PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
Congressional Research Service
No official summary is available in the imported record yet.
People & committees
Rep. Garamendi, John [D-CA-8] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We also preserved the text version used in the PlainBill explanation below.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Sep 15, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.10267 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.10267 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.10267 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.10267 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.
PlainBill explanation
Based on the full Introduced in House · 2026-09-03 text. This explanation has not received human editorial review. This overview describes the proposal’s major provisions; it does not establish what its real-world effects would be.
This proposal would require aircraft air-quality monitoring equipment and a federal rulemaking for annual training on responding to engine-oil and hydraulic-fluid smoke or fumes. It would expand incident reporting, require investigations when reported symptoms need medical attention beyond first aid, and make incident information publicly searchable with privacy protections. Airlines, aircraft manufacturers, aviation workers, emergency responders, and passengers would be affected. Rotorcraft would be excluded from the new requirements.
requiring flight attendants, pilots, aircraft mechanics, and airport first responders and emergency response teams to receive training, not less frequently than annually
any domestic or foreign air carrier operating in the United States shall be required to— (1) install and operate onboard detectors and other air quality monitoring equipment
in the case where such report indicates that 1 or more crew members or passengers had symptoms related to the smoke or fume event that required medical attention beyond first aid, shall initiate an investigation
The Administrator shall develop a publicly available internet website that includes the aggregate data reported under such system and a searchable database for the events reported to the Administrator under such system
Before making either individual event information or aggregate data available to the public under paragraph (1) or (2), the Administrator shall redact any personally identifiable information.
The provisions of this chapter shall not apply to rotorcraft.
Section 1 would name the bill the Cabin Air Safety Act of 2026. Section 2 would add a federal aviation-law chapter on cabin air quality and safety, administered by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).
This Act may be cited as the Cabin Air Safety Act of 2026.
Subpart III of part A of subtitle VII of title 49, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new chapter: 454 Cabin air quality and safety
The term Administrator means the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration.
The proposed chapter defines a covered engine-oil or hydraulic-fluid smoke or fume event as an atypical noticeable or persistent presence of those fumes or air contaminants in the cabin, including smoke events.
The term engine oil or hydraulic fluid smoke or fume event means an event in which there is an atypical noticeable or persistent presence of engine oil or hydraulic fluid fumes or air contaminants in the cabin, including, at a minimum, a smoke event.
Within 180 days after enactment, the FAA would have to propose a rule requiring at least annual response training for flight attendants, pilots, aircraft mechanics, airport first responders, and emergency response teams. This provision covers aircraft operating under the federal aviation regulations called Part 121. The deadline is for proposing the rule, not completing it.
Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this section, the Administrator shall promulgate a notice of proposed rulemaking requiring flight attendants, pilots, aircraft mechanics, and airport first responders and emergency response teams to receive training, not less frequently than annually, on how to respond to engine oil or hydraulic fluid smoke or fume events on board aircraft operating under part 121 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations.
Training would include manuals and checklists on recognizing and distinguishing smoke and fumes, potential short- or long-term impairment, response procedures, and reporting. The text's inclusion of potential impairment is a training requirement, not proof that a particular exposure causes harm.
The training required by subsection (a) shall include the dissemination of educational and training materials, including manual pages and checklists
Odor, location, and phase of flight descriptors to allow an individual to recognize the presence of engine oil and hydraulic fluid fumes and to differentiate them from other types of fumes
The potential for acute or chronic impairment to an individual relating to engine oil or hydraulic fluid fumes
(4) Procedures for recognizing and responding to engine oil or hydraulic fluid smoke and fumes on board aircraft. (5) An overview of the system for reporting events of engine oil or hydraulic fluid smoke or fumes on board aircraft established under section 45403(a). (6) Requirements relating to reporting events of engine oil or hydraulic fluid smoke and fumes on board aircraft to the Administrator under sections 45403 and 45405(b).
The reporting-system amendments would replace language allowing air-carrier employees to report voluntarily with language providing for reports by pilots, flight attendants, and aircraft mechanics. They would also remove the passenger-carrying restriction. Removing the word “voluntarily” does not itself clearly specify an individual duty or deadline to report every event.
the Administrator shall develop a standardized submission system for air carrier employees to voluntarily report fume or smoke events on board passenger-carrying aircraft operating under part 121 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations.
(i) by striking for air carrier employees to voluntarily report and inserting for pilots, flight attendants, and aircraft mechanics to report; (ii) by striking fume or smoke events and inserting engine oil or hydriodic fluid smoke or fume events; and (iii) by striking passenger-carrying;
The reporting system would collect applicable flight and aircraft identification, event dates, descriptions, locations, discernible sources, flight phases, duration, and onboard medical attention. The FAA would issue submission guidelines, and reporters would receive a copy and confirmation of receipt.
allows for the collection of the following information, if applicable: (1) Identification of the flight number, type, and registration of the aircraft. (2) The date of the reported fume or smoke event on board the aircraft. (3) Description of fumes or smoke in the aircraft, including the nature, intensity, and visual consistency or smell (if any). (4) The location of the fumes or smoke in the aircraft. (5) The source (if discernible) of the fumes or smoke in the aircraft. (6) The phase of flight during which fumes or smoke first became present. (7) The duration of the fume or smoke event. (8) Any required onboard medical attention for passengers or crew members.
The Administrator shall issue guidelines on how to submit the information described in subsection (b). (d) Confirmation of submission Upon submitting the information described in subsection (b), the submitting party shall receive a duplicate record of the submission and confirmation of receipt.
Additional report fields would cover symptoms, engine or auxiliary power unit identification and age, flight disruptions, maintenance before and after the incident, air-monitoring data, and the locations and types of sensors or cabin fume filters.
(9) A description of symptoms reported by crew members and passengers. (10) The manufacturer, type, serial number, and age of the engine or auxiliary power unit. (11) Information regarding any disruption to the operation of the flight or subsequent flights. (12) Information about relevant maintenance work conducted on the aircraft prior to and following the incident. (13) Relevant air monitoring data collected during the flight. (14) The locations and types of air monitoring sensors or cabin fume filters in use on the aircraft.
The FAA would maintain a reporting database and allow pilots, flight attendants, aircraft mechanics, and their collective bargaining representative to search it for incident monitoring and investigations. Airlines could obtain relevant submitted information on request, excluding information identifying the reporter.
shall maintain a database of such information
and allow pilots, flight attendants, aircraft mechanics, and their collective bargaining representative to search such a database for purposes of reviewing and monitoring incidents and assisting with investigations conducted under section 45404
at the request of an air carrier, shall provide to such air carrier any information submitted pursuant to this section that is relevant to such air carrier, except any information that may be used to identify the party submitting such information
The FAA could use reports for airline safety-system oversight and studies. It could not assume an unvalidated report was accurate when initiating rulemaking or taking enforcement action.
(5) may not, without validation, assume that information submitted pursuant to this section is accurate for the purposes of initiating rulemaking or taking an enforcement action; (6) may use information submitted pursuant to this section to inform the oversight of the safety management system of an air carrier; and (7) may use information submitted pursuant to this section for the purpose of performing a study or supporting a study sponsored by the Administrator.
The amendments would require public statistics at least quarterly and a public website with aggregate data and searchable event records. Listed event fields include aircraft and airline identification, the flight phase, fume descriptions, engine or auxiliary power unit type, oil or fluid product names, a de-identified narrative, and maintenance information.
Not less frequently than quarterly and subject to paragraph (2), the Administrator shall compile, and make available to the public, statistics regarding the information reported to the Administrator under the system under this section.
The Administrator shall develop a publicly available internet website that includes the aggregate data reported under such system and a searchable database for the events reported to the Administrator under such system that includes the following variables for each event: (A) Date. (B) Tail number. (C) Aircraft type. (D) Air carrier. (E) Phase of flight. (F) Location of fumes or smoke in the aircraft. (G) Description of the fumes or smoke, including relation to air supply vents and the nature and intensity of the odor. (H) Engine or auxiliary power unit type. (I) Engine oil or hydraulic fluid type, including product name. (J) De-identified narrative. (K) Relevant maintenance information.
Before public release, the FAA would remove personally identifying information. Symptoms and other health information could be shared only as combined data, rather than individual health records. A retained provision also conditions public release of aggregated reports on validation and an aviation-safety benefit.
Before making either individual event information or aggregate data available to the public under paragraph (1) or (2), the Administrator shall redact any personally identifiable information. (4) Symptom information Information about symptoms or other health data shall only be shared as aggregated data.
may only publicly publish information submitted pursuant to this section that has been aggregated if— (A) such information has been validated; and (B) the availability of such information would improve aviation safety
by striking paragraph (1) and redesignating paragraphs (2) through (7) as paragraphs (1) through (6), respectively
The FAA would have 180 days after enactment to revise the reporting system, including implementing public access. Separately, the initial system-creation language uses a deadline measured from enactment of the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024, rather than this bill.
Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this section, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration shall revise the system described in section 45403 of title 49, United States Code (as added by section (a)), to comply with the amendments made by paragraph (1), including the implementation of subsection (f) of such section 45403.
Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024, the Administrator shall develop a standardized submission system
The FAA could investigate reported events at its discretion, but an investigation would be mandatory when a report indicates that a passenger or crew member needed medical attention beyond first aid for related symptoms. The text says to begin that mandatory investigation “not less than 7 days” after submission: this is a minimum waiting period, not a seven-day deadline to act.
subject to paragraph (2), shall have the authority to, at the Administrator’s discretion, initiate an investigation described in subsection (b)
in the case where such report indicates that 1 or more crew members or passengers had symptoms related to the smoke or fume event that required medical attention beyond first aid, shall initiate an investigation described in subsection (b) not less than 7 days after the date of the submission of such report.
Investigations would gather information from involved aviation workers, responders, and doctors; collect event reports and technical findings; and identify a cause if possible. The FAA would consult the airline, work with its technical representatives, and seek participation from the employees' collective bargaining representative.
(1) Gathering factual and standardized information from all flight attendants, pilots, aircraft mechanics, airport first responders, emergency response teams, and medical doctors involved in the event. (2) Gathering any reports submitted under section 45403 with respect to the event. (3) Gathering technical findings on any replaced, worn, missing, failed, or improperly serviced components that may have resulted in the event. (4) Identifying the cause of the event, if possible.
the Federal Aviation Administration shall— (1) consult with the air carrier involved; (2) work in conjunction with the technical representatives of the air carrier; and (3) seek the participation of the collective bargaining representative of employees of the air carrier.
Within 180 days after enactment, domestic and foreign airlines operating in the United States would have to install and operate air-quality equipment. It would locate air-supply contamination, including carbon monoxide, in real time; continuously monitor chemical indicators of oil, hydraulic-fluid, and de-icing or anti-icing fumes; notify pilots of contamination sources and types; and be capable of continuous operation whenever the aircraft is powered on.
Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this section, any domestic or foreign air carrier operating in the United States shall be required to— (1) install and operate onboard detectors and other air quality monitoring equipment
(A) are situated in the air supply system to enable pilots and aircraft mechanics to identify the location of the source or sources of air supply contamination, including carbon monoxide, in real time; (B) continuously monitor any relevant marker compound consistent with the presence of engine oil and hydraulic fluid fumes or smoke in the bleed air supply; (C) provide flight deck notification of the source and type of contamination to support pilot decision-making and isolation procedures, where necessary; (D) continuously monitor any relevant marker compound consistent with de-ice or anti-ice fluid fume concentration in the aircraft cabin or air supply system; and (E) is capable of operating continuously when the aircraft is powered on, including inflight and on the ground
Under the same 180-day requirement, airlines would need procedures to train pilots to communicate and isolate contamination sources when air quality is dangerous to health. Pilots would use professional judgment based on onboard conditions, communicate with flight attendants, and involve air traffic controllers as needed.
Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this section, any domestic or foreign air carrier operating in the United States shall be required to
have in place procedures to train pilots to initiate standardized communication and source isolation protocols, as soon as appropriate, with flight attendants and air traffic controllers (as needed), and to apply their professional judgement based on onboard conditions, all in response to poor air quality that is dangerous to human health.
The FAA could also require specific maintenance measures to prevent or reduce air-supply contamination when it determines they are necessary to protect passengers and crew. It would consult federal occupational-health, workplace-safety, and environmental officials.
the Administrator may promulgate regulations to require specific maintenance measures intended to prevent or mitigate air supply system contamination, as the Administrator determines is necessary to protect the health and safety of air carrier crew members and passengers, in consultation with— (1) the Director of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; (2) the Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health; and (3) the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency.
Within one year after enactment, the FAA would have to finalize actions requiring aircraft manufacturers to put procedures for responding to air-quality equipment indications in flight operator manuals. The procedures would cover both normal and abnormal operations.
Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this section, the Administrator shall finalize such actions as are necessary, including promulgating regulations, to require an aircraft manufacturer to include procedures for responding to indications from air quality monitoring equipment required under subsection (a) during normal and non-normal operations in the flight operator’s manual for each such aircraft produced by the manufacturer.
The FAA would continue researching technologies to detect cabin contamination from the aircraft air-supply system called a bleed-air system, including sensors, filters, and maintenance measures to prevent oil or hydraulic-fluid contamination.
The Administrator shall continue to research, study, and identify emerging technologies suitable for providing reliable notification of cabin air contamination from an aircraft bleed air system, including through investigation and research into sensors, filters, and maintenance measures to prevent air supply system contamination with engine oil or hydraulic fluid smoke or fumes.
An air-quality alarm's failure to activate would not, under this section, establish that passengers or crew were unexposed or that an investigation was unnecessary.
Nothing in this section may be construed to imply that an investigation under section 45404 is not necessary or that crew members and passengers have not been exposed to fumes or smoke if the alarm from any air quality monitoring equipment installed on an aircraft is not activated.
Within 180 days after enactment, the FAA would have to finalize actions requiring transport-category aircraft manufacturers to include the monitoring equipment in the “master minimum equipment list” for covered bleed-air aircraft. The provision identifies covered aircraft through specified federal certification provisions; it does not reproduce the rules governing those equipment lists.
Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this section, the Administrator shall finalize such actions as are necessary, including promulgating regulations, to require any transport category aircraft manufacturer to include the air quality monitoring equipment required under section 45405 in the master minimum equipment list for aircraft with a bleed air system certified under section 44704 or for which certification was delegated under section 44702(d).
The bill would authorize Congress to provide whatever funding is necessary to carry out the chapter. This is permission for future appropriations, not an appropriation of a specified amount.
There are authorized to be appropriated to the Administrator such sums as may be necessary to carry out this chapter.
Rotorcraft would be excluded from the entire new cabin-air chapter, including its training, reporting, investigation, and equipment provisions.
45408. Exclusion of rotorcraft The provisions of this chapter shall not apply to rotorcraft.
The bill would repeal specified provisions of the 2024 FAA reauthorization law and section 326 of the 2018 FAA reauthorization law. It would also update a 2024-law reference to include this bill's reporting-system amendments and add the new chapter to the statutory table of contents. The supplied text does not reproduce the provisions being repealed.
Subsections (b) and (d) of section 362(b) of the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024 (49 U.S.C. 40101 note) is repealed.
Section 362(c)(2)(B) of the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024 (49 U.S.C. 40101 note) is amended by inserting , including as such system is amended by the provisions of the Cabin Air Safety Act of 2026 before the period at the end.
The table of contents of subpart III of part A of subtitle VII of title 49, United States Code, is amended by inserting after the item relating to chapter 453
Section 326 of the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 (49 U.S.C. 40101 note) and the item relating to that section in the table of contents under section 1(b) of that Act are repealed.
The supplied official-actions snapshot, updated September 15, 2026, records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure on September 3, 2026. It does not establish later legislative action or enactment.
Source snapshot updated 2026-09-15T14:30:02Z. 2026-09-03: Referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. 2026-09-03: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2026-09-03. These findings describe provisions and who may benefit; they are not judgments of waste, corruption, or motive.
This review covers the supplied bill text. “None identified” does not rule out provisions in later versions or accompanying reports and disclosures.
Provisions outside the bill’s main subject, or policy changes attached to appropriations.
None identified in the reviewed text
No unrelated provision or policy rider attached to appropriations was identified in the complete supplied introduced-text version. This conclusion does not establish the absence of riders in other versions or accompanying materials.
Spending directed to particular recipients or places outside ordinary competitive or formula-based allocation.
None identified in the reviewed text
No congressionally directed spending for a particular recipient or place was identified in the complete supplied introduced-text version. This text-only conclusion does not establish formal earmark status in other versions or accompanying materials.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
Findings to examine
The supplied introduced text contains a categorical exemption from the main safety policy. Identifying it as targeted treatment is not a judgment about its justification.
Rotorcraft operators and manufacturers would receive an exemption from the new cabin-air chapter's requirements. This is an express aircraft-category carve-out from the bill's central safety policy.
45408. Exclusion of rotorcraft The provisions of this chapter shall not apply to rotorcraft.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Sep 15, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI