DOD Reverses Support for Senate's ROTOR Act Aviation Safety Bill

The U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) has withdrawn its support for a key Senate aviation safety bill, creating significant uncertainty for legislation aimed at preventing a repeat of a deadly 2025 mid-air collision. In a statement, the Pentagon announced it now has concerns with the Senate-passed Rotorcraft Operations Transparency and Oversight Reform Act (ROTOR Act), citing unresolved budgetary and operational security risks. This reversal comes just as the bill, designated S. 2503, was scheduled for debate in the House of Representatives.

The move complicates a bipartisan effort led by Senate Commerce Committee Chair Ted Cruz and Senator Maria Cantwell. The legislation was drafted in response to a January 2025 collision between an American Airlines regional jet and a U.S. Army Black Hawk helicopter over Washington, D.C., which, according to National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) reports, resulted in 67 fatalities. The incident highlighted critical gaps in the integration of military and civilian air traffic, particularly the use of collision avoidance technology.

Legislative Impasse: ROTOR Act vs. ALERT Act

The DOD's new position effectively aligns it against the Senate bill and potentially favors a competing legislative proposal from the House. House Transportation Chair Sam Graves and Armed Services Chair Mike Rogers have introduced their own bill, the Airspace Location and Enhanced Risk Transparency Act (ALERT Act), or H.R. 7613. This alternative legislation also addresses the crash but reportedly grants the DOD more flexibility in how it complies with new safety mandates.

At the core of both bills is a requirement to equip aircraft with Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast In (ADS-B In) technology. This system enhances pilot situational awareness by allowing aircraft to receive real-time traffic information directly from other nearby aircraft. While the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) already mandates ADS-B Out for broadcasting an aircraft's position in most controlled airspace, the push to mandate ADS-B In for receiving data is a direct outcome of the NTSB's investigation into the 2025 crash.

Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell stated that the current version of the ROTOR Act "would create significant unresolved budgetary burdens and operational security risks affecting national defense activities." This marks a sharp reversal from the DOD's position in late 2025 when the Senate passed the bill with unanimous consent. At that time, Parnell had issued a statement backing the bill and expressing a commitment to its final passage. In his more recent comments, Parnell noted that while the DOD had worked with the Senate committee, "the version passed by the Senate does not reflect several of the mutually discussed updates."

Competing Visions for Military Compliance

The fundamental disagreement appears to center on the degree of oversight the Department of Transportation (DOT) would have over military aircraft and the extent of military exemptions. The Senate's ROTOR Act aims to close loopholes that allow some DOD aircraft to operate without broadcasting their position and mandates specific technological solutions. An amendment was previously added to the bill to allow the military to use alternative equipment in certain cases to secure the DOD's initial support.

In contrast, the House's ALERT Act is described by sources familiar with its text as giving the military "pretty wide latitude in determining how" its aircraft comply with the proposed directives. This version also reportedly lacks a "strong role" for the DOT in overseeing the military's implementation, a key difference that likely makes it more palatable to the Pentagon.

The ALERT Act was introduced in the House between February 19-20, 2026, and, according to a press release from the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, it is designed to address all 50 safety recommendations issued by the NTSB following its crash investigation.

What Comes Next

The ROTOR Act was poised for a fast-track debate and vote in the House, but the DOD's last-minute opposition places its future in jeopardy. The Pentagon has stated it "remains ready to continue productive dialogue with Congress," but the public reversal of support creates a significant hurdle for the bill's sponsors. The focus now shifts to the House, where lawmakers must decide whether to proceed with the Senate's version, amend it further to appease the DOD, or abandon it in favor of the ALERT Act.

This legislative conflict highlights the ongoing tension between ensuring national security operational flexibility and standardizing safety protocols across all users of the national airspace. The outcome will have lasting implications for how military and civilian aircraft are integrated and regulated.

Why This Matters

This legislative standoff is more than a jurisdictional dispute; it directly impacts the timeline for implementing critical, NTSB-recommended safety enhancements. A prolonged delay or a significantly weakened bill could leave the aviation system exposed to the same risks that led to the 2025 Washington tragedy. For the aviation industry, the resolution will determine the future costs of equipment mandates and the operational rules for civil-military airspace coordination.

From airline operations to fleet updates, commercial aviation news lives at flying.flights. For airline finances, mergers, and industry strategy, visit the Business category at flying.flights/business.