Regulations & Safety
NTSB Opposes ALERT Act Over Delayed ADS-B In Mandate After 2025 DCA Collision
The NTSB rejects the ALERT Act for delaying ADS-B In technology mandates until 2031, citing safety risks after the 2025 midair collision near DCA.
This article is based on an official press release from the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) and summarizes related legislative reports.
The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) has formally opposed the Airspace Location and Enhanced Risk Transparency (ALERT) Act of 2026 (H.R. 7613), a legislative proposal introduced by House leadership in response to the catastrophic January 2025 midair collision near Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport (DCA). In a public letter issued on February 26, 2026, NTSB Chair Jennifer Homendy criticized the bill as a “watered-down” measure that fails to adequately address the safety gaps responsible for the tragedy.
The dispute highlights a deepening rift between federal safety investigators and legislative bodies regarding how quickly aviation technology must be modernized. While the NTSB is calling for immediate mandates to prevent future collisions, the proposed legislation outlines a multi-year rulemaking process that would extend into the next decade.
At the center of the conflict is the implementation of “ADS-B In” technology. While most aircraft are already required to have “ADS-B Out” (which broadcasts their position to ground stations), “ADS-B In” allows pilots to receive that data and view the location of other aircraft directly on a cockpit display.
According to the NTSB, the ALERT Act falls short because it does not mandate the immediate adoption of this technology. Instead, the bill directs the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to initiate a rulemaking process with a deadline of December 31, 2031. The NTSB argues that this six-year timeline leaves a dangerous window open for further accidents.
In the official press release, Chair Homendy expressed strong disapproval of the delay:
“We cannot support the ALERT Act in its current form as it is not fully responsive to the NTSB’s recommendations… [It] falls short of fully implementing all of the NTSB’s recommendations.”
, Jennifer Homendy, NTSB Chair
The urgency of the NTSB’s demands stems from the investigation into the collision on January 29, 2025. The accident involved American Airlines Flight 5342, a Bombardier CRJ700 regional jet, and a U.S. Army Sikorsky UH-60L Black Hawk helicopter. The crash occurred approximately 0.5 miles southeast of DCA over the Potomac River, resulting in 67 fatalities. Investigative reports indicate that the regional jet pilots had only 19 seconds of warning from their existing Traffic Collision Avoidance System (TCAS) before impact. The NTSB concluded that if the jet had been equipped with ADS-B In, the pilots would have received a visual and aural alert 59 seconds prior to the collision, providing roughly three times the reaction window.
Pilot unions have echoed the NTSB’s assessment. Jason Ambrosi, President of the Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA), emphasized the critical nature of the missing technology in public statements following the accident investigation:
“One minute versus 19 seconds. That difference could have saved 67 lives.”
, Jason Ambrosi, ALPA President
The introduction of the ALERT Act follows the failure of a competing bill, the ROTOR Act (S. 2503). That legislation, which passed the Senate unanimously in December 2025, would have mandated ADS-B In for all aircraft in busy airspace and required military aircraft to broadcast their position during non-sensitive missions.
However, the ROTOR Act failed in the House of Representatives on February 24, 2026, following opposition from the Department of Defense (DoD). The DoD cited “unresolved budgetary burdens and operational security risks” as primary reasons for withdrawing support. In contrast, House Transportation & Infrastructure Chair Sam Graves (R-MO) has defended the new ALERT Act as a “comprehensive” solution that avoids being “overly prescriptive.”
The public lobbying by the NTSB against a specific piece of legislation is a rare move for the independent investigative body. Typically, the NTSB issues recommendations and allows Congress and the FAA to determine implementation. This aggressive stance suggests that the Board views the 2031 timeline not merely as a delay, but as a fundamental failure to learn from the DCA tragedy.
The conflict places the aviation industry in a difficult position. While the technology to prevent such collisions exists, the logistical and financial hurdles of equipping military and older civilian aircraft are significant. The failure of the ROTOR Act demonstrates the political weight of the defense establishment, while the NTSB’s rejection of the ALERT Act signals that safety advocates are unwilling to compromise on the timeline for implementation.
As the debate continues, the NTSB maintains that “efforts to now water-down our evidence-based recommendations are counter to safety and dishonor the lives of 67 people.”
NTSB Rejects House “ALERT Act” as Insufficient Response to Deadly DCA Midair Collision
The Core Dispute: ADS-B Technology
Context: The January 2025 DCA Collision
Legislative Gridlock: ROTOR Act vs. ALERT Act
AirPro News Analysis
Summary of Key Differences
Sources
Photo Credit: Jacquelyn Martin – AP