House Transportation committee approves Alert Act to implement all 50 NTSB recommendations; debate centers on ADS‑B privacy and airport fees

The House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure voted to report HR 7613, the Airspace Location and Enhanced Risk Transparency (Alert) Act, following a full‑day markup focused on implementing the National Transportation Safety Board's 50 safety recommendations after the Jan. 29 midair collision that killed 67 people.

Chairman Graves opened the markup by recounting the January collision and urging members to wait for the NTSB's findings before changing policy. "The collision claims 67 souls, all passengers and flight crews on both aircraft," he said, and described the substitute before the committee as a bipartisan effort to improve collision‑avoidance technology, controller training, route design and cross‑agency data sharing.

The committee adopted a manager's amendment that its sponsors described as incorporating member feedback and technical fixes developed with the NTSB and other stakeholders. The manager's amendment includes language to require collision‑prevention technologies and ADS‑B IN in appropriate aircraft, enhanced ATC training and procedures, modernization of ATC facilities, and the permanent closure of a helicopter route near Reagan National Airport cited as a longstanding safety concern.

Debate during the markup centered on section 105 of the bill, language derived from the Pilot and Aircraft Privacy Act (PAPA) that would restrict airports and third parties from using ADS‑B transmissions to identify aircraft for the purpose of billing and revenue collection. Supporters of section 105 argued it is a narrow safety protection intended to preserve trust in ADS‑B as a safety tool and encourage broader equipage. "ADSB 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," Rep. Nelson quoted from NTSB Chairwoman Hammedi's recent testimony.

Opponents, including Rep. Carbajal, said the provision would interfere with how some local airports manage operations and collect fees that fund safety infrastructure. Carbajal offered an amendment to strike the provision (Amendment No. 061) and argued that federal dictates on local airport operations without funding would be harmful. The committee postponed that question for a recorded vote; when the roll was taken later the amendment failed, 27–36.

Two other amendments addressing the ADS‑B privacy and equipage questions also failed on recorded votes (Amendment No. 035 — 27–36; Amendment No. 052 — 25–38). After the series of votes, the committee agreed to the substitute as amended and reported HR 7613 favorably to the House on a final recorded vote of 62–0.

Members on both sides repeatedly framed the markup as a bipartisan response to the NTSB's findings, emphasizing safety for the flying public and support for families of the victims. Supporters said the bill's requirements for ADS‑B IN and collision‑prevention technology, along with stronger FAA‑DoD coordination and inspector‑general reviews, will close critical gaps. Detractors warned that some privacy/fee language could produce unintended local fiscal consequences or operational burdens if not carefully implemented.

Votes at a glance: • Manager's amendment (manager's amendment to amendment in the nature of a substitute): agreed by voice vote. • Amendment No. 061 (Carbajal) — to strike section 105 (PAPA language): recorded vote — 27 yays, 36 nays; not agreed. • Amendment No. 035 (Freriedman): recorded vote — 27 yays, 36 nays; not agreed. • Amendment No. 052 (Figures): recorded vote — 25 yays, 38 nays; not agreed. • Final favorable report of HR 7613 as amended: recorded vote — 62 yays, 0 nays; bill ordered reported to the House.

What happens next: Committee leaders asked unanimous consent to permit technical and conforming changes and authorized staff to make clarifications before transmittal; the bill will proceed to the House with the committee's report. Provisions in the substitute tied to DoD jurisdiction were handled in parallel in the House Armed Services markup and will be merged as the measure moves through the process.

The markup was notable for its technical focus on ADS‑B equipage and collision‑avoidance architectures, its emphasis on implementing all 50 NTSB recommendations, and a relatively narrow—but contentious—policy debate over whether ADS‑B transmissions may be used by airports or third parties to bill aircraft operators. The committee recorded votes show the membership ultimately preserved the privacy‑oriented guardrail in section 105 and advanced the comprehensive Alert Act package to the House.