A substantive amendment. v2 renames the bill to the "John A. Hauser Mental Health in Aviation Act" and significantly modifies several operative provisions. Key changes include shortening the timeline for regulation updates, making the implementation of task group recommendations discretionary, altering the frequency of special issuance reviews, and adding a validation requirement for specific Aviation Rulemaking Committee recommendations.
John A. Hauser Mental Health in Aviation Act
- Sponsor
- Sen. Hoeven, John [R-ND]
- Committees
- Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Sep 14, 2026
Bottom line
The bill aims to modernize the FAA's approach to mental health for pilots and air traffic controllers, fostering a culture of disclosure and support while streamlining medical certification processes to enhance aviation safety.
What it actually does
This bill mandates the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to update regulations and guidance to encourage aviation professionals to seek and disclose mental health conditions. It requires periodic reviews of the special issuance process for medical certifications, allocates funds to the Office of Aerospace Medicine for capacity and training improvements, and directs the FAA to implement recommendations from a Mental Health & Aviation Medical Clearances Aviation Rulemaking Committee. Additionally, it establishes a public information campaign to destigmatize mental health care within the aviation sector.
Proponents argue
Proponents argue that current FAA regulations and cultural stigma deter aviation professionals from seeking necessary mental health care due to fear of losing their medical certifications, which poses a significant safety risk. This bill would create a more supportive environment, destigmatize mental health issues, and ensure that qualified individuals can continue their careers safely, ultimately enhancing overall aviation safety by encouraging early intervention and treatment.
Opponents contend
While broad opposition to improving mental health support in aviation is unlikely, potential concerns from critics might revolve around the pace of regulatory change, the potential for unintended safety compromises if medical standards are perceived to be relaxed, or the allocation of funds. Some might argue that the FAA already possesses adequate mechanisms and that legislative mandates could interfere with expert-driven regulatory processes.
The bill is moderately complex due to its technical nature and references to existing regulations, requiring a focused read to grasp its full implications, but it is manageable within a reasonable timeframe.
Section 3(a)
Encouraging Mental Health Disclosure
This provision mandates the FAA Administrator to update existing regulations, specifically in part 67 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, and issue new guidance within 18 months of the bill's enactment. The primary objective is to create an environment that actively encourages individuals involved in aviation activities to seek help for mental health conditions or symptoms and to disclose these conditions without fear of undue professional repercussions.
Supporters argue
Supporters contend that this provision is crucial for aviation safety, as it addresses the current disincentive for professionals to report mental health issues, which can lead to untreated conditions. Encouraging disclosure allows for proper evaluation and management, ensuring fitness for duty.
Critics contend
Critics might express concern that encouraging disclosure without robust, clear, and timely evaluation processes could lead to increased administrative burdens or temporary grounding of professionals, even for minor or well-managed conditions, potentially causing economic hardship.
Tradeoffs
This provision balances the need to encourage mental health care and disclosure with maintaining stringent aviation safety standards and ensuring that individuals are fit to perform safety-sensitive duties.
Section 3(b)
Enhanced Stakeholder Feedback and Report Requirements for Mental Health Task Group
This section amends the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024 to broaden the scope of feedback solicited by an existing mental health task group. It specifically requires input from aviation industry professionals, various air carrier operations, air traffic controller representatives, airline pilot organizations, and aviation higher education institutions. It also expands the task group's report requirements to include National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) recommendations and relevant clinical studies, research, diagnostic manuals, and protocols.
Section 4
Periodic Review and Update of Special Issuance Process
This provision mandates a review of the FAA's special issuance process for mental health-related medical certifications. This review will occur annually for the first two years after a specific FAA report is submitted, and then triennially thereafter. The Administrator must update regulations, policies, and guidance to consider new medications and evidence-based treatments, enhance mental health training for Aviation Medical Examiners (AMEs), and potentially expand AME authority to issue certificates for certain mental health situations, provided they have completed enhanced training.
Section 5
Funding for Office of Aerospace Medicine Capacity Enhancement
This section designates up to $15,000,000 annually for fiscal years 2026 through 2028 from existing FAA funds (pursuant to section 106(k)(1) of title 49, United States Code). These funds are to be used for recruiting, selecting, and training additional Aviation Medical Examiners (AMEs), including psychiatrists, expanding oversight capacity for AMEs, clearing the backlog of special issuance requests and cases awaiting review at the Office of Aerospace Medicine (OAM), and providing enhanced mental health training to AMEs.
Section 6
Mandated Implementation of Aviation Rulemaking Committee Recommendations
This provision requires the Administrator to implement, as appropriate, the recommendations of the Mental Health & Aviation Medical Clearances Aviation Rulemaking Committee (ARC), which were submitted on April 1, 2024, within two years of the bill's enactment. It also mandates consultation with stakeholders and requires the Administrator to leverage clinical studies and research for Recommendation 6, potentially commissioning new studies to fill data gaps. If any recommendation is not implemented, a justification must be submitted to the appropriate committees of Congress.
Section 7
Public Information Campaign to Destigmatize Mental Health
This section directs the Administrator to carry out a public information campaign or similar public education efforts for fiscal years 2026 through 2028. The campaign aims to destigmatize mental health care in the aviation industry, broaden awareness of available supportive services, and improve trust between the FAA and aviation professionals. It requires making information publicly available online and at Aviation Medical Examiner offices, and collaborating with air carriers, flight training institutions, and airports to disseminate this information. Briefings and reports to Congress on the campaign's development and efficacy are also mandated.
Amends Section 411(d) of the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024 (49 U.S.C. 44703 note) to expand stakeholder feedback and report requirements for an existing mental health task group.
Section 3(b)
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice for amending existing statutes, aiming for conciseness rather than evasion.
Case for: Ensures that the mental health task group's work is informed by the broadest possible range of expertise and current data, leading to more robust recommendations.
Case against: No specific case against, as it enhances existing requirements.
Estimated impact: Enhances the foundational research and consultation for future FAA mental health policies.
Requires the Administrator to leverage and cite relevant clinical studies, research, diagnostic manuals, and protocols to inform recommendation 6 of the Aviation Rulemaking Committee (ARC), and allows for commissioning new studies to fill data gaps within one year.
Section 6(c)
Why it matters:This level of detail is often placed in sub-sections to ensure specific, critical actions are taken without cluttering the main directive. It ensures a scientific basis for a particular policy change.
Case for: Ensures that any changes stemming from Recommendation 6 are thoroughly evidence-based and scientifically sound, preventing arbitrary policy shifts and building confidence in the FAA's approach.
Case against: Could potentially delay the implementation of Recommendation 6 if new studies are required and take longer than anticipated, or if data gaps are difficult to fill, potentially slowing down needed reforms.
Estimated impact: Ensures scientific rigor for a specific, potentially significant, policy change within the FAA's medical certification framework.