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. Pou, Nellie [D-NJ-9] · D–NJ
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.10303 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.10303 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.10303 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.10303 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 · 2026-09-04 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.
The proposed bill would let certified air traffic controllers employed by the Federal Aviation Administration observe flight crews from the cockpit during flights through a voluntary FAA training program. Aircraft participation would also be voluntary. Controllers would need management approval, subject to staffing and operational needs. Their observation time during flights would count as on-duty work, but the program would not reimburse their expenses.
shall establish a voluntary flight deck training program under which eligible employees of the Federal Aviation Administration may access the flight deck of voluntarily participating commercial passenger, air cargo, powered lift, or general aviation aircraft during flights
Certified air traffic controllers shall be eligible to participate in the program established under subsection (a).
(1) reimbursement of any expenses, including per diem and mileage, will not be authorized or paid; and (2) an eligible employee may only participate in the program subject to operational and staffing requirements with management approval.
An eligible employee participating in the program established under subsection (a) shall be considered as working on-duty during flight hours participating in the program.
Section 1 would name the legislation the FLIGHT DECK Act.
This Act may be cited as the Flight Logistics Initiative to Gain Heightened Travel Data and Enhance Communication Knowledge Act or the FLIGHT DECK Act.
The Federal Aviation Administration Administrator would have to establish the program within one year after enactment. Its stated purpose is to familiarize certified air traffic controllers with the complex onboard requirements flight crews experience. Participating aircraft could include commercial passenger, air cargo, powered-lift, and general aviation aircraft.
Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration shall establish a voluntary flight deck training program under which eligible employees of the Federal Aviation Administration may access the flight deck of voluntarily participating commercial passenger, air cargo, powered lift, or general aviation aircraft during flights for the purpose of familiarizing certified air traffic controllers with the complex onboard requirements experienced by flight crews.
Eligible controllers could sit in the cockpit for at least one round trip involving airports within the contiguous United States, Alaska, Hawaii, and U.S. possessions and territories. Participation would require management approval and remain subject to operational and staffing requirements. No expenses could be reimbursed, including daily travel allowances or mileage.
Eligible employees under subsection (b) participating in the program established under subsection (a) may sit in the flight deck for at least 1 round trip to immediate and destination airports within the coterminous United States, Alaska, Hawaii, and United States Possessions and Territories, except that— (1) reimbursement of any expenses, including per diem and mileage, will not be authorized or paid; and (2) an eligible employee may only participate in the program subject to operational and staffing requirements with management approval.
Controllers' flight hours spent participating in the program would count as on-duty work.
An eligible employee participating in the program established under subsection (a) shall be considered as working on-duty during flight hours participating in the program.
The Administrator would have to issue policies needed to operate the program, consulting organizations representing certified bargaining representatives of airline pilots and flight crews, and the exclusive bargaining representative of air traffic controllers. The text references certification under section 7111 of title 5, United States Code.
The Administrator shall, in consultation with organizations representing certified collective bargaining representatives of airline pilots, flight crews, and the exclusive bargaining representative of air traffic controllers certified under section 7111 of title 5, United States Code, issue such policies as are necessary to carry out the program under subsection (a).
The Administrator could impose additional ticketing and security-clearance eligibility requirements on participating employees to protect pilots, flight crews, and passengers. This authority would be optional.
The Administrator may prescribe additional ticketing requirements and security clearance eligibility requirements for eligible employees to ensure the safety of pilots, flight crew, and passengers.
The bill would not require a participating aircraft to displace or reassign an off-duty pilot using a cockpit seat to travel for work or an assignment so that a controller could participate. This limits what the Act would require; it does not impose an absolute prohibition on displacement or reassignment.
Nothing in this Act shall be construed to require a voluntarily participating commercial passenger, air cargo, powered lift, or general aviation aircraft to displace or otherwise reassign a off-duty pilot who is using an accessible seat within a flight deck for the purposes of traveling for work or assignment to allow an eligible employee to participate in the flight deck training program.
Within one year after establishing the program, the Administrator would have to report to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. The report would cover the number of participating controllers, the share of observed flights by aircraft type, barriers facing controllers and airline participants, and recommendations to increase participation.
Not later than 1 year after the establishment of the program under subsection (a), the Administrator shall submit to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate a report on the number of air traffic controllers who have participated in the program under this section, the proportion of flights observed on each type of participating aircraft, barriers to participation for both air traffic controllers and airline participants, and recommendations to increase participation both for air traffic controllers and airline participants.
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 4, 2026.
Source snapshot updated 2026-09-15T08:05:37Z. 2026-09-04: Referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. 2026-09-04: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2026-09-04. 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 was identified after reviewing the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials, or establish any amendment's attachment history.
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 particular recipients or places was identified after reviewing the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials. The source set cannot establish formal earmark status outside the supplied text.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
Findings to examine
The complete supplied introduced text contains a narrow protection within the main policy that warrants scrutiny as a targeted benefit. Classification does not imply improper purpose.
Off-duty pilots already using an accessible flight-deck seat for work travel or assignment receive a limited seating protection: the Act would not require their displacement or reassignment to accommodate a controller in the training program. This expressly protects a narrowly defined group when its seat use conflicts with program access. It does not establish an absolute right against displacement or reassignment.
Nothing in this Act shall be construed to require a voluntarily participating commercial passenger, air cargo, powered lift, or general aviation aircraft to displace or otherwise reassign a off-duty pilot who is using an accessible seat within a flight deck for the purposes of traveling for work or assignment to allow an eligible employee to participate in the flight deck training program.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Sep 15, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI