A bill to provide for updates to the Federal Aviation Administration type certification process to support development of new and novel technologies, and for other purposes.
- Sponsor
- Sen. Welch, Peter [D-VT]
- Committees
- Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Feb 12, 2026
Bottom line
This bill aims to streamline and modernize the FAA's aircraft certification procedures to accelerate the integration of innovative aviation technologies while maintaining safety standards.
What it actually does
This bill mandates the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to update its type certification process to support the development of new and novel aviation technologies, particularly in advanced air mobility. It requires the FAA to publish a plan for improving the issue paper process, establish standard expected timelines for certification milestones, define specific criteria for issue papers, and update delegation guidance for certification activities. The goal is to enhance transparency, predictability, and efficiency in the certification of innovative aircraft and engines.
Proponents argue
Proponents argue that the current FAA certification process is often too slow, opaque, and unpredictable, which hinders the rapid development and deployment of cutting-edge aviation technologies like advanced air mobility. They contend that this bill will foster innovation, ensure U.S. global leadership in aviation, and create a more efficient regulatory environment without compromising safety by focusing on performance-based standards and clearer guidelines.
Opponents contend
Opponents might express concerns that accelerating the certification process could inadvertently compromise aviation safety by potentially rushing evaluations of novel technologies. They might argue that the FAA needs flexibility to handle complex, unforeseen safety issues without strict timelines or that the proposed changes could strain agency resources if not adequately funded, leading to unintended consequences or a reduction in thoroughness.
The bill is concise and relatively easy to read, allowing a reader to quickly grasp its core objectives and proposed changes to FAA procedures.
Section 2(a)
Public Plan for Improving Certification Process
This provision requires the FAA Administrator, within 180 days of the bill's enactment, to publish a publicly available plan on the FAA's official website. This plan must outline how the FAA will improve the issue paper process, maximize the use of industry consensus standards as acceptable means of compliance, create stable policy for commonly addressed certification subjects, and ensure consideration of performance-based standards when promulgating type certification requirements.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue this provision is crucial for bringing transparency and predictability to a historically complex and often opaque certification process, which is essential for fostering innovation and maintaining U.S. leadership in aviation technology.
Critics contend
No specific opposition is typically raised against transparency and process improvement mandates, though some might argue that the FAA already has mechanisms for this and that legislative mandates could be overly prescriptive.
Tradeoffs
This provision balances the need for robust regulatory oversight and safety with the desire for efficiency and innovation in a rapidly evolving technological landscape.
Section 2(b)
Establishment of Standard Expected Timelines
Within 270 days of enactment, the Administrator must amend FAA orders to establish a range of standard expected timelines for major milestones in the type certification process. These milestones include the development of issue papers, certification basis memoranda, means of compliance, and equivalent levels of safety. It also sets timelines for FAA responses to applicant petitions for exemptions and proposals for compliance with performance-based design standards.
Section 3(a)
Criteria for FAA Issue Papers and Streamlining
This section requires the Administrator, within 180 days, to amend FAA orders to include specific criteria for determining when an issue warrants an issue paper and to assign responsibility for evaluating these criteria within the FAA. It also mandates accounting for performance-based rule projects and improving efficiency by converting stable means of compliance issue papers into published policy or advisory circulars, and by incorporating stable special conditions, exemptions, and equivalent level of safety findings into annual updates to airworthiness standards.
Section 4(a) and (b)
Updated Delegation Guidance for Type Certification
Within 90 days of enactment, the Administrator must publish updated delegation guidance for type certification of aircraft and engines. This guidance must include criteria for applicant eligibility for delegation, classification of routine versus safety-critical compliance findings, processes for FAA review when not using authorized representatives, and considerations for how delegation ensures safety, fosters predictable processes for new technologies, and impacts U.S. global leadership in these technologies.
This subsection states that the standard expected timelines established for certification milestones shall not apply to complex issues that, in the Administrator's sole determination, present an unsafe condition.
Section 2(c)
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice to provide necessary flexibility and a safety valve for the regulatory agency, ensuring that safety remains paramount even when efficiency is a goal. It's not evasive but a practical necessity.
Case for: Supporters would argue this carve-out is essential to preserve the FAA's ability to prioritize safety above all else, allowing for extended review periods when truly novel or complex safety issues arise, preventing a 'rush to judgment' on critical matters.
Case against: Critics might contend that such broad discretion, even for safety, could be used to circumvent the intent of the bill to accelerate certification, potentially allowing the FAA to delay projects indefinitely under the guise of 'complex unsafe conditions.'
Estimated impact: Provides the FAA with significant discretion to extend timelines for an unspecified number of certification projects deemed to have complex safety issues.