on any question of approving any measure or matter or adopting an amendment on which a recorded vote or the yeas and nays is ordered. I'd ask unanimous consent the Chairman be authorized to declare a recess at any time during today's meeting. Without objection, that is so ordered. All bill and amendment texts have been distributed electronically and paper copies are available here in the hearing room. As a reminder, the Committee may use an electronic voting system for any requested recorded votes. Today the Committee is considering an amendment in the nature of a substitute to H.R. 7613, the Airspace Location and Enhanced Risk Transparency, or ALERT Act of 2026. And I'd ask unanimous consent for the Committee to use an amendment's roster for any items under consideration by the Committee. Without objection, that is so ordered. Finally, I'd like to take a moment to welcome Representative Baucom back to the T&I Committee. Yesterday, Rudy was added to our Committee via House Resolution 1135, and we're glad to have him back with us. All right. Our only item for consideration is H.R. 7613, the ALERT Act. I'd ask unanimous consent to discharge the Subcommittee on Aviation from any further consideration of H.R. 7613. Without objection, that is so ordered. I now call up the bill for consideration. Without objection, the first reading of the bill is dispensed with and the bill is now considered as read and open for amendment at any point. I now recognize myself to offer an amendment in the nature of a substitute. Clerk, please designate.

An amendment in the nature of a substitute to H.R. 7613 offered by Chairman Graves.

Without objection, the amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be considered as read and shall be considered as base text for the purpose of further amendment. I now recognize myself for five minutes. On January 29, 2025, tragedy struck when an Army Black Hawk helicopter and American Airlines Flight 5342 collided while Flight 5342 was on final approach to Ronald Reagan National Airport, just a few miles obviously from where we are right now. The collision claimed 67 souls, all passengers and flight crews on both aircraft. This tragedy proved to be the deadliest aviation accident in the United States in decades and exposed the need for reform in a multiple or a multitude of areas. Accidents of this magnitude deserve very careful and deliberate and thoughtful debate. Any aviation tragedy is always complicated with multiple contributing factors, and that is why it is important for us to understand all of the facts before we legislate. Following an accident, the National Transportation Safety Board is one of the first on the ground and are uniquely equipped to collect and analyze all data before offering their recommendations to prevent further tragedies. This is why the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee waited until the NTSB concluded its investigation and issued its final report before taking legislative action. Lawmakers must have all the facts before crafting meaningful policy or we risk failing to address the multi-layered causes of accidents in a comprehensive and consensus-driven manner. Following the release of the NTSB's final report on February 17, I joined T&I Ranking Member Rick Larsen and the Armed Services Committee Chairman Mike Rogers and Armed Services Ranking Member Adam Smith to introduce the ALERT Act. The bipartisan ALERT Act is a comprehensive package that addresses the probable cause, contributing factors, and response to all 50 safety recommendations that were issued by the NTSB. At a higher level, the ALERT Act takes important steps to improve safety throughout our nation's airspace by ensuring the utilization of technology to enhance flight crew's traffic awareness with visual and aural alerting, making updates to separation requirements and helicopter route design, the NTSB identified root cause of last year's tragedy, enhancing air traffic controller situational awareness and training, requiring updates to air traffic control processes and procedures, addressing shortcomings in the safety culture that contributed to the collision with an independent audit of the FAA's air traffic organization by the Inspector General, increasing data collection and sharing within and between the FAA and the Pentagon to identify risk before tragedy occurs, requiring the FAA to establish and objectively define close proximity events and begin collecting and analyzing the data. This is especially relevant with continuing reports of near misses, which is currently a subjective determination left to the discretion of flight crews to report, and further by working with the Armed Services Committee, strengthening safety standards for military aircraft by enhancing cooperation between the military and the FAA. Before and after introducing the ALERT Act on February 20, we have worked diligently with the NTSB to refine and improve the legislation before us today. Before closing, I would like to take a moment to thank the family members, both of those who have traveled here to Washington, D.C. to join us and those who are obviously not able to attend. While I wish we had met under different circumstances, I want to thank each of you for your advocacy and the commitment to aviation safety. I can't even begin to understand what a family goes through in losing somebody like this so needlessly. I can't even begin to try to comprehend that. In short order, the members of the Committee will have the opportunity to join together in support of a bipartisan and comprehensive package of improvements with 86 cosponsors that advance aviation safety across the board. Passing the ALERT Act is just one way this Committee is seeking to improve aviation safety, and I'd be remiss if I didn't highlight the funding for air traffic controllers as another crucial component to safe skies. T&I acted last December to pass legislation to ensure stable funding for our controllers, and I will continue to advocate for that. Now I recognize Rick for a statement on the bill.

Thank you, Chair, for holding this markup. And the legislation before us today, the Airspace Location and Enhanced Risk Transparency Act, is the comprehensive response to the National Transportation Safety Board's thorough investigation into this tragic mid-air collision near National Airport in January of last year. I want to thank Chair Homendy, the NTSB investigators, and staff for their diligent work to uncover the cause and contributing factors of this tragedy, as well as their input as our Committee developed and refined this legislation. And to the families and the loved ones of those lost in this tragedy, you have my deepest condolences. What you've gone through is unimaginable, and yet my sincere gratitude for your continued advocacy. Your efforts to effect change and improve aviation safety have made this bill better. And as this process moves forward, I hope we can continue to have productive conversations to advance a comprehensive safety package to the President. Now, the ALERT, I want to talk a little bit about the process. The ALERT Act is the comprehensive bipartisan House response to address all 50 NTSB recommendations. The ALERT Act was bipartisan from its inception and emerged from good faith collaboration between the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, our Committee, as well as the Committee on Armed Services. The D.C. mid-air tragedy involved both the FAA and the DOD, Department of Defense, and the solution to prevent future accidents must involve both of the committees. So this morning, our Committee is marking up Title I, which contains provisions squarely in our jurisdiction. These provisions direct the DOT and FAA to take action. And as a result, we won't be considering any amendments outside of our jurisdiction. But the House Armed Services Committee is holding its own markup this morning on Title II. And Title II contains provisions squarely in HASC's jurisdiction. These provisions direct the DOD and the Army to act on NTSB recommendations. As a result, HASC is not considering any amendments that are under our jurisdiction. And I wanted to make that point, there were some questions from members about if we do our work, will HASC get their hands on it, and that isn't the case. As the process moves forward, the T&I title and the HASC title will merge at the Rules Committee before going to the House floor. Now, the ANS to the ALERT Act that we're marking up today is something I like to call ALERT Act version 7.0. And it looks very different from the legislation that we introduced in February, which you could call ALERT Act 1.0. So it isn't just the next version, this is a vastly different bill than the one originally introduced. Over the last month, we've incorporated feedback from key aviation stakeholders to get to the bill to a place where it truly implements all of NTSB's recommendations. And through our work with the NTSB and others, the ANS to the ALERT Act is truly comprehensive. Now, the ANS to ALERT contains a sense of Congress and 26 provisions requiring the FAA and DOT to act on safety recommendations issued in the NTSB's final report, including requiring ADS-B In and collision prevention technology on virtually all aircraft, enhancing air traffic control or ATC training and traffic management procedures, modernizing facilities and technology, addressing deficiencies in the DOT and FAA's safety culture, and strengthening the safety of the national airspace system in D.C. Now, most of the outreach that we've received during the process focused on ADS-B In. The important thing to know about ADS-B In is that it's just one part of the collision prevention equation. While extremely useful, ADS-B In has to be paired with the right system in the flight deck: the right displays, the right audible alarms, the right software to effectively give a pilot increased situational awareness. Our bill goes to great lengths not only to require ADS-B In, but also to require each aircraft has collision prevention technology. For instance, for all mainline carriers, this means ADS-B In enabled ACAS XA, the next generation collision avoidance system. For everyone else who's currently required to have ADS-B Out, this bill requires ADS-B In, ADS-B In enabled collision prevention technology that also meets a strict set of minimum requirements. Together, these ADS-B In capabilities, fed into the right collision prevention technologies, will provide pilots with an unprecedented level of situational awareness and increase the safety of the airspace across the country. We've also received a few questions about why the ANS no longer has an interim equipage requirement for commercial passenger planes that are waiting for the ACAS XA upgrade. After significant consultation with NTSB and others, it became apparent that the interim and sometimes conflicting requirements laid out in earlier versions of the bill could have drastically delayed the adoption of ACAS XA. So as a result, the decision was made to separate the ACAS XA requirement in Section 102 from the generic collision prevention technology requirement in Section 104. Therefore, instead of getting bogged down in delays, commercial airlines will now be required to go straight to the next generation ADS-B In enabled collision avoidance technology. So today's markup is an important step in delivering our safety commitment to the flying public. It will allow us to soon begin critical discussions with the Senate on a final legislative response to the D.C. mid-air tragedy, as well as aviation safety across the country. So I do urge my colleagues to support the bill. And with that, I yield back.

Troy.

Thank you, Chairman Graves. Today the Committee meets to consider H.R. 7613, the Airspace Location and Enhanced Risk Transparency Act of 2026, or the ALERT Act. This legislation is to strengthen aviation safety and reduce the risk of mid-air collisions in our national airspace. And before I begin, I want to highlight the strong bipartisan support behind this legislation. The ALERT Act was introduced on a bipartisan basis by the leadership of the House Committee of Transportation and Infrastructure: Chairman Graves, Ranking Member Larsen, Aviation Subcommittee Ranking Member Carson, and myself as Chair of the Aviation Subcommittee, as well as House Armed Services Committee Chairman Rogers and Ranking Member Smith. And upon the introduction, the legislation quickly garnered support, 86 cosponsors, and is supported by numerous groups within the sector of the aviation industry. The United States operates the safest aviation system in the world. We do. And that record is built on a foundation of rigorous investigation, careful oversight, and thoughtful policymaking. When an accident occurs, it is our responsibility as lawmakers to have the facts and ensure that appropriate safety reforms are made. Following the tragic midair collision near Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport, the NTSB conducted a very thorough investigation and issued findings, the probable cause, contributing factors, and 50 safety recommendations intended to reduce the risk of similar accidents in the future. The ALERT Act responds to all 50 of those recommendations. Chairwoman Homendy, you're sitting out there. Yesterday we had a meeting. You said this is really historic. This is really maybe the first time, I mean, all 50 of those recommendations. Congress is listening. Congress is listening. This legislation takes a comprehensive and responsible approach to strengthening aviation safety. It directs the Federal Aviation Administration to mandate and deploy collision alerting and avoidance technologies that utilize ADS-B In data, review and redesign helicopter routes, the NTSB-identified root cause of last year's crash, improve situational awareness in complex airspace environments, increase transparency in data sharing so that pilots, controllers, and regulators have the information they need to identify risks, make changes, and operate safely, and an independent review of the FAA safety culture that ultimately contributed to the needless lives of 67 people. And to the families, I see you out there, to the families of Flight 5342, you're not forgotten. You will never be forgotten. Aviation safety legislation warrants careful deliberation. By allowing the NTSB to complete its work and issue evidence-based safety recommendations, Congress can ensure that any legislative response is informed, effective, and strengthens the safety of the national airspace. Our goal is straightforward: ensure that the lessons learned from this tragedy lead to real improvements that make our aviation system even safer for the flying public. I look forward to today's discussion and I urge my colleagues to support the ALERT Act. I yield back, sir.

Andre.

Thank you, Chairman. Thank you, Ranking Member Larsen, Chairman Nehls, for your leadership and your partnership, which have allowed our committee to mark up our bill today, the ALERT Act. No disrespect to the other body, but the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee is one of the most thoughtful and hardworking committees in Congress. It's also one of the most bipartisan. As Ranking Member Larsen says, we aren't a bunch of show horses, we're a committee of workhorses. And it's very good that we're marking up a comprehensive bill that will address and implement all of NTSB's 50 recommendations in the DCA collision report, not just a few. The terrible midair collision at DCA on January 29 last year, it haunts all of us here today. I want to take a moment now to recognize the family members who are here and continue to mourn the loss of 67 people who died that day, including Asra Hussain from Carmel, Indiana. You have turned your pain into power and passionate advocacy. And you have inspired us to keep working on a bill that is comprehensive and will make long-overdue changes to improve safety. This bill will address all of NTSB's recommendations to fix problems that were ignored for too long. Requires ADS-B In and collision prevention technology with a hard deadline. Enhances air traffic control training and procedures, including time-on-position limits. Modernizes ATC facilities and technologies. Addresses deficiencies in the safety cultures at DOT, FAA, and DOD. Strengthens the traffic management and safety of the national airspace and DCA area, including assessing volume, aircraft arrival rates, and regular review of helicopter routes in the area. Mr. Chairman, I'm sure my colleagues will have more to say as we continue, but I also want to thank the illustrious staff, but for now I want to urge all of our colleagues to join us in supporting this bill that we have worked very hard on to bring up to markup.

Tracey.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. On January 29, 2025, the world stood in shock followed by intense sadness as we watched tragedy unfold in the collision over the Potomac River between American Airlines Flight 5342 out of my home state of Wichita and a U.S. Army helicopter. We lost 67 souls that day and I speak for all Kansans when I say that this is a day that we will never, ever forget. We remember our fellow Kansans and Americans whose lives were tragically lost: children, parents, farmers, professors, and college students, all with bright futures, all taken from us far too soon. I want to commend the National Transportation Safety Board for its tireless and dedicated work over the past year to produce a comprehensive investigation and recommendations. What happened on that day demands a serious and thoughtful response from Congress that incorporates the lessons we learned from their findings to strengthen aviation safety and ensure that this tragedy is never repeated. It is essential that Congress enacts solutions that address the root causes identified by the NTSB and stand the test of time. The ALERT Act is the most substantive comprehensive reform to aviation safety in years, and I believe that it directly and thoughtfully addresses the full range of safety issues, systematic failures, and vulnerabilities that were exposed by last year's tragedy with the overall goal of making our national airspace safer for everyone. I'd like to thank Chairman Graves, Ranking Member Larsen, Chairman Rogers, and Ranking Member Smith for all the collaborative work that have been done to incorporate all 50 of the safety-related recommendations issued by the NTSB throughout this legislation. Again, all 50 of their recommendations are included in this legislation. Meaningful, lasting improvements to the safety of our airspace require the full and fair consideration of Congress working with victims' families, the aviation industry, and the administration, and the ALERT Act does just that. We will never forget what happened on January 29, and I am committed to ensuring that we do everything possible to ensure that it will never happen again. I look forward to supporting this legislation today and I urge my colleagues to do the same. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.

Chuy's next, but he's not in here, so we'll just move to Mike.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I want to thank everybody that worked on this bill so hard. And I want everybody to know today that we fully support this, the ALERT Act. Before coming to Congress, I served as a sheriff of Jackson County in law enforcement. I learned quickly that you can't ignore the warning signs. When something goes wrong, you figure a way out to fix it and you get it done so that it doesn't happen the next time. That's exactly what this bill does. After last year's tragic collision, the NTSB did the hard work of investigating what went wrong. The ALERT Act takes their findings and translates them into real, tangible improvements with one clear priority: to raise the safety standards. It ensures that pilots and air traffic controllers have better tools and better awareness of what's going on around them so they can make the right decision at the right time. This also provides long-overdue updates, upgrades to collision avoidance technology. The bill also evaluates helicopter routes, especially in busy airspace like around Reagan National, and puts clear common-sense rules in place to keep aircraft safely separated. Just as important is strengthens accountability. It improves data collection, gives better tracking of near misses, and takes a closer look at the FAA safety procedures. Given my background, I see this as basic necessary prevention. You don't wait for the next accident, you act immediately and reduce the risk. This is a strong step in the right direction and it's focused on what matters most: protecting lives. I support it and I encourage all of my colleagues to do the same. And I'm so sorry for your loss. And thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back.

Tom.

Barrett. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Appreciate it. And I want to just start by acknowledging and thanking the families of the victims that are here today. We deeply appreciate and respect the voice that you've brought to this conversation and this effort to really make sure that the same things are not happening going forward and those gaps that we observed are not happening in the future. We often say in aviation that a lot of our changes and a lot of our requirements and safety changes are written in blood, and they're written in the blood of those that perished as we make these changes going forward. So we lift you up in prayer in this effort to make sure that these types of things are not happening again. I had the experience of flying the same type of Black Hawk helicopter that was tragically involved in this collision where 67 souls were lost in the skies over the Potomac River just a little over a year ago right now. And was actually conversing with members of my unit that I retired from the night of this tragedy and in the days following to see what we could do to change that. And it continued to come back to two things: ADS-B and collision avoidance technology. And those are two things that I'm very proud to see are included both in the T&I portion of this as well as the Armed Services portion of this bill to facilitate that effort to bring these forward. As I've reflected on the many different risk factors and elements that led to this, I continue to go back to a few different things. One of which was that the American Airlines flight had ADS-B Out that was operating, functional, and transmitting, but they did not have ADS-B In. The Army flight had ADS-B In, but they were not transmitting an ADS-B Out. The airline had TCAS and the helicopter did not. And those factors along with muddled transmissions through the radio with stepped-on transmission and a misidentification of which airplane they were set to steer around and avoid and altitude that was a little bit too high and altimeter that was less precise than the crew relied on, all contributed to this. And I think the steps, I truly believe that the steps we're taking today are going to decrease and mitigate those risks in a significant way. I'm also thankful that on the Armed Services side they've taken measures to hold the military accountable in ways that we need to force their hand to make significant safety improvements as well. And so I'm excited to see this bill form up on the floor as well. I also was thankful to see that the spacing and timing between air traffic coming into Washington, D.C. will be changed and modified so that we're not overwhelming our air traffic control volume here at the exact same time. I do want to thank Chair Homendy for being here and for your work on this continuously briefing our committee and helping us make the best work product that we can out of this. And I'm going to continue to work on ways that we can improve aviation safety and I'm proud that this bill makes a major step in that direction that I'm convinced will make everybody in all of our national airspace, especially in Washington, D.C. with the congestion and unique circumstances here, but really throughout the national airspace as well. So thank you, Mr. Chairman, for listening to a lot of the concerns. Thank you to Chair Homendy, thank you to the families for advocating, and I'm excited to get this bill over the finish line. Thank you.

Hank. Johnson. Yeah.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Before we begin, I want to acknowledge the families who have lost loved ones in the midair collision over the Potomac River last year. Your presence here today is a solemn reminder of why we are here. We honor your loved ones and we carry their memory with us as we consider this legislation. The National Transportation Safety Board conducted a thorough investigation into that tragedy and they told us what failed and they told us what must be fixed. And they confirmed that this bill, as amended, implements every single one of their safety recommendations. That is the level of seriousness that this moment demands. The ALERT Act strengthens the systems that help pilots avoid collisions. It improves training for the men and women who guide aircraft safely through our skies. It updates procedures that have not kept pace with the complexity of modern aviation. And it improves coordination between civilian and military aircraft so that everyone operating in our airspace is working from the same playbook. At its core, this bill is about responsibility. Our responsibility to the flying public, to the aviation workforce, and to the families who have already endured the unimaginable. Our task now is to take what we've learned and build a safer system with care and with purpose, starting with this legislation. I urge my colleagues to support this bill and with that I yield back.

Bob.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I really want to thank and commend Chairman Graves, Ranking Member Larsen for all their hard work on this bill. You know, over the years, the National Transportation Safety Board recommended 17 times that in the places where ADS-B Out has been required since 2020 of us pilots, that ADS-B In also be required. 17 times. And then in January 2025, 67 Americans lost their lives in outside of DCA. NTSB of course issued their recommendation an 18th time. So it was of course a matter of great disappointment to me as the House sponsor of the Rotor Act when on February 24th, the Rotor Act failed by one vote after already passing the Senate. And it was my concern when I saw an early version of ALERT that really all of NTSB's recommendations were not being incorporated into ALERT. But I am very, very happy to say that the committee, the chairman, the ranking member have continued to work with all concern, with Director Homendy, with the NTSB, with the families, with the various other stakeholders to produce a bill that does incorporate all 50 safety recommendations. This is, as one of my colleagues described, a substantive comprehensive piece of legislation. I think it literally will save lives and again, I just want to thank everyone involved, but most of all, I want to thank the families who have turned their tragedy into something good to prevent other families from having to go through the loss, through the tragedy, through the suffering that you all have had to go through. You all are in our prayers. God bless you all and Mr. Chairman, again, thank you for all your work on this bill.

Shomari.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think I have the most powerful seat in this committee today because I get to look directly into the faces of the families and the pictures of the victims of this crash that they're holding up. And I want to thank you guys for your courage and your passion and your advocacy in turning tragedy into actual results here. I was in a hotel as a freshman member of Congress that night, I believe it was during orientation, when this incident happened and I, like you and the rest of America, had the same question: how in the hell can this happen? And I was shocked as a member of this committee to learn that even though we sit in the most technologically advanced space that we have ever been in as a society, that we did not have that technology equipped on the aircraft involved in a way that could have realistically avoided this in the first place. And so I'm thankful that we're in a place today to do this, to make changes and incorporate it. I'm looking forward to the discussion today because there are some things here that we will discuss today. But I really want to thank the families for what you guys have to sit through and deal with this and the pain that you guys have to live with. I've lost a loved one suddenly, my father before, so I know what that's like and it is a club that nobody wants to be a part of. But you guys have taken the mantle and you guys are really doing a good deed in being here. Chair Homendy, you know, since I got here, we've interacted with a lot of government officials, a lot of agencies. In a time where we are seeing a decline in standards of professionalism and decency and communication and interaction between different aspects of government, you guys are professionals. You guys have been the best agency that I have had the opportunity to work with and engage since I've been here. The effort that you guys put into this investigation, the transparency in the briefings, the timely responsiveness that you guys have provided to us as a body and to the public in a reasonable and professional standard, this does not go unnoticed by me. You guys are what government should be, how it should function, and I thank you sincerely for that. And we look forward to incorporating a lot of what you guys have produced, unfortunately yet again with some of the recommendations, but hopefully today we can get to a space where we can finally get this across the finish line. Thank you and I yield back, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member Larsen. We really appreciate having the opportunity here to have this vote and get to commiserate with these families who have lost loved ones. We're here today to consider H.R. 7613, the ALERT Act, a bipartisan bill that takes important steps to improve safety across our nation's airspace. This legislation comes in response to the tragic mid-air collision near Reagan National Airport that claimed 67 lives, a sobering reminder of the importance of vigilance and accountability in our aviation sector. This bill is focused on making our aviation system safer for everyone who depends on it. It supports the use of modern technology, strengthens coordination within our airspace, and ensures that our safety systems keep pace with the demands of a complex and growing aviation environment. These are practical, forward-looking improvements that will help reduce risk and protect the flying public. Equally important, this legislation reflects a commitment to learning from past incidents and making necessary adjustments to prevent future tragedies. Aviation safety must and always remain a top priority and this bill demonstrates that Congress is taking that responsibility very seriously. As we move forward, we continue to pray and always recognize the families and the loved ones impacted by the tragedy that led us here. Our thoughts are with you always and we remain committed to honoring their loss through our work here in this committee. This is a strong bipartisan effort that reinforces the safety and the reliability of our aviation system. And I want to say how much I appreciate the work that has gone into this bill from our chairman and ranking member and members of this committee. And I also want to mention Ms. Homendy. Thank you, Madam Chair, for the work that you have put in on this as well to make sure this never happens again. And so with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.

Moving forward, I now recognize myself to offer a manager's amendment. Clerk, please designate.

A manager's amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to H.R. 7613 offered by Chairman Graves.

Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read and I'd recognize myself real quick for a statement. So the manager's amendment reflects some member feedback and incorporates some technical improvements identified by the NTSB and other stakeholders and strengthens the underlying bill in practical and targeted ways. Specifically, it includes Mr. Taylor's amendment to ensure airlines have a seat at the table alongside pilots, air traffic controllers, and manufacturers when it comes to consultation requirements because safety decisions benefit from obviously every operational perspective. It also includes language developed with Ms. Titus and Mr. Van Drew to make sure air traffic controllers receive clear guidance and training before any changes to visual separation policies take effect. We are not asking them to adapt on the fly, obviously. In coordination with Mr. Garamendi, the amendment permanently closes helicopter route four near Washington Reagan National Airport, addressing a long-standing safety concern in one of the most complex airspaces in the country. And in response to NTSB technical assistance, it ensures that law enforcement helicopters and other public use aircraft are equipped with ADS-B and collision prevention technology because visibility and situational awareness simply saves lives. These are practical and consensus-driven improvements that make the bill stronger and I'd urge my members to support the manager's amendment. With that, I yield back and recognize Mr. Larsen.

Thank you, Chair. I support the manager's amendment to the ANS of H.R. 7613 offered by the chair. This agreement includes several bipartisan provisions, technical corrections, and revisions raised by members and key stakeholders. Notably, I'm pleased the amendment clarifies visual separation training requirements for air traffic controllers in light of the FAA's recent procedure changes. This amendment led by Representatives Titus and Van Drew. Representative Garamendi's amendment to permanently close helicopter route four near DCA is included. This manager's amendment also ensures the DOT Inspector General evaluates safety management system, the safety management system of the FAA's new aviation safety management organization. It directs the FAA to also coordinate with general and business aviation operators on its assessment of the aircraft arrival rate at DCA. And it adds federal contract tower operators as an entity FAA should coordinate with on the development and implementation of safety risk assessment tools for air traffic controllers. All these among other changes. I want to thank the chair of the committee, Chair Graves, subcommittee Chair Nehls, and Ranking Member Carson and the staff of the committee for their efforts to maintain the bipartisan nature of this bill and I urge members to support this manager's amendment. Yield back.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I rise in strong support of the manager's amendment and I'm proud to have worked with the chair and my good friend Congresswoman Titus. I thank her for her leadership and her direction on this issue. It makes a simple but critical change in the underlying bill. Our provision ensures that when the FAA makes any change to visible visual separation rules or procedures, air traffic controllers must receive advanced training and clear guidance before those changes can take effect. We are only as good as the training we've had. Air traffic controllers operate in one of the most complex safety-critical environments in the world, we all know this. We rely on them to make real-time decisions that keep millions of passengers safe every single day. When we change their rules, we have an obligation to make sure they are fully prepared, fully trained, and fully understand the new rules. Last week, the FAA issued a new rule ending visual separation for helicopters in congested airport environments. This decision may have been implemented with safety in mind, and I know it was, but the rollout blindsided controllers with no notice, no guidance, and no plan. It's not how safety reform should happen. When controllers are forced to adapt on the fly without training or clarity, we are not strengthening safety, we're introducing uncertainty into an already high-stakes system. This amendment addresses that gap very directly. It's critical that we move swiftly to address these safety risks, which is why the ALERT Act must be passed. I'm proud of the work our chairman, our ranking member, and in a bipartisan way this entire committee did on this piece of legislation. It turns the lessons of a tragic and avoidable, a horrible disaster into mandatory enforceable action, closing the precise safety gaps needed to ensure this never happens again. Once again, I thank the chairman for including our provision in the manager's amendment because these reforms must be implemented in a way that supports the men and women responsible for keeping our skies safe, not one that leaves them scrambling to adapt in real time. I yield back.

John.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We've been at this several months, and I've been through many, many hearings, but rarely have I been through a process that was so complete and so informative. First, I want to mention and follow up with my colleagues about the families that are here and those who are not. This loss, this accident didn't have to happen. NTSB, the information that you gave us, the hearings, the interaction, extraordinarily important. Mr. Graves, you and Mr. Larsen, Nehls, and Carson did extraordinary work informing all of us and the general public about all of the complex issues that are found in this as a result of this accident. Good piece of work. I also want to just thank you for including my amendment. As we went through all of the details and listened to what ADSB in, out works or doesn't work and the cost of it and other extraordinarily detailed information, something was always nagging me and that is, what was that helicopter doing there anyway? Why was the helicopter flying down the Potomac? And it seemed to me that with all of the reforms that are in this bill, all of which are important, necessary, and will make things safer, the elimination of that helicopter route would have prevented this accident from ever happening. And so in this amendment, thank you for including my amendment that Route 4 is permanently closed. I will soon go over to the Armed Services Committee and we'll talk about the other military routes and whether they should also be closed or at least be restricted. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for an extraordinary piece of work. Thank you.

Thanks. Dina.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First of all, I too want to take a moment to acknowledge the families and loved ones of the 67 victims in the collision over the Potomac River. Their lives will never be the same, and the least we can do is pass legislation to prevent a tragedy like this from ever happening again, and that's what I know we are all committed to doing. On February 17, the National Transportation Safety Board released a final report outlining its investigations into the collision along with a suite of recommendations for improving the safety of the national airspace so we could prevent future tragedies. The legislation before us today addresses all 50 of those recommendations from the NTSB. That's pretty incredible for a piece of legislation, I thank the chairman and ranking member. I have full faith in the NTSB's independent investigation, and I'm glad that our committee is taking this action to implement those recommendations. The stakes for aviation safety are really high in my district in Las Vegas. 50 million people fly through Harry Reid International Airport just last year. Ensuring that those passengers and the crew members who visit Las Vegas are safe is a top priority of mine, and that's why I wanted to serve on the Aviation Subcommittee. I'd like to talk for a minute though about an amendment that I have to this manager's package that's based on visual separation. You've heard it mentioned from Mr. Van Drew, and I'm pleased to cooperate with him to introduce this amendment. It directs the FAA to provide advanced training and guidance to air traffic controllers for any future changes to visual separation policies. And I'm glad that it's included because as you heard him say, any kind of recommendations are great, changes need to be made, but they can't be made just overnight without any preparation. This policy seemed to have been rolled out overnight, and it suspended the use of visual separation between helicopters and airplanes, and it required our air traffic controllers to use radar-based separation where helicopter routes intercept with airport arrival and departure. Now, this was done without any sufficient warning or training, including for the air traffic controllers who were expected to immediately implement this policy on the ground. It led to disruptions in Las Vegas, including for helicopter tour operators who go out to Grand Canyon and take people down the strip. I'm reviewing the change in policy and the implications for the district, but one thing is clear, at a minimum, our air traffic controllers should receive advanced training and guidance for any changes in policy that they'll be entrusted to implement and administer. So I appreciate the chairman and ranking member including our amendment. I think that the air traffic controllers will certainly appreciate and benefit from this training. We want to be sure though that this legislation is just the first step, that we have deadlines and oversight to be sure these things are implemented and that will keep our skies safe for the future. Thank you so much.

Does anyone else wish to be heard on the amendment? Seeing no one, are there any amendments to the amendment? Seeing none, the question is on the amendment. All those in favor signify by saying aye. [Chorus of ayes.] All opposed signify by saying nay. The ayes have it, the amendment is agreed to. Okay, we're going to briefly recess because we are actually several of us that are also on this committee are on Armed Services and we're fixing to vote for passage of Armed Services version or their part of the bill. And so we will recess briefly, it shouldn't take, votes are at, vote is at, there's only one at 11:00 straight up, and so we should be right back after that. Committee stands in recess. We'll call the committee back to order. The Armed Services section of the bill, Title 2, passed unanimously. So we'll move on with our markup and hopefully we'll get the same, hopefully we'll get the same outcome. All right, so what purpose Mr. Carbajal seek recognition?

these changes. The provision in question would allow operators to essentially turn ADS-B transmission on and off, and that is a problem. These systems exist for a reason. They give us real-time visibility, improve situational awareness, and are foundational to how we manage safe and efficient airspace today. Weakening that, even with good intentions around privacy and other issues, introduces risk into a system where we are working really hard to reduce risk. I'll say this as well. I have not been hearing broad support from the folks on the ground who are responsible for running safe operations. I did speak with the executive director of our Johnson County Airport Commission, and he did not express support for this provision because of the real-world safety and operational concerns that it creates. If we want to have a conversation about privacy in general aviation, I'm absolutely open to that and would look forward to that conversation. It is absolutely a conversation worth having, but should happen on its own with the full attention that it deserves, not necessarily just folded into a bill that is primarily focused, exclusively focused on saving lives. So I would just urge my colleagues to keep this bill as focused as possible, keep it around the safety provisions, and I support Salud Carbajal's amendment. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back.

Mr. Nehls.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I oppose this amendment. Safety technology should be used for safety purposes, and that's the end of the discussion. I know all of your offices have been bombarded by airports saying this provision would prohibit them from collecting landing fees. That's flat out wrong, and I'm not quite sure where they get that interpretation from, certainly not from the text before us. In addition to aviation organizations nationwide, including those in California, efforts to restrict the use of ADS-B data for airport economic purposes are supported by airports in several states, including Illinois, Massachusetts, Florida, New Jersey, California, Ohio. And if I may take a quick moment to quote a statement from NTSB Chairwoman Homendy during a February 12, 2026 Senate Commerce hearing, quote, ADS-B is a safety tool, and it should be used for safety, not as a revenue generator to charge general aviation pilots ramp fees or landing fees, end quote. I want general aviation pilots to equip their aircraft with modern safety technology. We all do. We cannot allow for airports to deter this equipage by using it in a manner that it was never intended. And I urge my colleagues to vote no on this amendment. Thank you, I yield back.

Does anyone else wish to be heard? Seeing no one, I'll recognize myself for five minutes, and I want to thank Mr. Carbajal for working with us on this, but I have to oppose this amendment. I believe there's been a lot of misinformation shared about the intent of Section 105. Put simply, this bill, the ALERT Act, would not prohibit airports from obtaining revenue in the form of landing fees. And I'm going to say that again. This bill does not prevent airports from charging landing fees. What the provision does is ensure the transmissions of ADS-B data from aircraft are used only for safety purposes and not for invoicing. The equipage of ADS-B out significantly improves aviation safety and is foundational to many of the safety provisions that are in the ALERT Act. When more general aviation aircraft equip with this safety technology, even in airspace that it isn't required, the whole system is going to get safer. But when airports use ADS-B out to issue bills, often erroneously, the trust that safety technology is only used to improve safety is eroded and pilots are discouraged from equipping their aircraft. I want pilots to equip their aircraft. That's what the point of this is. I'll give a real quick story of my own. I was doing training in a T-6 and it was at night doing engine-out training and I was doing touch-and-goes. What a touch-and-go is, is you touch down and you immediately take back off again. So I was doing this at an airport, and I'm not going to name the airport, and I had ADS-B out equipped in my T-6 and I was doing my training, my touch-and-go training, and a week later I got a bill from the airport for a landing fee. And so what that does discourage is pilots not to equip where they don't have to. I want them to equip even in areas that they don't have to. And safety data should not be used to charge pilots. That's why I believe that Section 105 will ultimately increase the adoption of safety awareness technology everywhere. Restricting the use of safety technology and information for safety purposes isn't new. In aviation and in rail, cockpit voice recorders and mounted cameras can only be used for safety and investigative purposes, never for employee discipline. And just last Congress, we passed an FAA reauthorization law that included a provision requested by the airports that would protect information that they submit to the FAA about the development and implementation of their safety management systems from being disclosed. We all agree with the airports and others that protecting safety data from exploitation was important to promoting aviation safety. Pilots and aircraft owners are simply asking for the same protections with their own safety technology. The safety case is why NTSB Chair Homendy endorsed the policy preventing ADS-B out from being used as an airport billing tool at a recent Senate hearing. Airports have other tools at their disposal to charge landing fees, and I have no doubt they will quickly turn to those tools to do so. But if you believe that ADS-B is an important aviation safety technology and that Congress should be doing everything it can to encourage the adoption of the technology, then I would urge my colleagues to vote no on this amendment. And with that, I yield back. Does anyone else wish to be heard? Seeing no one, are there any amendments to the amendment? Seeing none, all those in favor signify by saying aye. All opposed signify by saying nay. In the opinion of the chair, the nays have it.

Mr. Chair.

Yes.

I'd like to request a recorded vote, please.

The gentleman requests a recorded vote on the amendment. As previously announced, pursuant to committee rule 6F, further proceedings on the question are postponed. For what purpose does Ms. Hoyle seek recognition?

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would like to submit an amendment.

Please designate.

Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Let us designate.

An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to H.R. 7613 offered by Ms. Hoyle of Oregon, number 042.

Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Ms. Hoyle, you're recognized for five minutes. Sorry about that.

Thank you, Mr. Chair, my fault. So I want to bring attention to yet another preventable aviation tragedy. On January 2, a helicopter collided with a slackline, essentially a narrow webbing of suspended high across a canyon near Superior, Arizona, claiming the lives of 60-year-old David McCarty, 24-year-old Rachel McCarty, 21-year-old Faith McCarty, and 22-year-old Caitlyn Heideman. They were on their way to a family wedding. David, Rachel, Faith, and Caitlyn were more than the tragedy that took them from us. They were people leading full lives with families, friends, and communities who are living with their loss every day. David McCarty founded McCarty Logging in his 20s, went on to establish Columbia Basin Helicopters, combining his entrepreneurial spirit with the love of aviation, and he'll be remembered for his work ethic, fearlessness, and unwavering commitment to the things he loved most, his family, the mountains, and the sky. Rachel McCarty will be remembered for her kind and gentle nature, her dry wit, the patience she showed to herself and others as she mentored them. She was known as the get-it-done girl as she got things done and cared deeply for her family and those around her. Faith McCarty brought energy and joy everywhere she went. She was an athlete who played with intensity and spirit and who loved competition, but loved people more. Whether on the court or in the classroom, she had a caring heart and a way of making people feel seen and valued. Caitlyn Heideman was a scholar who excelled in the classroom, an athlete, and an artist who was accomplished at photography, and she was a farm girl at heart. Those who knew Caitlyn will remember her radiant presence. Her teammate and friends described her as the glue that held people together, pushed them to their best, and a genuine listener. All these people were men and women of strong faith in their Lord and Savior, and their lives deserve to be remembered in full. But the best thing we can do to honor their memory is to work to ensure this doesn't happen to anyone else. Before entering Telegraph Canyon, the pilot had no clear way of knowing that a slackline was strung across the valley and had no reliable system to alert him to that danger. These lines can be nearly invisible to pilots and are not consistently marked or tracked or communicated through the system pilots use. The rescue helicopters, two of them, almost hit the same slackline that day within those 24 hours. We shouldn't have to wait for a report to begin addressing a threat we already understand. We should have the FAA act now to ensure hazards like this are clearly communicated before lives are put at risk. I recognize the NTSB investigation is ongoing, and I respect the importance of that work. We work very closely with you and we know this is important, a priority for NTSB. As that process continues, I want to look at what more we can do now. And I'm withdrawing this amendment today, but we're not walking away from this issue. I remain committed to working with my colleagues on a path forward that better protects pilots and helps prevent another tragedy. And I just want to acknowledge the family members in the room and watching that you know that we are not going to let this fall by the wayside. I thank you and yield back.

Val, do you wish to withdraw?

I wish to withdraw the amendment.

Without objection, that is so ordered. Thank you very much. For what purpose does Ms. Friedman seek recognition?

I would like to offer an amendment.

Please designate.

An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to H.R. 7613 offered by Ms. Friedman of California, number 035.

Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. You have five minutes.

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, Ranking Member Larsen. First, I want to acknowledge and thank the families for being with us here today. We've had several hearings, some of them closed hearings, on this topic and on the tragic accident that happened last year. And I do want to let the families know that the families and the victims were always foremost in everyone's mind and brought up at every single hearing and numerous times. So your advocacy has been extremely important. And I also want to thank all of my colleagues, Republican and Democrat alike, for taking this very seriously and for working in such a productive and bipartisan way. It's certainly the way that I was hoping Congress would operate when I came here and I'm glad to be able to be a part of that. I want to offer an amendment that I believe is a more, let's say, restrained measure than the one that my colleague Congressman Carbajal just offered. This amendment strikes a provision that locks the airports out of collecting critical takeoff and landing fees that are required to improve safety and ensure that operations continue efficiently. I represent the Hollywood Burbank Airport, an airport that's been called out by NTSB as being a potential, you know, a site that we have to be concerned about because of the amount of traffic and the complexity of the airspace. And so I take the safety very, very seriously. I was also an airport commissioner for six years at that airport before I was in Congress and understand as well the importance of making sure that pilots also obey the rules and pay their fees and not skirt the law and try to fly in without being noticed so that they don't have to pay landing fees. As well, I've heard from our county assessor in Los Angeles about the difficulty of making sure that billionaires in Los Angeles and other places in the country who are flying their own private planes are dodging paying their legal taxes or breaking the law and hiding their assets. And we need a better way certainly for our local cities and our airports to be able to get and retrieve the revenue to which they are entitled under the law so that they can make safety improvements, so that they can put the investments into their air traffic control towers and their equipment and their ADA accessibility and everything else that landing fees are used for. For maintenance, for public safety, and you know, when it comes to local taxes, for our schools and our roads. So I urge my colleagues to support the amendment that's in front of us. It is a reasonable and very limited amendment, but literally the safety of our airports and the livelihood of our local communities are really dependent on our ability to know who is flying in and out of airports and to be able to collect revenue from them under the law. And I would request a voice vote on this. Thank you.

Mr. Nehls.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I again, I oppose this amendment. Allowing ADSB data to be used for revenue collection would discourage operators from fully embracing safety technologies, particularly in the general aviation community, and it runs counter to the purpose for which the system was implemented. As we have already discussed, nothing in this provision can limit an airport's ability to access to assess fees. Airports already have a well-established authorities to impose landing fees, user charges, and other airport-based revenue mechanisms. This provision does not interfere with those authorities. It simply ensures that ADSB data is not used as a new backdoor mechanism to identify and charge operators in a way that was never intended when this safety system was put into the place. This is a narrow common sense guardrail. It protects the integrity of safety system while preserving the existing tools airports rely on to fund their operations. I'd like to again reiterate I said a few minutes ago that NTSB Chairwoman Homendy testified before the Senate that ADSB is a safety tool and should not be used as a revenue generator. The ALERT Act ensures the right protections are in place and this amendment seeks to remove those guardrails. I must, I strongly oppose this amendment and I urge my colleagues to do the same. I yield back.

Mr. Onder.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yeah, very briefly, this amendment likewise would strike the ADSB privacy provisions including in the included in the underlying bill. In doing so it would preserve the status quo where increasingly safety technology mandated by Congress is being used for a as a tool for revenue collection. Again, absolutely nothing about section 105 of this bill prevents airports from collecting landing fees. I cannot imagine that Burbank Airport in California, I've never been there, I cannot imagine they do not have someone on site manning their FBO who can copy down tail numbers. Instead what striking this provision would do would discourage aircraft owners and operators from adopting ADSB. As our chairman pointed out, with the ALERT Act we're only mandating ADSB in in certain busy airspace. Likewise, the 2020 FAA mandate of ADSB out only mandated ADSB out in very busy airspace. But we would really like to see every pilot in the United States adopt ADSB technology. And by using it for things other than safety, using it as an invoicing tool by airports abuses this technology and it undermines the safety purpose of this bill. So I strongly encourage my colleagues to reject this amendment and with that I yield back.

Does anyone else wish to be heard on the amendment? I'm not going to speak to it. I think I made my point known. Are there any other any amendments to the amendment? Seeing none, the question is on the question is on the amendment. All those in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

All opposed signify by saying nay.

Nay.

In opinion of the chair, the nays have it. The nays do have it.

Could I request a voice vote please?

A request a...

You want a recorded recorded vote.

Recorded vote. It's still getting over the legislature terms. The gentlelady requests a vote on the amendment as previously announced pursuant to committee rule 6F, further proceedings on the question are postponed. For what purpose does Ms. Hoyle seek recognition?

I have an amendment at the desk.

Please designate.

An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to H.R. 7613 offered by Ms. Hoyle of Oregon, number 043.

Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Ms. Hoyle recognized for five minutes.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I rise in support of this amendment which would clearly and unambiguously require that all commercial aircraft equip and operate with integrated ADSB in technology. Now I intend to withdraw it. However, I want to thank Congressman Bresnahan, Congresswoman Holmes Norton, and Congressman Greg Stanton for joining me in bringing this forward. I acknowledge the family and friends here today because they have lost loved ones from flight 5342 and we can't bring your loved ones back, but we can commit to do everything possible that this does not happen again. And I want to begin there because you all have helped make clear what's at stake here and your advocacy is why we were able to get to where we are with the current ALERT Act. I also want to thank Jennifer Homendy and the NTSB for working so very hard to make sure that this wasn't just another government bill where we, you know, kick the can down the road. We can't afford to do that. So we need to do something meaningful, meaningful enough to stop it from happening again. Now the families, you know, you all just put out a statement says the families of flight 5342 thank the House Armed Services Committee, the House Transportation Infrastructure Committee for their engagement with the NTSB's technical expertise on the ALERT Act. We acknowledge significant progress made to the bill, but equally important to address the recommendations is how safety requirements are implemented. Families have learned through painful experience that the recommendations, which were there before, without firm deadlines and clear mandates become recommendations without results. Any safety requirement that routes implementation through a negotiated process, administrative discretion, or multi-step rulemaking creates opportunities for delay that cost lives. The strongest version of this bill will set a clear statutory timeline and performance standards that leave no room for the process to become an obstacle. The families have made it clear what they need from us and we have a responsibility to meet this moment with real action. I don't want to miss an opportunity to enact the strongest possible safety requirements for a commercial aircraft. ADSB in is a situational awareness and surveillance tool for pilots. It's life-saving technology already in use in some aircraft and ready to be deployed now. When appropriately configured and integrated into the flight deck, it provides pilots with greater advanced warning of potential threat with visible, audible alerts that indicate position, speed, direction, and altitude of nearby aircraft. This gives pilots time and information to immediately identify a collision and take evasive action, action that likely would have saved those 67 lives. The NTSB has run simulations, summaries of which are included in the board's final report, that clearly show ACAS XA would have only given an extra eight seconds of warning to the pilots of PSA flight 5342 compared with 40 seconds for fully integrated ADSB in with a cocktail display of traffic information. I will continue to insist that any final legislation must appropriately require ADSB in with a cockpit display of traffic information for any aircraft that is flying in civilian airspace. And I want to thank you again to the families, to Chair Graves, Ranking Member Larsen, and I yield back for the moment.

Rob.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you Congresswoman Hoyle for introducing this amendment. I rise in support and am proud to help introduce this amendment that clearly and simply requires ADSB technology in on all aircraft that already is mandated to have ADSB out. As a helicopter pilot, I rely on ADSB both in and out every single time that I fly. It helps me see traffic, avoid conflicts, and frankly, it helps keep me and other pilots and passengers alive. Just this past weekend during my flight review, I remember specifically looking at the ADSB in in preparation for today's markup and saw multiple other aircraft inside of the traffic pattern and think about how this could be applicable in each and every one of our lives every single day. Less than a month ago, Congress had an opportunity to send a bill that had mandatory ADSB in to the president's desk. That opportunity was missed despite being supported by a vast majority of the House and unanimously in the Senate. This was a real disservice to the American people because this is technology that saves lives. I want to take time to acknowledge all the family members and friends, especially those in the room with us here today, who lost loved ones in flight 5342's tragic accident. And it's your advocacy up here in Washington on the hill that helped get us to where we are here today. Without you being here, I'm not sure we would all be in here talking about the ALERT Act and the markup in which we're working on. We have a responsibility to do everything we can to prevent tragedies like this from ever happening again. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to insert their statement in support of this amendment that Congresswoman Hoyle had mentioned earlier into the record.

Without objection.

For those of here who are not pilots, ADSB in is technology that provides situational awareness and surveillance that provides pilots a greater advanced warning of potential threats. It gives visual and audible alerts that indicate the position, speed, direction, and altitude of nearby aircraft, giving pilots the time and information needed to immediately identify a potential collision and take evasive action. It is a new day in aviation. The reality is this is technology that some new pilots are being trained on from day one. This is how modern aviation operates. ADSB in is proven technology that can be deployed now to save lives. I do want to acknowledge the progress that has been made with the ALERT Act. It is a step in the right direction, but there's certainly more work to be done. I will continue to push to ensure that any final legislation requires ADSB in and delivers the strongest possible safety protections to prevent future accidents and the loss of life. I look forward to continuing to work with you, Mr. Chairman, and all my colleagues to get a package across the finish line that makes our sky safer and saves lives. As well as to Chairwoman Homendy with the recent wake of the most the newest accident at LaGuardia, you and your team have been incredible with working with our committee, a small but mighty agency that does incredible work each and every day. With that I yield.

Greg.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I support this amendment led by my colleague Congresswoman Hoyle and Congressman Bresnahan to strengthen ADSB in provisions in the ALERT Act. Last January we tragically lost 67 lives in the mid-air collision between American Airlines flight 5342 and an Army Blackhawk helicopter. All of us continue to extend our deepest condolences to the families who lost loved ones and acknowledge their tireless advocacy in the wake of this tragedy. Your advocacy matters and we're so proud of you being here today. Thank you. I want to thank Chairman Graves and Ranking Member Larsen for working in a bipartisan manner to address the 50 recommendations made by the National Transportation Safety Board in response to this tragedy. Congress has a responsibility to do all we can to ensure a tragedy like this one never happens again. The ALERT Act makes important and comprehensive progress, but I hope that the bill can be strengthened further to wholly and extensively implement ADS-B In technology. Since 2008, the NTSB has recommended 17 times that ADS-B In be required in order to enhance safety in our nation's airspace. Safety must always remain all of our highest priority. The language in the amendment was included in the bipartisan ROTOR Act, which did pass the Senate unanimously and received 264 bipartisan yes votes on the House floor. It uses clear, direct language to require all aircraft to equip and operate with ADS-B In if they are currently required to operate with ADS-B Out. As this bill makes its way to the floor, I look forward to working with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to make additional changes that reflect the full scope and strength of ADS-B In recommendations. Thank you for your consideration on this important issue, and I yield back.

Eleanor.

Thank you. I strongly support this amendment to strengthen the ADS-B requirements in the ALERT Act. Since last year's heartbreaking collision near DCA, we have witnessed countless more reminders of the need to improve aviation safety. All aircraft must be equipped with early warning and surveillance systems, and the ALERT Act would make important progress toward that goal. This technology provides pilots with visual and audible alerts indicating the position, direction, altitude, and speed of nearby aircraft. However, I am deeply concerned about the number of exceptions to ADS-B requirements for civilian and military aircraft in the ALERT Act. Requiring wider ADS-B can save lives. I would like to offer my deepest condolences to the families and friends who lost loved ones on Flight 5342 and to commend them for their work to strengthen the ALERT Act. I will continue to work with them to prevent future tragedies, and I yield back.

Does anyone else wish to be heard? Seeing no one, Val, you're recognized.

I offer to withdraw my amendment.

Without objection, so ordered. Thank you. Thank you, Val. For what purpose does Mr. Figures seek recognition?

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Please designate.

An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to H.R. 7613 offered by Mr. Figures of Alabama, number 052.

Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Shomari, recognized.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. As we consider this legislation, it is important that we recognize the real-world implications that seemingly narrow provisions can have on states and local communities across the country. While the underlying bill is certainly well-intentioned, we must also be mindful that broadly drafted language can create unintended consequences, particularly for states that rely on specific data tools to carry out core responsibilities like tax enforcement and revenue collection. In my district and across Alabama, these impacts are not theoretical. State and local governments depend on access to ADS-B data to ensure compliance with property and sales tax laws. My amendment simply preserves that ability, allowing these authorities to continue enforcing existing laws and maintaining fairness in the tax system. Without this clarification, provisions included in Section 105, specifically the addition of language from the PAPA Act, could inadvertently prevent the use of ADS-B data for these purposes. And this would result in significant loss of critical revenue. For Alabama, that loss is estimated at approximately $18.8 million annually, and that is money that is funded directly to our Public Education Trust Fund. These are not theoretical numbers. I represent one of the poorest districts in this nation. Individual median income in my district is just north of $33,000. What do you think public education budgets look like in my district and in my state? And this is not something you just have to take my word for. As many of you know, Alabama is one of the most Republican states in the country, and I hold a letter that I will enter into the record from our Department of Revenue, from the Alabama Department of Revenue, which says in part that the state of Alabama and its counties and municipalities could incur a total annual fiscal impact of more than $18 million should the ALERT Act become law in its current form. And that is from the commissioner, the head of our Alabama Department of Revenue. These dollars, they flow directly into our Education Trust Fund. They support our public schools, our teachers, and the resources that keep class sizes manageable and students on track to succeed. At a time when state revenues are already declining, and as many of us know, we have already shifted significant costs onto states that they were not budgeting for before the big bill, we should be especially cautious about policies that could further reduce funding for education. This amendment does not expand authority. It does not create any new programs, no additional spending. This simply ensures that states like Alabama can continue using existing tools to enforce their state laws. Our goal should be clear: to advance legislation that achieves its intended purpose without undermining the fiscal stability of our states or the educational opportunities of our students. We have heard a lot about the use of NTSB data and how it's a safety tool, and I agree, it is a safety tool. But this tool, like many of us, can walk and chew gum at the same time. It can be used for multiple purposes. Never before has the NTSB listed the state collecting revenue as a contributing factor to a plane crash or any accident. And that is just the reality of it. And this is not just something that affects Alabama. Missouri, North Carolina, Arkansas, Kansas, West Virginia, Nebraska, Tennessee, California, Virginia, Kentucky, and Michigan are all states that use this data to generate revenue that is funded to their public education systems. It was no one's intent, I know by everyone joining this committee, was to take a vote on something that was going to cut funding to public education. And we have an opportunity to make sure that that does not happen. And I hear the argument that, hey, if you allow this data to be used, that pilots would be disincentivized from adopting the system. Well, there's a very simple solution for that. Because given the gravity of the situation, given the gravity of the consequences of what happens when this technology, when mandated, if it's not used, it is deadly. You take their license. If they don't want to adopt it, if they don't want to use it, it's a very simple solution. You make the punishment as severe as it can possibly be for someone that's not willing to save lives. Because no one's life is worth assisting someone who can afford a private plane from paying a local tax. We can use this data in multiple ways. And it is something that I encourage all of us to have that reality. And so it is my hope that we can adopt this amendment. I do want to thank everyone for their work on this bill. We know why we are here at the end of the day, and it is to prevent future tragedies like the one that cost your family members and friends their lives. And we are committed to doing just that. This provision has nothing to do with that. And that is why we can allow states to continue to operate the way they have been operating, at least for the better part of the last several decades. They can use this data to continue to collect that revenue without compromising any form of safety to any degree. And with that, I yield back, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Nehls. Mr. Nehls.

Yes, sir. Thank you. I respect my colleague Mr. Figures but I do oppose this amendment. ADSB was developed as a Yes, sir. Thank you. I respect my colleague Mr. Figures, but I do oppose this amendment. ADS-B was developed as a safety tool, not a tax enforcement mechanism. Allowing state local authorities to use ADS-B data to enforce property or sales tax laws would blur that line and fundamentally change how the system is perceived and used. If ADS-B data was the only way for state local authorities to assess taxes, this would be a different discussion. However, it is not. State localities need to rely on a different avenue to collect data to assess those taxes. I oppose this amendment, and thank you. I yield.

Rick.

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I want to speak to not just Mr. Figures' amendment, but amendment 35 from Representative Friedman and amendment 61 from Representative Carbajal. Just to remind us, Section 105 would prohibit public airports from using ADS-B data to identify aircraft and efficiently collect landing or takeoff fees. And also, I also understand that state and local governments are using ADS-B Out data to track aircraft sales. And we're going to see a proliferation of new entrants like advanced air mobility, which will also necessitate the use of ADS-B Out by airports so airports know who or what is using them. Now, I want to, if you allow me to disappoint my colleagues now, and this has to do with how we put bills together in this process as advanced both Democratic majorities on this committee and Republican majorities on this committee when the leadership of the committee and the subcommittees agree to vote the same way on amendments in order to maintain the base integrity of the underlying bill. And so in that, it's called Big Four agreement, and because of that, I am going to oppose all three of those amendments, but certainly stay open as we move on to continue the discussion. With that, I'll yield back.

Thanks, Rick. Does anyone else wish to be heard on the amendment? Seeing no one, are there any amendments to the amendment? Seeing none, the question is on the amendment. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. All opposed, signify by saying nay. It appears the nays have it.

Mr. Chair, request a recorded vote.

The gentleman requests a recorded vote on the amendment. As previously announced, pursuant to committee rule 6F, the further proceedings on the question are postponed. I would ask unanimous consent to enter into the record the work done by the NTSB's analysis that confirms that the amendment in the nature of a substitute to the ALERT Act responds to all 50 recommendations that were offered up. And with that, we're going to briefly recess so everybody can get back to the hearing room so that we can vote on the recorded amendment votes and then on final passage. So staff, get your member back in the room. We're in recess. The committee will come back to order. I want to take just a moment before we reconvene for a moment of privilege, I guess, before we continue with the postponed vote. And the reason for that is I want to acknowledge and thank a very dedicated staffer of the Aviation Subcommittee. Julie Devine started in my personal office and she served as my legislative director. She came to the committee to work on FAA reauthorization and she has served as the staff director of the Aviation Subcommittee for the past year. Throughout her career, she has been an absolute dedicated member of my team, even to the very end. And Julie is leaving us this month. In fact, I think this is the last day. Wow. This is the last day. In fact, she delayed her family's vacation so that she could be here to be at this markup and see this piece of legislation through committee. But she's a fierce advocate, she's a trusted staffer, and a mentor that is going to be missed by all of us. And Julie, I want to thank you for your service and I know that we are all wishing you the very best in your next career, which I'm sure is going to be very lucrative. [Applause.] Troy wanted to make a statement.

Yes, sir. I couldn't agree with you more, Chairman. And Julie, you have been wonderful. It's been a great experience working with you. Consider, you know, you're a trusted advisor, a problem solver, and a friend to so many of us. Her institutional knowledge, relentless work ethic, and her commitment to public service have earned her the respect of members and staff alike. She's got a 10-pound brain, big, big brain. While we are sad to see her leave this committee, we are incredibly proud to see her take this next step with Rolls-Royce. She said we'll get a ride when she gets one from Rolls-Royce. Well, she will continue to shape the future of aerospace innovation. There is no doubt that the same dedication and excellence she brought to the public service will now benefit the broader aviation industry. So Julie, thank you for your service, your leadership, your friendship. This subcommittee, this House, and the entire aviation community are better because of your contributions and we wish you continued success in your next chapter. Thank you, Julie. [Applause.] Yes, sir. Couldn't agree with you more, Chairman. And Julie, you have been wonderful. It's been a great experience working with you. Consider, you know, you're a trusted advisor.

Just a real quick story. When Julie had her first child, she was on maternity leave and I had a question that only she could answer. She's the only person that knew the answer and I called her and she read me the Riot Act. She had been up all night long with her new baby and it was sick and Julie basically said, "What the hell are you calling me for? I'm on maternity leave." I said, "I'm sorry, I'm sorry." So with that, thank you for your, again, thank you for your service. I do appreciate it. So the committee previously postponed proceedings on the amendment in the nature of a substitute to H.R. 7613. The question is now on the amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to H.R. 7613, previously postponed. First, we have amendment 61 offered by Mr. Carbajal of California, in which a recorded vote was ordered, in which a recorded, which was not agreed to by voice vote. Is a recorded vote still ordered? A recorded vote is requested. Members will record their votes using the electronic voting system. The Chairman intends to vote no.

Ranking Member vote no.

Open the board. Close the board and report the total.

Mr. Chairman, on that vote there are 27 yeas and 36 nays.

By a vote of 27 yeas and 36 nays, the amendment is not agreed to. Next amendment number 35 offered by Ms. Friedman of California, in which a recorded vote was ordered, which was not agreed to by the voice vote. Is a recorded vote still, still ordered?

Yes, a recorded vote is still ordered.

Yes, a recorded vote is still ordered. Members are going to record their votes using the electronic voting system. The Chairman intends to vote no.

Ranking will vote no.

Open the board. Has everyone voted who wished to be recorded? Seeing no one, is anybody who wished to change their vote? Seeing none, close the board, report the total.

Mr. Chairman, on that vote there are 27 yeas and 36 nays.

By a vote of 27 yeas, 36 nays, the amendment is not agreed to. Next amendment 52 offered by Mr. Figures of Alabama, in which a recorded vote was ordered, which was not agreed to by voice vote. Is a recorded vote still requested? Yes, a recorded vote is still requested. Members will record their votes using the electronic voting system. The Chairman intends to vote no.

Ranking will vote no.

Open the board. Has everyone been recorded that wished to be recorded? Seeing no one, does anyone wish to change their vote? Seeing none, close the board and report the total.

Mr. Chairman, on that vote there are 25 yeas and 38 nays.

By a vote of 25 yeas and 38 nays, the amendment is not agreed to. The question is now on the amendment in the nature of a substitute to H.R. 7613 as amended. All those in favor signify by saying aye. All opposed signify by saying nay. The ayes have it. The amendment in the nature of a substitute as amended is agreed to. The question is now on the adoption of and favorable reporting of H.R. 7613 as amended to the House of Representatives. All those in favor signify by saying aye. All opposed signify by saying nay.

Mr. Chair, ask for a recorded vote when we get there.

A recorded vote has been, a recorded vote has been requested. Members will record their votes using the electronic voting system. Chairman intends to vote yes.

Ranking vote yes.

Open the board. Clerk, close the board and report the total.

Mr. Chairman, on that vote there are 62 yeas and zero nays.

By a vote of 62 yeas, zero nays, the bill as amended is agreed to and ordered favorably reported to the House. And without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. Thank you all for participating in today's markup. I'd ask unanimous consent that each measure ordered reported today be reported as a single amendment in the nature of a substitute incorporating any amendments adopted. And without objection, that is so ordered. I'd ask unanimous consent that the staff be authorized to make all necessary technical, clarifying, and conforming changes to each of the measures ordered reported today to reflect the actions of the committee. And without objection, that is so ordered. Pursuant to House Rule 22, clause one, I'd ask unanimous consent that the Chairman or his designee be authorized to offer such motions as may be necessary to the House to go to conference with the Senate on the legislation adopted today or any similar measure. And without objection, that is so ordered. I'd ask unanimous consent that the Chairman, after consultation with the Ranking Member, have authority to strike or revise any provision of measures ordered reported today that would cause a sequential referral to another committee or that would cause the bill to go or to be subject to a Budget Act or Rule 21 cut-go point of order. And without objection, that is so ordered. Pursuant to House Rule 11, clause 2L, I'd ask unanimous consent that all members of the committee have at least two calendar days in which to file any supplemental minority additional or dissenting views on the legislation adopted today. And without objection, that is so ordered. Pursuant to Rule six of the rules of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, I note the presence of a quorum for all actions taken on committee business today. And with that, the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure has completed its business. The committee is now adjourned.