Rotorcraft Operations Transparency and Oversight Reform Act

Floor Speech

Mr. Speaker, last month marked the 1-year anniversary of the D.C. midair collision where a U.S. Army Black Hawk helicopter collided with American Airlines Flight 5342 near Washington National Airport, or DCA, tragically claiming all 67 lives aboard both aircraft.

It was the first mass-casualty commercial plane accident in the United States in nearly 16 years and marked the end of one of the longest streaks without such an accident in U.S. history.

This devastating accident is a stark reminder that we have to remain vigilant in our pursuit of aviation safety. More can always be done to make air travel safer. We owe it to the victims, to their families, and to the flying public to leave no stone unturned and to learn every lesson we can.

I thank the friends and families of the victims. Their presence keeps loved ones' memories alive, and their advocacy reminds us to focus on this unwavering pursuit of improving aviation safety.

After the D.C. accident, the National Transportation Safety Board started its thorough investigation. Like every accident, the House waited for the NTSB's final report and recommendations. Now, we do that deliberately to give the agency's investigators the room to pursue every lead and vet every theory, especially when it comes to complex accidents.

This patience proved to be prudent. For instance, the hypothesis that ADS-B In coupled with the right interface could have given more warning was in fact correct.

However, some of the NTSB's initial theories about ADS-B Out usage were ultimately not included as part of the probable cause.

Allowing NTSB investigators to pull on threads and test their theories is important, and it is why the House did not rush an investigation but instead allowed for the final conclusions from the entire Board.

When it comes to the ROTOR Act, I appreciate the urgency to act on the safety gaps in our aviation system. Although I disagree with the ROTOR Act's approach and have concerns about how it executes, both the ROTOR Act and the ALERT Act--the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and the Committee on Armed Services' response to the D.C. accident--seek to respond to this tragedy in their own ways.

While I know some have attempted to pit the bills against each other, suggesting there could only be one right bill to respond to the tragedy, we all do want the same thing. As the chair of the full committee said, we want to make our skies safer.

The ROTOR Act responded first before the NTSB's investigation was complete. As a result, it only addresses a few of NTSB's final 50 recommendations. All of the NTSB's recommendations are important and deserve to be considered by Congress and implemented by the respective Federal agencies. Bypassing the House's regular order and forcing the ROTOR Act through this typically deliberative process doesn't get us to this goal.

That brings me to the ALERT Act, the comprehensive bipartisan House response to the NTSB's recommendations on the D.C. midair collision. Chair Graves of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, Chair Rogers of the Committee on Armed Services, Ranking Member Smith, and I introduced this bill.

The ALERT Act was bipartisan from its inception and emerged from productive and good-faith collaboration between the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and the Committee on Armed Services.

It also builds on the ROTOR Act's momentum and tackles many of the issues the ROTOR Act does not address. For instance, the ROTOR Act's ADS-B In mandate doesn't apply to military aircraft since the FAA Administration equipage requirements don't apply to military aircraft. The ALERT Act does.

The House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure purposely partnered with the House Committee on Armed Services to make sure that both the FAA and the Department of Defense have strong ADS-B requirements. The D.C. midair tragedy involved both the FAA and the DOD. Consequently, the solution needs to involve both of the committees.

Through that partnership, the ALERT Act is truly comprehensive. It works to address all 50 recommendations.

Now, the excellent work of the NTSB investigators provided a thorough report that identified many--not just one--goals which Congress has to now pursue. The ALERT Act is the necessary response and narrowly focuses on the NTSB recommendations. Each provision can be tied to one or more of the NTSB recommendations and corresponding findings.

To the critics of the ALERT Act, I just say that legislating is a collaborative process. A bill is introduced as a draft until it is passed, and until then, all feedback is welcome.

Upon introduction, we immediately requested that the NTSB and FAA provide feedback, and we have solicited stakeholder input from many folks to ensure that we get the ALERT Act's swift implementation. We are still getting feedback. The ALERT Act works to address all of the NTSB recommendations. These recommendations deserve full consideration by Congress.

In the meantime, the ROTOR Act and the vote before us this week address just a small percentage of these recommendations.

Now, the NTSB has nearly 200 outstanding aviation recommendations, dating back to the year 2000. If the ROTOR Act passes as is, all we are doing is adding 45 or more recommendations to this long list that Congress has already not acted on.

If the Speaker can, in fact, promise the Senate that the Senate gets a vote on their bill--that only partially addresses the tragedy--then I certainly hope the Office of the Speaker can promise a floor vote on the one bipartisan joint committee House bill that comprehensively addresses all of the issues.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. LARSEN of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate this opportunity to speak on the ROTOR Act and on the ALERT Act. I really appreciate the bipartisan work and joint committee work done here in the U.S. House to produce the ALERT Act, the comprehensive response to the tragic DCA air crash.

I look forward to continue working with the T&I Committee and the House Armed Services Committee to bring that bill into markup in committees and onto the floor as soon as possible if we are allowed to.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source