The ROTOR Act and the ALERT Act: Top points for aviation operators

Update 2/24/2026: The House of Representatives voted 264–133 in favor of the ROTOR Act – a clear majority, but one vote short of the two-thirds threshold required under the fast-track procedure used for the vote. The measure fell short following a last-minute reversal by the Department of Defense, which withdrew its prior endorsement, citing unresolved budgetary and operational security concerns, and floor opposition from House Transportation and Infrastructure Chair Sam Graves (R-MO) and Armed Services Chair Mike D. Rogers (R-AL). Chairman Graves has committed to marking up the ALERT Act in committee as soon as next week. DLA Piper is continuing to monitor developments and will provide updates as the legislation progresses.

Congress is poised to enact new aviation safety requirements in response to recent National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) findings, which arose from the January 29, 2025 midair collision between American Airlines Flight 5342 and a United States Army Black Hawk helicopter on approach to Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport (DCA).

The United States House of Representatives is expected to vote on the Rotorcraft Operations Transparency and Oversight Reform Act (ROTOR Act) sometime this month. A broader alternative – the Airspace Location and Enhanced Risk Transparency Act (ALERT Act) – has also been introduced.

Although the bills take different approaches, both would expand collision‑avoidance and traffic‑awareness requirements and close existing exemptions that have permitted certain military aircraft to operate near airports without broadcasting their location. For operators, either legislative path could have implications for aircraft equipage, airspace procedures, and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) oversight. The details of these requirements are still evolving, and the final legislative vehicle remains uncertain.

Our alert outlines key provisions of each bill and highlights the top points for operators.

Background

On February 17, 2026, the NTSB released its final report on the crash of Flight 5342, finding that it resulted from a combination of flawed airspace design, FAA failures to act on known risks, and breakdowns in coordination between military and civilian aviation operations.

Among the NTSB’s findings was that the FAA had placed a helicopter route dangerously close to a runway approach path at DCA, and that the agency had not acted on years of warning data showing recurring close calls between helicopters and commercial aircraft in the area. The NTSB also found that neither aircraft was adequately equipped to alert its crew to the other’s presence. Over the course of the investigation, the Board issued approximately 50 safety recommendations, and Congress has moved to codify a number of them through legislation.

ROTOR Act

The ROTOR Act passed the Senate unanimously in December 2025 and has the support of the White House, the Department of Defense, and the NTSB. The House was expected to vote on the bill as early as Monday, February 23, 2026 but the vote has since been delayed.

At its core, the ROTOR Act addresses a straightforward problem: Pilots cannot avoid traffic they cannot see. The bill would require all aircraft operating near airports to be equipped with ADS-B In – technology that receives real-time location broadcasts from other aircraft and displays them in the cockpit. Under current rules, many aircraft are required to broadcast their position (ADS-B Out) but are not required to receive others’ broadcasts. The Army helicopter involved in the DCA crash had its ADS-B Out equipment non-functional; the regional jet lacked ADS-B In entirely.

According to the NTSB, had both aircraft been properly equipped, the airline crew would have received a traffic alert roughly one minute before the collision – rather than the approximately one second of awareness they ultimately had. NTSB Chair Jennifer Homendy testified that the crash “wouldn’t have occurred” if the ROTOR Act had been in place.

The bill also directs the FAA to review airspace around airports nationwide to identify other locations where similar risks may exist, improves safety data-sharing between the FAA and the military, requires a strategic roadmap for next-generation collision-avoidance technology, and repeals a provision of the fiscal year 2026 defense authorization act that widened exemptions for military aircraft from location-broadcasting requirements.

ALERT Act

On February 20, 2026, bipartisan leaders of the House Transportation and Infrastructure and Armed Services Committees released the ALERT Act – a broader bill that, according to its sponsors, addresses all 50 of the NTSB’s safety recommendations.

Where the ROTOR Act focuses principally on ADS-B equipage, the ALERT Act takes a wider view. In addition to collision-avoidance technology requirements, it addresses air traffic controller training and staffing, helicopter route design, DCA-specific operational procedures, and what the NTSB characterized as systemic deficiencies in the FAA’s safety culture. Rather than prescribing a specific technology, the ALERT Act would direct the FAA to conduct a rulemaking to determine the appropriate collision-avoidance solutions – a process that could take longer to yield results but may offer regulators greater flexibility.

Industry groups, including the National Business Aviation Association and Vertical Aviation International, have expressed support for the bill’s comprehensive approach.

Legislative status and next steps

The two bills reflect a familiar tension in legislative responses to aviation incidents:

1. Acting quickly to implement the most urgent safety measures or
2. Pursuing a comprehensive package that addresses the full scope of the problem.

The families of Flight 5342, along with major labor organizations – including the Air Line Pilots Association and the Association of Flight Attendants-CWA– have advocated for immediate passage of the ROTOR Act, arguing that its core provisions are ready to implement now, and that further delay preserves known risks.

Labor groups have also raised concerns that a broader bill could allow compliance through portable or tablet-based ADS-B devices rather than the integrated, cockpit-mounted systems the NTSB has recommended. The NTSB found in simulations that non-integrated devices were inadequate because they required pilots to look away from their instruments at a critical moment.

In a further development, the Department of Defense reversed its position on the ROTOR Act on February 24, 2026 – the same day the House was set to vote. United States Assistant to the Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs and Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell stated that the bill “would create significant unresolved budgetary burdens and operational security risks affecting national defense activities,” and that the version passed by the Senate “does not reflect several of the mutually discussed updates” negotiated with the Commerce Committee. The reversal is a striking about-face: the Pentagon endorsed the legislation in December, just hours before the Senate’s unanimous vote. Senators Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Maria Cantwell (D-WA) pushed back, noting that the bill already contains language negotiated at the Pentagon’s request to protect classified flights.

House Armed Services Committee Chairman Mike Rogers noted the Pentagon’s concerns, characterizing the ROTOR Act as “a flawed response” that would give the FAA authority over which military aircraft must carry ADS-B equipment and when it must be activated – broadcasting location data, he argued, over unencrypted channels visible to adversaries. The House vote, initially expected on February 23, 2026, was delayed to February 24, 2026 under suspension-of-the-rules procedures requiring a two-thirds majority to pass.

The families have separately expressed concern that the ALERT Act may not produce outcomes aligned with what the NTSB specifically called for, and that conditioning action on a comprehensive package risks delaying safety measures that are ready now.

Congressional leadership is deciding whether to pass the Senate bill as-is, advance the ALERT Act separately, or find a way to merge the two. Senators Cruz and Cantwell have also urged inclusion of the ROTOR Act in the fiscal year 2026 appropriations package as a fallback vehicle.

Key takeaways for operators

Regardless of which bill proceeds, new requirements are proposed in several areas, including:

• Adding ADS-B In equipage for aircraft operating near airports
• Potential upgrades to or the replacement of existing collision-avoidance systems
• Revising airspace procedures in locations where helicopter and fixed-wing traffic mix, and
• Eliminating military exemptions from location-broadcasting rules in the Washington, DC region.

The specifics – including timelines, compliance standards, and the definition of qualifying equipment – remain subject to the final legislative text, subsequent FAA rulemaking, and potential negotiation between the chambers. These details are key for fleet planning, operational budgeting, and compliance strategy.

Learn more

For more information on how emerging requirements may affect operations, evaluate fleet equipage and compliance readiness, and to engage in the rulemaking process, please contact the authors.