Regulations & Safety
NBAA Supports ALERT Act to Enhance Aviation Safety After 2025 DCA Collision
The NBAA supports the ALERT Act requiring collision avoidance tech for aircraft, addressing safety gaps after the 2025 DCA midair collision. NTSB opposes due to ADS-B loopholes.
This article is based on an official press release from The National Business Aviation Association (NBAA).
On March 25, 2026, the National Business Aviation Association (NBAA) announced its strong backing for the Airspace Location and Enhanced Risk Transparency (ALERT) Act, officially designated as H.R. 7613. The legislation is scheduled for markup on March 26 by the House of Representatives Committee on Transportation & Infrastructure (T&I) and the House Armed Services Committee.
The ALERT Act was introduced in February 2026 by House T&I Committee Chair Sam Graves (R-MO) and Ranking Member Rick Larsen (D-WA), alongside Armed Services Chair Mike Rogers (R-AL) and Ranking Member Adam Smith (D-WA). According to the NBAA press release, the bill aims to address critical safety recommendations made by the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) following a catastrophic midair collision near Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport (DCA) in early 2025.
While the legislation has garnered broad support from major aviation industry groups who praise its practical approach to safety, secondary industry research indicates it faces fierce opposition from the NTSB. The safety board argues the bill contains dangerous loopholes regarding equipment mandates.
The ALERT Act requires civil fixed-wing and rotorcraft to improve situational awareness by equipping with collision mitigation, avoidance, and alerting systems. However, the NBAA emphasizes that the bill achieves this while recognizing the diverse composition of the business aviation fleet.
In the official press release, NBAA President and CEO Ed Bolen expressed gratitude for the swift action by the House T&I Committee.
“This legislation aims to dramatically improve safety in today’s operations by closing existing gaps identified by the NTSB,” Bolen stated, adding that it advances the certification of future safety systems.
Beyond equipment mandates, the NBAA notes that the measure would enhance air traffic control (ATC) training, lower the risk profile in mixed-use environments, address the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) safety culture, and improve stakeholder coordination. Bolen highlighted that while the bill focuses on the highly congested DCA airspace, its benefits will extend throughout the entire National Airspace System (NAS).
To understand the urgency behind the ALERT Act, it is necessary to examine the tragedy it aims to prevent from recurring. According to industry research and official government reports, on January 29, 2025, a U.S. Army Sikorsky UH-60L Black Hawk helicopter on a training mission collided with a PSA Airlines Bombardier CRJ700 passenger jet (operating as American Eagle Flight 5342) over the Potomac River, just southeast of DCA. The crash resulted in the deaths of all 67 individuals aboard both aircraft, including 60 passengers and four crew members on the airplane, and three crew members on the helicopter. It stands as the deadliest U.S. aviation accident since 2001.
The NTSB released its final investigative report on the collision on February 17, 2026, issuing 50 distinct safety recommendations. According to public findings, NTSB Chair Jennifer Homendy blamed a “dizzying array” of systemic failures.
Chair Homendy stated publicly that the tragic collision was “100 percent preventable.”
Key findings from the NTSB investigation included:
The ALERT Act gained legislative momentum only after a competing Senate bill failed in the House. In December 2025, the Senate passed the Rotorcraft Operations Transparency and Oversight Reform (ROTOR) Act (S.2503), which strictly mandated integrated ADS-B In (Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast) technology for all aircraft.
According to legislative records, the ROTOR Act failed to secure a two-thirds majority in the House on February 24, 2026. It faced opposition from the U.S. military and Rep. Sam Graves, who argued the strict mandates would be overly burdensome to certain operators. Following this failure, the House shifted its focus to the ALERT Act.
While the NBAA, Airlines for America, and the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) heavily back the ALERT Act, the NTSB strongly opposes it in its current form.
Industry research reveals that the NTSB’s primary criticism centers on an “ADS-B loophole.” While the ALERT Act retains a form of an ADS-B In mandate, it allows operators to comply using portable ADS-B In receivers, such as tablets. The NTSB argues that portable units can lose signal if blocked by the aircraft’s fuselage and require pilots to divert their attention away from the cockpit windows. Chair Homendy has publicly criticized the ALERT Act for providing exemptions to lifesaving technology that she asserts would have prevented the DCA tragedy.
We observe that the core conflict surrounding the ALERT Act represents a classic tension in aviation regulation: the push for absolute safety versus the economic and technical realities of a varied aircraft fleet. When industry advocates, such as the NBAA, praise the legislation for recognizing the “diverse composition” of the fleet, this serves as a legislative euphemism for the financial burden that strict, integrated ADS-B In mandates would impose on operators of older or smaller aircraft.
The allowance for portable receivers is a calculated compromise by lawmakers. However, it places Congress in the difficult position of weighing industry practicality and cost-effectiveness against the stark, data-driven warnings of the NTSB following a historic loss of life. As the March 26 markup approaches, we expect this tension between universal mandates and flexible compliance to dominate committee discussions. The Airspace Location and Enhanced Risk Transparency (ALERT) Act (H.R. 7613) is a bipartisan aviation safety bill that requires civil fixed-wing and rotorcraft to equip with collision mitigation systems, enhances ATC training, and mandates route updates to improve safety in mixed-use airspace.
According to public statements, the NTSB opposes the ALERT Act because it allows operators to use portable ADS-B In receivers (like tablets) rather than mandating integrated systems. The NTSB argues portable units are prone to signal loss and distract pilots.
The NTSB’s February 2026 report cited multiple systemic failures, including flawed airspace design by the FAA, over-reliance on visual separation by air traffic control, equipment failures on the military helicopter, and a lack of adequate collision-avoidance technology on both aircraft.
Sources:The ALERT Act and Industry Support
The Catalyst: The January 2025 DCA Tragedy
NTSB Findings and Systemic Failures
Legislative Friction: ALERT vs. ROTOR
The Portable ADS-B Loophole Debate
AirPro News analysis
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the ALERT Act?
Why is the NTSB opposing the ALERT Act?
What caused the January 2025 DCA collision?
NBAA Press Release
Industry Research and NTSB Public Findings
Photo Credit: Reuters